AngryAngel80 wrote: Maybe they will see a bump in that, we currently don't know if they will get any rules at all in it. They could just be a narrative plot point with little or not actual power in it, especially so close after release of their new codex.
There’s more than just the background of an epic war zone in here, the book also includes new rules for:
Death Guard
Adeptus Mechanicus
Imperial Knights
Drukhari
AngryAngel80 wrote: Maybe they will see a bump in that, we currently don't know if they will get any rules at all in it. They could just be a narrative plot point with little or not actual power in it, especially so close after release of their new codex.
There’s more than just the background of an epic war zone in here, the book also includes new rules for:
Death Guard
Adeptus Mechanicus
Imperial Knights
Drukhari
It's going to be interesting since Drukhari also get a codex right before or around when they release this campaign book. I wonder if this going to be trend to release a campaign book around the release of a codex
Eldarsif wrote: Death Guard doesn't have any heavy infantry for example and have to rely exclusively on larger units like MPH and PBC to give them some firepower.
I might be mis-interpreting "heavy infantry" here, but by most standards both the Blightlords and Deathshrouds would qualify, especially if we assume +1W and possibly +1A for them.
I believe Eldarsif was refering to heavy [weapon] infantry rather than heavy [armour] infantry.
So like Devastators, Havocs, Retributors etc.
He'd have a point if Mortarion was not lazy for 10,000 years and actively leading a lot. Angron does gak all the time and he still has his Havoc squads.
He'd have a point if Mortarion was not lazy for 10,000 years and actively leading a lot. Angron does gak all the time and he still has his Havoc squads.
Because WE are currently rolled into the SMC Codex, thus why they have access to Havocs.
Wait until the WE Codex comes out and they lose access to both Havocs, Teeth of Khorne and this last one is also retconned
Can't see how that will work. Custodes are much faster and have much better standard weapons. Sticking an extra attack for CC does not make them even close to custodes.
You can see with Custodes the prevalent build is bike heavy as it's needed to be fast when such a small force.
Right, but we've seen like 1% of the codex so far?
Ha.
DG are a very small codex. At this point we've seen a lot of the units, or at least the major changes to a lot of the units (full statline for DG, just changes to possessed) and even a single unit is more than 1%.
But that's all we've seen - a smattering of stats. We don't even have full datasheets for any of the units you're talking about. I mean, just to rattle off a few things:
What does DR do?
Who all is CORE?
What are the new psychic powers?
What happened with points?
Are the Plague Companies included?
What changes are there to Hateful Assault/Malicious Volleys?
New strats
New relics
Statline changes
New character that supposedly buffs artillery
These are just a few questions that I can think of in the last 60 seconds. That's why I'm saying that us seeing a handful of statlines is largely useless to the grander conversation of how DG is or is not changing and whether those changes will affect how the army fundamentally plays.
The CORE question is rather easy to answer. You are right about all the rest though, but I'm not expecting too much in regards to relics or powers.
As for stratagems the more interesting question is which ones we get to keep, the tendency is more towards removing stratagems, not adding even more. For example, I expect VotLW to go away.
Jidmah wrote: The CORE question is rather easy to answer. You are right about all the rest though, but I'm not expecting too much in regards to relics or powers.
As for stratagems the more interesting question is which ones we get to keep, the tendency is more towards removing stratagems, not adding even more. For example, I expect VotLW to go away.
Surprised they took the route of leaving morty where he is points wise, it does suggest that DR is changed somewhat though given they liked 490 as a price point at t7.
Dudeface wrote: Surprised they took the route of leaving morty where he is points wise, it does suggest that DR is changed somewhat though given they liked 490 as a price point at t7.
Dudeface wrote: Surprised they took the route of leaving morty where he is points wise, it does suggest that DR is changed somewhat though given they liked 490 as a price point at t7.
Mortarion completely sucked at 490
Oh I know his problems but GW were happy with him there for whatever reason, they don't usually slap notable changes on stuff as freebies though. Who knows maybe they're managing to admit to some mistakes.
Did you even read the datasheet? There is no way to know what he is worth right now.
Automatically Appended Next Post: More random thoughts:
The warlord traits he gets to pick in addition in addition to the one he has are the plague company traits. Which means plague companies are in the book.
Assuming that these don't change, the most interesting ones would be Gloaming Bloat (1-3 to wound always fail) and Eater Plague (heal up 3 wounds per phase by destroying models in melee).
Jidmah wrote: Did you even read the datasheet? There is no way to know what he is worth right now.
Automatically Appended Next Post: More random thoughts:
The warlord traits he gets to pick in addition in addition to the one he has are the plague company traits. Which means plague companies are in the book.
Assuming that these don't change, the most interesting ones would be Gloaming Bloat (1-3 to wound always fail) and Eater Plague (heal up 3 wounds per phase by destroying models in melee).
They increased his stats, he keeps dr, even in the context of the current codex he got better. You can make an evaluation against what is currently available and known without all the extra gak they're giving them in the new rules.
He was 490 before, he's 490 now but better even without the extra rules aforementioned.
Jidmah wrote: Did you even read the datasheet? There is no way to know what he is worth right now.
Automatically Appended Next Post: More random thoughts:
The warlord traits he gets to pick in addition in addition to the one he has are the plague company traits. Which means plague companies are in the book.
Assuming that these don't change, the most interesting ones would be Gloaming Bloat (1-3 to wound always fail) and Eater Plague (heal up 3 wounds per phase by destroying models in melee).
They increased his stats, he keeps dr, even in the context of the current codex he got better. You can make an evaluation against what is currently available and known without all the extra gak they're giving them in the new rules.
He was 490 before, he's 490 now but better even without the extra rules aforementioned.
If DR goes to 6+, then he got worse against most weapons.He's 80% as durable as before with a 6+++ as compared to a 5+++.
So, against the following Strength values...
S1-3: 80% as durable
S4: 160% as durable
S5-6: 80% as durable
S7: 120% as durable
S8: 107% as durable
S9-13: 80% as durable
S14-15: 100% as durable
S16+: 80% as durable
Mortal Wounds: 80% as durable
Dudeface wrote: He was 490 before, he's 490 now but better even without the extra rules aforementioned.
Can we just stop this? For every_single_leak, you claim the unit must become more expensive. Then people tell you it was over-costed before. You claim it was fine before, but deliver no proof for that assessment whatsoever. Rinse, repeat.
Units can become better without their point increasing. Because if you improve their stats and their points accordingly, they don't actually become better. DG clearly are in need of improvements.
So please either construct an argument why those units are properly costed right now, or stop. And no, "GW knew what they were doing when costing them like they did" is not an argument, that's sarcasm at best.
So I am not seeing anything for Malicious Volleys or Hateful assault.
I think the Marine equivalent is part of Angels of death ability, which also has combat doctrines listed under it.
So maybe malicious volleys and hateful assault are listed under contagions of nurgle. Or under the remorseless ability. Although Mortarion is missing Remorseless.
Doohicky wrote: So I am not seeing anything for Malicious Volleys or Hateful assault.
I think the Marine equivalent is part of Angels of death ability, which also has combat doctrines listed under it.
So maybe malicious volleys and hateful assault are listed under contagions of nurgle. Or under the remorseless ability. Although Mortarion is missing Remorseless.
Could just be rolled into army-wide rules not on the datasheet, too, especially as there's not really much in Nurgle that can take advantage of it that doesn't already have it.
I had assumed it would be part of an army wide ability similar to Space Marines which lists it under abilities of every datasheet, but you are right, we just don't know
Doohicky wrote: So I am not seeing anything for Malicious Volleys or Hateful assault.
I think the Marine equivalent is part of Angels of death ability, which also has combat doctrines listed under it.
So maybe malicious volleys and hateful assault are listed under contagions of nurgle. Or under the remorseless ability. Although Mortarion is missing Remorseless.
Could just be rolled into army-wide rules not on the datasheet, too, especially as there's not really much in Nurgle that can take advantage of it that doesn't already have it.
Given he doesn't have any BOLT weapons, it's arguable that there's no point in Morty having Malicious Volleys (that was the equivalent to Bolter Discipline, correct?)
He is at +1A compared to the previous 'dex, so maybe HA is just baked in that way?
DttFE appears to have vanished completely, too - probably only a minor thing, but worth noting.
This was most noticable to me. I am hoping there is some sort of damage reduction or something in Disgustingly Resilient, like a Duty Eternal for mutli-wound models or something.
PoorGravitasHandling wrote: Also fun: COVID delayed the physical codex release, so of course the PDF will be similarly delayed.
They don't sell just ebooks anymore, so unfortunately yeah. You have to have a code from the book to scan it into their app now (which I detest, I don't like having physical books of these things).
Dudeface wrote: He was 490 before, he's 490 now but better even without the extra rules aforementioned.
Can we just stop this? For every_single_leak, you claim the unit must become more expensive. Then people tell you it was over-costed before. You claim it was fine before, but deliver no proof for that assessment whatsoever. Rinse, repeat.
Units can become better without their point increasing. Because if you improve their stats and their points accordingly, they don't actually become better. DG clearly are in need of improvements.
So please either construct an argument why those units are properly costed right now, or stop.
And no, "GW knew what they were doing when costing them like they did" is not an argument, that's sarcasm at best.
A pbc with the new stats and profiles with entropy cannons is a 160 tank commander with a 5++ & and 5+++ on top.
All I see in here is "yeah I want to be as offensively good as the marine book. And the most durable army. And not being a low model count."
Being the durable army means either being more expensive or hitting like a wet fart. So which is it?
I'm not commenting on current points but as a trend by people. It can't be hard to kill, killy and cheap.
Edit: topping it off i acknowledged he was too expensive, he was answering is 490 points and he is better than he was, nothing I said is incorrect. I asked what you thought he was worth now in context of the current book.
Another question is whether Hateful Assault remains in some form or another. If it has been removed then the +1 attack we've been seeing on units could have been done to make up for that. Also means that the +1 to Attack is also not as big of a boost.
Being the durable army means either being more expensive or hitting like a wet fart. So which is it?
Nobody is arguing that Death Guard should be cheap and they are technically expensive units already. It's you who are arguing that Death Guard is currently priced correctly or undercosted and people are disagreeing with that.
Eldarsif wrote: Another question is whether Hateful Assault remains in some form or another. If it has been removed then the +1 attack we've been seeing on units could have been done to make up for that. Also means that the +1 to Attack is also not as big of a boost.
Being the durable army means either being more expensive or hitting like a wet fart. So which is it?
Nobody is arguing that Death Guard should be cheap and they are technically expensive units already. It's you who are arguing that Death Guard is currently priced correctly or undercosted and people are disagreeing with that.
I've done neither, I stated with the buffs I'd expect the points to go up, specifically relating to the engines and plague marines. That doesn't mean they're priced correctly in either direction now, but they're (in my opinion) worth more with the buffs.
If the Contagions of Nurgle rule is anything like the Cycle of Corruption from the maggotkin in AoS, I think it could be rather interesting.
Especially if those rules transferred 'as is', that would add some power to our army.
After reading the article, it says: "...it’s disgusting – both in principle and its in-game effects – so your opponent won’t want to go anywhere near your Death Guard if they can avoid it!*"
So I think it'll be similar to the Cycle in AoS and/or Command Protocols in terms of selecting it, but it seems like to me it's going to be debuff/MW auras based off DG units, exciting stuff!
Oh wait no, these are just arbitrary differences to sell you a whole separate codex with little content!
No, death guard not having heavy weapons on infantry is well established lore, while WE not having ranged weapons is not.
And DG not having obliterators actually doesn't actually have a fluff justification at all. And now please stop the OT.
It's establisbed Mortarion doesn't like it, but it doesn't mean it doesn't happen, based on the fact he STILL doesn't do anything to lead them for the most part of the lore (which is also established, thanks). It's an artificial restriction for the sake of trying to make Death Guard a separate codex just like with the Loyalists and supplements/codices. It's just to make you buy more books. Nothing more, nothing less.
