....or "Does GW have any idea of what it is doing?"


For awhile I laughed at how I knew that the DA/BA codices wouldn't get any retcon. But I was just being cruel because of how the fanboys defended and lauded Jervis' handling of those books.


I have been thinking about this a lot and I have come to the realization that if Jervis doesn't retcon some of this stuff into the DA/BA codices via FAQ, he is a real tool.

By that I mean is that he strung everyone along with this 'grand plan' of reorganizing the structure of the game.
Some severe toning down of abilities.
To the point where people really snigger when they hear the names of the DA and BA codex mentioned.

And now we see all of these pretty much confirmed rumours (in all aspects except seeing the codex in hand) putting a waffle stomp on on this 'grand plan' he himself initiated.

I disliked how Jervis handled the DA codex, and I especially disliked how he pontificated to other designers about how it should be done when it was obviously not the way to go to make the customers happy.
However, I am glad to see a bit more flavor returning, but..... find a fething plan and stick to it for chrissakes!

I don't even play these codices, and I feel really bad for the armies. These armies are rather recent and they wont see a 5th ed codex for many years to come. Does GW expect DA/BA players to just sit idly by trying to enjoy their rules waiting for a new codex when they KNOW in their hearts the rules that they use are a crock of poo-doo? Give 'em a FAQ with a few minor upgrades so that they know they aren't forgotten.

However, BT can forget about it. They still get tons of cool crap such as two heavies in a 5 man termie squad, an actual wargear list, etc. Giving them any of the new stuff is just asking for the revisit of 3rd ed BT cheese fests. if anything BT lists need to be toned down to match.

I honestly think ol' Jervy-poo needs to make a huge apology to the consumers he reeled in with his spiel.
Jervis has made himself into the George Bush Jr. of the wargaming world.
Like GWB he lacks any credibility in my eyes because it seems rather apparent that he doesnt have the slightest idea what he or the rest of his designers are doing.

Again, I say this to GW (and to the pontificating Jervis especially):

FAQ now, or STFU!

Couldn't agree more

I don't see why all the varient marine chapters can't just get one supplementary book (a bit like Craftworld Eldar, only bigger and better!).

That way as and when they redo the main SM codex they only need to FAQ and then update 1 book instead of four...

I completely agree. If those codices don't get updated with a lot of "See SM Codex page XX" then it will be a huge disservice to the armies and the players.

Though i agree the DA codex is subpar... I will disagree with your assessment of the BA codex. Play against my 2k point with Dante AND brotha C and tell me BA are underpowered. (PE and FC 12" bubble) with 2 18" movement rhinos and a 8 man death company.

So, a gimmick army that relys on special characters to work. Yup, that's successful game design right there folks...

BYE

Yeah, I agree - relying on special characters isn't the way to go.

But really, how could GW not see this coming. They've got three codices, which reprint the majority of troop types, they're bound to have problems when they try to update ONE of them.

One army gets cheaper rhinos, One army can take two Terminator heavies, etc.

Seriously, why make all these extra books? It only makes things confusing. You could sum up all the extra rules for most of these chapters on one page, two at the most.

Make a SM codex. Put in two pages each on BA, DA, BT and SW with the extra units and special rules. That's it.

I agree. But can you imagine the furor surrounding that by other SM players who play subchapters?

Jesus, it would be like the second coming of Hitler or something.

For BAs as they essentially have a PDF codex (as the WD was printed so long ago) it would be easy enough to update it rather tahn do a FAQ.

im interested to see how my deathwing will hold up to the likes of the new lysander wing, what with them getting access to the new landraider varient and suppossed rule changes for things like venerable dreadnoughts. not too well me thinks.

the zodiac killer wrote:im interested to see how my deathwing will hold up to the likes of the new lysander wing, what with them getting access to the new landraider varient and suppossed rule changes for things like venerable dreadnoughts. not too well me thinks.

As someone who actually does play lysander wing, DW never did hold up well against it. Too severely outclassed in weaponry.

The new codex will definitely even that out a since there are no longer any termie command squads. Lysander loses his phalanx assault rule. Lysanderwing is basically dead.

The answer to the question is "yes." Games Workshop stores continue to move product and Games Workshop head office continues to post profits. Mr. Johnson can collect his paycheque and sleeps peacefully at night. I'd say they know exactly what they're doing.

I don't see this as something that is easily fixed with an FAQ. Consider there are rumored to be major differences between the new SM and DA/BA, what stuff from SM dex should be added to DA/BA? What about the various stat changes and removal of abilities rumored for the new SM (downgraded chaplains and librarians, removal of rites of battle, etc).

Is there really a problem with leaving the BA/DA alone as the standalone codexes they were designed to be? It isn't as if the option to use the new dex is denied to DA/BA. Seems to me you can still make an effective and fluffy BA army with either dex. Same for a standard DA army or even a Ravenwing army. Only DW get screwed a bit but are still an option (could be worse, ala LatD, 13th company or any number of unsupported armies).

Yes, it is a problem with leaving the BA/DA codices the way they are..... because they suck. Sure, you could make a BA and DA codex with the new space marine dex..... but then what's the point of having a DA/BA dex in the first place? Why not just get rid of all the SM chapters and make the "Not Marine" codex players happy? They could fix all their screw ups from the past years with TWO PAGES of extras for each chapter! What's that, like 30 minutes of time a chapter?

but then what's the point of having a DA/BA dex in the first place?

There was no point, in my opinion, other then a lame attempt at selling models. It was a huge mistake. They should have just had 'get you by' pdf's that allowed current BA/DA armies to be playable in 4ed and been done with it till 5ed (where they get rolled into the vanilla codex as they should have been all along).

Hellfury wrote:....or "Does GW have any idea of what it is doing?"

Yes, GW does.

The recent WD list for BA is pretty reasonable - just not stupidly brokenly good. The DA book has good Fluff and the Veterans bitz are quite good - DA haven't been super-competitive in a very long time (i.e. since the dawn of 3rd Ed), so their competitiveness just doesn't matter. BT as you note are still strong.

What's really funny is that you totally forgot about the Woofs. Just like GW.

Anyhow, BA are easy enough to fix with a new WD article - and there are some minor balance tweaks that they need anyways, so this isn't a big deal.

ArbitorIan wrote:Seriously, why make all these extra books?

Make a SM codex. Put in two pages each on BA, DA, BT and SW with the extra units and special rules.

Because some players will buy each paint scheme, netting GW more money?

Then GW wouldn't have more MEQ options than non-MEQ options and the 40k universe would implode.

winterman wrote:I don't see this as something that is easily fixed with an FAQ. Consider there are rumored to be major differences between the new SM and DA/BA, what stuff from SM dex should be added to DA/BA? What about the various stat changes and removal of abilities rumored for the new SM (downgraded chaplains and librarians, removal of rites of battle, etc).

Is there really a problem with leaving the BA/DA alone as the standalone codexes they were designed to be? It isn't as if the option to use the new dex is denied to DA/BA. Seems to me you can still make an effective and fluffy BA army with either dex. Same for a standard DA army or even a Ravenwing army. Only DW get screwed a bit but are still an option (could be worse, ala LatD, 13th company or any number of unsupported armies).

What would be included? I am not worried about special rules and all that. What aI am talking about is consistency. We are rapidly approaching 3rd ed levels of inconsistency here. Everyone has different landraiders, cyclones, etc. Make these things consistent. A landraider is a landraider is a landraider so to speak. They dont have to have redeemers. Just make their landraiders match what the vanillas landraiders are.

It does get a little wonky with issues such as scouts having differing WS and BS, but those can stay for now I guess. Or changed, I don't care really.

But I dont want to see across the table an army who has heavy1 cyclones opposing an army that has heavy2 cyclones. Its simply rubbish.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Hellfury wrote:....or "Does GW have any idea of what it is doing?"

Yes, GW does.

The recent WD list for BA is pretty reasonable - just not stupidly brokenly good. The DA book has good Fluff and the Veterans bitz are quite good - DA haven't been super-competitive in a very long time (i.e. since the dawn of 3rd Ed), so their competitiveness just doesn't matter. BT as you note are still strong.

I agree BA is fairly reasonable. I will fully admit that I do not have much experience seeing them across the table from me since third edition.

But again it is an issue with consistency.

The DA competitiveness does matter though. Its a great looking army with many followers.
Jervis has utterly failed them in all respects.

I left out SW because it seems a fairly common assertion that they are getting a new codex soon, so their whining wont be for much longer I do not imagine.

But now that I think about it, what about the SW right now? Their 4th ed FAQ allowing them to use the 4th ed SM codex as modified are where in october? Will they now use the 5th ed SM codex with the 4th ed FAQ?

Nice mess, that one.

Hellfury wrote:The DA competitiveness does matter though. Its a great looking army with many followers.
Jervis has utterly failed them in all respects.

I wouldn't go that far. Rules-wise, the DA are playable, they got some new toys, they can field pure Ravenwing or pure Deathwing armies. And they haven't given up any competitiveness since they got their first mini-Dex in 3rd Edition.

If Jervis were to utterly fail them, the DA would lose their ability to field Ravenwing or Deathwing at all. And they'd be even *less* competitive than they've been to date (hard to imagine, but theoretically possible).

BA is good.

Deathwing is weak. The best Deathwing was the one where you could mix all the weapons with 6 - 8 sized squads.

Ravenwing is expensive points-wise.

And the disadvantage of both is that you have to take the crazy uber-char which you may not always want. But I guess we will get used to that in the new marine book.

Yeah, there's nothing wrong with the BA list. They're been doing well at tourneys. DA have always been rubbish - traitorous scum. Acting all mysterious when we know exactly what they did... just Exterminatus 'em already.

Codex: AoD was great, wasn't it?

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Hellfury wrote:The DA competitiveness does matter though. Its a great looking army with many followers.
Jervis has utterly failed them in all respects.

I wouldn't go that far. Rules-wise, the DA are playable, they got some new toys, they can field pure Ravenwing or pure Deathwing armies. And they haven't given up any competitiveness since they got their first mini-Dex in 3rd Edition.

An army built with the 3rd ed mini-dex will beat an army built with the new codex.

You guys are silly, of course GW wants you to buy more codexes, more $$!

