EviscerationPlague wrote:
So basically how the 5th edition Space Marine codex operated when you think about it.

Not quite as extreme as that - that was the era where playing specific factions was tied to Special Characters, otherwise you were just playing 'Counts As', and that was an awful time - but yes, you are essentially correct.

I got answers to my using Kasrkin as stormtroopers question within minutes this morning.

I have not gotten an answer to my using Catachan as regular infantry question yet.

Weird.

And no, people did not want the return of Kasrkin per say, they wanted the models to use as either Kasrkin, stormtroopers or even veterans in carapace, if that ever came back.

Literally telling me I could convert my model to look like a Kasrkin and using them as a stormtrooper but I can't save myself the time and just use Kasrkin models is asinine.

The ITC has the best rules for models, hopefully most TO's will use them and not look to GW or Adepticon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

General Hobbs wrote:


I got answers to my using Kasrkin as stormtroopers question within minutes this morning.

I have not gotten an answer to my using Catachan as regular infantry question yet.

Weird.

And no, people did not want the return of Kasrkin per say, they wanted the models to use as either Kasrkin, stormtroopers or even veterans in carapace, if that ever came back.

Literally telling me I could convert my model to look like a Kasrkin and using them as a stormtrooper but I can't save myself the time and just use Kasrkin models is asinine.

The ITC has the best rules for models, hopefully most TO's/Events planners will use them and not look to GW or Adepticon.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
So basically how the 5th edition Space Marine codex operated when you think about it.

Not quite as extreme as that - that was the era where playing specific factions was tied to Special Characters, otherwise you were just playing 'Counts As', and that was an awful time - but yes, you are essentially correct.

So basically the best of both worlds in terms of "my Chapter Master punches dudes like Calgar so I'll just use him in my White Scars successor".

I think it can be done correctly as, while fluff was hated by a bunch of 1d4channers, 5th edition Marines was at least solid mechanically for rules (though internal balance was lacking of course).

 Miguelsan wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:


Here's hoping Forgeworld sort something out for Krieg models/officers and/or they get a regiment of renown army at some point which makes them operate a bit more like they should do.

What FW is going to do is to "legend" Krieg because now that they have an entry on the main codex there cannot be more options!

M.

With standard infantry, maybe. However there are Krieg command squads, death riders and engineers still on sale.

Additionally, the krieg infantry squads forgeworld sell so not have the same options as the veteren kit, so could be just stated to use the standard infantry, or they get a slightly different data sheet

Is then there any problem on using regular guard as cadian shock troops? Seems like the only way I have to find a use for all the spetial weapons that now I can't use anywhere

Can't be as bad a reason as that Bell of Lost Souls Article.

 BlackoCatto wrote:
Can't be as bad a reason as that Bell of Lost Souls Article.

You managed to read a BoLS article underneath the ads? What did it give as a reason?

Garrac wrote:
Is then there any problem on using regular guard as cadian shock troops? Seems like the only way I have to find a use for all the spetial weapons that now I can't use anywhere

probably not, as long as you remember it’s two specials no heavies and you’re going to have the extra “because I’m cadian” rule. The old plastics used to be sold as cadians anyway. The only issue might be if you plan to mix’n’match unit types with the same models and someone gets a bee in their bonnet about it.

 Haighus wrote:

 BlackoCatto wrote:
Can't be as bad a reason as that Bell of Lost Souls Article.

You managed to read a BoLS article underneath the ads? What did it give as a reason?

BOLS still has articles? I thought it had turned into one of those parked domain pages.

Garrac wrote:
Is then there any problem on using regular guard as cadian shock troops? Seems like the only way I have to find a use for all the spetial weapons that now I can't use anywhere

That's what I'm gonna do. Regular infantry will have a HWT so its fairly easy to differentiate between the squads anyway.
If I can be arsed to I might paint the "cadians" shoulderpads in a different color...

What are "regular guard"?

 Dawnbringer wrote:
What are "regular guard"?

Infantry squad

 Tastyfish wrote:

 Dawnbringer wrote:
What are "regular guard"?

Infantry squad

I get in terms of codex entry, but from the conversation that people are using "regular guard" as Cadian Shock Troops, as in using other models to represent Cadian Shock Troops, but as the old Cadians are still sold as Cadian Shock troops, I'm curious what they mean by regular guard. Usually other regiments have always been what they are, Praetorian, Vostroyan, etc, and if any guard could be called regular it would have been the Cadians.

 Dawnbringer wrote:
the old Cadians are still sold as Cadian Shock troops

Oh yes, they are! And checking just now, they still have

GW wrote:Build as an Infantry Squad, Veterans, or Conscripts

I imagine it'll all change once the codex fully releases.

What I am worried about with my armies, and I can see being an issue here for Guard players, is the 9th & 10th one two gut punch.

I think you can adapt your collection to these stupid 9th ed codex limitations, swap a few models in squads for others, have these count as X while these count as Y. Snap a few arms, glue a few new ones, etc.

But, they'll do the same again with the next codex, and fixing it will be even harder. I also suspect they'll make changes in the opposite "direction".

 Haighus wrote:

 BlackoCatto wrote:
Can't be as bad a reason as that Bell of Lost Souls Article.

You managed to read a BoLS article underneath the ads? What did it give as a reason?

Pure clickbait, no reason other than 3rd party models are bad for the hobby because... copyright, but convienently the author made a mess at defining of what he considers a 3rd party model.

M.

 Miguelsan wrote:
Pure clickbait, no reason other than 3rd party models are bad for the hobby because... copyright, but convienently the author made a mess at defining of what he considers a 3rd party model.

The author probably got lost in all the ads as well. If that site's half as hard to write for as it is to read, then it makes sense.

Weird, I never have a problem with BOLS articles.....

I agree with the article though. It is one of the conundrums of the hobby though. Cheap/alternate 3rd party models vs supporting the store and GW.....what do you want to do?

I think there are many people who would be ok with GW and the FLG store going under and not having places to game at, support events, create rules etc. if they could save some money on models. They would just move on to some other hobby.

Of course there are other content creators out there. Grimdark Future is apparently a fun alternate to 40K.

But would the hobby of wargaming thrive as it is now, or be relegated to trying to find someone into it and playing in someone's basement or dining room or garage? The uniformity of GW, like McDonald's, is one of the attractive aspects of the game....the knowledge you can walk into a store or event and everyone is playing the game the same way, whereas with individuals making their own content etc you possibly lose that uniformity, and the attractiveness of events ( not to mention having the financial backing to do tournaments or game's days).

I know pre 2000 it was a lot harder... a LOT harder...to find a Dungeons and Dragons game than it is now. I'd hate to see the GW hobby go back to those days. (and when I say GW I also mean any other other big wargaming companies that are out there today. )


Automatically Appended Next Post:


I am still waiting for them to tell me that since I have to use my Kasrkin as Kasrkin only at GW events, whether I have to use my Catachans as only Catachans and not as regular Guard.....

General Hobbs wrote:
Cheap/alternate 3rd party models vs supporting the store and GW...

I like how these two seem to be the only options for some weird reason.

 AtoMaki wrote:

General Hobbs wrote:
Cheap/alternate 3rd party models vs supporting the store and GW...

I like how these two seem to be the only options for some weird reason.

How else are you going to get the right amount of clickbaitiness for your article if you don't polarize like that?

I have done a first and actually emailed the rules team over the plasma or vox option on the krieg datasheet.

I assume many people do this on a regular basis, but it is a first for me.

Have to say I really a enjoying putting together the Cadia Stands set. Just not sure that those going infantry heavy will enjoy putting together 80 to 100 of the Cadians. Did we ever reach agreement on if Cadian squads can have the same 2 special weapons in them?

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
Have to say I really a enjoying putting together the Cadia Stands set. Just not sure that those going infantry heavy will enjoy putting together 80 to 100 of the Cadians. Did we ever reach agreement on if Cadian squads can have the same 2 special weapons in them?

You must have the Codex. You tell us.

