H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Is it boomers who like to use this as a pejorative? Because to millennials this is not a problem at all.

Speak for yourself. And don't pretend like you don't know what the term means, or why the comparison is used.

Plus you're using "Boomer" as a pejorative.

It's an outdated saying that people mainly know because of the inertia of its use, not for current accuracy, like "Dial the phone," or "Hang up the phone"

These days Boomer is meant to be a pejoritive after what that generation has and continues to do to the economy, environment, and tolerance issues.

I do find it funny that cartoons are a form of pejorative on a wargames forum though.

am i the only one who had to look up pejorative?
why not just say insult...

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
These days Boomer is meant to be a pejoritive after what that generation has and continues to do to the economy, environment, and tolerance issues.

I'm aware of its provenance, and it's continued misuse.

I think one of the drives towards an official tournament scene is to protect their IP from 3D prints. There’s more incentive to buy and paint official models that you could play in a tournament, even if you ultimately don’t, than to print and paint models that you wouldn’t be able to use in a tournament (barring copies).

I’m personally a fan of the new fluid style of 40k, having been on the end of some truly horrendous lists like the far sight bomb, hornet spam, dark reaper spam, to name a few, now i can build an army to play towards objectives and the game feels more balanced and i can be fairly confident that any extremely strong or weak armies will get adjusted sooner rather than later. Arks of omens will only be here for a short while so have some fun with it being more open before the expected reset happens.

Gosh, remember Leafblower lists that were just lines of Chimeras that would use the OP multi-lasers to blast you off the table turn 1 with zero recourse?

Yeah, don't miss that stuff. For all the flaws that I see in the competitive scene personally, I prefer the way lists look now versus how they did back in 5th and 6th.

My personal hope is we see renewed interest in Crusade into 10th (now that every faction will finally have full Crusade rules, just in time for the system to be reset) and that we see a reduction in raw crunch from competitive 40k and matched play in general, to ease new players into the game and reward veteran players with quicker games that don't require an extra hour per game just reading off stratagems.

I'm trying to figure out how an S6 AP nothing gun that fires 3 BS3 shots a turn was over powered...

well, Leafblower was a strange Alpha Strike Concept that only worked in the USA
and it had nothing to do with the Multilaser but more that IG was the only army that could still spam tanks and artillery were everyone else was limited to 3.
basically 2 Medusa, 2 Hydra, 2 Valkyrie and a Manticore together with battle Psyker squads, everything that could was in a Chimera

either because they were the only ones playing with default missions/scenarios or other rules that were not a thing in Europe

I have only seen one once in a big tournament were the local IG player wanted to try the "op internet hype net-list" and it was tumbling around the bottom places with it
and outside of that, the US Team used that list for the ETC and the results more or less showed that it was a Internet hype and a Meme at best

Ork Nob-Biker lists or Space Wolves Terminator spam would be something I would mention if we talk about the downsides of 5th Edition tournament scene (specially Space Wolves as 90% of the CSM players used that list to play World Eaters, so you saw them a lot)

PS: I played once against one in a smaller tournament, Wolf Scouts and Thunderwolves had a lot of fun

 kodos wrote:
well, Leafblower was a strange Alpha Strike Concept that only worked in the USA
and it had nothing to do with the Multilaser but more that IG was the only army that could still spam tanks and artillery were everyone else was limited to 3.
basically 2 Medusa, 2 Hydra, 2 Valkyrie and a Manticore together with battle Psyker squads, everything that could was in a Chimera

either because they were the only ones playing with default missions/scenarios or other rules that were not a thing in Europe

I have only seen one once in a big tournament were the local IG player wanted to try the "op internet hype net-list" and it was tumbling around the bottom places with it
and outside of that, the US Team used that list for the ETC and the results more or less showed that it was a Internet hype and a Meme at best

Ork Nob-Biker lists or Space Wolves Terminator spam would be something I would mention if we talk about the downsides of 5th Edition tournament scene (specially Space Wolves as 90% of the CSM players used that list to play World Eaters, so you saw them a lot)

PS: I played once against one in a smaller tournament, Wolf Scouts and Thunderwolves had a lot of fun

As much as those tank-heavy lists didn't do well in tournaments, they TERRORIZED local game stores that didn't have a mature enough immune system to tell those types of players to calm the feth down.