The thing that annoys me the most is the rumour that vanilla dreadnoughts may have access to 2 CCW's in the new codex. As a long time BA player, i think it sucks real hard to have the Furioso, one of our most characterful and fluffy units, cannibalised for Ultraweakmarines to get their fscking hands on.

Grrrrrr

I'm just glad I'm doing a Deamon army at the moment.

I've been a devout DA player since 2nd edition, not prone to jealousy, and always sticking to my codex out of pride for the chapter. If I'm bringing a loyalist Marine army to the table, you can bet that its Dark Angels. Never using another codex as a crutch to get better units, I've always stuck with the DA codex using it the best I could.....

I'm in total agreement with some of the above statements. With all of these rumours coming out, if a large portion of them are true, our codex is a total failure and Jervis really screwed the pooch.

Loyalist space marines=TONS of options
DA's=Hardly any

There look to be SOO many ways to play the new Marine dex....its getting to the point that even if point cost is thru the roof (which by looking at the cost of tac-squads it isnt) there are still a plethora of options to make you happy and experimenting with army builder for a LONG time. Nevermind the chapter specific vehicles (which we've NEVER gotten ie-Wolf's Leman russ, B'aal, and now redeemers, scout speeders, and techmarine scary gun)

I'm going to pick up this codex. If it is actually as bad as I think its going to be, I'll be finally jumping ship after sticking with dark angels thru thick and thin for 3 editions of the game. I'll be saying goodbye to the Lion and adopting the ways of Ferrus Manus. More likely I'll drop Marines for all time or until another 5 years or so pass when the DA's get yet another flawed codex.

...for now THIS may be the last straw....I'll wait until the book gets into my hands before I pass final judgement however.

Shane! NO! Don't give in.....


What the DA lack in special rules....they more than make up for with Ultra-Coolness!

Fortunately, my 4th ed. traits marines were designed to be BT-eque, so if I ever do 40k again, I can just run 'em as BTs.

As to the endless swinging pendulum of GW nerfing/ubering their armies/rules...that's just the nature of the game, and either you have to accept that as a fact of life and decide you still enjoy the game and want to play it in its current edition, or you and your buddies stick with the edition you like and ignore the RT scene, or you move to a different game. I got off the merry-go-round in part because, even though I had so much Eldar stuff from 2nd ed. that I'd be able to rework my army with almost no effort, the idea of doing so for the 3rd time just exhausted me.

Aldonis wrote:Shane! NO! Don't give in.....


What the DA lack in special rules....they more than make up for with Ultra-Coolness!

Yeah...'Ultra-Coolness' wins games...

Is ultracoolness an ultramarine rule?

[edit]
Besides dude, you're missing the point completely. Its not about special rules, its about consistency.

Do you want to face an army across from you who has twice as many shots with their cyclones as you are packing?

It kinda makes one feel a shrinking feeling in the pants so to speak.

Angron wrote:Yes, it is a problem with leaving the BA/DA codices the way they are..... because they suck. Sure, you could make a BA and DA codex with the new space marine dex..... but then what's the point of having a DA/BA dex in the first place? Why not just get rid of all the SM chapters and make the "Not Marine" codex players happy? They could fix all their screw ups from the past years with TWO PAGES of extras for each chapter! What's that, like 30 minutes of time a chapter?

They don't suck.

And my guess is that the new marines will be costed at a higher level, so there. For all the gnashing of teeth, wailing of women, and rent sackcloth we have in this thread, we still have yet to see points costs for these kewl powerz, so the point is moot.

As long as we (BA/DA) get the Redeemer, I'm cool.

Valhallan42nd wrote:

Angron wrote:Yes, it is a problem with leaving the BA/DA codices the way they are..... because they suck. Sure, you could make a BA and DA codex with the new space marine dex..... but then what's the point of having a DA/BA dex in the first place? Why not just get rid of all the SM chapters and make the "Not Marine" codex players happy? They could fix all their screw ups from the past years with TWO PAGES of extras for each chapter! What's that, like 30 minutes of time a chapter?

They don't suck.

And my guess is that the new marines will be costed at a higher level, so there. For all the gnashing of teeth, wailing of women, and rent sackcloth we have in this thread, we still have yet to see points costs for these kewl powerz, so the point is moot.

As long as we (BA/DA) get the Redeemer, I'm cool.

You're right, they dont suck.

I mean really, who likes loads and loads of options in a codex? Who likes new vehicles? Both of THOSE things are what sucks.

I would rather have a codex where every single army is the same or one that features the only 'trick' availiable to the codex. (deathwing assault assisted by scouting bikers)

Dont count on getting the new vehicles, they have NEVER retconned to add units into a previously released codex, regardless of how much sense it would make. Thats ok though, like I said above, new vehicles and the options on the battlefield that they bring suck anyway, who'd want to take something new and fresh. Give me stale and played out any day.

I dont need attack bike squadrons, they suck. I know I'm ravenwing and all that and should have more bike options than a vanilla dex, but screw that.

I dont need veteran squads with str 6 power weapons. (as ridiculous as that is in the first place, seriously) I dont need the option for them, what can str 6 kill that str 4 cannot?

I dont need umpteen versions of dreadnaughts even though they failed to give us OUR special version of a dread that was supposed to come out in the EARLY early rumours of the DA codex. Give me one overpriced dread any day of the week over the multiple options of dreads that vanilla marines get.

I dont need combat tactics, even though loyalist space marines have been all fighting the same way for 5 editions of the game leadership wise.

...............................................

The truth of the situation, is points aside, you have SO many different, new and fresh things in this space marine codex that make it not necessarily overpowered, but loaded with different ways to do battle. Variety, that's what we're talking about here. Variety is what this new codex has in droves and the DA/BA's have in miniscule amounts.

Point cost is a factor sure, but the points will work themselves out. You may not be able to take ALL the toys here, but the different ooptions that you will have to take will be staggering. Just like in the old Chaos codex, noone could take ALL the toys, but the different flavors of armies were abundant.

No you wont be getting the new vehicles, that is a pipe dream. Our codeii dont suck, they dont even suck hard.....They're a flat out slap in the face.

Oh yea, and before you say that DA dont need the options as they're only representing one chapter....NO....

....the DA codex is not a supplement as before, its a CODEX BOOK. It's its own army that deserves the treatment (or at least a portion of the treatment) of this new book.

We're being left out to dry....and yes, our book DOES most assuradly SUCK!

Not missing the point - just speaking tongue in cheek to a fellow DA fan.

I played them in second also - just normal joe's then. 3rd edition codex turned them into an underpowered army - I still played them. Even with the Roll a 1 and the squad stands and and yells at the enemy.

Then the FAQ's helped out - but Marines overall are underpowered.

Then the new DA codex - very characterful but underpowered still. A few nice things - but didn't see the point...until....5th edition - where the things like combat squads and Deathwing, etc begin to look much more viable.

Now the new Marine dex is coming out - and may make the DA and BA the laughing stock of the space marine gamers. But...the DA still have a great fluff and are fun to play from that standpoint regardless.


Also, I believe I heard FAQ would come out with the Dex to cover the other chapters out - DA, BA, and Wolves.

So...all may not be lost....I'm hoping they change the new dex to have it in line with the rest of the chapters.

Either way - I'll still play them - maybe not as my tourney army though.

What basically amounts to a brand new codex almost and the DA's need a retcon to include new and fun units for me to play with on the table?

.....gay.

Valhallan42nd wrote:

Angron wrote:Yes, it is a problem with leaving the BA/DA codices the way they are..... because they suck. Sure, you could make a BA and DA codex with the new space marine dex..... but then what's the point of having a DA/BA dex in the first place? Why not just get rid of all the SM chapters and make the "Not Marine" codex players happy? They could fix all their screw ups from the past years with TWO PAGES of extras for each chapter! What's that, like 30 minutes of time a chapter?

They don't suck.

And my guess is that the new marines will be costed at a higher level, so there. For all the gnashing of teeth, wailing of women, and rent sackcloth we have in this thread, we still have yet to see points costs for these kewl powerz, so the point is moot.

As long as we (BA/DA) get the Redeemer, I'm cool.

Heh. The marines are costing exactly the same as the DA/BA alternatives. Look more closely at the rumours flying about. Some very solid people who normally are spot on are saying this. Take that for what it is worth.

And dude, they more than likely wont be getting that vehicle, I wouldnt hold my breath to have that added. Its asking enough as it is just to bring the DA up to par with their brethren's newer rules.

Th whole wiling and gnashing of teeth comment is rather uncalled for to be precise. This isnt a bitch thread, this is to logically air out the grievances for the lack of consistency. In sometimes a flavorful manner. That comment is pure hyperbole.

I was just as upset about the proposed changes as anyone else.

And then I sat and thought about it. Most of changes are to things that would not affact my list building. I don't use high-end high-costed killie squads, I don't think I'd ever deep strike a unit close enough to probably scatter into them and die, esspecailly a high costed unit, etc. Most of these added units will just appear in high pointed apoc style games, and most of the better armies will focus on making balanced tight lists with proper support.

The issue of cylcones will probably be FAQed, and there will probably be a WD update of the other codexes adding the reedemer and scout bikes, etc because they want to sell them to as many people as possible.

We won't know this until closer to release time, but I'm patient.

I also hear that there is a point increase for tac squads, but if ten are taken, it evens out with the "free" equipment available. Just like my death company are "free".

At the next Gamesday, someone should ask Jervis why he hates Dark Angels.

There really is no reason other than marketing for multiple marine codexes anymore. Add the RW and DW special characters, Baal, Lemartes and the Death Company to the regular codex and you're done. After some whining, most would realize its better in the long run.

Hellfury wrote:Heh. The marines are costing exactly the same as the DA/BA alternatives.

And dude, they more than likely wont be getting that vehicle, I wouldnt hold my breath to have that added. Its asking enough as it is just to bring the DA up to par with their brethren's newer rules.

Th whole wiling and gnashing of teeth comment is rather uncalled for to be precise.

Yup. 90 points for Vet + 4 SM.

I don't know that the DA need the Redeemer. But I think it would be appropriate to give them the Ironclad Dread. DA are their own Chapter, and they have some deviance beyond wearing dresses. So maybe newer technology like Scout Speeders is stuff they disdain.

Personally, I like it when the women rend their garments...