Death to the False Emperor has gone. I am guessing that the +1A is to replace that as an inbuilt "hey, you guys have fought the long war" bonus.
Contagions of Nurgle is obviously the doctrine equiv. I'm guessing it's like the old Lord of Contagion rule and that it's range just increases (to replace the old host of plagues rule, which is a shame if it's not quite as good). Maybe there's something additional like -1 to hit or other stats
Heretic Astartes, Daemon and Nurgle keywords all still there. Obviously they could change that for the book but seemingly synergy might still be a thing (it absolutely should be considering the CP cost and doctrine loss to soup these days, imho).
He's lost his -1 T aura from what I can see but then this might be incorporated into the doctrine equiv somehow. Or maybe even one of the warlord traits. That choice could be very interesting. Gloaming Bloat could equal Mortarion with permanent trans human lmao (not that it's necessarily worth it with his toughness already being what it is). Eater plague could be fun too, regaining wounds (if he gets to Combat).
I'm guessing that remorseless from the plague marine article is going to be like angels of death, which will include Hateful assault and malicious volleys.
Sasori wrote: I'm guessing that remorseless from the plague marine article is going to be like angels of death, which will include Hateful assault and malicious volleys.
That's what I am thinking too. But seems strange that Morty loses out on hateful assault due to not having it.
DTTFE I would actually be happy to lose. I am not a fan of bonuses vs certain armies like that. ie vengence of cadia etc. I know they are fluffy, but they are very all or nothing things.
DTTFE I would actually be happy to lose. I am not a fan of bonuses vs certain armies like that. ie vengence of cadia etc. I know they are fluffy, but they are very all or nothing things.
Same. In certain armies you trigger them all the time (DTTFE) and in others, almost never. Some are not often triggered but stupidly OP when in effect (grey knights smite vs daemons).
If they must be included for fluff, make them a stratagem that isn't game breaking.
Sasori wrote: I'm guessing that remorseless from the plague marine article is going to be like angels of death, which will include Hateful assault and malicious volleys.
That's what I am thinking too. But seems strange that Morty loses out on hateful assault due to not having it.
DTTFE I would actually be happy to lose. I am not a fan of bonuses vs certain armies like that. ie vengence of cadia etc. I know they are fluffy, but they are very all or nothing things.
Agree about bonuses vs. certain armies. Feels like it creates an artificial Rock, Paper, Scissor on top of it all.
There is one leak that I find curious and that is the Typhus insert. He still has the scythe but the Destroyer Hive is not listed on the sheet. My guess it is now some sort of an ability or stratagem.
It used to be an ability instead of a shooting weapon. Maybe it's back to that again?
Or if we are right about the whole contagions of nurgle, it could buff it now instead, by either being one ahead or does more damage/minuses. I like the idea of that.
Importantly though.
Does tomorrow still bring the coin and free model.
I’m guessing yes as they mention them, but they don’t say it’s for December, so I hope that hasn’t been pushed.
As for DA mentioned as being pushed back, I don’t think so, I think this will just slot in when it arrives.
Assuming the delay is transit.
If it was production then we could see everything pushed along..
Sasori wrote: I'm guessing that remorseless from the plague marine article is going to be like angels of death, which will include Hateful assault and malicious volleys.
That's what I am thinking too. But seems strange that Morty loses out on hateful assault due to not having it.
DTTFE I would actually be happy to lose. I am not a fan of bonuses vs certain armies like that. ie vengence of cadia etc. I know they are fluffy, but they are very all or nothing things.
Agree about bonuses vs. certain armies. Feels like it creates an artificial Rock, Paper, Scissor on top of it all.
There is one leak that I find curious and that is the Typhus insert. He still has the scythe but the Destroyer Hive is not listed on the sheet. My guess it is now some sort of an ability or stratagem.
Maybe because the Destroyer Hive isn't exactly MODELED like a Nurgling is for Mortarion? Yeah we see the cloud of demon wasps but that's the best guess I have.
Looks like they buffed plague knifes and swords. plague knife gets a -1 ap and the sword gets +1 strength and -1 ap. I wonder if they are changing plague weapons
Did GW really just delete Blood Angels Tactical squads and the start collecting Blood Angels set as a codex for them came out? If so, what an absolutely idiotic company.
clodax66 wrote: Looks like they buffed plague knifes and swords. plague knife gets a -1 ap and the sword gets +1 strength and -1 ap. I wonder if they are changing plague weapons
This should also mean a change to Plague Bearers who carry the exact same weapon (Plague Sword).
Mace of Contagion with damage 3 could become a decent choice depending on points, so far you always had to buy it together with an axe, paying full price for both weapons but without an attack bonus so it was a very bad choice.
AngryAngel80 wrote: Maybe they will see a bump in that, we currently don't know if they will get any rules at all in it. They could just be a narrative plot point with little or not actual power in it, especially so close after release of their new codex.
There’s more than just the background of an epic war zone in here, the book also includes new rules for:
Death Guard
Adeptus Mechanicus
Imperial Knights
Drukhari
Crusade rules still count as rules yes ? Nothing said match play rules unless I'm missing it. Like I said we are arguing over rumors here I actually think they will have match play rules in but for now, could just be crusade stuff to push that game type, however narrow the chance is for that, could still true.
AngryAngel80 wrote: Maybe they will see a bump in that, we currently don't know if they will get any rules at all in it. They could just be a narrative plot point with little or not actual power in it, especially so close after release of their new codex.
There’s more than just the background of an epic war zone in here, the book also includes new rules for:
Death Guard
Adeptus Mechanicus
Imperial Knights
Drukhari
Crusade rules still count as rules yes ? Nothing said match play rules unless I'm missing it. Like I said we are arguing over rumors here I actually think they will have match play rules in but for now, could just be crusade stuff to push that game type, however narrow the chance is for that, could still true.
Given there's a separate crusade expansion book being released alongside it, I'd imagine not. Again not impossible, but very unlikely.
I agree its pretty unlikely but I just am hoping it won't make me want to buy a second book just to play them. So I'm hoping beyond hope its just crusade stuff.
AngryAngel80 wrote: Maybe they will see a bump in that, we currently don't know if they will get any rules at all in it. They could just be a narrative plot point with little or not actual power in it, especially so close after release of their new codex.
There’s more than just the background of an epic war zone in here, the book also includes new rules for:
Death Guard
Adeptus Mechanicus
Imperial Knights
Drukhari
Crusade rules still count as rules yes ? Nothing said match play rules unless I'm missing it. Like I said we are arguing over rumors here I actually think they will have match play rules in but for now, could just be crusade stuff to push that game type, however narrow the chance is for that, could still true.
Given there's a separate crusade expansion book being released alongside it, I'd imagine not. Again not impossible, but very unlikely.
Wait, is there? Wasn't the other book a mission pack (like the one that came out for the terrain zones)?
AngryAngel80 wrote: Maybe they will see a bump in that, we currently don't know if they will get any rules at all in it. They could just be a narrative plot point with little or not actual power in it, especially so close after release of their new codex.
There’s more than just the background of an epic war zone in here, the book also includes new rules for:
Death Guard
Adeptus Mechanicus
Imperial Knights
Drukhari
Crusade rules still count as rules yes ? Nothing said match play rules unless I'm missing it. Like I said we are arguing over rumors here I actually think they will have match play rules in but for now, could just be crusade stuff to push that game type, however narrow the chance is for that, could still true.
Given there's a separate crusade expansion book being released alongside it, I'd imagine not. Again not impossible, but very unlikely.
Wait, is there? Wasn't the other book a mission pack (like the one that came out for the terrain zones)?
The Plague Purge Mission Pack allows everyone to join the fun in the Charadon war zone with a host of specific Crusade rules. Send your army campaigning through a land of rust and decay, and pick up some new relics and abilities along the way. In the same way as Beyond the Veil, this pack gives you a whole new region of space to set your campaigns in.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Maybe because the Destroyer Hive isn't exactly MODELED like a Nurgling is for Mortarion? Yeah we see the cloud of demon wasps but that's the best guess I have.
For another episode of "Slayer doesn't know gak about Death Guard": The Destroyer Hive is quite clearly modeled on Typhus, in fact, it should be impossible to miss.
clodax66 wrote: Looks like they buffed plague knifes and swords. plague knife gets a -1 ap and the sword gets +1 strength and -1 ap. I wonder if they are changing plague weapons
This should also mean a change to Plague Bearers who carry the exact same weapon (Plague Sword).
Mace of Contagion with damage 3 could become a decent choice depending on points, so far you always had to buy it together with an axe, paying full price for both weapons but without an attack bonus so it was a very bad choice.
Mace of contagion's stats are unchanged though. It might become a decent weapon if we keep hateful blows or if it loses the -1 to hit.
For ranged definitely, with more wounds and a very likely points hike blowing up yourself with plasma is even less attractive. Especially with blight launchers going to 2 damage flat for marine killing.
Depending on how the whole hateful blows thing goes though, melee squads could be decent as well for pushing enemies off objectives.
Yeah, I was looking at the Plasma,
I have two marines with Plasma, and three champions with the weapon in their back (those can be swapped from Bolter to Plasma backpacks, so I guess they’ll stick to Bolter..)
But then I do have 31 marines plus the heroes series coming, so it’s not like I’ll need to put them in ever.
Plasma champions are a nice point sink if you have points left to spare, but it's often one of the first things to go. My main reason to use plasma marines is because I'm running 5+ troops and I've run out of blight launchers.
With Plague Knives being -1 ap and 2 attacks base, it's going to be less important to kit out the PMs for close combat I think.
I think we are more likely to see shooty set ups with a flail in there, depending on points.
But then even with the points increases I am still thinking of squads of 7 as I refuse to change hahah.
With squads of 5 them in a rhino and CC set up could well be seen too
Automatically Appended Next Post: 5 CCPMs and 5 with Blight Launchers in a rhino to start for turn 1 protection.Depending on objectives either shooty squad jumps out and characters jump in or rhino moves turn one with all in and characters running.
Thinking about it that is one thing DG are really missing. All our proper lords are in Termi armour so we never have a way of getting them to front lines quick bar teleporting. (LR doesn't count as it sucks lol)
Jidmah wrote: Plasma champions are a nice point sink if you have points left to spare, but it's often one of the first things to go. My main reason to use plasma marines is because I'm running 5+ troops and I've run out of blight launchers.
Time to get yourself down to GW and select a free mini.
The manager at mine has boxed them with letters on according to what loadout they can build inside.
Automatically Appended Next Post: 5 CCPMs and 5 with Blight Launchers in a rhino to start for turn 1 protection.Depending on objectives either shooty squad jumps out and characters jump in or rhino moves turn one with all in and characters running.
Thinking about it that is one thing DG are really missing. All our proper lords are in Termi armour so we never have a way of getting them to front lines quick bar teleporting. (LR doesn't count as it sucks lol)
Well I might be able to do this..
I have the rhino and 4 blights, then a flail, cleaver and two mace/axe combos.
One more melee and BL and I’m set.
And if the heroes series comes with that, then all good..
Time to get yourself down to GW and select a free mini.
The manager at mine has boxed them with letters on according to what loadout they can build inside.
Do you have any idea of how many are available in the store?
I am a week away from store opening again here so that I can pick mine up.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Maybe because the Destroyer Hive isn't exactly MODELED like a Nurgling is for Mortarion? Yeah we see the cloud of demon wasps but that's the best guess I have.
For another episode of "Slayer doesn't know gak about Death Guard": The Destroyer Hive is quite clearly modeled on Typhus, in fact, it should be impossible to miss.
clodax66 wrote: Looks like they buffed plague knifes and swords. plague knife gets a -1 ap and the sword gets +1 strength and -1 ap. I wonder if they are changing plague weapons
This should also mean a change to Plague Bearers who carry the exact same weapon (Plague Sword).
Mace of Contagion with damage 3 could become a decent choice depending on points, so far you always had to buy it together with an axe, paying full price for both weapons but without an attack bonus so it was a very bad choice.