Anyway, nowadays players get pretty plugged into what's 'meta' thanks to the Internet and even Warcom listing out what the meta is and addressing it as they tend to.

that's the advantage but also the disadvantage.

The solution remains to buy and build and paint what you think is cool, and then to just wait for your army to have its 15 minutes of limelight before cycling through the rest.

Edited for rules 1 & 3.

What is everyone else's opinion on whether Imperial forces can still take an Imperial agent in their detachment or do we need to create an Imperial agent Patrol Allied Detachment to take them in?

An Ark of Omen detachment is not a Patrol, Battalion, or Brigade detachment, therefore Agents of the Imperium does not apply to it.

 alextroy wrote:
An Ark of Omen detachment is not a Patrol, Battalion, or Brigade detachment, therefore Agents of the Imperium does not apply to it.

Probably because they forgot that rule existed.

Wait for the FAQ, I guess!

You do have the option to include an Agents of the Imperium Auxiliary Support or Patrol detachment as your Allies detachment, so it's not like you can't get one in your army.

I picked up my pre-order today. It seems to me that the only rules not in here that you'd still need the BRB for are the old detachments (for allies).

I guess I won't be taking the BRB to games anymore then!

Interestingly there's a mistake on page 1 where it summarises one of the changes as each player starting with 4CP

It's the correct 6CP in the actual rules though.

I have checked the FAQs again today to see if GW finally added something for Drukhari and it turns out... yes, they actually did! There's a new FAQ for the GT Mission Pack.

We can now take an AoO detachment and add one allied patrol detachment of a different type, so Kabal + Wych Cult, Kabal + Coven, or Wych Cult + Coven. All units within their respective detachments keep their Obsessions.

This seems reasonable. I can finally start concocting cool army lists again.

Our store actually got them in this time! Half a dozen copies, sold out within a couple days. Better than the Nephilim we never received though. Wonder if we’ll get any restocks of this one or if it was another one time limited release.

Also supreme commanders got bit of help in FAQ. Can take silent kind in all dynasties again etc

Had my first AoO game tonight. Played the Abandoned Sanctuaries mission with my Chaos Knights against Space Wolves. Was good fun, even though I lost quite convincingly

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Is it boomers who like to use this as a pejorative? Because to millennials this is not a problem at all.

Speak for yourself. And don't pretend like you don't know what the term means, or why the comparison is used.

Plus you're using "Boomer" as a pejorative.

It's an outdated saying that people mainly know because of the inertia of its use, not for current accuracy, like "Dial the phone," or "Hang up the phone"

These days Boomer is meant to be a pejoritive after what that generation has and continues to do to the economy, environment, and tolerance issues.

I do find it funny that cartoons are a form of pejorative on a wargames forum though.

I would love to see what age bracket you would list for Boomer (without looking it up). I couldn't stop laughing at your description of what "Boomers" are responsible for..........its literally the same insult as my generation flung around and the one before and the one before....................LOL! Youth is so cute.

 Da-Rock wrote:
I couldn't stop laughing at your description of what "Boomers" are responsible for

Surprising absolutely no one.

 Da-Rock wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Is it boomers who like to use this as a pejorative? Because to millennials this is not a problem at all.

Speak for yourself. And don't pretend like you don't know what the term means, or why the comparison is used.

Plus you're using "Boomer" as a pejorative.

It's an outdated saying that people mainly know because of the inertia of its use, not for current accuracy, like "Dial the phone," or "Hang up the phone"

These days Boomer is meant to be a pejoritive after what that generation has and continues to do to the economy, environment, and tolerance issues.

I do find it funny that cartoons are a form of pejorative on a wargames forum though.

I would love to see what age bracket you would list for Boomer (without looking it up). I couldn't stop laughing at your description of what "Boomers" are responsible for..........its literally the same insult as my generation flung around and the one before and the one before....................LOL! Youth is so cute.

