I hadn't previously clocked that the vindictor weapon was named after the fact that it says desert eagle vindictor on the model.
I guess that's worse than Farsight having a nametag on his shield...
Lord Damocles wrote: I hadn't previously clocked that the vindictor weapon was named after the fact that it says desert eagle vindictor on the model.
I guess that's worse than Farsight having a nametag on his shield...
...still an eviscerator with attached exterminator to me.
Would be funny if they started doing the same with the inscriptions on Marine relic weapons.
So we can hopefully predict that future army-box-locked models will get standalone releases a couple of codexes down the line, so the CSM alongside the next Codex release.
I really hope that means we get some of the other BSF figures as standalone releases. The ones from Escalation are almost impossible to find now, and they would be most welcome.
Warhammer Community wrote:The book contains five Detachments – including the Brood Brother Auxilia that lets you merge select Astra Militarum units into your army
Army 'stealers are still a thing, but with the upgrade sprue being a lot more specialised than the old one, I wonder how GW will depict them in the book. Still trot out that old Russ and Sentinel?
The new mission deck seems better than Leviathan, which IMHO was complete crap and a huge reason why I've not liked 10th edition. the Secret Missions give me definite 2nd edition mission card vibes. Still not a fan of secondary objectives, but they are what they are.
I still can't believe they went with no middle ground between "narrative games" and "tournament games" i.e. nothing for people who just want to play casual games. It's more mind-boggling because AOS is apparently staying with Open/Narrative/Matched/GHB for 4th edition.
Wayniac wrote: The new mission deck seems better than Leviathan, which IMHO was complete crap and a huge reason why I've not liked 10th edition. the Secret Missions give me definite 2nd edition mission card vibes. Still not a fan of secondary objectives, but they are what they are.
I still can't believe they went with no middle ground between "narrative games" and "tournament games" i.e. nothing for people who just want to play casual games. It's more mind-boggling because AOS is apparently staying with Open/Narrative/Matched/GHB for 4th edition.
The problem is that people would just play the tournament gamemode even casually because it would be perceived as the 'most balanced' format by default, particularly when it's a random pick up game. In that way, I can't really blame them for not trying to appeal.
Wayniac wrote: The new mission deck seems better than Leviathan, which IMHO was complete crap and a huge reason why I've not liked 10th edition. the Secret Missions give me definite 2nd edition mission card vibes. Still not a fan of secondary objectives, but they are what they are.
I still can't believe they went with no middle ground between "narrative games" and "tournament games" i.e. nothing for people who just want to play casual games. It's more mind-boggling because AOS is apparently staying with Open/Narrative/Matched/GHB for 4th edition.
The problem is that people would just play the tournament gamemode even casually because it would be perceived as the 'most balanced' format by default, particularly when it's a random pick up game. In that way, I can't really blame them for not trying to appeal.
No, i can't blame them, but I wish that they'd do something to stop people thinking that. It's a very destructive mindset.
SamusDrake wrote: "Pious Vorne" has been promoted to Priest! It'll be nice to have a second model...
Yeah, I have one from Blackstone Fortress. And another two from these boxes. The new price for her wouldn't beat 30€ for all the BSF characters and the Ambull.
Warhammer Community wrote:The book contains five Detachments – including the Brood Brother Auxilia that lets you merge select Astra Militarum units into your army
Army 'stealers are still a thing, but with the upgrade sprue being a lot more specialised than the old one, I wonder how GW will depict them in the book. Still trot out that old Russ and Sentinel?
The old upgrade sprue is still listed for sale.
Interestingly enough, Lewis refers to the Neophytes in the army set as "turncoat soldiers" and Brood Brothers were referred to as planetary defence forces in some of the promotional info for the KT set. There's no unit in the GSC book unless the table of contents is wrong.
There's a mention of a "new miniature reveal" for the week and we still have a Redacted Codex to come...maybe we'll be seeing an actual, dedicated Guard Infantry Squad kit coming that the Brood Brother KT upgrade lets you emulate?
Wayniac wrote: but I wish that they'd do something to stop people thinking that.
How? In every PvP game that I have ever played, both physically and in video games, players overwhelmingly prefer to play with the "competitive" ruleset when given a choice unless the goal is very explictly from all sides to have a goofy and whacky time, in which case they'll play the "party" mode.
It is deeply ingrained in human nature to want an even playing field and not feel cheated when competing. Obviously, when emotional investment in the outcome of a game is involved, players are going to gravitate toward whatever ruleset seems the most fair.
PoorGravitasHandling wrote: Do the coins always correspond to a release? It will be weird to have guard running a full codex for more than half a year.
Marksman's Honor and Iron Halo may be Imperial Agent or Deathwatch related?
Latest rumours are guard being late 2024/early 2025 with an end of year pre-release box with a full release the following Jan.
Deathwatch are possibly being shoved into imperial agents is the speculation.
There's also the rumor that the next season of Kill Team is going to feature new Kasrkin models so that might be the hook with the coin.
PoorGravitasHandling wrote: Do the coins always correspond to a release? It will be weird to have guard running a full codex for more than half a year.
Marksman's Honor and Iron Halo may be Imperial Agent or Deathwatch related?
Latest rumours are guard being late 2024/early 2025 with an end of year pre-release box with a full release the following Jan.
Deathwatch are possibly being shoved into imperial agents is the speculation.
There's also the rumor that the next season of Kill Team is going to feature new Kasrkin models so that might be the hook with the coin.
That would be really weird, since we already got a Kasrkin Kill-Team?
There's also the rumor that the next season of Kill Team is going to feature new Kasrkin models so that might be the hook with the coin.
Are you talking about the flying season rumours? Because then its not Kasrkin but Tempestus Scions/Elysian Drop Troops. They have been called both but its pretty much Guard with drop packs. Weither GW makes them specialized Scions or brings back Elysians will have to wait for the actual reveal
xttz wrote: Wonder if this means a new dataslate before the cards release on June 22nd. GW might get it out of the way before their focus shifts to AOS.
I'd guess at probably not - dataslates were meant to be every six months now, IIRC, and the last one was January, so I'd expect one during July.
I quite like that. The helmeted head is much superior, but the tactical rock actually makes it feel like a centrepiece and the Sororitas don't have many of them.
Wayniac wrote: but I wish that they'd do something to stop people thinking that.
How? In every PvP game that I have ever played, both physically and in video games, players overwhelmingly prefer to play with the "competitive" ruleset when given a choice unless the goal is very explictly from all sides to have a goofy and whacky time, in which case they'll play the "party" mode.
It is deeply ingrained in human nature to want an even playing field and not feel cheated when competing. Obviously, when emotional investment in the outcome of a game is involved, players are going to gravitate toward whatever ruleset seems the most fair.
I don't know how, I'm just tired of that terrible mindset infesting everything. It turns the game from being interesting to being bland and boring, which is a huge issue with 10th edition already.
Wayniac wrote: but I wish that they'd do something to stop people thinking that.
How? In every PvP game that I have ever played, both physically and in video games, players overwhelmingly prefer to play with the "competitive" ruleset when given a choice unless the goal is very explictly from all sides to have a goofy and whacky time, in which case they'll play the "party" mode.
It is deeply ingrained in human nature to want an even playing field and not feel cheated when competing. Obviously, when emotional investment in the outcome of a game is involved, players are going to gravitate toward whatever ruleset seems the most fair.
I don't know how, I'm just tired of that terrible mindset infesting everything. It turns the game from being interesting to being bland and boring, which is a huge issue with 10th edition already.
See that isn't a "competitive rules set" its a "how GW made 10th" aspect.
It's not helped by the fact that GW never fully lets their rules actually reach a mature state of play where they are polished and well oiled and where poeple know how it works well and are thus more apt to experiment outside of the pure competitive game.
I quite like that. The helmeted head is much superior, but the tactical rock actually makes it feel like a centrepiece and the Sororitas don't have many of them.
gorgeous model
Automatically Appended Next Post: is this supposed to be a "use it as an existing character", or will she be getting a datasheet of her own? base feels too big to use as an AdSor character
oh also, from the latest auspex tactics video: it's really weird that Acolytes are getting split up based on what pistols they're using. like i get it, hand flamers are too strong, but it's still a weird call to make
StudentOfEtherium wrote: oh also, from the latest auspex tactics video: it's really weird that Acolytes are getting split up based on what pistols they're using. like i get it, hand flamers are too strong, but it's still a weird call to make
I wouldn't be surprised if this means they're splitting the special weapon options and creating two units with distinct roles. For example; handflamers & demo charges with a ranged datasheet ability, and autopistols & heavy miining weapons with a melee-focused special rule.
xttz wrote: Wonder if this means a new dataslate before the cards release on June 22nd. GW might get it out of the way before their focus shifts to AOS.
I'd guess at probably not - dataslates were meant to be every six months now, IIRC, and the last one was January, so I'd expect one during July.
It's not like GW have ever stuck to a strict schedule for these updates, 3/6 months was is a guideline and the actual dates always shifted back & forth around other demands as needed. We've had anywhere from 2-4 months between updates in the past.
The last points update felt very much like a placeholder in lieu of further changes later, with confirmation they'd already done some work on a new balance update. Releasing a new card deck at the end of June that overhauls how the game is played is far too late to implement any feedback for a July dataslate. The start of a 'new season' plus updated MFM for two codexes seems like the ideal time for rebalancing.
I wouldn't be surprised if this means they're splitting the special weapon options and creating two units with distinct roles. For example; handflamers & demo charges with a ranged datasheet ability, and autopistols & heavy miining weapons with a melee-focused special rule.
I'd think it would be the autopistols with the ranged ability?
Hopefully this means that Guard might be seeing their Heavy Weapon Squads split up into the old "Fire Support, Anti-Tank, and Mortar" setup. Really needed at this point.
xttz wrote: Wonder if this means a new dataslate before the cards release on June 22nd. GW might get it out of the way before their focus shifts to AOS.
I'd guess at probably not - dataslates were meant to be every six months now, IIRC, and the last one was January, so I'd expect one during July.
It's not like GW have ever stuck to a strict schedule for these updates, 3/6 months was is a guideline and the actual dates always shifted back & forth around other demands as needed. We've had anywhere from 2-4 months between updates in the past.
The last points update felt very much like a placeholder in lieu of further changes later, with confirmation they'd already done some work on a new balance update. Releasing a new card deck at the end of June that overhauls how the game is played is far too late to implement any feedback for a July dataslate. The start of a 'new season' plus updated MFM for two codexes seems like the ideal time for rebalancing.
Don't forget that they made a mention of AdMech being in line for something significant with the next dataslate. New season would be a good time to drop that too for data gathering purposes.
Apparently death cult assassins, crusaders and missionaries are gone. I'm waiting to see whether squad sizes get changed too, so that small squads of penitent engines, flagellants and repentia you got in the SoB starter box become unusable...
Shame to hear about those missing models - though I'd wager we'll see them return at some point in an expansion or new codex. Kind of surprised that GW didn't update them already considering how much the threw into SoB
I dunno if they will come back to the Sisters. They were somewhat odd fits left over from the Inquisition as it is. Feels like they might go back there if they pop up anywhere.
Always sad to see stuff cut from codexes, but those units did seem just to be legacy units from when it was the witch hunter book with the inquisition and all that came with it.
I hope the all land on their feel in an imperial agents/inquisition book. Hopefully in a form that can still be splashed into a SoB army for those who want to keep things the way they were.
i wonder if the cut AdSor models will return in KT. they're a bit weird on their own since they're not a full unit but not characters— not something GW does much of anymore, there's a much clearer divide now
if they do come back, it will be in the agents/inquisition book, for sure
Crimson wrote: Apparently death cult assassins, crusaders and missionaries are gone.
I've lost track - was Missionaries the SOB term for Preachers?
Missionaries were the Guard Preachers' loadout on a different model than the Guard Preacher, which used the same model as the SoB Preacher despite the SoB Preachers' base loadout being Pious Vorne's loadout.
It's all very convoluted, perfect representation of the Imperium!
As long as the combined priest keeps all the wargear options of preacher and missionary it's fine, but I'm afraid it will be limited to just to the Pious Vorne gear as that's what the current model is.
Also, where are all the leaks? The codes release is near.
Love the new SoB. I really hope the Battle Sanctum comes back, I'm sad not to see mention of it with the codex coming out.
Also, those dice look awful. Actually gold pips would be so much better than whatever sludge colour they have on them, unless they've just photographed them awfully.
alextroy wrote: IMHO Thaddeus looks too much like a specific individual while Vorne looks more generic.
It warms my heart that the official Ministorum Priest model is now female. Go Sisters of Battle!
The fact you call out the Pious Vorne model as a generic style give me hope for 40k. Just your generic religious lunatic wielding a great evicerator/flamer combo.
She would also make a better redemptionist in a Cawdor heavy gang, because of the awkvard size difference between redemptionists and Cawdor.
Giving the Aveline model another look, I'm wondering why she has a hand flamer if her sword already has an attached flame weapon. There are a lot of bolter shell casings scattered on her base, so was she meant to have a bolt pistol?
And her raised arm - it looks like she has cloth on her upper arm, underneath the traditional big sleeves, so the elbow plating is the only armour on the arm?
StudentOfEtherium wrote: i wonder if the cut AdSor models will return in KT. they're a bit weird on their own since they're not a full unit but not characters— not something GW does much of anymore, there's a much clearer divide now
if they do come back, it will be in the agents/inquisition book, for sure
Yep.
