Everyone pays for tactical options. Marine are elite,and with the current leaks are going to be top tier.

Now, back to the rumors!

All that objective secured. It was bad enough when it was just drop pods, at least they had to stay put. Now you can have 10+ transports and 10+ units all ObSec?

How is another army supposed to win in objective missions? Nobody could clear all that out.

And They Shall Know No Fear: the most powerful special rule that everyone thinks doesn't matter. Seriously, being able to ignore most of the negative effects of morale without the drawbacks of Fearless is a lot more powerful than people make it out to be.

As for Marines not "feeling elite", I introduce you to the grimdark 41st millennium, where there isn't just a bullet with your name on it, but a laser beam, heat ray, krak missile, plasma blast, and monomolecular blade too. If your Marines are dying too much for ATSKNF to not have an effect, more bodies or more cover is the answer.

The strength of Space Marines isn't in their specialization. It's that they are capable of being okay at everything in the game due to their rules and wargear. Windriders are a bad example, as they are blatantly undercosted for what they can do. Dire Avengers might have a better gun, and Necron Warriors might have a lot more durability and a better gun, but neither of those units can do everything that a Space Marine can do to the same level of quality.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orock wrote:
All that objective secured. It was bad enough when it was just drop pods, at least they had to stay put. Now you can have 10+ transports and 10+ units all ObSec?

How is another army supposed to win in objective missions? Nobody could clear all that out.

It's not like METAHL BAWKSES are hard to kill. Only cowards and fools hide in them, you know!

My god thunderfire canons got EVEN BETTER!

Techmarine gunner has 2W and BS 5 and can now add two more canons for the same cost making the gunner BS6!!!!!!!!!

12 bs 6 fething barrage shots with 60" range and 12 t7 wounds with 2+ save tanking characters for only 300pts..... MY GOD!

Consider this ladies and chums, how will this affect 30k and 40k space marine stuff, for example, Contemptors are dreads +1, so try to imagine them being bumped to 4 attacks each, now imagine my loverly khorne contemptor with rage and rampage, that's what 4+2+D3+1 attacks on the charge, mmmm


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or squadrons of plasma cannon monster hunter press, or magma melta tank hunters, or.... God forbid and prep to throw up in your mouth, the land raider formations with 3 achilles or dw land raiders, what that? You rolled a 6 with your lascannon to damage my dw land raider, Rr that please mate, aww you got a 1...don't care... Dark angels will be sick if they are inline with this book.

35pt dw termies (as we should get our chapter tactics free too yeah?) will mean 30 at 1050 before characters or upgrades, not too shabby, plus we should be getting a solid dw only formation, a ravenwing only one and a combined one if gw has any bloody sense at all. Price drops across the board etc., all in all I'm pretty stoked for dark angels now.

 Mulletdude wrote:
These new space marine dreadnoughts are better than the Blood Angels ones in just about every way. The 100 pt dread has as many attacks as a death company dread, for 25 less pts. Not going to lie, I'm a bit salty.

I'm happy. In a year or so, Furiosos will get buffed!

 Red Corsair wrote:
My god thunderfire canons got EVEN BETTER!

Techmarine gunner has 2W and BS 5 and can now add two more canons for the same cost making the gunner BS6!!!!!!!!!

12 bs 6 fething barrage shots with 60" range and 12 t7 wounds with 2+ save tanking characters for only 300pts..... MY GOD!

Oh how did i miss that.

Also not lossing the TFC if the guy gets sniped out... SWEET! Back up gunners! (If gunner goes down, chuck the extra TFC in front to tank.

 Timotheus wrote:
Grav Cannon for TT confirm:

Spoiler:

Timotheus, is this the correct list for Tac squad weapon upgrades?
Because it looks to me like Tac squads can now take heavy flamers.

 Nicorex wrote:

 Timotheus wrote:
Grav Cannon for TT confirm:

Spoiler:

Timotheus, is this the correct list for Tac squad weapon upgrades?
Because it looks to me like Tac squads can now take heavy flamers.

The note says Sternguard and LotD only sadly.

Ahh I knew I should not have given up on my Rosetta Stone German lessons..... POO!

 Nicorex wrote:
Ahh I knew I should not have given up on my Rosetta Stone German lessons..... POO!

Even if you can't read German, you can infer it, or if you're lazy, just use the English version that was leaked .

Did I miss a Captain page or was it just not posted? German or English, I'm not picky. I'm actually learning German pretty decently...

Guys, that says Grav Cannons on Legion of the Damned. On a unit with Slow and Purposeful. Grav-gun and Grav Cannon squads Deep Striking with Slow and Purposeful is pretty friggin impressive. Cent-Stars aren't the only option anymore. I can't be the only one drooling over that.

Clarification please:

Am I reading the posts correctly when it says for the formation that gives you the free transports, you have to take a full company, and another detachment?


Thanks.

I'll tell you whats extremely minor, but really fething slowed.

I made my VD years ago and glued the ML on, I havent had the heart to change him because I painted it up so nicely.

You can STILL get a twin-linked autocannon for 5 points more than the 10 point ML, that nobody in the history of the world takes because it is so much worse.

The ML on the VD should be free to switch out for a goddamn multi-melta or a powerfist!

They can't, the option has a 2 next to it which means only Sternguard and LotD can take them, like in the previous 'dex.

Oh cool! I can look at the new pics.

*opens up 4chan link*
*realises he's at work*

AHH! What am I doing?!?

General Hobbs wrote:


Clarification please:

Am I reading the posts correctly when it says for the formation that gives you the free transports, you have to take a full company, and another detachment?


Thanks.

As I can't/won't look at the pics at 4chan whilst at work, did we get confirmation if Dev Centurions get 2 weapons now, or still 1 TL weapon?

Still 1 TL iirc from when I looked at 4chan earlier this morning.

EDIT: Yep, still TL.

Ha ha what in the f is the point in vanguard vets when you can take honor guard?

honor guard are 25ppm with PW, AA, FG, KG, BP and a BG while VV are 24 ppm for PW, FG, KG and BP... Same goes for stern guard and command squads only at least commands are stuck at 5 models while sterns can go to 10 but that doesn't apply to honr guard and VVets lol. Honor guard can take 10 models lol.

Vanguard can take JP?

That's the only reason I can think of. Not a crazy good one, but it is one.

lmao 3 man iron clad dread units with rerolls to run and hit and run.... so much stupid in that book.

Looking at Pedro Kantor, he FINALLY got Artificer Armor! His rules are basically the same, but now he is 2+/4++/5+++ which is pretty awesome. Hold the Line is still in place, so Sternguard are a MUST with him. I can't really decide if I want to run him with Tactical Terminators (who have much the same abilities so they fit right in), Assault Terminators, or some Vanguard Vets. The fact Tactical Terminators are cheaper and actually not that terrible anymore. Maybe run him with a squad of five in an LRR, giving the HW Terminator an Assault Cannon. I have some VVs almost made up, I would just need to take their jump packs off. I have Man I am so happy. Unfortunately, I am going to have to give up on the idea of running a Demi-Company, since there are no slots for Sternguards.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Vanguard can take JP?

That's the only reason I can think of. Not a crazy good one, but it is one.

Yea i realized that but it hardly seems to justify it lol. I'd rather save the points on jump packs and take honor guard in a pod.

Interesting. So under the Combat doctrines, it implies that you can use all 3 once per game ( ie. the same way UltraMarines can).

It also clarifies that its per Gladius Strike Force and not Demi company, so you can't stack combat doctrines up that way.

Is there a listing of all the Auxiliaries anywhere????

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Looking at Pedro Kantor, he FINALLY got Artificer Armor! His rules are basically the same, but now he is 2+/4++/5+++ which is pretty awesome. Hold the Line is still in place, so Sternguard are a MUST with him. I can't really decide if I want to run him with Tactical Terminators (who have much the same abilities so they fit right in), Assault Terminators, or some Vanguard Vets. The fact Tactical Terminators are cheaper and actually not that terrible anymore. Maybe run him with a squad of five in an LRR, giving the HW Terminator an Assault Cannon. I have some VVs almost made up, I would just need to take their jump packs off. I have Man I am so happy. Unfortunately, I am going to have to give up on the idea of running a Demi-Company, since there are no slots for Sternguards.

Stick him in a pod with some honor guard.

 Red Corsair wrote:
lmao 3 man iron clad dread units with rerolls to run and hit and run.... so much stupid in that book.

Wow, I didn't realize that dreads now get chapter tactics. That's hilarious.

On the plus side I think this book is still going to be one of the most diverse in the game. Maybe some stuff is ridiculous, but there are plenty of ways to have a good army without being a complete powercheeser.

Wait if there is no Master of the Forge how do we then fit multiple relics of the armoury into our list (since things like double sicaran needed a MOTF)

fidel wrote:Wait if there is no Master of the Forge how do we then fit multiple relics of the armoury into our list (since things like double sicaran needed a MOTF)

You don't. It's now impossible until FW changes something.

Red Corsair wrote:lmao 3 man iron clad dread units with rerolls to run and hit and run.... so much stupid in that book.

You are getting hit and run....how? My understanding is that the WS chapter tactic doesn't have it anymore.

You houserule it to be Techmarines or wait for FW to release an FAQ.

Also, RAW Chronus doesn't have to, and indeed can't start in his tank... the tank gets all the buffs and Chronus can start separate, and then when the tank is destroyed he teleports to the tank and disembarks from it.

*slow clap*

Good job GW.

EDIT: WS CT still has Hit & Run.

 Carnage43 wrote:

fidel wrote:Wait if there is no Master of the Forge how do we then fit multiple relics of the armoury into our list (since things like double sicaran needed a MOTF)

You don't. It's now impossible until FW changes something.

Red Corsair wrote:lmao 3 man iron clad dread units with rerolls to run and hit and run.... so much stupid in that book.

You are getting hit and run....how? My understanding is that the WS chapter tactic doesn't have it anymore.

WS still have it. Look at the pictures posted a few pages back.

Man templar dread units will get rage and counter attack after you kill one of them too lol. I think white scar, smurfs and BT will have the best dreads. The others don't gain anything really.

Wow with helbrekt they get hartred, fleet and if they killed an iron clad the remaining two would have 7 attacks on the charge each rerolling misses! ROFL!

Part of me wants to start a BT army now... Hordes of Crusaders and Dreads rushing across the field would be an amazing sight.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Part of me wants to start a BT army now... Hordes of Crusaders and Dreads rushing across the field would be an amazing sight.

Yea I think it would be decent too. With helbrekt your getting so many USR's.

Raven Dread gets stealth lol

Unfortunately they don't. Only non-vehicle models get Shrouded.

Unless you mean Stealth from NF, in which case they do. But so do Rhinos and they don't have CT.



Hmm... I just realised the new wording means only Dreads benefit from the IWND! part of the IH chapter tactics as no other vehicles are, RAW, IH vehicles

So... anyone know what the new chappy looks like? Still as useless as ever? (save for unlocking the battle company?)

As far as I can see Gits, chaplains haven't changed at all.

Still useless... *sigh*

I have a problem with this 'free transport' thing.

Transports have a value. They've been given points values. This formation just allows you to take more points than your limit. I know that Rhinos aren't all that, but even so, it's free stuff for no real downside that I can see.

The payment is in terms of lack of unit flexibility. The less options something has, the cheaper it is.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
The payment is in terms of lack of unit flexibility. The less options something has, the cheaper it is.

Evidence? That is totally not true when GW is involved. Point values are derived from what GW thinks they should be, which most likely has no coherent strategy behind it. Free points are bad in a game primarily balanced via points.

Honestly I'm surprised GW didn't try to release a bunch of "new" SM units for this codex just to get people to buy more.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
The payment is in terms of lack of unit flexibility. The less options something has, the cheaper it is.

This is an overused logical fallacy. People were going to take drop troops in pod lists for example, regardless of the new formation, especially devestators with the new grav canons. The free pods basically give them extra free units. in a Cad for example I'd need two troops before I got heavy or FA slots for drop assault squads and devastators and just the two pods for them comes to 70 pts. In the new formation I may need 3 troops but hey look, those two pods I would have taken anyway are worth those same 70 points i am now spending on a 3rd squad only now they also get a free pod as well, so I am netting a free drop pod and a 5 man troop squad, how is that inflexible?

CAD
70 + 35 + 70 + 35= 210 for 4 units

Demi
70 + 0 + 70 + 0 + 70 + 0 = 210 for 6 units

Both have obsec

It's definitely just free stuff to get you to purchase more.

I did a lot of work in the updating of the old vehicle design rules (link in SIG) and I found that the more restrictive a races base vehicle options were, the cheaper their weapons and upgrades turned out to be.

When you look at tactical marines compared to dire avengers you have to say "OK, dire avengers do more damage to things with wounds hands down" but, what can they do at all against armor 11-12? If two of them die, how likely is it they will contribute next turn? What upgrades are available to the unit to allow it to tackle other problems? The marines pay points for better survivability, better melee damage output, and more versatility.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I have a problem with this 'free transport' thing.

Transports have a value. They've been given points values. This formation just allows you to take more points than your limit. I know that Rhinos aren't all that, but even so, it's free stuff for no real downside that I can see.

Didn't you read Talys' defense of this? It's okay because they shouldn't fix the main problems with Marines anyway!

Whatever...tacticals are the single most boring and useless unit in the book now that scouts get WS/BS 4. Why take a company when the rest is so interesting?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
1. They're outclassed by other infantry. Looking "elite" is not the same AS actually being elite. You have people that whine over ATSKNF and grenades, but the former doesn't get used because they die quickly and the latter never gets used because you'd have to be a REALLY bad player to have a Tactical Marine charge your Wave Serpent.

2. You actually aren't serious are you? Scatterbikes put out more shots than Wave Serpents for the points and still have a ridiculous range.

3. So you're admitting that the codices are just poorly written. If you absolutely have to ally in something because the core army you WANT to play is that weak, there's a glaring problem in the codex writing. Eldar and Necrons do not have this problem, and they're singular armies. Space Marines are a singular army and SHOULD be able to hold their own. Except they can't.

4. This isn't tanks we're dealing with. We're dealing with Necron Warriors and Scatterbikes.

Well, briefly:

1. Tacticals are really no worse than Guardians. They both kinda suck. Thrown them on a bike/jetbike and give them a good weapon, and that's something different. ATSKNF is great as a freebie. Scouts are something fierce now. Devastators with grav have potential, I think.