No Sir, already sold off the codex. Awaiting my 2nd box for my codex but a royal mail strike has delayed that.

 alextroy wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
Have to say I really a enjoying putting together the Cadia Stands set. Just not sure that those going infantry heavy will enjoy putting together 80 to 100 of the Cadians. Did we ever reach agreement on if Cadian squads can have the same 2 special weapons in them?

You must have the Codex. You tell us.

It's not a question of what the codex says, we've seen pictures of the datasheet. It's a question of whether you think the restriction is a typo that will soon be fixed to a no duplicates rule or a deliberate but nonsensical rule that won't change.

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
Have to say I really a enjoying putting together the Cadia Stands set. Just not sure that those going infantry heavy will enjoy putting together 80 to 100 of the Cadians. Did we ever reach agreement on if Cadian squads can have the same 2 special weapons in them?

The jacks on the siege cannons are kind of a pain, but so far I'm enjoying building the kits as well.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
Have to say I really a enjoying putting together the Cadia Stands set. Just not sure that those going infantry heavy will enjoy putting together 80 to 100 of the Cadians. Did we ever reach agreement on if Cadian squads can have the same 2 special weapons in them?

The jacks on the siege cannons are kind of a pain, but so far I'm enjoying building the kits as well.

Would 2nd Ed metal Heavy Bolter or Autocannon gunners work in the seats for the new heavy weapons?

I'm not back in the UK until next May so am far removed from my delivery to work it out for myself.

For anyone curious, the Field Ordinance platforms can be built with no gunner sitting on them. There's empty 'wheels' with no hands attached for controlling the weapon itself and whatnot.

So if anyone happens to have, say, old metal gunners with the 'remotes' in hand? You're going to be able to really have some fun with them.

 Kanluwen wrote:
For anyone curious, the Field Ordinance platforms can be built with no gunner sitting on them. There's empty 'wheels' with no hands attached for controlling the weapon itself and whatnot.

So if anyone happens to have, say, old metal gunners with the 'remotes' in hand? You're going to be able to really have some fun with them.

I have a fair few spare Praetorian lascannon and mortar crew. I am now smiling and looking forward to May when I can get my hands on them.

Thank you.

In fact, I may be off to Zinge Industries for some more of the Curious Constructs heavy weapons crew.

https://www.zinge.co.uk/collections/infantry/products/colonial-empire-artillery-crew-6-man

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:

 alextroy wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
Have to say I really a enjoying putting together the Cadia Stands set. Just not sure that those going infantry heavy will enjoy putting together 80 to 100 of the Cadians. Did we ever reach agreement on if Cadian squads can have the same 2 special weapons in them?

You must have the Codex. You tell us.

It's not a question of what the codex says, we've seen pictures of the datasheet. It's a question of whether you think the restriction is a typo that will soon be fixed to a no duplicates rule or a deliberate but nonsensical rule that won't change.

How many of each Special Weapon does the kit instructions allow you to build? This is the best indicator of their intentions next to the written text.

 alphaecho wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
For anyone curious, the Field Ordinance platforms can be built with no gunner sitting on them. There's empty 'wheels' with no hands attached for controlling the weapon itself and whatnot.

So if anyone happens to have, say, old metal gunners with the 'remotes' in hand? You're going to be able to really have some fun with them.

I have a fair few spare Praetorian lascannon and mortar crew. I am now smiling and looking forward to May when I can get my hands on them.

Thank you.

In fact, I may be off to Zinge Industries for some more of the Curious Constructs heavy weapons crew.

https://www.zinge.co.uk/collections/infantry/products/colonial-empire-artillery-crew-6-man

Dam, those are some massive hands! Bet the women love these guys.

I've got plenty of spares kicking around the bits box. Some of the Stargrave arms have tablets and the Les Grognards heavy weapons hands should fit the bill.

I ordered 6 field ordnance battery guns from eBay for my Steel Legion army, we will have to see how well I can integrate those old metal models

 ph34r wrote:
I ordered 6 field ordnance battery guns from eBay for my Steel Legion army, we will have to see how well I can integrate those old metal models

I think I ordered 6. Or I ordered 12.

That's the problem. I either got 3 sprues (6 guns), or 6 sprues (12 guns). I won't know until they arrive.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ph34r wrote:
I ordered 6 field ordnance battery guns from eBay for my Steel Legion army, we will have to see how well I can integrate those old metal models

I think I ordered 6. Or I ordered 12.

That's the problem. I either got 3 sprues (6 guns), or 6 sprues (12 guns). I won't know until they arrive.

Whale.

I've noticed GW always takes away the little things that makes an army fun/even slightly competitive from the non-competitive armies but never truly nerfs the armies that always hit home runs.

Giving orders to deepstriking stormtroopers....man that was broken let's take it away!

General Hobbs wrote:
I've noticed GW always takes away the little things that makes an army fun/even slightly competitive from the non-competitive armies but never truly nerfs the armies that always hit home runs.

Giving orders to deepstriking stormtroopers....man that was broken let's take it away!

Clearly you were having fun the wrong way.

General Hobbs wrote:


I've noticed GW always takes away the little things that makes an army fun/even slightly competitive from the non-competitive armies but never truly nerfs the armies that always hit home runs.

Giving orders to deep striking stormtroopers....man that was broken let's take it away!

That would actually be a nice question: Can a deep striking Officer issue an order on the turn they deep strike? Considering they can do it when they disembark, I wouldn't say the chance is nil. Is that covered in the Codex?

Because if so, you could drop a Tempestor in the same move and have it issue the order. Not ideal, but at least some way to make it work. And also sort of fluffy. Regular people would have problems reacting to the sudden lightning jolt of a deep strike. But a Tempestor could have prepared to issue their order while they wait in the Teleportarium.

I don’t see any rule exceptions in the book for scions ordering after deep strike, but I haven’t really dug through the stratagems yet.

 GiToRaZor wrote:

General Hobbs wrote:


I've noticed GW always takes away the little things that makes an army fun/even slightly competitive from the non-competitive armies but never truly nerfs the armies that always hit home runs.

Giving orders to deep striking stormtroopers....man that was broken let's take it away!

That would actually be a nice question: Can a deep striking Officer issue an order on the turn they deep strike? Considering they can do it when they disembark, I wouldn't say the chance is nil. Is that covered in the Codex?

Because if so, you could drop a Tempestor in the same move and have it issue the order. Not ideal, but at least some way to make it work. And also sort of fluffy. Regular people would have problems reacting to the sudden lightning jolt of a deep strike. But a Tempestor could have prepared to issue their order while they wait in the Teleportarium.

It is my understanding orders are now given in an earlier phase, which would preclude the movement phase.

General Hobbs wrote:
It is my understanding orders are now given in an earlier phase, which would preclude the movement phase.

Correct. Orders happen in the command phase and there is no way to give orders to a unit that arrives via deep strike.

A problem that astra militarum players noted as soon as the "command phase" came into existence, and yet here we are.

So.... yeah. this codex bullies scions to hell

Even their access to deeptrike its not THAT important since theres a relic with that specific spetial rule for karskin. who get the job done better with an extra regimental doctrine

Have Codex: besides Yarrick, the Lord Commissar, Crusaders, Veterans and Special Weapon Squads are gone.

Command Squads now incorporate the officer and are HQ’s.

Weirdly, there is the generic Platoon Command Squad, Cadian and Tempestus Command Squads have their own entry but Catachan don’t.

Also, Gaunt’s Ghosts are not a command squad. I didn’t expect them to be (they’re a spec ops team AFAIK) but I know some people referred to them as.

In addition there is just Heavy Weapon Squads, no specific ones for Cadia or Catachan. Inconsistent yet again!

What I’m really curious on is, and I admit this may have been the wrong impression, is that regimental doctrines could be chosen on a per unit basis. The wording though, says it’s for the whole detachment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That said, it looks like a lot of proof reading didn’t happen. Both Cadian and Krieg infantry squads say, for weapon options; Up to TWO models can select one of the following: [list of special weapons]*

*You cannot select the same weapon more than TWICE per unit.