Mace of contagion's stats are unchanged though. It might become a decent weapon if we keep hateful blows or if it loses the -1 to hit.
You quite frankly didn't read my post at all did you?
Doohicky wrote: With Plague Knives being -1 ap and 2 attacks base, it's going to be less important to kit out the PMs for close combat I think.
I think we are more likely to see shooty set ups with a flail in there, depending on points.
But then even with the points increases I am still thinking of squads of 7 as I refuse to change hahah.
With squads of 5 them in a rhino and CC set up could well be seen too
Automatically Appended Next Post: 5 CCPMs and 5 with Blight Launchers in a rhino to start for turn 1 protection.Depending on objectives either shooty squad jumps out and characters jump in or rhino moves turn one with all in and characters running.
Thinking about it that is one thing DG are really missing. All our proper lords are in Termi armour so we never have a way of getting them to front lines quick bar teleporting. (LR doesn't count as it sucks lol)
Yeah, if I had two pie-in-the-sky wish lists for DG it would be a plaguemarine stat line Lord in power armor and Blessed Number bonuses for risking increased blast hits and coherency pains for some kind of minor nurgle-y bonus when taking PM squads (or Termis!) in units of 7.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I agree its pretty unlikely but I just am hoping it won't make me want to buy a second book just to play them. So I'm hoping beyond hope its just crusade stuff.
Expect to be disappointed then because there's absolutely no chance that their next big narrative thing only includes crusade rules in it, especially when there is a specifically crusade-themed book coming out alongside it. There's being hopeful and then there's having unrealistic expectations.
That art of the plague marine is super interesting. The bloated shoulder pad makes me think it could be a new character, but I think we've seen everything from the DG release. At least GW has started to go away from "no unique artwork unless there's a model"
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Did GW really just delete Blood Angels Tactical squads and the start collecting Blood Angels set as a codex for them came out? If so, what an absolutely idiotic company.
They said when they announced the Combat Patrols that those were replacing the Start Collecting sets. They released a BA Combat Patrol with the Codex.
The Blood Angels Tactical Squad has been missing since at least August of this year, so definitely not "just as a codex for them came out".
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Did GW really just delete Blood Angels Tactical squads and the start collecting Blood Angels set as a codex for them came out? If so, what an absolutely idiotic company.
Start collecting was predictable. Gw did say combat patrols are REPLACEMENTS for sc's after all.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I agree its pretty unlikely but I just am hoping it won't make me want to buy a second book just to play them. So I'm hoping beyond hope its just crusade stuff.
Expect to be disappointed then because there's absolutely no chance that their next big narrative thing only includes crusade rules in it, especially when there is a specifically crusade-themed book coming out alongside it. There's being hopeful and then there's having unrealistic expectations.
If I was afraid of GW to let me down I'd play nothing but loyalist marines. As is I just wish they wouldn't do that, it feels lame to right out the gate need or want two books just to get the most bang for your plague covered buck.
AngryAngel80 wrote: If I was afraid of GW to let me down I'd play nothing but loyalist marines. As is I just wish they wouldn't do that, it feels lame to right out the gate need or want two books just to get the most bang for your plague covered buck.
There is this old MadTV segment which always reminds me of the secret to enjoying GW's products:
I remember that show and yes I agree but if you post with your low expectations you get flakk for hating, then you try and say " Hey, maybe they won't do that ? " and then you're too optimistic.
I feel GW will do what I don't want them to do, but I also still hope they won't. It's a fine line and if they let me down ? Well it's still that same old GW at the end of the day.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Did GW really just delete Blood Angels Tactical squads and the start collecting Blood Angels set as a codex for them came out? If so, what an absolutely idiotic company.
Start collecting was predictable. Gw did say combat patrols are REPLACEMENTS for sc's after all.
That seems like a poor choice on Geedubs part. I can't imagine that making it easier for new players to get into this hobby. I got in on a Start Collecting box, there's no way I would have started this hobby with a $140 item. I know there's the Necron vs Primaris sets, but if a newbie wants a starting point for CSM for example, the cost would be pretty discouraging.
AngryAngel80 wrote: If I was afraid of GW to let me down I'd play nothing but loyalist marines. As is I just wish they wouldn't do that, it feels lame to right out the gate need or want two books just to get the most bang for your plague covered buck.
There is this old MadTV segment which always reminds me of the secret to enjoying GW's products:
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Did GW really just delete Blood Angels Tactical squads and the start collecting Blood Angels set as a codex for them came out? If so, what an absolutely idiotic company.
Start collecting was predictable. Gw did say combat patrols are REPLACEMENTS for sc's after all.
That seems like a poor choice on Geedubs part. I can't imagine that making it easier for new players to get into this hobby. I got in on a Start Collecting box, there's no way I would have started this hobby with a $140 item. I know there's the Necron vs Primaris sets, but if a newbie wants a starting point for CSM for example, the cost would be pretty discouraging.
I'm sure there is a thread about this that is not the news thread about Death Guard.
AngryAngel80 wrote: If I was afraid of GW to let me down I'd play nothing but loyalist marines. As is I just wish they wouldn't do that, it feels lame to right out the gate need or want two books just to get the most bang for your plague covered buck.
There is this old MadTV segment which always reminds me of the secret to enjoying GW's products:
Spoiler:
the anthem would be " curb you enthusiasm"?
Oh,but I'm totally enthusiastic about this release
I'm just not expecting MtG levels of rules writing or e-sports levels of balancing, because I'm also not expecting someone who has just gotten their licence to be awesome drivers. I still expect them to not drive into a wall, or in other words, create another clusterfeth like 7th edition's ork codex and the supplement that shall not be named which rendered my entire army unplayable and caused me to quit the game.
Considering we are talking about a company that misses whole sections of rules, can't even work with their own keyword system, a system so fething easy if one has a bit of brainpower remaining i don't know...
I do like the ability to ignore movement modifiers, meaning that while we are slower in general, we can move unhampered through craters, woods and other difficult grounds. This is nice on a proper table that offers plenty of varying terrain, especially in narrative games where you can enjoy properly bombed-out environments..
Definitely helps our standard bolter dudes, and given that we don't have any infantry with heavy weapons (except the one blightlord option I think) I think that's an improvment.
Vehicles firing in combat without penalty seem nice, especially since they all just went to 3+, but given most things will have plague spewers or blast it really benefits defilers.
Ignoring movement, advance, and charge modifiers is nice, particularly against TFC and admech bombers, and since it says 'can' ignore, you can still benefit from any positive modifiers.
Also good to see that we still have Malicious Volleys, gives me hope that we still keep Hateful Assault
Sherrypie wrote: I do like the ability to ignore movement modifiers, meaning that while we are slower in general, we can move unhampered through craters, woods and other difficult grounds. This is nice on a proper table that offers plenty of varying terrain, especially in narrative games where you can enjoy properly bombed-out environments..
I like it a lot. Though it does somewhat push the balance back to plasma from blight launchers, as DG no longer ignore the penalty for firing Assault weapons after advancing.
Atlatl Jones wrote: I like it a lot. Though it does somewhat push the balance back to plasma from blight launchers, as DG no longer ignore the penalty for firing Assault weapons after advancing.
Eh. That's pretty corner-case, especially when you consider that plasma won't be firing at all after advancing.
The big problem with plasma on DG is that the low-power setting just isn't enough anymore, and 1s on the overcharged setting just evaporates an expensive model while ignoring its otherwise great defensive buffs. It's one thing to self-immolate guardsmen, its another to set 30+ point models on fire. The guardsmen are doomed anyway, but the DG could otherwise hold for a while.
It's lore-friendly, it's good and there is something for every unit type (infantry and vehicle).
Bonus point for it because GW thought of positive modifiers for Movement, Advance and Charge rolls. You are not forced to ignore all modifiers, thus, you can still benefit from the positive ones.
They're just the ones that were in dark vengeance. GW love using them in promotional photos but still haven't released the rest. The heavy weapons guy looks like he's been slightly converted tho which is odd.
Probably means they are removing the heavy options because they are clearly OP and cultists need a nerf...
Abaddon303 wrote: They're just the ones that were in dark vengeance. GW love using them in promotional photos but still haven't released the rest. The heavy weapons guy looks like he's been slightly converted tho which is odd.
Probably means they are removing the heavy options because they are clearly OP and cultists need a nerf...
Thanks. I recognized the Cawdor and Orlock guys, but didn't recognize the others. Didn't see them on the site...but judging by the sculpt I didn't think they would be new.
Selfcontrol wrote: It's lore-friendly, it's good and there is something for every unit type (infantry and vehicle).
Bonus point for it because GW thought of positive modifiers for Movement, Advance and Charge rolls. You are not forced to ignore all modifiers, thus, you can still benefit from the positive ones.
I like it. Quite a lot.
My only immediate question is a rules one: 'can ignore any or all modifiers' should let cherry picking happen, yes? If you've got a -2, a -3 and a +1 to a move, you can ignore the penalties and still take the bonus, rather than being forced to ignore them all.
There are just times when I second guess GW rules for wording and intent, even if it feels like it should be obvious.
Partly because they feel the need to write redundant redundancies like a 'Rapid fire bolt weapon is a bolt weapon that Rapid Fires.'
This is a nail in the coffin to plasma on Death Guard infantry which is how a lot of people including me modeled a lot of plague marines and blightlord terminators. Sucks in a major way.
That said, overall this is a powerful boost to the army. Bolters will benefit a huge amount. You can now move 5" in the first turn and rapid fire 24" into units a couple inches into your opponent's deployment zone. Once you're sitting on an objective in midfield, you have pretty comfortable reach into your opponent's backfield with bolter weapons.
Likewise, ignoring movement, advance, and charge modifiers on infantry is very powerful. Psychic powers and strats to cut movement or charges are some of the strongest things in the game and were extra punishing against slow units like Death Guard. This is a thematic rule that gives DG something very useful in game terms that is unique compared to other power armor armies.
Selfcontrol wrote: It's lore-friendly, it's good and there is something for every unit type (infantry and vehicle).
Bonus point for it because GW thought of positive modifiers for Movement, Advance and Charge rolls. You are not forced to ignore all modifiers, thus, you can still benefit from the positive ones.
I like it. Quite a lot.
My only immediate question is a rules one: 'can ignore any or all modifiers' should let cherry picking happen, yes? If you've got a -2, a -3 and a +1 to a move, you can ignore the penalties and still take the bonus, rather than being forced to ignore them all.
I'd say yes. Keyword there is "Any". So if you have -2, -3, and +1, you can ignore all of them (no modifiers) or any of them (the -2 and -3, in all probability).
Alright, who stomped the writers or their manager with perma-advance blight launcher spam squads and plasma squads?
It’s a seriously undeserved nerf in both respects and while maybe further rules this week give the 18” plasma rapid fire and no-penalty advance and assault weapon bits I’m not confident.
Abaddon303 wrote: They're just the ones that were in dark vengeance. GW love using them in promotional photos but still haven't released the rest. The heavy weapons guy looks like he's been slightly converted tho which is odd.
Probably means they are removing the heavy options because they are clearly OP and cultists need a nerf...
Thanks. I recognized the Cawdor and Orlock guys, but didn't recognize the others. Didn't see them on the site...but judging by the sculpt I didn't think they would be new.
Converted cultist dude is actually in the current Codex, hiding in the background on pg.63.
Yes the advance and shoot at full BS and rapid fire 18" plasma is gone.
But the consistent movement and constant 24" rapid fire on infantry makes up for it.
And frankly it suits the theme better. Running and firing was nice, but really it wasn't their style. This consistent bolter march feels much more like I imagine they would look on the battlefield
PoorGravitasHandling wrote: To make up for the 16% fewer shots made by Blight Launchers against MEQs, you would need a lot of bolters.
If you are constantly advancing your PMs with BLs then you are playing your DG very different from me.
I rarely have to advance in 9th ed compared to 8th with my PM squads
I'm not saying there may not be a slight reduction in damage in a vacuum for people who do use advancing a lot, but I have rarely relied on my PM squads to do range damage beyond plinking off a few wounds.