2. 6e WS is harder to beat than 7e Scatterbikes, if that's mostly all your opponent is playing. You can barely move 1850 points of scatterbikes on a 6x4 table with any amount of meaningful terrain, for starters. On the other hand, serpent spam allows you to hug edges to prevent exposing rear facing, and the 60" ranges allows you too shoot/advance to keep your WS out of harms way (so that you never have to jink). Any way, both are extremely noobish lists that are really not good for anything other than stomping other new players and making them feel bad.

3. Well, I think there's pages of this thread where people would disagree. Space Marines in 7e codex will do just fine on their own. They might do BETTER with allies, but hey, if they didn't, why would you ever take allies? If you don't like allies, too bad. They're in the game.

4. As I said, you can't compare a tactical marine with a scatter bike. Compare a biker marine with a grav gun with a guardian on a jetbike with a scatter laser, and then we can talk. Or, if you want, compare a guardian with a tactical. Anyway, comparing 1 unit to 1 unit is a lost cause in 40k, because you have to compare 1 army to 1 army; and really, 1 potential alliance to 1 potential alliance (even including Allies of Convenience) if you're talking about competitive play.

Anyways, back to the relevant topic -- the new codex. Space Marines are going to be a top tier codex with a zillion different cool tricks. Personally, I suspect, it will be the most versatile in terms of being able to generate the number of viable builds in the "competent to competitive" range of lists.

 Red Corsair wrote:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
The payment is in terms of lack of unit flexibility. The less options something has, the cheaper it is.

This is an overused logical fallacy. People were going to take drop troops in pod lists for example, regardless of the new formation, especially devestators with the new grav canons. The free pods basically give them extra free units. in a Cad for example I'd need two troops before I got heavy or FA slots for drop assault squads and devastators and just the two pods for them comes to 70 pts. In the new formation I may need 3 troops but hey look, those two pods I would have taken anyway are worth those same 70 points i am now spending on a 3rd squad only now they also get a free pod as well, so I am netting a free drop pod and a 5 man troop squad, how is that inflexible?

CAD
70 + 35 + 70 + 35= 210 for 4 units

Demi
70 + 0 + 70 + 0 + 70 + 0 = 210 for 6 units

Both have obsec

It's definitely just free stuff to get you to purchase more.

Well, if you want the free transports, you have to buy 6 tactical squads.

So depending on what you want, it could be better, could be worse...

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I have a problem with this 'free transport' thing.

Transports have a value. They've been given points values. This formation just allows you to take more points than your limit. I know that Rhinos aren't all that, but even so, it's free stuff for no real downside that I can see.

Didn't you read Talys' defense of this? It's okay because they shouldn't fix the main problems with Marines anyway!

Free transports isn't as big a deal as everyone is making it out to be. Honestly, it's about the only thing GW could do in addition to improved Chapter Tactics without buffing Astartes to the level of movie marines.

Sure, you can MSU combat-squad your way into getting everyone a free soda can/METAL BOX. This isn't nearly as good an idea as it sounds. All that it means is that you're spending points that could have gone toward valuable upgrades and more durable/faster units on getting enough bodies to fill the formation requirement. And, lest we forget, only cowards and fools hide in METAL BOXES. Take away the box/soda can, and the MSU die like any 5-man Tac Squad.

It's the same idea as the new Skitarii/Mechanicus/Knights formation that gives you free relics and upgrades. Powerful on paper, but not a good idea on the tabletop.

And besides, free points/units/upgrades have been aroudn since 7th edition launched. It's called summoning Daemons. RAW everyone can do that!

 Colpicklejar wrote:
Whatever...tacticals are the single most boring and useless unit in the book now that scouts get WS/BS 4. Why take a company when the rest is so interesting?

Because tacticals are a 70 point unit that get a free 55 point vehicle -- making the 5 tactical marines 3 points per model. And they are the steal of a lifetime for that price! Or, to put it another way, for 90 points, you get 5 tactical marines with bolters and grenades plus a las/plas razorback or lascannon razoerback. There is nothing in any codex that can beat that for 90 points. Or add spare change at the end of your listbuidling and give a tactical a flamer/melta/plasma.

Also, don't discount the combat doctrines. That's a potential game winner.

MSU rhino/razorback parking lot spam is back.

It's like 5th edtion all over again, and vehicles is going to be en vogue again.

:shrug:

GW... you magnificant bastard. (obvious cash grab ploy)

I'm not sure if this has been covered or not because there are 92 pages worth of banter/information regarding the new codex. Are the formations requiring you to have a full squad of ten marines and can you upgrade a free razorback to include Las cannons? I can see some massive potential for abuse if that's the case.

 Inkubas wrote:
I'm not sure if this has been covered or not because there are 92 pages worth of banter/information regarding the new codex. Are the formations requiring you to have a full squad of ten marines and can you upgrade a free razorback to include Las cannons? I can see some massive potential for abuse if that's the case.

- No, you just need 5-man tactical squads (it has no minimum model restriction in the demi-company formation)
- Yes, you can upgrade them to include lascannons, but you need to pay for the 20 point upgrade (it specifically says so). You can take las + twinlink plasma for 20 points too, of course. If you want to buy lots of FW upgrades.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
MSU rhino/razorback parking lot spam is back.

It's like 5th edtion all over again, and vehicles is going to be en vogue again.

:shrug:

GW... you magnificant bastard. (obvious cash grab ploy)

That was exactly the first thing I thought hahaha


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@TheNewBlood - you get a lot more models and a lot more utility out of the SM free stuff than the Cult Mechanicus, plus, you have a lot more points to work with afterwards. I think it has much more potential.

The actual amount of overhead is 1 devastator squad 6 tactical squad (for which you get 7 razorbacks), if you take bikes and 1 devastator centurion squad. And that's very little, considering that you're only taking 70 point squads. You could even make the devastator squad good and give them a drop pod instead. And don't forget Objective Secured on everything, down to the chapter master, the centurions, razorbacks, drop pods... all of it. That's a point scoring machine -- plus doctrines work on all models in the company, too. Potentially 3 turns of rerolls for the deathstar (UM, Company, Calgar) is awesome.

Also, the benefit only comes with a full company, so 6 tactical squads, 4 devestators, 4 assault, a captain and a chaplain. That seems pretty restrictive to me

Edit: wow, should have hit refresh

Thank you. Personally, I don't mind having 6 Iron Hands razorbacks with TL-LC for 120. Throw in DA ally with a PWG for extra fun.

all this wonderful stuff is givng me grand hopes for my DAs

I do like the Scout buffs, since I planned on running more of them anyways, and as far as BA and SW feeling thrown under the bus... Join us in CHAOS!

Also those min point squads are going to not really do anything and your arguments imply that all points are created equal. They are not, otherwise we would see everything being used. points are not equal between units in efficiency nor in how they are priced. Rhinos compared to drop pods? No question which gets taken more, when was the last time anyone saw a razorback. I might take them at 35 points.

Razorbacks are not worth 55 points, tacticals are not worth 70. However here is no really good way to price them differently without opening up a whole lot of issues. At the base points you get 5 bolters and a heavy bolter whoopie who cares. Marines can't get the specialization in their basic squads that would make them worth taking. Now here is at least a little incentive to take those squads who are not worth it normally.

I have all the models for that formation and it is probably not going to be run very often. Most of the army is just sitting there doing next to nothing and if I spend points on it I am just throwing good points after bad if I want the units that get free transports.

Like Scouts really needed more of a bump, but the Cerberus Launcher on the Land Speeder Storm got a bump. It is Str4 AP6 now. It used to be Str2 AP-, so yay for that!

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Unfortunately they don't. Only non-vehicle models get Shrouded.

Unless you mean Stealth from NF, in which case they do. But so do Rhinos and they don't have CT.



Hmm... I just realised the new wording means only Dreads benefit from the IWND! part of the IH chapter tactics as no other vehicles are, RAW, IH vehicles

Oh FFS GW, you didn't shat on the Iron Hands enough last time?

 TheNewBlood wrote:

It's the same idea as the new Skitarii/Mechanicus/Knights formation that gives you free relics and upgrades. Powerful on paper, but not a good idea on the tabletop.

Except for that we have, you know, video evidence that the Skitarii/CultMech/Knight formation is pretty fantastic. Check Frontline's twitch channel. Giving the Skitarii and Knight Canticles is amazing on its own, nevermind the metric ton of free stuff you get.

Out of interest, how would you deal - without list tailoring mind you - with an MSU-Razorspam Battle Company list? You can't beat them on objectives because literally everything has ObSec and the force has enough units to put several on each objective; you likely can't table them with an all-comers list in the span of a normal game, so which tournament lists can deal with enough of those small units and Razorbacks to win on KPs(assuming the mission uses KPs), taking into account that such a list still has enough points after taking the mandatory stuff to include a pretty sickening amount of grav and other heavy/special weaponry.

Just like their first time with the daemon summoning army was evidence of how broken that mechanic was going to be and ruled the meta right?

 Leth wrote:
Just like their first time with the daemon summoning army was evidence of how broken that mechanic was going to be and ruled the meta right?

It's not the first time any more, but whatever. Don't suppose you'd care to take a pop at answering the question? How, specifically, would you deal with such a force, without tailoring your list?

 bullyboy wrote:
all this wonderful stuff is givng me grand hopes for my DAs

Forget it. We'll get crapped on again for sure. Ten bucks says DA scouts are WS/BS 3!

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Just like their first time with the daemon summoning army was evidence of how broken that mechanic was going to be and ruled the meta right?

It's not the first time any more, but whatever. Don't suppose you'd care to take a pop at answering the question? How, specifically, would you deal with such a force, without tailoring your list?

The entire army dies to str6+ ap4, there is quite a lot of that in many armies via auto cannons and the like, most of the fire power is on non-durable platforms. Unless they were podding in a alpha strike army would have a pretty easy time I would think. Too situational I would have to say but having played he skitarii and mechanicus myself I could see my stern guard army I am working on doing quite well.

Also the complete lack of OS in the army as well as limited mobility and speed means that they are going to have some issues.

Until we see a game where both sides know what the army can do and play it well I can't say how broken or not it is. It looks powerful but like the battle company I feel it is too restrictive in points

 Leth wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Just like their first time with the daemon summoning army was evidence of how broken that mechanic was going to be and ruled the meta right?

It's not the first time any more, but whatever. Don't suppose you'd care to take a pop at answering the question? How, specifically, would you deal with such a force, without tailoring your list?

The entire army dies to str6+ ap4, there is quite a lot of that in many armies via auto cannons and the like, most of the fire power is on non-durable platforms. Unless they were podding in a alpha strike army would have a pretty easy time I would think. Too situational I would have to say but having played he skitarii and mechanicus myself I could see my stern guard army I am working on doing quite well.

That wasn't the question, the question was how to deal with an MSU-Razorspam Battle Company, apologies if I wasn't clear.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Leth wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Just like their first time with the daemon summoning army was evidence of how broken that mechanic was going to be and ruled the meta right?

It's not the first time any more, but whatever. Don't suppose you'd care to take a pop at answering the question? How, specifically, would you deal with such a force, without tailoring your list?

The entire army dies to str6+ ap4, there is quite a lot of that in many armies via auto cannons and the like, most of the fire power is on non-durable platforms. Unless they were podding in a alpha strike army would have a pretty easy time I would think. Too situational I would have to say but having played he skitarii and mechanicus myself I could see my stern guard army I am working on doing quite well.

That wasn't the question, the question was how to deal with an MSU-Razorspam Battle Company, apologies if I wasn't clear.

I run a lot of assault so it's less of an issue for me lol, I would probably have to take advantage of the fact that they are not as mobile, nor do they do as much damage, try to go second and then Just focus on 2 or 3 objectives instead of the entire board and clear out what I can. If it's kill points I would just sit back and be thankful for the easy win.

I am actually looking into working a unit of vanguard into my army, they are pretty sweet, just take the first company formation and ally that in. That no disordered charge is huge for my army where I like to charge 3 or 4 units at a time

The best bet will be to dismount and destroy as many Razorbacks as possible, and clean up whatever bolter toting marines you can afterward.

but yeah, the key will be drawing better tactical cards or focusing on capturing 3 and denying him one.

So to confirm, giving VV dual lightning claws is only 2 meltabombs?

So someone double check my logic on this:

Strike force ultra requires a captain selection using terminator armor.

Chapter master is now just a stat/ability upgrade to captain, and thus doesn't change the actual unit selection. Thus still fulfilling the captain selection. (This part is debatable, but let's have some fun and assume that it's true.)

With the upgrade, the character will have orbital bombardment while being relentless. Assuming he is attached to a squad of terminators, this would be a "ranged weapon in the unit."
As long as the unit just arrived from deep strike, then this should fit all the criteria for an ordnance 2 bombardment.

Also as a sidenote, assault 2 heavy flamers in the squads!

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
So to confirm, giving VV dual lightning claws is only 2 meltabombs?

Yep, only costs 2 melta bombs.

niv-mizzet wrote:
So someone double check my logic on this:

Strike force ultra requires a captain selection using terminator armor.

Chapter master is now just a stat/ability upgrade to captain, and thus doesn't change the actual unit selection. Thus still fulfilling the captain selection. (This part is debatable, but let's have some fun and assume that it's true.)

With the upgrade, the character will have orbital bombardment while being relentless. Assuming he is attached to a squad of terminators, this would be a "ranged weapon in the unit."
As long as the unit just arrived from deep strike, then this should fit all the criteria for an ordnance 2 bombardment.

Also as a sidenote, assault 2 heavy flamers in the squads!

Wrong. The Captain becomes a Chapter Master. It has a different stat line, thus is no longer a Captain. All of the options in the sheet refer to Captains or Chapter Masters as separate entities.

I'm not entirely sure that's true. While yes, he's now a Chapter Master he still uses the Captain dataslate, which is what Formations refer to.

I mean, RAI you probably can't upgrade is the but RAW maybe you can. Again, not entirely sure.

EDIT: Yeah pretty sure you can upgrade the Captain to a Chapter Master otherwise you wouldn't be able to have a generic Chapter Master in a Gladius Strike Force Detachment at all as every option refers to a Captain.

Yep you go by unit name not model name for formations

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:
So someone double check my logic on this:

Strike force ultra requires a captain selection using terminator armor.

Chapter master is now just a stat/ability upgrade to captain, and thus doesn't change the actual unit selection. Thus still fulfilling the captain selection. (This part is debatable, but let's have some fun and assume that it's true.)

With the upgrade, the character will have orbital bombardment while being relentless. Assuming he is attached to a squad of terminators, this would be a "ranged weapon in the unit."
As long as the unit just arrived from deep strike, then this should fit all the criteria for an ordnance 2 bombardment.

Also as a sidenote, assault 2 heavy flamers in the squads!

