I have to say, a lot of those abilities are a lot less interesting than I'd hoped.
Also, given how difficult multi-wound models like Destroyers are to bring back with the new RP, the fact that Rites of Reanimation also can't bring them back, except with a once-per-game relic is very disappointing.
I agree that the psychomancer one looks nice, though. CounterTemporal Nanomines might be okay, too.
They went out of their way to strip any reason to run Aggressors out of them. They are completely bland now. Out of the army they go. I will run Inceptors instead.
So any info on what the rules for Relic Terminators are? Cataphractii, Tartaros, a choice of either, some sort of an amalgamation of the two? I'd like to know, just in case gw decides to do the right thing and give a similar unit to the marines for whom such armour marks aren't "relics", but just the armour they've always had since the Heresy.
Gadzilla666 wrote: So any info on what the rules for Relic Terminators are? Cataphractii, Tartaros, a choice of either, some sort of an amalgamation of the two? I'd like to know, just in case gw decides to do the right thing and give a similar unit to the marines for whom such armour marks aren't "relics", but just the armour they've always had since the Heresy.
If they've had it since The Heresy, isn't it a relic by now?
vipoid wrote: I have to say, a lot of those abilities are a lot less interesting than I'd hoped.
Also, given how difficult multi-wound models like Destroyers are to bring back with the new RP, the fact that Rites of Reanimation also can't bring them back, except with a once-per-game relic is very disappointing.
I agree that the psychomancer one looks nice, though. CounterTemporal Nanomines might be okay, too.
At least the destroyers seem to be costed ability for not bringing a lot back. 35 pts for the Ophdidyan and Skorpekh are pretty good.
vipoid wrote: I have to say, a lot of those abilities are a lot less interesting than I'd hoped.
Also, given how difficult multi-wound models like Destroyers are to bring back with the new RP, the fact that Rites of Reanimation also can't bring them back, except with a once-per-game relic is very disappointing.
I agree that the psychomancer one looks nice, though. CounterTemporal Nanomines might be okay, too.
At least the destroyers seem to be costed ability for not bringing a lot back. 35 pts for the Ophdidyan and Skorpekh are pretty good.
Also, it looks like Res Orbs are OPG for rolling RP in the command phase, including on models that have died already. The relic adds +1 to the rolls.
Gadzilla666 wrote: So any info on what the rules for Relic Terminators are? Cataphractii, Tartaros, a choice of either, some sort of an amalgamation of the two? I'd like to know, just in case gw decides to do the right thing and give a similar unit to the marines for whom such armour marks aren't "relics", but just the armour they've always had since the Heresy.
If they've had it since The Heresy, isn't it a relic by now?
Maybe, but by that logic almost all csm units, including the marines themselves, are relics. But the point is it makes sense that these marks of armour should be available to The Legions, possibly more than the newer Indomutus pattern. But that's an argument for another thread. I'd just like to see the loyalist units rules.
CSM time is wibbly wobbly, wheras loyalist marines have actually had to upkeep the suits for 10000 years.
Also CSM do get those marks. Tsons are tartaros and DG are cataphract.
From the datasheet, it looks like they just combined the two heresy terminators as they have the shared weapons between the two kits. And then they just cut the suit specific abilities (4++ and 6" move) to clean them up. Honestly a good thing, as those suits were just splitting hairs. Now they're just terminators with fancy weapon loadouts.
Kinda wish we'd get TH/SS in there as well to represent some of the Loyalist 30k models such as Firedrakes, but oh well, assault termies they shall count as and remain
As someone who plays both of these armies to one degree or other, tonight is eating a lot of my residual enthusiasm to get back into this game after lockdown ends.
I mean sure, cool new Necron models, my most collected and played faction? I wanna get my hands on those and work on them. There’s even a few marine models I might grab for my experimental “I have some starter set primaris from two editions starters anyhow so I might as well make a primaris chapter even if I dislike a lot of the lore that led to them” army...
But damn, the core rules changed so much arbitrary stuff with no coherent game plan, then these books are so arbitrary and slipshod as well... What’s the point playing? What’s the point even going back to earlier editions, given it’d be a lot harder to find an opponent and I couldn’t use much of my collection?
McGibs wrote: CSM time is wibbly wobbly, wheras loyalist marines have actually had to upkeep the suits for 10000 years.
Also CSM do get those marks. Tsons are tartaros and DG are cataphract.
That's only two out of nine Legions. But if they've actually changed the rules as you explain here:
From the datasheet, it looks like they just combined the two heresy terminators as they have the shared weapons between the two kits. And then they just cut the suit specific abilities (4++ and 6" move) to clean them up. Honestly a good thing, as those suits were just splitting hairs. Now they're just terminators with fancy weapon loadouts.
Then, meh. I'll just continue to use mine as better looking Chaos Terminators. Which it sounds like what they basically are now for loyalists. Sounds like a waste of page space really. What weapons do they gain? Plasma blasters? And volkite, I guess. And...Reaper ac's? Loyalists get Reapers? Oh for .
355pts for a tank that, by the numbers, heavy melta rifle eradicators can pretty easily yeet turn 1 from outside melta range.
Absolutely bizarre...I wonder if we're going to see big vehicles getting that "only X wounds per phase" rule that might as well be called "We Swallowed A Spider To Eat The Fly"?
the_scotsman wrote: 355pts for a tank that, by the numbers, heavy melta rifle eradicators can pretty easily yeet turn 1 from outside melta range.
Absolutely bizarre...I wonder if we're going to see big vehicles getting that "only X wounds per phase" rule that might as well be called "We Swallowed A Spider To Eat The Fly"?
I’d say it’s more likely to see a point increase to Eradicators. They’re just bonkers atm.
the_scotsman wrote: 355pts for a tank that, by the numbers, heavy melta rifle eradicators can pretty easily yeet turn 1 from outside melta range.
Absolutely bizarre...I wonder if we're going to see big vehicles getting that "only X wounds per phase" rule that might as well be called "We Swallowed A Spider To Eat The Fly"?
I’d say it’s more likely to see a point increase to Eradicators. They’re just bonkers atm.
I'd say eradicators will have to become more expensive while some vehicles will have to come down in price. Eradicators aren't the only things getting more deadly for vehicles.
I would really like to know more about making a war council and what the upgrades are.
Also what the modified chapter tactics complete list is and relic list
Imgur link with a bunch of leaked SM data sheets (all masters of chapter, new landspeeder and tank variants) from reddit thread: https://imgur.com/a/Lh4Q7hJ
Billagio wrote: Imgur link with a bunch of leaked SM data sheets (all masters of chapter, new landspeeder and tank variants) from reddit thread: https://imgur.com/a/Lh4Q7hJ
Spoiler:
This might be the most exciting bit out of all of that!
So there are restrictions of what Chapter can take what.
So much bloat. The Grav Captains being separate entries is so fething stupid that it's hard to grasp. Not to mention that the Vet Intercessors have literally no rules differences and just could've been a consolidated profile and just made them troops. Let's be honest, if Heavy Intercessors aren't breaking things nobody would've cared about Vet Intercessors being a potential troop choice. They already kinda WERE.
Automatically Appended Next Post: OH and every new tank having a separate profile is totally necessary.
Billagio wrote: Imgur link with a bunch of leaked SM data sheets (all masters of chapter, new landspeeder and tank variants) from reddit thread: https://imgur.com/a/Lh4Q7hJ
Spoiler:
This might be the most exciting bit out of all of that!
So there are restrictions of what Chapter can take what.
Yes, I hope it spreads to other subfactions in other codexes. Sometimes it's what you can't have that makes a faction special. Like "Night Lords can't take any unit with a mark of chaos other than Undivided". Get those chaos botherers out of my nihilistic, godless Legion.
@Slayer-Fan: Wait until you see that they made a data sheet just to give Cataphractii and Tartaros the same stats and abilities as every other terminator with a few special weapon options. Bloat for the Bloat God!
Vehicles are looking pretty useless with the buffs to anti-tank generally not being matched with any sort of buff to the tank datasheets we've seen (and in fact a nerf to impulsors). Why anyone would take that gladiator thing in a game where there are eradicators, I just don't know.
Hard to see where GW thinks it's going with this, except for the predictable "we don't know how to balance stuff so we just keep inflating stats generally in a haphazard way."
Eradicators may ironically cause themselves to go extinct simply because nobody'll take anything worth having them shoot at, like the predator that eats all the prey then starves to death.
edit: That hammerfall bunker is just stupid, too. I don't know any other word to describe it.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one whose noticed that none of the primaris floaty tanks have the fly keyword on their data sheets? Another win for real tanks!
So, the Hammerfall Bunker couldn't just fire regular krak missles like us CSM peasents, oh no. It has to fire Str. 10 SUPERkrak missles instead, give me a break GW.
On the plus side of the tanks, if my midnight envelop math is correct, the anti-infantry tank (lancer) does a little less than half the wounds the anti-tank tank (reaper) does to other Gladiators. Edit: woops, almost a third. Did the math as if they d6 damage weapons, not d3+3)
So at least they didn't screw things up like the Leman Russ anti-infantry and anti-tank variants.
yukishiro1 wrote:Yeah it looks like primaris tanks lost FLY, which is a good change.
Yeah, it gives something back to the Xenos factions for whom flying tanks used to be "their thing". Also puts them back on the ground with real tanks. No more flying over terrain for loyalist armour.
Vanican wrote:So, the Hammerfall Bunker couldn't just fire regular krak missles like us CSM peasents, oh no. It has to fire Str. 10 SUPERkrak missles instead, give me a break GW.
So another thing that can wound my Fellblade on 3s. If gw keeps this up they better have something nice for my 300+ ton monster in the Imperial Armour Compendium.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one whose noticed that none of the primaris floaty tanks have the fly keyword on their data sheets? Another win for real tanks!
Depends what the 'Repulsor Field' keyword does. It might just be the -2 to enemy charge distances rule that's on current datasheets, or it might have picked up a rider effect.
yukishiro1 wrote:Yeah it looks like primaris tanks lost FLY, which is a good change.
Yeah, it gives something back to the Xenos factions for whom flying tanks used to be "their thing". Also puts them back on the ground with real tanks. No more flying over terrain for loyalist armour.
Vanican wrote:So, the Hammerfall Bunker couldn't just fire regular krak missles like us CSM peasents, oh no. It has to fire Str. 10 SUPERkrak missles instead, give me a break GW.
So another thing that can wound my Fellblade on 3s. If gw keeps this up they better have something nice for my 300+ ton monster in the Imperial Armour Compendium.
Ave Dominus Nox brother, if GW dosen't, your Fellblade and my Chaos Knights can go play canasta together in the Eye of Terror home for assisted living.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Am I the only one whose noticed that none of the primaris floaty tanks have the fly keyword on their data sheets? Another win for real tanks!
Depends what the 'Repulsor Field' keyword does. It might just be the -2 to enemy charge distances rule that's on current datasheets, or it might have picked up a rider effect.
Judging from the flavor text I bet it's the -2 to chargers and some kind of ignore difficult terrain ability. It talked about how they move over swamps and rivers. As long as it isn't buildings I can live with that. Anyone see any rules for real tanks with real treads? Predators and Land Raiders?
yukishiro1 wrote:Yeah it looks like primaris tanks lost FLY, which is a good change.
Yeah, it gives something back to the Xenos factions for whom flying tanks used to be "their thing". Also puts them back on the ground with real tanks. No more flying over terrain for loyalist armour.
Vanican wrote:So, the Hammerfall Bunker couldn't just fire regular krak missles like us CSM peasents, oh no. It has to fire Str. 10 SUPERkrak missles instead, give me a break GW.
So another thing that can wound my Fellblade on 3s. If gw keeps this up they better have something nice for my 300+ ton monster in the Imperial Armour Compendium.
Ave Dominus Nox brother, if GW dosen't, your Fellblade and my Chaos Knights can go play canasta together in the Eye of Terror home for assisted living.
Can't retire the old girl after 10,000 years of grinding loyalist dogs beneath her treads just because she's a little less tough compared to some new thin bloods weapons. Gotta go out in a doomed last stand. It's the Eighth Legion way, after all. AVE DOMINUS NOX BROTHER!
Tiberius501 wrote: Can someone magically make a rule appear to ignore the LoW restrictions on the Monolith please, so I can be excited for it again? Haha.
GW really needs to examine LOWs, few if any LOWs are worth 3 CP
Tiberius501 wrote: Can someone magically make a rule appear to ignore the LoW restrictions on the Monolith please, so I can be excited for it again? Haha.
GW really needs to examine LOWs, few if any LOWs are worth 3 CP
Tiberius501 wrote: Can someone magically make a rule appear to ignore the LoW restrictions on the Monolith please, so I can be excited for it again? Haha.
GW really needs to examine LOWs, few if any LOWs are worth 3 CP
If someone was expecting a nerf to grav pods, this is it. Clearly you can no longer reroll the damage roll now, so the strat only rerolls to wound. Still good, but definitely less so.
Tiberius501 wrote: Can someone magically make a rule appear to ignore the LoW restrictions on the Monolith please, so I can be excited for it again? Haha.
GW really needs to examine LOWs, few if any LOWs are worth 3 CP
Heh, try 3CP + 880 points.
Oof, what’s that for?
Hellforged Fellblade.
Anybody seen the data sheet for the Ironclad dreadnought? Chainfists are flat D3 against vehicles, wondering if dreadnought chainfists are getting something similar. My Contemptor would like to know.
Tiberius501 wrote: Can someone magically make a rule appear to ignore the LoW restrictions on the Monolith please, so I can be excited for it again? Haha.
GW really needs to examine LOWs, few if any LOWs are worth 3 CP
Heh, try 3CP + 880 points.
not gonna lie dude, thats why when your comment on eradicators vs a fellblade I silently smirk. we all know you don't need eradicators for fellblades to be a horriable choice (a shame as it's a neat model, I want one myself(
Tiberius501 wrote: Can someone magically make a rule appear to ignore the LoW restrictions on the Monolith please, so I can be excited for it again? Haha.