Capital emphasis mine. Anyways the restriction is irrelevant.

Catachan, while restricted to flamers (dumb) but instead it says “for every 5 models one can have a flamer”.

The unit size is fixed at 10 models…

I understand that the lead times mean that finalizing a codex is a lot shorter of a period than we think. However, GW said they wrote all codexes at the same time this edition.

Even though it would natural to keep tweaking and testing a codex until release submission time, the fact that such basic design ideas weren’t nailed down until last minute says a lot about either the lack of work ethic of employees or the direction of management, or both.

TreeStewges wrote:
However, GW said they wrote all codexes at the same time this edition.

Don't tell me people were stupid enough to believe them.

At the start there was no reason to think otherwise, initial codexes were in line with each other more or less.

Further, given the power creep and simultaneous equipment restrictions, it’s not impossible that they were all drafted and initial tested at once and that later issues are due to a special kind of dumb being introduced for later codexes.

I mean you can write scripts for a movie trilogy all at once, but different actors and/or directors will just do things differently for better or for worse. Thus each entry will feel like someone totally different did everything.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Any whose, the Platoon and Tempestus Command Squad can have any vet swap out to a special weapon but only one of each special weapon can be taken.

Cadian Command Squad is extra special. All 4 vets each have a different starter loadout (sans their grenades of course):

1.) lasgun, standard flag
2.) lasgun, medipack
3.) laspistol, master vox
4.) laspistol, chainsword

1.) can replace the lasgun and standard for any special weapon save sniper.

3.) or 4.) but not both, can replace their laspistol with a bolt pistol or plasma pistol.

4.) can replace their chainsword with a power sword, power fist, or any of the special weapons that 1.) can take as the kit does have two of each of the special weapons.

Bad news though: the new Cadian Command Squad uses 28mm bases while the normal Cadians troops are still on 25mm.

Anyone playing in an environment that’s picky about that even when using older models may want to look into base extenders. The rest of us shouldn’t care IMO.

Sentinel is worse, it’s now on an 80mm base versus 60mm. Double shame as current sentinels are also good as alts for Ork deffdreads, especially when using some leftover bits.

Further, I don’t think the new one is actually bigger overall. At best it might, emphasis might, be a bit taller. The old one looks like it barely fits on its 60mm base as its feet on effectively right on the edges. While the new one has some comfortable slop on 80mm.

While not a worthwhile change overall, this also means older sentinels can just use base extenders like cadian command squads.

(These should be taken as suggestions to overcome the created problem, they are not meant to excuse the created problems caused by increasing base sizes without making models actually bigger).

Sentinel also doesn’t have any new gear, it just looks different and more armored. While the directions tell you to attach the leg and foot armor for both variants I’d like to see how it looks without them, if anything so that the scout version looks a bit more different.

Good news though, the infantry kits, both command and troop, are in general fairly modular despite the directions implying that only certain parts will ever fit together:

- each leg is its own segment half with the left being the slot (in what would be the crotch area) with the right having the triangular peg.

While leg pairs may not fit super flush or have issues with sudden changes in cloth shape, well after a quick dry test fit there’s no reason you couldn’t ultimately combine legs however you want. You’ll just need to be prepared to do at least some basic filling and/or surgery.

- Torsos are separate with backs and sides being one part but the chest pieces being separate. My quick test shows that any chest should fit any back, and likewise any piece should in theory fit any leg pair.

- Arms seem to fit any body as the body has flat circle areas, as do arms, just like space marine kits. At worst, some special weapons >may< have an issue due to their pose hitting something IE at least one of the legs has a holstered combat knife sticking up.

- Finally heads are directly interchangeable.

In other words, these kits aren’t mono-anything!!! Not mono-gear, mono-cosmetic or mono-pose. At worst you’ll have to tweak mismatched leg pairs to look right together.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
Okay, this should be the last of my first impressions.

First to clarify my ork comment for those who don’t know, most ‘dreadnought’ sized walkers are $60 USD and are on 60mm bases including the ork deffdread. The current sentinel though, is $35 USD, and is therefore an instance of a ripe conversion being cheaper than the actual kit. Deffdreads have lots of leftover cosmetic and weapon bits that could ork-ify two sentinels easily, thus one could be a 3-man vehicle squadron (deffdread has that detachment deployment rule) for a price of just over the price of 2 dreds.

So the new sentinel being most likely $60 USD as my guess, and on a bigger base that has to be sourced otherwise, well fudge (I could go for some right now).

Another peculiarity is the field ordnance battery unit. The field gun option has blast + can target units not visible to bearer.

One, I just realized that a lot of codexes ignore or forget the core rule effect called indirect fire - which is the same thing but non-visible targets have -1 to the shooters hit rolls.

Two, field guns were direct fire weapons, IIRC, and were anti-tank weapons for fortified areas. The indirect fire ability seems more fitting for the rocket launcher option.

Lastly lets talk how big of army you get, while the contents are indeed a savings and therefore worth $200 if you want everything, my calculations show the armies points and power value are a bit low.

HQ: [1x] Cadian Command Squad - Min: 4 PL / 75 Points - Max: 4 PL / 85 Points if officer takes both plasma pistol and power fist (+5 each).

Troop: [2x] Cadian Shock Troops - Min: 3 PL / 65 Points - Max: Same, all options are free

Fast Attack: [1x] Sentinel - Min: 3 PL (Scout or Armored) / 40 Points for Scout, 45 Armored - Max: 3 PL / 50 Points for Scout, 55 Armored if Hunter-Killer missile and chainsaw taken (+5 each)

Heavy Support: [1x] 2 models fixed - Min & Max: 6 PL / 130 Points (all options free)

Total if Min options taken: 19 PL / 375 Points

Total if Max options taken: 19 PL / 400 Points

So a bit light but not by much, I mean it’s not terrible to have some left. The Mechanicus CP box IIRC is 21 PL and like 400 points minimum, but it can be pushed to 500 points easily if certain options are taken.

Keeping the box contents to only new units and only what would be found with a Cadian Regiment without going over a CP game size automatically;

that would leave more Sentinels (1 would get 450 which is reasonably close, 2 more would let you max out and make you think about options a bit), 1 heavy weapons squad (worth 3 PL / 55 Points, all options free), a Commissar (3 PL / 40 - 50 Points), A Cadian Castellan (3 PL / 50 - 60 Points) or Ursula Creed (4 PL / 80 Points).

Strategically, if I wanted to push the army level higher and were GW, I’d go for the Commissar, a second Sentinel or say screw pure new and throw in a Taurox.

A Commissar is a single figure which is what they make a lot on (if the markup on singles is any indication) but an army could always us multiples, versus Ursula or a Castellan would only be 1 in a detachment and would give a second HQ, in which case they’d only need a third infantry squad to qualify for a Brigade detachment!

A second sentinel wouldn’t hurt because they can fit in three in a slot/unit. Plus with two kinds of sentinel they’d have a chance of wanting 3 of each!

A Taurox because a simply transport to round things off doesn’t hurt but a Chimera is something a lot of people already have anyway.

Oh, and the book says the AM patrol box will be the exact same thing!!! :(

That sucks, they could swap the Sentinel for Rough Riders, the second troop for heavy weapons, a Hellhound for the Ordnance Battery, and the command squad for a Castellan. Or stuff along those lines.

The Leman Russ datasheet is clunky too. Each comes with a battle cannon and lascannon as standard for 150pts.

Yet you have to add +5 points to the base cost for the lascannon...whilst the replacement Hull options (heavy bolter and heavy flamer) are both 5 points each as well. Why not just make it 155 points base? The lascannon entry is largely irrelevant as it is not a sponson option.

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
The Leman Russ datasheet is clunky too. Each comes with a battle cannon and lascannon as standard for 150pts.

Yet you have to add +5 points to the base cost for the lascannon...whilst the replacement Hull options (heavy bolter and heavy flamer) are both 5 points each as well. Why not just make it 155 points base? The lascannon entry is largely irrelevant as it is not a sponson option.