Valhallan42nd wrote:I was just as upset about the proposed changes as anyone else.

And then I sat and thought about it. Most of changes are to things that would not affact my list building.

You know, the changes are really designed to affect your future purchases.

Crimson Devil wrote:At the next Gamesday, someone should ask Jervis why he hates Dark Angels.

He'll answer that he doesn't hate the Dark Angels because they got two 3rd Edition Codices plus the 4th/5th Edition Codex - he hates the Woofs so they'll never get an update to their mini-dex.

Nah, ask him why he hates Freebooters, Speed Freaks, Clan-themed armies, individual hive fleets, individual gaurd regiments, individual chaos legions, individual dark eldar cabals, tau septs etc etc etc.
If you don't like the Dark Angels dex, just use your friggin' models to play with the marine dex. The rest of use are able to manage with generic dexes and conversions, I don't know why marine players need someone to hold their hands.

Da Boss wrote:Nah, ask him why he hates Freebooters, Speed Freaks, Clan-themed armies, individual hive fleets, individual gaurd regiments, individual chaos legions, individual dark eldar cabals, tau septs etc etc etc.
If you don't like the Dark Angels dex, just use your friggin' models to play with the marine dex. The rest of use are able to manage with generic dexes and conversions, I don't know why marine players need someone to hold their hands.

"Thats right, and you ork players that complained about lack of a shooting game before the current codex came out should've been using your ork models and the TAU EMPIRE codex the whole time."

....maybe people want to be loyal to their codex army book there genius. If you play Dark Angels you DONT WANT to use the Vanilla book.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Yup. 90 points for Vet + 4 SM.

Now i dont post much here anymore, but I had to throw in on this issue. That 90 points right there is exactly what you would pay for a Sgt with Term Honors, now the decision is just made for you. You are paying 18 points for the first 5 marines, and then 15 for each marine after that. For 180-190 Points you can get a 10 man Tact squad with a SW/HW and a Sgt with Pweapon&melta or Fist. I play BA so I cant tell you how DA does it, but for that same Squad I am paying 180 for the BASE squad, no wizbangs and gizmo's, just a sgt with CCW/BP and 9 Bolter marines. For the sake of arguement say it is a Missile Launcher and Melta Gun for both units, and a Fist for the Sgt. New Marines will be paying 190 points and BA will be paying 225. A 35 point differential for the same exact squad?

BA/DA Wont get an upgrade when the new dex comes out, and my Furioso Dread will just take up space, as will my baal pred. By making 4.5ed codex and not back tracking and fixing them, they will be shunning a very devoted section of gamers. As previous posters have said they are longtime players and with the new codex they will still keep the marines, the color schemes, the pride in their army, but they will call it Codex Marines that look like DA/BA. There is something wrong with that.

Da Boss wrote:Nah, ask him why he hates Freebooters, Speed Freaks, Clan-themed armies, individual hive fleets, individual gaurd regiments, individual chaos legions, individual dark eldar cabals, tau septs etc etc etc.
If you don't like the Dark Angels dex, just use your friggin' models to play with the marine dex. The rest of use are able to manage with generic dexes and conversions, I don't know why marine players need someone to hold their hands.

Good for you. I don't play Dark Angels.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Crimson Devil wrote:At the next Gamesday, someone should ask Jervis why he hates Dark Angels.

He'll answer that he doesn't hate the Dark Angels because they got two 3rd Edition Codices plus the 4th/5th Edition Codex - he hates the Woofs so they'll never get an update to their mini-dex.

Only if he wants to eat a frost blade.

I would be very happy with a WD codex or fold us into the new SM codex. As long as he stops leaving us hanging.

Deadshane1 wrote:Dont count on getting the new vehicles, they have NEVER retconned to add units into a previously released codex, regardless of how much sense it would make.

Uhh... from the recent Space Wolves FAQ:

Space Wolves vehicles: Use the point costs and rules from Codex: Space Marines for Dreadnoughts, Land Speeders, Attack Bikes, Whirlwinds, Predators, Land Raiders and Vindicators. All of the different variants and options available to these units in a Space Marine army are also available to the Space Wolves.

I know GW can be mind-bogglingly incompetent at times, but really, they knew enough to throw that into the SW FAQ to bring it in line with the current SM codex. Why wouldn't they just throw the same thing into the DA FAQ when the shiny new SM codex hits? Aside from continuing the fine tradition of boning DAs, I mean.

Deadshane1 wrote:....maybe people want to be loyal to their codex army book there genius. If you play Dark Angels you DONT WANT to use the Vanilla book.

Well, I play Chaos and I don't want to use the Vanilla book so I'm right there with ya buddy.

Crimson Devil: I should have been more specific. The you in the post was not actually aimed at you.

Deadshane1: Sorry, but I don't see it as the same thing.
Tau is Tau, orks is orks, marines is marines. The sub dexes are one of the worst things about 40K.
Either do them for everyone, or do them for no one.

Da Boss wrote:The sub dexes are one of the worst things about 40K.
Either do them for everyone, or do them for no one.

Agreed. Making subchapters was a really dumb idea (gamewise).

Sadly its been stated that if you get a codex once, you will forever get a codex.

Its a real shame they didnt take this opportunity to wrap all chapters up into one codex. They could have done it last edition, they could have done it this edition too.

Dark Angels have always gotten short shift from GW they seem to want them to fade into the background but the fanatical players like myself keep the rock alive

Da Boss wrote:
Deadshane1: Sorry, but I don't see it as the same thing.
Tau is Tau, orks is orks, marines is marines. The sub dexes are one of the worst things about 40K.
Either do them for everyone, or do them for no one.

Sorry, but you see, actually it is EXACTLY the same thing.

It's a well known FACT that Dark Angels may be marines in fluff, but rules-wise, it is a 88 page stand alone army codex that has nothing at all to do with the Space Marine Codex....NOTHING. They are completely two different factions in the GAME. Perhaps they are both part of the Imperium in the fluff, but the armies are completely seperate entities.

Marines actually is NOT marines.

They may be similar enough to appear related. Enough to make a non-subchapter player think that you can use the Marine codex and be happy. Enough to make a Dark Angel player feel insulted. They're still different stand alone books though, as surely as Tau is different from chaos daemons.

When I'm playing in a tournement, you'll see my dark angels arrayed against you. When you say something like "WTF?" after my chapter master drops a orbital strike on you and you didnt expect my "Veteran Squad" to hit you with STR 6, you'll be totally justified. Same as when your Shoota boyz have range 30" STR 5 rapid fire weapons(FW's) and your MegaNobz with Turboboostaz can do pop-up attacks (crisis suits). Exactly the same.

Actually deadshane, a marine is a marine is a marine.

Dark angels aren't so special that they are no longer marines. They are still marines with a ever so light difference in rules. Stats are basically identical, etc. They all get ATSKNF etc. In fact, I would say DA resemble vanilla marines more than they ever have in the past.

I understand upholding the right to get a separate codex, but when you get down to brass tacks, DA could easily be repped by about 2 pages of rules deviation from the main list, much like appeared in 3rd ed but without the seperate subcodex to apply them.

moosifer wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Yup. 90 points for Vet + 4 SM.

That 90 points right there is exactly what you would pay for a Sgt with Term Honors, now the decision is just made for you.

New Marines will be paying 190 points and BA will be paying 225. A 35 point differential for the same exact squad?

Yup. Good call on GW's part, BTW.

Aside from the "FREE" Death Company Marine that the BA get, yeah. And that Death Company Marine is worth a good 25 points for his basic statline, so you're paying only 10 points for Fearless, FNP, Rending, and Furious Charge. We're supposed to be sympathetic to you for finally having to pay a semi-reasonable cost for your Death Company?



Boo hoo, cry me a river...

JohnHwangDD wrote:

moosifer wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Yup. 90 points for Vet + 4 SM.

That 90 points right there is exactly what you would pay for a Sgt with Term Honors, now the decision is just made for you.

New Marines will be paying 190 points and BA will be paying 225. A 35 point differential for the same exact squad?

Yup. Good call on GW's part, BTW.

Aside from the "FREE" Death Company Marine that the BA get, yeah. And that Death Company Marine is worth a good 25 points for his basic statline, so you're paying only 10 points for Fearless, FNP, Rending, and Furious Charge. We're supposed to be sympathetic to you for finally having to pay a semi-reasonable cost for your Death Company?



Boo hoo, cry me a river...

Actually, I think this is one of the best parts of the codex. It's a great compromise between balaning their expendibility, and their utility.

Hellfury wrote:I understand upholding the right to get a separate codex, but when you get down to brass tacks, DA could easily be repped by about 2 pages of rules deviation from the main list, much like appeared in 3rd ed but without the seperate subcodex to apply them.

Frankly, the couple pages of rules that came out in 4E after the SM Codex came out to bring the DA in line with the Codex was quite possibly the most solid improvement to the DA in years - giving DW Terminators the opportunity to take Tank Hunters and Furious Charge made the list semi-competitive for a short while.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

moosifer wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Yup. 90 points for Vet + 4 SM.

That 90 points right there is exactly what you would pay for a Sgt with Term Honors, now the decision is just made for you.

New Marines will be paying 190 points and BA will be paying 225. A 35 point differential for the same exact squad?

Yup. Good call on GW's part, BTW.

Aside from the "FREE" Death Company Marine that the BA get, yeah. And that Death Company Marine is worth a good 25 points for his basic statline, so you're paying only 10 points for Fearless, FNP, Rending, and Furious Charge. We're supposed to be sympathetic to you for finally having to pay a semi-reasonable cost for your Death Company?



Boo hoo, cry me a river...

So a marine with a CCW/BP and 2 base attacks is worth 25 points? I agree that probably 30 of the 35 points is justified for the death company (which is not free) but where do those extra 5 points go? Vanilla Marines should be equal to a Dark Angel should be equal to a Blood Angel should be equal to a Black Templar, etc...

Don't cry for me, I will do fine I built an army that can be anything, but cry for the folks who truely believed that GW could balance out the sub dex's with the main dex's only to find out the armies they paid and played for amount to nothing in the face of ultraweenies..

Death By Monkeys wrote:

Hellfury wrote:I understand upholding the right to get a separate codex, but when you get down to brass tacks, DA could easily be repped by about 2 pages of rules deviation from the main list, much like appeared in 3rd ed but without the separate subcodex to apply them.