There was a rumor floating around about 3 Inquisition Combat Patrol boxes or Battle Forces. If their exclusion from Sororitas means the Agents dex is real, well I'm game- I always thought it was wonky that battle conclave units (Crusaders, Arcos and DCAs) could use AoF. If they become Agents, they lose the Sororitas Keyword. This isn't a perfect solution to me, because currently the Agents army rule does nothing except allow Agents to be played at all, and worse, because the mechanism for their inclusion denies them a detachment, they're without detachment rule as well. Perhaps this will be cleaned up with an Agents dex.
I do think the Battle Conclave would make an excellent Kill Team though.
Now if Battle Conclave units outside of Arcos truly are gone, and not set to return as Agents? Well that's it for awhile I guess. I took a break for 6th and 7th due to GW's mistreatment of Sisters, and I could do it again. I'll wait for the Goonhammer review before I snap to judgement. I still have the free index cards, and anyone out there who is a small circle garagehammer player where such things are permissible, download the free index cards while you can.
Shakalooloo wrote: Giving the Aveline model another look, I'm wondering why she has a hand flamer if her sword already has an attached flame weapon. There are a lot of bolter shell casings scattered on her base, so was she meant to have a bolt pistol?
And her raised arm - it looks like she has cloth on her upper arm, underneath the traditional big sleeves, so the elbow plating is the only armour on the arm?
Maybe the flamy burny thingy on the sword is only there to make the fiery faction logo so she can strike a super inspirational pose? Or she just likes to burninate things.
I'm just going to pretend that's a tight(ish) cloth sleeve over the actual armor. Skipping intermediate sections of power armor is as dumb as it gets.
There was a rumor floating around about 3 Inquisition Combat Patrol boxes or Battle Forces. If their exclusion from Sororitas means the Agents dex is real, well I'm game- I always thought it was wonky that battle conclave units (Crusaders, Arcos and DCAs) could use AoF. If they become Agents, they lose the Sororitas Keyword. This isn't a perfect solution to me, because currently the Agents army rule does nothing except allow Agents to be played at all, and worse, because the mechanism for their inclusion denies them a detachment, they're without detachment rule as well. Perhaps this will be cleaned up with an Agents dex.
.
In fairness, Crusaders are Ecclesiarchy household bodyguards and Death cult assassins are also Imperial fanatics. These two groups using Acts of Faith is plausible. Doesn't make a lot of sense for arcos though...
The restrictions on what units you can take are the same as before – no Commissars, Tempestus Scions, Valkyries, or the like – but now the points allowance has been doubled. In a Brood Brother Auxilia force, fully half of your army can be taken from the Astra Militarum roster.* This means that large squadrons of tanks and massed infantry regiments are on the table, and if you want to drop a cheeky Baneblade into your list, it won’t take up your entire allotment.
* However, Brood Brother units can now only be taken in this specific Detachment.
The restrictions on what units you can take are the same as before – no Commissars, Tempestus Scions, Valkyries, or the like – but now the points allowance has been doubled. In a Brood Brother Auxilia force, fully half of your army can be taken from the Astra Militarum roster.* This means that large squadrons of tanks and massed infantry regiments are on the table, and if you want to drop a cheeky Baneblade into your list, it won’t take up your entire allotment.
* However, Brood Brother units can now only be taken in this specific Detachment.
That paragraph seems perfectly crafted to annoy Kan...
It's to be expected. The designers seem to want Guard to be T3 Grots.
To seize a quick moment:
This would have been the absolute, 100% perfect time for them to have released a preview for the Guard. To show Guard players that "Hey. We got you."
Need to see the other detachments but I see this as a positive overall.
It does restrict Guard to just the one detachment but in return we get some fluffy looking Strategems that actually affect BB and in allow cult and BB units to synergise with each other.
big fan of everything shown of the codex so far. am wondering about the army rule, since i'm not sure if that's getting changed or staying what it is with the dataslate. even if it is, i'm optimistic about the state of the army this edition
Last few minutes of the video confirms the next balance dataslate & points updates will be released later this month (instead of July) alongside the cards
Last few minutes of the video confirms the next balance dataslate & points updates will be released later this month (instead of July) alongside the cards
Can't wait for all the crying about units with Assault weapons not being able to run and action anymore.
Personally, I'm hoping they strip the Battleline keyword from Nurglings.
Last few minutes of the video confirms the next balance dataslate & points updates will be released later this month (instead of July) alongside the cards
Can't wait for all the crying about units with Assault weapons not being able to run and action anymore.
It felt very weird and unintentional that they could in the first place!
Because they’re the only Infiltrators Chaos has.
They don’t do anything other than exist on a point (to block other Infiltrators, for instance) and be moderately tough to kill.
Because they’re the only Infiltrators Chaos has.
They don’t do anything other than exist on a point (to block other Infiltrators, for instance) and be moderately tough to kill.
Ironically Nurglings were one of the profiles I looked at when 10th started and was like: Why would I ever field these? They do nothing and they're not even durable anymore, poor Nurglings!
I nearly dropped Lucius and change my army to Chaos Marines rather than. Emperor's Children just so I can take Nurglings. I got boxed into my deployment zone bad my last game vs Tau and one big unit of Kroot. Lined up 9" from my deployment zone and then Tau had first turn. Just advanced the unit as close as possible to my units and I got stuck turn 1.
Turn 2 had loads of Crisis Suits come from Deep Strike and he maintained solid fire lanes and board control.
Nurglings could alleviate issues like that. Not always but at least gives some level of protection.
Last few minutes of the video confirms the next balance dataslate & points updates will be released later this month (instead of July) alongside the cards
Can't wait for all the crying about units with Assault weapons not being able to run and action anymore.
It felt very weird and unintentional that they could in the first place!
The weirder thing was being able to run and action if you didn't have any guns at all, but not if you had a single pistol or something.
Sarigar wrote: I nearly dropped Lucius and change my army to Chaos Marines rather than. Emperor's Children just so I can take Nurglings. I got boxed into my deployment zone bad my last game vs Tau and one big unit of Kroot. Lined up 9" from my deployment zone and then Tau had first turn. Just advanced the unit as close as possible to my units and I got stuck turn 1.
Turn 2 had loads of Crisis Suits come from Deep Strike and he maintained solid fire lanes and board control.
Nurglings could alleviate issues like that. Not always but at least gives some level of protection.
Sometimes you just need useless units to take up space on the battlefield. It’s not a glamorous job, but you don’t needs decent stats for it. Just show up, gum up the table with your presence, and take time out of someone’s busy schedule to get killed.
Chaff units might be chaff, but they got a job and can do it while sucking.
Sarigar wrote: I nearly dropped Lucius and change my army to Chaos Marines rather than. Emperor's Children just so I can take Nurglings. I got boxed into my deployment zone bad my last game vs Tau and one big unit of Kroot. Lined up 9" from my deployment zone and then Tau had first turn. Just advanced the unit as close as possible to my units and I got stuck turn 1.
Turn 2 had loads of Crisis Suits come from Deep Strike and he maintained solid fire lanes and board control.
Nurglings could alleviate issues like that. Not always but at least gives some level of protection.
Sometimes you just need useless units to take up space on the battlefield. It’s not a glamorous job, but you don’t needs decent stats for it. Just show up, gum up the table with your presence, and take time out of someone’s busy schedule to get killed.
Chaff units might be chaff, but they got a job and can do it while sucking.
Nurglings just don't feel like they should be a Battleline unit. In my view, Daemons should have exactly four Battleline units: Bloodletters, Daemonettes, Pink Horrors, and Plaguebearers. If you want Nurglings, pay the Plaguebearer tax.
Nurglings should have an OC value.
I don’t care about battleline or not-but yeah, I certainly see the argument for making them not battleline. (I’ve 18 bases, so I’d have to make some squads bigger to keep taking them all, but if they had an OC… be totally worth it.)
Sarigar wrote: I nearly dropped Lucius and change my army to Chaos Marines rather than. Emperor's Children just so I can take Nurglings. I got boxed into my deployment zone bad my last game vs Tau and one big unit of Kroot. Lined up 9" from my deployment zone and then Tau had first turn. Just advanced the unit as close as possible to my units and I got stuck turn 1.
Turn 2 had loads of Crisis Suits come from Deep Strike and he maintained solid fire lanes and board control.
Nurglings could alleviate issues like that. Not always but at least gives some level of protection.
Sometimes you just need useless units to take up space on the battlefield. It’s not a glamorous job, but you don’t needs decent stats for it. Just show up, gum up the table with your presence, and take time out of someone’s busy schedule to get killed.
Chaff units might be chaff, but they got a job and can do it while sucking.
Nurglings just don't feel like they should be a Battleline unit. In my view, Daemons should have exactly four Battleline units: Bloodletters, Daemonettes, Pink Horrors, and Plaguebearers. If you want Nurglings, pay the Plaguebearer tax.
With the limited way that Battleline and Rule of 3 work, Nurglings should be Battleline so that you can take a swarmy number of them in your army.
Sarigar wrote: I nearly dropped Lucius and change my army to Chaos Marines rather than. Emperor's Children just so I can take Nurglings. I got boxed into my deployment zone bad my last game vs Tau and one big unit of Kroot. Lined up 9" from my deployment zone and then Tau had first turn. Just advanced the unit as close as possible to my units and I got stuck turn 1.
Turn 2 had loads of Crisis Suits come from Deep Strike and he maintained solid fire lanes and board control.
Nurglings could alleviate issues like that. Not always but at least gives some level of protection.
Sometimes you just need useless units to take up space on the battlefield. It’s not a glamorous job, but you don’t needs decent stats for it. Just show up, gum up the table with your presence, and take time out of someone’s busy schedule to get killed.
Chaff units might be chaff, but they got a job and can do it while sucking.
Nurglings just don't feel like they should be a Battleline unit. In my view, Daemons should have exactly four Battleline units: Bloodletters, Daemonettes, Pink Horrors, and Plaguebearers. If you want Nurglings, pay the Plaguebearer tax.
With the limited way that Battleline and Rule of 3 work, Nurglings should be Battleline so that you can take a swarmy number of them in your army.
Much like Ripper Swarms, they feel like they're NOT supposed to be the core of your army.
Sarigar wrote: I nearly dropped Lucius and change my army to Chaos Marines rather than. Emperor's Children just so I can take Nurglings. I got boxed into my deployment zone bad my last game vs Tau and one big unit of Kroot. Lined up 9" from my deployment zone and then Tau had first turn. Just advanced the unit as close as possible to my units and I got stuck turn 1.
Turn 2 had loads of Crisis Suits come from Deep Strike and he maintained solid fire lanes and board control.
Nurglings could alleviate issues like that. Not always but at least gives some level of protection.
Sometimes you just need useless units to take up space on the battlefield. It’s not a glamorous job, but you don’t needs decent stats for it. Just show up, gum up the table with your presence, and take time out of someone’s busy schedule to get killed.
Chaff units might be chaff, but they got a job and can do it while sucking.
Nurglings just don't feel like they should be a Battleline unit. In my view, Daemons should have exactly four Battleline units: Bloodletters, Daemonettes, Pink Horrors, and Plaguebearers. If you want Nurglings, pay the Plaguebearer tax.
With the limited way that Battleline and Rule of 3 work, Nurglings should be Battleline so that you can take a swarmy number of them in your army.
Much like Ripper Swarms, they feel like they're NOT supposed to be the core of your army.
It’s a weird space. There should be little gribbles everywhere underfoot across the battlefield, but they should not be a core pillar of your army.
Sarigar wrote: I nearly dropped Lucius and change my army to Chaos Marines rather than. Emperor's Children just so I can take Nurglings. I got boxed into my deployment zone bad my last game vs Tau and one big unit of Kroot. Lined up 9" from my deployment zone and then Tau had first turn. Just advanced the unit as close as possible to my units and I got stuck turn 1.
Turn 2 had loads of Crisis Suits come from Deep Strike and he maintained solid fire lanes and board control.
Nurglings could alleviate issues like that. Not always but at least gives some level of protection.
Sometimes you just need useless units to take up space on the battlefield. It’s not a glamorous job, but you don’t needs decent stats for it. Just show up, gum up the table with your presence, and take time out of someone’s busy schedule to get killed.
Chaff units might be chaff, but they got a job and can do it while sucking.
Nurglings just don't feel like they should be a Battleline unit. In my view, Daemons should have exactly four Battleline units: Bloodletters, Daemonettes, Pink Horrors, and Plaguebearers. If you want Nurglings, pay the Plaguebearer tax.
With the limited way that Battleline and Rule of 3 work, Nurglings should be Battleline so that you can take a swarmy number of them in your army.
Much like Ripper Swarms, they feel like they're NOT supposed to be the core of your army.
It’s a weird space. There should be little gribbles everywhere underfoot across the battlefield, but they should not be a core pillar of your army.
Or the only allies you take in other Chaos forces...
Very curious how the new missions will work. I've hated how little 40k armies resemble armies for a long time now (turns out that having army building restrictions are a good thing, who would have thought?).
Gonna dust off my death guard to give it a try, since I'm not liking CSM.
Ok, so, there'll be a new preview for between the 5th and 12th of august, if the Oghram patterns are followed, where the 2nd skaven wave will be anounced (im already asuming skaven players will win this)
Guess a 40k preview anouncing the mistery dex and the new roadmap should follow after it? Or am I too deep into conspiracy theory
Garrac wrote: (im already asuming skaven players will win this)
Tyranids won the last one so now is the time for the Sigmarines
My asumption is that skaven players from TOW (whoever are left after GW nerfed them to the ground) will swarm buy the box on day 1, drop the code, and then sell the sigmarine parts on ebay.
Which doesnt come as a negative saying, mind you, it will in fact make it easier for new sigmarine players to start a cheap army!