GW really needs to examine LOWs, few if any LOWs are worth 3 CP
Heh, try 3CP + 880 points.
not gonna lie dude, thats why when your comment on eradicators vs a fellblade I silently smirk. we all know you don't need eradicators for fellblades to be a horriable choice (a shame as it's a neat model, I want one myself(
Yeah, the infuriating thing is that it's defensive profile makes it one of the best vehicles against eradicators, it's just Salamanders that cause it problems. But yeah, that price. And I had so much fun with it in 7th and during Index 8th before CA 2018 happened. *sigh*
AduroT wrote: Do we know what the Smokescreen keyword does?
Have we seen a sheet for Reivers?
Apparently there's a strategem that lets some vehicles pop smoke when they're targeted in their opponents shooting phase, so that's probably what "smoke screen" does. Reivers now remove obsec from enemy units. Not sure about stats.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote: After a brief flick through the leaks, beyond eradicators and bladeguard, marines seems a fair bit more reasonable now?
Agreed. Other than eradicators this looks pretty good.
Tiberius501 wrote: Can someone magically make a rule appear to ignore the LoW restrictions on the Monolith please, so I can be excited for it again? Haha.
GW really needs to examine LOWs, few if any LOWs are worth 3 CP
Heh, try 3CP + 880 points.
Oof, what’s that for?
Hellforged Fellblade.
Anybody seen the data sheet for the Ironclad dreadnought? Chainfists are flat D3 against vehicles, wondering if dreadnought chainfists are getting something similar. My Contemptor would like to know.
I rep[eat GW reaaaaaaaally needs to step back and re-examine Lords of war on a whole. the easiest solution, put 0-1 LOWs in the FOC for battalions and brigades.
BrianDavion wrote:I rep[eat GW reaaaaaaaally needs to step back and re-examine Lords of war on a whole. the easiest solution, put 0-1 LOWs in the FOC for battalions and brigades.
Agreed. It wasn't a problem with the combined arms detachment in 7th.
BrianDavion wrote: I rep[eat GW reaaaaaaaally needs to step back and re-examine Lords of war on a whole. the easiest solution, put 0-1 LOWs in the FOC for battalions and brigades.
This would be an easy and good solution for them to do. It would only need a quick FAQ.
Vanican wrote: So, the Hammerfall Bunker couldn't just fire regular krak missles like us CSM peasents, oh no. It has to fire Str. 10 SUPERkrak missles instead, give me a break GW.
Superkrak is old school - used to be a missile type in older editions.
With many of the powerful synergies being nerfed in marines. I wonder if they'll tweak the combat doctrines as well... Has anybody seen them as yet (dev, tactical and assault).
Brigade getting a free LoW would make a lot of sense, meaning that you could bring them in specialised lists (6 troops +LoW would easily be 1-1.5k alone) and big games without feeling nerfed by doing so.
Battalion would probably be a bit too easy.
We should email the GWFAQ/Errata team with this suggestion tbh
Neknoh wrote: Brigade getting a free LoW would make a lot of sense, meaning that you could bring them in specialised lists (6 troops +LoW would easily be 1-1.5k alone) and big games without feeling nerfed by doing so.
Battalion would probably be a bit too easy.
We should email the GWFAQ/Errata team with this suggestion tbh
Neknoh wrote: Brigade getting a free LoW would make a lot of sense, meaning that you could bring them in specialised lists (6 troops +LoW would easily be 1-1.5k alone) and big games without feeling nerfed by doing so.
Battalion would probably be a bit too easy.
We should email the GWFAQ/Errata team with this suggestion tbh
Making a brigade with a LOW using many armies would be near impossible. Try writing a csm brigade with one. Battalions would work better. You could take a LOW in 7th in a combined arms detachment with only one HQ and two troops as mandatory slots, and it wasn't a problem.
Neknoh wrote: Brigade getting a free LoW would make a lot of sense, meaning that you could bring them in specialised lists (6 troops +LoW would easily be 1-1.5k alone) and big games without feeling nerfed by doing so.
Battalion would probably be a bit too easy.
We should email the GWFAQ/Errata team with this suggestion tbh
Making a brigade with a LOW using many armies would be near impossible. Try writing a csm brigade with one. Battalions would work better. You could take a LOW in 7th in a combined arms detachment with only one HQ and two troops as mandatory slots, and it wasn't a problem.
Cheapest csm brigade without relying on fw is 1284 I think but it is pure trash.
Again, allows armies such as Guard and Orks (which are more likely to bring a LoW at lower points) to bring a LoW in a 2k or 2.5k game without paying CP for it, while armies that have fewer of them in lore and not as much need for them on the tabletop can still bring them for CP at 2k, or bring them in as normal for 3k games with brigades.
Neknoh wrote: Again, allows armies such as Guard and Orks (which are more likely to bring a LoW at lower points) to bring a LoW in a 2k or 2.5k game without paying CP for it, while armies that have fewer of them in lore and not as much need for them on the tabletop can still bring them for CP at 2k, or bring them in as normal for 3k games with brigades.
Yeah, I figured that was where you were coming from. "If it works for my army it's cool".
What lore says csm have less LOW than guard and orks? Quick count gives me: Hellforged Fellblade, Falchion, Spartan, Cerberus, Typhon, Mastodon, and three super heavy daemon engines: Khorne Lord of Skulls, Kytan Ravager, and the Greater Brass Scorpion. Seems like we have a couple.
Neknoh wrote: Again, allows armies such as Guard and Orks (which are more likely to bring a LoW at lower points) to bring a LoW in a 2k or 2.5k game without paying CP for it, while armies that have fewer of them in lore and not as much need for them on the tabletop can still bring them for CP at 2k, or bring them in as normal for 3k games with brigades.
Yeah, I figured that was where you were coming from. "If it works for my army it's cool".
What lore says csm have less LOW than guard and orks? Quick count gives me: Hellforged Fellblade, Falchion, Spartan, Cerberus, Typhon, Mastodon, and three super heavy daemon engines: Khorne Lord of Skulls, Kytan Ravager, and the Greater Brass Scorpion. Seems like we have a couple.
Tryanids, Orks and Guard are "Quantity has its own Quality" - Ork scrap engines are usually described in large numbers.
Forgeworld makes vast amounts of Marine models - hence all the variants.
I am not sure however how you make this work - given how many of us have Knights painted to be part of our armies its a shame that its difficult to do it.
On the other hand there are a few armies who can't have them unless they ally?
Only seen a little bit of the stuff on the C'tan. Thankfully, it looks like they don't get Look out Sir. So they shouldn't be as crazy OP. But all of them have the 9 Wounds and extra attack, plus living metal. Deceiver has been changed a little, now only strength 6 with 5 attacks (Damage 3 still), can redeploy 3 units in 1st battle round but only in your deployment zone (no turn 1 rapid fire shenanigans) but can still put units into reserve. So no roll for number of units, and being able to put units into reserve without spending command points like many have to right now. Also got a -1 to hit penalty against enemy attacks. Nightbringer is really spicy though. 6 Attacks and Strength 7 with 2 weapons profiles. One doubles his attacks, with ap -3 and 1 damage. The other is x2 strength ap -4 and d6 damage that ignores invulnerable saves. All of his attacks also ignore feel no pain type effects. Will say, Necrodermis with the cap on 3 damage per phase with living metal is pretty hot. Curious to get a good look on the c'tan powers for myself when I can.
Neknoh wrote: Again, allows armies such as Guard and Orks (which are more likely to bring a LoW at lower points) to bring a LoW in a 2k or 2.5k game without paying CP for it, while armies that have fewer of them in lore and not as much need for them on the tabletop can still bring them for CP at 2k, or bring them in as normal for 3k games with brigades.
Yeah, I figured that was where you were coming from. "If it works for my army it's cool".
What lore says csm have less LOW than guard and orks? Quick count gives me: Hellforged Fellblade, Falchion, Spartan, Cerberus, Typhon, Mastodon, and three super heavy daemon engines: Khorne Lord of Skulls, Kytan Ravager, and the Greater Brass Scorpion. Seems like we have a couple.
Tryanids, Orks and Guard are "Quantity has its own Quality" - Ork scrap engines are usually described in large numbers.
Forgeworld makes vast amounts of Marine models - hence all the variants.
I am not sure however how you make this work - given how many of us have Knights painted to be part of our armies its a shame that its difficult to do it.
On the other hand there are a few armies who can't have them unless they ally?
Well you can't fix the no LOWs without allies problem unless either gw makes one for each faction or they allow some to be used in factions similar to those that already have one. Dark Eldar could use the big Eldar grav tanks for example. GSC could get Baneblades with the Brood Brothers rule.
As for making it work, just add a LOW slot to battalions and brigades. There's no reason to need extra tax units, that's no better than paying 3CP. And as far as lower points games go, I'm not too keen on LOWs below 2000 points. Below that they can turn an army into a skew list fast.
Neknoh wrote: Again, allows armies such as Guard and Orks (which are more likely to bring a LoW at lower points) to bring a LoW in a 2k or 2.5k game without paying CP for it, while armies that have fewer of them in lore and not as much need for them on the tabletop can still bring them for CP at 2k, or bring them in as normal for 3k games with brigades.
Yeah, I figured that was where you were coming from. "If it works for my army it's cool".
What lore says csm have less LOW than guard and orks? Quick count gives me: Hellforged Fellblade, Falchion, Spartan, Cerberus, Typhon, Mastodon, and three super heavy daemon engines: Khorne Lord of Skulls, Kytan Ravager, and the Greater Brass Scorpion. Seems like we have a couple.
Out of my 6 armies, only one is guard, the others are Salamanders, Silver Templars, Death Guard, Red Corsairs and Necrons
the Imperial Guard and Orks both field more superheavies per major battle under their own direct control than any SM chapter or CSM Renegade force in lore (more than Tau, Eldar and Necrons as well, Tyranids can be discussed, but a proper hive fleet landing does have more biotitans than entire chapter conglomerations have thunderhawks), this is however lore-based rather than based on table balance.
I don’t know if this has been mentioned before, but it just occurred to me that there has been no digital release of the new rule book and no mention of digital releases of the new codices.
Are GW stopping these in favour of the app? If so, that kind of sucks. I’ve been buying all my GW books digitally for years now and much prefer that format.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: I don’t know if this has been mentioned before, but it just occurred to me that there has been no digital release of the new rule book and no mention of digital releases of the new codices.
Are GW stopping these in favour of the app? If so, that kind of sucks. I’ve been buying all my GW books digitally for years now and much prefer that format.
Yes. They have decided they don’t want me to give them money for the PDFs I’m still going to seek out. Not only is the app the only digital rules, but to get the rules in the app you have to buy the physical book. You can not get the app rules separate. It is the dumbest. I’m curious if/how they’re going to get Chapter Approved in there, because those didn’t have codes.
Well, digital won't need a preorder so there might not be a focus on that (also helps prevent early epub/pdf leaks)
Also, we know that individual codexes in the app can be tied to accounts since you can redeem codes from the back of the book to permanently unlock those entries for you in the app itself without needing a subscription
Neknoh wrote: Again, allows armies such as Guard and Orks (which are more likely to bring a LoW at lower points) to bring a LoW in a 2k or 2.5k game without paying CP for it, while armies that have fewer of them in lore and not as much need for them on the tabletop can still bring them for CP at 2k, or bring them in as normal for 3k games with brigades.
Yeah, I figured that was where you were coming from. "If it works for my army it's cool".
What lore says csm have less LOW than guard and orks? Quick count gives me: Hellforged Fellblade, Falchion, Spartan, Cerberus, Typhon, Mastodon, and three super heavy daemon engines: Khorne Lord of Skulls, Kytan Ravager, and the Greater Brass Scorpion. Seems like we have a couple.
Out of my 6 armies, only one is guard, the others are Salamanders, Silver Templars, Death Guard, Red Corsairs and Necrons
the Imperial Guard and Orks both field more superheavies per major battle under their own direct control than any SM chapter or CSM Renegade force in lore (more than Tau, Eldar and Necrons as well, Tyranids can be discussed, but a proper hive fleet landing does have more biotitans than entire chapter conglomerations have thunderhawks), this is however lore-based rather than based on table balance.
And that means no one else should use them because? Look, we had a thread about what to do about the super heavy auxiliary detachment a couple weeks back in general, maybe it would be more appropriate to discuss this there? But I'd just like to point out that I don't play renegades, I play Legionnaires, and Legionnaires use Legion weapons, like super heavys.
Has anyone seen any dreadnought data sheets? Someone over on B&C said they all had -1 to incoming damage. I need to know if this is true, especially for the Contemptor.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Has anyone seen any dreadnought data sheets? Someone over on B&C said they all had -1 to incoming damage. I need to know if this is true, especially for the Contemptor.
I saw that in a review as well. All Dreads have the old Strat baked in and always on.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I would have liked for ALL vehicles and monsters to get the -1 damage rule. It would have finally set the D2 and D3 damage weapons as anti infantry, while leaving higher damage weapons as AT.
The new power level of AT weapons would have been justified in that case.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I would have liked for ALL vehicles and monsters to get the -1 damage rule. It would have finally set the D2 and D3 damage weapons as anti infantry, while leaving higher damage weapons as AT.
The new power level of AT weapons would have been justified in that case.
Agreed. And if chaos doesn't get the -1 to damage rule for our dreads there will be salt. I need to see the Imperial Armour Compendium yesterday.
Nightscythes operate like normal transports now. Can carry up to 20 models. Can now deploy a character with a unit of lychguard or the like. Monolith has a 2+ armour save, but no invuln. Same for Obelisk. Obelisk's gravity pulse now halves the movement of a single enemy unit with fly within 24". If it's an aircraft model, you also roll 2d6, subtract the model's toughness from the result, and inflict that many mortal wounds.
vipoid wrote: Any leaked dataslates for Necrons? Curious to see the new Crypteks.
Just the Chronomancer and Plasmancer: 80 and 70 pts respectively before Arkana.