Consistent movement for me is much more important.
Also, if cataphactii armour still exists this means no more 1/2 advancing!
Inexorable advance is basicly the UM super doctrine as a chapter tactic. and UMs are one of the stronger marine factions right now aren't they? this I suspect is going to make deathguard pretty strong
Inexorable Advance and Malicious Volleys look great. I love bolter PMs, so yipee. I'll be able to move my PBC around a lot more now. This new codex is looking good so far.
BrianDavion wrote: Inexorable advance is basicly the UM super doctrine as a chapter tactic. and UMs are one of the stronger marine factions right now aren't they? this I suspect is going to make deathguard pretty strong
I dont think its that strong really. With SM they have a vast amount of heavy weapons and bolt weapons where as DG do not. They only have the humble bolter to benefit from Malicious Volleys and how many heavy weapons do PM have access to so that they can ignore the -1 to hit? Blight Launcher is assault and a Heavy Plaguespewer auto hits and DG cant use Havoks and they already ignore the modifier for moving and firing a heavy weapon?
Then with vehicles ignoring the penalty to hit in cc with heavy weapons, how many is there that isnt blast or autohits? Heavy Blight Launcher, Entropy Cannons, Heavy Bolters, Lascannons, Reaper Autocannons, Multi-meltas, Missile Launchers and Plasma Cannon? And its kind of situational if these models that are equipped with them are even in combat. Maybe youd want a Defiler or a Myphitic Blight-hauler in melee but not the rest.
Now choosing to ignore certain modifers to movement/advance/charge is pretty strong. The other parts of Inexorable Advance not so much, they simply dont have the weapons to capitalise on it like UM do with SM.
MBHs are bound to go WAY up in price. I will be very surprised if they don't.
Unless daemon engines don't get inexorable advance they will now hit on 3s and even in CC they will be shooting missile launchers and meltas on 3s.
Wait, does missile launcher still count as blast when krak? I think they might. So just multi meltas, but that's still not bad. Would take a brave elite unit to go into CC with a squad of them.
Doohicky wrote: MBHs are bound to go WAY up in price. I will be very surprised if they don't.
Unless daemon engines don't get inexorable advance they will now hit on 3s and even in CC they will be shooting missile launchers and meltas on 3s.
Wait, does missile launcher still count as blast when krak? I think they might. So just multi meltas, but that's still not bad. Would take a brave elite unit to go into CC with a squad of them.
As long as Blight Launchers are still good then all is well.
Went into my GW yesterday for the free mini (surprised they were doing the full kit and not just ETB, but either way) grabbed myself a 5th BL for the army.
These rules look decent and gives some hope to the other CSM as well. Seems our vehicles get traits now too. Bit let down about the nerf to plasma rapid fire, but as said by others: with the price hike to PM's coming I was already reconsidering equipping them with plasma. Shame since I've got quite a few of those.
MBH shooting multi-melta at 3+ in CC means they won't get bogged down by small marine squads anymore either. Overall I like it and I wonder what else will be in store for us this week.
Danny76 wrote: As long as Blight Launchers are still good then all is well.
Went into my GW yesterday for the free mini (surprised they were doing the full kit and not just ETB, but either way) grabbed myself a 5th BL for the army.
Well the leaks say they're still a decent weapon in terms of stats, but point costs will determine it all.
I'm mostly liking all this. I don't like the hit to plasma as my plague marines are the old ones so I have a good deal of plasma and some melta ones so this feels bad a little bit for me maybe they'll have other stuff that brings it back ? Either way I'll still run them as I have them.
Oh but did anyone else notice they say to make sure you have plenty of plague marines and at least in the US you click on the link and it shows they are out of stock ?
Thank god they made sure we are stocked up on things we can't order. Oh GW, you pranksters.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I'm mostly liking all this. I don't like the hit to plasma as my plague marines are the old ones so I have a good deal of plasma and some melta ones so this feels bad a little bit for me maybe they'll have other stuff that brings it back ? Either way I'll still run them as I have them.
Oh but did anyone else notice they say to make sure you have plenty of plague marines and at least in the US you click on the link and it shows they are out of stock ?
Thank god they made sure we are stocked up on things we can't order. Oh GW, you pranksters.
That's happened at least twice before specifically with Plague Marines and WarCom articles in the last month. Exactly once they were actually in stock, but its been kind of hilarious.
The lead up to the Necron codex was actually worse (for a period the ONLY thing in stock was the new Szeras) and its still pretty bad. Its just the way things are for now.
I imagine the promotional work is all written and prepared well in advance of posting - so they probably work in the dark regarding what will actually be in stock when the articles are published.
H.B.M.C. wrote: They're just holding the Disgustingly Resilient rule for the end of the week, aren't they?
I am nervous that they made DG awful when so far it's the amazing rule at the core of the army, so they are holding it until end of the week to soften the blow.
Red Corsair wrote: It honestly should be a 6+++ unless they severely jack the cost of units up, which I think would be worse.
I'd say it's even odds one way or the other lol
If the idea is to make a historically bad army a lot better, then it wouldn't do much good to improve the units only to jack up all their point costs at the same time.
Honestly why are people so convinced they are going to rework or nerf DR? Durability is THE core of our faction identity and we had 5+++ all throughout 8th and it never was an issue. Yes we are getting (from the looks of it) increased firepower but we were already expensive, Necrons got an arguably better 5+ FNP for their 1 wound models, IH kept their 6+++ from what I know and all these rumors so far have been unsupported except by hearsay from other doomsayers.
GW: Here's day 1 of a week long Codex Death Guard Preview. Look at the all new Inexorable Advance! And in case you wondered, Malicious Volleys are here to stay.
And Dakka Dakka's response?
H.B.M.C. wrote: They're just holding the Disgustingly Resilient rule for the end of the week, aren't they?
Castozor wrote: Honestly why are people so convinced they are going to rework or nerf DR?
Because it's GW, and GW are notorious for overbalancing things.
The thought process is this:
Rules Writer #1: DG need an improvement. They're not worth their cost. Rules Writer #2: Maybe we can give them W2? RW#1: That's great. Now they're be more powerful and worth their cost! RW#2: Wait, did you just say more powerful? RW#1: Oh no! RW#2: Oh no! DG are more powerful! We'd better increase their cost! RW#1: Wait, you said more powerful? RW#2: Oh no! RW#1: Oh no! Better reduce DR to 6+. That'll balance them.
And then, 8 months later...
Rules Writer #1: DG need an improvement. They're not worth their cost.
... and the cycle begins anew.
alextroy wrote: I guess it wouldn't be DD without the cynicism
I'd say randomly whining about what other people are saying is becoming more of a DD trait.
Eh I can get behind that H.B.M.C. but even as a thoroughly pessimistic person our PA and the leaks so far have convinced me that for once GW actually gets what DG is/should be about. I have faith that they will retain the very core of our identity. That being our incredible resilience. Now maybe they will muck it up and make PM 30 points, or make everything else way to expensive but I'm positive the 5+ FNP will stay.
For people who are wondering why salty veterans of this hobby are woe-spiraling over minor nerfs to plasma and blight launchers please also wonder how often STRICTLY (no daemon summoning or soup) Death Guard lists got to the top tournament table.
I'm as pessimistic as they come, but it's looking good so far. Fingers crossed there aren't any unwelcome surprises throughout the week. Keen for the contagions preview but I hope DR is out of the gate tomorrow.
Horla wrote: I imagine the promotional work is all written and prepared well in advance of posting - so they probably work in the dark regarding what will actually be in stock when the articles are published.
Maybe but the plague marine stuff has been pretty much out of stock for a month/months so it was just a joke that they were " Hey Pick up these ! " and you can't. You'd think someone would have amended the bottom of the article at least when it was placed to say ** When they are back in stock ! You know at least make a joke of it as opposed to just not care and post and forget which it felt more like.
I really like the new Inoxerable Advance. It really fits the Death Guard. I see them slowly advancing on their enemies, never getting in a hurry, just shrugging off anything that gets thrown at them, while slowly, steadily chewing away at them with their bolters. Reminds me of how the Lords of Silence fought in their book. I hope they make the rules for the other Legions as thematic and fitting.
Gadzilla666 wrote: I really like the new Inoxerable Advance. It really fits the Death Guard. I see them slowly advancing on their enemies, never getting in a hurry, just shrugging off anything that gets thrown at them, while slowly, steadily chewing away at them with their bolters. Reminds me of how the Lords of Silence fought in their book. I hope they make the rules for the other Legions as thematic and fitting.
Agree. It's also worth noting that Inexorable Advance affects vehicles, which is likely to be the same for all legions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
alextroy wrote: GW: Here's day 1 of a week long Codex Death Guard Preview. Look at the all new Inexorable Advance! And in case you wondered, Malicious Volleys are here to stay.
And Dakka Dakka's response?
H.B.M.C. wrote: They're just holding the Disgustingly Resilient rule for the end of the week, aren't they?
I guess it wouldn't be DD without the cynicism
I disagree. Hatred Blows and Disgustingly Resilient are clearly the two army-wide rules which will have the most impact on how DG will perform, followed closely whatever the new rule does. GW clearly lead with the less important stuff to create tension, and there is nothing cynic about that.
AP 0 bolters never accomplish much. PMs were more about their special weapons or their melee weapons like flails. You could double their bolter weapon shots and it still wouldn't do much. Usually, 3 out of 5 of the PMs in a squad would be running special weapons anyway, so only 2 of them would be carrying bolters.
Also, Loyalist Space Marines have doctrines and stuff so not only do they shoot far more shots, but their shots are AP1 or even AP2, and they are more likely to have rerolls to wound on 1s.
Still, I do like Inexorable Advance so far because it is quite fluffy. Let's see what else they reveal.
I will greatly enjoy their attempts to make whatever trash they shovel on the XVIIth sound appealing. This will be the third time since 8th began some poor bastard had to try and polish that turd.
Castozor wrote: Honestly why are people so convinced they are going to rework or nerf DR?
Because there was a badly photo-shopped, hastings-style fake "leak" and after now decades of having seen stuff like this make the rounds on click-bait sites, people still haven't learned to just ignore the non-sense.
Eldenfirefly wrote: AP 0 bolters never accomplish much. PMs were more about their special weapons or their melee weapons like flails. You could double their bolter weapon shots and it still wouldn't do much. Usually, 3 out of 5 of the PMs in a squad would be running special weapons anyway, so only 2 of them would be carrying bolters.
Also, Loyalist Space Marines have doctrines and stuff so not only do they shoot far more shots, but their shots are AP1 or even AP2, and they are more likely to have rerolls to wound on 1s.
Still, I do like Inexorable Advance so far because it is quite fluffy. Let's see what else they reveal.
keep in mind that this is their chapter tactic we're seeing now, thus far since space marines 8.5 came out every new codex (sisters of battle, space marines and necrons) have had a "doctrine equivilant" (not nesscarily in power level but a 'if you run your army pure with no soup whatsoever you get this" type thing) So it's safe to assume deathguard will get something along those lines so we can't say for sure how powerful deathguard will be. we lack sufficant information
Rumours about DR changes have been circulating for at least 2 months, with playtesters mentioning it "accidentally."
Essentially the rumour is that it is changed to a -1 to wound instead of a FNP which on its own is something I can absolutely see happening. Not necessarily because a 5+++ on 2W models would be too imbalanced or anything like that, but because a FNP on multiwound model dealing with multiple damage just slows the game down to an absolute crawl. Trying to work out damage to a DG terminator unit if you're throwing damage 2+ weapons at it is already a nightmare, but putting that across an entire army sounds like an exercise in hammering nails through your balls.