Garrac wrote: (im already asuming skaven players will win this)
Tyranids won the last one so now is the time for the Sigmarines
My asumption is that skaven players from TOW (whoever are left after GW nerfed them to the ground) will swarm buy the box on day 1, drop the code, and then sell the sigmarine parts on ebay.
Which doesnt come as a negative saying, mind you, it will in fact make it easier for new sigmarine players to start a cheap army!
Yeah, it could happen but I suspect that the winner is already decided with all the narrative etc. prepared. Of course I can be wrong, and it will be the Skaven, which I do not mind as I like them.
Garrac wrote: (im already asuming skaven players will win this)
Tyranids won the last one so now is the time for the Sigmarines
My asumption is that skaven players from TOW (whoever are left after GW nerfed them to the ground) will swarm buy the box on day 1, drop the code, and then sell the sigmarine parts on ebay.
Which doesnt come as a negative saying, mind you, it will in fact make it easier for new sigmarine players to start a cheap army!
Yeah, it could happen but I suspect that the winner is already decided with all the narrative etc. prepared. Of course I can be wrong, and it will be the Skaven, which I do not mind as I like them.
They most likely have both prepared then just pull the trigger on whichever wins.
Garrac wrote: Ok, so, there'll be a new preview for between the 5th and 12th of august, if the Oghram patterns are followed, where the 2nd skaven wave will be anounced (im already asuming skaven players will win this)
Guess a 40k preview anouncing the mistery dex and the new roadmap should follow after it? Or am I too deep into conspiracy theory
Depends, all known 40k dex are now out, so if they don't do a preview before the end of August, that's a 2 month content drought with literally nothing on the radar.
I'd suspect a 40k drop between the launch box and 1st faction release, similar to how seraphon iirc were between leviathan and nids.
Garrac wrote: Ok, so, there'll be a new preview for between the 5th and 12th of august, if the Oghram patterns are followed, where the 2nd skaven wave will be anounced (im already asuming skaven players will win this)
Guess a 40k preview anouncing the mistery dex and the new roadmap should follow after it? Or am I too deep into conspiracy theory
Depends, all known 40k dex are now out, so if they don't do a preview before the end of August, that's a 2 month content drought with literally nothing on the radar.
I'd suspect a 40k drop between the launch box and 1st faction release, similar to how seraphon iirc were between leviathan and nids.
It really depends on what does GW consider as summer, and most importantly, if september is included on that (very ambiguous) bag.
Would be weird to have a new 40k army dropping on august, tbh.
Garrac wrote: (im already asuming skaven players will win this)
Tyranids won the last one so now is the time for the Sigmarines
My asumption is that skaven players from TOW (whoever are left after GW nerfed them to the ground) will swarm buy the box on day 1, drop the code, and then sell the sigmarine parts on ebay.
Which doesnt come as a negative saying, mind you, it will in fact make it easier for new sigmarine players to start a cheap army!
I feel as though people vastly overestimate how popular the skaven used to be in fantasy. They always seemed to be on the mid-to-lower end of popularity in my experience.
Depends, all known 40k dex are now out, so if they don't do a preview before the end of August, that's a 2 month content drought with literally nothing on the radar.
I'd suspect a 40k drop between the launch box and 1st faction release, similar to how seraphon iirc were between leviathan and nids.
Last year we had a "no 40k stuff" preview on July 1st, so I wouldn't be surprised to see something similar that excludes AOS in the next few weeks. They can update roadmaps for the various game systems in advance of AOS's separate big preview event.
It really depends on what does GW consider as summer
They use whole months, so June/July/August. There was a couple of quite clear examples of that last year. For example a 'Spring' HH roadmap item released on the final weekend in May, then the 'Summer' roadmap Seraphon was the following first weekend in June.
Garrac wrote: (im already asuming skaven players will win this)
Tyranids won the last one so now is the time for the Sigmarines
My asumption is that skaven players from TOW (whoever are left after GW nerfed them to the ground) will swarm buy the box on day 1, drop the code, and then sell the sigmarine parts on ebay.
Which doesnt come as a negative saying, mind you, it will in fact make it easier for new sigmarine players to start a cheap army!
I feel as though people vastly overestimate how popular the skaven used to be in fantasy. They always seemed to be on the mid-to-lower end of popularity in my experience.
I feel like they were very popular but the actual player count was lower than the popularity due to the model count involved.
Garrac wrote: (im already asuming skaven players will win this)
Tyranids won the last one so now is the time for the Sigmarines
My asumption is that skaven players from TOW (whoever are left after GW nerfed them to the ground) will swarm buy the box on day 1, drop the code, and then sell the sigmarine parts on ebay.
Which doesnt come as a negative saying, mind you, it will in fact make it easier for new sigmarine players to start a cheap army!
I feel as though people vastly overestimate how popular the skaven used to be in fantasy. They always seemed to be on the mid-to-lower end of popularity in my experience.
I was, in fact, a skaven player during the fantasy 7th to 8th days. They were, indeed, very popular, to the point where in my country it got hard to find high elf players with whom to share-buy Island of Blood. Others just watched with envy, but had the faction as their favorite, just because an average skaven army was 200-300 models minimum and that was hard to field on a tournament.
But I'd love to know if GW's Battleforces are good for their bottom line. I guess they probably are, as they seem to sell out nearly instantly. But to my mind their unavailability (okay I've not sat up on Friday night trying to get one) almost acts as an anti-hype.
Sure, the unique models will show up about 2~ months later. But by then there's a whole range of new-new models, so they don't have the same newness.
Overread wrote: GW chooses to make them, if they weren't profitable GW wouldn't make them. GW is under no obligation to make discount boxed sets or anything.
Well they sell out, so clearly it works. The question is as I said - whether the FOMO works as hype or anti-hype.
I mean this may very much be a "me" issue. Its just there have been various releases I've been interested in - but then I can't buy them.
If I then go and buy regular boxes, GW wins. If I don't buy anything (because I can always look at the new unavailable shiny thing), then they don't really. Although if they sell out of everything they make they obviously won't care.
The fact that GW keeps selling out of everything I think suggests that in the long run its working. I do agree if you miss out its a bummer, but I'd wager if that starts pushing you out of buying GW entirely, chances are you were on your way out already for other things.
Ergo its not enough on its own to drive someone out; but it might be the bit that tips you over alongside a bunch of other things. So if it wasn't the boxed sets being missed it would be something else that would eventually tip you over to moving on.
And that doesn't have to mean that you hate GW or their games. You can grow out of something that you once enjoyed and just not find it as fun; or find other things more engaging and fun.
As long as you're still posting on a GW centric forum about being frustrated that you can't buy their product, you're still hooked, clearly. GW is selling out of everything, they don't care that your personal needs aren't met, you're just a customer in reserve, waiting to buy more if you could...
Also, in all honesty, how many of us both gripe at not being able to get the latest deal whilst at the same time having a small to modest to huge mountain of unbuilt models
LunarSol wrote: Battleforce's are a way clear out excess inventory. They're not producing to meet demand; they're creating demand to consume excess production.
I don't know how many times we have to go over this, but no. They're not a way to clear out excess inventory.
They aren't unboxing old stuff to cram into these.
LunarSol wrote: Battleforce's are a way clear out excess inventory. They're not producing to meet demand; they're creating demand to consume excess production.
Yeah no that's not how Battleforces work at all.
GW are not sitting there with mountains of unsold models in boxes and paying people ot unbox them and rebox them in discount boxed sets. That would be sheer madness considering that GW has enough trouble keeping most model lines in stock as it is. GW specifically produces Battleforces with known stocking quantities and planned production. That's how they cna order the boxes half a world away from China, ship them over and get those battleforces made and sent out.
Battleforces exist because people cannot resist a bundle. I bet if there was no discount at all people would still go for these bundles first, theres something there that tickles the collector cord.
LunarSol wrote: Battleforce's are a way clear out excess inventory. They're not producing to meet demand; they're creating demand to consume excess production.
Yeah no that's not how Battleforces work at all.
GW are not sitting there with mountains of unsold models in boxes and paying people ot unbox them and rebox them in discount boxed sets. That would be sheer madness considering that GW has enough trouble keeping most model lines in stock as it is. GW specifically produces Battleforces with known stocking quantities and planned production. That's how they cna order the boxes half a world away from China, ship them over and get those battleforces made and sent out.
Yeah, the blind boxes of stuff they sold a couple of years back are the real excess-inventory-flushers.
at best, i imagine battleforces might be a way for GW to make certain kits look better in the books. ie, "this kit from xxx faction from five years ago didn't quite make its money back, so if we put it in this value box, then we can say it breaks even" (and even this much is just speculation on my part)
Battleforces are primarily a tool to convince people into starting new armies. Used to be GW would just tempt people around xmas, now it's with almost every codex.
xttz wrote: Battleforces are primarily a tool to convince people into starting new armies. Used to be GW would just tempt people around xmas, now it's with almost every codex.
Gotta convince people to spend $200 on a single new character somehow...
StudentOfEtherium wrote: at best, i imagine battleforces might be a way for GW to make certain kits look better in the books. ie, "this kit from xxx faction from five years ago didn't quite make its money back, so if we put it in this value box, then we can say it breaks even" (and even this much is just speculation on my part)
GW aren't producing kits which 'don't make their money back'.
The discount boxes are the only thing I even look at nowadays because I won't buy anything at full price or even full price -20%, it's gotta be discounted further.
The main effect this has on me is giving me serious sticker shock when I see how few miniatures I would be getting for really substantial chunks of money. Like I really like the Squighog boyz so I was interested to see them in the Combat Patrol, but it's just a ludicrous amount of money to pay for an elite unit, a HQ and two min sized squads of Boyz.
At this point we might as well take up sculpting, as much as we're expected to paint the bloody things ourselves...
For example, I absolutely love the Eldar Banshees and Reapers, but for only 10 small models thats bloody £80. Even with 20% from Wayland...£64. For only £40 I could have a much larger Wave Serpent.
With very minor kitbashing, sculpting and casting skills, one could instead purchase 10 Guardians and make their own conversions of both those units. And you would still have a heavy platform left over for another conversion project...
xttz wrote: Battleforces are primarily a tool to convince people into starting new armies. Used to be GW would just tempt people around xmas, now it's with almost every codex.
Yeah.
Essentially my argument is that GW could potentially earn more by "seeding" new armies via the Battleforces. People then buy more models to bring these forces up to scale.
As it stands however I feel they get instantly sniped by people who probably don't do that. They are disproportionately destined either to head to Ebay, where they'll be broken up and sold for a 10-20% margin, or into the hands of "I bought 3 copies of Leviathan. And then 3 copies of the TOW army boxes. What? No, I don't have a problem."
But then I have no evidence for this - just a suspicion based on who's mad keen to buy them seconds after they become available.
Arguably for GW tracking the difference in the bottom line would be very difficult. If they sell out of everything, then they have maximized their revenue anyway. But its just a thought.
I think the intent is to get people into buying new armies, but I agree, at the rate they sell out it doesn't really provide for much time to ponder about it before it is too late. That said, with the week notice of what is going on pre-order, does provide that to some extent. I can definitely see people who have been circling around the idea of starting a particular army, seeing its coming up to preorder and then trying to get one. Whether or not they are among those who manage to grab one might depend on the release. GSC one I was able to grab at a discount even on Sunday. The ones that sell out in 5-10 minutes, yeah doubt there are many that are trying to start a new army getting one.
GW 100% knows that a lot of people buy-out on starter sets like Leviathan when they are existing customers to either augment armies they already play or start new ones.
Leviathan and similar sets aren't even aimed at newbies by GW - yes they have everything in the box you need to play, but with the rulebook alone basically being free in the box (even more free if you sell off both armies second hand on FB/Ebay); then GW knows they will sell out fast to existing customers more than new ones.
That's why GW then has 3 tiers of welcome pack intro games released after the main starter set. Those are the ones that, over time, GW intends to really be the welcome kit for new people at 3 different price points; the big launch sets are the huge money raker where GW generates big sales.
They also help kick-start people into the new edition by basically gifting rulebooks away for free in the set and thus ensuring that a huge chunk of GW's market gets fired up about grabbing the new rules and moving into the new edition.
GW realised that if they are going to play the rapid editions game they've got to market for rapid editions otherwise people would go "oh new edition, eh I don't need to spend £50 on the new rules and X on new codex just yet, I'll wait and see if its any good"
Instead there's a big new set which floods the market with cheap/easy rulebook access on a limited time period which encourages people to grab them
NAVARRO wrote:Battleforces exist because people cannot resist a bundle. I bet if there was no discount at all people would still go for these bundles first, theres something there that tickles the collector cord.
That reminds of those old (around the 40k 2nd edition time) 2000 points armies they'd sell. They were usually not especially efficient or even that thematically focused but they looked cool. And the only discount was that you got the army leader for free (I think?).
I don't even see it as marketing scum or anything. Many 3rd party stores also sell army bundles with no additional discount over what they offer for individual packs.
Army bundles without discount are very valid to advertise for sale. Some people like just a one-click approach to buying a load of stuff
Looking at the instructions for the Harlequin Troupe kit, which was updated during 9th edition, the Troupe Master has been renamed specifically as a Lead Player, and that now leaves the Troupe Master without an official model.
And taking a look at the point values for a Troupe...
...a single character model blister pack and that will become...
6 - 90 points
12 - 180 points
Given that the only Harlequin that can be a Warlord - and give Troupes the battleline keyword - is the Troupe Master, then I'm surprised that the Shadowseer, Solitaire and Death Jester all have a much fancier tactical rock, than the big cheese themself.
After what happened to the Tyranid Prime, I'm very confident that we'll be seeing a Troupe Master model for the Aeldari Codex, when it drops.