Frankly, the couple pages of rules that came out in 4E after the SM Codex came out to bring the DA in line with the Codex was quite possibly the most solid improvement to the DA in years - giving DW Terminators the opportunity to take Tank Hunters and Furious Charge made the list semi-competitive for a short while.

Agreed. I was sad to see the list go downhill when the newest DA codex was printed. A simple mod to the base set of rules, and its go time from there.

If only I could convince people to allow me to play my deathwing that way still, I would be a happy bunny.

Its one reason why I still have that FAQ and why I will continue to retain the 4th ed SM codex.

Though furious charge is worthless on termies now that you can no longer "switch off" the powerfists in 5th ed. It makes it impossible to charge @ initiative 5 and str 5.

Hellfury wrote:Actually deadshane, a marine is a marine is a marine.

Dark angels aren't so special that they are no longer marines. They are still marines with a ever so light difference in rules. Stats are basically identical, etc. They all get ATSKNF etc. In fact, I would say DA resemble vanilla marines more than they ever have in the past.

I understand upholding the right to get a separate codex, but when you get down to brass tacks, DA could easily be repped by about 2 pages of rules deviation from the main list, much like appeared in 3rd ed but without the seperate subcodex to apply them.

Great, then we can scrap the entire chaos space marine book as well and just call the new Codex Space Marines? Thats bull man, and you know it...

Ratbarf wrote:Thats bull man, and you know it...

No, it isn't bull. Its the plain truth.

But really thats neither here nor there.

GW has stated that if a army has a codex that it will forever get a codex, so no need to get your panties all wadded up.

It is rather odd how people want what the new space marine codex gets, yet they cannot fathom considering themselves space marines.

Hellfury wrote:

Ratbarf wrote:Thats bull man, and you know it...

No, it isn't bull. Its the plain truth.

But really thats neither here nor there.

GW has stated that if a army has a codex that it will forever get a codex, so no need to get your panties all wadded up.

It is rather odd how people want what the new space marine codex gets, yet they cannot fathom considering themselves space marines.

Its not that we are not space marines... after all BA, DA, and SW are in fact space marines. However BA and SW have unique geneseeds that alter the combat "doctrines" of the chapter organization, and still use standard issue imperial space marine equipment. I think that is what the issue is, why should the new Death wind launcher be heavy 2 and mine still heavy 1? Why should my tech marines not have access to the big cannon? Why should my landraiders only carry 10 (5) when the new ones are 12 (6)? Now keep in mind this can be easily fixed if they just had 1 extra line in that codex:
All loyalist space marine chapters may use the new landraider/drop pod/landspeeder/wargear profiles that parallels (shares a name) with their current version.

moosifer wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:that Death Company Marine is worth a good 25 points for his basic statline, so you're paying only 10 points for Fearless, FNP, Rending, and Furious Charge. We're supposed to be sympathetic to you for finally having to pay a semi-reasonable cost for your Death Company?



Boo hoo, cry me a river...

So a marine with a CCW/BP and 2 base attacks is worth 25 points? I agree that probably 30 of the 35 points is justified for the death company (which is not free) but where do those extra 5 points go? Vanilla Marines should be equal to a Dark Angel should be equal to a Blood Angel should be equal to a Black Templar, etc...

Don't cry for me, I will do fine I built an army that can be anything, but cry for the folks who truely believed that GW could balance out the sub dex's with the main dex's only to find out the armies they paid and played for amount to nothing in the face of ultraweenies..

No, a Marine with BP&CCW isn't worth 25 pts. He doesn't have a Jump Pack, for starters, and that's worth 7 points on a standard Assault Marine. Then you've got the extra Ld, which is worth a point. And the extra Attack, with is another 2 points.

Thus, a Veteran Assault Marine with A2 Ld9 BP&CCW is worth 25 pts.

The Death Company get 4 USRs for 10 points. And they're all good USRs for Assault: Fearless, FNP, Rending, and Furious Charge. Under Traits / Veteran Skills, USRs are worth at least 3 pts each. So that bundle of USRs is nominally worth at least 12 points. Only paying 10 pts for them is a bargain.

Suck it up and don't complain.

Hellfury wrote:GW has stated that if a army has a codex that it will forever get a codex, so no need to get your panties all wadded up.

OTOH, if your WFB army had an Army Book, all bets are off.

At least, that's how it appears to us Dogs of War players...

Hellfury wrote:GW has stated that if a army has a codex that it will forever get a codex, so no need to get your panties all wadded up.

Heh. What they don't say is how long it might be between codices (DE and SW, looking at you, kids) or whether your codex might be rolled into someone else's (that's you, SoB). So, while it's true that Squats may never get another codex because they never had one to begin with, if GW so chose, they could choose to never update, say, the DE codex. They'd have to FAQ it with every new edition of the game to make sure it's tourney legal, but eventually, the folks playing the army would just dwindle down to a pathetic few - just like their friends, the Squat players. I'm not arguing with you, Hellfury, just pointing out that GW has the leeway to manipulate this statement to do a lot of things.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Hellfury wrote:GW has stated that if a army has a codex that it will forever get a codex, so no need to get your panties all wadded up.

OTOH, if your WFB army had an Army Book, all bets are off.

At least, that's how it appears to us Dogs of War players...

There's a very distinct difference between the two. A 40k army list is a "codex", while a WHFB list is an "army book". See, so if you had a 40k army that had an army book, GW would be well within their rights to never make another codex for that army. And vice versa, if you had a WHFB army with a codex, you'd be perfectly safe because you'd have GW's guarantee on it.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

moosifer wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:that Death Company Marine is worth a good 25 points for his basic statline, so you're paying only 10 points for Fearless, FNP, Rending, and Furious Charge. We're supposed to be sympathetic to you for finally having to pay a semi-reasonable cost for your Death Company?



Boo hoo, cry me a river...

So a marine with a CCW/BP and 2 base attacks is worth 25 points? I agree that probably 30 of the 35 points is justified for the death company (which is not free) but where do those extra 5 points go? Vanilla Marines should be equal to a Dark Angel should be equal to a Blood Angel should be equal to a Black Templar, etc...

Don't cry for me, I will do fine I built an army that can be anything, but cry for the folks who truely believed that GW could balance out the sub dex's with the main dex's only to find out the armies they paid and played for amount to nothing in the face of ultraweenies..

No, a Marine with BP&CCW isn't worth 25 pts. He doesn't have a Jump Pack, for starters, and that's worth 7 points on a standard Assault Marine. Then you've got the extra Ld, which is worth a point. And the extra Attack, with is another 2 points.

Thus, a Veteran Assault Marine with A2 Ld9 BP&CCW is worth 25 pts.

The Death Company get 4 USRs for 10 points. And they're all good USRs for Assault: Fearless, FNP, Rending, and Furious Charge. Under Traits / Veteran Skills, USRs are worth at least 3 pts each. So that bundle of USRs is nominally worth at least 12 points. Only paying 10 pts for them is a bargain.

Suck it up and don't complain.

Death Company gets jump packs for free? Did I create the part in my head where it costs 5 points a model for the entire unit to get jump packs?

So you are justifying 15 extra points for FNP/Rending/FC/Fearless/Ld9. Please dont forget Black Rage which means you NEED a chaplain or you have a squad that you cannot control. And ldr9 on a fearless unit isnt that big a deal because you probably pay 85 points for a Captain with goodies and Combat Tactics to get a Universal Leadership of 10.

One glaring difference between the two codicies is that you have combat tactics which in of itself is awesome, but you have the ability to mix and match diff characters to get the army the way you want it. BA/DA do NOT get this and this in of itself is a huge difference maker.

Death By Monkeys wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Hellfury wrote:GW has stated that if a army has a codex that it will forever get a codex, so no need to get your panties all wadded up.

OTOH, if your WFB army had an Army Book, all bets are off.

At least, that's how it appears to us Dogs of War players...

There's a very distinct difference between the two. A 40k army list is a "codex", while a WHFB list is an "army book". See, so if you had a 40k army that had an army book, GW would be well within their rights to never make another codex for that army. And vice versa, if you had a WHFB army with a codex, you'd be perfectly safe because you'd have GW's guarantee on it.

Except that GW said that they were going to maintian WFB armies with Army Books, and they've stopped support for Dogs of War, despite the fact that we had a "proper" Army Book back in 5th Edition.

It'd be as if GW simply told the Space Wolf players that they couldn't field their armies any more because they don't have a proper Codex, or the Dark Eldar are too old.

Oh, wait...

moosifer wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:No, a Marine with BP&CCW isn't worth 25 pts. He doesn't have a Jump Pack, for starters, and that's worth 7 points on a standard Assault Marine. Then you've got the extra Ld, which is worth a point. And the extra Attack, with is another 2 points.

Thus, a Veteran Assault Marine with A2 Ld9 BP&CCW is worth 25 pts.

The Death Company get 4 USRs for 10 points. And they're all good USRs for Assault: Fearless, FNP, Rending, and Furious Charge. Under Traits / Veteran Skills, USRs are worth at least 3 pts each. So that bundle of USRs is nominally worth at least 12 points. Only paying 10 pts for them is a bargain.

Suck it up and don't complain.

Death Company gets jump packs for free? Did I create the part in my head where it costs 5 points a model for the entire unit to get jump packs?

So you are justifying 15 extra points for FNP/Rending/FC/Fearless/Ld9. Please dont forget Black Rage which means you NEED a chaplain or you have a squad that you cannot control. And ldr9 on a fearless unit isnt that big a deal because you probably pay 85 points for a Captain with goodies and Combat Tactics to get a Universal Leadership of 10.

One glaring difference between the two codicies is that you have combat tactics which in of itself is awesome, but you have the ability to mix and match diff characters to get the army the way you want it. BA/DA do NOT get this and this in of itself is a huge difference maker.

Oh noes, your stupidly broken Death Company might be overpriced by as much as 5 pts, and an entire unit might be overpriced by as much as 25 pts.

To which, I say "so what?"

Look at Imperial Guard. A *single* Imperial Guard Chimera is overpriced by more than 40 pts. Imperial Guard Advisors are at least 10 points overpriced. Imperial Guard Ogryns are at least 5 pts overpriced. And most importantly, the basic *mandatory* Troops squad of Guardsmen is at least 10 pts overpriced (even moreso if they take a Lascannon) and 2 such squads are *mandatory* in each basic Platoon.