Wrong. The Captain becomes a Chapter Master. It has a different stat line, thus is no longer a Captain. All of the options in the sheet refer to Captains or Chapter Masters as separate entities.

Eh I don't particularly care, but you haven't convinced me of that. I don't see a chapter master option in any formation anywhere. Just captains. I would have to see an official source to accept that the captain may not take a listed upgrade on his profile without any such restriction written.

Legally one could have a battleforged army using say, 1st company Strike Force with 5 units of terminators...and no HQ????

I could see it going either way. Doesn't really affect me since I use Pedro Kantor. Though I think it is pretty dumb that a generic Chapter Master can be part of a Battle Demi-Company, but a named one cannot.

General Hobbs wrote:


Legally one could have a battleforged army using say, 1st company Strike Force with 5 units of terminators...and no HQ????

Yes. Questions like this have literally been asked somewhere once every 2 minutes since 7h edition dropped.

Battle forged just means ALL your models are in detachments. Special detachments like fleshtearer's are detachments. Formations are also detachments. If you can fill the points you want with just formations, you can indeed have just them. You could take a dozen 10th company strike forces as your whole army for example.

niv-mizzet wrote:

General Hobbs wrote:


Legally one could have a battleforged army using say, 1st company Strike Force with 5 units of terminators...and no HQ????

Yes. Questions like this have literally been asked somewhere once every 2 minutes since 7h edition dropped.

Battle forged just means ALL your models are in detachments. Special detachments like fleshtearer's are detachments. Formations are also detachments. If you can fill the points you want with just formations, you can indeed have just them. You could take a dozen 10th company strike forces as your whole army for example.

Cool. I understand though some tournaments don't allow you to take multiples of the same formation????

General Hobbs wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:

General Hobbs wrote:


Legally one could have a battleforged army using say, 1st company Strike Force with 5 units of terminators...and no HQ????

Yes. Questions like this have literally been asked somewhere once every 2 minutes since 7h edition dropped.

Battle forged just means ALL your models are in detachments. Special detachments like fleshtearer's are detachments. Formations are also detachments. If you can fill the points you want with just formations, you can indeed have just them. You could take a dozen 10th company strike forces as your whole army for example.

Cool. I understand though some tournaments don't allow you to take multiples of the same formation????

True. Not only do many restrict you from duplicates of the same detachment, but most limit you to 2 or 3 detachments total. Still plenty possible to run just a single formation or two and hit a full point army.

By straight up book rules though, you can go nuts on detachments and duplicates of detachments and still be battle forged.

General Hobbs wrote:
Cool. I understand though some tournaments don't allow you to take multiples of the same formation????

Oh, I bet this will change now that it benefits Marines.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

General Hobbs wrote:
Cool. I understand though some tournaments don't allow you to take multiples of the same formation????

Oh, I bet this will change now that it benefits Marines.

In fairness, the largest single exception made at ITC was to allow multiple gc/superheavies ONLY for Imperial Knights

The whole "maximum number of detachments" thing has gone to pot ever since the Decurion, where there are detachments containing detachments/formations. The whole concept will need to be revisited in a more macro view, once most of the army books have gone to core-command-auxiliary.

The larger looming question in my mind is, come 8e, what will happen to CAD and AD. I think these will become more restrictive and receive fewer bonuses (or exist in some other form) while GW tries to push people towards the new detachment in a detachment force organization system.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I could see it going either way. Doesn't really affect me since I use Pedro Kantor. Though I think it is pretty dumb that a generic Chapter Master can be part of a Battle Demi-Company, but a named one cannot.

I'm pretty sure the Crimson Fists don't have much in the way of equipment, after the disaster on their home world.

On a further note, it feels like there may be more transfer sheets on the way? (See company banner bearer)

 angelofvengeance wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I could see it going either way. Doesn't really affect me since I use Pedro Kantor. Though I think it is pretty dumb that a generic Chapter Master can be part of a Battle Demi-Company, but a named one cannot.

I'm pretty sure the Crimson Fists don't have much in the way of equipment, after the disaster on their home world.

It is also why their Chapter Master also functions as their First Company Captain. So it would actually make sense for him to be able to be used as a Captain in the Battle Demi-Company.

Now if there were only a way to add Shrike in to a 5 unit VV army from 1st Company Sf without the 2 Troops tax.

Does anyone know if there are plans to release more upgrade kits for more founding chapters? Any rumours going around? Would love to see some kits for Imperial Fists, Raven Guard etc.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
So to confirm, giving VV dual lightning claws is only 2 meltabombs?

Yep, only costs 2 melta bombs.

This, this I love. Along with the RG shrouded/jump pack rules. Thanks for losing the scout, RG are NOT rhino rush marines.

News just in "GW sells more models than there are people on the Earth" haha nah, some interesting rules for running 3 of X- like the 3 raiders ignoring all results except for explode, yuck!

 whembly wrote:
MSU rhino/razorback parking lot spam is back.

It's like 5th edtion all over again, and vehicles is going to be en vogue again.

:shrug:

GW... you magnificant bastard. (obvious cash grab ploy)

It's almost like GW was expecting this, with gauss, Haywire, Scatter lasers, D-Weapons, and Heavy Grav cannons all being quite good at popping vehicles, especially lightly armored ones.

Hmm... another thought: I wonder how BT Righteous Zeal interacts with Helbretch's Sword of the High Marshals.

Righteous Zeal grants Rage if the unit suffers a single wound, and the Sword gives "a Charge bonus of D3 attacks instead of 1". Since Rage is worded similarly, do you choose which to use, or would one take precedence over the other? I'm guessing choose, but I'm unsure.



Sidenote: GW failing with Chronus's rules is still bugging the hell out of me. You make a Tank Commander who, RAW can't command his tank, though it still gets the benefits as if he was, and then when it's destroyed he teleports to it and disembarks from it... I don't expect much from GW but all they had to do was copy-paste his rules from the last dex...
If I hadn't seen the scans on 4chan I wouldn't have believed GW had screwed this up. Maybe that's my problem.

General Hobbs wrote:

Now if there were only a way to add Shrike in to a 5 unit VV army from 1st Company Sf without the 2 Troops tax.

Well, with Scouts being so much better, and fluffy for RG, that isn't much of a tax.

 Jangus wrote:
News just in "GW sells more models than there are people on the Earth" haha nah, some interesting rules for running 3 of X- like the 3 raiders ignoring all results except for explode, yuck!

I wonder what happens to the venerable upgrade... Seems like C:SM takes everything from C: DA. Makes me sad.

As rumoured in the upcoming WD:

Crimson Fists:

1. Warlord has Feel no Pain
2. Warlord and his Unit get Counterattack and Relentless(?) as long as in 3" of an objective
3. Warlord and his Unit get Hatred (Orks) and Preferred Enemy (Orks)
4. If your Warlord doesn't shoot and run, choose one MODEL within 12". The Model uses the Warlord ballistic skill
5. Eternal Warrior
6. Warlord and units within 12" gain Fearless.

Black Templars:

1. Add +1 to WS and A to Warlords Profile
2. If the Warlords Unit fail a moralcheck (within psychic or shooting phase), they instead run 2D6 towards the next enemy unit.
3. Warlord has Hatred and Prefered Enemy against Psykers
4. may reroll charge distance for Warlord and his unit.
5. Warlord has Fearless SR and rerolls to hit in challenges.
6. Warlord and all friendly units within 12" reroll all failed Morale, pinning or fearchecks.

Via lots of people, I read it thanks to a post by Timotheus - www.gamestrust.de has posted a few pages from the upcoming White Dwarf (next saturday)

There are CF and BT WD-only rules in it. I am at lunch break and unable to translate them now but hopefully others can do that

Edit: Ninjaed

Okay then. Here are the other photos of rhe article:



http://www.gamestrust.de/news,warhammer-40-000-space-marines-wd-bilder-cover-vorschau-librarius-formation,id43746.html

Maybe time for GW to bring back this bundle?

WindsOfFury wrote:
Maybe time for GW to bring back this bundle?

Needs another stalker.

Toss a speeder in there as well, so the WWs can be either part of the main formation, or their own suppression force.

WindsOfFury wrote:
Maybe time for GW to bring back this bundle?

Man if that had the built in discount like the old battle forces used to, and i could get a FLGS discount, I would find a way to sneak it past the wife!

The Painting Guide Sonf of Ultramar is 15.50 EUR for 120 pages (softcover). That's a fair price

Warhams-77 wrote:
The Painting Guide Sonf of Ultramar is 15.50 EUR for 120 pages (softcover). That's a fair price

Does it include Ultra successors as well?

Blood of Kittens has posted all' the snippets :http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2015/06/09/rumor-it-tired-reading-german-space-marine-rules/

General Hobbs wrote:


Blood of Kittens has posted all' the snippets :http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2015/06/09/rumor-it-tired-reading-german-space-marine-rules/

http://boards.4chan.org/tg/thread/40496270/so-lets-give-this-another-go-heres-to-hoping-this

Or you know, just read the English version and avoid his annoying site.

I also like the Librarian stuff. Found two discontinued(?) 4ed Librarians in a FNSLGS (Friendly Not so Local Gaming Store) and try to motivate driving 4 hours to get them as they aren't allowed to sell it over the internet due to stupid GW rules.

man that new libby is massive.

I am still extremely disappointed that they did not do a Bike Army Formation. They did one for 10th company, for 1st company.... but not for the company with bikes.

Its funny too because the 10th company could be technically a bike army - but a scout one.... boooooo

 Red Corsair wrote:

General Hobbs wrote:


Blood of Kittens has posted all' the snippets :http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2015/06/09/rumor-it-tired-reading-german-space-marine-rules/

http://boards.4chan.org/tg/thread/40496270/so-lets-give-this-another-go-heres-to-hoping-this

Or you know, just read the English version and avoid his annoying site.

Oh come on, you didn't even click the link Hobbs posted but whine how annoying it is, otherwise you would know that what BoK provides is, indeed, the English version and WAY easier to go through than the 4chan thread. And you know what else? BoK isn't banned from most company networks, that also helps a lot.

 SickSix wrote:

Warhams-77 wrote:
The Painting Guide Sonf of Ultramar is 15.50 EUR for 120 pages (softcover). That's a fair price

Does it include Ultra successors as well?

Dont know, sorry. I can only tell you what I know about SoU based on a screenshot I made and posted here on Saturday a few pages back. It is from the iBook Codex and an ad for the digital painting guide(s). Shown is a bundle in the top left called Sons of Ultramar and also its parts (Character model, tanks, etc) available separately - but unfortenately there was no successor painting guide amongst them. GW did this with Skitarii and CM in exactly the same way. So I guess the printed painting guide will be - like the digital content - for Ultramarines only and does not include successor chapters.

We should have more pics of the next White Dwarf soon enough though

Does anyone know if they are ever going to release or do a Bike Formation - so that My White Scars can be extra fluffy

fidel wrote:
Does anyone know if they are ever going to release or do a Bike Formation - so that My White Scars can be extra fluffy

There was talk about a Lancer Strike Force in the last WD. What it described was bikes, attack bikes, and land speeders instead of Tacticals, assaults, and Devastators. Said list sounds VERY much like the Ravenwing. What I would be willing to bet is that the Lancer Strike Force either comes in the DA codex and is usable by DA and C:SM or it will be in White Dwarf and be usable by DA and C:SM.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

fidel wrote:
Does anyone know if they are ever going to release or do a Bike Formation - so that My White Scars can be extra fluffy

There was talk about a Lancer Strike Force in the last WD. What it described was bikes, attack bikes, and land speeders instead of Tacticals, assaults, and Devastators. Said list sounds VERY much like the Ravenwing. What I would be willing to bet is that the Lancer Strike Force either comes in the DA codex and is usable by DA and C:SM or it will be in White Dwarf and be usable by DA and C:SM.

Well them tell them to hurry the hell up - I want my formation - been waiting too long

fidel wrote:
Does anyone know if they are ever going to release or do a Bike Formation - so that My White Scars can be extra fluffy

I can’t tell you about formations, but bike lists did just get a nice boost.

Any IC on a bike unlocks them as troops, with no minimum size. So you don’t get to play with the new formation structure, but can console yourself with librarians leading your army, and 103point 3 man troop-pick bike squads, w/ 2xgrav, c-grav on the sarge. Spam those in a CAD to your heart’s content.

fidel wrote:
Does anyone know if they are ever going to release or do a Bike Formation - so that My White Scars can be extra fluffy

yes, it's called Ravenwing

fidel wrote:
Does anyone know if they are ever going to release or do a Bike Formation - so that My White Scars can be extra fluffy

Now that command squads are taken as elite,
White scars got an unexpected nice boost,
Three man troop bikes are also pretty neat,
In a CAD the scars may well rule the roost.

Feel no pain bikers all toting the grav,
Kor'sarro on board allows them to scout,
Storm shields and hammers are awesome to have,
Three units like this are what its about.

With attack bikes staying sat their in fast,
Command in elite and bikers in troops,
More bike slots abound than in all times past,
Your army can be cool bikers in groups.

Overall I think the chapter is strong,
As Marines in a CAD you can't go wrong.

Wow, what a difference a couple of days makes. I was very underwhelmed with the initial set of leaks, but it turns out that those leaks left a ton of pertinent details out. I'd put this army up there with Necrons and Eldar (although slightly behind Eldar). Which is good because my regular opponents are Necrons and Eldar LOL!

Top picks for favorite changes:

Vehicle and Dread squadrons with nice bonuses
Scout stat-line upgrade for no extra charge (reliable snipers!)
Gladius detachment allows the use of all 3 doctrines (the tactical doctrine twice for the demi company even)
Tacs and Devs getting gravcannons
VV getting cheaper upgrades
IF Chapter Tactics finally apply to Sternguard
Objective Secure for the Demi Company
Pedro finally getting artificer armour!


I really hope that BA and SW codexes get updates via WD or FAQs for their dreads and scouts. Seems odd that two units all marines share would have vastly different stats.

Five points to change a bolt pistol or chainsword on Vanguard Vets to a Power Weapon or Lightning Claw? Neat!

Also, Scouts with WS/BS4, oh my.

@Drager Summed up well

Maybe more White Dwarf formations ahead? Or a future Webshop bundle? Buying 60 bikes will come with an exclusive formation sheet and some pots of white scars white paint? Ok the paint pots part is pretty unrealistic

RAW Space Marines can't ally with anyone as they are not listed in the Ally Matrix with the current Codex -name.

Also, using 2 Relic of the Armoury vehicles for Space Marines just became illegal, as Master of the Forge no longer exists. Third, all Space Marine entries from Forgeworld are illegal as they are entries in a Codex that no longer exists by name.