Chronomancer : Equipped with aeon scepter, (melee weapon) Aeon scepter ( shooting) 18” assault D3 S5 -2 AP 1D Blast invulnerable saves can not be made against each attack from this weapon Entropic lance ( shooting) 18” assault 1 S8 -3 AP D3+3D Aeon scepter (melee) S. User -2 AP 1 damage invulnerable saves can not be made against each attack from this weapon (melee weapon) : each time user fights with this weapon, makes 3 extra attacks with it Entropic lance (melee) S. User -3 AP 3D
Aeon scepter can be replaced with entropic lance
Living metal, command protocols Dynastic advisors : If your army is battle forged, for each cryptek unit (except dynastic agent) included in a detachment that contains at least one noble unit, a second cryptek unit (except dynastic agent) can also be included in the detachment without taking a tactical role slot
Uchronic cape : this model has a 4+ invulnerable save
Chronometron : in your command phase, you can select a <dynasty> unit within 9” from this model. Until the beginning of your next command phase, you can reroll all charge rolls for the unit, and models in the unit have a 5+ invulnerable save
Plasmancer
Living metal, command protocols
Dynastic advisors : If your army is battle forged, for each cryptek unit (except dynastic agent) included in a detachment that contains at least one noble unit, a second cryptek unit (except dynastic agent) can also be included in the detachment without taking a tactical role slot
Something Lightning (Aura) At the start of the fight phase roll 1d6 for each enemy unit within 6” if this model, on 4+ that unit suffers 1 mortal wound
Harbinger of Destruction At the end of your movement phase, if this model has not fallen back. You can select the nearest visible enemy unit with 18”. If you do, roll 3d6, for each 4+ that unit suffers a mortal wound
Do you have the source? Apparently it's in French, I would like to read it myself.
Neknoh wrote: Again, allows armies such as Guard and Orks (which are more likely to bring a LoW at lower points) to bring a LoW in a 2k or 2.5k game without paying CP for it, while armies that have fewer of them in lore and not as much need for them on the tabletop can still bring them for CP at 2k, or bring them in as normal for 3k games with brigades.
Yeah, I figured that was where you were coming from. "If it works for my army it's cool".
What lore says csm have less LOW than guard and orks? Quick count gives me: Hellforged Fellblade, Falchion, Spartan, Cerberus, Typhon, Mastodon, and three super heavy daemon engines: Khorne Lord of Skulls, Kytan Ravager, and the Greater Brass Scorpion. Seems like we have a couple.
Out of my 6 armies, only one is guard, the others are Salamanders, Silver Templars, Death Guard, Red Corsairs and Necrons
the Imperial Guard and Orks both field more superheavies per major battle under their own direct control than any SM chapter or CSM Renegade force in lore (more than Tau, Eldar and Necrons as well, Tyranids can be discussed, but a proper hive fleet landing does have more biotitans than entire chapter conglomerations have thunderhawks), this is however lore-based rather than based on table balance.
And that means no one else should use them because? Look, we had a thread about what to do about the super heavy auxiliary detachment a couple weeks back in general, maybe it would be more appropriate to discuss this there? But I'd just like to point out that I don't play renegades, I play Legionnaires, and Legionnaires use Legion weapons, like super heavys.
All I'm saying is that a Brigade represents a large enough army where a free superheavy slot makes sense and would give a good incitament to field a brigade. A battalion with a free slot could mean superheavies in 1k games or smaller with armies like guard or orks. Minimum battalion points values can be as low as 150pts to unlock that superheavy without paying CP for it.
Nowhere did I say that the auxiliary detachment should be removed to prevent battalions from bringing them, just that the free slot makes more sense lore wise in a brigade and probably bakance wise as wemm
...ok, did nobody else spot the mention of Legion Of The Damned on that last pic?! Or am I the only one excited about it...?
They've barely had a proper Codex mention since Grey Knights started getting Codexes, leaving them and Assassins as the only "special", limited Imperial allies (and these days, Inquisitors too I guess). I was beginning to worry they'd be quietly squatted over time.
Super Ready wrote: ...ok, did nobody else spot the mention of Legion Of The Damned on that last pic?! Or am I the only one excited about it...?
They've barely had a proper Codex mention since Grey Knights started getting Codexes, leaving them and Assassins as the only "special", limited Imperial allies (and these days, Inquisitors too I guess). I was beginning to worry they'd be quietly squatted over time.
They are good propects for a supplement - they use standard Marine units - so a few special rules on to make it rules lite.
Special character makes a nice small release and recyled lore mixed with new tit bits - will there be Primaris Legion units.
It seems like Inquisitors/Assassins are less likely - getting thrown into half assed campaign books or WD
Just realised I can no longer take a Battlalion or Brigade with my marine army now that scouts have moved to Elite. The only other troops I own are 10 Intercessors.
Neknoh wrote: Brigade getting a free LoW would make a lot of sense, meaning that you could bring them in specialised lists (6 troops +LoW would easily be 1-1.5k alone) and big games without feeling nerfed by doing so.
Battalion would probably be a bit too easy.
We should email the GWFAQ/Errata team with this suggestion tbh
Making a brigade with a LOW using many armies would be near impossible. Try writing a csm brigade with one. Battalions would work better. You could take a LOW in 7th in a combined arms detachment with only one HQ and two troops as mandatory slots, and it wasn't a problem.
Cheapest csm brigade without relying on fw is 1284 I think but it is pure trash.
I think the simplest fix is a combination of existing special rules for Battlalions and Brigades. Stick this after Command Benefits / Dedicated Transports:
Lord of War: Can include 1 if your WARLORD is part of this detachment.
Neknoh wrote: All I'm saying is that a Brigade represents a large enough army where a free superheavy slot makes sense and would give a good incitament to field a brigade. A battalion with a free slot could mean superheavies in 1k games or smaller with armies like guard or orks. Minimum battalion points values can be as low as 150pts to unlock that superheavy without paying CP for it.
I don't think LOWs should be available below 2000 points either, that's why you make a rule banning them below that threshold just like in HH. You don't make one that only benefits factions with lots of cheap units at the expense of those that don't.
Nowhere did I say that the auxiliary detachment should be removed to prevent battalions from bringing them, just that the free slot makes more sense lore wise in a brigade and probably bakance wise as wemm
No, you said that armies that can't make a functional brigade with enough points left over to pay for a LOW could just take the 3CP hit in addition to paying the points for the unit. That isn't an equal playing field.
Now back to the topic. Dreadnought chainfists are flat D6 against vehicles. My double chainclaw Contemptor likes this news.
Super Ready wrote: ...ok, did nobody else spot the mention of Legion Of The Damned on that last pic?! Or am I the only one excited about it...?
They've barely had a proper Codex mention since Grey Knights started getting Codexes, leaving them and Assassins as the only "special", limited Imperial allies (and these days, Inquisitors too I guess). I was beginning to worry they'd be quietly squatted over time.
They are good propects for a supplement - they use standard Marine units - so a few special rules on to make it rules lite.
Special character makes a nice small release and recyled lore mixed with new tit bits - will there be Primaris Legion units.
It seems like Inquisitors/Assassins are less likely - getting thrown into half assed campaign books or WD
2 characters, some stratagems, maybe a unique chapter tactic
Throw in a small upgrade box like we have for most chapters by now, a pack of datacards and a small box of objective markers and boom, a full release that could have been dropped as a fancy, 20 dollar white dwarf, but now can be sold as several 40 dollar items! Perfect for GW
This might be the most exciting bit out of all of that!
That page really just says: Space Wolf players you don't really need this book at all.
Unless Grey Hunters, Blood Claws and Long Fangs are in the main Codex separately? I'd doubt it, but I know the big book's had the Black Templars combined brother/scout Crusader squads before.
Also judging by the shot of the Terminator squad, it looks like Wolf Guard Terminators are covered there, maybe other Wolf Guard too.
Gadzilla666 wrote: And that means no one else should use them because? Look, we had a thread about what to do about the super heavy auxiliary detachment a couple weeks back in general, maybe it would be more appropriate to discuss this there? But I'd just like to point out that I don't play renegades, I play Legionnaires, and Legionnaires use Legion weapons, like super heavys.
Legionaries, as in these guys who had their arses kicked from Terra to Eye of Terror and ran with tails between their legs abandoning all that stuff? These ones?
Because outside of fanfiction, it makes no sense for them to have any of that stuff left. If it wasn't abandoned in some hasty escape, blown up in battle, then it simply broke down and fell apart from lack of maintenance and spare parts in the meantime. Even CSM and Terminator armor of the traitors is cobbled together from whatever spare parts they could loot, and you think they can field superheavy detachments? How? They are lucky to have a dreadnought or predator from legion days, even the bands that still have them are mostly fielding random looted vehicles, not 30K armored companies...
You know right chaos has planets dedicated to producing new stuff? What with half the guys who made equipment in 30k going chaos...
Logically it's imperium that has lost tech while on chaos side there are literally same guys who produced stuff 10k earlier doing stuff again. There's people there who know how tech works and not just follow 1000's years old rituals.
So multi meltas, heavy bolters etc. Did they get point changes? Tesla immortal got price hike despite tesla hitting nerfbat. Good thing bought gauss ones short time ago. Price drop on those with range buff unexpected bonus
Honestly, a bit surprised the Heavy Destroyer had two gun options; same with the ATV. The floaty bit is a bit odd, but if the Lokhurst lord ends up with good rules, it looks easy enough to swap out the body with something to convert one up.
GaroRobe wrote: Honestly, a bit surprised the Heavy Destroyer had two gun options; same with the ATV. The floaty bit is a bit odd, but if the Lokhurst lord ends up with good rules, it looks easy enough to swap out the body with something to convert one up.
We've seen both weapons for the Heavy Destroyer in previews from GW for almost the last month.
As I mentioned in another thread, the goonhammer article states that C'tan no longer benefit from Look out Sir. This is kind of a big deal, despite Necrodermis being strong
I've realised from the list of restricted units that Space Wolves can now take "normal" Scouts. Something tells me that separate, veteran Wolf Scouts are no longer a thing in rules terms, even if they're still there in lore...
Super Ready wrote: I've realised from the list of restricted units that Space Wolves can now take "normal" Scouts. Something tells me that separate, veteran Wolf Scouts are no longer a thing in rules terms, even if they're still there in lore...
This is Codex: Space Marines, not Codex: Space Wolves.
Wolf Scouts would be in the Space Wolf supplement if they're still a thing.
But holy gak that Vet Intercessor Sergeant Wargear description...
"If the Sergeant has this, but not that, then he can have this thing, that thing or this other thing. But if he has that, but not this, he can have that, this and the other thing. If he has both this and that though, he can have the other thing, but not that."
H.B.M.C. wrote: But holy gak that Vet Intercessor Sergeant Wargear description...
"If the Sergeant has this, but not that, then he can have this thing, that thing or this other thing. But if he has that, but not this, he can have that, this and the other thing. If he has both this and that though, he can have the other thing, but not that."
Just do a fething Wargear list GW. It's not hard.
Agreed. I love primaris marines, but GW's rigid requirement that the only wargear options be the official models is EXHAUSTING. The Primaris Captain is the worst, IMHO. Just let them have weapon options already.
H.B.M.C. wrote: But holy gak that Vet Intercessor Sergeant Wargear description...
"If the Sergeant has this, but not that, then he can have this thing, that thing or this other thing. But if he has that, but not this, he can have that, this and the other thing. If he has both this and that though, he can have the other thing, but not that."
Just do a fething Wargear list GW. It's not hard.
It follows on from the last Sisters dex with the Canoness - VERY specific options.
GaroRobe wrote: Honestly, a bit surprised the Heavy Destroyer had two gun options; same with the ATV. The floaty bit is a bit odd, but if the Lokhurst lord ends up with good rules, it looks easy enough to swap out the body with something to convert one up.
We've seen both weapons for the Heavy Destroyer in previews from GW for almost the last month.
H.B.M.C. wrote: But holy gak that Vet Intercessor Sergeant Wargear description...
"If the Sergeant has this, but not that, then he can have this thing, that thing or this other thing. But if he has that, but not this, he can have that, this and the other thing. If he has both this and that though, he can have the other thing, but not that."
Just do a fething Wargear list GW. It's not hard.
It follows on from the last Sisters dex with the Canoness - VERY specific options.
It’s just giving the segeants the same options as the non vet versions, but has to be extra wordy because of vet serges being able to have two different default loadouts.
H.B.M.C. wrote: But holy gak that Vet Intercessor Sergeant Wargear description...
"If the Sergeant has this, but not that, then he can have this thing, that thing or this other thing. But if he has that, but not this, he can have that, this and the other thing. If he has both this and that though, he can have the other thing, but not that."
Just do a fething Wargear list GW. It's not hard.
Well list can't be done so that it allows say plasma pistol and thunder hammer if there is no such model. How would you do such a list?
Super Ready wrote: I've realised from the list of restricted units that Space Wolves can now take "normal" Scouts. Something tells me that separate, veteran Wolf Scouts are no longer a thing in rules terms, even if they're still there in lore...
This is Codex: Space Marines, not Codex: Space Wolves.
Wolf Scouts would be in the Space Wolf supplement if they're still a thing.
Oh, I understand that. But I was kind of expecting them not to be able to take normal Scouts at all yet.
If Wolf Scouts end up arriving in the supplement? Then they'll be able to take two kinds of Scouts, which breaks their fluff. I don't see it happening.
50 minutes till the salamanders vs necrons game. I dont have much hope for the crons for a couple reasons. 1: Marines. 2: One of the better chapters. 3: Necrons are so different now and so many new units to try though I doubt they'll have the new units
nintura wrote: 50 minutes till the salamanders vs necrons game. I dont have much hope for the crons for a couple reasons. 1: Marines. 2: One of the better chapters. 3: Necrons are so different now and so many new units to try though I doubt they'll have the new units
Marines got nerfed in a lot of good places, including Salamanders. They are still going to be good, but I don't think they are going to be as dominant as they were.
nintura wrote: 50 minutes till the salamanders vs necrons game. I dont have much hope for the crons for a couple reasons. 1: Marines. 2: One of the better chapters. 3: Necrons are so different now and so many new units to try though I doubt they'll have the new units
For new units it's not new unit=broken with GW. Yes sometimes it is, sometime it's not. None of the new models in the codex really look like must have. Heavy destroyer meh, void dragon is good but then again nightbringer just might be even better, silent king hardly must have. Doomstalker looks to be best of the new models.