I did a very *generous* cost breakdown. Others can easily conclude that the USRs are actually fairly priced at 15 pts for the lot. And those are very good USRs that all work together - they have synergy such that they amplify each other. Finally, Black Rage is NOT a liability that's worth anything, because you'd take Chaplain Lemartes *anyways*.

The idea that a Blud Angelz player would whine over paying a fair price for their Death Company, and this is in a thread whereby other MEQs are getting new toys, it strikes me as exceptionally childish. I definitely see Yaks' wisdom in "Friends don't let friends start MEQ armies".

Quite frankly, if you don't like Blood Angels, repaint their shoulderpads and call them something else. It's not like you need to buy all-new models to switch the army around...

JohnHwangDD wrote:

moosifer wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:No, a Marine with BP&CCW isn't worth 25 pts. He doesn't have a Jump Pack, for starters, and that's worth 7 points on a standard Assault Marine. Then you've got the extra Ld, which is worth a point. And the extra Attack, with is another 2 points.

Thus, a Veteran Assault Marine with A2 Ld9 BP&CCW is worth 25 pts.

The Death Company get 4 USRs for 10 points. And they're all good USRs for Assault: Fearless, FNP, Rending, and Furious Charge. Under Traits / Veteran Skills, USRs are worth at least 3 pts each. So that bundle of USRs is nominally worth at least 12 points. Only paying 10 pts for them is a bargain.

Suck it up and don't complain.

Death Company gets jump packs for free? Did I create the part in my head where it costs 5 points a model for the entire unit to get jump packs?

So you are justifying 15 extra points for FNP/Rending/FC/Fearless/Ld9. Please dont forget Black Rage which means you NEED a chaplain or you have a squad that you cannot control. And ldr9 on a fearless unit isnt that big a deal because you probably pay 85 points for a Captain with goodies and Combat Tactics to get a Universal Leadership of 10.

One glaring difference between the two codicies is that you have combat tactics which in of itself is awesome, but you have the ability to mix and match diff characters to get the army the way you want it. BA/DA do NOT get this and this in of itself is a huge difference maker.

Oh noes, your stupidly broken Death Company might be overpriced by as much as 5 pts, and an entire unit might be overpriced by as much as 25 pts.

To which, I say "so what?"

Look at Imperial Guard. A *single* Imperial Guard Chimera is overpriced by more than 40 pts. Imperial Guard Advisors are at least 10 points overpriced. Imperial Guard Ogryns are at least 5 pts overpriced. And most importantly, the basic *mandatory* Troops squad of Guardsmen is at least 10 pts overpriced (even moreso if they take a Lascannon) and 2 such squads are *mandatory* in each basic Platoon.

I did a very *generous* cost breakdown. Others can easily conclude that the USRs are actually fairly priced at 15 pts for the lot. And those are very good USRs that all work together - they have synergy such that they amplify each other. Finally, Black Rage is NOT a liability that's worth anything, because you'd take Chaplain Lemartes *anyways*.

The idea that a Blud Angelz player would whine over paying a fair price for their Death Company, and this is in a thread whereby other MEQs are getting new toys, it strikes me as exceptionally childish. I definitely see Yaks' wisdom in "Friends don't let friends start MEQ armies".

Quite frankly, if you don't like Blood Angels, repaint their shoulderpads and call them something else. It's not like you need to buy all-new models to switch the army around...

Man you are a bit bitter about this. As I said before, my army is a generic army with BA units. I started playing BA to get ready for 5th edition and the new dex and lo and behold GW does exactly what I thought. I learned to play with the changes that were coming and am infinitely more comfortable with combat squads and limited choices than the las/plas kiddies.

As for always taking Lemartes, could the reason we *ALWAYS* take lemartes is that DC go wonky without him? I mean you yourself would have to say something about paying 5 points more for an extra wound, and death mask making it always worth the upgrade. DC FORCES you to take a chaplain, which is a very potent HQ, but a mandatory HQ with DC.

What you see as a whine is merely pointing out the fact that the new toys given to C:SM marines far outweigh the "brokeness" of the blud angelz as you so maturely put it. Combat tactics alone is worth its weight in gold, as do the HQ Special Characters changing combat tactics to a USR FOR THE ENTIRE ARMY NOT ONE UNIT

Lemartes is underpriced. That's why I don't think BA players have anything to whine about.

Chaplains are good. Very good in a HtH army. So you would take them anyways. There's no "forcing" going on here.

Unlike, say, Guard...

JohnHwangDD wrote:Lemartes is underpriced. That's why I don't think BA players have anything to whine about.

Chaplains are good. Very good in a HtH army. So you would take them anyways. There's no "forcing" going on here.

Unlike, say, Guard...

I will agree with you 100% he is underpriced, no doubt about it. Me personally I would rather have Dante or Mephhy for my HQ but I cannot take them unless it is a 2000+ point game due to limited availability of point value to be given into HQ choices. Right now I am building a 'ard boyz list and even at 2500 points sticking a second HQ in other than a chappy for the DC seems to be rough

As for the guard Analogy, guard take shooty stuff and stick conscripts with commissars in the front to hold off the enemy. Ogyrn are nice (chaos ones are even better) as are rough riders, but again you are not forced into a HQ choice just to make sure they are doing what they are suppose to do (doctrines are choices not compulsary)

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Oh noes, your stupidly broken Death Company might be overpriced by as much as 5 pts, and an entire unit might be overpriced by as much as 25 pts.

To which, I say "so what?"

Look at Imperial Guard. A *single* Imperial Guard Chimera is overpriced by more than 40 pts. Imperial Guard Advisors are at least 10 points overpriced. Imperial Guard Ogryns are at least 5 pts overpriced. And most importantly, the basic *mandatory* Troops squad of Guardsmen is at least 10 pts overpriced (even moreso if they take a Lascannon) and 2 such squads are *mandatory* in each basic Platoon.

I did a very *generous* cost breakdown. Others can easily conclude that the USRs are actually fairly priced at 15 pts for the lot. And those are very good USRs that all work together - they have synergy such that they amplify each other. Finally, Black Rage is NOT a liability that's worth anything, because you'd take Chaplain Lemartes *anyways*.

The idea that a Blud Angelz player would whine over paying a fair price for their Death Company, and this is in a thread whereby other MEQs are getting new toys, it strikes me as exceptionally childish. I definitely see Yaks' wisdom in "Friends don't let friends start MEQ armies".

Quite frankly, if you don't like Blood Angels, repaint their shoulderpads and call them something else. It's not like you need to buy all-new models to switch the army around...

Death Company are not broken, sorry to say. They're neat, they are a great concept, and unlike prior edition's incarnations, they are fair. Rending and FNP, which made them uber in 4th, are signifigantly reduced in power in 5th. And I'm okay with that. A DC with a jump pack is worth it's cost, however you want to slice it. As for Lemartes, well, can you blame us? I'd rather not have to field him, but them's the breaks.

I hope I get the redeemer, but if I don't, I'll get it for my standard Marine army.

Why are you so angry? Guard are coming up soonish if the rumors are right. Quite frankly, you'll probably be on other side of that arguement at that time. We'll get a ton of cool stuff that probably won't see the table top any time soon due to outrageous cost imbalances. People wil be bitching about those units and they'll want to sell of their marine armies due to the general unfairness of it all. I just want you to remember that when that time hits.

OK, "broken" may be a bit too strong as shorthand for "uber 1337".

I've been waiting for nearly a decade for my Dogs of War to get their next Army Book, so you'll excuse me for being a bit cranky about Guard.

If Guard get lots of cool stuff, I'll be very happy. Hopefully, it makes up for lost time.

I love it when marine players or marines supporters tell those of us who have to watch release schedules packed to the gills with MEQ releases to wait patiently for our new codex that's "just around the corner".
I'm very tired of marines.
I'd love to see necrons, DE and guard get codices before the Space Marines, for once. Though obviously that would only happen in Loopy Lah Lah Land.

Deadshane1: The reason you think your guys should stay seperate in a codex is the reason I think the codex should disappear. I have a lot of friends who will switch between marine codices every game using the same models. Sometimes I'm fighting Space Marines who have one unit with Feel No Pain and Rending, sometimes I'm fighting Space Marines who run at me and engage me in close combat, sometimes I'm fighting Space Marines who are lead by some dude in a Land Speeder and who like Termies and Bikes. It's all space marines, it's the same statline, the same gear, it should be in the same book. It would free us up release cycle time for those non Marines who need attention, and prevent threads like this with all the bitching and moaning that comes with them.

Death By Monkeys wrote:I'm not arguing with you, Hellfury, just pointing out that GW has the leeway to manipulate this statement to do a lot of things.

Agreed. They do seem to change their minds a lot....*shakes head*

The bottom line is that, as they did with 4th ed., they changed the rules without doing a complete reload of the army lists (as they did in 3rd, and 6th ed. WFHB with 'Ravening Hordes'). I understand the logic behind that: Anyone who bought a 'late' codex for 4th edition would be pissed to find out they had wasted $30 (or whatever they cost now), and their release schedule being what it is, I'm sure they were afraid of having the peasants at the gates screaming for blood.

Nevertheless, by making that accommodation, we're stuck with a bunch of army lists that are imbalanced one from another and subject to the vagaries of the author at the time and his/her orders from the top on how to deal with the game. Thus: Dark Angels and C:CSM were a direct response to the 'uber' issues of the previous codicies, while C: SM is going back to uber because that's what sells models/marine codicies.

*shrug* Say what you will about the release of 3rd ed. and the blandness of the codicies at the time, but the BBB was tight and got you by until your codex came out, and while they were doing the thin books, they were churning out 'dexes at a pretty fast rate and putting out supplemental rules in WD/compilations equally quickly.

You knew that at the reboot, your list was balanced with everyone else's list. That's not going to happen when some armies are dealing with 3rd/early 4th codicies, some were written while the design team were trying to figure out what they were doing, and some are coming out with the release of 5th. Retrofitting just doesn't work.

You're probably right.

At some point (like they did in the transition from 2nd to 3rd, I think?) GW needs to 'level' the playing field, re-balance everything (for real this time! Using (gasp!) statistics!) and go from there.