I hope GW puts up a FAQ, or the RAW people will love this.

Drager wrote:

fidel wrote:
Does anyone know if they are ever going to release or do a Bike Formation - so that My White Scars can be extra fluffy

Now that command squads are taken as elite,
White scars got an unexpected nice boost,
Three man troop bikes are also pretty neat,
In a CAD the scars may well rule the roost.

Feel no pain bikers all toting the grav,
Kor'sarro on board allows them to scout,
Storm shields and hammers are awesome to have,
Three units like this are what its about.

With attack bikes staying sat their in fast,
Command in elite and bikers in troops,
More bike slots abound than in all times past,
Your army can be cool bikers in groups.

Overall I think the chapter is strong,
As Marines in a CAD you can't go wrong.

Well played indeed

 SickSix wrote:

Warhams-77 wrote:
The Painting Guide Sonf of Ultramar is 15.50 EUR for 120 pages (softcover). That's a fair price

Does it include Ultra successors as well?

Probably not. The current paint guides they have up now have them. As well as a dozen or so other Successor chapters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ps> love that 2nd trait for Black Templars- fail a morale test? feth it. Let's kill the bastards! Chaaaaarge!!!

 Runic wrote:
RAW Space Marines can't ally with anyone as they are not listed in the Ally Matrix with the current Codex -name.

Also, using 2 Relic of the Armoury vehicles for Space Marines just became illegal, as Master of the Forge no longer exists. Third, all Space Marine entries from Forgeworld are illegal as they are entries in a Codex that no longer exists by name.

I hope GW puts up a FAQ, or the RAW people will love this.

As one of those RAW people, sorry, they didn't screw that up from a rules perspective, though stilll entertaining- they just rebranded all of the Marines with the adeptus header- they kept their old kinda' dated but recognizable name but got an official silly latin name on top of it, which makes it so they all take up another line on the web store. The best of both worlds?

Would it have killed GW to put an Iron Hands specific character in the new codex? Heck, they could just borrow one of the 50 from the Ultramarines?

Median Trace wrote:
Would it have killed GW to put an Iron Hands specific character in the new codex? Heck, the could just borrow one of the 50 from the Ultramarines?

Yes, yes it would have. What kind of monster are you to ask for GW's death solely for a single special character?

Just realized you can put your entire Librarius Conclave on bikes....Dope!

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Runic wrote:
RAW Space Marines can't ally with anyone as they are not listed in the Ally Matrix with the current Codex -name.

Also, using 2 Relic of the Armoury vehicles for Space Marines just became illegal, as Master of the Forge no longer exists. Third, all Space Marine entries from Forgeworld are illegal as they are entries in a Codex that no longer exists by name.

I hope GW puts up a FAQ, or the RAW people will love this.

As one of those RAW people, sorry, they didn't screw that up from a rules perspective, though stilll entertaining- they just rebranded all of the Marines with the adeptus header- they kept their old kinda' dated but recognizable name but got an official silly latin name on top of it, which makes it so they all take up another line on the web store. The best of both worlds?

Hate to break it to you, but they've been called Adeptus Astartes for a good long time lol. They officially added the name to protect their IP.

 Runic wrote:
RAW Space Marines can't ally with anyone as they are not listed in the Ally Matrix with the current Codex -name.

Also, using 2 Relic of the Armoury vehicles for Space Marines just became illegal, as Master of the Forge no longer exists. Third, all Space Marine entries from Forgeworld are illegal as they are entries in a Codex that no longer exists by name.

I hope GW puts up a FAQ, or the RAW people will love this.

this will only apply if you play with TFG . People will mind the Motf, but as long as allies and forgeworld entries ...seriously

 Kalhas wrote:
This will only apply if you play with TFG . People will mind the Motf, but as long as allies and forgeworld entries ...seriously

There be the path of madness:
Who knows, they may slip a little allies matrix in the back like with the other codex's.

 SickSix wrote:

Warhams-77 wrote:
The Painting Guide Sonf of Ultramar is 15.50 EUR for 120 pages (softcover). That's a fair price

Does it include Ultra successors as well?

As long as they're painted blue?

 whembly wrote:
MSU rhino/razorback parking lot spam is back.

It's like 5th edtion all over again, and vehicles is going to be en vogue again.

:shrug:

Don't be ridiculous. In 5th edition, you have to pay for those parking spots. Now it's free parking!

 warboss wrote:

 whembly wrote:
MSU rhino/razorback parking lot spam is back.

It's like 5th edtion all over again, and vehicles is going to be en vogue again.

:shrug:

Don't be ridiculous. In 5th edition, you have to pay for those parking spots. Now it's free parking!

It's a very powerful formation for sure, but how many marine players actually own that many rhinos/razorbacks or be willing to pay for the models?

I just read the Land Raider formation buffs. They are better than I thought.

Armored Behemoth allows you to ignore damage up to Immobilized (so including Crew Shaken, Stunned, Weapon Destroyed, Immobilized) "as long as they are within 6" of at least one other model from this formation when the roll is made". So you can lose 1 tank, and still have ignore damage... that is pretty damn good. Maybe buff 2 of them to Invisible, hide a third behind the first 2?

Even the Mightest Shall Fall, gives rerolls to wound or armor penetration to SH, GC, and buildings with Mighty Bulkwark.

It's still 750 points, though :(

Maybe I'll try it just so I can play some land raiders It would have been so much better if the formation was 2-3 instead of 3.

The Whirlwind+ Land speeder formation is cool, too. Infinite range and reroll to hits sounds awesome. Maybe I can convince someone to play on a table that's 20' long? But 3 whirlwinds in a unit vs 1 target every round with wound rerolls sounds way overkill.

 Hoyt wrote:

 warboss wrote:

 whembly wrote:
MSU rhino/razorback parking lot spam is back.

It's like 5th edtion all over again, and vehicles is going to be en vogue again.

:shrug:

Don't be ridiculous. In 5th edition, you have to pay for those parking spots. Now it's free parking!

It's a very powerful formation for sure, but how many marine players actually own that many rhinos/razorbacks or be willing to pay for the models?

Judging from the old days of 'ard boyz, there is no shortage of players that will either bump up their existing motor pool or create a new one. Players that ran MEQ MSU in 5th or rhino rush in 3rd already have the vehicles for the most part. Same thing for folks who already owned a drop pod list. Lists heavy with those exact choices have been in and out of vogue for years but the only difference was that you actually had to pay for them in the past.. not so any more thanks to the glories of 7e!

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Runic wrote:
RAW Space Marines can't ally with anyone as they are not listed in the Ally Matrix with the current Codex -name.

Also, using 2 Relic of the Armoury vehicles for Space Marines just became illegal, as Master of the Forge no longer exists. Third, all Space Marine entries from Forgeworld are illegal as they are entries in a Codex that no longer exists by name.

I hope GW puts up a FAQ, or the RAW people will love this.

As one of those RAW people, sorry, they didn't screw that up from a rules perspective, though stilll entertaining- they just rebranded all of the Marines with the adeptus header- they kept their old kinda' dated but recognizable name but got an official silly latin name on top of it, which makes it so they all take up another line on the web store. The best of both worlds?

Well, RAW an IA entry that is to be used with Codex: Space Marines cannot be used with a Codex that has a different name?

 Hoyt wrote:

 warboss wrote:

 whembly wrote:
MSU rhino/razorback parking lot spam is back.

It's like 5th edtion all over again, and vehicles is going to be en vogue again.

:shrug:

Don't be ridiculous. In 5th edition, you have to pay for those parking spots. Now it's free parking!

It's a very powerful formation for sure, but how many marine players actually own that many rhinos/razorbacks or be willing to pay for the models?

You can buy used Rhino's on Ebay for 10 dollars all day. Snag a couple turret bits, and you're good to go.

 warboss wrote:
Judging from the old days of 'ard boyz, there is no shortage of players that will either bump up their existing motor pool or create a new one. Players that ran MEQ MSU in 5th or rhino rush in 3rd already have the vehicles for the most part. Same thing for folks who already owned a drop pod list. Lists heavy with those exact choices have been in and out of vogue for years but the only difference was that you actually had to pay for them in the past.. not so any more thanks to the glories of 7e!

I just ditched 5 rhinos/rb (the 2nd edition kind) that were left over from 3rd-5th. Looks like I should have waited.

Given that there are no formations in the book focusing on Fast Attack, I kinda expect a White Scars or Raven Guard supplement next.

 Runic wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Runic wrote:
RAW Space Marines can't ally with anyone as they are not listed in the Ally Matrix with the current Codex -name.

Also, using 2 Relic of the Armoury vehicles for Space Marines just became illegal, as Master of the Forge no longer exists. Third, all Space Marine entries from Forgeworld are illegal as they are entries in a Codex that no longer exists by name.

I hope GW puts up a FAQ, or the RAW people will love this.

As one of those RAW people, sorry, they didn't screw that up from a rules perspective, though stilll entertaining- they just rebranded all of the Marines with the adeptus header- they kept their old kinda' dated but recognizable name but got an official silly latin name on top of it, which makes it so they all take up another line on the web store. The best of both worlds?

Well, RAW an IA entry that is to be used with Codex: Space Marines cannot be used with a Codex that has a different name?

Pg 679-680 describes the use of symbols in army lists to determine what faction something belongs to. Each entry in the new book has the proper space marine symbol at the top of the page, so no problems with allies.

 pretre wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Judging from the old days of 'ard boyz, there is no shortage of players that will either bump up their existing motor pool or create a new one. Players that ran MEQ MSU in 5th or rhino rush in 3rd already have the vehicles for the most part. Same thing for folks who already owned a drop pod list. Lists heavy with those exact choices have been in and out of vogue for years but the only difference was that you actually had to pay for them in the past.. not so any more thanks to the glories of 7e!

I just ditched 5 rhinos/rb (the 2nd edition kind) that were left over from 3rd-5th. Looks like I should have waited.

No you did the right thing, that is how this formation is meant to be run. With all new Razorback kits bought straight from GW!

 pretre wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Judging from the old days of 'ard boyz, there is no shortage of players that will either bump up their existing motor pool or create a new one. Players that ran MEQ MSU in 5th or rhino rush in 3rd already have the vehicles for the most part. Same thing for folks who already owned a drop pod list. Lists heavy with those exact choices have been in and out of vogue for years but the only difference was that you actually had to pay for them in the past.. not so any more thanks to the glories of 7e!

I just ditched 5 rhinos/rb (the 2nd edition kind) that were left over from 3rd-5th. Looks like I should have waited.

Yup. I'm in the same boat you were with my original marine force that was a rhino rush army back in the day (not necessarily because of the power back then but because I like mounted forces.. my tau, eldar, and deathwing force are the same). I think I have 3 or 4 rhinos, a razor back, and a whirlwind/razorback combo mag kit that can suddenly become free if I ever get the urge to actually play a game in the current mess of a meta.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 flukezor wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Judging from the old days of 'ard boyz, there is no shortage of players that will either bump up their existing motor pool or create a new one. Players that ran MEQ MSU in 5th or rhino rush in 3rd already have the vehicles for the most part. Same thing for folks who already owned a drop pod list. Lists heavy with those exact choices have been in and out of vogue for years but the only difference was that you actually had to pay for them in the past.. not so any more thanks to the glories of 7e!

I just ditched 5 rhinos/rb (the 2nd edition kind) that were left over from 3rd-5th. Looks like I should have waited.

No you did the right thing, that is how this formation is meant to be run. With all new Razorback kits bought straight from GW!

Or dreamforge hanomags apcs. Just sayin'...

 Maelstrom808 wrote:

 Runic wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Runic wrote:
RAW Space Marines can't ally with anyone as they are not listed in the Ally Matrix with the current Codex -name.

Also, using 2 Relic of the Armoury vehicles for Space Marines just became illegal, as Master of the Forge no longer exists. Third, all Space Marine entries from Forgeworld are illegal as they are entries in a Codex that no longer exists by name.

I hope GW puts up a FAQ, or the RAW people will love this.

As one of those RAW people, sorry, they didn't screw that up from a rules perspective, though stilll entertaining- they just rebranded all of the Marines with the adeptus header- they kept their old kinda' dated but recognizable name but got an official silly latin name on top of it, which makes it so they all take up another line on the web store. The best of both worlds?

Well, RAW an IA entry that is to be used with Codex: Space Marines cannot be used with a Codex that has a different name?

Pg 679-680 describes the use of symbols in army lists to determine what faction something belongs to. Each entry in the new book has the proper space marine symbol at the top of the page, so no problems with allies.

Page what now? Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if the big book had almost 700 pages, this being Warhammer 40,000 and all. I just have the mini version.

 Runic wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Runic wrote:
RAW Space Marines can't ally with anyone as they are not listed in the Ally Matrix with the current Codex -name.

Also, using 2 Relic of the Armoury vehicles for Space Marines just became illegal, as Master of the Forge no longer exists. Third, all Space Marine entries from Forgeworld are illegal as they are entries in a Codex that no longer exists by name.

I hope GW puts up a FAQ, or the RAW people will love this.

As one of those RAW people, sorry, they didn't screw that up from a rules perspective, though stilll entertaining- they just rebranded all of the Marines with the adeptus header- they kept their old kinda' dated but recognizable name but got an official silly latin name on top of it, which makes it so they all take up another line on the web store. The best of both worlds?

Well, RAW an IA entry that is to be used with Codex: Space Marines cannot be used with a Codex that has a different name?

No, its not about the codex name, its about unit factions. The new codex might have a new name but the units within it will still use the same old "space marines" faction just like units in codex: craftworlds still use the eldar faction. The IA units also have the "space marines" faction. In a detachment where the only restriction is "All units in this detachment must have the same faction or have no faction." or "All units in this detachment must have the Space Marines faction or have no faction." both units from IA with the "space marines" faction and units from codex: Adeptus Astartes with the "space marines" would be perfectly legal. The only potential problem I see is if there are detachments/formations with restrictions like the daemonkin codex that read "All units in this detachment must come from Codex: Adeptus Astartes: Space Marines."

Edit: Just saw a leak of the gladius strike force detachment. It only allows for units in the new codex, so no FW units can be used in it at all, but FW units will still be just fine in a CAD.

Something that just struck me as odd- I am surprised that GW has left options for units that dont come in the kits. Like the Razorback's TL AC or TL HF. Or the Dread's HF or TL HB.

That seems counter to what they have been doing lately with bringing a units rules inline with it's kit or vice versa.

Oh man command squads are actually Elites.... white scar list all day long

 Talys wrote:
I just read the Land Raider formation buffs. They are better than I thought.