And yeah, I realise IH still have their FNP, but it's still very apparent that different design philosophies exist between different writers of the Codexes. Just look at how carefully balanced and designed the Necron one is and then looking at Marines you still have at least a dozen abusive feel-bad mechanics going on, which is half down to the writers not caring as much but also the natural bloat of 7+ books with hundreds of combos in it being an impossible task to properly balance or design around. DG lose their FNP because it slows the game down but IH keep theirs? How veryGW~
Horla wrote: I imagine the promotional work is all written and prepared well in advance of posting - so they probably work in the dark regarding what will actually be in stock when the articles are published.
Maybe but the plague marine stuff has been pretty much out of stock for a month/months so it was just a joke that they were " Hey Pick up these ! " and you can't. You'd think someone would have amended the bottom of the article at least when it was placed to say ** When they are back in stock ! You know at least make a joke of it as opposed to just not care and post and forget which it felt more like.
I could have sworn the big PM box was in stock as of a few days ago as I was thinking about picking them up. Plus, don’t the different regions have different stock levels, making it look like you’re sold out and having someone in Europe when the US is sold out (or whatever) not click a link is worse for business than someone clicking the link and then having to go buy them in a shop or wait until they restock their region.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I feel like I’ve truly become a DakkaDakka member now when I’m arguing about whether GW should flag links or not
No, they were out for at least a month or two as every time I looked at DG stuff a lot of it was sold out in the US at least, plague marines counted with those sold out. You are correct that certain areas may have it and others not, I think this is just a supply issue as they seem to be doing awful bad at keeping things in stock.
My comment was more they should have maybe put a tongue in cheek comment to say they may not be in stock as opposed to just place a link to stock up, with no stock, wouldn't take long just to add that.
Just feels like kind of a sad DG roll out. First people are hyped, slow trickle of info, then told they are delayed till next year, then continue to tease information but put in links for things to buy in the mean time that you can't, made me chuckle..
It's worth noting that there is lots of stuff happening in the real world around our plastic toys. With Christmas coming up, GW having shut down in spring and apparently still not catching up with the backlog from then (probably with reduce production capacity), basically anything 40k is hard to get.
Heck, I'm still waiting for a SW dread I ordered in August.
Assume I live in a world and in this world we also are dealing with these real life issues, that has nothing to do with me finding it funny the snafus or fubars that do crop up are there.
The only thing I'd ordered was a couple DG things way earlier in the year that I just got weeks ago and honestly I'm lucky to have them as it feels like they must have come back into stock to just go right back out of stock again. I hope your dread gets to you soon.
Castozor wrote: Honestly why are people so convinced they are going to rework or nerf DR?
Because there was a badly photo-shopped, hastings-style fake "leak" and after now decades of having seen stuff like this make the rounds on click-bait sites, people still haven't learned to just ignore the non-sense.
Rumour started way before that though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bosskelot wrote: Rumours about DR changes have been circulating for at least 2 months, with playtesters mentioning it "accidentally."
Essentially the rumour is that it is changed to a -1 to wound instead of a FNP which on its own is something I can absolutely see happening. Not necessarily because a 5+++ on 2W models would be too imbalanced or anything like that, but because a FNP on multiwound model dealing with multiple damage just slows the game down to an absolute crawl. Trying to work out damage to a DG terminator unit if you're throwing damage 2+ weapons at it is already a nightmare, but putting that across an entire army sounds like an exercise in hammering nails through your balls.
And yeah, I realise IH still have their FNP, but it's still very apparent that different design philosophies exist between different writers of the Codexes. Just look at how carefully balanced and designed the Necron one is and then looking at Marines you still have at least a dozen abusive feel-bad mechanics going on, which is half down to the writers not caring as much but also the natural bloat of 7+ books with hundreds of combos in it being an impossible task to properly balance or design around. DG lose their FNP because it slows the game down but IH keep theirs? How veryGW~
This. And I would gladly take that. Either way it can be made balanced but if you get rid of some dice rolling from the process yey.
There's reason I decided I would never play snakebites period when first indication of ork kultures appeared 6+++? On orks? Like hell I slow my games like that.
Now if we could get rid of ridiculous amount of rerolls...One thing AOS got right. Less rerolls.
-1 to wound is pretty spicy if you do the maths, I'm 50/50 on whether it's too good, but it would speed things up and sounds the most believable of the rumoured replacement options. Only other one I've seen floating around is -1 to damage which wouldn't even work on units like Poxwalkers.
Marshal Loss wrote: -1 to wound is pretty spicy if you do the maths, I'm 50/50 on whether it's too good, but it would speed things up and sounds the most believable of the rumoured replacement options. Only other one I've seen floating around is -1 to damage which wouldn't even work on units like Poxwalkers.
gif DR preview today GW
Someone mathed it out in the DG tactics thread. Statistically it's very similar to 5+ FNP, with it being slightly better against attacks lower than your toughness and slightly worse against attacks higher than your toughness.
Marshal Loss wrote: -1 to wound is pretty spicy if you do the maths, I'm 50/50 on whether it's too good, but it would speed things up and sounds the most believable of the rumoured replacement options. Only other one I've seen floating around is -1 to damage which wouldn't even work on units like Poxwalkers.
gif DR preview today GW
Someone mathed it out in the DG tactics thread. Statistically it's very similar to 5+ FNP, with it being slightly better against attacks lower than your toughness and slightly worse against attacks higher than your toughness.
Yeah--i definitely wouldn't complain about replacing FnP with -1 to wound. Speeds up the game as well.
I kind of like the way they are making the rules we've seen for death guard so far.
It's not. For example, a lascannon currently wounds a T5 plague marine on a 3+.
-1 to wound makes that a 4+, +1T is still a 3+.
Not only that, but -1 to Wound is a way to cancel out anything that might get a +1 to Wound...and anything that might be a Mortal Wound or additional Wound triggering off of 5+, 6+ or things of that nature.
I wouldn't be shocked if there's a permacover bonus or something for the infantry too.
I'd rather have the -1-to wound as a stratagem for one unit, and keep the disgustingly resilient as it is. Sure, the reroll mechanic is slower, but death guard is not exactly a horde army.
Spreelock wrote: I'd rather have the -1-to wound as a stratagem for one unit, and keep the disgustingly resilient as it is. Sure, the reroll mechanic is slower, but death guard is not exactly a horde army.
The number of DG models is irrelevant, you might only have 10 models but if I do 360d6 damage we still need to roll each one of those individually RAW, just in case.
Not by longshot. Same reason why +1 to wound is HUGE making blood angels largely best marine chapter and why skorpek destroyer stratagem is so awesome.
3-7 ed's it would have been but imagine all those s7-8 weapons becoming 4+ to wound, bolters wounding on 6's(t5 and t6? Bolter doesn't care)
There's reason why blood angels(native) and bloody rose(stratagem) are so good. +1 to wound. That ain't no strength stat boost.
Salamander captain with t7 and -1 to wound? Need s7 to not wound on 6's...
Marshal Loss wrote: -1 to wound is pretty spicy if you do the maths, I'm 50/50 on whether it's too good, but it would speed things up and sounds the most believable of the rumoured replacement options. Only other one I've seen floating around is -1 to damage which wouldn't even work on units like Poxwalkers.
gif DR preview today GW
Someone mathed it out in the DG tactics thread. Statistically it's very similar to 5+ FNP, with it being slightly better against attacks lower than your toughness and slightly worse against attacks higher than your toughness.
It also does nothing against mortal wounds so I'd prefer we keep the 5+. Compared to the rerolls of some armies and with our low model count I never felt DR was slowing my games down too much.
Marshal Loss wrote: -1 to wound is pretty spicy if you do the maths, I'm 50/50 on whether it's too good, but it would speed things up and sounds the most believable of the rumoured replacement options. Only other one I've seen floating around is -1 to damage which wouldn't even work on units like Poxwalkers.
gif DR preview today GW
Someone mathed it out in the DG tactics thread. Statistically it's very similar to 5+ FNP, with it being slightly better against attacks lower than your toughness and slightly worse against attacks higher than your toughness.
It also does nothing against mortal wounds so I'd prefer we keep the 5+. Compared to the rerolls of some armies and with our low model count I never felt DR was slowing my games down too much.
Being numb to pain or having thick flubber to blast off doesn't make you more resilient to your soul being burned out though. Never the less, ever d2+ shot coming in at plague marines now has to be rolled individually, by getting more wounds your DR rolls will become longer winded.
It really only seems to impact 3 models right now? The Biologus, the Blightspawn, and the Lord of Virulence.
The best mention is that this upgrade is points based, so CP can be saved for turn to turn things.
On DR being -1 to wound, I think the best comparison isn’t between Strength but between Damage.
D1 is currently ignored 1/3 of the time, would move to 1/6 wiffing.
D2 is 1/9 currently, would be 1/6 wiffing.
D3 is 1/27, would be 1/6 wiffing.
And so on. Not as good vs D1 (and useless against being T double the weapon’s S) but better against D2 and waaaaay better against every other D value.
Which is to say, this will make Daemon Engines even more of the go to than they already are. The only thing it’s useless against on the T7 engines is flashlights and other S3 or S2 weapons.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Now is it applied per unit or weapon? That'll be the deal breaker on using it for anything not a character or Daemon Engine.
Going by the article these upgrades are Character only to begin with. The revealed one is nice for the Blightspawn and makes me wonder if this will be the replacement for his stratagem in War of the Spider. Makes me wonder what the others will do. Also while I didn't expect otherwise, with this new guys flamers being only 12" and heavy while being in Terminator armor I'm REALLY wondering what his rules are going to be. Can't see him keep up with the very engines he's supposed to buff. And if he's supposed to be more of a backline buffer, why give him 12" flamers?
PoorGravitasHandling wrote: It really only seems to impact 3 models right now? The Biologus, the Blightspawn, and the Lord of Virulence.
Technically daemon prince with sword and spitter as well.
I'm curious what the other pathogens are - if there is something decent for melee characters in there a LoC or noxious blightbringer could make use of the extra point of strength.
Im hoping for some way to heal Deamon engines, either a plague warpsmith, a strat or a powr for my casters. Every other deamon engine self heals each turn and every other legion has smiths.
Just been watching the news here in UK, it was talking about how many businesses are low on stock for manufacturing and for imported stock due to a perfect storm of CV-19, PPE backlogs at ports and Brexit.
It specifically said how imports from China were badly affected and it's affecting lots of industries as there are massive backlogs.
I think that goes a long way to explain the DG delay and stock levels in general
AngryAngel80 wrote: Well I'm hoping that character is a demon engine support type character, probably won't be with his weapon loadout but I hope he is.
I seem to remember them saying he was on a stream?
They did. The new character is confirmed to be a master of ordnance that is supposed to support daemon engines. With daemon engines most likely not being core and heralds of nurgle no longer having an effect on spitters, giving them their own support character actually fills a nice niche.
Doohicky wrote: Just been watching the news here in UK, it was talking about how many businesses are low on stock for manufacturing and for imported stock due to a perfect storm of CV-19, PPE backlogs at ports and Brexit.
It specifically said how imports from China were badly affected and it's affecting lots of industries as there are massive backlogs.
I think that goes a long way to explain the DG delay and stock levels in general
Question on this - what would actually be delayed from the DG release if stuff from China is held up? If the back of my SM 'dex is to be believed, it looks like the books are being printed in the UK now...
Doohicky wrote: Just been watching the news here in UK, it was talking about how many businesses are low on stock for manufacturing and for imported stock due to a perfect storm of CV-19, PPE backlogs at ports and Brexit.
It specifically said how imports from China were badly affected and it's affecting lots of industries as there are massive backlogs.
I think that goes a long way to explain the DG delay and stock levels in general
Question on this - what would actually be delayed from the DG release if stuff from China is held up? If the back of my SM 'dex is to be believed, it looks like the books are being printed in the UK now...
That's beyond my knowledge, I thought it was to do with these delays as rumour had been that it was caused by lost or delayed shipping containers. Or maybe the printing company are missing resources. Honestly I don't know so I'll stop guessing now
Doohicky wrote: Just been watching the news here in UK, it was talking about how many businesses are low on stock for manufacturing and for imported stock due to a perfect storm of CV-19, PPE backlogs at ports and Brexit.