Dysartes wrote: Would you prefer Troupe Master or Great Harlequin, Samus?
Name wise? Troupe Master would be ideal as all Troupe Masters assume the lead role of Cegorach, the Great Harlequin himself. I suppose "Avatar of Cegorach" might be another suitable name, but it feels like a name reserved for a single and powerful individual...
A model of Cegorach himself? That would be supremely cool, although being a god I'm not sure how that would work unless he has his own avatar like the ones for Khaine and Ynnead.
Ynnead’s Avatar is singular because they’re young and weak. Khaine’s Avatars are many because he was shattered at the height of his power. Cegorach’s Avatars are mortals because he thinks it’s funny.
Really though, if someone in the studio wants to sculpt an “Avatar of Cegorach” with a base full of swirling swirly swirls and a bunch of faces like theatre masks that you can swap around or something then the fluff team will Find a Way…
I must say that I do have a thing for swirling swirly swirls, so I wouldn't mind if the fluff team goes a bit mad on the fizzy drinks...
For now though, a dedicated Troupe Master is as much to look forward to - especially with all the remaining Aspects and Phoenix Lords yet to be resculpted. It would be interesting to see a Troupe Master appear in Kill Team...
SamusDrake wrote: I must say that I do have a thing for swirling swirly swirls, so I wouldn't mind if the fluff team goes a bit mad on the fizzy drinks...
For now though, a dedicated Troupe Master is as much to look forward to - especially with all the remaining Aspects and Phoenix Lords yet to be resculpted. It would be interesting to see a Troupe Master appear in Kill Team...
Perhaps they repack Kyganil from the Ephrael Stern story as a troupe master (thats my plan for him ) Pretty cool guy, but dont look very cheerfull; they only need to make up some fluff about masters usually dont have a mask)
SamusDrake wrote: I must say that I do have a thing for swirling swirly swirls, so I wouldn't mind if the fluff team goes a bit mad on the fizzy drinks...
For now though, a dedicated Troupe Master is as much to look forward to - especially with all the remaining Aspects and Phoenix Lords yet to be resculpted. It would be interesting to see a Troupe Master appear in Kill Team...
Perhaps they repack Kyganil from the Ephrael Stern story as a troupe master (thats my plan for him ) Pretty cool guy, but dont look very cheerfull; they only need to make up some fluff about masters usually dont have a mask)
Nah, they'll go in the other direction, for sure; lots of swirly 'energy' sculpting as a variety of masks are scattered around to represent the master changing his expression, cycling through them in a maddening representation of 'motion' on the mjniature.
Really hope they reverse some of the terrible decisions made with the Dark Angels codex supplement. I still haven’t touched them with the new rules (although haven’t played them with Index rules either). Just killed my desire to play them (and technically 40K in general).
Kind of curious how the Space Woofs aren't among the four magnets. I'm always happy to see Imperial Fists feature, but I can't help but wonder if that's any indication of popularity or just bias on part of the merchandise company folks.
Geifer wrote: Kind of curious how the Space Woofs aren't among the four magnets. I'm always happy to see Imperial Fists feature, but I can't help but wonder if that's any indication of popularity or just bias on part of the merchandise company folks.
They got theirs in the first wave:
Spoiler:
Actually, I'm struggling to see what the difference is between those four and their original releases:
Hmm, yeah. I didn't know they already had the same thing but with more variety. Maybe the first batch is sold out and they're only making more of the bestsellers? Because yeah, those look the same to me as well.
Am I blind? Where are the mentioned rule changes to movement, the Grenade stratagem and devastating wounds in the Dataslate? I'm not in the mood to watch an hour long video for something I could simply read.
Seneca wrote: Am I blind? Where are the mentioned rule changes to movement, the Grenade stratagem and devastating wounds in the Dataslate? I'm not in the mood to watch an hour long video for something I could simply read.
Seneca wrote: Am I blind? Where are the mentioned rule changes to movement, the Grenade stratagem and devastating wounds in the Dataslate? I'm not in the mood to watch an hour long video for something I could simply read.
Tyranids Synapse gaining +1 Str in melee is quite interesting. Broodlord (and thus Genestealers) and Neurolictor gained the Synapse keyword so they are now both S7 in melee, nice, and Genestealers with Broodlord will be S5
Also nice to see the Trygon/Mawloc and Raveners added for Vanguards! It made so much sense and yet they weren't originally. Happy to see that change!
There are a TON of changes, not only to the armies but the main rules. With this and the pariah nexus mission rules changes, it is almost a new edition.
Domandi wrote: There are a TON of changes, not only to the armies but the main rules. With this and the pariah nexus mission rules changes, it is almost a new edition.
usernamesareannoying wrote: so you have to pay to pivot now... why are they going back to making things so hard?
They checked their notes from 2010 and found that people had been losing their minds over Raiders and Battlewagons getting "extra movement" when they deployed sideways. So they fixed it for 10th.
usernamesareannoying wrote: so you have to pay to pivot now... why are they going back to making things so hard?
They checked their notes from 2010 and found that people had been losing their minds over Raiders and Battlewagons getting "extra movement" when they deployed sideways. So they fixed it for 10th.
Raiders are on circular bases and are thus exempt from this change.
It sounds like they might be fixing the issue that Tyranids were very good at taking out infantry and marines, but borderline had only two options for heavy armour - the Tyrannofex and Zoanthropes
Domandi wrote: There are a TON of changes, not only to the armies but the main rules. With this and the pariah nexus mission rules changes, it is almost a new edition.
Makes sense. that's a good thing, I guess?
So an edition lasts how long? 3 years? This update comes how long after the beginning of 10th?
I would rather they stick with something for a change theres no patience for these constant changes.
Domandi wrote: There are a TON of changes, not only to the armies but the main rules. With this and the pariah nexus mission rules changes, it is almost a new edition.
Makes sense. that's a good thing, I guess?
So an edition lasts how long? 3 years? This update comes how long after the beginning of 10th?
I would rather they stick with something for a change theres no patience for these constant changes.
Weird I remember 3 weeks after the edition launched when eldar were banned and people demanded rapid changes.
kodos wrote: yeah, to how the Datasheets were handled, I haven't read anywhere people demanding changes to the core rules to fix Eldar
The changes to titanic, towering and devastating were all core rules changes as a result of eldar. Unless someone can correct ofc.
and as I recall the change that was demanded aimed at the Eldar Knights specific and not to change all titanic units (with the main complain being that the melee version and ranged version should be split and get points adjusted)
Crimson wrote: Impulsor and Repulsor have their transport capacity increased. Nice!
Any idea why? I can’t see a reason it’s better but might be being thick.
As an example--adding a character to 6-man units, such as Bladeguard, which would need a transport capacity of 7.
That seems very niche reason to change the transport capacities of the transports. No biggie I suppose. Just aren’t many units that size.
A few units are enough to warrant the change, especially melee orientated units ideal for those transports. I'm not sure why it needs to be a 'big deal.' In this example, the impulsor worked in previous editions because 5 bladeguard could be taken without being penalized for it, plus an added character for the 6th slot in the transport.
LunarSol wrote: It's very much for the Bladeguard to take a character.
Similarly the Repulsor upgrade to 14 is to let 6 man Gravis units take a character.
Still can't bring full Deathshroud units with a character attached though in a vehicle. I like that they fix this, but it's only fixed for certain armies (Marines)
Overread wrote: It sounds like they might be fixing the issue that Tyranids were very good at taking out infantry and marines, but borderline had only two options for heavy armour - the Tyrannofex and Zoanthropes
That’s always been a drawback to Nids though, average at best anti-tank. Even going back to 2nd Ed, your best bet was to get a Carnfiex to sit on enemy tanks.
The changes are welcome as it adds to the possibilities of more dedicated ranged units. Just hope it doesn’t prove overly reliable to the point of no brainer.
LunarSol wrote: It's very much for the Bladeguard to take a character.
Similarly the Repulsor upgrade to 14 is to let 6 man Gravis units take a character.
Still can't bring full Deathshroud units with a character attached though in a vehicle. I like that they fix this, but it's only fixed for certain armies (Marines)
Well, yes. They specifically changed the Impulsor and Repulsor so that's to be expected.
LunarSol wrote: It's very much for the Bladeguard to take a character.
Similarly the Repulsor upgrade to 14 is to let 6 man Gravis units take a character.
Still can't bring full Deathshroud units with a character attached though in a vehicle. I like that they fix this, but it's only fixed for certain armies (Marines)
Well, yes. They specifically changed the Impulsor and Repulsor so that's to be expected.
I thought it was quite obvious that my point was, good that they are fixing this, but really it should be done for all situations like this instead of just marines being only ones to get the fix.
I realise it's not easy as upping DGLRs has a knockon effect on should all LRs become bigger etc etc, but it should be possible to fix
LunarSol wrote: It's very much for the Bladeguard to take a character.
Similarly the Repulsor upgrade to 14 is to let 6 man Gravis units take a character.
Still can't bring full Deathshroud units with a character attached though in a vehicle. I like that they fix this, but it's only fixed for certain armies (Marines)
Well, yes. They specifically changed the Impulsor and Repulsor so that's to be expected.
I thought it was quite obvious that my point was, good that they are fixing this, but really it should be done for all situations like this instead of just marines being only ones to get the fix.
I realise it's not easy as upping DGLRs has a knockon effect on should all LRs become bigger etc etc, but it should be possible to fix
Land Raiders already were made bigger. They used to only Transport 10.
For all they've crammed in, it would've been nice if they just added a special rule for Imperial Knights to elect a single Armiger as a Warlord, only in the absence of a Knight. Plopping a single Knight on the table for a 500 point game is silly for the sake of the character keyword.
SamusDrake wrote: For all they've crammed in, it would've been nice if they just added a special rule for Imperial Knights to elect a single Armiger as a Warlord, only in the absence of a Knight. Plopping a single Knight on the table for a 500 point game is silly for the sake of the character keyword.
GW doesn't support 500 point games anymore, so if you're playing 10th edition at 500 points, it's via houserules, and at that point, no one is stopping you from saying that an Armiger counts as a character for those purposes
GW doesn't support 500 point games anymore, so if you're playing 10th edition at 500 points, it's via houserules, and at that point, no one is stopping you from saying that an Armiger counts as a character for those purposes
Thats interesting because a Warlord Titan is 3500 points, yet the largest game is a maximum of 3000 points...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MajorWesJanson wrote: When Knights get a combat patrol box, they will get something bespoke.
I can't see it being three Armigers in a box, thats less than the other CP boxes. I'd guess that GW would have to introduce even smaller and lighter units...
Domandi wrote: There are a TON of changes, not only to the armies but the main rules. With this and the pariah nexus mission rules changes, it is almost a new edition.
Makes sense. that's a good thing, I guess?
So an edition lasts how long? 3 years? This update comes how long after the beginning of 10th?
I would rather they stick with something for a change theres no patience for these constant changes.
If the tournament try-hards would stop trying so hard to break the game, GW wouldn't feel the need to 'fix' it.
But, mea culpa: RIP to my Knight Rampager tank-shocking things fist-first.
Overread wrote: It sounds like they might be fixing the issue that Tyranids were very good at taking out infantry and marines, but borderline had only two options for heavy armour - the Tyrannofex and Zoanthropes
I'm not sure this helps. Most dangerous vehicles and monsters are T11 or more. A quick look through the Nid datasheets shows that +1S doesn't hit a whole lot of useful breakpoints for a lot of the more common Nid monsters, but maybe this will see people shift to different ones now.
Just my opinion but 40K would be better off with larger unit games being taken into a new game, much like team skirmishes were with Kill Team. We wouldn't have a Wraithlord in Kill Team, so it seems as wierd as Phantom Titans in 40K.
SamusDrake wrote: Just my opinion but 40K would be better off with larger unit games being taken into a new game, much like team skirmishes were with Kill Team. We wouldn't have a Wraithlord in Kill Team, so it seems as wierd as Phantom Titans in 40K.
GW has done that in the past - Apocalypse is exactly that. GW has oddly not updated it in ages though, which I suspect is because its a superniche of the genre. The kind of thing the whole club plays once a year (at best for many). So not a huge money spinner. GW still updates the rules for their titans though, so you can keep up and use them, but most of the time those kind of models are not turning up to regular matches or tournaments and the like.
Overread wrote: It sounds like they might be fixing the issue that Tyranids were very good at taking out infantry and marines, but borderline had only two options for heavy armour - the Tyrannofex and Zoanthropes
I'm not sure this helps. Most dangerous vehicles and monsters are T11 or more. A quick look through the Nid datasheets shows that +1S doesn't hit a whole lot of useful breakpoints for a lot of the more common Nid monsters, but maybe this will see people shift to different ones now.
It puts several monsters onto S10, making them a threat to medium vehicles like Gladiators, Daemon Prince equivalents, and most transports. Screamer Killers can be S11, and Carnifexes S13. There's also combos like an Assimilation S11 Hive Tyrant plus S10 Tyrant Guard - both with twin-linked.
For ranged attacks there's some far more noticeable buffs. Rupture cannons become quite reliable, and lethal hits from the Hive Tyrant aura means that detachments other than Invasion can hurt tougher targets. Zoanthropes are big winners as Neurotyrants open up new buffs with their monster keyword, including hitting on 2+, Big Guns Never Tire, or Swarm-guided Salvos in Crusher Stampede.
LunarSol wrote: It's very much for the Bladeguard to take a character.
Similarly the Repulsor upgrade to 14 is to let 6 man Gravis units take a character.
Cracking thank you. Never thought of a six man gravis unit in a transport. Will give it some thought now. Ta.