Armored Behemoth allows you to ignore damage up to Immobilized (so including Crew Shaken, Stunned, Weapon Destroyed, Immobilized) "as long as they are within 6" of at least one other model from this formation when the roll is made". So you can lose 1 tank, and still have ignore damage... that is pretty damn good. Maybe buff 2 of them to Invisible, hide a third behind the first 2?

Even the Mightest Shall Fall, gives rerolls to wound or armor penetration to SH, GC, and buildings with Mighty Bulkwark.

My dream might come true... 3 Deathwing Land Raiders, 1 Redeemer and 2 Crusaders, carrying 1 Squad of DWK, 1 Squad of Deathwing Terminators and 1 DWCS with Belial into battle, joined by another Dreadnought or 2 dropping in in Pods.

 SickSix wrote:
Something that just struck me as odd- I am surprised that GW has left options for units that dont come in the kits. Like the Razorback's TL AC or TL HF. Or the Dread's HF or TL HB.

That seems counter to what they have been doing lately with bringing a units rules inline with it's kit or vice versa.

Seems to be just preference for SM.

 SickSix wrote:
Something that just struck me as odd- I am surprised that GW has left options for units that dont come in the kits. Like the Razorback's TL AC or TL HF. Or the Dread's HF or TL HB.

That seems counter to what they have been doing lately with bringing a units rules inline with it's kit or vice versa.

...except that FW makes all of those except the TL HF, I believe. Similar to how the TL AC dreads got in the main books.

 SickSix wrote:
Something that just struck me as odd- I am surprised that GW has left options for units that dont come in the kits. Like the Razorback's TL AC or TL HF. Or the Dread's HF or TL HB.

That seems counter to what they have been doing lately with bringing a units rules inline with it's kit or vice versa.

It probably has something to do with the interchangeability of marine kits. Being able to buy a razorback kit and use the left over guns from that storm raven you bought to get your TL AC turret translates to one more reason to spend money on another kit.

 Kalhas wrote:

 Runic wrote:
RAW Space Marines can't ally with anyone as they are not listed in the Ally Matrix with the current Codex -name.

Also, using 2 Relic of the Armoury vehicles for Space Marines just became illegal, as Master of the Forge no longer exists. Third, all Space Marine entries from Forgeworld are illegal as they are entries in a Codex that no longer exists by name.

I hope GW puts up a FAQ, or the RAW people will love this.

this will only apply if you play with TFG . People will mind the Motf, but as long as allies and forgeworld entries ...seriously

yet, TFG were not labeled when Iyanden became "invalidated" when Codex Eldar changed to Codex Eldar Craftworlds. I don't see a real difference here. The codex name has changed, therefore it's not the same.

 Runic wrote:

 Maelstrom808 wrote:

 Runic wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Runic wrote:
RAW Space Marines can't ally with anyone as they are not listed in the Ally Matrix with the current Codex -name.

Also, using 2 Relic of the Armoury vehicles for Space Marines just became illegal, as Master of the Forge no longer exists. Third, all Space Marine entries from Forgeworld are illegal as they are entries in a Codex that no longer exists by name.

I hope GW puts up a FAQ, or the RAW people will love this.

As one of those RAW people, sorry, they didn't screw that up from a rules perspective, though stilll entertaining- they just rebranded all of the Marines with the adeptus header- they kept their old kinda' dated but recognizable name but got an official silly latin name on top of it, which makes it so they all take up another line on the web store. The best of both worlds?

Well, RAW an IA entry that is to be used with Codex: Space Marines cannot be used with a Codex that has a different name?

Pg 679-680 describes the use of symbols in army lists to determine what faction something belongs to. Each entry in the new book has the proper space marine symbol at the top of the page, so no problems with allies.

Page what now? Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if the big book had almost 700 pages, this being Warhammer 40,000 and all. I just have the mini version.

Yeah i'm going off of the digital version of the full book. It's in thebsection for choosing your army under "Factions".

Median Trace wrote:
Would it have killed GW to put an Iron Hands specific character in the new codex? Heck, they could just borrow one of the 50 from the Ultramarines?

They couldn't even manage to include us without nerfing our Chapter Tactics(only Dreadnoughts meet the new definition of an "Iron Hands vehicle", since only Dreadnoughts get the Chapter Tactics rule, and so only Dreadnoughts get IWND).

Give us a new character?

Don't know if it has been asked already, but may i take 2 demi comp from 2 different chapters and still get free transport for everybody?

 Javorra wrote:
Don't know if it has been asked already, but may i take 2 demi comp from 2 different chapters and still get free transport for everybody?

nope, they have to be from the same chapter.

 Javorra wrote:
Don't know if it has been asked already, but may i take 2 demi comp from 2 different chapters and still get free transport for everybody?

Nope:

To get the free transports, the Demi Companies need to be part of the same Gladius Strike Force. All formations in a Gladius Strike Force need to be the same Chapter.

Black templars!!

Found a link where someone has linked and gotten statement about black templars.

via Steve the Warboss on Faeit 212

"Black Templars are gone (from Codex: Space Marines)"
Here is a little clarifications for my last Codex content rumors:

Black Templars are not "gone" in the Fluff and from the Universe, they will be only removed from the Codex Space Marines. Templars will become soon or later a own Codex again. For this Time you can use the current codex



They will still be in the new codex untill then.

Yeah, Steve the Warboss is notoriously bad and makes up most of his leaks.

Picture looks like its from Ipad codex.

 akkados wrote:
Black templars!!

Found a link where someone has linked and gotten statement about black templars.

via Steve the Warboss on Faeit 212

"Black Templars are gone (from Codex: Space Marines)"
Here is a little clarifications for my last Codex content rumors:

Black Templars are not "gone" in the Fluff and from the Universe, they will be only removed from the Codex Space Marines. Templars will become soon or later a own Codex again. For this Time you can use the current codex

Boy, you are late to the game! The entire book is already leaked - and Black Templars got significant buffs across the board. Scouts got better - making Initiates stronger. Grimaldus is awesome. Emperor's Champion got buffed...

Now I'm going to play like everything functions with the new Codex just like the old one, but just ouf of interest since you say it's about factions:

The Sicaran Battle Tank entry from IA2 2nd Ed strictly says:

A relic Sicaran Battle Tank is a Heavy Support choice for a Codex: Space Marines, Codex: Blood Angels, Codex: Dark Angels or Codex: Space Wolves army.

"Codex: Space Marines" - is now outdated, and the new book has a different name. It doesn't say anything about being included in an army of the Faction: Space Marines/IoM/whatever, it says Codex: Space Marines and nothing more. I just want to understand this logic on a principal level because it's going to keep coming with new codices I'm sure.

The Iyanden supplement book, I heard, is not legal in GW's own tournaments/events because of the name change to the new Eldar Codex. I'd see a similiar logic applying here.... and yeah, especially Clan Raukaan and Sentinels of Terra.

Luckily, people can play how they want and I'm sure your average TO has the brain to allow the supplements to function as it would be ridicilous to invalidate them already.

On the Iron Hands thing, it does also say that "all models drawn from a given chapter benefit from the chapter's chapter tactics rules"

Requizen wrote:
Yeah, Steve the Warboss is notoriously bad and makes up most of his leaks.

He just picked up 21 FALSE from the SM codex.

 pretre wrote:

Requizen wrote:
Yeah, Steve the Warboss is notoriously bad and makes up most of his leaks.

He just picked up 21 FALSE from the SM codex.

I'm pretty sure my cats drop a more accurate load of rumors in their box everyday than Steve the Warboss puts up...

Experiment 626 wrote:

 pretre wrote:

Requizen wrote:
Yeah, Steve the Warboss is notoriously bad and makes up most of his leaks.

He just picked up 21 FALSE from the SM codex.

I'm pretty sure my cats drop a more accurate load of rumors in their box everyday than Steve the Warboss puts up...

Do your cats hit the box at least 30% of the time? They're doing better than Steve.

Why is that schlub even quoted anymore?

Oh yeah, Natkfa clickbait.

Well, it's more accurately BOLS clickbait, everything just gets repeated on Natkfa.

Blimey, I made up a 1000 pts White Scars list and it looked a little big so I went to check my old lists. The exact same models cost 1300 pts in 4th edition. And didn't even have Jink.

jSewell wrote:
On the Iron Hands thing, it does also say that "all models drawn from a given chapter benefit from the chapter's chapter tactics rules"

Yes, and as I said, it defines exactly what "models drawn from a given chapter" are - units with Chapter Tactics from that chapter.



The Iron Hands Chapter Tactic is a rule, it refers to "Iron Hands characters and vehicles", and as the image shows the overall Chapter Tactics rules state that "in all cases" when a rule"refer(s) to a model, character, or unit by its chapter", it is referring to "a model, character, or unit with the Chapter Tactics rule that is drawn from the given chapter". I don't see how it's possible to read that in a way that allows the Iron Hands CT to override the rules that define how CTs work not one page beforehand.

My raven guard list got a pretty decent boost. I usually run

Chappy
1 x 6-8 man VV
1 x 6 Sterguard in a pod
3 x 5 man TAC squads
2 x 5 sniper scout
1 x 5 ccw scout in speeder
1 x 10 man assault squad
1 x 6 man Dev squad.

Not only do I love that EVERYONE gets shrouded now. But also that is a gladius with 10th company task force. So I get all the extra special rules. I just need another squad for a 1st company task force.

Should I go sternguard vanguard or some termies maybe?

Also is there anyway to get just a tfc in the list with no tanks?

Just thought about something. RG scouts with cloaks from a task force have a 3+ cover in open ground

 Yodhrin wrote:

jSewell wrote:
On the Iron Hands thing, it does also say that "all models drawn from a given chapter benefit from the chapter's chapter tactics rules"

Yes, and as I said, it defines exactly what "models drawn from a given chapter" are - units with Chapter Tactics from that chapter.



The Iron Hands Chapter Tactic is a rule, it refers to "Iron Hands characters and vehicles", and as the image shows the overall Chapter Tactics rules state that "in all cases" when a rule"refer(s) to a model, character, or unit by its chapter", it is referring to "a model, character, or unit with the Chapter Tactics rule that is drawn from the given chapter". I don't see how it's possible to read that in a way that allows the Iron Hands CT to override the rules that define how CTs work not one page beforehand.

Agreed. I draw the same conclusion. Mind you, I seriously doubt that it is RAI, the RAW seems pretty darn clear.... and stupid.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
Well, it's more accurately BOLS clickbait, everything just gets repeated on Natkfa.

Steve often posts to Natfka first.

 Runic wrote:
...The Sicaran Battle Tank entry from IA2 2nd Ed strictly says:
A relic Sicaran Battle Tank is a Heavy Support choice for a Codex: Space Marines, Codex: Blood Angels, Codex: Dark Angels or Codex: Space Wolves army...

With the way 7th edition list building works the restriction on what unit can be in a detachment comes from the detachment itself. Datasheets (unit entries) would have to require they have a special rule prohibiting their use in a detachment they would otherwise allowed in. Now Forgeforld wrote that book for 6th edition and shockingly has failed to provide an update for 7th. The line you quoted had a purpose in 6th edition but that purpose has changed. Either that line does nothing, and the units in IA2 2E have either no faction or the IA2 faction, or that line means the battle tank has the space marine, blood angels, dark angels, or space wolves faction. Since its ambiguous we have to look at what the author intended. The 1st option would mean that any army could include these battle tanks in a CAD, including tau or tyranid. Clearly not the intent so we look at the 2nd option. This one would prevent any battle forged army from ever taking this unit, also clearly not the intent. That leaves us with the 3rd option where only the 4 listed factions could include the battle tank in a CAD. Bingo we have a winner.

This is a problem caused by the fact that forgeworld is not GW design studios. They are two different groups making rules for the same game. Forgeworld as a result is almost a full year behind on updating thier style of rules. Even IA13, published months after the launch of 7th edition, is still written like a 6th edition codex.

jimkurtjimmy wrote:
My raven guard list got a pretty decent boost. I usually run

Chappy
1 x 6-8 man VV
1 x 6 Sterguard in a pod
3 x 5 man TAC squads
2 x 5 sniper scout
1 x 5 ccw scout in speeder
1 x 10 man assault squad
1 x 6 man Dev squad.

Not only do I love that EVERYONE gets shrouded now. But also that is a gladius with 10th company task force. So I get all the extra special rules. I just need another squad for a 1st company task force.

Should I go sternguard vanguard or some termies maybe?

Also is there anyway to get just a tfc in the list with no tanks?

Just thought about something. RG scouts with cloaks from a task force have a 3+ cover in open ground

I'm seriously considering creating a Raven Guard Scout army. Depending on how the Raptors CT are taken, I possibly will go with them instead, but yeah. Scout spam with turn 1 4+ in Cover, 3+ if they haven't moved and are part of the formation, 2+ in open ground on turn 1 if it's Night Fight... it seems pretty cool. Camping Scouts from the 10th Company Formation who sit in cover and don't move have a 3+ in forest, 2+ in ruins. All the time. And only down 1 if they move.

I'm really interested in making something like that.

 pretre wrote:

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
Well, it's more accurately BOLS clickbait, everything just gets repeated on Natkfa.

Steve often posts to Natfka first.

Oh, whoops, I never noticed he had posting rights on Faeit. I never ever go to BOLS (the only worse 40k site is Spikey Bitz), so I didn't know.

So... Everything in the Demi/Full company gets obsec, not just the tacticals.

My Drop List with 2 Demis has 26 Obsec Units, 12 of which are pods.

 pretre wrote:
So... Everything in the Demi/Full company gets obsec, not just the tacticals.

My Drop List with 2 Demis has 26 Obsec Units, 12 of which are pods.

By the way, which means you can take the Dev Cents instead of the regular Devs along with a Land Raider dedicated transport... and that land raider would have obsec!

jSewell wrote:

 pretre wrote:
So... Everything in the Demi/Full company gets obsec, not just the tacticals.

My Drop List with 2 Demis has 26 Obsec Units, 12 of which are pods.

By the way, which means you can take the Dev Cents instead of the regular Devs along with a Land Raider dedicated transport... and that land raider would have obsec!

But the Land Raider would cost you points, the rule stipulates specifically Rhinos, Razorbacks, and Drop Pods. But yeah, ObSec LRs would be pretty amusing!

 pretre wrote:
So... Everything in the Demi/Full company gets obsec, not just the tacticals.

My Drop List with 2 Demis has 26 Obsec Units, 12 of which are pods.

Could you post the list again? I'm intrigued.