It specifically said how imports from China were badly affected and it's affecting lots of industries as there are massive backlogs.
I think that goes a long way to explain the DG delay and stock levels in general
Question on this - what would actually be delayed from the DG release if stuff from China is held up? If the back of my SM 'dex is to be believed, it looks like the books are being printed in the UK now...
It's very likely the terrain. All of the Age of Sigmar faction terrain is cast in China and I imagine they are doing the same with the 40k faction terrain.
So basically the DG launch was delayed because of the faction terrain is my guess.
All of the Core Death Guard Infantry units – namely Plague Marines, Death Guard Possessed, Blightlord Terminators, and Deathshroud Terminators – come with this handy ability.
edit again: Blight Haulers also confirmed as coming with the ability, and can still be taken in units of up to 3
So that’s A) still a thing and B) still a rule with some sort of impact on the unit of 3?
Not that I have ever had or see blighthaulers be affected by morale ever. You’d have to apply a -2 to even begin making them vulnerable, right?
Considering that they are multi-wound you are usually hard pressed to ever need to take a test on them. Add to that LD of 8 and I find this scenario preposterous.
So that’s A) still a thing and B) still a rule with some sort of impact on the unit of 3?
Not that I have ever had or see blighthaulers be affected by morale ever. You’d have to apply a -2 to even begin making them vulnerable, right?
Well, it's the attrition text, not the initial moral check, where they ignore modifiers.
There are not a lot of rules that modify attrition. There's a Space Marine WL trait that gives -1 I believe, but nobody will ever take it when you have stuff like Rites of War
Sunny Side Up wrote: I am so glad morale rules are so much more meaningful in 9th now compared to 8th
Well, you need to sit back and think for a minute what this rule actually does.
1) In case you have lost enough models to both fail a moral test and be below starting strength and you have more than one model left, you halve the chance of losing additional models.
2) Screws over anyone who actually brought an attrition test modifier and tried to play around morale *waves at the nightlords players out there*
The most important info to come out of that preview is that "Death Guard Possessed" will have their own datasheet.
Yeah. Either way, it'll never matter for Blighthaulers outside of shafting future morale modifying abilities (nu-Night Lords?).
Assuming Haulers are at least LD 7, of course (and leaked dataasheet says they remain at 8).
You lose one model, the unit cannot fail the morale test.
You lose two models and fail the moral test on a 6, the last model is removed for the morale test and no attrition test would even be made before the unit is wiped.
So Death Guard get atsknf? That has been a complaint for a while in comparing the Legions to loyalists. Personally, I preferred it when we just had naturally higher leadership to offset that. Be interesting to see if this kind of rule is given to other Legions.
Sunny Side Up wrote: I am so glad morale rules are so much more meaningful in 9th now compared to 8th
No kidding.
Please stop with the "Scary Marines" meme rules for Night Lords gw, please.
Eldarsif wrote: Considering that they are multi-wound you are usually hard pressed to ever need to take a test on them. Add to that LD of 8 and I find this scenario preposterous. Remorseless just means they are immune at this point.
Remorseless doesn't affect the one moral casualty they will take no matter what.
I don't see this rule every impacting anything unless I'm running plague marine or possessed mobs of 20
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Does it?
It COULD equally also just be a confirmation it's still the same? These articles are about selling to new collectors as well as existing players so it's not ridiculous they would dedicate an article to an unchanged rule and one of the key features of the army. I'm not saying that it is or isn't, I suppose i'm just saying let's not count our squigs before they've hatched.
I agree it may not be likely it's gone unchanged but that's purely speculation.
Remorselessness. I won't complain its there, it can be useful now and then without doubt so i'm grateful even but it certainly didn't put a fire in my loins on its todd. CSM should all have ATSKNF stock anyway.
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Does it?
It COULD equally also just be a confirmation it's still the same? These articles are about selling to new collectors as well as existing players so it's not ridiculous they would dedicate an article to an unchanged rule and one of the key features of the army. I'm not saying that it is or isn't, I suppose i'm just saying let's not count our squigs before they've hatched.
I agree it may not be likely it's gone unchanged but that's purely speculation.
At the top of every article it explicitly says that there are five key changes to DG rules and we get five days of previews. If DR is the subject of tomorrow's, I'd say that confirms it's changed
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Does it?
It COULD equally also just be a confirmation it's still the same? These articles are about selling to new collectors as well as existing players so it's not ridiculous they would dedicate an article to an unchanged rule and one of the key features of the army. I'm not saying that it is or isn't, I suppose i'm just saying let's not count our squigs before they've hatched.
I agree it may not be likely it's gone unchanged but that's purely speculation.
At the top of every article it explicitly says that there are five key changes to DG rules and we get five days of previews. If DR is the subject of tomorrow's, I'd say that confirms it's changed
Excellent. Thank you for pointing that out. Bring on the change.
All of the Core Death Guard Infantry units – namely Plague Marines, Death Guard Possessed, Blightlord Terminators, and Deathshroud Terminators
So Possessed apparently are CORE.
It goes on:
With Toughness 5 and multiple Wounds apiece, not to mention the effects of Disgustingly Resilient (more on that tomorrow!), these models are hard enough to kill in the first place.
With Toughness 5 and multiple Wounds apiece, not to mention the effects of Disgustingly Resilient (more on that tomorrow!), these models are hard enough to kill in the first place.
So possessed also seem to have T5.
That was already confirmed in November.
Grandfather Nurgle has also blessed them with an extra point of Toughness as well as granting them the Remorseless and Contagions of Nurgle abilities.
PoorGravitasHandling wrote:Night Lords may get the equivalent in the Morale Phase of the Nightbringer’s “ignore all rules that say to ignore this rule” bit.
Because an arms race of escalating “ignore that” rules with constant priority assigning FAQs is very, very GW.
Ugh, please just no. Just drop the Scary Marines meme and focus on their dirty fighting and disruption tactics. That's all I'm saying on the matter here, as this thread is about Death Guard, not Night Lords.
Eldarsif wrote: Considering that they are multi-wound you are usually hard pressed to ever need to take a test on them. Add to that LD of 8 and I find this scenario preposterous. Remorseless just means they are immune at this point.
Remorseless doesn't affect the one moral casualty they will take no matter what.
I don't see this rule every impacting anything unless I'm running plague marine or possessed mobs of 20
Take this with a pinch (or even a tub) of salt. A rep said the US warehouse is almost 2 weeks behind in shipping out orders and sometimes the packers just mark stuff out of stock because they don't want to go all the way to the back to get an item when fulfilling an order. Also the reason DG was delayed was to give the warehouse time to catch up on all the old orders.
I am in a Blood Bowl group and a lot of US based posters still have yet to receive their new boxed set, so they are definitely having some issues over there.
Regarding the Death Guard they really do seem like they are going to be a pretty strong army, I am liking most of what has been revealed thus far.
PoorGravitasHandling wrote: Night Lords may get the equivalent in the Morale Phase of the Nightbringer’s “ignore all rules that say to ignore this rule” bit.
Because an arms race of escalating “ignore that” rules with constant priority assigning FAQs is very, very GW.
Can't wait for the eventual unit that "ignores all rules that say to ignores rules that ignore any or all modifiers to attrition tests"
tneva82 wrote: Yep. There's already obsec and super obsec so why not extra scary guys that ignore not-scared rules
The easiest solution is to add an Objective Value for how much the individual model counts as contesting objectives. Thats too hard for GW to figure out though.
Red Corsair wrote: It honestly should be a 6+++ unless they severely jack the cost of units up, which I think would be worse.
I'd say it's even odds one way or the other lol
If the idea is to make a historically bad army a lot better, then it wouldn't do much good to improve the units only to jack up all their point costs at the same time.
I'm not trying to argue against whats logical, I am just making predictions based on the track record.
GW has proven that even with the best intentions they cannot get this mammoth of a system into a state of balance or fair. I'd go as far as to say it's not even possible to begin with.
PoorGravitasHandling wrote:Night Lords may get the equivalent in the Morale Phase of the Nightbringer’s “ignore all rules that say to ignore this rule” bit.
Because an arms race of escalating “ignore that” rules with constant priority assigning FAQs is very, very GW.
Ugh, please just no. Just drop the Scary Marines meme and focus on their dirty fighting and disruption tactics. That's all I'm saying on the matter here, as this thread is about Death Guard, not Night Lords.
I mean, pretty much everything about them is a bad meme. Pick one, scary marines, we LoVe RapToRs or we are a bunch of dinks that only engage with under strength depleted enemies? The third one is basically cheating, hey I get to play 2k at 1k level games lol. So it's probably one of the other two. I could also see a rule where they get +1 to hit in melee if they outnumber the enemy, but again, that would be a terrible meme rule.
I always loved the look and idea of nightlords until I read into their shticks, then I kind of hated them lol. They were *this close* to being the stealthy marines instead of alpha legion but then they had to ignite their armor with lightning
Red Corsair wrote: It honestly should be a 6+++ unless they severely jack the cost of units up, which I think would be worse.
I'd say it's even odds one way or the other lol
If the idea is to make a historically bad army a lot better, then it wouldn't do much good to improve the units only to jack up all their point costs at the same time.
I'm not trying to argue against whats logical, I am just making predictions based on the track record.
GW has proven that even with the best intentions they cannot get this mammoth of a system into a state of balance or fair. I'd go as far as to say it's not even possible to begin with.
I feel like 9th has done a lot to bring the game more in line, the core C:SM book is pretty solid even if the older supplements are still opening things up to be abused, and we saw them reign things in via CA.
That said, I'm more keen on Crusade and not trying to see where I place in the ITC so maybe my head isn't where it needs to be to be so negative about it.
Don't confuse honest pragmatism with negativity. I actually really like the game, and realize I will be engaging with another person so there is a necessary social contract to draw up between us. Well, at least if we both aim to enjoy the game we have to the fullest.
I also realize that to expect significant balance from thousands upon thousands of overlapping, stacking and variable costed rules slow dripped for release over time is a pipe dream without said social engagement.
Red Corsair wrote: Don't confuse honest pragmatism with negativity. I actually really like the game, and realize I will be engaging with another person so there is a necessary social contract to draw up between us. Well, at least if we both aim to enjoy the game we have to the fullest.
I also realize that to expect significant balance from thousands upon thousands of overlapping, stacking and variable costed rules slow dripped for release over time is a pipe dream without said social engagement.
Red Corsair wrote: Don't confuse honest pragmatism with negativity. I actually really like the game, and realize I will be engaging with another person so there is a necessary social contract to draw up between us. Well, at least if we both aim to enjoy the game we have to the fullest.
I also realize that to expect significant balance from thousands upon thousands of overlapping, stacking and variable costed rules slow dripped for release over time is a pipe dream without said social engagement.
GW knows this too.
They can do a lot better than they are now.
If you think they're bad now you should see where the game came from.
GW is making an effort to pursue balance now. They aren't 100% perfect, but no game is. The fact the game is improving though is something worth commending and encouraging. It's a carrot AND stick, not just a stick.
Red Corsair wrote: Don't confuse honest pragmatism with negativity. I actually really like the game, and realize I will be engaging with another person so there is a necessary social contract to draw up between us. Well, at least if we both aim to enjoy the game we have to the fullest.
I also realize that to expect significant balance from thousands upon thousands of overlapping, stacking and variable costed rules slow dripped for release over time is a pipe dream without said social engagement.
GW knows this too.
They can do a lot better than they are now.
If you think they're bad now you should see where the game came from.
GW is making an effort to pursue balance now. They aren't 100% perfect, but no game is. The fact the game is improving though is something worth commending and encouraging. It's a carrot AND stick, not just a stick.
So why put money towards "It's better than it was" when thats not much a measure to begin with?
Red Corsair wrote: Don't confuse honest pragmatism with negativity. I actually really like the game, and realize I will be engaging with another person so there is a necessary social contract to draw up between us. Well, at least if we both aim to enjoy the game we have to the fullest.