Ironically GW forgot(?) to improve the capacity of the Repulsor Executioner, so now the Impulsor has a bigger transport capacity than the Repulsor Executioner...
I do think it's an oversight honestly. GW, if you're reading this, please fix in the next update.
Does anyone actually want to put 7 dudes in a RepEx? I forget the thing even has transport capacity most of the time, but that might be because I don't own one.
ZergSmasher wrote: Does anyone actually want to put 7 dudes in a RepEx? I forget the thing even has transport capacity most of the time, but that might be because I don't own one.
Probably. Bladeguard would be the obvious answer, as they come in units of 3 or 6. Adding a Character makes seven and couldn't fit into Impulsor/RepEx previously,.
Impulsor is probably the more common ride, but adjusting the RepEx to match makes sense.
ZergSmasher wrote: Does anyone actually want to put 7 dudes in a RepEx? I forget the thing even has transport capacity most of the time, but that might be because I don't own one.
Probably. Bladeguard would be the obvious answer, as they come in units of 3 or 6. Adding a Character makes seven and couldn't fit into Impulsor/RepEx previously,.
Impulsor is probably the more common ride, but adjusting the RepEx to match makes sense.
I get wanting it to match, but generally I want my transport to get close enough to the enemy to allow the Bladeguard to get an easy charge off. I don't want to be that close with a RepEx. Not saying it would be bad to give the RepEx an extra slot, but it doesn't seem as necessary as the Impulsor.
SamusDrake wrote: Just my opinion but 40K would be better off with larger unit games being taken into a new game, much like team skirmishes were with Kill Team. We wouldn't have a Wraithlord in Kill Team, so it seems as wierd as Phantom Titans in 40K.
GW has done that in the past - Apocalypse is exactly that. GW has oddly not updated it in ages though, which I suspect is because its a superniche of the genre. The kind of thing the whole club plays once a year (at best for many). So not a huge money spinner. GW still updates the rules for their titans though, so you can keep up and use them, but most of the time those kind of models are not turning up to regular matches or tournaments and the like.
Last time GW made Apocalypse, most people thought "whats the point?".
Apocalypse is a relic from the time of having to deal with the one FOC that allowed for only ever 3 choises of heavy support, and "super heavies" like bane blades was not possible to take in regular 40k.
Remember apocalypse also had the exotic function of "strategems" you could play out as twists and turns.
Regular 40k these days are more apocalypse than apocalypse was back in the day.
ZergSmasher wrote: Does anyone actually want to put 7 dudes in a RepEx? I forget the thing even has transport capacity most of the time, but that might be because I don't own one.
Probably. Bladeguard would be the obvious answer, as they come in units of 3 or 6. Adding a Character makes seven and couldn't fit into Impulsor/RepEx previously,.
Impulsor is probably the more common ride, but adjusting the RepEx to match makes sense.
I get wanting it to match, but generally I want my transport to get close enough to the enemy to allow the Bladeguard to get an easy charge off. I don't want to be that close with a RepEx. Not saying it would be bad to give the RepEx an extra slot, but it doesn't seem as necessary as the Impulsor.
I find if I use my repulsor executioner as a transport it gets a bit lost, as a tank hunter it’s better off keeping away from stuff as you say. Have found as I don’t want the transport option to muddy the waters I take the gladiator instead most the time. But do like the model so still use it.
usernamesareannoying wrote: so you have to pay to pivot now... why are they going back to making things so hard?
You already had to factor it as no part of model could move longer than M value. You couldn't deploy sideway, 90 rotate, move full M forward. That would gain distance and mean you cheat.
What change does is ease up measuring up since you don't need to figure what part of model moved longest and how far
SamusDrake wrote: Just my opinion but 40K would be better off with larger unit games being taken into a new game, much like team skirmishes were with Kill Team. We wouldn't have a Wraithlord in Kill Team, so it seems as wierd as Phantom Titans in 40K.
GW has done that in the past - Apocalypse is exactly that. GW has oddly not updated it in ages though, which I suspect is because its a superniche of the genre. The kind of thing the whole club plays once a year (at best for many). So not a huge money spinner. GW still updates the rules for their titans though, so you can keep up and use them, but most of the time those kind of models are not turning up to regular matches or tournaments and the like.
Last time GW made Apocalypse, most people thought "whats the point?".
Apocalypse is a relic from the time of having to deal with the one FOC that allowed for only ever 3 choises of heavy support, and "super heavies" like bane blades was not possible to take in regular 40k.
Remember apocalypse also had the exotic function of "strategems" you could play out as twists and turns.
Regular 40k these days are more apocalypse than apocalypse was back in the day.
There are other parts to Apoc as well, such as changing how damage is resolved so that you get to fire back even if you're "killed" in a turn. Which with titans and insane unit counts is almost needed otherwise whoever went first would likely win entirely and - well - no one wants to spend half a day setting things up to only end it after the first half of the first turn
Then there's things like formation movement trays and so forth that come along with an update and are in the rules and so forth.
I do agree, it is a limited appeal system and a "once a year at the club" kind of thing; not something you play regularly. So even if you need the rules you might only need one copy for the whole club rather than everyone having one; but its still a worthwhile system to take the games into huge huge huge battles in a slightly more practical manner.
The strategems in 1st edition Apocalypse made so much more sense than the current paradigm since 8th edition though. They actually felt like key operational/strategic resources a commander could lobby for access to in a battle. Like a scheduled artillery fire mission or a shield generator or a general staff for better command and control.
Rather than a unit apparently carrying meltabombs but only able to use them if the commander decides it is worth their political capital... or a tank suddenly remembering they can fire twice as quick actually, but again only if the commander thinks it is worth lobbying for right now...
You also chose them at the start of the game, rather than deciding in the spur of the moment that XYZ is useful, actually.
Surely it would be a lot easier to test the true 40k wargamer talents of tournament players to make a more static, balanced and non list-built (Actually making them all play the same army would be even more effective as a test of their prowess) Combat Patrol or something like it the basis of their games and leave mainline 40k alone. (It would also make the matches more palatable for spectators since they'd have an easier time understanding what's going on. I only mention because GW seems to really want to make these games spectator events) Rather than have Combat Patrol act as a kind of safe haven from all these balance updates for players playing strangers not in a tournament setting. (I know that's not it's only purpose, it exists due to new players being confused in a post-FoC situation and also acts a way to get vets and new players alike to get a foothold into armies and thus encourage more sales)
In a similar way to how things used to be with points and rules differences between Tournament 40k and non-Tournament 40k before GW insisted on taking more involvement and control over the tournament scene and hiring those guys from North America (I presume competitive 40k evolved there due to lower concentrations of players and thus more of a culture of playing strangers at LGS) to be in it's rules dev team. Attempts to harmonise the rules between the two mean the bulk of the players who never experience the problems the updates try to "fix" are at the mercy of what new autistic schemes come from 40k's Lance Armstrongs and having to make the letter and spirit of the rules match or close off things nobody but said Lance Armstrong types would ever think to exploit. As well as an unthinking assumption that perfect correct balance is either achievable or desirable (Or worth the downsides of constant rules changes) or even that the stats from the tournaments of win rates are an infallible metric of it.
And potential players (Both new and lapsed older players) from the outside are going to see all this LoL style stuff and be turned off or think the game is more complicated than it is. It's surely not possible to tell those people "Don't worry, they've fixed all the problems they won't do this again".
I don't think GW thinks they can "let go" of the tournament scene and trying to balance the rules around their meta given that platforms like YouTube mean a lot of new players are socialised into meta-chasing. It'd be much nicer to let them just go and come up with their consensus of rules based on the nature of how the game is played by themselves. So given that, it'd be a nice compromise to make a Combat Patrol standard for the big competitive tournaments. Broken list builders would be upset but it's from them that a lot of the problems have always come. Plus it'd make the barriers for entry into tournaments much lower making situations like certain guys winning so much because they have the money and insane mentality to buy the new most broken army every year a lot rarer. You could add some variety and list building by having one or two units being optionally replaced by some others it doesn't have to be either or. Another major advantage of this system is the battles would also be smaller and faster, making it more desirable as a spectator event and to organise. It would also make it easier than ever to do doubles tournaments and other non-1v1 formats like that.
The issue is still that GW wants to make 40k be everything to everyone, but it's not a good game at all so barely serviceable as a competitive game and a narrative/casual game.
A truer test of their skills would be more diverse missions and randomised allocations of roles in those missions. Hold outs/beachhead assaults where all objectives are in one deployment zone and the defender needs to defend them and the attacker, attack and capture them. Capture the flag, board/terrain design where tanks can only fit on a road or two on the board for some missions. I dislike the clinical nature of board design in modern 40k. I get the flip side of it though, tournament organisers don't want the chop and change as it is expensive to do, at which point GW should heavily subsidise tournament organisers when they buy terrain.
Whilst many players may hate the above because they cannot plan for it, that is completely the point... A tournament should not be won on list building and reliance on standard dice rolling with the only real reactions/decision making being choosing when to use your stratagems (a massive simplification as accurate movement is also a skill required).
Trading has become a huge part of modern 40k and it is so against established lore for most factions (whilst being the MO of others)... Someone should design a system in tournaments that incorporates an element of attrition.
There are other parts to Apoc as well, such as changing how damage is resolved so that you get to fire back even if you're "killed" in a turn. Which with titans and insane unit counts is almost needed otherwise whoever went first would likely win entirely and - well - no one wants to spend half a day setting things up to only end it after the first half of the first turn
That's only in the nuApocalypse which uses Epic as base rules. The previous versions played exactly like the concurrent editions of 40K and had no such mechanics, so most times you sat around for an hour waiting for the other side to resolve their massive turn while just picking up your own models.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: A truer test of their skills would be more diverse missions and randomised allocations of roles in those missions. Hold outs/beachhead assaults where all objectives are in one deployment zone and the defender needs to defend them and the attacker, attack and capture them. Capture the flag, board/terrain design where tanks can only fit on a road or two on the board for some missions. I dislike the clinical nature of board design in modern 40k. I get the flip side of it though, tournament organisers don't want the chop and change as it is expensive to do, at which point GW should heavily subsidise tournament organisers when they buy terrain.
Whilst many players may hate the above because they cannot plan for it, that is completely the point... A tournament should not be won on list building and reliance on standard dice rolling with the only real reactions/decision making being choosing when to use your stratagems (a massive simplification as accurate movement is also a skill required).
.
TOTALLY agree!
I'm a casual player, but your idea nails it for me!
8th Apocalypse was better 40k than... 40k. It's a damn shame that it flopped, which I suppose was because it was basically a whole new game in which you happened to use your 40k models, rather than an 'expansion' addon like it was in 4th/6th.
Nonetheless I had a lot more fun with the 8th Apocalypse ruleset than any of the recent 40k editions - which ironically (as others have pointed out) is now a lot closer to what Apocalypse used to be when Super-Heavies (whole armies of them even) are now expected rather than the exception.
Arbitrator wrote: 8th Apocalypse was better 40k than... 40k. It's a damn shame that it flopped, which I suppose was because it was basically a whole new game in which you happened to use your 40k models, rather than an 'expansion' addon like it was in 4th/6th.
Nonetheless I had a lot more fun with the 8th Apocalypse ruleset than any of the recent 40k editions - which ironically (as others have pointed out) is now a lot closer to what Apocalypse used to be when Super-Heavies (whole armies of them even) are now expected rather than the exception.
I wish more people had played it with 40k sized armies. Most people assumed you had to play with unreasonably sized armies when it worked quite well at 2k.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: A truer test of their skills would be more diverse missions and randomised allocations of roles in those missions. Hold outs/beachhead assaults where all objectives are in one deployment zone and the defender needs to defend them and the attacker, attack and capture them. Capture the flag, board/terrain design where tanks can only fit on a road or two on the board for some missions. I dislike the clinical nature of board design in modern 40k. I get the flip side of it though, tournament organisers don't want the chop and change as it is expensive to do, at which point GW should heavily subsidise tournament organisers when they buy terrain.
You could also do this but have them switch roles and judge from some criteria using the results of both. Reminds me of the way Unreal Tournament used to have the assault/defend game mode where each team played a round in each role in a completely asymmetric map and set of objectives.
Actually it would be really cool if they went out of their way to have a proper cool themed table for the final match instead of the sad little world of L-shaped terrain. It's simply not good to watch the Nova broadcasts no matter how much esports effort they put into it. Generally a lot of people seem to try different things to make battle reports most entertaining.
This guy seems to have it right as the comments attest. Prior to the likes of Critical Role in Japan there was the cool world of people writing up their DnD campaigns in narrative form. And just like how nobody succeeds really in being as good as the somewhat fake Critical Role with most real recordings of a DnD session being horrible to watch, the same could be said for a lot of battle reports.
Arbitrator wrote: 8th Apocalypse was better 40k than... 40k. It's a damn shame that it flopped, which I suppose was because it was basically a whole new game in which you happened to use your 40k models, rather than an 'expansion' addon like it was in 4th/6th.
Nonetheless I had a lot more fun with the 8th Apocalypse ruleset than any of the recent 40k editions - which ironically (as others have pointed out) is now a lot closer to what Apocalypse used to be when Super-Heavies (whole armies of them even) are now expected rather than the exception.
I wish more people had played it with 40k sized armies. Most people assumed you had to play with unreasonably sized armies when it worked quite well at 2k.
totally agree...
I couldn't get any of the local guys to try it even...
(even with me having all the rules and cards... they'd just need their figures)
Arbitrator wrote: 8th Apocalypse was better 40k than... 40k. It's a damn shame that it flopped, which I suppose was because it was basically a whole new game in which you happened to use your 40k models, rather than an 'expansion' addon like it was in 4th/6th.