Requizen wrote:

jSewell wrote:

 pretre wrote:
So... Everything in the Demi/Full company gets obsec, not just the tacticals.

My Drop List with 2 Demis has 26 Obsec Units, 12 of which are pods.

By the way, which means you can take the Dev Cents instead of the regular Devs along with a Land Raider dedicated transport... and that land raider would have obsec!

But the Land Raider would cost you points, the rule stipulates specifically Rhinos, Razorbacks, and Drop Pods. But yeah, ObSec LRs would be pretty amusing!

It would, but you're only giving up 55 points out of a bunch of free points already. And that's assuming TOs let you double up on the demi-company anyways

rollawaythestone wrote:

 akkados wrote:
Black templars!!

Found a link where someone has linked and gotten statement about black templars.

via Steve the Warboss on Faeit 212

"Black Templars are gone (from Codex: Space Marines)"
Here is a little clarifications for my last Codex content rumors:

Black Templars are not "gone" in the Fluff and from the Universe, they will be only removed from the Codex Space Marines. Templars will become soon or later a own Codex again. For this Time you can use the current codex

Boy, you are late to the game! The entire book is already leaked - and Black Templars got significant buffs across the board. Scouts got better - making Initiates stronger. Grimaldus is awesome. Emperor's Champion got buffed...

Oh sorry my bad. you got any link for me??

 akkados wrote:

rollawaythestone wrote:

 akkados wrote:
Black templars!!

Found a link where someone has linked and gotten statement about black templars.

via Steve the Warboss on Faeit 212

"Black Templars are gone (from Codex: Space Marines)"
Here is a little clarifications for my last Codex content rumors:

Black Templars are not "gone" in the Fluff and from the Universe, they will be only removed from the Codex Space Marines. Templars will become soon or later a own Codex again. For this Time you can use the current codex

Boy, you are late to the game! The entire book is already leaked - and Black Templars got significant buffs across the board. Scouts got better - making Initiates stronger. Grimaldus is awesome. Emperor's Champion got buffed...

Oh sorry my bad. you got any link for me??

Linky link

WARNING: 4CHAN - CRASS LANGUAGE PRESENT

1000 edits because of quotes messing up....

 docdoom77 wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

jSewell wrote:
On the Iron Hands thing, it does also say that "all models drawn from a given chapter benefit from the chapter's chapter tactics rules"

Yes, and as I said, it defines exactly what "models drawn from a given chapter" are - units with Chapter Tactics from that chapter.



The Iron Hands Chapter Tactic is a rule, it refers to "Iron Hands characters and vehicles", and as the image shows the overall Chapter Tactics rules state that "in all cases" when a rule"refer(s) to a model, character, or unit by its chapter", it is referring to "a model, character, or unit with the Chapter Tactics rule that is drawn from the given chapter". I don't see how it's possible to read that in a way that allows the Iron Hands CT to override the rules that define how CTs work not one page beforehand.

Agreed. I draw the same conclusion. Mind you, I seriously doubt that it is RAI, the RAW seems pretty darn clear.... and stupid.

Interesting. Does this mean that Iron hands just got the biggest stealth nerf ever with only dreads having IWND? I guess that thought that having all those free transports with the rule would be too broken? Between that and the removal of the master of the forge, meaning I can no longer take more than one "relic" vehicle my whole army just got entirely broken and shafted. /rerolling Crimson Fists

A few pages back there was a pic of chapter specific warlord traits...is that just fanricated? Which chapters are getting those if it's true?

 Jimsolo wrote:
A few pages back there was a pic of chapter specific warlord traits...is that just fanricated? Which chapters are getting those if it's true?

It was WD supposedly.

no clue who will be in it.

Killermonkey wrote:


Interesting. Does this mean that Iron hands just got the biggest stealth nerf ever with only dreads having IWND? I guess that thought that having all those free transports with the rule would be too broken? Between that and the removal of the master of the forge, meaning I can no longer take more than one "relic" vehicle my whole army just got entirely broken and shafted. /rerolling Crimson Fists

If it was intentional, they would have put "Iron Hands Dreadnoughts" but they put "VEHICLES"...

I don't care what little rule debacle is on the previous page, it says "Iron Hands vehicles" and the vehicles in an Iron Hands detachment are Iron Hands vehicles

jSewell wrote:

Killermonkey wrote:


Interesting. Does this mean that Iron hands just got the biggest stealth nerf ever with only dreads having IWND? I guess that thought that having all those free transports with the rule would be too broken? Between that and the removal of the master of the forge, meaning I can no longer take more than one "relic" vehicle my whole army just got entirely broken and shafted. /rerolling Crimson Fists

If it was intentional, they would have put "Iron Hands Dreadnoughts" but they put "VEHICLES"...

I don't care what little rule debacle is on the previous page, it says "Iron Hands vehicles" and the vehicles in an Iron Hands detachment are Iron Hands vehicles

Regardless of that besides landraiders who ever really used that rule?

ITs always been for the benefit of the smash masters with eternal warriors.

jSewell wrote:

Killermonkey wrote:


Interesting. Does this mean that Iron hands just got the biggest stealth nerf ever with only dreads having IWND? I guess that thought that having all those free transports with the rule would be too broken? Between that and the removal of the master of the forge, meaning I can no longer take more than one "relic" vehicle my whole army just got entirely broken and shafted. /rerolling Crimson Fists

If it was intentional, they would have put "Iron Hands Dreadnoughts" but they put "VEHICLES"...

I don't care what little rule debacle is on the previous page, it says "Iron Hands vehicles" and the vehicles in an Iron Hands detachment are Iron Hands vehicles

Yes, just like any unit that is in an Ultramarine Detachment is an Ultramarine. For example, in the Scions of Guilliman Chapter Tactic that reads: "If your army contains any Ultramarines units, you can choose..."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DJGietzen wrote:

 Runic wrote:

Well, RAW an IA entry that is to be used with Codex: Space Marines cannot be used with a Codex that has a different name?

No, its not about the codex name, its about unit factions. The new codex might have a new name but the units within it will still use the same old "space marines" faction just like units in codex: craftworlds still use the eldar faction. The IA units also have the "space marines" faction. In a detachment where the only restriction is "All units in this detachment must have the same faction or have no faction." or "All units in this detachment must have the Space Marines faction or have no faction." both units from IA with the "space marines" faction and units from codex: Adeptus Astartes with the "space marines" would be perfectly legal. The only potential problem I see is if there are detachments/formations with restrictions like the daemonkin codex that read "All units in this detachment must come from Codex: Adeptus Astartes: Space Marines."

Edit: Just saw a leak of the gladius strike force detachment. It only allows for units in the new codex, so no FW units can be used in it at all, but FW units will still be just fine in a CAD.

In case there is any doubt about this, the new codex is not called Codex: Adeptus Astartes: Space Marines. It's just Codex: Space marines. Says so on the copyright page, on the spine, and is so referred to on the Website and promotional material. In fact, it is never referred to, anywhere, as Codex: Adeptus Astartes [anything].

Since it's not news (or rumor) related I made a thread in Genera Discussion with a nifty pic here http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/652043.page

Here's the picture that speaks for itself (from top to bottom 7e SM, 6e SM, 7e Craftworlds, 6e Eldar):

 Talys wrote:

jSewell wrote:

Killermonkey wrote:


Interesting. Does this mean that Iron hands just got the biggest stealth nerf ever with only dreads having IWND? I guess that thought that having all those free transports with the rule would be too broken? Between that and the removal of the master of the forge, meaning I can no longer take more than one "relic" vehicle my whole army just got entirely broken and shafted. /rerolling Crimson Fists

If it was intentional, they would have put "Iron Hands Dreadnoughts" but they put "VEHICLES"...

I don't care what little rule debacle is on the previous page, it says "Iron Hands vehicles" and the vehicles in an Iron Hands detachment are Iron Hands vehicles

Yes, just like any unit that is in an Ultramarine Detachment is an Ultramarine. For example, in the Scions of Guilliman Chapter Tactic that reads: "If your army contains any Ultramarines units, you can choose..."

While I certainly hope that is the situation, I am doubtful of it. The old codex was very specific about the fact that vehicles did not have he chapter tactics special rule but still benefited from the IWND. The way it is worded now is also very specific in that when it talks about a chapter unit getting the bonus that it only means those with that special rule :-/

RAW only vehicles with Chapter Tactics (Iron Hands) are Iron Hands vehicles.



Apparently the Warlords Traits in WD are only for CF and BT; no other Chapter-specific traits are reported to be in it.

If Iron Hands vehicles dont get IWND, that's pretty lame. GW might be saving me a lot of me over the next 6 months.

jSewell wrote:

Killermonkey wrote:


Interesting. Does this mean that Iron hands just got the biggest stealth nerf ever with only dreads having IWND? I guess that thought that having all those free transports with the rule would be too broken? Between that and the removal of the master of the forge, meaning I can no longer take more than one "relic" vehicle my whole army just got entirely broken and shafted. /rerolling Crimson Fists

If it was intentional, they would have put "Iron Hands Dreadnoughts" but they put "VEHICLES"...

I don't care what little rule debacle is on the previous page, it says "Iron Hands vehicles" and the vehicles in an Iron Hands detachment are Iron Hands vehicles

 Talys wrote:

jSewell wrote:

Killermonkey wrote:


Interesting. Does this mean that Iron hands just got the biggest stealth nerf ever with only dreads having IWND? I guess that thought that having all those free transports with the rule would be too broken? Between that and the removal of the master of the forge, meaning I can no longer take more than one "relic" vehicle my whole army just got entirely broken and shafted. /rerolling Crimson Fists

If it was intentional, they would have put "Iron Hands Dreadnoughts" but they put "VEHICLES"...

I don't care what little rule debacle is on the previous page, it says "Iron Hands vehicles" and the vehicles in an Iron Hands detachment are Iron Hands vehicles

Yes, just like any unit that is in an Ultramarine Detachment is an Ultramarine. For example, in the Scions of Guilliman Chapter Tactic that reads: "If your army contains any Ultramarines units, you can choose..."

And for the fourth or fifth time, as per the image I posted of the actual rule in the actual codex; an "Ultramarines unit" is defined as a unit with the Ultramarines CTs. Just as an "Iron Hands unit" is a unit with Iron Hands CTs, an "Imperial Fists unit" is a unit with IF CTs etc etc. You can "not care" all you like, you can think it's stupid or unfair, but as written the rules have a specific definition and it has nothing to do with detachments.

Taking Iron Hands CTs for your army doesn't change the fact that other than Dreadnoughts no vehicles have the Chapter Tactics rule.

Now hopefully any rational, sportsmanlike opponent will ignore such idiocy and allow you to get IWND on all your vehicles, but if they decide to argue the point or if you play in a strict-RAW environment as many do, you have absolutely no basis in the actual rules to object when they deny it you.

Killermonkey wrote:
While I certainly hope that is the situation, I am doubtful of it. The old codex was very specific about the fact that vehicles did not have he chapter tactics special rule but still benefited from the IWND. The way it is worded now is also very specific in that when it talks about a chapter unit getting the bonus that it only means those with that special rule :-/

Actually, upon reread, I see the problem. However, it is not a solvable problem because of the ambiguity of the English language; specifically the conjunction, "and". Perhaps analyzing another language version would solve it, though.

The special rule reads, "Iron Hands characters and vehicles have the IWND special rule."

This COULD mean, "Iron Hands characters and Iron Hands vehicles have the IWND special rule." Or it could mean, "Vehicles and Iron Hands characters have the IWND special rule."

In the same way: "I like spicy wings and drumsticks". Do I like spicy hot wings and spicy drumsticks, or do I like drumsticks of any variety?

It's actually not possible to tell the intent of the speaker, except perhaps with context, because spicy or Iron Hands can be an adjective for the first OR both nouns. In context, for example, if you're choosing at a restaurant that doesn't serve spicy chicken except for hot wings, it'd be obvious.

In the same way, if there were no vehicles with chapter tactics, it'd be pretty straight forward. But there are the dreadnoughts, so it's less straight forward, though, as has been stated, in context, had the rules writers intended it to be only dreadnoughts, they would have simply said so.

10 free vehicles would be a little much with IWND..... Wait what am I saying. 10 free vehicles is already a little much haha

The second interpretation of the 'and' causes all sorts of problems, though, as it would mean that as long as you have one model with Chapter Tactics (Iron Hands), every friendly vehicles would have IWND! i.e. Allied Mechanicus/Guard/Inquisitor/DA/BA/SW/GK/SoB/etc. vehicles gain IWND! and allied non-IH SM vehciles get IWND!, leading to things like allied Ultramarine/IF/RG/BT/etc. Dreads with IWND! or Landraiders with IWND!

Talys, I think your clarification points out the clearer way of writing pretty well- it's how you'd say it if you wanted to be clear. It's GW, so, heap o' salt regarding RAI, but RAW is pretty obviously just dreads and characters since other vehicles don't have the rule.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
The second interpretation of the 'and' causes all sorts of problems, though, as it would mean that as long as you have one model with Chapter Tactics (Iron Hands), every friendly vehicles would have IWND! i.e. Allied Mechanicus/Guard/Inquisitor/DA/BA/SW/GK/SoB/etc. vehicles gain IWND! and allied non-IH SM vehciles get IWND!, leading to things like allied Ultramarine/IF/RG/BT/etc. Dreads with IWND! or Landraiders with IWND!

That's just being facetious as you've always picked a single chapter tactic per Codex: Space Marine formations, which can only include Space Marine units and only of that one chapter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
it's GW, so, heap o' salt regarding RAI, but RAW is pretty obviously just dreads and characters since other vehicles don't have the rule.

Imo, they would have out "Iron Hands characters and dreadnoughts" if they meant for it to be only dreads

But if you choose the 'vehicles (not necessarily Iron Hands) and Iron Hands characters' interpretation, you don't care if they are Iron Hands vehicles so ALL friendly vehicles get IWND! if you have an Iron Hands model in the army, because it no longer only effects Iron Hands vehicles but instead any (friendly, as per ally rules) vehicle.

It's just a mess and I'm putting my money on it being an oversight while they changed the wording for the Ultramarines so it'd only affect infantry

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Talys, I think your clarification points out the clearer way of writing pretty well- it's how you'd say it if you wanted to be clear. It's GW, so, heap o' salt regarding RAI, but RAW is pretty obviously just dreads and characters since other vehicles don't have the rule.