Apparently they are taking away the -1s to hit for weapons that are meant to target Aircraft when targeting ground units. So the Stalker is actually going to be a bit insane, as it will have a ton of autocannon shots that just happen to be really good against aircraft (two hit rolls instead of one for each shot, +1 to hit). Same goes for stuff like the Icarus Rocket Pods on Redemptors and Repulsors.
Super Ready wrote: I've realised from the list of restricted units that Space Wolves can now take "normal" Scouts. Something tells me that separate, veteran Wolf Scouts are no longer a thing in rules terms, even if they're still there in lore...
This is Codex: Space Marines, not Codex: Space Wolves.
Wolf Scouts would be in the Space Wolf supplement if they're still a thing.
Oh, I understand that. But I was kind of expecting them not to be able to take normal Scouts at all yet.
If Wolf Scouts end up arriving in the supplement? Then they'll be able to take two kinds of Scouts, which breaks their fluff. I don't see it happening.
Eh. It's not a huge issue, given that Wolf Scouts really only had the one or two special options once GW ceased the statline goofiness.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
casvalremdeikun wrote: Apparently they are taking away the -1s to hit for weapons that are meant to target Aircraft when targeting ground units. So the Stalker is actually going to be a bit insane, as it will have a ton of autocannon shots that just happen to be really good against aircraft (two hit rolls instead of one for each shot, +1 to hit). Same goes for stuff like the Icarus Rocket Pods on Redemptors and Repulsors.
nintura wrote: 50 minutes till the salamanders vs necrons game. I dont have much hope for the crons for a couple reasons. 1: Marines. 2: One of the better chapters. 3: Necrons are so different now and so many new units to try though I doubt they'll have the new units
For new units it's not new unit=broken with GW. Yes sometimes it is, sometime it's not. None of the new models in the codex really look like must have. Heavy destroyer meh, void dragon is good but then again nightbringer just might be even better, silent king hardly must have. Doomstalker looks to be best of the new models.
This. People like to claim that GW releases OP stuff to drive sales but honestly it's completely random how powerful something is day 1. Eradicators were hilariously busted, bladeguard and outriders were strong but pretty fair, most of the tanks seems pretty crap. It's throwing darts blindfolded with GW.
nintura wrote: 50 minutes till the salamanders vs necrons game. I dont have much hope for the crons for a couple reasons. 1: Marines. 2: One of the better chapters. 3: Necrons are so different now and so many new units to try though I doubt they'll have the new units
For new units it's not new unit=broken with GW. Yes sometimes it is, sometime it's not. None of the new models in the codex really look like must have. Heavy destroyer meh, void dragon is good but then again nightbringer just might be even better, silent king hardly must have. Doomstalker looks to be best of the new models.
This. People like to claim that GW releases OP stuff to drive sales but honestly it's completely random how powerful something is day 1. Eradicators were hilariously busted, bladeguard and outriders were strong but pretty fair, most of the tanks seems pretty crap. It's throwing darts blindfolded with GW.
And making the shiny, new Monolith a Lord of War isn't going to help sales, either. That choice is rather confusing.
Crimson wrote: So one thing that bugs me unreasonably much: apparently the Incursors got AP -1 for their tiny knives yet they couldn't give Reivers' knives that?
Reivers got an additional -1 on their pistols for -2 total!
Crimson wrote: So one thing that bugs me unreasonably much: apparently the Incursors got AP -1 for their tiny knives yet they couldn't give Reivers' knives that?
Lost their 6's generate extra hits-rule though. But yeah, Reivers are destined to be "meh" it seems.
Crimson wrote: So one thing that bugs me unreasonably much: apparently the Incursors got AP -1 for their tiny knives yet they couldn't give Reivers' knives that?
Reivers got an additional -1 on their pistols for -2 total!
C'tan are insane... this guys deceiver has done sky of falling stars, picking 3 units, then the leadership check power, then paid a cp to do another random ct'an power which rolled the falling stars again.
Crimson wrote: So one thing that bugs me unreasonably much: apparently the Incursors got AP -1 for their tiny knives yet they couldn't give Reivers' knives that?
Lost their 6's generate extra hits-rule though. But yeah, Reivers are destined to be "meh" it seems.
I’m tempted by them for their new models lose Obsec ability with the Lt that gives +1 charge range.
Crimson wrote: So one thing that bugs me unreasonably much: apparently the Incursors got AP -1 for their tiny knives yet they couldn't give Reivers' knives that?
Lost their 6's generate extra hits-rule though. But yeah, Reivers are destined to be "meh" it seems.
I actually disagree, Reivers have some intreasting uses, they now impose a flat -2 to LDR and remove obsec of any enemy unit within 3 inches. IIRC they can also prevent units from taking actions, they're not going to be killing a ton of stuff but I can see potential for them being a behind the lines spoiler.
Crimson wrote: So one thing that bugs me unreasonably much: apparently the Incursors got AP -1 for their tiny knives yet they couldn't give Reivers' knives that?
Lost their 6's generate extra hits-rule though. But yeah, Reivers are destined to be "meh" it seems.
Crimson wrote: So one thing that bugs me unreasonably much: apparently the Incursors got AP -1 for their tiny knives yet they couldn't give Reivers' knives that?
Lost their 6's generate extra hits-rule though. But yeah, Reivers are destined to be "meh" it seems.
I actually disagree, Reivers have some intreasting uses, they now impose a flat -2 to LDR and remove obsec of any enemy unit within 3 inches. IIRC they can also prevent units from taking actions, they're not going to be killing a ton of stuff but I can see potential for them being a behind the lines spoiler.
watching this vid and it's just dumb. A gravis captain starts at 7 wounds? goes to 8 with the relic that ALSO gives +1 toughness and an auto 2+ save? 8 wounds at toughness 6? really?
nintura wrote: watching this vid and it's just dumb. A gravis captain starts at 7 wounds? goes to 8 with the relic that ALSO gives +1 toughness and an auto 2+ save? 8 wounds at toughness 6? really?
nintura wrote: watching this vid and it's just dumb. A gravis captain starts at 7 wounds? goes to 8 with the relic that ALSO gives +1 toughness and an auto 2+ save? 8 wounds at toughness 6? really?
.
Hmmm. I feel the need to point out that some of that already existed in the current codex. The 7 wound gravis profile certainly did, and while that specific combination wasn't available (in the base codex), 3++ saves are also just gone, so a lot of shenanigans are as well.
And that you need to pay 40 points for the Chapter Master upgrade to get access to that relic.
And gravis captains (and therefor the Chapter Master) are _really_ limited in their gear choices, which reduces their offensive output a lot.
Also given the offensive output of weapons now... trying to tank things out with your Warlord is far from the most broken thing you can do (and likely won't be very successful)
Voss wrote: Also given the offensive output of weapons now... trying to tank things out with your Warlord is far from the most broken thing you can do (and likely won't be very successful)
nintura wrote: watching this vid and it's just dumb. A gravis captain starts at 7 wounds? goes to 8 with the relic that ALSO gives +1 toughness and an auto 2+ save? 8 wounds at toughness 6? really?
Be a Salamander, go for 8 toughness.
Yep, he does. That's how he's playing it I believe.
I disagree. I hate the new 'If NOT X, then you can Y, or else Z' thing they have going on, I had to read some stuff multiple times to see what negative conditionals really meant.
Also, no model no rule stupid is back, say primaris captain can have a bolter and power fist, but only if he is DA. Hello? GW? Ever heard of Deathwatch? Who are now in same book? Seeing the DA guy likely went through it, why the frak they can't take him after pad swap? And why is any chapter change an issue at all, all he needs to be Black Templar is pad/helmet swap, why BT can't take that loadout?
I thought they would relax this idiocy after unsold chapter specific minis were mass dumped in loot boxes, but alas, it would be too smart...
nintura wrote: watching this vid and it's just dumb. A gravis captain starts at 7 wounds? goes to 8 with the relic that ALSO gives +1 toughness and an auto 2+ save? 8 wounds at toughness 6? really?
There isa WLT for sallies that adds +2 toughness on top of that.
The worst offender so far in the marine book is duty eternal stock on all dreads... That is just stupid.
nintura wrote: watching this vid and it's just dumb. A gravis captain starts at 7 wounds? goes to 8 with the relic that ALSO gives +1 toughness and an auto 2+ save? 8 wounds at toughness 6? really?
.
Hmmm. I feel the need to point out that some of that already existed in the current codex. The 7 wound gravis profile certainly did, and while that specific combination wasn't available (in the base codex), 3++ saves are also just gone, so a lot of shenanigans are as well.
And that you need to pay 40 points for the Chapter Master upgrade to get access to that relic.
And gravis captains (and therefor the Chapter Master) are _really_ limited in their gear choices, which reduces their offensive output a lot.
Also given the offensive output of weapons now... trying to tank things out with your Warlord is far from the most broken thing you can do (and likely won't be very successful)
having only 1 captain per detachment is also huge. It stops the triple smash fether BS. Or at least makes it very hard to pull.
nintura wrote: seems like chief apothecary is busted bringing back full aggressors.... marines have necron schtick now. All for 105 point'ish
IDK about that, so far I haven't seen a game with very good necron armies IMO. The stalkers and doomscythes seem pretty amazing for ranged support. A pair of doom scythes can kill gravis pretty quickly.
The worst offender so far in the marine book is duty eternal stock on all dreads... That is just stupid.
having only 1 captain per detachment is also huge. It stops the triple smash fether BS. Or at least makes it very hard to pull.
1 Sadly it's not as the damage output is way too high, it's very necessary, hopefully other codex's get something similar.
2 That actually has a work around in the CM can have a captain in the same detachment, so noy as nerfed as it was made to sound like.
Im aware of the chapter master, but nobody is paying +40 on top of that guys gear and tossing him in the front lines, remember characters don't gain the rerolls since they are not core so they will whiff more with the hammer.
I also disagree with the dreads needing it. -1 damage is a lazy fix and makes redemptors wave serpents only they also gained range strength and shots on onsloughts as well as min 4 damage on melee attacks. It's stupid, plus they can be repaired lol.
The worst offender so far in the marine book is duty eternal stock on all dreads... That is just stupid.
having only 1 captain per detachment is also huge. It stops the triple smash fether BS. Or at least makes it very hard to pull.
1 Sadly it's not as the damage output is way too high, it's very necessary, hopefully other codex's get something similar.
2 That actually has a work around in the CM can have a captain in the same detachment, so noy as nerfed as it was made to sound like.
Im aware of the chapter master, but nobody is paying +40 on top of that guys gear and tossing him in the front lines, remember characters don't gain the rerolls since they are not core so they will whiff more with the hammer.
I also disagree with the dreads needing it. -1 damage is a lazy fix and makes redemptors wave serpents only they also gained range strength and shots on onsloughts as well as min 4 damage on melee attacks. It's stupid, plus they can be repaired lol.
How else would you suggest they fix the damage inflation they have rammed into the game with these codex's meaning you have way more firepower, ti the point that all gladiouses are apparently unplayable (marine player's assesment) predators didn't survive even before this damager per point increase.
It also does help tone down the take autocannons shoot everything = profit.
Unfortunately it does sadly highlight that despite GW's marking BS 9th edition with an 8th edition codex won't work, and certainly wound be competitive for a lot of factions.
The worst offender so far in the marine book is duty eternal stock on all dreads... That is just stupid.
having only 1 captain per detachment is also huge. It stops the triple smash fether BS. Or at least makes it very hard to pull.
1 Sadly it's not as the damage output is way too high, it's very necessary, hopefully other codex's get something similar.
2 That actually has a work around in the CM can have a captain in the same detachment, so noy as nerfed as it was made to sound like.
Im aware of the chapter master, but nobody is paying +40 on top of that guys gear and tossing him in the front lines, remember characters don't gain the rerolls since they are not core so they will whiff more with the hammer.
I also disagree with the dreads needing it. -1 damage is a lazy fix and makes redemptors wave serpents only they also gained range strength and shots on onsloughts as well as min 4 damage on melee attacks. It's stupid, plus they can be repaired lol.
How else would you suggest they fix the damage inflation they have rammed into the game with these codex's meaning you have way more firepower, ti the point that all gladiouses are apparently unplayable (marine player's assesment) predators didn't survive even before this damager per point increase.
It also does help tone down the take autocannons shoot everything = profit.
Unfortunately it does sadly highlight that despite GW's marking BS 9th edition with an 8th edition codex won't work, and certainly wound be competitive for a lot of factions.
By not making weapons as powerful lol.
Instead in typical GW fashion they give the redemptor, for example, a d3+3 damage CCW and they increase the fire rate, strength and range of it's guns. So expect other amries guns to get that much worse because of stupid rules like duty eternal.
Instead in typical GW fashion they give the redemptor, for example, a d3+3 damage CCW and they increase the fire rate, strength and range of it's guns. So expect other amries guns to get that much worse because of stupid rules like duty eternal.
You think it's bad playing marines, try playing one of the other armies that are no doubt going to be stuck with non functional, uncompetitive codex for atleast the next year.
This really isnt a soft tidy up that GW marketing pedalled, this is a new design paradigm that isnt backwords compatable for codex's.
What is unclear to me how the successors interact with unit restrictions and bespoke options. Like for example if I make a homebrew chapter with custom chapter tactics and declare that they are Dark Angels successor, can that chapter take units the DA are prohibited from taking? Or can they take the DA specific loadout on the primaris captain?
Crimson wrote: What is unclear to me how the successors interact with unit restrictions and bespoke options. Like for example if I make a homebrew chapter with custom chapter tactics and declare that they are Dark Angels successor, can that chapter take units the DA are prohibited from taking? Or can they take the DA specific loadout on the primaris captain?
The restriction list specifically states that Successors are affected by the same restrictions. Both Dark Angels and Space Wolves say "(or any of their Successor Chapters)".