I presume this is to avoid things becoming arguably even *more* convoluted when you have to start distinguishing between sponson heavy bolters/flamers (which you have to pay for) and hull heavy bolters/flamers (which you don't have to pay for).

TreeStewges wrote:
At the start there was no reason to think otherwise, initial codexes were in line with each other more or less.

Besides all the previous examples you mean?

GW speaks lots of marketing speech. One would think after decades of them being proven to be talking hot air people would actually realize that Much like George Lucas keeps claiming he planned 9 movie series from the get-go yet other statements from him during years prove that having been incorrect...

As the saying goes fool me once...

 Nazrak wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
The Leman Russ datasheet is clunky too. Each comes with a battle cannon and lascannon as standard for 150pts.

Yet you have to add +5 points to the base cost for the lascannon...whilst the replacement Hull options (heavy bolter and heavy flamer) are both 5 points each as well. Why not just make it 155 points base? The lascannon entry is largely irrelevant as it is not a sponson option.

I presume this is to avoid things becoming arguably even *more* convoluted when you have to start distinguishing between sponson heavy bolters/flamers (which you have to pay for) and hull heavy bolters/flamers (which you don't have to pay for).

On the datasheet you have to pay for the Hull bolters and flamers as well I think. The Russ comes with the Lascannon as standard per the rules. Happy to be proved wrong, it is confusing though. The last thing you want with rules.

To tneva82:

I’ll say it again, the initial codexes this edition were in line with each other, this gave it credence.

And again, GW could have drafted all codexes at the same time then simply had a change of philosophy and later drafts of codexes to be released later got the stupid bat. That doesn’t make the initial claim a lie, that they started writing them all at the same time.

It sounds like you’re making the classic mistake of expecting consistency from GW, in the form of always the wrong decision.

The reality is that GW is on consistent on being inconsistent. It’s a total coin flip on whether they’ll do the right or wrong thing. My own impressions of the codex and kits are just a few examples.


To ListenToMeWarriors:

The problem with the Leman Russ and other entries is that writers can’t conceive of specifying which weapon areas they’re talking about. They could say “…can swap out the front hull heavy bolter for one if the following: heavy flamer, lascannon”. And, “…this model’s sponson mounts can have up to two of the following (one per side): lascannons, heavy bolters, heavy flamers, multi-meltas, plasma cannons”.

Just specifying how they’re mounted would solve the problem. They could also add a caveat that the front hull bolter is free so there’s no confusion.

Oh, found a forum where someone posted that the 7th edition codex at least specified that the pairs are sponsons.

Speaking of vehicles, on the Russ gets vehicle squadron. The hellhound and every other heavy support vehicle based on the chimera can only be taken one per slot now.

And the commissar no longer nukes a model to restore morale, it just happens.

With the commissar, you still lose the model for failing morale, but then pass the further tests, so that first model was evidently shot.

Right now my main issue for list writing is filling out fast attack and to a lesser degree elites choices… I can run myself up to 7 heavies no problem just taking heavy weapons, field ordnance, and a single russ. I guess sentinels is the way for cheap fasts still? Since rough riders are 100 for 5, right.

 ph34r wrote:
Right now my main issue for list writing is filling out fast attack and to a lesser degree elites choices… I can run myself up to 7 heavies no problem just taking heavy weapons, field ordnance, and a single russ. I guess sentinels is the way for cheap fasts still? Since rough riders are 100 for 5, right.

Both Sentinels and Rough Riders are very strong units so you should be fine with taking either or both.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TreeStewges wrote:
Just specifying how they’re mounted would solve the problem.

How they're mounted makes zero difference in 9th because you can shoot from any part of the model. If you want to put the lascannon in the left sponson, the first plasma cannon in the hull mount, and the second plasma cannon in the commander's arms (leaving the right sponson empty) feel free to do so, it won't make any difference from a rules point of view.

And I'm not sure what your confusion with the datasheet is? Like all 9th edition datasheets you pay the base price and then the additional price for any item you have on your unit that has a +X point cost. It doesn't matter if the lascannon was there by default or is something you selected to replace another weapon, you have it on your unit one time so you pay 1x the listed point cost in addition to the base price. You seem to be making the assumption that the base price includes some standard list of equipment but it doesn't. It's just the number you start adding other numbers to.

TreeStewges wrote:
To tneva82:

I’ll say it again, the initial codexes this edition were in line with each other, this gave it credence.

Ah yes. What has happened before as well is proof that THIS time it's different

Lol. Initially being in line and then starting to vary HAS HAPPENED LOADS OF TIME BEFORE!

There's literally no change to how things have gone before. Mid edition paragrim shift is well known GW thing...

Well. GW keeps doing same thing all the time. Keep on believing every time NOW it's different and they aren't just doing same thing they have been doing for decades.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me, fool me 10 times, shame on...?

There's literally nothing in 9e codex pattern that hasn't happened before. Repeatedly. Start about same, then suddenly change. That happens...every...single...edition. So why something that happens every single time gives credence to theory it is different now? That's like sun always rising from east gives credence to theory that TOMORROW it rises from the west.

TreeStewges wrote:

Weirdly, there is the generic Platoon Command Squad, Cadian and Tempestus Command Squads have their own entry but Catachan don’t.

They are also listed as discontinued on the GW site, possibly due to needing the base change?

Catachan, while restricted to flamers (dumb) but instead it says “for every 5 models one can have a flamer”.

That is the whole 'no model no rules' design constraint. ignores the fact the command squad box includes all the special weapons and the heavy weapon of course.

I wonder if they are re-releasing the command squad with new bases and an extra £10 cost they will do a white dwarf entry to add it and its options to match the box.

Has anyone mentioned the new aegis defensive line in the codex? There’s a pic and everything. (Not been in this thread much recently)

Andykp wrote:
Has anyone mentioned the new aegis defensive line in the codex? There’s a pic and everything. (Not been in this thread much recently)

Where? I've seen no picture.

It shows up quite a bit.

With regards to the Catachans...

I still am fully expecting we'll see some additional goodies for the Krieg and Catachans. I'm fully expecting a Command Squad, Heavy Weapon Team, Field Ordnance Battery crew figures, and some kind of signature unit (if not two of them!) for each.

Am expecting the same for Tallarn and Vostroyans next.

 Kanluwen wrote:

It shows up quite a bit.

With regards to the Catachans...

I still am fully expecting we'll see some additional goodies for the Krieg and Catachans. I'm fully expecting a Command Squad, Heavy Weapon Team, Field Ordnance Battery crew figures, and some kind of signature unit (if not two of them!) for each.

Am expecting the same for Tallarn and Vostroyans next.

I am too. Probably in mini-codexes over the next 2-3 years.

Thanks for the pic, I hadn't seen it yet. That's good news! I was in the middle of collecting a defense line last fall when they axed the models for it. Glad it's coming back!

Oh, I'm not expecting mini-codices. I'm expecting codex release schedules to get more aggressive or they'll start leaning more into things like White Dwarf supplements or Warhammer Plus giving access to them.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Oh, I'm not expecting mini-codices. I'm expecting codex release schedules to get more aggressive or they'll start leaning more into things like White Dwarf supplements or Warhammer Plus giving access to them.

Or just a 10th edition book. They also need to update the Basilisk kit and plasticize the ratling snipers and regimental advisors.

I know that there hasn't been a lot of time since the new models went on sale, but has anyone seen a picture that shows how the Ogryns/Bullgryns kit stacks up with the new models? Do they look out of place or scale now? Or are they a good fit?

Yes.

a single reply to multiple questions... lol

Hey, a picture's worth a thousand words! It was a thousand and one word reply!

 Kanluwen wrote:

Yes.

Stunning. I've passed on buying the box twice now because I wanted to do more research, and make sure that this was indeed something I really want. It is looking very good.