Nonetheless I had a lot more fun with the 8th Apocalypse ruleset than any of the recent 40k editions - which ironically (as others have pointed out) is now a lot closer to what Apocalypse used to be when Super-Heavies (whole armies of them even) are now expected rather than the exception.
I wish more people had played it with 40k sized armies. Most people assumed you had to play with unreasonably sized armies when it worked quite well at 2k.
totally agree...
I couldn't get any of the local guys to try it even...
(even with me having all the rules and cards... they'd just need their figures)
+1 for 8th Ed. Apocalypse. The most fun “40k” games I’ve played in a long time. I still have my set and expansion cards pack. It’s kind of sad how this was left to wither on the vine, while the most recent editions of 40k did not take any of the great rule concepts from this ruleset.
any idea when can we expect the next WH reveal event? Somehow we got all 40k faction reveals already out. We got the mystery faction nxt and is already June. Perhaps, the following book will come in aug?
In case anyone was wanting one, the GSC battlefore is currently in stock at Element. Pairs well with the new combat patrol and with the demise of the old one the best place to get Goliath trucks / rockginders.
And another strike on the Tyranids - it seems GW lastchanced and removed the hierodules - and they must have done it really fast because I don't recall seeing any news about it or any lag time.
Very sad about this, esp since they downgraded them to a regular super heavy and made them useful in the game.
I've still got my scythed, but I'd always intended picking up a barbed one day.
Still this might mean new plastic ones - -- one day!
Too be honest, I get getting disappointed about products being removed for sale. But Forgeworld being Legends to me just harkens back to the old days when you were expected to need your opponents permission for Forgeworld.
I'd be slightly less disappointed if GW did a proper "last chance" (even though I'd then grumble that its only a week/month at most esp on high value items and on lots of them at once)
What gets me are the "wake up and they are gone" no warning situations where even if you had the money you've no chance to get something.
MajorWesJanson wrote: Next reveal will probably be after the age of sigmar launch, showing off next wave of 40k and first few sigmar releases.
I recall reading something recently about a dedicated AOS preview event in August, I think at the first official tournament.
GW may do something similar to last year's July "no 40k!" stream and have a preview in the next few weeks that excludes AOS, followed by showing off the new faction ranges a few weeks after everyone has had Skaventide.
Having a look at the new dataslate for Nids, am I right in thinking a synapse model is in range of itself? So Hive tyrants and Norn Emissaries will get the +1 str all the time in melee?
I recall reading something recently about a dedicated AOS preview event in August, I think at the first official tournament.
That may be due to what happened with 40k 10th edition and Battle of Oghram. AoS is doing something similar and will get a livestream that shows the winner's rest of the new range.
No wolves on Fenris wrote: Having a look at the new dataslate for Nids, am I right in thinking a synapse model is in range of itself? So Hive tyrants and Norn Emissaries will get the +1 str all the time in melee?
Yes. Same way they always get to test battle-shock on 3D6.
Inquisitor Coteaz will get a new model. "Stoic look, like HH Dorn, resting on a thunder hammer, looking into the distance, eagle flying around him"
Again reiterates that there will be 3 Battleforces boxes for Agents of the Imperium. Ordo Malleus, Ordo Xenos, Ordo Hereticus.
Summary of old BA rumours:
New Lemartes, new Astorath, Death Company themed boxset with Brutalis Dreadnought, Jump Assault Intercessors and Lemartes
New BA info:
New Captain with the same muscle armour design as on other BA models
New Combat Patrol has the new captain in there, squad of new Sanguinary Guard, Squad of Assault Intercessors. Probably something else too as to little right now but thats all he heard.
About the new Sanguinary Guard:
They apparently got their wings removed and instead have the Grav-Chute flaps with wings engraved on them. They are also going down to three per squad like the DA Inner Circle Companions. Wrist mounted Bolters still a thing and apparently getting some kind of "Grey Knight Halbert" as a melee weapon
I cannot stress how frustrating it is that they seem to have the inclinations to add little itty bitty units to the non-divergent divergent Chapters, but refuse to give any of the actual in the codex Chapters a morsel of a unit.
Kanluwen wrote: I cannot stress how frustrating it is that they seem to have the inclinations to add little itty bitty units to the non-divergent divergent Chapters, but refuse to give any of the actual in the codex Chapters a morsel of a unit.
But if “codex” chapters had unique units, they wouldn’t adhering to the codex any more.??
Kanluwen wrote: I cannot stress how frustrating it is that they seem to have the inclinations to add little itty bitty units to the non-divergent divergent Chapters, but refuse to give any of the actual in the codex Chapters a morsel of a unit.
I think he’s referring to things like Raven Guard jump body guard with claws, or maybe a salamander gravis unit with thunderhammer/stormshield etc.
Would be nice to see but only really possible with book expansions like we had in 8th. With a 3 year churn cycle, there is not time to flesh these out when the corporate gods stress a complete new edition and recycle of codexes.
Kanluwen wrote: I cannot stress how frustrating it is that they seem to have the inclinations to add little itty bitty units to the non-divergent divergent Chapters, but refuse to give any of the actual in the codex Chapters a morsel of a unit.
But if “codex” chapters had unique units, they wouldn’t adhering to the codex any more.??
Ultramarines literally have a unique bodyguard unit in the form of the Victrix Guard. Just because they're now rolled into Calgar's entry does not mean they did not exist.
bullyboy wrote: I think he’s referring to things like Raven Guard jump body guard with claws, or maybe a salamander gravis unit with thunderhammer/stormshield etc.
Would be nice to see but only really possible with book expansions like we had in 8th. With a 3 year churn cycle, there is not time to flesh these out when the corporate gods stress a complete new edition and recycle of codexes.
Oh please, it could be done without book expansions. They did unique lieutenant loadouts for individual Chapters before.
In an ideal world? We'd see a unique bodyguard unit for each of the Codex Chapters, a unique unit in general, and a unique piece of wargear for lieutenants and captains.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: they also had Tyrannic War Veterans until recently (i think that might be my vote for the weirdest oddity in the SM range. just, why?)
A combination of things, I guess. They were metal models, and sculpting and casting four metal Marines for the poster boy faction was likely only ever going to generate profit. Cassius also got a (metal) model around the time, when GW doubled down on the Ultramarine poster boy craze and came up with a lot of new special characters for them, and Tyrannic War Veterans gave him a flavorful unit to join.
Also until 4th ed Ultramarines didn't really have anything special in terms of units. Which is of course the point, but as one of the big four, GW couldn't just let them be the examplars of the Codex Astartes and tried to add things like Calgar's bodyguards and Tyrannic War Veterans that were harmless in so far as they didn't feel like violations of long standing background.
They were just a bit of harmless fun. We used to get things like that back in the day.
GW did some unique character models & upgrade sprues for the other codex chapters back in 8th(?) edition, I remember a lot of them showing up later in overstock clearance sales including GW's own mystery drop bundles. Perhaps there just aren't enough players for those chapters to make unique plastic kits viable?
xttz wrote: GW did some unique character models & upgrade sprues for the other codex chapters back in 8th(?) edition, I remember a lot of them showing up later in overstock clearance sales including GW's own mystery drop bundles. Perhaps there just aren't enough players for those chapters to make unique plastic kits viable?
They did the "characters"(really just named but not named lieutenants) for the Divergent Non-Divergent Chapters only. DA, BA, SW(whose model came in the GSC v SW box), and then one that was obviously meant to be Ultramarines(came with the Aeldari v SM box). They also did the upgrade sprues for those Chapters only and did them around the launch of Primaris.
Shadowspear marked a turning point for the Marine stuff and the lead-in to the Codex Chapter supplements which saw the rework of a bunch of older characters into Primaris and some new characters as Primaris as well.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: they also had Tyrannic War Veterans until recently (i think that might be my vote for the weirdest oddity in the SM range. just, why?)
A combination of things, I guess. They were metal models, and sculpting and casting four metal Marines for the poster boy faction was likely only ever going to generate profit. Cassius also got a (metal) model around the time, when GW doubled down on the Ultramarine poster boy craze and came up with a lot of new special characters for them, and Tyrannic War Veterans gave him a flavorful unit to join.
Also until 4th ed Ultramarines didn't really have anything special in terms of units. Which is of course the point, but as one of the big four, GW couldn't just let them be the examplars of the Codex Astartes and tried to add things like Calgar's bodyguards and Tyrannic War Veterans that were harmless in so far as they didn't feel like violations of long standing background.
They were just a bit of harmless fun. We used to get things like that back in the day.
TWVs were sternguard before SG was a thing. At the time when vets were a a single unit, before the VG/SG vet split, they were the special shooty vets. My recollection was that most normal veteran squads at the time were used as choppy ones, because that’s what the stats/wargear/rules promoted. TWV actually let you field vets that shot better.
Once 5th came out with SG, TWVs were basically redundant. The only time to field them using their actual rules (when they had them) was to list tailor against nid players. Why? But they are very cool and flavorful minis, and work just fine in sternguard squads. Which is where mine have been serving faithfully in many a battle.
I think I remember that initially (so around 2nd/3rd edition times) veteran squads were more or less just tactical squads with white helmets, the Crux Terminatus as the squad sign, and Terminator stats (I think +1 on WS, BS, Initiative, and Attack, (maybe also Ld) compared to regular Marines), or just one extra attack because of the Crux Terminatus? And maybe the leader got the Veteran upgrade for free that regular squads had to buy.
But I don't remember it too well, It's been more than two decades.
Yeah, Veterans as barely different Tactical Squads were nothing to write home about. Terminator honors from 3rd ed onward added +1A and +1LD. It wasn't a bad thought per se taking things easy like that. The game wasn't terribly lethal during that time and in theory the additional attacks would give you a modest edge if you found your squad engaged by a fairly large number of close combat units. But rapid fire rules and superior close combat rules crippled bolter Marines as it was, without even considering the impact of paying extra for no increase in survivability when you could get actual close combat troops to do a better job once they got stuck in.
As Nevelon said, Tyrannic War Veterans actually had something of a point as a poor poor man's Deathwatch Kill Team before Sternguard was introduced as the actual poor man's Deathwatch Kill Team. If you played Ultramarines, of course. If you played a cool chapter, their existence didn't do you any good.
Geifer wrote: Yeah, Veterans as barely different Tactical Squads were nothing to write home about. Terminator honors from 3rd ed onward added +1A and +1LD. It wasn't a bad thought per se taking things easy like that. The game wasn't terribly lethal during that time and in theory the additional attacks would give you a modest edge if you found your squad engaged by a fairly large number of close combat units. But rapid fire rules and superior close combat rules crippled bolter Marines as it was, without even considering the impact of paying extra for no increase in survivability when you could get actual close combat troops to do a better job once they got stuck in.
Even in 3rd Vets could take BP and CS, and assoon as 4th, Vets could be given a LC or PF replacing the heavy weapon, and Power weapon replacing the special weapon. And at the time Assault Marines could take a couple plasma pistols but otherwise no special close combat equipment over a Vet squad.
But to your point that was what anyone that took them with termi honours would do, no point in paying 10ppm for an extra S4 attack on bolter Marines.
Geifer wrote: Yeah, Veterans as barely different Tactical Squads were nothing to write home about. Terminator honors from 3rd ed onward added +1A and +1LD. It wasn't a bad thought per se taking things easy like that. The game wasn't terribly lethal during that time and in theory the additional attacks would give you a modest edge if you found your squad engaged by a fairly large number of close combat units. But rapid fire rules and superior close combat rules crippled bolter Marines as it was, without even considering the impact of paying extra for no increase in survivability when you could get actual close combat troops to do a better job once they got stuck in.
Even in 3rd Vets could take BP and CS, and assoon as 4th, Vets could be given a LC or PF replacing the heavy weapon, and Power weapon replacing the special weapon. And at the time Assault Marines could take a couple plasma pistols but otherwise no special close combat equipment over a Vet squad.
But to your point that was what anyone that took them with termi honours would do, no point in paying 10ppm for an extra S4 attack on bolter Marines.
Little bit of extra detail- vets in 3rd were Ld9 by default, terminator honours only provided an extra attack. Vets in 4th required terminator honours to get Ld9 (and the extra A), but you could just upgrade the sergeant to get Ld9 the vast majority of the time, and in 4th a Captain or Master on the table would give Ld9+ to every unit regardless so it was less important anyway despite Ld being a bigger deal in 4th than 3rd.
In an ideal world? We'd see a unique bodyguard unit for each of the Codex Chapters, a unique unit in general, and a unique piece of wargear for lieutenants and captains.
In a truly ideal world?
Marines wouldn't get another damn thing until every other faction caught up with them... Meaning every other faction in the game got 3 Supplemental books with extra detachments for their subfactions, as well as actual bespoke units for all of those snowflake subfactions, and each faction's base range grew to 90+ datacards. Once the balance was achieved, in an ideal world, GW would maintain it by adding the same number of units to every army every edition.
Now, obviously I know we're never going to get that. But the closer GW takes us in that direction, the better. And there are things they could do to move the needle. The Kroot was good. The Aspect Warriors were good. Rumoured Inquisition Battleforces, and IA dex will be good if true.
Mandrakes were also good, but I swear if we don't get the court of the Archon, Wych Cult Beasts and Grotesques... I just don't know how much longer I can support the company if it doesn't give us at least that.
GW had me content in 9th, because I felt every Army's subfactions at least had rules parity with Marine subfactions. While I had that, I felt like I had something. Then GW decided to make subfactions irrelevant, and now there are ten possible ways to build a Blood Angels Army (7 + 3 detachments I think?), while there are only 4 ways to build a sisters army, despite having six major orders.