Sure, it would get a lot of people angry to have to use a "Ravening Hordes" type of list for a while, but in the long run, the game would probably be better off for it. Though they'd have to resist the temptation to 'churn' out a Codex 'just because', as we're then back on the same slippery slope as before, most likely.

But, that would take a lot of planning, hard work and intelligence to pull off correctly, so...

Let me get this straight:

There are a few "problem" Codices under the new Edition. Some Codices have a few "problem" units.

So the solution is to throw away *ALL* of the Codices and start from scratch?

GW is stupid, but not that stupid.

Er, no, not really, so I guess you didn't get it straight...

Hellfury wrote:....or "Does GW have any idea of what it is doing?"


For awhile I laughed at how I knew that the DA/BA codices wouldn't get any retcon. But I was just being cruel because of how the fanboys defended and lauded Jervis' handling of those books.


I have been thinking about this a lot and I have come to the realization that if Jervis doesn't retcon some of this stuff into the DA/BA codices via FAQ, he is a real tool.

By that I mean is that he strung everyone along with this 'grand plan' of reorganizing the structure of the game.
Some severe toning down of abilities.
To the point where people really snigger when they hear the names of the DA and BA codex mentioned.

And now we see all of these pretty much confirmed rumours (in all aspects except seeing the codex in hand) putting a waffle stomp on on this 'grand plan' he himself initiated.

I disliked how Jervis handled the DA codex, and I especially disliked how he pontificated to other designers about how it should be done when it was obviously not the way to go to make the customers happy.
However, I am glad to see a bit more flavor returning, but..... find a fething plan and stick to it for chrissakes!

I don't even play these codices, and I feel really bad for the armies. These armies are rather recent and they wont see a 5th ed codex for many years to come. Does GW expect DA/BA players to just sit idly by trying to enjoy their rules waiting for a new codex when they KNOW in their hearts the rules that they use are a crock of poo-doo? Give 'em a FAQ with a few minor upgrades so that they know they aren't forgotten.

However, BT can forget about it. They still get tons of cool crap such as two heavies in a 5 man termie squad, an actual wargear list, etc. Giving them any of the new stuff is just asking for the revisit of 3rd ed BT cheese fests. if anything BT lists need to be toned down to match.

I honestly think ol' Jervy-poo needs to make a huge apology to the consumers he reeled in with his spiel.
Jervis has made himself into the George Bush Jr. of the wargaming world.
Like GWB he lacks any credibility in my eyes because it seems rather apparent that he doesnt have the slightest idea what he or the rest of his designers are doing.

Again, I say this to GW (and to the pontificating Jervis especially):

FAQ now, or STFU!

QFT!!

I definitely agree that the Dark Angels and the Blood Angels should be FAQed to be brought in line with some of the new Marine changes.

DA/BA should have all their wargear brought in line with the new stats. Another debacle like the DH assault cannon would just be stupid. At bare minimum this is what must be done. As far as the new units are concerned, other than possibly vehicles, DA should not have access to them. Sternguard/Vanguard/Honor Guard seem to represent first company elements and as such would not be used by DA. For BA, I don't know if they should have such units as I'm not as up on their background.

I also would like to see a small alteration of some of the special characters for these armies. I think Azrael should have a WS of 6 for example and the BA specials who have a 6 WS should probably have a 7. Now I don't think this will happen and by and large it won't make a huge difference most of the time anyhow but it would make sense.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Let me get this straight:

There are a few "problem" Codices under the new Edition. Some Codices have a few "problem" units.

So the solution is to throw away *ALL* of the Codices and start from scratch?

GW is stupid, but not that stupid.

I think the point was that if GW ever does another "about face" like from second to third (which was drastic), then they'll need to do a ravening hordes list.

Here's hoping for a Space Wolves codex soon to be released either via White Dwarf or a quick fix online pdf.

Though I suspect GW will take the long route and go for the new models and new codex coincidation

Red_Lives wrote:

Its not that we are not space marines... after all BA, DA, and SW are in fact space marines. However BA and SW have unique geneseeds that alter the combat "doctrines" of the chapter organization, and still use standard issue imperial space marine equipment. I think that is what the issue is, why should the new Death wind launcher be heavy 2 and mine still heavy 1? Why should my tech marines not have access to the big cannon? Why should my landraiders only carry 10 (5) when the new ones are 12 (6)? Now keep in mind this can be easily fixed if they just had 1 extra line in that codex: All loyalist space marine chapters may use the new landraider/drop pod/landspeeder/wargear profiles that parallels (shares a name) with their current version.

As a Flesh Tearer (Blood Angel) player, I'd argue that the above statement is more than enough reason to just have one marine codex. I've been playing since 2nd ed, when my Word Bearers were the same as every other chaos marine army, except painted red. It wasn't that terrible, really. And if its just a matter of "altering the doctrines and organization", that can easily be done within the same codex as every one else.

As Syr mentioned, though, GW continues to strap itself by trying to make everything backwards compatible, which straightjackets itself by continuing to include bad game/army design.

And, to respond to Alpharius, yes, they should throw out all the codexes and start again. Reason being is they can NEVER get every codex updated before they switch editions. So we're NEVER playing on an even field (except with 'ravening hordes' types of lists - which by the way, 3rd ed right out of the box was the best 40k I ever played). So we'll always have codexes from old editions that are wonky, wargear that doesn't match up (hell, we still have DH with sub-par assault cannons, and that's been known for how long?), and skewed power levels as the designers wander from brilliant idea to brilliant idea.

And the main reason we'll never see one consolidated marine dex? It doesn't sell models. They can push the shiny new rules and models they make up for all of those MEQ sub-dexes to fuel sales. Take those away, and its a harder pull for GW. So it'll never happen.

Oh, and I've been planning to run my Flesh Tearers as "vanilla" since the 3rd ed BA codex where they (BA) were stupid-broken. It was a point and click army. So when the new dex hits, I'll paint them black, give them a yellow saw emblem, and use them as they were written in Rogue Trader, as a 'codex' chapter.

"It would free us up release cycle time for those non Marines who need attention"

Wait, what? There are non Marines??? Who the hell are they and why are they trying to steal some of our limited release schedule time!!! I mean who even knows what a non marine is??? Like some kind of evil space elf or something? Maybe killer robots? Why would anyone even want to play one of those anyways!

Ratbarf wrote:Great, then we can scrap the entire chaos space marine book as well and just call the new Codex Space Marines?

Might as well. I'm pretty sure you can make a better (read: fluffier) Night Lords army with the new Codex: SM than with Codex: CSM. Same with Alpha Legion. Same with Iron Warriors if you don't want Obliterators. Etc.

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

Ratbarf wrote:Great, then we can scrap the entire chaos space marine book as well and just call the new Codex Space Marines?

Might as well. I'm pretty sure you can make a better (read: fluffier) Night Lords army with the new Codex: SM than with Codex: CSM. Same with Alpha Legion. Same with Iron Warriors if you don't want Obliterators. Etc.

Amen brother!

I know that's what I will be doing!

And any complaints at my doing so will be met with, "Ah, but this is my DIY Chapter, Brothers of the Hydra!"

Hellfury wrote:I have been thinking about this a lot and I have come to the realization that if Jervis doesn't retcon some of this stuff into the DA/BA codices via FAQ, he is a real tool.

By that I mean is that he strung everyone along with this 'grand plan' of reorganizing the structure of the game.
Some severe toning down of abilities.
To the point where people really snigger when they hear the names of the DA and BA codex mentioned.

And now we see all of these pretty much confirmed rumours (in all aspects except seeing the codex in hand) putting a waffle stomp on on this 'grand plan' he himself initiated.

Yet another reason I'm glad I quit 40k right before 40k5e was released.

I agree but it's not just 40k that's getting the crappy Jervis/non-Jervis treatment. Look at Blood Bowl. 3rd edition makes it Warhammer Fantasy Football, which is a really bad move (despite all the other improvements in that edition), one that even JJ has admitted to. So over the latter part of 4th and all of 5th, the intention has been to move it away from WFB (for example, see JJ's comments in BB Mag #8, the new minis at the time - Elfs, Ogres, Vamps, etc. - and so on), yet now the current rumours are for Bretonnians to be the new team for 2009. Sigh.

Here's an idea. Have a game plan (which GW do seem to do, to be fair) and damn well stick to it (which GW do not).

Voodoo_Chile wrote:Here's hoping for a Space Wolves codex soon to be released either via White Dwarf or a quick fix online pdf.

Though I suspect GW will take the long route and go for the new models and new codex coincidation

This could turn out to be a double edged sword. On the one hand I'd love to see an updated Space Wolves Codex, as mine is falling apart being that it was bought when it was first released for 3rd Ed(it's my oldest 40k book that I still have), and it would motivate me to actually play them again. OTOH, I would hate to see one of the most flavorful, and interesting 40k armies get the DA/BA treatment. I don't want a gutted codex. I like that currently there are a lot of options from C: SM for the Space Wolves, and I'm sure Space Wolves will like it even more when they get to use the new stuff come October. All of that could go away when they get a new standalone book.

To be honest I liked the 3rd Ed codex supplements(mostly because it allowed me to have copies of all the chapter rules for cheap), and while I wish they'd do an all-in-one book for Space Marines, which they could easily do by giving rules for all first founding chapters and a few variants such as Black Templar, Crimson Fists, Relictors, and the like, they never will because it's much more profitable to sell 4 different books, than to give everyone all they want as one. Doing away with the flavors of Marines was one thing I hated about the 4th Ed book, Traits didn't cut it. The IA articles were awesome.

They could do an all-in-one.

It's just that it would cost $100.

JohnHwangDD wrote:They could do an all-in-one.

It's just that it would cost $100.

I was thinking more along the lines of $50, about the same size as the rulebook, with lots of background. 10-12 different Chapters included. Would be a great book.

I was thinking more along the lines of $25 if not much more cheaper.
AT-43 can make the same type of army book for half the price with twice the quality in EVERY way. Full color glossy pages on all pages, better rules..

The consumers continual acceptance of the sort of suggested price gouging is astounding.

JohnHwangDD wrote:They could do an all-in-one.

It's just that it would cost $100.