One more question, apologies if it's been answered before. Do we have a rough idea of when the rest of the models will be up for preorder? The new tank, HWTs and so on, before Christmas?

 Kanluwen wrote:
Hey, a picture's worth a thousand words! It was a thousand and one word reply!

So they look out of scale and they’re a good fit? Because that’s how you answered if we take your “yes” to apply to all three questions. Of course you do get points for actually finding a picture rather than just Kosh’ing.

Edit:

 Togusa wrote:
One more question, apologies if it's been answered before. Do we have a rough idea of when the rest of the models will be up for preorder? The new tank, HWTs and so on, before Christmas?

I don’t believe we have anything firm but based on the SoB release pattern the rest won’t arrive until next year unfortunately. Indeed it’s December now so there are almost guaranteed to be no major preorders left in the year.

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Hey, a picture's worth a thousand words! It was a thousand and one word reply!

So they look out of scale and they’re a good fit? Because that’s how you answered if we take your “yes” to apply to all three questions. Of course you do get points for actually finding a picture rather than just Kosh’ing.

I mean that scale looks really good to me. The Orgryn is still much taller. But I understand others might have a different opinion.

 Togusa wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Hey, a picture's worth a thousand words! It was a thousand and one word reply!

So they look out of scale and they’re a good fit? Because that’s how you answered if we take your “yes” to apply to all three questions. Of course you do get points for actually finding a picture rather than just Kosh’ing.

I mean that scale looks really good to me. The Orgryn is still much taller. But I understand others might have a different opinion.

And officer-man's head is smaller than the skull of the commissar.

It's hard to tell, but the 360 view on Nork makes it clear that it's just a fancy vox-grille with a hat.

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's hard to tell, but the 360 view on Nork makes it clear that it's just a fancy vox-grille with a hat.

Yeah, that’s just a loudspeaker wearing a Big Hat so the ogryn knows it speaks with Authority.

I always assued that was Colonel Greiss's skull integrated into a vox on Nork's shoulder.

It may be the top half of the skull on top of a speaker.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Hey, a picture's worth a thousand words! It was a thousand and one word reply!

So they look out of scale and they’re a good fit? Because that’s how you answered if we take your “yes” to apply to all three questions. Of course you do get points for actually finding a picture rather than just Kosh’ing.

I mean that scale looks really good to me. The Orgryn is still much taller. But I understand others might have a different opinion.

And officer-man's head is smaller than the skull of the commissar.

Well, just about every space marine head is the same size regardless of if they are wearing a helmet or not, so you've picked an odd hill to die on there.

 Dawnbringer wrote:
Well, just about every space marine head is the same size regardless of if they are wearing a helmet or not, so you've picked an odd hill to die on there.

'Sa big skull, that's all I'm saying. GW has been doing a better job lately of getting them to at least suggest the possibility of fitting inside someone's head.

A while back I remember seeing a new plastic Primaris Psyker model as a part of some boxed game, did that ever get released?

 Togusa wrote:
One more question, apologies if it's been answered before. Do we have a rough idea of when the rest of the models will be up for preorder? The new tank, HWTs and so on, before Christmas?

I think the box set article said next year.
EDIT: "The launch edition of Codex: Astra Militarum – available exclusively in this box until next year".

 Togusa wrote:
A while back I remember seeing a new plastic Primaris Psyker model as a part of some boxed game, did that ever get released?

No. One of the models from that set (the Technoarcheologist) is up for pre-order tomorrow.

beast_gts wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
One more question, apologies if it's been answered before. Do we have a rough idea of when the rest of the models will be up for preorder? The new tank, HWTs and so on, before Christmas?

I think the box set article said next year.
EDIT: "The launch edition of Codex: Astra Militarum – available exclusively in this box until next year".

 Togusa wrote:
A while back I remember seeing a new plastic Primaris Psyker model as a part of some boxed game, did that ever get released?

No. One of the models from that set (the Technoarcheologist) is up for pre-order tomorrow.

Okay, so they're slowly coming out then. I was thinking about grabbing one off Ebay, but I might just wait and see.

Thanks!

Tneva82,

Similar things were likely said about GW bringing back dead or functionally dead factions, ex. Genestealer Cults, Sisters of Battle, Squats/Leagues of Votann.

Similar things were said about them doing customizable models after a slew of mono-pose and/or monobuild kits. But then they came out with the heresy dreadnoughts and new cadian infantry. Or the autarch that’s cross compatible with the old.

GW is inconsistent about everything. Period. No caveats.

By all evidence they can, and will eventually, stick with an idea through a whole edition. Not necessarily because they’ve suddenly become competent, but because how they want to do anything isn’t remotely set in stone.

A better way to put it is ADHD as a metaphor; people know this means an inability to focus on one thing for long (inconsistency) , but what they usually don’t know is that it also manifests as the inability to redirect your focus (hyper consistency). The nature of ADHD means you’ll see swings from both extremes.

Also, at this point the original I even said has been lost. All I said was that we have no evidence to say that they didn’t write the initial codex drafts all at once.

We only have evidence that they changed their minds on a design philosophy (for the worse!) and later drafts of later codexes in the release schedule reflected this.

Yes they miggt have done all books at once but evidence gives no suggestion they did and in fact opposite. Every edition books start about same and then changes. This suggests books weren't done at same time. Rather it　suggests books were made as they went along...

Gw meanwhile has history of bringing new armies so sob votann etc weren't exactly unexpected. Q is rather when.

You keep saying books being about same level at start was evidence that all books were done at same time but that's what happes every...single...edition.

Unless you　can provide actual evidence that all were written at same time you are just intentionally lying,

The way the books go through obvious paradigm shifts, with new styles of rules, new exceptions to exceptions, and how updates to one book via FAQ become standard in later books, shows that they are not all written at the same time.

Wait and See. And then rewrite the past.

It's evident just from fairly nonsense weapon changes, or lack of reasonable parity of similar weapons across factions that they were not written at the same time.

Bright Lanch/Dark Lance being so different to a lascannon, then Ad Mech basically getting a bright-cannon to make up for that, to Chaos getting whatever their special lascannon is... The sudden obscene amount of spammable ignore Inv weapons that started popping up in every codex, not just a 1x shot thing (the knights missile) or one off weapon on unique/special characters.

They were not written at the same time. In fact, I think marketing strategy goes against that. They actually want the game to be imbalanced for periods, so armies have their chance in the spotlight. If they were all written at the same time, to be balanced against each other, they wouldn't have the sales they generate from meta chasers, as their current army should already be set up to compete.

New Aegis reveal.

Huh, I think I preferred the original kit. The guns/communication array is sorely missing.

I... I want this.

Even with 6' of Fronteiris walls to paint I want 6' of this too.

It's what the wall o dead cadians should have been

Pah.

No skulls, no deal.

That's not been cemented together with the blood of martyrs.

Truth though, I prefer because it is less busy.

 Kanluwen wrote:
New Aegis reveal.

New and improved Aegis Defense Line, now with “Armor of Contempt”!

It's nice by itself and I think it's nice as a similarly styled addition to the Wall of Martyrs for when you just want wall sections instead of a full on trench. It does that better, stylistically speaking, than the original Aegis.

I'm a bit wary of the connectors. They look like they go on two ways for a zigzagging line, but won't be able to make a straight line. Remains to be seen if this is true, but if it is, a bit more freedom of movement would have been appreciated.

The original Aegis was good because it wasn't super Imperial in design. Want to loot it for Orks? Whack some armour plates on there and you're good to go. Need a defence line for your Iron Warriors? Stick some Chaos spikes or hang some skulls and off you go.
This has pre-made heavy battle damage and is far too Imperial in is base design to be worth converting for another army.

Looks like it has some options. In the big pic it looks like the platform section has an option for a low wall for guns to shoot over, but the close up back side pic looks like they are all high walls.

Looks cool. Been working on my box today and I have to say that the new models are just stunning. The field batteries are just amazing kits all around...

Now if I could just get at the new HWTs and that Tank!