Crimson wrote: What is unclear to me how the successors interact with unit restrictions and bespoke options. Like for example if I make a homebrew chapter with custom chapter tactics and declare that they are Dark Angels successor, can that chapter take units the DA are prohibited from taking? Or can they take the DA specific loadout on the primaris captain?
The restriction list specifically states that Successors are affected by the same restrictions.
Makes sense. But can they take the chapter specific gear options of their parent? At least DA and SW have such.
So C'tan have the character keyword and with their max 3 wounds per phase rule, ouch. Those things won't be going to down anything short of Gulliman or Ghaz. I can see one in every list even at 350pts a pop.
Crimson wrote: What is unclear to me how the successors interact with unit restrictions and bespoke options. Like for example if I make a homebrew chapter with custom chapter tactics and declare that they are Dark Angels successor, can that chapter take units the DA are prohibited from taking? Or can they take the DA specific loadout on the primaris captain?
The restriction list specifically states that Successors are affected by the same restrictions. Both Dark Angels and Space Wolves say "(or any of their Successor Chapters)".
Which is stupid. If you dont want Sternguard in your Dark Angels successor, JUST DON'T TAKE THEM.
buddha wrote: So C'tan have the character keyword and with their max 3 wounds per phase rule, ouch. Those things won't be going to down anything short of Gulliman or Ghaz. I can see one in every list even at 350pts a pop.
they can be targeted. they do not benefit from look out sir either. or at least it seems that way from the game today.
McMagnus Mindbullets wrote: Aggressors will still definitely find a place in some armies. They'll still be good in sallies+IF.
Just far less of an auto-include (as most of the book is turning into, overly better balanced choices)
edit- most
Why would you ever run them in a IF list now? They are terrible at STR 4 and no AP. Maybe Salamanders, it no one will actually run the. Now if they want to be competitive. It only are they slower but their firepower was literally cut by 50%. They were nerfed harder than any unit in the both Codexes.
buddha wrote: So C'tan have the character keyword and with their max 3 wounds per phase rule, ouch. Those things won't be going to down anything short of Gulliman or Ghaz. I can see one in every list even at 350pts a pop.
they can be targeted. they do not benefit from look out sir either. or at least it seems that way from the game today.
Yup - they confirmed that in the MWG codex breakdown - under the enslaved star god rule they don't benefit from look out sir rule.
buddha wrote: So C'tan have the character keyword and with their max 3 wounds per phase rule, ouch. Those things won't be going to down anything short of Gulliman or Ghaz. I can see one in every list even at 350pts a pop.
they can be targeted. they do not benefit from look out sir either. or at least it seems that way from the game today.
.
Looking at the book I can't see a restriction they don't benefit from LoS. If anyone can point to it I'd be very appreciative.
buddha wrote: So C'tan have the character keyword and with their max 3 wounds per phase rule, ouch. Those things won't be going to down anything short of Gulliman or Ghaz. I can see one in every list even at 350pts a pop.
they can be targeted. they do not benefit from look out sir either. or at least it seems that way from the game today.
.
Looking at the book I can't see a restriction they don't benefit from LoS. If anyone can point to it I'd be very appreciative.
'And they shall know no fear' changed. No more reroll.
Now they ignore combat attrition modifiers (like -1 for half strength, or presumably penalties imposed by enemy special rules).
Not sure how I feel about it, or if it really matters.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Yeah it is. Just click on the pic and it zoooooooooms in.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Which is stupid. If you dont want Sternguard in your Dark Angels successor, JUST DON'T TAKE THEM.
Sternguard are in power armour. Dark Angel 1st Company is the Deathwing, and they're 100% Terminator armour...
... unless you buy the shiny new Primaris kits! They can be Deathwing as well.
Games Workshop - "Buy All Our Playsets & Toys!"
It's difference for the sake of just being different. They have Vets that can get the same loadout as Sternguard or foot Vanguard to begin with. It's stupid and screw pretending they and their successors are THAT super different.
So for the relic terminators, did tartaros and cataphractii armor get flattened into one generic terminator profile or did they retain their unique characteristics?
H.B.M.C. wrote: Yeah it is. Just click on the pic and it zoooooooooms in.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Which is stupid. If you dont want Sternguard in your Dark Angels successor, JUST DON'T TAKE THEM.
Sternguard are in power armour. Dark Angel 1st Company is the Deathwing, and they're 100% Terminator armour...
... unless you buy the shiny new Primaris kits! They can be Deathwing as well.
Games Workshop - "Buy All Our Playsets & Toys!"
Well, that’s why dark angels have company veterans. Presumably we’ll get some kind of primaris that markets on the iconic silhouette of a terminator around wave four or five when they flesh out first company primaris fully.
(Do you think we should remind the guy in charge of working out how primaris fit into existing company veterans exist, or would that be impolite after he already messed it up?)
Tiberius501 wrote: How does the silent king seem to fit in? Worth his points or is he a sad wasted opportunity? He seems pretty awesome but 450pts is pretty hurty.
Having looked through the codex myself, the Silent King is even better than previewed. Like, a lot better. Wowza. Hello auto explode for 1 CP for 2d6" explosion of d6" mortal wounds per unit. Or how about the fact that seems like menhirs can be overkilled on damage without excess bleeding onto the next menhir or the Silent King? Or the 1 CP strat to count as full profile if he's damaged? And then there's the extra shooting attack and the extra melee attacks from his little triumvirate dudes, when SK has enough wounds left that they are still kicking.
Tiberius501 wrote: How does the silent king seem to fit in? Worth his points or is he a sad wasted opportunity? He seems pretty awesome but 450pts is pretty hurty.
Having looked through the codex myself, the Silent King is even better than previewed. Like, a lot better. Wowza. Hello auto explode for 1 CP for 2d6" explosion of d6" mortal wounds per unit. Or how about the fact that seems like menhirs can be overkilled on damage without excess bleeding onto the next menhir or the Silent King? Or the 1 CP strat to count as full profile if he's damaged? And then there's the extra shooting attack and the extra melee attacks from his little triumvirate dudes, when SK has enough wounds left that they are still kicking.
Nice. Do his 2 buddies hilariously come back to life when he uses the strat to count as having full wounds?
Tiberius501 wrote: How does the silent king seem to fit in? Worth his points or is he a sad wasted opportunity? He seems pretty awesome but 450pts is pretty hurty.
Having looked through the codex myself, the Silent King is even better than previewed. Like, a lot better. Wowza. Hello auto explode for 1 CP for 2d6" explosion of d6" mortal wounds per unit. Or how about the fact that seems like menhirs can be overkilled on damage without excess bleeding onto the next menhir or the Silent King? Or the 1 CP strat to count as full profile if he's damaged? And then there's the extra shooting attack and the extra melee attacks from his little triumvirate dudes, when SK has enough wounds left that they are still kicking.
Nice. Do his 2 buddies hilariously come back to life when he uses the strat to count as having full wounds?
I don't think so, the rule that states when you lose abilities keys off his current wound count, so unless the strat specifies counting as having full wound then probably not.
Definitely worth it to bring a technomancer with cloak though
Tiberius501 wrote: How does the silent king seem to fit in? Worth his points or is he a sad wasted opportunity? He seems pretty awesome but 450pts is pretty hurty.
Having looked through the codex myself, the Silent King is even better than previewed. Like, a lot better. Wowza. Hello auto explode for 1 CP for 2d6" explosion of d6" mortal wounds per unit. Or how about the fact that seems like menhirs can be overkilled on damage without excess bleeding onto the next menhir or the Silent King? Or the 1 CP strat to count as full profile if he's damaged? And then there's the extra shooting attack and the extra melee attacks from his little triumvirate dudes, when SK has enough wounds left that they are still kicking.
Nice. Do his 2 buddies hilariously come back to life when he uses the strat to count as having full wounds?
I don't think so, the rule that states when you lose abilities keys off his current wound count, so unless the strat specifies counting as having full wound then probably not.
Definitely worth it to bring a technomancer with cloak though
Yeah I will pretty much have a technomancer with a cloak in every game haha.
Also I’m a little sad Reanimators don’t have an Invuln save or anything. Are they easy enough at least to hide behind obscuring terrain and still reach units with their beam?
nintura wrote: watching this vid and it's just dumb. A gravis captain starts at 7 wounds? goes to 8 with the relic that ALSO gives +1 toughness and an auto 2+ save? 8 wounds at toughness 6? really?
There isa WLT for sallies that adds +2 toughness on top of that.
The worst offender so far in the marine book is duty eternal stock on all dreads... That is just stupid.
nintura wrote: watching this vid and it's just dumb. A gravis captain starts at 7 wounds? goes to 8 with the relic that ALSO gives +1 toughness and an auto 2+ save? 8 wounds at toughness 6? really?
.
Hmmm. I feel the need to point out that some of that already existed in the current codex. The 7 wound gravis profile certainly did, and while that specific combination wasn't available (in the base codex), 3++ saves are also just gone, so a lot of shenanigans are as well.
And that you need to pay 40 points for the Chapter Master upgrade to get access to that relic.
And gravis captains (and therefor the Chapter Master) are _really_ limited in their gear choices, which reduces their offensive output a lot.
Also given the offensive output of weapons now... trying to tank things out with your Warlord is far from the most broken thing you can do (and likely won't be very successful)
having only 1 captain per detachment is also huge. It stops the triple smash fether BS. Or at least makes it very hard to pull.
Anti tank is ramping up super hard right now, so I don't actually think duty eternal will be that great for dreadnoughts against new codex armies with the hard ramp of melta weapons and all the necron tank destroying stuff. It'll be a slog for older armies because they havn't gotten themselves the buff to AT yet, but GW has clearly decided the game has to be even more deadly now.
Not exactly. The game is deadlier on the AT sides and is getting some heavy melee hitters, but the shooting in general is being restricted.
Marines surely shoot less in this codex (CM nerf, salamander nerf, aggressor nerf, graviton nerf...), and the necrons never had a really good one apart from destroyers, which got nerfed.
Also, both codici are ripe with defensive buffs and rules.
An 8th edition codex is perfectly in line if not more powerful that those new dexes on the shooting side. Where the gap is really evident is on AT and melee. One of those skorphek destroyers hits harder than a carnifex in melee.
Coolyo294 wrote: So for the relic terminators, did tartaros and cataphractii armor get flattened into one generic terminator profile or did they retain their unique characteristics?
They are one generic unit now, with standard terminator profile, tartaros is not fast, cataphractii is not slow or more durable. They can be equiped with any combo of stuff from the plastic GW kits, no FW 30k options and still no tele homer though. I think cataphractii captain is gone too although not 100% on that.
Looks like reaper cannon is now ap2 and claws are +1 attack each, not just for a pair. Looks like the only really advantage these have other generic terminators is mixing claws and guns, or putting a x2 str weapon on the sarge.
seeing all those 19's, 28's and other weird point numbers, I am now 100% convinced the devs assign those at random. They go "this unit is roughly worth 20pts per model" and then fiddle it so it looks like Rigorous Playtesting made them realize it is in fact exactly ONE point less capable than 20pts.
You think all should cost 20, 30 etc? Despite that being logical impossibity correct price is not such convenient numbers. I don't know how correct these are but were points always divisible by 5 it would be 100% sure proof they are wrong
Cronch wrote: seeing all those 19's, 28's and other weird point numbers, I am now 100% convinced the devs assign those at random. They go "this unit is roughly worth 20pts per model" and then fiddle it so it looks like Rigorous Playtesting made them realize it is in fact exactly ONE point less capable than 20pts.
They are not 'weird'.
When 9th dropped, all of a sudden everything was a multiple of 5. Which was stupid.
Now there's been a couple months for Devs to see how that shakes out, they can make small adjustments based on performance. A point either side on a model is a lot when you take 20 in a list.
Cronch wrote: seeing all those 19's, 28's and other weird point numbers, I am now 100% convinced the devs assign those at random. They go "this unit is roughly worth 20pts per model" and then fiddle it so it looks like Rigorous Playtesting made them realize it is in fact exactly ONE point less capable than 20pts.
I doubt they balanced based on individual model costs, remember that at 10 models that swing between 19 and 21 for individual models is a 20 point swing for the unit (potentially an extra model). When you take 5 or 10 models in a unit, the prices are always going to be divisible by 5, right?
'And they shall know no fear' changed. No more reroll.
Now they ignore combat attrition modifiers (like -1 for half strength, or presumably penalties imposed by enemy special rules).
Not sure how I feel about it, or if it really matters.
Definitely matters. Put Eradicators on LD6, kill two, 33% chance to off the last one and with some luck even more if they took a big squad.
Marines have to be really careful against morale mods now that they have all these beefy models that can run.
Yes Morale matters now. In a game against Death Guard, there was a big blob of 20 Plague Marines, over the course of the game I made at least 6 run because of the new rules. I think it's great as it's not overly punishing due to attrition tests (you won't lose 10 cultists because you lost a dozen to shooting) but it makes it matter against every target save those who are effectively Fearless.
Cronch wrote: seeing all those 19's, 28's and other weird point numbers, I am now 100% convinced the devs assign those at random. They go "this unit is roughly worth 20pts per model" and then fiddle it so it looks like Rigorous Playtesting made them realize it is in fact exactly ONE point less capable than 20pts.
They are not 'weird'.
When 9th dropped, all of a sudden everything was a multiple of 5. Which was stupid.
Now there's been a couple months for Devs to see how that shakes out, they can make small adjustments based on performance. A point either side on a model is a lot when you take 20 in a list.
Uuh no games since 9e was launched, internally or externally, was used for figuring points in codex.
Coolyo294 wrote: So for the relic terminators, did tartaros and cataphractii armor get flattened into one generic terminator profile or did they retain their unique characteristics?
They are one generic unit now, with standard terminator profile, tartaros is not fast, cataphractii is not slow or more durable. They can be equiped with any combo of stuff from the plastic GW kits, no FW 30k options and still no tele homer though. I think cataphractii captain is gone too although not 100% on that.
Looks like reaper cannon is now ap2 and claws are +1 attack each, not just for a pair. Looks like the only really advantage these have other generic terminators is mixing claws and guns, or putting a x2 str weapon on the sarge.