The problem with an all-in-one book is not the size or price. It's that they wouldn't be able to release it 5 times.

derek wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:They could do an all-in-one.

It's just that it would cost $100.

I was thinking more along the lines of $50, about the same size as the rulebook, with lots of background. 10-12 different Chapters included. Would be a great book.

I think Derek's prediction is closer to what reality would be.

If they'd ever do it.

Which they won't. (see: Abadabadoobaddon for why)

Its easy to see why GW would never do it.

Its not so easy to see why people will continue to reinforce GW's behavior regarding that though.

What was wrong with the Index Astartes method of compiling Space Marine rule sets from White Dwarf? Apart from ruining White Dwarf's current MO of not having any articles worth reading in it of course.

George Spiggott wrote:What was wrong with the Index Astartes method of compiling Space Marine rule sets from White Dwarf? Apart from ruining White Dwarf's current MO of not having any articles worth reading in it of course.

I believe the reason that they stopped doing IA(and for that matter Chapter Approved) was because they were trying to streamline everything into Codexes, with the previous Codex: Chaos Space Marines being the first, and then the trait system in Codex: Space Marines really being the death knell of unique Space Marine chapters that didn't already have their own Codex list. Of course Salamanders had Codex: Armageddon, but since then Salamanders players have been forced into being just another Codex chapter.

George Spiggott wrote:What was wrong with the Index Astartes method of compiling Space Marine rule sets from White Dwarf? Apart from ruining White Dwarf's current MO of not having any articles worth reading in it of course.

There was nothing wrong with it at all!

The current 're-emphasis on the hobby and making WD readable' again currently going on has me hoping...

Since we have new developments regarding this whole issue, I will reiterate what I previously said:

FAQ now, or STFU!

I mean that in the truest sense of sincerity.

GW, you don't have much credibility to begin with, don't make it worse. Especially now on the cusp of a new edition.

If Index Astartes were reprinted as an Apocalypse supplement, I'd be all for it.

But really, *another* book for Marines?

Really?

JohnHwangDD wrote:If Index Astartes were reprinted as an Apocalypse supplement, I'd be all for it.

But really, *another* book for Marines?

Really?

I am not sure if that was directed at me, but since there is no quote and it directly proceeds my post, I will assume it is.

Who is asking for a book? I am talking about a one or two page Errata until they do get a new book sometime in the Far Future Where There Is Only...Stuff.

It's not specifically to you, just reacting to the prior discussion of IA. But it could be a way to print the FAQs in one place.

Ok, I've been one of the biggest advocates for the DA book since it came out. *Sigh* I'm disappointed.

As others have pointed out, the DA really don't have any unique things to them (at least in the way that the other Marines do). I will be picking up the new SM Codex and unless I am playing a Death/Raven/Double-Wing army I will be using the new codex. There is no reason not to! I can field a DA-esque army using the SM dex just as well as the DA dex and that I think is the failure.

I do believe that all the marine sub-dexes should have gotten rolled into the SM dex simply because it makes updating them easier. They don't need to release 5 books to update Loyalist marines, they can release one, cool book and everyone can make an army from that one.

Unlike Abby and HBMC, I think the Chaos dex is a huge success in this regard. You can make just about any Legion as well as any Warband using the Chaos Dex.

I have always played Dark Angels for the fluff and back-story and not for the special rules. I can still do that with the new SM codex. I don't play in many tournaments and if I do I'd probably take Ravenwing anyway.

That's my 2-cents.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

I would support GW making a single Marine codex, the only reason I want a Slaanesh codex is so I can get my daemonettes back.

DA and BA easliy fit in the current structure of the codex. Add 4 characters; Lemartes, Death Company, Masters of the Ravenwing and Deathwing and there you go. I seriously doubt any marine player would argue with gaining the Baal and Furioso to play with. The Space Wolves and Black Templars would be harder but not impossible. I expect GW will make the SW much closer to codex with the new dex anyway.

GW needs to be consistent. What's the point in investing money in their products when I don't know what they are going to do next?

Noisy_Marine wrote:GW needs to be consistent. What's the point in investing money in their products when I don't know what they are going to do next?

GW *is* consistent - whatever Codex you use will be valid until such time as GW deigns to revisit and revise it. If some other Codex gets a shiny new toy, and you want it, you can buy that Codex and use it until such time as GW magnanimously chooses to update that one as well.

In the mean time, it's not like your armies turn to dust or something.

It's just, oh noes, your army may not be the most optimized thing out there.

If you want to continuously chase having the nominally "strongest" army from a theoretical standpoint, you can keep buying Codices from GW. If you want to spend less on Codices, pick something and stick with it.

ArbitorIan wrote:Yeah, I agree - relying on special characters isn't the way to go.

But really, how could GW not see this coming. They've got three codices, which reprint the majority of troop types, they're bound to have problems when they try to update ONE of them.

One army gets cheaper rhinos, One army can take two Terminator heavies, etc.

Seriously, why make all these extra books? It only makes things confusing. You could sum up all the extra rules for most of these chapters on one page, two at the most.

Make a SM codex. Put in two pages each on BA, DA, BT and SW with the extra units and special rules. That's it.

I totally agree. I thought the way they did legions in the 3.5 chaos book was fine. 2 pages per legion/chapter listing the special rules. Preferably rules that aren't insanely overpowered.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Noisy_Marine wrote:GW needs to be consistent. What's the point in investing money in their products when I don't know what they are going to do next?

GW *is* consistent - whatever Codex you use will be valid until such time as GW deigns to revisit and revise it. If some other Codex gets a shiny new toy, and you want it, you can buy that Codex and use it until such time as GW magnanimously chooses to update that one as well.

In the mean time, it's not like your armies turn to dust or something.

It's just, oh noes, your army may not be the most optimized thing out there.

If you want to continuously chase having the nominally "strongest" army from a theoretical standpoint, you can keep buying Codices from GW. If you want to spend less on Codices, pick something and stick with it.

You assume too much. I'm not chasing the best army. I want GW to have a rules philosophy throughout their codices other than "Sell shiny new models." When they release a book where some of the stuff is great and some of it is very weak, it's obvious they aren't interested in writing decent rules. If they were, then they'd make an effort to make every unit choice useful in some way.

There's also the long wait in between codices. I don't want to wait years for an update when an FAQ would suffice. And for me, it would. Just something to show that they are listening. If I don't like my codex, that's not motivation to buy another army until the next release. That's reason for me to stop using the codex, which probably means not playing the game. How is that good business sense for GW? Encouraging players when established armies to shelve models because their new codex is boring, rushed, or obviously far weaker than the other codices?

I don't want the best army in the game. I want an even playing field and interesting rules. Right now GW provides neither. Certain books vastly overpower other books, and the new rules just aren't that great, unless I want to jump ship and play loyalists, which I don't.





Right now the only consistent thing they do is act inconsistently.

Noisy_Marine wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:GW *is* consistent - whatever Codex you use will be valid until such time as GW deigns to revisit and revise it.

You assume too much. I'm not chasing the best army. I want GW to have a rules philosophy throughout their codices other than "Sell shiny new models."

Right now the only consistent thing they do is act inconsistently.

No, GW's only consistent thing is that they try to sell shiny new models.

Wow. We agree on something.

Lemme check to see if the moon is red or something or there's a twin-tailed comet flying in the sky...

BYE

So you are asking how a inconsistent company could mess up so consistently?

Just checking.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

dont know if this has been posted before or not as I am in a hurry and only read the first page (damn job) but I would be quite happy (not sure about you guys) if they did a well balanced marine codex (hopefully 5th ed dex will fulfil this) and then did WD codexes on each of the 'marketed' (DA,BA,WS,SW,BT,IF,CF etc) chapters, a bit like how they did index astartes, with subtle changes to the marine dex rather than a new full-blown codex for each, then either publish them in a book or in pdf format.

H.B.M.C. wrote:So, a gimmick army that relys on special characters to work. Yup, that's successful game design right there folks...

BYE

That's quite a cynical view. I bet a lot of the new SM armies will feature special characters. In fact you are a very special character yourself! G

I dunno how cynical it is, or more realistic GBF. I mean, look at the BA dex. To some, I could really see that it sounds like a bad sales pitch.

"SURE you could have Furious Charge on all your marines! For the mere cost of taking Corbulo, you too..."

I dunno what makes "successful game design", but I know what I enjoy playing. I enjoy playing my Jumpwing, always have. I really don't appreciate having them wave these huge special abilities in my face, provided I take a named IC. I mean, HOW many BA Jumpwings are going to be running Dante? Try all of them.

In the end, it all boils down to personal prefferance and why you are gaming.

I am satisfied with the new BA codex and I understand why players don't want to lumped together with DA. BA
got to keep all their trademark units but nothing new and I am okay with that too. The DA codex is an utter failure as is Jervis as a developer.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with fielding special characters and no one should be criticized if they do. Look how popular the combination of Eldrad/Avatar is. I am sure we will see a lot of chapter masters roaming the tables soon. I am okay with that as well. It is the current direction of the game. Heck BT have always had their champion. It's no big deal.

I don't like to see yak spouting off against Marines but he is entitled to his opinions so I just give him a hard time about it. HMBC just comes across as bitter about the nerd to Chaos and deletion of Lost and the Damned. L&tD was a Chaos/IG cherry picker army. I do feel bad about Chaos but it is still playable. There is no way Chaos was going to be able to keep all the options. G

FWIW, I agree with much of the sentiment expressed on both sides of this issue.

Here's my simple take on it.

GW hasn't gotten me to buy new models with their new way of doing things. It's been a big fail, company wide.

With the SM Codex, I am buying because I feel like I can finally make a competitive marine army.

So to recap:

Marines won't suck. This is new.

I will spend money on GW products. This is new.

I don't see the issue with Special Characters being required and gimmick armies becoming common.

I mean, it's not like nobody here plays Warmachine / Hordes...

there have always and always will be the gimmick armies. G

it looks realy nice but nid hunters is now universal not only the ultra mariens the things that made ultra mariens some what special are gone now en universal.

Green Blow Fly wrote:That's quite a cynical view.

You do know who you're talking to, right?

Green Blow Fly wrote:I bet a lot of the new SM armies will feature special characters.