Someone with the book on hand can check, but I saw someone say that only the platform provides any benefits as the new Aegis Line is listed as 'area terrain', and the platform is the only thing anyone can be 'within'.

I can't say I've much interest in the kit, but I'm glad whoever wrote the old Regimental Standards is still around.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Someone with the book on hand can check, but I saw someone say that only the platform provides any benefits as the new Aegis Line is listed as 'area terrain', and the platform is the only thing anyone can be 'within'.

Yep. ADLs were previously classified as Obstacles, now they are Area Terrain and worthless (if they weren't already because of the fortification setup rules).

Looks like the watch post has an option for the front panel, with either a full size wall or low gun port.

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Someone with the book on hand can check, but I saw someone say that only the platform provides any benefits as the new Aegis Line is listed as 'area terrain', and the platform is the only thing anyone can be 'within'.

Yep. ADLs were previously classified as Obstacles, now they are Area Terrain and worthless (if they weren't already because of the fortification setup rules).

What makes them worthless?

 Togusa wrote:
What makes them worthless?

Worthless is a bit hyperbolic, but certainly a bit more complicated as it isn't intuitive, nor well defined by the datasheet. It really needs an FAQ or designers commentary.

Area Terrain
Area Terrain can include Ruins, Woods, Craters and other terrain features that models can move into and through. Each time an Area Terrain feature is set up on the battlefield, both players must agree upon the footprint of that terrain feature — that is, the boundary of the terrain feature at ground level. This is essential to define so that players know when a model is wholly on or within that terrain feature, and when it is not. For some Area Terrain features, their footprint will be obvious, especially if the terrain feature has a base or some other well defined boundary, but if not, then agree with your opponent what the footprint is. Models can move up, over and down Area Terrain following the normal rules for movement. A model on or behind Area Terrain uses the normal rules for determining if another model is visible to it, or if it is visible to another model. Area Terrain cannot be chosen as the target of an attack (but units within them can).

INFANTRY, BEAST and SWARM models receive the benefits of cover from Area Terrain features while they are within it.

So as the footprint isn't defined by the datasheet nor the model, you need to agree with your opponent what it is. This means it could change from game to game or tourny to tourny. Since this isn't some neutral terrain piece, I suspect there will be many disagreements until some sort of standard practice is defined.

Also worth noting that:
As it's area terrain and not obstacle terrain, you only get cover being on one side of the wall, not the other
You're protected from all sides, not just sight-lines that pass over the wall

KillerAngel wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
What makes them worthless?

Worthless is a bit hyperbolic, but certainly a bit more complicated as it isn't intuitive, nor well defined by the datasheet. It really needs an FAQ or designers commentary.

Area Terrain
Area Terrain can include Ruins, Woods, Craters and other terrain features that models can move into and through. Each time an Area Terrain feature is set up on the battlefield, both players must agree upon the footprint of that terrain feature — that is, the boundary of the terrain feature at ground level. This is essential to define so that players know when a model is wholly on or within that terrain feature, and when it is not. For some Area Terrain features, their footprint will be obvious, especially if the terrain feature has a base or some other well defined boundary, but if not, then agree with your opponent what the footprint is. Models can move up, over and down Area Terrain following the normal rules for movement. A model on or behind Area Terrain uses the normal rules for determining if another model is visible to it, or if it is visible to another model. Area Terrain cannot be chosen as the target of an attack (but units within them can).

INFANTRY, BEAST and SWARM models receive the benefits of cover from Area Terrain features while they are within it.

So as the footprint isn't defined by the datasheet nor the model, you need to agree with your opponent what it is. This means it could change from game to game or tourny to tourny. Since this isn't some neutral terrain piece, I suspect there will be many disagreements until some sort of standard practice is defined.

Also worth noting that:
As it's area terrain and not obstacle terrain, you only get cover being on one side of the wall, not the other
You're protected from all sides, not just sight-lines that pass over the wall

Ah, yeah my friends and I use an extremely simple cover system of our own design so the issues with the 9th ed rules don't apply to us, but for the majority of players I see the problem.

You have to be "within" it. The only thing you can be "within" is the platform, as the walls don't have anywhere to stand.

So the walls are basically meaningless.

Yep. They really screwed up with the rules. Also no quad gun makes me sad.

Old ones a lot better looking than these and they had guns.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
You have to be "within" it. The only thing you can be "within" is the platform, as the walls don't have anywhere to stand.

So the walls are basically meaningless.

I seriously hope this is a joke.
GW, the biggest player in the business, after 9 iterations of the game, can't get a rule for a 'wall/barricade' done correctly?

Jeez, after writing rules for moving and shooting, rules for hiding behind a wall are pretty much next on the list for any wargames designer surely.
Every game in its first edition has this pretty much nailed.

H.B.M.C. wrote:You have to be "within" it. The only thing you can be "within" is the platform, as the walls don't have anywhere to stand.

So the walls are basically meaningless.

Someone literally posted this just above:

KillerAngel wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
What makes them worthless?

Worthless is a bit hyperbolic, but certainly a bit more complicated as it isn't intuitive, nor well defined by the datasheet. It really needs an FAQ or designers commentary.

Area Terrain
Area Terrain can include Ruins, Woods, Craters and other terrain features that models can move into and through. Each time an Area Terrain feature is set up on the battlefield, both players must agree upon the footprint of that terrain feature — that is, the boundary of the terrain feature at ground level. This is essential to define so that players know when a model is wholly on or within that terrain feature, and when it is not. For some Area Terrain features, their footprint will be obvious, especially if the terrain feature has a base or some other well defined boundary, but if not, then agree with your opponent what the footprint is. Models can move up, over and down Area Terrain following the normal rules for movement. A model on or behind Area Terrain uses the normal rules for determining if another model is visible to it, or if it is visible to another model. Area Terrain cannot be chosen as the target of an attack (but units within them can).

INFANTRY, BEAST and SWARM models receive the benefits of cover from Area Terrain features while they are within it.

So as the footprint isn't defined by the datasheet nor the model, you need to agree with your opponent what it is. This means it could change from game to game or tourny to tourny. Since this isn't some neutral terrain piece, I suspect there will be many disagreements until some sort of standard practice is defined.

Also worth noting that:
As it's area terrain and not obstacle terrain, you only get cover being on one side of the wall, not the other
You're protected from all sides, not just sight-lines that pass over the wall

So the walls are not useless, but you have to tediously define what counts as within for each pick-up game. It is terrible rules writing, but technically functional.

And opponent then gets to nerf you by disagreeing with the idea...

Your opponent never has an incentive to agree with you on the definition, though, which is a problem for all games not played against friends.

tneva82 wrote:And opponent then gets to nerf you by disagreeing with the idea...

Agamemnon2 wrote:Your opponent never has an incentive to agree with you on the definition, though, which is a problem for all games not played against friends.

Not going to argue it is a gak way of doing it. Although it sucks if you can't find anyone to play against that is enough of a good sport to agree something sensible. The incentive is having a good game and not being an arse.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
You have to be "within" it. The only thing you can be "within" is the platform, as the walls don't have anywhere to stand.

So the walls are basically meaningless.

I seriously hope this is a joke.
GW, the biggest player in the business, after 9 iterations of the game, can't get a rule for a 'wall/barricade' done correctly?

Jeez, after writing rules for moving and shooting, rules for hiding behind a wall are pretty much next on the list for any wargames designer surely.
Every game in its first edition has this pretty much nailed.

Ah, I see your issue. Let me help you. You'll probably be happier if you stop thinking of the people GW employs to write the 40k rules as game designers. They're a clown act with little knowledge of wargame design, whose field of expertise is the curious, the comical and the grotesque. You'll find a lot of things to come out of GW to make more sense if you think of it like that.

This isn't a new situation either. You could tell from the 8th ed previews what kind of rules writing you had to expect. Not just in terms of terrain rules or more accurately their absence, but on a fundamental, systematic level. Yet here we are, six years later and looking forward to the next train wreck edition, and some people are still hopeful that against all evidence 40k might get well written rules.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
Your opponent never has an incentive to agree with you on the definition, though, which is a problem for all games not played against friends.