Coolyo294 wrote: So for the relic terminators, did tartaros and cataphractii armor get flattened into one generic terminator profile or did they retain their unique characteristics?
They are one generic unit now, with standard terminator profile, tartaros is not fast, cataphractii is not slow or more durable. They can be equiped with any combo of stuff from the plastic GW kits, no FW 30k options and still no tele homer though. I think cataphractii captain is gone too although not 100% on that.
Looks like reaper cannon is now ap2 and claws are +1 attack each, not just for a pair. Looks like the only really advantage these have other generic terminators is mixing claws and guns, or putting a x2 str weapon on the sarge.
Wow that's gakky thanks GW
What? It's the worst of both worlds - a separate entry feeding the bloat, but without any real semi-meaningful differences. Of course that's what GW went with!
Cronch wrote: seeing all those 19's, 28's and other weird point numbers, I am now 100% convinced the devs assign those at random. They go "this unit is roughly worth 20pts per model" and then fiddle it so it looks like Rigorous Playtesting made them realize it is in fact exactly ONE point less capable than 20pts.
They are not 'weird'.
When 9th dropped, all of a sudden everything was a multiple of 5. Which was stupid.
Now there's been a couple months for Devs to see how that shakes out, they can make small adjustments based on performance. A point either side on a model is a lot when you take 20 in a list.
Well, you're partially right. They aren't weird.
But these numbers would have been finalized by the time the CA2020 book came out. Between printing and distribution there hasn't been time for the devs to see how the 2020 numbers 'shook out.' These would have been based on 2019 and probably internal testing.
Most of the indomitus models and the EtB kits have the exact same numbers they did in CA2020
Usually a dead time between the stream and youtube allowing you to watch it as a video but otherwise I believe it's just always their if they tick the option during the setup of the stream.
Coolyo294 wrote: So for the relic terminators, did tartaros and cataphractii armor get flattened into one generic terminator profile or did they retain their unique characteristics?
They are one generic unit now, with standard terminator profile, tartaros is not fast, cataphractii is not slow or more durable. They can be equiped with any combo of stuff from the plastic GW kits, no FW 30k options and still no tele homer though. I think cataphractii captain is gone too although not 100% on that.
Looks like reaper cannon is now ap2 and claws are +1 attack each, not just for a pair. Looks like the only really advantage these have other generic terminators is mixing claws and guns, or putting a x2 str weapon on the sarge.
Aw, that stings I have 15 cataphractii I like to run that got a lot of mileage out of their 4++ save.
Interesting of note, new Veil of Darkness let's you use it during the move phase, and not just the end of movement phase. Not sure if that actually changes anything or not.
Coolyo294 wrote: So for the relic terminators, did tartaros and cataphractii armor get flattened into one generic terminator profile or did they retain their unique characteristics?
They are one generic unit now, with standard terminator profile, tartaros is not fast, cataphractii is not slow or more durable. They can be equiped with any combo of stuff from the plastic GW kits, no FW 30k options and still no tele homer though. I think cataphractii captain is gone too although not 100% on that.
Looks like reaper cannon is now ap2 and claws are +1 attack each, not just for a pair. Looks like the only really advantage these have other generic terminators is mixing claws and guns, or putting a x2 str weapon on the sarge.
Aw, that stings I have 15 cataphractii I like to run that got a lot of mileage out of their 4++ save.
I’ve got mixed feelings on the relic terminators.
I build my Tartaros from the BoP box with a mixed loadout that is legal in 30k, but when they got around to publishing the 40k rules, was not. Of course, it’s a mixed load that made more sense in 7th, but at least I can field them now. Big plus, they have just been collecting dust.
My capheracts were built 2xLC on all of them. I figured with the 4++ I could get away from the need for SSs (and just taking normal assault terminators), and with all the re-rolls to wound, get some work done. They just got a bit squishier. Of course, with the new rules for LC, they also got a lot more blendery. And a 2+ save is worth a bit more then it did in prior editions. The drop in the invuln will mater when facing -3 AP stuff, which covers a few things. And they got a little faster.
If I were to build them again today, it would be different. But C’est La vie.
This right here is what annoys me... marines get the exact same relic but better.... theirs gives +1 T, +1 W, AND an automatic 2+ save. But for any other race? No.
Also TabletopTitans are doing a codex Marines revirw today in 3 hours. I think that will be more telling as they have had a bit more time and are able to call out tmthe changes directly.
That new Gravis Captain seems like a good choice for making a Chapter Master. Give him the relic that boosts his Toughness and Wounds and a 2+ Save, then aim for a Warlord trait that increases durability like Iron Resolve or Stubborn Heroism (if an Imperial Fist), and you have yourself a T6, W9, 2+/4++/6+++ Captain that lets you allow one unit with in 6" reroll everything. Not bad.
casvalremdeikun wrote: That new Gravis Captain seems like a good choice for making a Chapter Master. Give him the relic that boosts his Toughness and Wounds and a 2+ Save, then aim for a Warlord trait that increases durability like Iron Resolve or Stubborn Heroism (if an Imperial Fist), and you have yourself a T6, W9, 2+/4++/6+++ Captain that lets you allow one unit with in 6" reroll everything. Not bad.
nintura wrote: This right here is what annoys me... marines get the exact same relic but better.... theirs gives +1 T, +1 W, AND an automatic 2+ save. But for any other race? No.
The marine relic is for the chapter master upgrade only though, so its not an entirely fair comparison.
I really wish there was just a regular relic giving +1 W and T that everyone could take as that would be a perfect way to make gravis versions of characters who do not have that armour option.
casvalremdeikun wrote: That new Gravis Captain seems like a good choice for making a Chapter Master. Give him the relic that boosts his Toughness and Wounds and a 2+ Save, then aim for a Warlord trait that increases durability like Iron Resolve or Stubborn Heroism (if an Imperial Fist), and you have yourself a T6, W9, 2+/4++/6+++ Captain that lets you allow one unit with in 6" reroll everything. Not bad.
casvalremdeikun wrote: That new Gravis Captain seems like a good choice for making a Chapter Master. Give him the relic that boosts his Toughness and Wounds and a 2+ Save, then aim for a Warlord trait that increases durability like Iron Resolve or Stubborn Heroism (if an Imperial Fist), and you have yourself a T6, W9, 2+/4++/6+++ Captain that lets you allow one unit with in 6" reroll everything. Not bad.
Salamander for T8, W8, 2+/4++, and ignore -1AP
Oh dang! I like it. I suppose one could use the regular Gravis Captain, but this one has a better shooting profile. So you trade some better shooting for the ability to punch a hole in a tank. That's a fair trade.
casvalremdeikun wrote: That new Gravis Captain seems like a good choice for making a Chapter Master. Give him the relic that boosts his Toughness and Wounds and a 2+ Save, then aim for a Warlord trait that increases durability like Iron Resolve or Stubborn Heroism (if an Imperial Fist), and you have yourself a T6, W9, 2+/4++/6+++ Captain that lets you allow one unit with in 6" reroll everything. Not bad.
Salamander for T8, W8, 2+/4++, and ignore -1AP
Oh dang! I like it. I suppose one could use the regular Gravis Captain, but this one has a better shooting profile. So you trade some better shooting for the ability to punch a hole in a tank. That's a fair trade.
If you want to punch holes in tanks (my Gravis Captain is named King Bradley for a reason) you can spend some CP to give him a second Warlord Trait for so his sword is S7 and his fist is S10.
nintura wrote: This right here is what annoys me... marines get the exact same relic but better.... theirs gives +1 T, +1 W, AND an automatic 2+ save. But for any other race? No.
The marine relic is for the chapter master upgrade only though, so its not an entirely fair comparison.
It absolutely IS a fair comparison because the Weave has restrictions too.
nintura wrote: This right here is what annoys me... marines get the exact same relic but better.... theirs gives +1 T, +1 W, AND an automatic 2+ save. But for any other race? No.
The marine relic is for the chapter master upgrade only though, so its not an entirely fair comparison.
It absolutely IS a fair comparison because the Weave has restrictions too.
Infantry. Not a massive restriction really compared to "1 specific 1 per army hq you must spend 40 points extra to access".
Why do they keep having issues in Aus and New Zealand with characters but none of the rest? They also had trouble with the bike chaplain haha. Is our country against characters or something?
Tiberius501 wrote: Why do they keep having issues in Aus and New Zealand with characters but none of the rest? They also had trouble with the bike chaplain haha. Is our country against characters or something?
I'm guessing a shipping container has gotten 'lost' somewhere...
casvalremdeikun wrote: That new Gravis Captain seems like a good choice for making a Chapter Master. Give him the relic that boosts his Toughness and Wounds and a 2+ Save, then aim for a Warlord trait that increases durability like Iron Resolve or Stubborn Heroism (if an Imperial Fist), and you have yourself a T6, W9, 2+/4++/6+++ Captain that lets you allow one unit with in 6" reroll everything. Not bad.
Salamander for T8, W8, 2+/4++, and ignore -1AP
Oh dang! I like it. I suppose one could use the regular Gravis Captain, but this one has a better shooting profile. So you trade some better shooting for the ability to punch a hole in a tank. That's a fair trade.
If you want to punch holes in tanks (my Gravis Captain is named King Bradley for a reason) you can spend some CP to give him a second Warlord Trait for so his sword is S7 and his fist is S10.
Do it. This is amazing. Yes, it is one dude and it is only in melee, but it is amazing. I am still going with the shooty dude for my Crimson Fists. Better Bolt Rifle gets more hits that way.
Tiberius501 wrote: Why do they keep having issues in Aus and New Zealand with characters but none of the rest? They also had trouble with the bike chaplain haha. Is our country against characters or something?
They mentioned a storm last week.
Ship may have gotten damaged or just delayed.
If you want to punch holes in tanks (my Gravis Captain is named King Bradley for a reason) you can spend some CP to give him a second Warlord Trait for so his sword is S7 and his fist is S10.
What warlord trait does that? Do you mean Imperium's Sword or is there one which gives a permanent strength boost?
nintura wrote: This right here is what annoys me... marines get the exact same relic but better.... theirs gives +1 T, +1 W, AND an automatic 2+ save. But for any other race? No.
The marine relic is for the chapter master upgrade only though, so its not an entirely fair comparison.
It absolutely IS a fair comparison because the Weave has restrictions too.
Infantry. Not a massive restriction really compared to "1 specific 1 per army hq you must spend 40 points extra to access".
A relic is a relic is a relic. Can still only have one in an army.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I will say though, the Nightbringer brings me joy. It seems like whatever he touches in combat is going to get devoured.
If you want to punch holes in tanks (my Gravis Captain is named King Bradley for a reason) you can spend some CP to give him a second Warlord Trait for so his sword is S7 and his fist is S10.
What warlord trait does that? Do you mean Imperium's Sword or is there one which gives a permanent strength boost?
If you want to punch holes in tanks (my Gravis Captain is named King Bradley for a reason) you can spend some CP to give him a second Warlord Trait for so his sword is S7 and his fist is S10.
What warlord trait does that? Do you mean Imperium's Sword or is there one which gives a permanent strength boost?
Salamanders have a +2 Str warlord trait.
That. Salamanders have a +2 Strength trait, a +2 Toughness trait, and a Strat that lets you have two traits. I don’t know how Good that is, but the idea of it amuses me so.
Coolyo294 wrote: So for the relic terminators, did tartaros and cataphractii armor get flattened into one generic terminator profile or did they retain their unique characteristics?
They are one generic unit now, with standard terminator profile, tartaros is not fast, cataphractii is not slow or more durable. They can be equiped with any combo of stuff from the plastic GW kits, no FW 30k options and still no tele homer though. I think cataphractii captain is gone too although not 100% on that.
Looks like reaper cannon is now ap2 and claws are +1 attack each, not just for a pair. Looks like the only really advantage these have other generic terminators is mixing claws and guns, or putting a x2 str weapon on the sarge.
Aw, that stings I have 15 cataphractii I like to run that got a lot of mileage out of their 4++ save.
I’ve got mixed feelings on the relic terminators.
You know what is funny? Plasma and volkite blasters are legal on cataphractii now, even though the bit doesn't exist in the entirety of FW and GW ranges. Consistency, what's that? Storm shields and thunder hammers are illegal, though, despite FW making the bits and GW trying hard to blanderize 'relic' terminators with regular ones. Go figure, again.
On a side note, necron warriors sold separately faster than I expected. Place your bets, will GW sell them at insanely (for them) low price, or will they get usual pricetag and GW sells exactly zero of them because for a pittance more you can grab starter box with double the model count?
Irbis wrote: On a side note, necron warriors sold separately faster than I expected. Place your bets, will GW sell them at insanely (for them) low price, or will they get usual pricetag and GW sells exactly zero of them because for a pittance more you can grab starter box with double the model count?
The old kit has been off the webstore for probably close to a month now, so not really a surprise and I wouldn't expect them to retail for less than £25 ($40 US).
nintura wrote: Interesting of note, new Veil of Darkness let's you use it during the move phase, and not just the end of movement phase. Not sure if that actually changes anything or not.
Huh, kind of intreasting. It doesn't say anything about being unable to move after you use it.
EDIT: So, you can't move after you use it due to the advanced rules.
That being said, you can pull units out of engamgent range now and odn't count as falling back so you can still shoot with them.
GW has to sell them on their own even if right now they won't sell all that much because they are a core unit and beginners who might not want to deal with ebay; or who don't know about it. Will want to get the core warriors for their army.
Plus the cheap supply will run out given time so might as well have them on the books. Chances are they'll be selling the kit for a long while now.
Plus any time in the future Necrons get a big marketing push chances are warriors won't be being updated. So yep plenty of time to profit from sales.
I'm more surprised we didn't see a like release for Marines at the same time.
Huh. The McFarlane action figures are going up for pre-order for a single week, despite the fact that they were available for months on Amazon before all of the orders were cancelled last week.
How does GW manage such consistency..?
nintura wrote: Interesting of note, new Veil of Darkness let's you use it during the move phase, and not just the end of movement phase. Not sure if that actually changes anything or not.