If you only ever yardstick against what marines get you'll never be happy, they will always get the most stuff, the most frequently and they're caught in a loop where they're the most popular and therefore sell the most so get the most releases which makes them popular.
To keep using sisters as an example, I'm not sure why they picked 4 army styles, I'm not sure if there are other appropriate suggestions for more. But sisters are in a far healthier position now than they were for at least 5 editions in the run up to their relaunch.
All armies (including marines) have less stuff and fewer options than in 9th and I much prefer the current methodology as previously discussed, but this is still leaps ahead of where the game existed for decades for faction representation and rules comprehensiveness.
Sisters got 4 good ones. Compare to marines where several can be just ignored.
Only issue being the usual free bonus rules like detachments give. Point values impossible to get right since one has to price as if best detachment. So units bad in other detachments. Penitent units being prime example with sisters.
Free rules outside datasheet always give problems.
Sisters got 4 good ones. Compare to marines where several can be just ignored.
Only issue being the usual free bonus rules like detachments give. Point values impossible to get right since one has to price as if best detachment. So units bad in other detachments. Penitent units being prime example with sisters.
Free rules outside datasheet always give problems.
It depends on how you look at it. In most cases, this occurs because two models share such similar roles that no matter the point difference one will always be better than the other. By giving them slightly better rules in different detachments you carve out design space for each of them. This can 100% be taken too far and probably have for Penitent, but I find it creates more viable options overall than not most of the time.
yeah, instead of having 2 units having different roles by default, adding detachments to make units different is an option
if the rules changes would come with points changes for the detachments and not be priced with the unit itself as this would simply remove options
Sisters got 4 good ones. Compare to marines where several can be just ignored.
Only issue being the usual free bonus rules like detachments give. Point values impossible to get right since one has to price as if best detachment. So units bad in other detachments. Penitent units being prime example with sisters.
Free rules outside datasheet always give problems.
In that case it would be most comprehensive for each unit to have different points costs for different detachments. However we can't have different points for different upgrades within the same squad, so that's probably too much to hope for...
Sisters got 4 good ones. Compare to marines where several can be just ignored.
Only issue being the usual free bonus rules like detachments give. Point values impossible to get right since one has to price as if best detachment. So units bad in other detachments. Penitent units being prime example with sisters.
Free rules outside datasheet always give problems.
In that case it would be most comprehensive for each unit to have different points costs for different detachments. However we can't have different points for different upgrades within the same squad, so that's probably too much to hope for...
The most likely outcome of this is units being worse in their primary detachment because they're overcosted for the privilege.
Sisters got 4 good ones. Compare to marines where several can be just ignored.
Only issue being the usual free bonus rules like detachments give. Point values impossible to get right since one has to price as if best detachment. So units bad in other detachments. Penitent units being prime example with sisters.
Free rules outside datasheet always give problems.
In that case it would be most comprehensive for each unit to have different points costs for different detachments. However we can't have different points for different upgrades within the same squad, so that's probably too much to hope for...
The most likely outcome of this is units being worse in their primary detachment because they're overcosted for the privilege.
The best evidence for this is the changes that have been made to Marines to reflect all the Dark Angels armies pretending to be Iron Hands.
Monday Valrak update, not much new tbh:
- Reiterates that coteaz and 3 battleforces for agents is coming
- deathwatch folded in
- GK are not folded in
- new assassin's mentioned but from a less reliable source
- says that the noises and sources keep reinforcing that daemons are going to god books with their legions, but much like us doesn't know how be'lakor fits into that
Dudeface wrote: Monday Valrak update, not much new tbh:
- Reiterates that coteaz and 3 battleforces for agents is coming
- deathwatch folded in
- GK are not folded in
- new assassin's mentioned but from a less reliable source
- says that the noises and sources keep reinforcing that daemons are going to god books with their legions, but much like us doesn't know how be'lakor fits into that
I would assume they'd handle Be'lakor like AOS does, throwing him in the general chaos faction... but for 40k, that's CSM, which has already come and gone, so yeah, very curious to consider. would certainly be a change for the better, tho
new assassin would be pretty wild, unless it's bringing the heresy assassins to plastic (maybe the source mixed things up?)
oh and, DW getting rolled in but DW not feels pretty obvious. the GK army list is much more substantial, even if it still needs a lot of updates
Dudeface wrote: Monday Valrak update, not much new tbh:
- Reiterates that coteaz and 3 battleforces for agents is coming
- deathwatch folded in
- GK are not folded in
- new assassin's mentioned but from a less reliable source
- says that the noises and sources keep reinforcing that daemons are going to god books with their legions, but much like us doesn't know how be'lakor fits into that
Be'lakor hijacked a Knight World...he could show up in Chaos Knights?
Dudeface wrote: Monday Valrak update, not much new tbh:
- Reiterates that coteaz and 3 battleforces for agents is coming
- deathwatch folded in
- GK are not folded in
- new assassin's mentioned but from a less reliable source
- says that the noises and sources keep reinforcing that daemons are going to god books with their legions, but much like us doesn't know how be'lakor fits into that
Be'lakor hijacked a Knight World...he could show up in Chaos Knights?
Personally, I suspect he'll be a 1 page pdf agent of chaos. Tying him to the knights codex would be a bit of a phallic move after disbanding the daemons book.
Dudeface wrote: Monday Valrak update, not much new tbh:
- Reiterates that coteaz and 3 battleforces for agents is coming
- deathwatch folded in
- GK are not folded in
- new assassin's mentioned but from a less reliable source
- says that the noises and sources keep reinforcing that daemons are going to god books with their legions, but much like us doesn't know how be'lakor fits into that
Be'lakor hijacked a Knight World...he could show up in Chaos Knights?
Personally, I suspect he'll be a 1 page pdf agent of chaos. Tying him to the knights codex would be a bit of a phallic move after disbanding the daemons book.
Be'lakor always struck me as just being more of a WHFB/AOS character anyway, so backseating him in 40k would be okay with me.
Personally, I suspect he'll be a 1 page pdf agent of chaos. Tying him to the knights codex would be a bit of a phallic move after disbanding the daemons book.
Be'lakor has lately been tied more to the mortal side of things than daemons. I'm just throwing it out there, as it would be a way to add a character to the Chaos Knights and a Canis Rex equivalent.
Same sort of story as Vashtorr surely, especially if the various thousand sons automata rumours come to fruition.
Assassins as Death Cult is something that I've wondered about. There's already a plastic crusader for retinues in the Blackstone Fortress set, adding some more Death cultists other than the Rogue Trader retinue would help pad out the inquisitor retinues.
Shakalooloo wrote: Maybe we'll eventually get a Lost and the Damned book, with Be'lakor as the de facto 'leader' of the the beastmen, rebels and cultists.
I've had this idea since the end of 9th, but now that we have the CSM codex, I think it's unlikely to happen in 10th edition. those units already have a home for now
Overread wrote: Very unlikely right now when GW are on a huge quest in both AoS and 40K to simplify weapon profiles, especially close combat weapons.
They do seem quite happy to give you “more attacks less damage” less attacks more damage” and “one attack medium damage with special effects” as weapon options and call them equal value though.
Kanluwen wrote: Vanus and Venenum would be the two that would make the jump, but they're all resin so unlikely to be in the Agents book.
Those are the two! Why don't you think the Adamus (had to look him up) would make the jump? Just too generic maybe?
Although you make a good point on the resin. They do seem sort of resin-phobic for 40k/AoS these days.
It's been noted over on B&C (I just checked to validate) but the 40k assassins have just disappeared from the webstore in the UK. Possible imminent surprise release of Agents?
They're gone from the AUS website too. This means they'll come back with the inevitable re-packaging price rise, which is a terrifying thought as they were already $60 a pop.
Snrub wrote: They're gone from the AUS website too. This means they'll come back with the inevitable re-packaging price rise, which is a terrifying thought as they were already $60 a pop.
Assuming you want all of them.
And could use them all.
And don’t already own some of them.
Etc..
Who doesn't want a 2nd Evesor Assassin?! If the first one doesn't work, just through another one at the problem. If that doesn't work, the whole planet's probably fethed and needs nuking anyway.
Assuming you want all of them.
And could use them all.
And don’t already own some of them.
Etc..
Who doesn't want a 2nd Evesor Assassin?! If the first one doesn't work, just through another one at the problem. If that doesn't work, the whole planet's probably fethed and needs nuking anyway.
Heh.
No lie, I’d be tempted for a box. I’ve got a chunk of assassins kicking around, but mostly old metals. Some are even painted. I like the new plastics, but the way GW prices them I just could not bring myself to drop the cash for single models.
And it’s not just the assassins. I have to really want a character to pay what they are asking for them these days.
Assuming you want all of them.
And could use them all.
And don’t already own some of them.
Etc..
Who doesn't want a 2nd Evesor Assassin?! If the first one doesn't work, just through another one at the problem. If that doesn't work, the whole planet's probably fethed and needs nuking anyway.
Heh.
No lie, I’d be tempted for a box. I’ve got a chunk of assassins kicking around, but mostly old metals. Some are even painted. I like the new plastics, but the way GW prices them I just could not bring myself to drop the cash for single models.
And it’s not just the assassins. I have to really want a character to pay what they are asking for them these days.
Back in the day I hesitated to buy Execution Force due to the 100€ price tag, until I realized each Assassin was likely to sell for 25€ individually. Which they did. Glad I did pull the trigger. I put my free Cultists and Chaos Lord to good use and have all four new plastic Assassins, which only got even more expensive in the meantime.
Yeah, character prices are pretty ridiculous and by and large I only own any of the newer characters if they were in a discount box with other stuff. I made an exception or two, but it's exceedingly rare.
Nevelon wrote: No lie, I’d be tempted for a box. I’ve got a chunk of assassins kicking around, but mostly old metals. Some are even painted. I like the new plastics, but the way GW prices them I just could not bring myself to drop the cash for single models.
And it’s not just the assassins. I have to really want a character to pay what they are asking for them these days.
Yeah I feel ya there. I haven't bought a single character model for any system in ages due to the outrageous prices they're asking. Even online retailers can't make it super palatable.
The only two in recent years that have almost made cave in were the plastic Lion El'jonson and new Asmodai. Both gorgeous, both really expensive. I'll get em at some point when I don't have more pressing hobby purchases.
I also really want all four assassins, as they have some use in Heresy (Vindi and Evesor mostly, other two... ehh... not so much.) and I've got some cool conversion ideas for posing that i'd like to attempt. If they are indeed released as a four pack and the price is "ok", I might consider it.
Geifer wrote: Back in the day I hesitated to buy Execution Force due to the 100€ price tag,
Arrrgh, I regret not buying that bloody box set. I procrastinated on it for ages and I decided against it for some reason and then it vanished into the ether and the assassins came back at stupid prices and I cursed myself for a fool.
It was such a good value box too. And you can never have too many of those Dark Vengeance cultists.
Snrub wrote: They're gone from the AUS website too. This means they'll come back with the inevitable re-packaging price rise, which is a terrifying thought as they were already $60 a pop.
I was lucky enough to get the Execution Force box when it was around. And the game itself is actually decent in comparison to some of the other little board games GW have done to sell models.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: oh and, DW getting rolled in but [edit]GK[/edit] not feels pretty obvious. the GK army list is much more substantial, even if it still needs a lot of updates
The army list issue is of GW's own making, given they've been kinda aimless in how they've implemented the army in each edition.
From a kit perspective, by my count we're currently looking at 4 (1 character, 1 character unit) plus an upgrade for DW (after they cycled Artemis out for some reason), compared to 7 (of which 4 are characters, along with BC Stern being cycled out), so it's not like there's a huge amount of difference between them in terms of generics.
DW Deathwatch Veterans
Corvus Blackstar
Kill Team Cassius
Watch Master
GK Power Armour
Terminator Armour
Dreadknight/Baby Carrier
Castellan Crowe
Grand Master Voldus
Lord Kaldor Draigo
Brother Captain
I'd disagree that there's much ground for saying the GK army list is more developed than the DW - it's just been around for longer. They're both stretching certain kits to fill as many slots as possible, then adding addition units from the main SM list, sometimes tweaked.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: oh and, DW getting rolled in but [edit]GK[/edit] not feels pretty obvious. the GK army list is much more substantial, even if it still needs a lot of updates
The army list issue is of GW's own making, given they've been kinda aimless in how they've implemented the army in each edition.
From a kit perspective, by my count we're currently looking at 4 (1 character, 1 character unit) plus an upgrade for DW (after they cycled Artemis out for some reason), compared to 7 (of which 4 are characters, along with BC Stern being cycled out), so it's not like there's a huge amount of difference between them in terms of generics.
DW Deathwatch Veterans
Corvus Blackstar
Kill Team Cassius
Watch Master
GK Power Armour
Terminator Armour
Dreadknight/Baby Carrier
Castellan Crowe
Grand Master Voldus
Lord Kaldor Draigo
Brother Captain
I'd disagree that there's much ground for saying the GK army list is more developed than the DW - it's just been around for longer. They're both stretching certain kits to fill as many slots as possible, then adding addition units from the main SM list, sometimes tweaked.
I would also like to add, DW would be around just as long if Alienhunters hadn't been scrapped back in the day.
Realistically, I think the issue is that DW have always had a identity problem, from the OG 3rd ed implementation, to the RPGs, to the current form. Every edition the focus has changed. 7th it was bespoke units and killteams, 8th was Spec Issue Ammo, in 9th it was wargear and customization and 10th index is them giving up. So I could see them throwing in the towel, tossing them into Agents and finally calling it a day.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: oh and, DW getting rolled in but [edit]GK[/edit] not feels pretty obvious. the GK army list is much more substantial, even if it still needs a lot of updates
The army list issue is of GW's own making, given they've been kinda aimless in how they've implemented the army in each edition.