Is gaming culture really that bad? Would generally accepted social norms (eg the desire that most people have to be agreeable, among many others) not be enough?

It isn't,. Most of the tome people agree, even in hyper competitive tournaments

Haven't been following the thread, maybe it's already been mentioned. The regular Leman Russ is listed as "sold out" on the UK site, and on the Oz site the regular one is completely gone and the Demolisher is "sold out".

Site error? Repackaging? Getting replaced?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
It isn't,. Most of the tome people agree, even in hyper competitive tournaments

It stands to reason that a hypercompetitive tournament would have some sort of referee to resolve that sort of problem, or use house rules or a FAQ in the tournament package to make general rulings about problems that arise frequently.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Haven't been following the thread, maybe it's already been mentioned. The regular Leman Russ is listed as "sold out" on the UK site, and on the Oz site the regular one is completely gone and the Demolisher is "sold out".

Site error? Repackaging? Getting replaced?

My gut feeling is repackaging, I think there would have been a reveal of some kind if the Russ kit is getting updated.

Having said that, it is more-or-less the same age as the current Sentinel kit, and that just got axed

Could be repackaging into a single SKU.

Downside? Likely price increase. Upside? From memory, the various turret options are super easy to make modular, so you will get more bang for your more bucks.

No hint when the new stuff hits yet?

Only had a quick read of the new codex and atm...we are a little short on Warlord choices arnt we until new stuff hits?

Contents of Cadia Stands slated for release after Christmas, I assume the rest will be alongside, so between two and six weeks? Unfortunately.

Something to add to this is that both Imperial Guard and Slaves to Darkness come with a substantial model release, and they're both next in line. I don't think we know if 40k or AoS comes first, so there's a possibility that Guard is pushed one or two weeks further out. I reckon we'll still see something before the end of January, even if it's just a pre-order announcement.

Of course ideally it's Guard, Slaves to Darkness, World Eaters so the 40k releases aren't too close to each other. But I'm sure GW has other filler to space things out to that end.

 Geifer wrote:
Something to add to this is that both Imperial Guard and Slaves to Darkness come with a substantial model release, and they're both next in line. I don't think we know if 40k or AoS comes first, so there's a possibility that Guard is pushed one or two weeks further out. I reckon we'll still see something before the end of January, even if it's just a pre-order announcement.

Of course ideally it's Guard, Slaves to Darkness, World Eaters so the 40k releases aren't too close to each other. But I'm sure GW has other filler to space things out to that end.

That would put Chaos back-to-back, so I can see the logic for either order.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Could be repackaging into a single SKU.

Downside? Likely price increase. Upside? From memory, the various turret options are super easy to make modular, so you will get more bang for your more bucks.

Think this is unlikely – the turrets aren't a separate sprue (and there are some minor hull differences between the kits too).

Don't forget that the accessory sprue is back in play, effectively...might be repacking that in there.

Speaking of accesories, in the codex I found an image of an ordiance battery team member holding wrench that isn't anywere on the sprue.

 Nazrak wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Could be repackaging into a single SKU.

Downside? Likely price increase. Upside? From memory, the various turret options are super easy to make modular, so you will get more bang for your more bucks.

Think this is unlikely – the turrets aren't a separate sprue (and there are some minor hull differences between the kits too).

Yeah - you'd end up with an extra turret and half hull:



They could re-cut the sprues, but updated packaging is my bet (or putting the accessory sprue back in, as Kanluwen said).

Random thought, they could also just be putting two in a box ala the Carnifexes.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Random thought, they could also just be putting two in a box ala the Carnifexes.

Could be, but it would be a weird move. Didn't GW only double up on Carnifexes when they moved them to direct only? Also off topic but feth that crap, it's such a sadness to demote Carnifexes to the webstore. If they do the same to Leman Russes, they are fething nuts.

Plus, it's hard to imagine a 2x Leman Russ box just by virtue of sprue count (unless there was re-cutting like folks mentioned above, which seems very unlikely)

Tank article
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/12/19/designing-the-new-rogal-dorn-tank-chatting-tracks-turrets-and-tension-springs-with-the-warhammer-design-studio/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=warhammer-40,000&utm_content=rogaldornarticle19122022

It's so fething nice to see GW acknowledging the designer of their minis

They'll acknowledge their own work on social media sometimes, usually well after the fact. I assume they're told to do so because it's always the same word form when it happens. "Proud to say I was part of the team that worked on..." (always something very close to this, didn't have to check because I've read it so many times).

Edit - Latham https://www.instagram.com/p/ChZ2xu6thIt/

JWBS wrote:
Tank article

Huh, nice on conversion/customizing capability of new IG vehicles. Was wondering on number of extra parts shown on new Sentinels.

But wait, isn't current Dakka post-squatting conspiracy theory the one saying GW hates both of these things?

Garrac wrote:
It's so fething nice to see GW acknowledging the designer of their minis

They used to do it all the time until rabid 4chan crowd started attacking everything bearing certain name (funnily enough, for the bits said dude was not responsible for). Even if said work was really good (and not matched in four editions since), go figure. From that era pretty much everything was anonymous going forward.

I wish GW just ignored the loudest screaming monkeys (see also W2 debacle) but it is what it is...

 Irbis wrote:

JWBS wrote:
Tank article

Huh, nice on conversion/customizing capability of new IG vehicles. Was wondering on number of extra parts shown on new Sentinels.

But wait, isn't current Dakka post-squatting conspiracy theory the one saying GW hates both of these things?

Garrac wrote:
It's so fething nice to see GW acknowledging the designer of their minis

They used to do it all the time until rabid 4chan crowd started attacking everything bearing certain name (funnily enough, for the bits said dude was not responsible for). Even if said work was really good (and not matched in four editions since), go figure. From that era pretty much everything was anonymous going forward.

I wish GW just ignored the loudest screaming monkeys (see also W2 debacle) but it is what it is...

Yes, putting random bits of crap on a model is the same as converting the weapons it has, clearly.

 Irbis wrote:

They used to do it all the time until rabid 4chan crowd started attacking everything bearing certain name (funnily enough, for the bits said dude was not responsible for). Even if said work was really good (and not matched in four editions since), go figure. From that era pretty much everything was anonymous going forward.

I wish GW just ignored the loudest screaming monkeys (see also W2 debacle) but it is what it is...

Now they're opening themselves to being accused of using AI to make the minis, and, thus, possibility loose their copyright. Time to see which way they jump.

Not sure if already observed or mentioned, but the classic Primaris Psyker model has been removed from the online store, so chances are we're also getting the Escalation Primaris Psyker on her own soon?

Possible. I would not be shocked if the priest from BSF shows up, considering he is the "base" profile in the book.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

They used to do it all the time until rabid 4chan crowd started attacking everything bearing certain name (funnily enough, for the bits said dude was not responsible for). Even if said work was really good (and not matched in four editions since), go figure. From that era pretty much everything was anonymous going forward.

I wish GW just ignored the loudest screaming monkeys (see also W2 debacle) but it is what it is...

Now they're opening themselves to being accused of using AI to make the minis, and, thus, possibility loose their copyright. Time to see which way they jump.

Why would that affect copyright?

for example in the USA you cannot protect something via copyright that was made without human input

which is not what AI Art usually is as there is a human input first that guides the AI to design stuff

Yet if GW go that far to claim that their design was made without human input, so no human designer was needed, it won't be that easy to get a copyright claim on that one

 kodos wrote:
Yet if GW go that far to claim that their design was made without human input, so no human designer was needed, it won't be that easy to get a copyright claim on that one

That's... not even close to what GW do. Removing the name of specific designers =/= claiming there wasn't a designer.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Yet if GW go that far to claim that their design was made without human input, so no human designer was needed, it won't be that easy to get a copyright claim on that one

That's... not even close to what GW do. Removing the name of specific designers =/= claiming there wasn't a designer.