Huh, kind of intreasting. It doesn't say anything about being unable to move after you use it.
Doesn't need to. Already covered in Rare Rules for Repositioned and Replacement Units.
nintura wrote: Interesting of note, new Veil of Darkness let's you use it during the move phase, and not just the end of movement phase. Not sure if that actually changes anything or not.
Huh, kind of intreasting. It doesn't say anything about being unable to move after you use it.
Doesn't need to. Already covered in Rare Rules for Repositioned and Replacement Units.
Yeah, I edited my post. still useful for pulling a unit out of combat and being able to shoot.
Lord Damocles wrote: Huh. The McFarlane action figures are going up for pre-order for a single week, despite the fact that they were available for months on Amazon before all of the orders were cancelled last week.
How does GW manage such consistency..?
...something tells me that has more to do with Amazon's expectations of McFarlane not being met. Remember, GW aren't actually producing them, they've licensed McFarlane to do it - which means they probably won't be handling distribution to third party sellers like Amazon either.
Overread wrote: GW has to sell them on their own even if right now they won't sell all that much because they are a core unit and beginners who might not want to deal with ebay; or who don't know about it. Will want to get the core warriors for their army.
Plus the cheap supply will run out given time so might as well have them on the books. Chances are they'll be selling the kit for a long while now.
Plus any time in the future Necrons get a big marketing push chances are warriors won't be being updated. So yep plenty of time to profit from sales.
I'm more surprised we didn't see a like release for Marines at the same time.
Except for outriders, the marine units from Indomitus are full multi-part kits. Even though the only options for Assault Intercessors and bladeguard are sergeant weapons (which is two pistols for the bladeguard).
So slightly more production than stuffing the EtB sprues in a box.
[And I still suspect outriders will get a real box next year with DA]
Overread wrote: GW has to sell them on their own even if right now they won't sell all that much because they are a core unit and beginners who might not want to deal with ebay; or who don't know about it. Will want to get the core warriors for their army.
Plus the cheap supply will run out given time so might as well have them on the books. Chances are they'll be selling the kit for a long while now.
Plus any time in the future Necrons get a big marketing push chances are warriors won't be being updated. So yep plenty of time to profit from sales.
I'm more surprised we didn't see a like release for Marines at the same time.
Except for outriders, the marine units from Indomitus are full multi-part kits. Even though the only options for Assault Intercessors and bladeguard are sergeant weapons (which is two pistols for the bladeguard).
So slightly more production than stuffing the EtB sprues in a box.
[And I still suspect outriders will get a real box next year with DA]
Not really. The only difference is the number of sprue that go into each box. Which basically means one or two sprue difference most likely. Multipart models; duel builds; easy to build etc.... They are all cast in the same machine and spat out at the same rate. So it wouldn't be any more complicated, at this stage, for GW to produce and box them up.
Overread wrote: GW has to sell them on their own even if right now they won't sell all that much because they are a core unit and beginners who might not want to deal with ebay; or who don't know about it. Will want to get the core warriors for their army.
Beginners would presumably want to grab the starter box, that thing GW tries to flog to any newcomer who wants to get into the hobby. Seeing the box has two troops and two HQs for slightly more than usual cost of troop choice box (and beginners really want that extra character for their necron army plus can always sell marine half to lower the cost even more) I don't see warriors selling all that well on their own, unless GW tries double sprue discount like MWJ said...
I wonder if the rules of combi-weapon rules have changed again or whether GW has just messed up the points. At least for the Sternguard combi-weapons seem to cost five points, whereas several of the special weapons alone seem to cost ten points which really doesn't make much sense if combi-weapon is basically a bolter + a fully-functioning special weapon....
(I'm building primaris-bodied Sternguard and trying to decide how to equip them.)
Overread wrote: GW has to sell them on their own even if right now they won't sell all that much because they are a core unit and beginners who might not want to deal with ebay; or who don't know about it. Will want to get the core warriors for their army.
Plus the cheap supply will run out given time so might as well have them on the books. Chances are they'll be selling the kit for a long while now.
Plus any time in the future Necrons get a big marketing push chances are warriors won't be being updated. So yep plenty of time to profit from sales.
I'm more surprised we didn't see a like release for Marines at the same time.
Except for outriders, the marine units from Indomitus are full multi-part kits. Even though the only options for Assault Intercessors and bladeguard are sergeant weapons (which is two pistols for the bladeguard).
So slightly more production than stuffing the EtB sprues in a box.
[And I still suspect outriders will get a real box next year with DA]
Not really. The only difference is the number of sprue that go into each box. Which basically means one or two sprue difference most likely. Multipart models; duel builds; easy to build etc.... They are all cast in the same machine and spat out at the same rate. So it wouldn't be any more complicated, at this stage, for GW to produce and box them up.
'One or two sprues difference' is changing production time by a third or half again (or double, I'm not sure how you're counting sprues). That's pretty big. And these have been in production for quite a bit longer (I doubt they stopped once the indomitus boxes were done, especially since they are also in the starters). Fewer sprues in more machines and a longer run makes a big difference in production.
It isn't just a matter of each kit being done in one machine for a week and the production run is done.
There's no fething way that the assault intercessors in the various starters count as full multi-part kits, and we've already seen what the actual multi-kits look like for assault Intercessors, Eradicators, and Bladeguard.
You know what is funny? Plasma and volkite blasters are legal on cataphractii now, even though the bit doesn't exist in the entirety of FW and GW ranges.
Lernean Terminators get you Volkite on Cataphractii and the Cataphractii Special Weapon set has a Plasma Blaster.
nintura wrote: This right here is what annoys me... marines get the exact same relic but better.... theirs gives +1 T, +1 W, AND an automatic 2+ save. But for any other race? No.
The marine relic is for the chapter master upgrade only though, so its not an entirely fair comparison.
It absolutely IS a fair comparison because the Weave has restrictions too.
Infantry. Not a massive restriction really compared to "1 specific 1 per army hq you must spend 40 points extra to access".
You skipped the Noble Infantry part. Compare that to a Chapter Master that can be doing anything.
JWBS wrote: There's no fething way that the assault intercessors in the various starters count as full multi-part kits, and we've already seen what the actual multi-kits look like for assault Intercessors, Eradicators, and Bladeguard.
Correct on both. Its an entirely separate production run, and almost certainly more sprues per box.
The EtB warriors and skorpekhs are much easier to slot in alongside the giants, because they've been churning out those things for months for Indomitus and the starters.
nintura wrote: Interesting of note, new Veil of Darkness let's you use it during the move phase, and not just the end of movement phase. Not sure if that actually changes anything or not.
Huh, kind of intreasting. It doesn't say anything about being unable to move after you use it.
Doesn't need to. Already covered in Rare Rules for Repositioned and Replacement Units.
Yeah, I edited my post. still useful for pulling a unit out of combat and being able to shoot.
That's been big use for it for edition or two in edition of 3 pointing with no real own melee threats that was sometimes only way to deal with some units
Overread wrote: GW has to sell them on their own even if right now they won't sell all that much because they are a core unit and beginners who might not want to deal with ebay; or who don't know about it. Will want to get the core warriors for their army.
Beginners would presumably want to grab the starter box, that thing GW tries to flog to any newcomer who wants to get into the hobby. Seeing the box has two troops and two HQs for slightly more than usual cost of troop choice box (and beginners really want that extra character for their necron army plus can always sell marine half to lower the cost even more) I don't see warriors selling all that well on their own, unless GW tries double sprue discount like MWJ said...
How many starter sets you expect beginner to buy? 2? 3?
JWBS wrote: There's no fething way that the assault intercessors in the various starters count as full multi-part kits, and we've already seen what the actual multi-kits look like for assault Intercessors, Eradicators, and Bladeguard.
Correct on both. Its an entirely separate production run, and almost certainly more sprues per box.
The EtB warriors and skorpekhs are much easier to slot in alongside the giants, because they've been churning out those things for months for Indomitus and the starters.
Yeah, I am curious how long this release is going to be spaced out. We've got 6 more kits for the Necrons to come and a ton more for SM. Looks like we may have at least two more weeks of release at a minimum.
JWBS wrote: There's no fething way that the assault intercessors in the various starters count as full multi-part kits, and we've already seen what the actual multi-kits look like for assault Intercessors, Eradicators, and Bladeguard.
Correct on both. Its an entirely separate production run, and almost certainly more sprues per box.
The EtB warriors and skorpekhs are much easier to slot in alongside the giants, because they've been churning out those things for months for Indomitus and the starters.
Yeah, I am curious how long this release is going to be spaced out. We've got 6 more kits for the Necrons to come and a ton more for SM. Looks like we may have at least two more weeks of release at a minimum.
It wouldn't surprise me if we come to the end of the month and still have several kits go to.
Necrons still have both the Monolith and Void dragon - two big expensive kits. Plus it wouldn't surprise me if we see a Reanimator kit on its own as well or otherwise a "Getting Started" set that uses that sprue with the other models as its foundation
JWBS wrote: There's no fething way that the assault intercessors in the various starters count as full multi-part kits, and we've already seen what the actual multi-kits look like for assault Intercessors, Eradicators, and Bladeguard.
Correct on both. Its an entirely separate production run, and almost certainly more sprues per box.
The EtB warriors and skorpekhs are much easier to slot in alongside the giants, because they've been churning out those things for months for Indomitus and the starters.
Yeah, I am curious how long this release is going to be spaced out. We've got 6 more kits for the Necrons to come and a ton more for SM. Looks like we may have at least two more weeks of release at a minimum.
It wouldn't surprise me if we come to the end of the month and still have several kits go to.
Necrons still have both the Monolith and Void dragon - two big expensive kits. Plus it wouldn't surprise me if we see a Reanimator kit on its own as well or otherwise a "Getting Started" set that uses that sprue with the other models as its foundation
Along with the Monolith and Void Dragon, Necrons still have the new Overlord, Royal Warden, Skorpekh Lord, Psychomancer, Chronomancer, Plasmancer, Canoptek Reanimator, Cryptothralls, Ophydian Destroyers and the Convergence of Dominion all potentially awaiting release (a few models from Indomitus may not see a separate release for a while). That would definitely fill the releases for the rest of October and into November.
JWBS wrote: There's no fething way that the assault intercessors in the various starters count as full multi-part kits, and we've already seen what the actual multi-kits look like for assault Intercessors, Eradicators, and Bladeguard.
Correct on both. Its an entirely separate production run, and almost certainly more sprues per box.
The EtB warriors and skorpekhs are much easier to slot in alongside the giants, because they've been churning out those things for months for Indomitus and the starters.
Yeah, I am curious how long this release is going to be spaced out. We've got 6 more kits for the Necrons to come and a ton more for SM. Looks like we may have at least two more weeks of release at a minimum.
It wouldn't surprise me if we come to the end of the month and still have several kits go to.
Necrons still have both the Monolith and Void dragon - two big expensive kits. Plus it wouldn't surprise me if we see a Reanimator kit on its own as well or otherwise a "Getting Started" set that uses that sprue with the other models as its foundation
I only returned to the hobby a couple of years ago and had been away since before the Get Started sets were a thing, so I could be wrong, but I noticed that the GSC starter took ages to release, long after the full line was otherwise available, so I wouldn't bet we'll see and new Necron or Primaris starters this year (though I do seem to remember the Vanguard Primaris box wasn't too long after their initial release, so maybe wrong about that).
Crimson wrote: I wonder if the rules of combi-weapon rules have changed again or whether GW has just messed up the points. At least for the Sternguard combi-weapons seem to cost five points, whereas several of the special weapons alone seem to cost ten points which really doesn't make much sense if combi-weapon is basically a bolter + a fully-functioning special weapon....
(I'm building primaris-bodied Sternguard and trying to decide how to equip them.)
*Looks at newly converted combi-plasma Chosen* Oh !!
Billagio wrote: Did grav devs go up in points? I know they lost the strat but wondering if they’re still a viable option if I don’t wanna spam eradicators
They went up 3 points per model, due to the extra wound, but that's about it.
why are people so hanged up on the necron reanimator being tall?
As long as the terrain is 5" at its tallest point and your model is less than 18 wounds you are protected from LOS along the entire width of the terrain piece. Or has this changed somehow?
The fact its fairly slim should make it easier to hide. Its not like a flyrant or a blood thirster with huge wings poking out either side...
Ragnar69 wrote: Stern guard already have special bolters that are replaced by the combos, that's why they are cheaper
But the special weapon replaces that too. Sternguard combi-melta costs five points sternguard meltagun costs ten. How does that make any sense with the current combi-weapon rules?
Argive wrote: why are people so hanged up on the necron reanimator being tall?
As long as the terrain is 5" at its tallest point and your model is less than 18 wounds you are protected from LOS along the entire width of the terrain piece. Or has this changed somehow?
The fact its fairly slim should make it easier to hide. Its not like a flyrant or a blood thirster with huge wings poking out either side...
last i recall, tails, wings, weapons, and banners didnt count for los? but i might have the wrong edition in mind
Argive wrote: why are people so hanged up on the necron reanimator being tall?
As long as the terrain is 5" at its tallest point and your model is less than 18 wounds you are protected from LOS along the entire width of the terrain piece. Or has this changed somehow?
The fact its fairly slim should make it easier to hide. Its not like a flyrant or a blood thirster with huge wings poking out either side...
last i recall, tails, wings, weapons, and banners didnt count for los? but i might have the wrong edition in mind
I dont have my brb to hand. The battle primer pdf doesnt cover LOS after a skim read. As far as I remember any antenna / weapon barrel doesn't count for LOS. But wings are considered part of the "body".
Anyway. Your model could be a foot tall as long as its standing behind terrain feature that's 5" or taller and doesn't have 18+ wounds you cant be seen.
Maybe what people mean is that being so tall is detrimental to try and hide using other terrain stuff thats lower than 5" though.. Which is a fair point.
Ragnar69 wrote: Stern guard already have special bolters that are replaced by the combos, that's why they are cheaper
But the special weapon replaces that too. Sternguard combi-melta costs five points sternguard meltagun costs ten. How does that make any sense with the current combi-weapon rules?