I can provide you a list just to deny any responsibility and say "all fake news" to it

Inter-generational conflict hasn't changed much since Ancient Greece, which I believe is where we have the earliest references to it written from.

Haven't seen anything about this elsewhere, but apologies if I'm repeating something everyone already knew about – from WHC:

+++

Fixing a points error
We’ve spotted a slight points error on the latest Munitorum Field Manual. It seems Space Marine Inceptors were running around with a pair of free plasma exterminators – which is a little unfair to their assault bolter-wielding battle brothers. Rather than wait three months for the next quarterly update, we thought we’d better make a quick change now – it’s +10 points each. Still deadly, but you have to pay for it.

+++

Seems like a walking-back of arguably the most egregious instance of free upgrades, and presumably some people will be furious about this.

The Validity Document was updated too. Agents of the Imperium continue to hang on from Psychic Awakening. What units were in that book?

 alextroy wrote:
The Validity Document was updated too. Agents of the Imperium continue to hang on from Psychic Awakening. What units were in that book?

Assassins iirc.

 Nazrak wrote:
Haven't seen anything about this elsewhere, but apologies if I'm repeating something everyone already knew about – from WHC:

+++

Fixing a points error
We’ve spotted a slight points error on the latest Munitorum Field Manual. It seems Space Marine Inceptors were running around with a pair of free plasma exterminators – which is a little unfair to their assault bolter-wielding battle brothers. Rather than wait three months for the next quarterly update, we thought we’d better make a quick change now – it’s +10 points each. Still deadly, but you have to pay for it.

+++

Seems like a walking-back of arguably the most egregious instance of free upgrades, and presumably some people will be furious about this.

Change good but this back and forth is irritating. Could have just made it +10 from get-go.

tneva82 wrote:

Change good but this back and forth is irritating. Could have just made it +10 from get-go.

Assuming you can take it at face value but i'll give them benefit of doubt.

Haven't even had chance to design list with them before points changed

 alextroy wrote:
The Validity Document was updated too. Agents of the Imperium continue to hang on from Psychic Awakening. What units were in that book?

The validity document is an amazing piece on why their supplemental rulebooks model is terrible one. The vast, vast majority of material is crossed out and officially abandon-ware.

Nazrak 808154 11483641 wrote:
Seems, from the way this is worded, like this might have been a genuine oversight / error in the originally-published document, rather than a new change.

I'm pretty impressed you think it was accidental when all guns besides the ones on Command Squads became free.

Voss wrote:
]
The validity document is an amazing piece on why their supplemental rulebooks model is terrible one. The vast, vast majority of material is crossed out and officially abandon-ware.

Speed mob and the blood axes supplement are 14 months old. Why would they need to be invalidated? There hasn't been a codex or supplement released since then that would "supercede" their rules.

Stop buying books.

tneva82 wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:
Haven't seen anything about this elsewhere, but apologies if I'm repeating something everyone already knew about – from WHC:

+++

Fixing a points error
We’ve spotted a slight points error on the latest Munitorum Field Manual. It seems Space Marine Inceptors were running around with a pair of free plasma exterminators – which is a little unfair to their assault bolter-wielding battle brothers. Rather than wait three months for the next quarterly update, we thought we’d better make a quick change now – it’s +10 points each. Still deadly, but you have to pay for it.

+++

Seems like a walking-back of arguably the most egregious instance of free upgrades, and presumably some people will be furious about this.

Change good but this back and forth is irritating. Could have just made it +10 from get-go.

+10 each, so +20 for the pair of guns right? So in effect this is walking back the change to exactly where it was before marines had any points cuts (back when no one considered inceptors particularly good even with AoC).

They took them from "never going to take them" to "overpowered" to "never going to take them".

GW's pendulum is getting a real workout at the moment. Why are they such fething amateurs at this?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
They took them from "never going to take them" to "overpowered" to "never going to take them".

GW's pendulum is getting a real workout at the moment. Why are they such fething amateurs at this?

Well, maybe their "playtestors" changed their mind......

Hankovitch wrote:

Voss wrote:
]
The validity document is an amazing piece on why their supplemental rulebooks model is terrible one. The vast, vast majority of material is crossed out and officially abandon-ware.