I also realize that to expect significant balance from thousands upon thousands of overlapping, stacking and variable costed rules slow dripped for release over time is a pipe dream without said social engagement.
GW knows this too.
They can do a lot better than they are now.
If you think they're bad now you should see where the game came from.
GW is making an effort to pursue balance now. They aren't 100% perfect, but no game is. The fact the game is improving though is something worth commending and encouraging. It's a carrot AND stick, not just a stick.
So why put money towards "It's better than it was" when thats not much a measure to begin with?
Why pretend nothing is changing or improving when it obviously has and is? It's nowhere near perfect, but I feel people are falling into a habit of doom scrolling through online communities and letting the negativity breed more negativity instead of taking a step back and looking at the positives too. I know I've done it.
Well I think its is getting a touch off of Death guard rumors so I'll not add to the talk of GW sucks or not. So far the news has been pretty alright in my opinion going to need to wait for the next two days to see how much it actually changes for the better, or stays meh.
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Isn't this just And They Shall Know No Fear but Death Guard? I haven't been following the codex rule changes from 8th to 9th that closely.
Yes. After two decades (or more) of complaining, Chaos Space Marines (or at least Death Guard) will finally be as brave as Imperial Space Marines. I for one welcome the end of this long standing complaint.
So, if DG Rhinos count as not having moved, Then does that now mean that Plague marines can ride in Rhinos, have those rhinos move, then disembark, then move, then assault?
cuda1179 wrote: So, if DG Rhinos count as not having moved, Then does that now mean that Plague marines can ride in Rhinos, have those rhinos move, then disembark, then move, then assault?
Yippy, a return to Rhino Rush.
No, because you still have to disembark before the transport model moves. Counting as Remained Stationary doesn't negate the fact that you still moved.
cuda1179 wrote: So, if DG Rhinos count as not having moved, Then does that now mean that Plague marines can ride in Rhinos, have those rhinos move, then disembark, then move, then assault?
alextroy wrote: After two decades (or more) of complaining...
I think your avatar appears in the dictionary next to the word "hyperbole". CSMs have, at times, had better Ld or just been flat out Fearless, so I don't know where this "two decades of complaining" bull gak is coming from.
alextroy wrote: After two decades (or more) of complaining...
I think your avatar appears in the dictionary next to the word "hyperbole". CSMs have, at times, had better Ld or just been flat out Fearless, so I don't know where this "two decades of complaining" bull gak is coming from.
Personally, I preferred it when CSM had better leadership than loyalists. Of course, that was when leadership actually meant more than just how many guys ran away.....
Well look on the bright side, maybe massed all infantry DG list can be a viable list after the codex is released. And if it is, then having remorseless would be nice.
BTW. just to add to DR possibly getting changed. I am fine with DG becoming a -1 to wound. That's ok really. Because all of DG's core troops are now toughness 5. A -1 to wound is pretty good on T5 units. A str 4 bolter would need to roll a 6 to wound. All str 6 to 9 weapons would need a 4+ to wound.
cuda1179 wrote: So, if DG Rhinos count as not having moved, Then does that now mean that Plague marines can ride in Rhinos, have those rhinos move, then disembark, then move, then assault?
Yippy, a return to Rhino Rush.
Cheekey... haha
On another note, whats this super ob sec ??
I dont get it, seems Im missing something and its not my dignity for once...
alextroy wrote: After two decades (or more) of complaining...
I think your avatar appears in the dictionary next to the word "hyperbole". CSMs have, at times, had better Ld or just been flat out Fearless, so I don't know where this "two decades of complaining" bull gak is coming from.
Why you trying to hurt my feelings
But seriously, Chaos players have been complaining every time a unit isn't Fearless that their vaunted Veterans of the Long War run away and were subject to Sweeping Advance when all Space Marines were basically invulnerable thanks to ATSKNF. It appears that will no longer be the case. They will be at least as brave as their Corpse God Loving counterparts.
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Isn't this just And They Shall Know No Fear but Death Guard? I haven't been following the codex rule changes from 8th to 9th that closely.
It is, but it's replacing Fearless so some people are mad. I'm taking it as GW removing army wide fearless abilities so leadership tests matter more.
Death Guard haven't had Fearless since 7th edition. In 8th they took morale tests like everyone else. This makes leadership tests matter less.
So it's swinging the pendelum back halfway? Honestly it feels like a good change for CSM compared to "everyone runs away or is fearless". Leadership tests will still matter, attrition won't.
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Isn't this just And They Shall Know No Fear but Death Guard? I haven't been following the codex rule changes from 8th to 9th that closely.
It is, but it's replacing Fearless so some people are mad. I'm taking it as GW removing army wide fearless abilities so leadership tests matter more.
Death Guard haven't had Fearless since 7th edition. In 8th they took morale tests like everyone else. This makes leadership tests matter less.
So it's swinging the pendelum back halfway? Honestly it feels like a good change for CSM compared to "everyone runs away or is fearless". Leadership tests will still matter, attrition won't.
This rule is for Death Guard. Not all Legions had Fearless on all of their units in previous editions. No reason to assume they all will have a rule similar to this in 9th.
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Isn't this just And They Shall Know No Fear but Death Guard? I haven't been following the codex rule changes from 8th to 9th that closely.
It is, but it's replacing Fearless so some people are mad. I'm taking it as GW removing army wide fearless abilities so leadership tests matter more.
Death Guard haven't had Fearless since 7th edition. In 8th they took morale tests like everyone else. This makes leadership tests matter less.
So it's swinging the pendelum back halfway? Honestly it feels like a good change for CSM compared to "everyone runs away or is fearless". Leadership tests will still matter, attrition won't.
This rule is for Death Guard. Not all Legions had Fearless on all of their units in previous editions. No reason to assume they all will have a rule similar to this in 9th.
The Rubrics, Noise Marines, and Berserkers were fearless in the past, and it at least provides some hope they'll fix the CSM going forward. Not holding my breathe or anything but maybe fingers crossed.
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Isn't this just And They Shall Know No Fear but Death Guard? I haven't been following the codex rule changes from 8th to 9th that closely.
It is, but it's replacing Fearless so some people are mad. I'm taking it as GW removing army wide fearless abilities so leadership tests matter more.
Death Guard haven't had Fearless since 7th edition. In 8th they took morale tests like everyone else. This makes leadership tests matter less.
So it's swinging the pendelum back halfway? Honestly it feels like a good change for CSM compared to "everyone runs away or is fearless". Leadership tests will still matter, attrition won't.
This rule is for Death Guard. Not all Legions had Fearless on all of their units in previous editions. No reason to assume they all will have a rule similar to this in 9th.
The Rubrics, Noise Marines, and Berserkers were fearless in the past, and it at least provides some hope they'll fix the CSM going forward. Not holding my breathe or anything but maybe fingers crossed.
Yes, the cult units got it, but Undivided had to get it from icons and the like, except for specific units like Possessed or Obliterators that had it automatically. They may go back to that. It's possible some of the Undivided Legions will be locked out of god specific marks again as well. We'll just have to wait and see.
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Isn't this just And They Shall Know No Fear but Death Guard? I haven't been following the codex rule changes from 8th to 9th that closely.
It is, but it's replacing Fearless so some people are mad. I'm taking it as GW removing army wide fearless abilities so leadership tests matter more.
Death Guard haven't had Fearless since 7th edition. In 8th they took morale tests like everyone else. This makes leadership tests matter less.
So it's swinging the pendelum back halfway? Honestly it feels like a good change for CSM compared to "everyone runs away or is fearless". Leadership tests will still matter, attrition won't.
This rule is for Death Guard. Not all Legions had Fearless on all of their units in previous editions. No reason to assume they all will have a rule similar to this in 9th.
The Rubrics, Noise Marines, and Berserkers were fearless in the past, and it at least provides some hope they'll fix the CSM going forward. Not holding my breathe or anything but maybe fingers crossed.
Yes, the cult units got it, but Undivided had to get it from icons and the like, except for specific units like Possessed or Obliterators that had it automatically. They may go back to that. It's possible some of the Undivided Legions will be locked out of god specific marks again as well. We'll just have to wait and see.
I remain optimistic only because they've been doing a decent job so far and it feels like they're buffing DG while trying to stick to the fluff which beats out buffing for the sake of buffing.
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Isn't this just And They Shall Know No Fear but Death Guard? I haven't been following the codex rule changes from 8th to 9th that closely.
It is, but it's replacing Fearless so some people are mad. I'm taking it as GW removing army wide fearless abilities so leadership tests matter more.
Death Guard haven't had Fearless since 7th edition. In 8th they took morale tests like everyone else. This makes leadership tests matter less.
So it's swinging the pendelum back halfway? Honestly it feels like a good change for CSM compared to "everyone runs away or is fearless". Leadership tests will still matter, attrition won't.
This rule is for Death Guard. Not all Legions had Fearless on all of their units in previous editions. No reason to assume they all will have a rule similar to this in 9th.
The Rubrics, Noise Marines, and Berserkers were fearless in the past, and it at least provides some hope they'll fix the CSM going forward. Not holding my breathe or anything but maybe fingers crossed.
Yes, the cult units got it, but Undivided had to get it from icons and the like, except for specific units like Possessed or Obliterators that had it automatically. They may go back to that. It's possible some of the Undivided Legions will be locked out of god specific marks again as well. We'll just have to wait and see.
I remain optimistic only because they've been doing a decent job so far and it feels like they're buffing DG while trying to stick to the fluff which beats out buffing for the sake of buffing.
Oh, don't misunderstand me. I liked it when all of the Legions had different rules. That's talking 3.5 and Traitor Legions. The Undivided Legions got other rules to compensate, like +1 leadership for votlw. My boys got Fear, Night Vision, and Stealth (though admittedly only one of those was useful). I'm totally cool with them not getting marks as well, that way they can be the godless, nihilistic monsters they're supposed to be. I'm really hoping that's what gw is doing. Screw all of this warbands and renegades crap, gimme Legions.
Disgustingly Resilient is being shown tomorrow, which confirms that it is being changed.
Isn't this just And They Shall Know No Fear but Death Guard? I haven't been following the codex rule changes from 8th to 9th that closely.
It is, but it's replacing Fearless so some people are mad. I'm taking it as GW removing army wide fearless abilities so leadership tests matter more.
Death Guard haven't had Fearless since 7th edition. In 8th they took morale tests like everyone else. This makes leadership tests matter less.
So it's swinging the pendelum back halfway? Honestly it feels like a good change for CSM compared to "everyone runs away or is fearless". Leadership tests will still matter, attrition won't.
This rule is for Death Guard. Not all Legions had Fearless on all of their units in previous editions. No reason to assume they all will have a rule similar to this in 9th.
The Rubrics, Noise Marines, and Berserkers were fearless in the past, and it at least provides some hope they'll fix the CSM going forward. Not holding my breathe or anything but maybe fingers crossed.
Yes, the cult units got it, but Undivided had to get it from icons and the like, except for specific units like Possessed or Obliterators that had it automatically. They may go back to that. It's possible some of the Undivided Legions will be locked out of god specific marks again as well. We'll just have to wait and see.
I remain optimistic only because they've been doing a decent job so far and it feels like they're buffing DG while trying to stick to the fluff which beats out buffing for the sake of buffing.
Oh, don't misunderstand me. I liked it when all of the Legions had different rules. That's talking 3.5 and Traitor Legions. The Undivided Legions got other rules to compensate, like +1 leadership for votlw. My boys got Fear, Night Vision, and Stealth (though admittedly only one of those was useful). I'm totally cool with them not getting marks as well, that way they can be the godless, nihilistic monsters they're supposed to be. I'm really hoping that's what gw is doing. Screw all of this warbands and renegades crap, gimme Legions.
I want both. Give us legions, but make all the "build your own" rules for Renegades.
cuda1179 wrote: So, if DG Rhinos count as not having moved, Then does that now mean that Plague marines can ride in Rhinos, have those rhinos move, then disembark, then move, then assault?