The problem is, I'm not so sure it's clear at all. Unless/until it's FAQ'd or there's some GW Battle Report or something else to contextualize, clarify or infer the meaning, people can read it any way they want and argue make circular arguments (as we've done here) til their heads explode. At the end of the day, if it's a tournament, clarify with the TO first; if it's a friendly game, give the IH player IWND or find another person to play with

Frankly, the Ultramarine and White Scars CTs are way deadlier anways, IMHO. And the previous (6e) codex is extremely clear (All vehicles and characters in the detachment), so from a practical perspective, I would always give it to the Iron Hands player.

I think RAI, what the rules writers wanted to say was, all vehicles and characters in the detachment like the old version, but since the other chapter tactics were adjusted to say, "Imperial Fists models...", "Salamanders models...", "White Scars models...", this one just follows the mold. It was also to prevent people from joining a different model into the IH unit and getting the buff.

Just my reading of it.

Except Ultramarines also effects Dreads, so theirs doesn't only effect Infantry.

You don't "take Chapter tactics Iron Hands" any more. You SELECT A UNIT WITH CHAPTER TACTICS and pick which chapter it is from. If you chose Iron Hands, then the Iron Hands Chapter Tactics apply.

Note that all units from the same detachment must choose the same chapter. This does not however, stop you from using all those little formations, with each one being a different chapter.

That's the way it is now guys. Better get used to it. It's cut and dried, and no amount of rules lawyering will change the rules.

Guess I'll be running my Iron Hands with one of the already better chapter tactics then

 Talys wrote:
...I think RAI...

Yep, this has always been the flaw with GW- RAW is decipherable but often doesn't matter since there's so often a gap between that and intention. There are plenty of companies where they're consistent enough that RAW is assumed to be RAI, but not in this case...

 Kavish wrote:
You don't "take Chapter tactics Iron Hands" any more. You SELECT A UNIT WITH CHAPTER TACTICS and pick which chapter it is from. If you chose Iron Hands, then the Iron Hands Chapter Tactics apply.

Note that all units from the same detachment must choose the same chapter. This does not however, stop you from using all those little formations, with each one being a different chapter.

That's the way it is now guys. Better get used to it. It's cut and dried, and no amount of rules lawyering will change the rules.

Except, as I have stated, it could mean, "Iron Hands characters and [all] vehicles", as the "Iron Hands" adjective may or may not apply to "vehicles". Especially when you consider that the old chapter tactic read, "All vehicles and characters in this detachment".

Anyhow, I've put my two bits worth, and I'll just be repeating myself, so off to painting more Blood Angels and reading the new Codex.

And/but: - I *LOVE* the new codex. Even though a lot of the artwork from 6e has been moved to 7e, a lot of it has been made a lot larger. For instance, all the unit paintings for things like Chaplains, Librarians, etc. are now a half-page vertical instead of the old quarter-page. There's some really nice updated photography, the rules section in the new format (datasheets) is way easier to use, and it's just superior to the 6e codex in every way.

ALSO: New dev marines box ROCKS. I bought two, and am debating whether I want to buy 2 more :\ IknowIwanna... (but when will I ever get around to painting them, hehe)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@jSewell - Sok, I play my BA as vanilla successors 75% of the time

@spiralingcadaver - Yup! I agree. Oh well. More Dakka!

 Yodhrin wrote:

And for the fourth or fifth time, as per the image I posted of the actual rule in the actual codex; an "Ultramarines unit" is defined as a unit with the Ultramarines CTs. Just as an "Iron Hands unit" is a unit with Iron Hands CTs, an "Imperial Fists unit" is a unit with IF CTs etc etc. You can "not care" all you like, you can think it's stupid or unfair, but as written the rules have a specific definition and it has nothing to do with detachments.

Taking Iron Hands CTs for your army doesn't change the fact that other than Dreadnoughts no vehicles have the Chapter Tactics rule.

Now hopefully any rational, sportsmanlike opponent will ignore such idiocy and allow you to get IWND on all your vehicles, but if they decide to argue the point or if you play in a strict-RAW environment as many do, you have absolutely no basis in the actual rules to object when they deny it you.

Well, GW isn't the best of writing clear rules.

“all models in the same detachment or formation must be drawn from the same chapter.

Does that mean that that units without Chapter Tactics can't be taken, since they are not specified to be in THAT chapter?

In that case, RIP all vehicles and Legion of the damed along with 5 formations used in the Gladius Strike Force...

or?

"all models must be drawn from the same chapter" this means that where the choice is made (for units with the chapter tactics rule) you must choose the same chapter. Reading it any other way screws up the rules.

@ WindsofFury, Nope. The 1st time you take a unit with the chapter tactics special rule you must pick a chapter. All the units in the same detachment as that unit have to be from the same chapter. That means all other units, even those with out the chapter tactics special rule, in the detachment will technically have to be drawn from that chapter as well. You just can't choose a unit that is required to be drawn from a different chapter to be in the same detachment. If you have a space marine detachment with zero units with the chapter tactics rule in it then you will end up with a chapterless detachment. This can be done with at least two formations off the top of my head.

Interestingly enough it also means that unbound armies will have use 1 set of chapter tactics, or maybe just unbound armies with a space marine warlord ... can't remember. Cause all units with the same faction are treated as 1 detachment if memory serves.

That's stretching it a bit I reckon. Only units with CT can choose a chapter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Make a note of which chapter each unit with the chapter tactics special rule is drawn from"

Hey guys, just thought i might help clear this up.

It seems to be saying that any iron hands vehicles get IWND (wow!) as well as their characters; so as long as the vehicles in question are in the same detachment/formation as a model with the 'chapter tactics (iron hands) special rule.

The vehicle itself doesn't need the chapter tactics rule, just one model in it's detachment.
The codex assumes any vehicles taken are therefore from the chapter which took them - many of the new formations list vehicles among them as 'compulsory' alongside units which have the 'chapter tactics' rule.
Keeping that in mind, looking at the 5th and 6th sentence of the first paragraph of the 'chapter tactics' page reads; "all models in the same detachment or formation must be drawn from the same chapter."
See the juxtaposition? formations with compulsory vehicles but can't choose non-chapter tactics vehicles in formations?... ?

The only logical conclusion is that vehicles assume the chapter of whatever the formation they are chosen for already is.


So a traditional CAD is looking fairly tasty for an iron hands army?

Except that in order to benefit from the Chapter Tactics, you have to have the Chapter Tactics rule.

By the logic mostly being used against IH, "all models in the same detachment or formation must be drawn from the same chapter" means we can't even take vehicles in from our codex because they don't have chapter tactics.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kavish wrote:
"all models must be drawn from the same chapter" this means that where the choice is made (for units with the chapter tactics rule) you must choose the same chapter. Reading it any other way screws up the rules.

That's not RAW though!!!1!!111!!

There were too many issues with it where low(like Knights) were getting the upgrade by joining the army or really any low getting that upgrade for free(80 points from FW) was a bit much. In addition I can see them toning it down with the level of vehicle spam that is possible in this codex, instead they clarified the rules for everyone and how they interact with each other etc. in return its +1 to FNP which is huge, especially with cmd squads going to elites and blood Angels being a thing.... Overall I would call it a wash for iron hands, also with how much better dreads are now I can see it still coming up often.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
RAW only vehicles with Chapter Tactics (Iron Hands) are Iron Hands vehicles.



Apparently the Warlords Traits in WD are only for CF and BT; no other Chapter-specific traits are reported to be in it.

Super lame. BT already get more special characters than all the founding chapters (save for Ultramarines), and now they have special units that are actually worthwhile.

A little bit of extra juice for the Salamanders would have been nice. I like our chapter tactics and all, but I feel like I'm gnawing on bones here. None of the new changes are particularly great for my army.

 Leth wrote:
There were too many issues with it where low(like Knights) were getting the upgrade by joining the army or really any low getting that upgrade for free(80 points from FW) was a bit much. In addition I can see them toning it down with the level of vehicle spam that is possible in this codex, instead they clarified the rules for everyone and how they interact with each other etc. in return its +1 to FNP which is huge, especially with cmd squads going to elites and blood Angels being a thing.... Overall I would call it a wash for iron hands, also with how much better dreads are now I can see it still coming up often.

Since when has GW balanced their rules around FW stuff though? The IWND was WAY more fluffy than the FNP stuff... especially in the result of chapter master builds (even more so) than vehicle centric ones

Pretty interesting - Althenian Armourlost on Warseer

GW News app saying supplementary codexes are still legal?

Hi all

On the GW news iPhone app this morning there is a section on 'Sentinels of Terra' in which it is touting this supplementary codex for sale. It very clearly specifically says "All of this content is completely compatible with the new Codex:Space Marines' (though the Planetstrike and Cities of Death stratagems included in the book are designed for older editions of these rules.)"

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?409925-GW-News-app-saying-supplementary-codexes-are-still-legal&p=7464806&viewfull=1#post7464806

Has someone the Warhammer app and can confirm the information?

jSewell wrote:

 Leth wrote:
There were too many issues with it where low(like Knights) were getting the upgrade by joining the army or really any low getting that upgrade for free(80 points from FW) was a bit much. In addition I can see them toning it down with the level of vehicle spam that is possible in this codex, instead they clarified the rules for everyone and how they interact with each other etc. in return its +1 to FNP which is huge, especially with cmd squads going to elites and blood Angels being a thing.... Overall I would call it a wash for iron hands, also with how much better dreads are now I can see it still coming up often.

Since when has GW balanced their rules around FW stuff though? The IWND was WAY more fluffy than the FNP stuff... especially in the result of chapter master builds (even more so) than vehicle centric ones

Considering the original FNP ability was from bionics I ink it works just fine. It also allows for a variety of builds, it was mainly dread aughts in the fluff imo hat should have healed, now they do. You can still repair vehicles crazy easy and tech marines got way better overall. Lots of good things for iron hands players in this book. I think squadrons with Iwnd would have been a bit rough. However now that per unit buffs can apply to all of the models, anything that buffs a unit is pretty powerful now.

Warhams-77 wrote:
Pretty interesting - Althenian Armourlost on Warseer

GW News app saying supplementary codexes are still legal?

Hi all

On the GW news iPhone app this morning there is a section on 'Sentinels of Terra' in which it is touting this supplementary codex for sale. It very clearly specifically says "All of this content is completely compatible with the new Codex:Space Marines' (though the Planetstrike and Cities of Death stratagems included in the book are designed for older editions of these rules.)"

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?409925-GW-News-app-saying-supplementary-codexes-are-still-legal&p=7464806&viewfull=1#post7464806

Has someone the Warhammer app and can confirm the information?

Seems odd, considering Sentinels of Terra is gone from the GW store. Curiously, both SM Supplements (Sentinels of Terra and Clan Raukaan) are still on Black Library as eBooks.

Fracked up.

Warhams-77 wrote:
Pretty interesting - Althenian Armourlost on Warseer

GW News app saying supplementary codexes are still legal?

Hi all

On the GW news iPhone app this morning there is a section on 'Sentinels of Terra' in which it is touting this supplementary codex for sale. It very clearly specifically says "All of this content is completely compatible with the new Codex:Space Marines' (though the Planetstrike and Cities of Death stratagems included in the book are designed for older editions of these rules.)"

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?409925-GW-News-app-saying-supplementary-codexes-are-still-legal&p=7464806&viewfull=1#post7464806

Has someone the Warhammer app and can confirm the information?

Yes.

Doesn't come in clear because I screenshotted it on my ipad but your quote is exact wording.

Thanks Ignatius. So together with the info from this post http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/651829.page#7896362

The supplement book's are no longer available and we have not been made aware of them getting reprinted or of any FAQ updates for them. However it does look like the digital copies of these two supplements have been updated. So if you have purchased the digital copies then you can get the updated information there.

it seems both digital SM supplements will be updated and can be used with the new Space Marine codex. Hopefully this turns into a trend

So if the Raukaan supplement still works, and you roll the +1 FNP trait, and you're in a Command Squad with an Apothecary... that's a 3+ FNP. THAT is fitting for Iron Hands!

I hope that if Sentinels of Terra was updated that Sternguard get Close Range Bolter Drill on Special Ammunition like regular Sternguard get Bolter Drill on Special Ammunition.

I see the Iron Hands debate is still live and well

I will add fuel to the fire. I just popped open the datacards a while ago -- very nice, by the way, they have the chapter emblems on a shield for each of the chapters -- and read the fluff section for the card.

The Iron Hands and their successors venerate the purity of the machine over the weakness of mere flesh. Their proliferation of bionics, coupled with the advanced self-repair mechanisms of their vehicles, renders Iron Hands forces nigh unstoppable in battle.

The Flesh is Weak: Non-vehicle...

Machine Empathy: Iron Hands characters and vehicles have the It Will Not Die...

Now, when they say, "the advanced self-repair mechanisms of their vehicles", does a reasonable person think, "Dreadnoughts" or, "all vehicles"?

So, therefore, I think in the context of the description directly above the rule, the phrase, "Iron Hands characters and vehicles", the conjunction joins "Iron hands characters" with "vehicles", rather than Iron Hands as a adjective for "characters and vehicles".

Or in math terms...

A = Iron hands
B = characters
C = vehicles

A B + C

NOT

A (B + C)

Though both are grammatically correct in English, the context sets the context of "self-repair mechanisms of vehicles".

Now, admittedly, this opens up the context of WHAT vehicles? Just the ones in the detachment? The Imperial Knight in the army? The Allied Crimson Hunter? At this point, I think you'd just have to let common sense prevail, and make it the vehicles belonging to the Iron Hands, as the other vehicles wouldn't have the IH advanced self-repair mechanisms.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Now, about those new Devastators! The box comes with...

- 7 torsos fronts!! (5 backs, but whatever)
- 2 Mk5, 3 Mk6, 1 Mk7, and one really cool Mk5 with a armor plated tabard.

- 6 legs (like the old ones)!
- 2 bases are two-part and posable! One cut at the knee, the other at the hip.
- 3 of the legs are spread very wide apart, filling out the 32mm bases quite well.
- 1 base is like the old missile launcher two-part base, with one knee kneeling

- Some very cool helmets!! Way improved.
- really boring shoulders :( Only 2 sculpted, and then only minimally

- freaky nekkid baby ammo angel + 25mm base!! (this is actually a pretty cool little model)

- 2 of each of the heavy weapons, yay
- Missile Launcher can be built with missile firing or not, and there is a missile pack option that reminds me of the original plastic space marine Missile Launcher!

- 1 Combi with all the options
- 1 each of Grav, plasma, bolt pistol, 1 storm bolter
- 1 powerfist
- 1 power sword, power axe, lightning claw, and thunder hammer.

Have you ever seen a devastator squad member with a powerfist, power sword, power axe, lightning claw, or thunder hammer?! Why are these even options or in the box >.<

I think if you paint them like Iron Hands, they can fix themselves...