From a kit perspective, by my count we're currently looking at 4 (1 character, 1 character unit) plus an upgrade for DW (after they cycled Artemis out for some reason), compared to 7 (of which 4 are characters, along with BC Stern being cycled out), so it's not like there's a huge amount of difference between them in terms of generics.
DW Deathwatch Veterans
Corvus Blackstar
Kill Team Cassius
Watch Master
GK Power Armour
Terminator Armour
Dreadknight/Baby Carrier
Castellan Crowe
Grand Master Voldus
Lord Kaldor Draigo
Brother Captain
I'd disagree that there's much ground for saying the GK army list is more developed than the DW - it's just been around for longer. They're both stretching certain kits to fill as many slots as possible, then adding addition units from the main SM list, sometimes tweaked.
I would also like to add, DW would be around just as long if Alienhunters hadn't been scrapped back in the day.
Realistically, I think the issue is that DW have always had a identity problem, from the OG 3rd ed implementation, to the RPGs, to the current form. Every edition the focus has changed. 7th it was bespoke units and killteams, 8th was Spec Issue Ammo, in 9th it was wargear and customization and 10th index is them giving up. So I could see them throwing in the towel, tossing them into Agents and finally calling it a day.
I mean they operate in small distinct squads called kill teams, often in isolation and we have a killteam game about small squads of specialists operating in isolation. I think GW figured out exactly what their identity is/where it should belong, they just jumped the shark too early and now need to back pedal.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: oh and, DW getting rolled in but [edit]GK[/edit] not feels pretty obvious. the GK army list is much more substantial, even if it still needs a lot of updates
The army list issue is of GW's own making, given they've been kinda aimless in how they've implemented the army in each edition.
From a kit perspective, by my count we're currently looking at 4 (1 character, 1 character unit) plus an upgrade for DW (after they cycled Artemis out for some reason), compared to 7 (of which 4 are characters, along with BC Stern being cycled out), so it's not like there's a huge amount of difference between them in terms of generics.
DW Deathwatch Veterans
Corvus Blackstar
Kill Team Cassius
Watch Master
GK Power Armour
Terminator Armour
Dreadknight/Baby Carrier
Castellan Crowe
Grand Master Voldus
Lord Kaldor Draigo
Brother Captain
I'd disagree that there's much ground for saying the GK army list is more developed than the DW - it's just been around for longer. They're both stretching certain kits to fill as many slots as possible, then adding addition units from the main SM list, sometimes tweaked.
I would also like to add, DW would be around just as long if Alienhunters hadn't been scrapped back in the day.
Realistically, I think the issue is that DW have always had a identity problem, from the OG 3rd ed implementation, to the RPGs, to the current form. Every edition the focus has changed. 7th it was bespoke units and killteams, 8th was Spec Issue Ammo, in 9th it was wargear and customization and 10th index is them giving up. So I could see them throwing in the towel, tossing them into Agents and finally calling it a day.
A different angle on this is that the identity of the Deathwatch was never in question but the moment GW decided to blow up a single unit into a full army to sell more miniatures, it opened up a lot of questions GW's game designers were consistently unable to answer. But they had to stick with it because GW still wanted to sell those models.
If Deathwatch is cut back now it may happen not because they finally realized they don't know what they want for the army but that in the very recent past GW has been so successful that they don't have to worry about the repercussions of invalidating people's armies. GW has been happily doing that for a while now. They might see this as an opportunity to fix a mistake.
In theory I'm fine with DW being changed, or "tweaked" a bit here or there. I just ask for a few little things.
1. The obvious one everyone wants, points balance internally and externally.
2. Keep the special units/wargear. I still want to see the Corvus Blackstar, Watchmaster, and Frag Cannons.
3. Custodes are the exception to the "no Heresy Crossover" rule. Can you give DW a bit of leeway on the "no model, no rules" part? DW have a noted history of truly diverse weapons loadouts. I'm not saying it needs to be anything-goes, but just relax a bit? Bring back special weapons (melta, plasma, flamer, etc.). I'm not saying it has to be available to EVERY member of a squad, but 2-3 would be nice.
4. Keep squads with 4 frag cannons legal, even if they have to make a Devastator equivalent unit for it.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: oh and, DW getting rolled in but [edit]GK[/edit] not feels pretty obvious. the GK army list is much more substantial, even if it still needs a lot of updates
The army list issue is of GW's own making, given they've been kinda aimless in how they've implemented the army in each edition.
From a kit perspective, by my count we're currently looking at 4 (1 character, 1 character unit) plus an upgrade for DW (after they cycled Artemis out for some reason), compared to 7 (of which 4 are characters, along with BC Stern being cycled out), so it's not like there's a huge amount of difference between them in terms of generics.
DW Deathwatch Veterans
Corvus Blackstar
Kill Team Cassius
Watch Master
GK Power Armour
Terminator Armour
Dreadknight/Baby Carrier
Castellan Crowe
Grand Master Voldus
Lord Kaldor Draigo
Brother Captain
I'd disagree that there's much ground for saying the GK army list is more developed than the DW - it's just been around for longer. They're both stretching certain kits to fill as many slots as possible, then adding addition units from the main SM list, sometimes tweaked.
I would also like to add, DW would be around just as long if Alienhunters hadn't been scrapped back in the day.
Realistically, I think the issue is that DW have always had a identity problem, from the OG 3rd ed implementation, to the RPGs, to the current form. Every edition the focus has changed. 7th it was bespoke units and killteams, 8th was Spec Issue Ammo, in 9th it was wargear and customization and 10th index is them giving up. So I could see them throwing in the towel, tossing them into Agents and finally calling it a day.
It may well just be a release planning issue. If Grey Knights are slated for new kits (Primaris and upscaled Terminators), then that perhaps justifies their own book, at least this time around, and allows GW to go ahead and release Imperial Agents in the meantime. Deathwatch have an upgrade sprue so can simply function as an extension of the main Space Marine range.
cuda1179 wrote: In theory I'm fine with DW being changed, or "tweaked" a bit here or there. I just ask for a few little things.
1. The obvious one everyone wants, points balance internally and externally.
2. Keep the special units/wargear. I still want to see the Corvus Blackstar, Watchmaster, and Frag Cannons.
3. Custodes are the exception to the "no Heresy Crossover" rule. Can you give DW a bit of leeway on the "no model, no rules" part? DW have a noted history of truly diverse weapons loadouts. I'm not saying it needs to be anything-goes, but just relax a bit? Bring back special weapons (melta, plasma, flamer, etc.). I'm not saying it has to be available to EVERY member of a squad, but 2-3 would be nice.
4. Keep squads with 4 frag cannons legal, even if they have to make a Devastator equivalent unit for it.
I quite like the DW, though I'm not inclined to collect an army of them. And I agree with you that the special units/wargear give them personality. I personally think we won't see a huge amount of change to their datasheets, though I could be wrong.
I'm expecting everything to be cut down to the kits that exist. Watch Master, DW Veterans, Corvus Blackstar. They lose Oath and gain Agents and exist as a unit like Henchmen or what not that you can hire. All the Kill Teams gone.
cuda1179 wrote: In theory I'm fine with DW being changed, or "tweaked" a bit here or there. I just ask for a few little things.
1. The obvious one everyone wants, points balance internally and externally.
2. Keep the special units/wargear. I still want to see the Corvus Blackstar, Watchmaster, and Frag Cannons.
3. Custodes are the exception to the "no Heresy Crossover" rule. Can you give DW a bit of leeway on the "no model, no rules" part? DW have a noted history of truly diverse weapons loadouts. I'm not saying it needs to be anything-goes, but just relax a bit? Bring back special weapons (melta, plasma, flamer, etc.). I'm not saying it has to be available to EVERY member of a squad, but 2-3 would be nice.
4. Keep squads with 4 frag cannons legal, even if they have to make a Devastator equivalent unit for it.
I quite like the DW, though I'm not inclined to collect an army of them. And I agree with you that the special units/wargear give them personality. I personally think we won't see a huge amount of change to their datasheets, though I could be wrong.
I think one of the ways they screwed up the codex is that they didn't know how to handle mixed units. Squads with Terminators, bikes, and power armor are priced ridiculously high, but point them any lower and players will just have minimal power armor and the rest terminators. My idea to fix that? Have a mechanic that is like reverse combat squads. Have all the "vanilla" squads, but make them 3-10 guys. Then a terminator squad, before the battle, can "reverse combat squad" into a tactical squad. Make the max unit size once combined to be 10 guys.
I think one of the ways they screwed up the codex is that they didn't know how to handle mixed units. Squads with Terminators, bikes, and power armor are priced ridiculously high, but point them any lower and players will just have minimal power armor and the rest terminators. My idea to fix that? Have a mechanic that is like reverse combat squads. Have all the "vanilla" squads, but make them 3-10 guys. Then a terminator squad, before the battle, can "reverse combat squad" into a tactical squad. Make the max unit size once combined to be 10 guys.
The way they screwed up the codex was letting the playtesters bully them into treating it like a real army in later editions.
The ORIGINAL Deathwatch Codex that dropped towards the end of 7E? Where you could take single model units? That was, is, and will forever be the best representation of both the Deathwatch and Custodes as a concept ever.
The ORIGINAL Deathwatch Codex that dropped towards the end of 7E? Where you could take single model units? That was, is, and will forever be the best representation of both the Deathwatch and Custodes as a concept ever.
I don't recall ever being able to take single model units in Deathwatch. You could in the weird little version of Kill Team they published around the same time as the Codex, but I think 5 man vet teams were always the minimum.
Deathwatch have never really worked. A lot of this is just a result of 40k being a game of redundancy and not one where a dozen unique loadouts per squad makes any sense at all. GW has always had this KT Cassius vision for the faction that never actually worked with how points actually work. Honestly, I kind of like how 10th just forced the variety in the squads and its really a good direction for them if GW put in the time to give each option a purpose.
The one consistent problem with DW though is a lack of attention. Every edition DW has been ignored. Early on they didn't get Primaris and when Space Marines got buffs they didn't transfer to DW despite them struggling. Pricing SIA has always been a major issue and created ridiculous things like Vets costing more than Intercessors despite having the same statline with SIA as the Bolt Rifles and half as many wounds. When DW does okay GW generally reacts immediately and nerfs them into oblivion to be ignored for the remainder of the edition.
Being a generic space marine chapter is probably the best thing that could happen at this point. GW has ignored the faction since its inception and generally left it in a worse place than if they were just generic marines. I love the kill team concept, but its very clear GW has no interest in giving it the attention needed to make it work.
The ORIGINAL Deathwatch Codex that dropped towards the end of 7E? Where you could take single model units? That was, is, and will forever be the best representation of both the Deathwatch and Custodes as a concept ever.
I don't recall ever being able to take single model units in Deathwatch. You could in the weird little version of Kill Team they published around the same time as the Codex, but I think 5 man vet teams were always the minimum.
Terminators, bikers, and Vanguard Veterans were able to be taken as singles.
The ORIGINAL Deathwatch Codex that dropped towards the end of 7E? Where you could take single model units? That was, is, and will forever be the best representation of both the Deathwatch and Custodes as a concept ever.
I don't recall ever being able to take single model units in Deathwatch. You could in the weird little version of Kill Team they published around the same time as the Codex, but I think 5 man vet teams were always the minimum.
Terminators, bikers, and Vanguard Veterans were able to be taken as singles.
Although only by cancerous virtue of the Killteam Cassius box existing...
The ORIGINAL Deathwatch Codex that dropped towards the end of 7E? Where you could take single model units? That was, is, and will forever be the best representation of both the Deathwatch and Custodes as a concept ever.
I don't recall ever being able to take single model units in Deathwatch. You could in the weird little version of Kill Team they published around the same time as the Codex, but I think 5 man vet teams were always the minimum.
Terminators, bikers, and Vanguard Veterans were able to be taken as singles.
Although only by cancerous virtue of the Killteam Cassius box existing...
You mean the box that literally had a formation of all of those operating as one thing?
Whether you liked it or not, it was a better way of representing Deathwatch operating as a group than anything else they've done.
The ORIGINAL Deathwatch Codex that dropped towards the end of 7E? Where you could take single model units? That was, is, and will forever be the best representation of both the Deathwatch and Custodes as a concept ever.
I don't recall ever being able to take single model units in Deathwatch. You could in the weird little version of Kill Team they published around the same time as the Codex, but I think 5 man vet teams were always the minimum.
Terminators, bikers, and Vanguard Veterans were able to be taken as singles.
Single model units or single additions to the Kill Teams? I don't recall the former but 7th didn't really exist long enough for me to get that into it so I could just have forgotten.
The ORIGINAL Deathwatch Codex that dropped towards the end of 7E? Where you could take single model units? That was, is, and will forever be the best representation of both the Deathwatch and Custodes as a concept ever.
I don't recall ever being able to take single model units in Deathwatch. You could in the weird little version of Kill Team they published around the same time as the Codex, but I think 5 man vet teams were always the minimum.
Terminators, bikers, and Vanguard Veterans were able to be taken as singles.
furthermore, the way that you assembled kill teams was by taking veterans (multi-model units) alongside a number of these single-model units as formations. it worked really solid for the effect it was trying to have... but doesn't work in a rules system without formations, which i assume is why that iteration of the rules didn't survive past seventh edition (although 9th edition tried something similar)
It'll be nice to have a second model...
But swapping that out would be easy enough to make either a cannoness or palatine.
) Pretty cool guy, but dont look very cheerfull; they only need to make up some fluff about masters usually dont have a mask)