Yippy, a return to Rhino Rush.
Not to be personal against you but this is such a toxic way of thinking... It's what has created many of the issues with the game. A rule is released and it's clear what is meant by it but there is always a "lawyering" of the rule to try and break it or reinterpret it. This is a casual tabletop game, the rules and suggestions from GW shouldn't be approached in this manner at all IMO.
cuda1179 wrote: So, if DG Rhinos count as not having moved, Then does that now mean that Plague marines can ride in Rhinos, have those rhinos move, then disembark, then move, then assault?
Yippy, a return to Rhino Rush.
Not to be personal against you but this is such a toxic way of thinking... It's what has created many of the issues with the game. A rule is released and it's clear what is meant by it but there is always a "lawyering" of the rule to try and break it or reinterpret it. This is a casual tabletop game, the rules and suggestions from GW shouldn't be approached in this manner at all IMO.
It's not even a good read of the summary of the rule:
Plus we've seen before that these are summaries, not full rules.
cuda1179 wrote: So, if DG Rhinos count as not having moved, Then does that now mean that Plague marines can ride in Rhinos, have those rhinos move, then disembark, then move, then assault?
Yippy, a return to Rhino Rush.
Not to be personal against you but this is such a toxic way of thinking... It's what has created many of the issues with the game. A rule is released and it's clear what is meant by it but there is always a "lawyering" of the rule to try and break it or reinterpret it. This is a casual tabletop game, the rules and suggestions from GW shouldn't be approached in this manner at all IMO.
I think you are overreacting - the guy was just asking a question.
Speaking of Remorseless and Leadership shenanigans, I wonder what the Plague Marine Icon of Despair will do now.
That -1 ld to enemies within 6'' is so not worth 10 points.
Hollow wrote: Not to be personal against you but this is such a toxic way of thinking... It's what has created many of the issues with the game. A rule is released and it's clear what is meant by it but there is always a "lawyering" of the rule to try and break it or reinterpret it. This is a casual tabletop game, the rules and suggestions from GW shouldn't be approached in this manner at all IMO.
It's in the responsibility of the rules writers to make sure their rules are properly written, and fix them if they are not. Players can be casual, a company who charges money for their rules has no excuse to not be professional.
This culture of victim blaming in GW communities always baffles me, people have been brainwashed by GW pushing the blame onto players for so long. GW is in charge of the rules, it's their responsibility to make them work for every player, both casual and competitive.
That said, in this case the rules are anything but clear:
Core Rules wrote:If a unit starts its Movement phase embarked within a TRANSPORT model, that unit can disembark in that phase so long as the model itself has not yet made a Normal Move, an Advance or has Fallen Back that phase.
Inexorable Advance wrote:This unit counts as having remained stationary if it did not advance or fall back if it did not Advance or Falls Back during its previous movement phase.
RAW:
- During T1 you have no previous movement phase. Even if you advance or fall back during that turn, you still can disembark after advancing or falling back because the transport will never count as having made a Normal Move, an Advance or as Fallen Back.
- If you do advance or fall back, you will not count as stationary in your next movement phase.
- If you remain stationary or make a Normal Move, you will count as stationary in your next movement phase, no matter what you actually in in that phase
RAI:
This most likely just wanted to give hateful volley to plague marines at all times and fix the reaper autocannon.
GW feths up the rules every time they use "counts as" and should have learned by now. If they want infantry models to shoot as if they had not moved, they should write that into the rule.
Hollow wrote: Not to be personal against you but this is such a toxic way of thinking... It's what has created many of the issues with the game. A rule is released and it's clear what is meant by it but there is always a "lawyering" of the rule to try and break it or reinterpret it. This is a casual tabletop game, the rules and suggestions from GW shouldn't be approached in this manner at all IMO.
It's in the responsibility of the rules writers to make sure their rules are properly written, and fix them if they are not. Players can be casual, a company who charges money for their rules has no excuse to not be professional.
This culture of victim blaming in GW communities always baffles me, people have been brainwashed by GW pushing the blame onto players for so long. GW is in charge of the rules, it's their responsibility to make them work for every player, both casual and competitive.
That said, in this case the rules are anything but clear:
Core Rules wrote:If a unit starts its Movement phase embarked within a TRANSPORT model, that unit can disembark in that phase so long as the model itself has not yet made a Normal Move, an Advance or has Fallen Back that phase.
Inexorable Advance wrote:This unit counts as having remained stationary if it did not advance or fall back if it did not Advance or Falls Back during its previous movement phase.
RAW:
- During T1 you have no previous movement phase. Even if you advance or fall back during that turn, you still can disembark after advancing or falling back because the transport will never count as having made a Normal Move, an Advance or as Fallen Back.
- If you do advance or fall back, you will not count as stationary in your next movement phase.
- If you remain stationary or make a Normal Move, you will count as stationary in your next movement phase, no matter what you actually in in that phase
RAI:
This most likely just wanted to give hateful volley to plague marines at all times and fix the reaper autocannon.
GW feths up the rules every time they use "counts as" and should have learned by now. If they want infantry models to shoot as if they had not moved, they should write that into the rule.
If there is no previous movement phase the rule can't take effect, disembarking is before the unit moves, regardless of whether it counts as stationary or otherwise. It seems pretty clear.
Dudeface wrote: If there is no previous movement phase the rule can't take effect, disembarking is before the unit moves, regardless of whether it counts as stationary or otherwise. It seems pretty clear.
The rule is always on unless you do specific things in your previous movement phase. In turn 1 the answer to "did you advance of fall back in your previous movement phase?" is "No".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AduroT wrote: It’s clearly written as a rule that applies to shooting.
"Clearly" is clearly the wrong word.
It might have been intended that way, but "shooting" doesn't even appear in the rule, so it also applies to all other phases. Whenever any rule requires you to be stationary for any reason, this will interact with it. For example - assuming rules have stayed the same - you can use the fire frenzy stratagem on a moved helbrute, because it counts as having remained stationary.
Dudeface wrote: If there is no previous movement phase the rule can't take effect, disembarking is before the unit moves, regardless of whether it counts as stationary or otherwise. It seems pretty clear.
The rule is always on unless you do specific things in your previous movement phase. In turn 1 the answer to "did you advance of fall back in your previous movement phase?" is "No".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AduroT wrote: It’s clearly written as a rule that applies to shooting.
"Clearly" is clearly the wrong word.
It might have been intended that way, but "shooting" doesn't even appear in the rule, so it also applies to all other phases. Whenever any rule requires you to be stationary for any reason, this will interact with it.
For example - assuming rules have stayed the same - you can use the fire frenzy stratagem on a moved helbrute, because it counts as having remained stationary.
You can't not have advanced or fallen back in a previous movement phase if there isnt a previous movement phase to relate to. I agree that is unclear and has been for years though, not the first instance of this sort of thing and will be faqd on this point.
Never the less as you say the disembark happens before a transport commences a normal move, you can't "count as" stationary without having moved. Likewise the requirement for disembark isn't a stationary vehicle, so it doesn't help there.
Ask: did the vehicle perform a normal move, if the answer is yesbut I count as stationary, then the disembark rules are clear on this.
Hollow wrote: Not to be personal against you but this is such a toxic way of thinking... It's what has created many of the issues with the game. A rule is released and it's clear what is meant by it but there is always a "lawyering" of the rule to try and break it or reinterpret it. This is a casual tabletop game, the rules and suggestions from GW shouldn't be approached in this manner at all IMO.
It's in the responsibility of the rules writers to make sure their rules are properly written, and fix them if they are not. Players can be casual, a company who charges money for their rules has no excuse to not be professional.
This culture of victim blaming in GW communities always baffles me, people have been brainwashed by GW pushing the blame onto players for so long. GW is in charge of the rules, it's their responsibility to make them work for every player, both casual and competitive.
That said, in this case the rules are anything but clear:
Core Rules wrote:If a unit starts its Movement phase embarked within a TRANSPORT model, that unit can disembark in that phase so long as the model itself has not yet made a Normal Move, an Advance or has Fallen Back that phase.
Inexorable Advance wrote:This unit counts as having remained stationary if it did not advance or fall back if it did not Advance or Falls Back during its previous movement phase.
RAW:
- During T1 you have no previous movement phase. Even if you advance or fall back during that turn, you still can disembark after advancing or falling back because the transport will never count as having made a Normal Move, an Advance or as Fallen Back.
- If you do advance or fall back, you will not count as stationary in your next movement phase.
- If you remain stationary or make a Normal Move, you will count as stationary in your next movement phase, no matter what you actually in in that phase
RAI:
This most likely just wanted to give hateful volley to plague marines at all times and fix the reaper autocannon.
GW feths up the rules every time they use "counts as" and should have learned by now. If they want infantry models to shoot as if they had not moved, they should write that into the rule.
The rules summaries we've seen on WHC have failed to fully encapsulate rules in the past. Using them as a definitive guide on how the rule is written in the actual codex is just bad.
Well damn. Plague Marines looking like they're finally going to be proppa Nurgle-infused supersoldiers on the tabletop. And before someone accuses me of wanting OP units, of course they should also be appropriately priced. Thing is just that I've always felt a disconnect between the combat performance of many non-Primaris SM between the fluff and tabletop and 9th edition is finally rectifying that. Do Plague Flails still have the D3 hits per successful hit roll?
Pandabeer wrote: Do Plague Flails still have the D3 hits per successful hit roll?
We don't know yet, we just know their strength is reduced by 1.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ClockworkZion wrote: The rules summaries we've seen on WHC have failed to fully encapsulate rules in the past. Using them as a definitive guide on how the rule is written in the actual codex is just bad.
Pandabeer wrote: Well damn. Plague Marines looking like they're finally going to be proppa Nurgle-infused supersoldiers on the tabletop. And before someone accuses me of wanting OP units, of course they should also be appropriately priced. Thing is just that I've always felt a disconnect between the combat performance of many non-Primaris SM between the fluff and tabletop and 9th edition is finally rectifying that. Do Plague Flails still have the D3 hits per successful hit roll?
I’m far from an expert on 40k, let alone DG, but the Bolter Drill with the always count as stationary does seem to have helped their overall damage output, which I understand was a concern (thinking being it’s fine and well being difficult to kill, but struggling to kill in return isn’t a great trade off).
This might mean something down the line when more armies have acquired more high damage weapons, but for now this is a nerf that and does nothing against D1 weapons of which there is a plethora of. I mean, this is a boost to intercessor fire as there is now no chance to ignore their fire.
So no more protection from mortal wounds at all and poxwalkers are now completly worthless. All our little stuff is now alot easier to kill but all our big stuff is now harder to kill. So the new look DG will be deamon engines and terminators with no troops.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Plus nobody will ever super charge plasma against us again as there is no point nowr
A single plasma shot will not be able to kill a Plague Marine. It will be able to kill a Primaris marine.
While I liked the way DR used to work, this is not a huge nerf. It just means they take less guaranteed damage at the upper end of the spectrum instead of randomly shrugging off damage all over.
2 wound plague marines with this vs. 1 wound plague marines with old DG still are more resilient vs. Bolters, Heavy Bolters, even Mortal Wounds, etc.. .
Seems good, and most importantly, less dice-rolling to get through stuff!!!
A single plasma shot will not be able to kill a Plague Marine. It will be able to kill a Primaris marine.
While I liked the way DR used to work, this is not a huge nerf. It just means they take less guaranteed damage at the upper end of the spectrum instead of randomly shrugging off damage all over.
The difference is that without FnP Poxwalkers are useless as they are T3 with 7+ save(hopefully they'll get something to barely survive). It also means we are now quite vulnerable to Mortal Wound gimmicks. Also, D2 weapons are not a dime a dozen even if it has been increased with the new Heavy Bolter changes. I have also not seen that great a proliferation of plasma to really fear plasma.
Ultimately this makes DG vulnerable to small arms fire.
I am not a fan of the change, but will live with it as long as we see an appropriate point drop. I just want the book now so I can see the entire picture.