Of course they will, because people who want to play Sallies, Raven Guard, Imp Fists, White Scars and Crimsons fists have to bring them now, otherwise they're just playing 'Counts As' Marines, and as much as my main man DD loves that idea, a lot of people don't.

Green Blow Fly wrote:In fact you are a very special character yourself!

If the next Imperial Guard Codex doesn't include Commissar Lord Matthius Calgar - the Half Brother of Marneus Calgar - I will be very dissapointed. Ok, ok. Let's be honest, more dissapointed, as I don't expect anything good from GW with the new Guard Codex.

BYE

To be honest I don't expect anything really great for IG either. It has always been my opinion that IG is an army for people that like to field a lot treads. The new rules for fifth edition has given them some advantages but I am aware that kill points hurt them in a tournament environment.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:It has always been my opinion that IG is an army for people that like to field a lot treads.

*checks Guard army, sees over 50 tanks*

Yeah, that's pretty true. But then again, I also like fielding forests of infantry (I have around 400+/- infantry as well). The enemy can't shoot you if you clog up their barrels with the bodies of your men.

BYE

to be onist the new codex makes it possebal for the peaple on the imperiums side to win a game for one's
hell the chaos player and the nid player win all the time.
in the campain for some weard reson I em the bigist loyalist player in te store that is in the campain and I only have 1/4 of the bigist choas player and 1/8 of the bigist nid player ( yes thay bouth kan feeld a wooping 20000 pnt army's in apoc.

GW should re think the whole marine dex's, and make 1.
i needs to be around 4-5x the size of the normalone (ok, price will go up alot)
but then its all in 1 book, most chapters are now being hidden away since nothing is ever mentioned of them.

and back to the 1st page about relying on special characters, i used to do that with my chaos DP, a nice 9-11 attacks on the charge, S6, T6, W4, 2+sv, and allowed no saves, this and an expensive unit of chosen used to work wonders in crushing an army on its own, now though, thanks to the new dex, theres no such thing as a strong DP :K
so mines now in pieces in my bitzbox since it has no use.

With me being lazy and not having 2 hours to read this whole post.......

Is it rumor or confirmed. All SM armies are getting zinged for time being and must use the new SM codex as their army book. I heard this and just growled.

What I'm saying is this. I just have modeled and had painted a Ravenwing/Deathwing army. Will I get to use my army in same way with the release of new SM codex.

I have been gathering impression that my Apothecaries will not be honored with giving my squads "Feel no Pain" like the "Blessed 'Nilla marines" can. Also, nauseated by thought that I can't do Termie assault per DA codex.

Quell my irrational thought process, sombody. Tell me this is B******t and I can continue happily playing my DA's in current DA codex form enjoying some new SM codex upgrades.

Tis bs, all seperate chapter books are still legal. Though they don't get any of the new stuff that marines get. (for example the FNP apoths rule. We don't get that, though I don't see your problem seeing as you run Ultras as well as Unforgiven. (W00t Pride to the Emo Marines!!!)

BA/DA players have always been the laughing stock of MEqs. At least where I'm from... BA are even more vanilla than Smurfs, and having a BA army basically means you don't know the game rules properly. Because you're a noob. Sorry, not making a big judgement here - it's just that "Blood Angels player" means "vampire kid who paints the eye-liner on his models" by my own unfortunate circumstances of association.

If my armies were vulnerable to BA tactics I'd have a different opinion, of course. All-jumppacking-death-company apocalypse scale lists are another thing. But they never had eye-liner, or tried to justify getting into combat on the first round because "maybe my ruler is a bit different to yours". Ahem.

I loved the last marinedex. I've held the new one in my hands, read it throughout, and I don't like it. Might have something to do with the fact that most of my old marines were reconstructed with assault/cc weapons. Las/plas isn't great in 5th - I want my bloody divergency back! CA is just out of date now, and that's about all there is to it. Obviously the GW boys have been busy and missed a few things. Happens EVERY new edition, EVERY new codex, but despite the chips and bangs the game must go on, and forward at that!

In summary, FAQs are for explaining things to people with BA armies, not for giving them better lists. BA don't need it. Dark Angels might, but self-loathing people just don't seem to get as many breaks, do they?

Ratbarf wrote:Tis bs, all seperate chapter books are still legal. Though they don't get any of the new stuff that marines get. (for example the FNP apoths rule. We don't get that, though I don't see your problem seeing as you run Ultras as well as Unforgiven. (W00t Pride to the Emo Marines!!!)

Well if I'm going to run an Apothecary in my Deathwing squad I'd like to have access to up to date tech. Ultramarines are whole different army. Comparing is moot!

GW likes to take one step forward then two steps back.

Hey guys, if you dont mind I'm collating a bit of online research.

If you dont mind checking out this link here on Dakka for a Poll... ->

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/217358.page#367532

and clicking one option !

Thanks in advance.
Thanks again.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:BA/DA players have always been the laughing stock of MEqs. At least where I'm from... BA are even more vanilla than Smurfs, and having a BA army basically means you don't know the game rules properly. Because you're a noob. Sorry, not making a big judgement here - it's just that "Blood Angels player" means "vampire kid who paints the eye-liner on his models" by my own unfortunate circumstances of association.

If my armies were vulnerable to BA tactics I'd have a different opinion, of course. All-jumppacking-death-company apocalypse scale lists are another thing. But they never had eye-liner, or tried to justify getting into combat on the first round because "maybe my ruler is a bit different to yours". Ahem.

I loved the last marinedex. I've held the new one in my hands, read it throughout, and I don't like it. Might have something to do with the fact that most of my old marines were reconstructed with assault/cc weapons. Las/plas isn't great in 5th - I want my bloody divergency back! CA is just out of date now, and that's about all there is to it. Obviously the GW boys have been busy and missed a few things. Happens EVERY new edition, EVERY new codex, but despite the chips and bangs the game must go on, and forward at that!

In summary, FAQs are for explaining things to people with BA armies, not for giving them better lists. BA don't need it. Dark Angels might, but self-loathing people just don't seem to get as many breaks, do they?

Sorry to hear that BA/DA players from your area are so inept. Over this last year I have gotten back into 40k, and I kept with my blood angels due to their interesting background and fun to play. I have won two local area tournaments with them and came in 10th out of 60 in a larger con (was 6 points shy of first, and was one of 5 blood angel armies there). With 5th ed I have found the death company to be not as nasty as they used to be, but still effective most of the time. Under 5th I have not had a chance to play in a tournament with them yet, but so far have 3 wins and 2 losses.

Besides that, I do find I agree with you about a few things. I am very disapointed with the new dex for us "non-codex" chapters. It labeled us as aberrant chapters that are slowing dying off; just the way the author wrote that part was particularly annoying. I wonder if other non-ultramarine chapter players are happy being labeled as 'guilliman lovers' no matter who their primarch was.

Thanks to the new codex, BA has lost even more of their unique units. For now any codex marine can have a furioso equivalent with the ironclad, veteren assault in the form of vanguard (whom can assault the turn they deepstrike), and points for the most part are very cheap compared to ba (such as every marine army now gets inertial guidance on their pods for a lot cheaper). Free flamer and missile launcher for a 10 man tac squad? I don't know the other non-codex chapter armies as well so I can't say how much they are missing out on.

While I disagree with what you think faqs are for, I do agree that they would not be enough to update the non-codex armies. Would have been so nice if they had included them in the new codex. Here's hoping that they update the armies (and not get rid of them) before the next edition comes out.


And while I know there are flaws in my post, do go easy on it as I just needed to rant and get out some of my frustration.

BA/DA players have always been the laughing stock of MEqs. At least where I'm from... BA are even more vanilla than Smurfs, and having a BA army basically means you don't know the game rules properly. Because you're a noob. Sorry, not making a big judgement here - it's just that "Blood Angels player" means "vampire kid who paints the eye-liner on his models" by my own unfortunate circumstances of association.

The funny thing here is, I can't decide if you're right I started with BA, back at the release of 4th, never really played much, never could figure out how to actually get an army together with the Marine 'Dex BA 'Dex madness... I'm going to get back into 40K and redo my BA army with the intention of making an army list first, and was debating the vampire eye-liner

Seriously tho, It is frustrating to see the mess caused by the release schedule... that's always been one of the reasons I enjoy and support Privateer Press... one book, everyone's units, everything is compatible, no muss no fuss. I'm going thru the BA PDF making my list, and the only thing GW thought to FAQ for 5th was calculating KP for DC... how'sabout some of the new standard Marine 'Dex stuff? I want better transport capacity and Scout special ammunition, but am using the BA 'Dex because we have a Codex right now specifically for all the other unique stuff we have.

After a complete analysis and play testing,9/10 times BA can do a better close combat marine army than new dex, the only exception is Drop Pod assault armies, and even there the lack of PE and FC can cause problems.

My Flesh Tearers will eat the new marines for breakfast. I'm not worried.

Red_Lives wrote:After a complete analysis and play testing,9/10 times BA can do a better close combat marine army than new dex.

The new SM are all about 10-man squads in Transport. You simply can't play them as a MSU force with any success.

BA, however, still have a number of close combat advantages.

I haven't decided how I'm going to play, but I'm leaning toward BA.

Being a DA player myself errr ex DA player and playtesting against the new Dex, Ravenwing is still awesome there quite good at what they do. Deathwing and the normal DA army are well lacking in the subject. Belial still sucks worst named char ever i swear, don't even get me started on the whole storm shield thing that one makes absolutly no sense cyclone missles Im fine with the new dex ones are 10 points more death wing assault is nifty and counting as troops helps but i don't think the plus' outweigh the minus' .

Now the normal list Azreal was super awesome but the new named chars will trash him like vulkan who is cheaper(Im using him in my new army). Also now alot of the DA marine options you pay more points for something that isn't as effective why is that fair? The new landraiders can shoot there machine spirit at BS 4 instead of 2 for the same amount of points ? the new storm shield is only 5 points more for them and they have improved Invuln saves that you also get in the shooting phase now...

Now im sure this has all been beat into the ground but I felt that i should just give my 2 cents on the matter (spelling errors aside ) other then that i really like the new dex Ive had alot of fun playing with it. It just makes me sad that they would do that to me and the other DA players. Im sure they have there reasons for it even though alot of use may think there stupid reasons so Im done complaning about it and Im moving on.

Happy Gaming