Speed mob and the blood axes supplement are 14 months old. Why would they need to be invalidated? There hasn't been a codex or supplement released since then that would "supercede" their rules.

Stop buying books.

Because they don't sell those books anymore.
That's literally the only reason, they don't want to encourage people downloading the rules since they can't buy the books without realising invalidating purchases this fast is only going to encourage it more.

Sounds like we need a new annual book to compile all the rules from prior years for use during the next year that have not been overridden by newer publications.

 alextroy wrote:
Sounds like we need a new annual book to compile all the rules from prior years for use during the next year that have not been overridden by newer publications.

Maybe it culd be called, I don't know, "Chapter Approved" or something...

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Because they don't sell those books anymore.
That's literally the only reason, they don't want to encourage people downloading the rules since they can't buy the books without realising invalidating purchases this fast is only going to encourage it more.

Yep. GW is making it clear that you're paying to rent the rules, not to permanently own them, and they will cease to be legal as soon as they no longer make a direct profit for GW. And that's exactly the sort of thing that gets people to use the free sources, sources that already provide a superior product.

 Dysartes wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Sounds like we need a new annual book to compile all the rules from prior years for use during the next year that have not been overridden by newer publications.

Maybe it culd be called, I don't know, "Chapter Approved" or something...

Man, I miss old CA.

Hankovitch wrote:

Voss wrote:
]
The validity document is an amazing piece on why their supplemental rulebooks model is terrible one. The vast, vast majority of material is crossed out and officially abandon-ware.

Speed mob and the blood axes supplement are 14 months old. Why would they need to be invalidated? There hasn't been a codex or supplement released since then that would "supercede" their rules.

Stop buying books.

Not just that, inquisiton as a faction has no rules at all now besides two inquisitors from Imperial Armor that are broken since their special rules/keywords now have no definitons.

Hankovitch wrote:

Stop buying books.

I'm far less Mad At GW in general than most people on DD, but I genuinely don't get why anyone's buying these weird little supplements that we *know* have an even-more-limited shelf-life than the 'main' books. I'm having a much less frustrating time of it with 40K since I brought in my self-imposed policy of only buying a Codex when I have a fully-painted, game-ready army fully set to go.

I mean, if you get something out of the books, then go nuts I guess, but if all you get from them is annoyed, then probably save your money.

Hankovitch wrote:

Voss wrote:
]
The validity document is an amazing piece on why their supplemental rulebooks model is terrible one. The vast, vast majority of material is crossed out and officially abandon-ware.

Speed mob and the blood axes supplement are 14 months old. Why would they need to be invalidated? There hasn't been a codex or supplement released since then that would "supercede" their rules.

Stop buying books.

Way past you on that second part. I haven't bought any books past the release of the edition (or pirated any, before anyone wants to make weird, baseless inferences). 8th edition was a couple codexes and an active avoidance of the psychic failure, 7th I skipped entirely because I didn't need to pay for a dozen pages of errata for 6th (and reflavoring the most imbalanced magic system in the history of WFB as the psychic rules)

As for your first question, the point of the document is to invalidate things. My observation wasn't that those specific ones hadn't been invalidated yet, just that 80%+ of the books they've published and covered in this doc _are_ invalid. Its basically a monument to how much of an utter waste this publication model is.

 Nazrak wrote:
I mean, if you get something out of the books, then go nuts I guess

Honestly, the people who get the most out of the books are probably people who don't care about the "What's Legal for Tournaments" PDF in the first place.

Time to knock off the 'Don't buy the books' chatter and get back to the actual discussion.

Oh well this is fun: seems GW haven't actually replaced the previous MFM PDF with the new one – I just landed on the one *without* the Inceptors revision accessing it via google.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:
I mean, if you get something out of the books, then go nuts I guess

Honestly, the people who get the most out of the books are probably people who don't care about the "What's Legal for Tournaments" PDF in the first place.

This is true. Just because tourney goers can no longer enjoy using their models/armies doesn't mean the rest of us can't. If your primary way of playing 40k is tourneys? Sucks to be you.