...given that it's intended to be a beer-and-pretzels game and wasn't designed to be scruitinised by half-lawyer/half-linguist/half-logician mutants.

 Talys wrote:


In case there is any doubt about this, the new codex is not called Codex: Adeptus Astartes: Space Marines. It's just Codex: Space marines. Says so on the copyright page, on the spine, and is so referred to on the Website and promotional material. In fact, it is never referred to, anywhere, as Codex: Adeptus Astartes [anything].

Since it's not news (or rumor) related I made a thread in Genera Discussion with a nifty pic here http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/652043.page

Here's the picture that speaks for itself (from top to bottom 7e SM, 6e SM, 7e Craftworlds, 6e Eldar):

Nice one Talys. That really puts the "issue" to rest for good.

jSewell wrote:
By the logic mostly being used against IH, "all models in the same detachment or formation must be drawn from the same chapter" means we can't even take vehicles in from our codex because they don't have chapter tactics.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kavish wrote:
"all models must be drawn from the same chapter" this means that where the choice is made (for units with the chapter tactics rule) you must choose the same chapter. Reading it any other way screws up the rules.

That's not RAW though!!!1!!111!!

Have you seen this?

http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2015/06/09/rumor-it-tired-reading-german-space-marine-rules/

What I'm telling you is RAW. See the first paragraph on the chapter tactics page.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The first half of the paragraph specifically.

 Kavish wrote:

Have you seen this?

http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2015/06/09/rumor-it-tired-reading-german-space-marine-rules/

What I'm telling you is RAW. See the first paragraph on the chapter tactics page.

The first half of the paragraph specifically.

And I repeat to you, in the English language, that text may read, Iron Hands characters and vehicles have the It Will Not Die Special Rule, meaning that the adjective "Iron Hands" applies to characters but not vehicles. In the same way that if I say that I like "sweet meats sand candies" I can mean sweet meats and all candies or sweet meats and sweet candies.

In the alternate reading, first paragraph on the chapter tactics page doesn't apply, because it's not "Iron Hands vehicles" (which RAW clearly states requires Chapter Tactics Special Rule). It's just, "vehicles". You can choose to read it one way, and someone else's reading the other way are both 100% grammatically correct.

The only way you can tell what the meaning is, is via context. For that, read the paragraph directly above the Chapter Tactic:

The Iron Hands and their successors venerate the purity of the machine over the weakness of mere flesh. Their proliferation of bionics, coupled with the advanced self-repair mechanisms of their vehicles, renders Iron Hands forces nigh unstoppable in battle.

The Flesh is Weak: Non-vehicle...

Machine Empathy: Iron Hands characters and vehicles have the It Will Not Die...

While the English in Machine Empathy is ambiguous, the context is not. Also, the 6e rules provides additional context, namely that it includes ALL vehicles in the Detachment. But that doesn't work anymore, really, because the models are in more than 1 detachment now.

Incidentally, this is why contracts suck and can take 30 pages to describe what can be explained in 3 lines.

 Talys wrote:

- 1 powerfist
- 1 power sword, power axe, lightning claw, and thunder hammer.

Have you ever seen a devastator squad member with a powerfist, power sword, power axe, lightning claw, or thunder hammer?! Why are these even options or in the box >.<

What hand (left or right) is the powerfist and lightning claw for? I'm guessing that GW expect people to buy all the different type boxes to stock up their bits box to get enough bits to fill in all the options as the new assault box only comes with a single left hand (I think) lightning claw.

 Looky Likey wrote:

 Talys wrote:

- 1 powerfist
- 1 power sword, power axe, lightning claw, and thunder hammer.

Have you ever seen a devastator squad member with a powerfist, power sword, power axe, lightning claw, or thunder hammer?! Why are these even options or in the box >.<

What hand (left or right) is the powerfist and lightning claw for? I'm guessing that GW expect people to buy all the different type boxes to stock up their bits box to get enough bits to fill in all the options as the new assault box only comes with a single left hand (I think) lightning claw.

All of the melee weapons are left handed, including the lightning claw and power fist, while the ranged weapons are right handed (like almost all other kits). All the of the non-heavy weapons other than LC/PF are just the hand + weapon. You get 2 right and 2 left arms, one straight and one bent of each.

Ah, thats gak then.

 Talys wrote:

 Kavish wrote:

Have you seen this?

http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2015/06/09/rumor-it-tired-reading-german-space-marine-rules/

What I'm telling you is RAW. See the first paragraph on the chapter tactics page.

The first half of the paragraph specifically.

And I repeat to you, in the English language, that text may read, Iron Hands characters and vehicles have the It Will Not Die Special Rule, meaning that the adjective "Iron Hands" applies to characters but not vehicles. In the same way that if I say that I like "sweet meats sand candies" I can mean sweet meats and all candies or sweet meats and sweet candies.

In the alternate reading, first paragraph on the chapter tactics page doesn't apply, because it's not "Iron Hands vehicles" (which RAW clearly states requires Chapter Tactics Special Rule). It's just, "vehicles". You can choose to read it one way, and someone else's reading the other way are both 100% grammatically correct.

The only way you can tell what the meaning is, is via context. For that, read the paragraph directly above the Chapter Tactic:

The Iron Hands and their successors venerate the purity of the machine over the weakness of mere flesh. Their proliferation of bionics, coupled with the advanced self-repair mechanisms of their vehicles, renders Iron Hands forces nigh unstoppable in battle.

The Flesh is Weak: Non-vehicle...

Machine Empathy: Iron Hands characters and vehicles have the It Will Not Die...

While the English in Machine Empathy is ambiguous, the context is not. Also, the 6e rules provides additional context, namely that it includes ALL vehicles in the Detachment. But that doesn't work anymore, really, because the models are in more than 1 detachment now.

Incidentally, this is why contracts suck and can take 30 pages to describe what can be explained in 3 lines.

Even if your interpretation of "Iron hands characters and vehicles" is RAW, wouldn't that mean that ANY vehicle - including Dreadnoughts with DIFFERENT Chapter Tactics - would be elligible? That doesn't seem reasonable.
And reg. prev. editions - I'd say if you have to refer to context , you're arguing for RAI. And noone here argues that RAI isn't what you're arguing for.

By the way I'd suggest moving this discussion to the YMDC section of dakka, it's not really a rumor anymore since we have the scanned actual pages already.

This is my least favorite part of any codex release. There's no more questions, no more hypotheticals... not beyond linguistic and semantic quibbles. Anyone that really wants the rules can just reach out and grab them through the miracle of the internet.

But while the big things can leak and find their way onto the internet it's the small things now, the tiny questions, that really have me on edge. I utilize a good number of Forgeworld units in my routine games. Nothing too off the wall, Contemptor Dreadnoughts and a Land Raider Prometheus being the most common, but I also make use of the Siege Vanguard List. How's that going to play into Gladius Formations and the overall composition? As plenty of other people have been wondering as well how is Raukaan going to function if at all? We might have the core rules, we might be informed, and yet we all still seem to have questions.

Just got my Codex. First half has a good amount of new artwork and seems pretty good.
The technical drawings leaked here are pretty poor, but serve their purpose, especially for company and squad markings.
Building a Gladius Strike Force seems incredibly complex, seeing they consist of nothing but formations and getting Combat Doctrines multiple times, but for different parts of the Strike Force.

@Dust: As long as there is no FAQ, the Gladius Strike Force entries are restricted to the different formations and these in turn have restrictions of which units they consist. So Contemptors and other Land Raider Variants, etc. can not be part of a Gladius Strike Force.

- 6 legs (like the old ones)!
- 2 bases are two-part and posable! One cut at the knee, the other at the hip.
- 3 of the legs are spread very wide apart, filling out the 32mm bases quite well.
- 1 base is like the old missile launcher two-part base, with one knee kneeling

Ugh...so Talys this means they won't fit on 28mm bases????

nekooni wrote:By the way I'd suggest moving this discussion to the YMDC section of dakka, it's not really a rumor anymore since we have the scanned actual pages already.

I think that when all the text was changed to 7e, and they added "Ultramarine models" and "White Scars models" they didn't really think too hard about the consequences of writing in the Iron Hands part. I don't think it's really a practical problem, because the result will just be that the IH player won't play with the person arguing the rule

But I agree with you -- this should go to YMDC. I don't think I can say any more constructive on the subject anyhow.

Dust wrote:This is my least favorite part of any codex release. There's no more questions, no more hypotheticals... not beyond linguistic and semantic quibbles. Anyone that really wants the rules can just reach out and grab them through the miracle of the internet.

But while the big things can leak and find their way onto the internet it's the small things now, the tiny questions, that really have me on edge. I utilize a good number of Forgeworld units in my routine games. Nothing too off the wall, Contemptor Dreadnoughts and a Land Raider Prometheus being the most common, but I also make use of the Siege Vanguard List. How's that going to play into Gladius Formations and the overall composition? As plenty of other people have been wondering as well how is Raukaan going to function if at all? We might have the core rules, we might be informed, and yet we all still seem to have questions.

You can't put a Contemptor Dreadnought or a LR Prometheus into a Gladius SF. Among other things, one must ask, is the LR formation balanced with the LR Prometheus, or not? I don't have the answer to that, of course. However, there's nothing to stop you from allying it in an Allied Detachment. Keep in mind that you're not alone in this -- Eldar are in much the same boat if they choose to play a War Host.

Hanskrampf wrote:Just got my Codex. First half has a good amount of new artwork and seems pretty good.
The technical drawings leaked here are pretty poor, but serve their purpose, especially for company and squad markings.
Building a Gladius Strike Force seems incredibly complex, seeing they consist of nothing but formations and getting Combat Doctrines multiple times, but for different parts of the Strike Force.

@Hanskrampf - some of that artwork I've seen in places other than the codex before (like White Dwarf), but I largely agree with you. The first half of the codex feels "fresh" and worthy of a new book. Like I mentioned before, I really like how they did half-page instead of quarter page artwork for each unit type (like Scouts, Captain, etc.) in the fluff half. It's nicely balanced with the model photography in the rules half -- which is literally almost half of the 200 pages.

Speaking as someone with many other armies, almost all of them are very jealous of the C:SM treatment. I wish ALL the codex books were produced to this standard.

The technical diagrams part, if you're not into exacting squad markings, you're never going to look at it anyhow. I don't mind it only because it's balanced against all the inspirational artwork and photography. If it were instead of, that would be an issue, but as an "in addition to", they do the job, as you say.

I think a Gladius Strike Force is actually pretty easy to build -- relatively, a lot less complicated than an Eldar War Host for example, where you have many core options (though one may argue that many of those core options are obviously inferior). I mean, you either have 1 or 2 demi-companies, and you have very little choice within those demi-companies. Some of the options are false choices, too; like nobody is going to take an attack bike. And frankly, the only reason to take a Gladius Strike Force, in my opinion, is to get free razorbacks and drop pods and ObSec for everything to make the best thousand points of MSU that points can buy.

The Auxiliary Formations are hit and miss -- some like the Scouts are just awesome. Others, like the tanks, look neat and may be fun to play for kicks, but are totally uncompetitive, because even buffed, the crappy units are pretty crappy, or just too expensive. Same with the tank squads -- some look fun, but are not really practical (like the 24" range vindicator squadron with a 10" blast radius).

I was so happy with the Stalker unit Skystorm rule (ignoring cover = no jink)

On a AV 12 flyer it would on average deal 3,5 HP of damage if targeting one unit.
Now I read in the leaks that the Icarus got nerfed to Heavy 3! That is only 2,6 HP on average... Still a 0,8 % chance of killing it with one shot...

Well, at least we got Interceptor on in...

Thanks for the photos and Dev kit review, Talys. Very helpful indeed

WindsOfFury wrote:
I was so happy with the Stalker unit Skystorm rule (ignoring cover = no jink)

On a AV 12 flyer it would on average deal 3,5 HP of damage if targeting one unit.
Now I read in the leaks that the Icarus got nerfed to Heavy 3! That is only 2,6 HP on average... Still a 0,8 % chance of killing it with one shot...

Well, at least we got Interceptor on in...

I have the printed, English codex. Icarus Stormcannon is a bit different. It looks like a nerf but it it's actually a buff.

Yes, it is now 48" S7 AP4 Heavy 3, Interceptor, Skyfire -- down from Heavy 4.

HOWEVER: Now, when firing at Dual Targets, you do so normally, instead of at BS2!! In my opinion, I would much rather have 2 x Heavy3 at BS 4, than, 2xHeavy 4 at BS2. (Servo Tracking is gone)

The single-target is unchanged -- they describe it as something different, but it's still effectively Twin Link. So yeah, it would have been better shooting at a single target with the old rules. But shooting normally at 2 targets is generally better than shooting Twin Link on 1 target.

And yeah, 3 gets you Ignore Cover.

At 210 points, it's probably one of the better tank squads

I also have 2 BNIB and one really old painted one!

Hey guys, go and take the rules dispute over to ymdc, sick of seeing pages of "durp durp raw/not raw" nonsense, it's not a rumour, go elsewhere and let the thread get back on track.

Honestly as is this thread is basically done. The whole codex is leaked, images of the librarian have been leaked and the WD exclusive Warlord traits for CT and BT have been leaked. This release is spent.

On to the DA release thread

But is this not the 2nd half of a rumor?
What could it say?
What could it possibly mean?
Gotta love their "entertaining" style of writing rather than clear language.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
So if the Raukaan supplement still works, and you roll the +1 FNP trait, and you're in a Command Squad with an Apothecary... that's a 3+ FNP. THAT is fitting for Iron Hands!

Iron Hands character on Bike with Artificer armour & Gorgon Chain, and Command Squad including Apothecary with Storm Shields & grav guns; Character gets 2+/3++/2+++ until he starts taking wounds and can use LOS shenanigans, squad all have 3+/3++/3+++ and put out 9 grav shots, everyone's T5. Hnnnng.

Warhams-77 wrote:
Pretty interesting - Althenian Armourlost on Warseer

GW News app saying supplementary codexes are still legal?

Hi all

On the GW news iPhone app this morning there is a section on 'Sentinels of Terra' in which it is touting this supplementary codex for sale. It very clearly specifically says "All of this content is completely compatible with the new Codex:Space Marines' (though the Planetstrike and Cities of Death stratagems included in the book are designed for older editions of these rules.)"

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?409925-GW-News-app-saying-supplementary-codexes-are-still-legal&p=7464806&viewfull=1#post7464806

Has someone the Warhammer app and can confirm the information?

I have the app and confirm this. I thought it was an odd place to make such a potentially huge rules clarification.