Depends on how you do the math. If you are only looking at it is 16.7% reduced hit then it is a no brainer. However if you look at it as 50% more misses than the equation is different, especially when considering re-rolls. It’s why stormshields were pretty mandatory on captions, even when they had a native 4++.
when doing any of this math requires adding in the cost of the platform rather than just the weapon. Melta gun is about 20% more. Personally I wouldn’t bother with the combi weapons on veterans since there are so many other more efficient platforms.
Ragnar69 wrote: Stern guard already have special bolters that are replaced by the combos, that's why they are cheaper
But the special weapon replaces that too. Sternguard combi-melta costs five points sternguard meltagun costs ten. How does that make any sense with the current combi-weapon rules?
Depends on how you do the math. If you are only looking at it is 16.7% reduced hit then it is a no brainer. However if you look at it as 50% more misses than the equation is different, especially when considering re-rolls. It’s why stormshields were pretty mandatory on captions, even when they had a native 4++.
when doing any of this math requires adding in the cost of the platform rather than just the weapon. Melta gun is about 20% more. Personally I wouldn’t bother with the combi weapons on veterans since there are so many other more efficient platforms.
What are you even talking about? With the current rules you can fire combi-melta as a melta with no penalties to hit. It is a meltagun and other stuff on top of that. There is no sane way to do the maths that results it costing less than a normal melta...
Haven’t the combi weapon points be out of wack since 9th dropped? Part of the “normalizing” of points to multiples of 5. Expect when they didn’t. For reasons.
I’ve been not following points that closely, as I’ve been playing PL crusade games and knew they were going to be updated in the codex.
I'm more curious as to when we will see the first marine supplement, and which one or two will it be. I'm thinking Deathwatch simply because they said to expect it soon in the stream for 9th way back. If so, I wonder if it will be this month, or in November.
bullyboy wrote: I'm more curious as to when we will see the first marine supplement, and which one or two will it be. I'm thinking Deathwatch simply because they said to expect it soon in the stream for 9th way back. If so, I wonder if it will be this month, or in November.
I expect them all to come as a bunch. Maybe not on the same weekend, but there isn't much point in dragging them out or wandering into December. One of the few other things we know for sure is medusas vs mortal Slaanesh box for AoS. But hopefully there's more to November than 3 books and a box.
Actually given the number of necron and marine kits for this release, and that today's Sunday preview is mostly necrons (for 40k) there might be a little spillover into November. Maybe they'll save the assault intercessors and/or bladeguard kits for the BA/SW weekend and go for a choppy theme.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Ok, we need to see the rules for combi-weapons. Has anyone seen those? My Chosen and terminators need to know.
They got the same changes as their base weapons (i.e. 12" flamer, dead on natural 1 plasma, etc), but are otherwise the same. They can still shoot either part any number of times and can still shoot both parts at -1 to hit.
bullyboy wrote: I'm more curious as to when we will see the first marine supplement, and which one or two will it be. I'm thinking Deathwatch simply because they said to expect it soon in the stream for 9th way back. If so, I wonder if it will be this month, or in November.
IMHO we can make some guesses based on BL release dates.
we have 3 space marine books set in november a blood angels and death watch release scheduled for the 31st. and a reprint of Space Wolf due for "sometime in october" (didn't they just reprint that one awhile back? jeeze GW publish something NEW for the wolves instead of reprinting the same book over and over please)
my guess is that we'll get space wolves out on the 24th and blood angels and death watch on the 31st.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Ok, we need to see the rules for combi-weapons. Has anyone seen those? My Chosen and terminators need to know.
They got the same changes as their base weapons (i.e. 12" flamer, dead on natural 1 plasma, etc), but are otherwise the same. They can still shoot either part any number of times and can still shoot both parts at -1 to hit.
Excellent. Thank you, kind sir. *massive exhale of relief*
Edit: Has anyone seen the Centurion data sheets? Have siege drills changed any?
Gadzilla666 wrote: Ok, we need to see the rules for combi-weapons. Has anyone seen those? My Chosen and terminators need to know.
They got the same changes as their base weapons (i.e. 12" flamer, dead on natural 1 plasma, etc), but are otherwise the same. They can still shoot either part any number of times and can still shoot both parts at -1 to hit.
Excellent. Thank you, kind sir. *massive exhale of relief*
Edit: Has anyone seen the Centurion data sheets? Have siege drills changed any?
Siege Drills: Sx2, AP-4, Damage 3. Centurions are base 3 attacks, WS3+.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Ok, we need to see the rules for combi-weapons. Has anyone seen those? My Chosen and terminators need to know.
They got the same changes as their base weapons (i.e. 12" flamer, dead on natural 1 plasma, etc), but are otherwise the same. They can still shoot either part any number of times and can still shoot both parts at -1 to hit.
Excellent. Thank you, kind sir. *massive exhale of relief*
Edit: Has anyone seen the Centurion data sheets? Have siege drills changed any?
Siege Drills: Sx2, AP-4, Damage 3. Centurions are base 3 attacks, WS3+.
...I don't know what they did before, sorry.
The same. Thanks. Just working on a theory, this derails it a bit. Dang.
Oh does the spyder get 12 shots with their particle beamers now? Seems like they still get 2 and they’re 6 shots base. That seems awesome along with all the other buffs they got.
Argive wrote: why are people so hanged up on the necron reanimator being tall?
As long as the terrain is 5" at its tallest point and your model is less than 18 wounds you are protected from LOS along the entire width of the terrain piece. Or has this changed somehow?
The fact its fairly slim should make it easier to hide. Its not like a flyrant or a blood thirster with huge wings poking out either side...
last i recall, tails, wings, weapons, and banners didnt count for los? but i might have the wrong edition in mind
I dont have my brb to hand. The battle primer pdf doesnt cover LOS after a skim read.
As far as I remember any antenna / weapon barrel doesn't count for LOS. But wings are considered part of the "body".
Anyway. Your model could be a foot tall as long as its standing behind terrain feature that's 5" or taller and doesn't have 18+ wounds you cant be seen.
Maybe what people mean is that being so tall is detrimental to try and hide using other terrain stuff thats lower than 5" though.. Which is a fair point.
There's no universal 5" tall, infinite los blocking terrain. That's for obscuring traits so unless you agree all terrain is obscuring(against rulebook recommendations) then there's still 5" terrain that doesn't block los
Argive wrote: why are people so hanged up on the necron reanimator being tall?
As long as the terrain is 5" at its tallest point and your model is less than 18 wounds you are protected from LOS along the entire width of the terrain piece. Or has this changed somehow?
The fact its fairly slim should make it easier to hide. Its not like a flyrant or a blood thirster with huge wings poking out either side...
last i recall, tails, wings, weapons, and banners didnt count for los? but i might have the wrong edition in mind
In 9th edition no part of the model is excluded for drawing LOS to. If you can see an antenna, the entire baneblade attached to it can be destroyed - just like an entire unit of imperial soldiers can be destroyed if one has a hand poking out from behind cover.
Considering how any attempt at excluding non-crucial parts of models in the past has led to people modeling for advantage, I think this is the only way to do it.
If the rules stated that antennae, banner poles, random spikes, gun barrels, pointing hands (and equivalents) specifically didn't count, then there's be no reason to model for advantage, as it wouldn't matter if they could be seen.
If the rules stated that antennae, banner poles, random spikes, gun barrels, pointing hands (and equivalents) specifically didn't count, then there's be no reason to model for advantage, as it wouldn't matter if they could be seen.
They idea is it's 100% reciprocal if you can see you can be seen, ignoring obscuring terrain rules.
As I had seen people argue this numerous times as GW has tried various other approaches to line of sight.
What is a wing and what is hull on say a void raven?
Oh you can't see Mortarian it's only his wing you can see and that doesn't count, but it says from any part of the model for Mortarian to shoot you.
The simplest rules while seeming janky tend to leed to less feels bad moments of one-sided being favoured.
Oh you can't see Mortarian it's only his wing you can see and that doesn't count, but it says from any part of the model for Mortarian to shoot you.
The simplest rules while seeming janky tend to leed to less feels bad moments of one-sided being favoured.
Uuuh every time there's been "X doesn't count" it's gone both way...Why create new problems by introducing new rules when you could go with rule as it's been before? If something doesn't count for X it doesn't count for Y either.
Oh you can't see Mortarian it's only his wing you can see and that doesn't count, but it says from any part of the model for Mortarian to shoot you.
The simplest rules while seeming janky tend to leed to less feels bad moments of one-sided being favoured.
Uuuh every time there's been "X doesn't count" it's gone both way...Why create new problems by introducing new rules when you could go with rule as it's been before? If something doesn't count for X it doesn't count for Y either.
Because GW can't do consistent writing, they often use from any part of the model as if its copy and pasted, without thinking if it is what they mean.
Oh you can't see Mortarian it's only his wing you can see and that doesn't count, but it says from any part of the model for Mortarian to shoot you.
The simplest rules while seeming janky tend to leed to less feels bad moments of one-sided being favoured.
Uuuh every time there's been "X doesn't count" it's gone both way...Why create new problems by introducing new rules when you could go with rule as it's been before? If something doesn't count for X it doesn't count for Y either.
You seem to have forgotten why all those riptides and stormsurges on ebay have their guns modeled at the same odd angle. We had quite some editions when you could draw LOS from gun gun barrels but not shoot them. In 5th there were multiple issues with models that had "X doesn't count" parts block entire parts of a model - RAW a vindicator could not be shot when standing directly in front of it because neither the siege shield nor the demolisher cannon were hull. Last but not least, there are multiple issues with parts of a model "not counting" that prevent you from moving into melee range. "Everything counts" is the one and only solution that does not create rule nightmares.
Ice_can wrote: What is a wing and what is hull on say a void raven?
I cannot believe that this wouldn't be obvious.
Ice_can wrote: Oh you can't see Mortarian it's only his wing you can see and that doesn't count, but it says from any part of the model for Mortarian to shoot you.
Well obviously it would work in reverse ie. cannot draw LOSfrom antennae, banner polls, etc.
Ice_can wrote: Because GW can't do consistent writing, they often use from any part of the model as if its copy and pasted, without thinking if it is what they mean.
Remember when in 5th edition we had competent writer that actually played the game? With the most balanced books in 40k history, points and options tailored to individual units (on datasheets, too, instead of stupid flipping 575754 times to armory/points page insanity), very generous counts as (no 'model/paint scheme X can only mean X'), LOS rules written with not penalizing modelling in mind (that was edition that ignored banners, guns, wings, hands, etc), rules written to be flavorful and to cover holes in army (outright telling you to convert chapter master or chief apothecary instead of 'buy this specific no-options captain' we have now)?
Alas, loud children didn't like two words of fluff so we had to suffer for three editions with Kelly, Cruddace and co instead, TYVM whiners
I was actually reminded of 5th edition book while reading this one, BTW - in 5th edition, Chapter Master was introduced as peer of the Imperium, ruler of particular subsector, and brilliant strategist. Someone who actually did important things. Waving a sword wasn't his job, hell, 5th edition created Honour Guard, unit made out of guys whose only job was keeping enemies busy so Chapter Master can command in peace. Now, in 9th edition, HG is gone and Chapter Master's introduction is that of a Rambo who charges enemies first so he can rack biggest Fortnite killcounts, killstreaks, and killsteals, very little mention of commanding anything. Gee, I wonder which one is more fluffy/sensible
Ice_can wrote: Because GW can't do consistent writing, they often use from any part of the model as if its copy and pasted, without thinking if it is what they mean.
Remember when in 5th edition we had competent writer that actually played the game? With the most balanced books in 40k history, points and options tailored to individual units (on datasheets, too, instead of stupid flipping 575754 times to armory/points page insanity), very generous counts as (no 'model/paint scheme X can only mean X'), LOS rules written with not penalizing modelling in mind (that was edition that ignored banners, guns, wings, hands, etc), rules written to be flavorful and to cover holes in army (outright telling you to convert chapter master or chief apothecary instead of 'buy this specific no-options captain' we have now)?
Alas, loud children didn't like two words of fluff so we had to suffer for three editions with Kelly, Cruddace and co instead, TYVM whiners
I was actually reminded of 5th edition book while reading this one, BTW - in 5th edition, Chapter Master was introduced as peer of the Imperium, ruler of particular subsector, and brilliant strategist. Someone who actually did important things. Waving a sword wasn't his job, hell, 5th edition created Honour Guard, unit made out of guys whose only job was keeping enemies busy so Chapter Master can command in peace. Now, in 9th edition, HG is gone and Chapter Master's introduction is that of a Rambo who charges enemies first so he can rack biggest Fortnite killcounts, killstreaks, and killsteals, very little mention of commanding anything. Gee, I wonder which one is more fluffy/sensible
That's very interesting regarding the status of Chapter Masters. And, yeah, it also makes a hell of a lot more sense.
Incidentally, it's also one of the reasons I've never been particularly eager to field Vect or The Silent King or similar characters. It just seems like they really don't belong on a random battlefield somewhere.
Anyway, I agree about 5th edition. I think the sad thing is that GW has gotten very close to having a solid system in the past, but instead of ironing out a handful of issues, they instead just throw the baby out with the bathwater and replace a lot of things that worked well with a load of random, untested mechanics.
Warriors for £29 or recruit edition and get the warden, Lieutenant and 5 assault intercessors for £32.50.
Elite edition £65
Same warriors and destroyers are £63.50 separately but then you get the rules, outriders, 5 assault intercessors, captain and overlord extra for a mere £1.50
Can anyone kindly check the wording on Vassal Dynasties and the Dynasty-specific things?
If I'm making a custom Dynasty and choose it to be a Vassal of Nephrekh, is there anything I miss out on? Stratagems or relics or anything? Or does it end up being "Nephrekh but purple"?
But the point is it makes sense that these marks of armour should be available to The Legions, possibly more than the newer Indomutus pattern. But that's an argument for another thread. I'd just like to see the loyalist units rules.
.
(a shame as it's a neat model, I want one myself(