Indeed. The AI point is interesting but not remotely relevant.

 kodos wrote:
for example in the USA you cannot protect something via copyright that was made without human input

which is not what AI Art usually is as there is a human input first that guides the AI to design stuff

Yet if GW go that far to claim that their design was made without human input, so no human designer was needed, it won't be that easy to get a copyright claim on that one

And when has gw said so? Not mentioning designer is about as close to claiming no human input as you are from alpha centauri.

Ask Ibris were he got that from

Anyone heard or care to speculate about some IG made to Order?

I kind of expected it when Cadia Stands came out but maybe with the general release?

It would be nice to get some Modrians, Tallarns and/or metal Cadians fresh from the forge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Yet if GW go that far to claim that their design was made without human input, so no human designer was needed, it won't be that easy to get a copyright claim on that one

That's... not even close to what GW do. Removing the name of specific designers =/= claiming there wasn't a designer.

Exactly, corporate owned works like commercials, jingles, artwork, packaging is rarely credited because the creators are doing work for hire and have no ownership rights.

Comic books are unusual in that creators are credited, and sometimes get royalty-like incentives even when they have no ownership rights.

we already had a regiment made to order before the release, I doubt there will be another one anytime soon

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

Exactly, corporate owned works like commercials, jingles, artwork, packaging is rarely credited because the creators are doing work for hire and have no ownership rights.

this depends on the country, as for example Germany the ownership is always with the creator no matter what (which was one if the reasons GW panicked because of fan-work done in Germany)

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That's the problem. I either got 3 sprues (6 guns), or 6 sprues (12 guns). I won't know until they arrive.

It was 6 sprues.

Whoops!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That's the problem. I either got 3 sprues (6 guns), or 6 sprues (12 guns). I won't know until they arrive.

It was 6 sprues.

Whoops!

Tell the mek to bolt them all to a single walking contraption!

People may already be aware of this but my FLGS has had notification to return the plastic Cadian kits (command squads, heavy weapon teams and shock troops), so they will be gone for good soon, so if you want any grab them now if you can

Posted over on B&C:

Seen on Facebook, apparently from Ebay...




Could explain those minis you cant currently build from the box, looks to be like the Blacktemplar one

Would be great if that means we will also get other Regiments as upgrade sets

Those are definitely some cool cadian upgrade bits.

We might see other Regimental upgrade sets down the road, but I don't think they'll be adding stuff like the Steel Legion or whatever to the Cadian Shock Troops via upgrade frame.

It looks pretty good but WHY IS THERE ONLY 6 RESPIRATOR HEADS?! It is honestly so infuriating. At least put enough for a whole squad

 Haighus wrote:
It looks pretty good but WHY IS THERE ONLY 6 RESPIRATOR HEADS?! It is honestly so infuriating. At least put enough for a whole squad

Because the Command Squad comes with 2 respirator heads, and is part of the upcoming Combat Patrol box?

Heads are not something anyone will be lacking, unless they're just wanting respirators I guess?

Perhaps some of the sprues are doubled up like the marine upgrade kits

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
It looks pretty good but WHY IS THERE ONLY 6 RESPIRATOR HEADS?! It is honestly so infuriating. At least put enough for a whole squad

Because the Command Squad comes with 2 respirator heads, and is part of the upcoming Combat Patrol box?

Heads are not something anyone will be lacking, unless they're just wanting respirators I guess?

Which I do, which is why I pointed out the respirators specifically. To be honest, I generally think it is weird to have a mix of models wearing respirators and not- usually the air is toxic or it isn't. The exception is giving respirators just to those carrying noxious weaponry like flamers, which I suppose this kit caters for.

I just find it very frustrating that this kit is overflowing with heads, but they couldn't go as far as ten of them having gas masks. The basic kit has plenty of non-respirator heads.

Right, as does the Cadian Command Squad box--which also features two Respirator heads.

Which is what I was pointing out...alongside of pointing out that people starting an army fresh will likely be swimming in Cadian Command Squad sets.

Nice stuff. I could see myself find a use for one of these.

 xttz wrote:
Perhaps some of the sprues are doubled up like the marine upgrade kits

In that case wouldn't it have a x2 noted on the back of the box somewhere? I may be misremembering but I thought that's what GW does with Marine upgrades and Necromunda stuff in order to accurately reflect box contents?

Thankfully I have not made up my 2nd Cadia Stands box yet. Happy with these, the tank commander especially is great. Nice to have the kneeling legs as well.

Bloody hell, that is some great stuff right there, the tank commander in particular is just ace.

I like seeing upgrade sets. It should add a little bit more variety in armies.
I hope they extend said upgrade sets to equipment too so they can stop doing those silly equipment restrictions in the codices.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Right, as does the Cadian Command Squad box--which also features two Respirator heads.

Which is what I was pointing out...alongside of pointing out that people starting an army fresh will likely be swimming in Cadian Command Squad sets.

Right... so two heads per 5 bodies. This is not a helpful ratio for making an all-respirator Cadian force...

Unless you mean to sell off the excess command squads minus two heads clipped off the sprue?

Looks great, interesting that it comes with two extra Guard bodies.
Now… leak my Primaris Dante pls 😂

Those are amazing. First the black templar upgrade sprues, now these. If only GW would do something for either Horus Heresy (stupid expensive FW resin) or some for chaos space marines.

That awkwardly stiff robot hand is killing me .

 AtoMaki wrote:
That awkwardly stiff robot hand is killing me .

A guardsman only needs a left arm for clotheslining xenos!

The helmet mounted on the lasgun is by far my favourite bit of that kit.

Due to no model no rules, does this mean tank commanders will be able to take a power sword?

Looks like it was made with half an eye on Kill team- very easy to make a hardened veteran, bruiser, and medic operative from that kit.

Doesn’t this also solve the mystery of the other sergeant pose from the patrol box? I guess that means it will include the upgrade sprue as well.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Doesn’t this also solve the mystery of the other sergeant pose from the patrol box? I guess that means it will include the upgrade sprue as well.

No, because the one from the patrol box is just built with the autogun.

Looks like a nice upgrade sprue. It makes picking up some Cadians even more tempting.

2021 upgrade sprue for previous Cadian Shock Troops feels bit of a wasted resources now.

Interested to see if we get these for other styles of infantry?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Interested to see if we get these for other styles of infantry?

Traitor Guard in the vein of Brood Brothers is the obvious choice.

jullevi wrote:
Looks like a nice upgrade sprue. It makes picking up some Cadians even more tempting.

2021 upgrade sprue for previous Cadian Shock Troops feels bit of a wasted resources now.

I wonder if that could be a case of bad internal communications? Someone just being told to make a cadian upgrade sprue without knowing someone else was working on new ones? Thought still strange that they would still choose to make a mould then.

Or the old upgrade sprue was already finished long ago but massively delayed for some reason

 ph34r wrote:
Due to no model no rules, does this mean tank commanders will be able to take a power sword?

Nah. Just because you have model doesn't quarantee rules. But not having model reduces odds of having rule considerably.

Maybe in new book anyway but as is IG isn't in line for new codex for a while.

tneva82 wrote:
Maybe in new book anyway but as is IG isn't in line for new codex for a while.

The new Guard book is done. We're just waiting on the general release.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Interested to see if we get these for other styles of infantry?

I'd love other factions to get these as well though as it could really free up modelling/army styling choices. I'd love even more options for the Votann for example, or a new sprue of biomorphs for Nids. It would give factions a good bit of freshness -more so than a single character release does.

 silverstu wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Interested to see if we get these for other styles of infantry?

I'd love other factions to get these as well though as it could really free up modelling/army styling choices. I'd love even more options for the Votann for example, or a new sprue of biomorphs for Nids. It would give factions a good bit of freshness -more so than a single character release does.

I also bet that it's pretty profitable, it's not that much material, does not take up a lot of space, and you can probably do much of the design work by using random assets you already made that did not quite make it to the main sprues.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/01/04/new-year-new-bayonets-the-cadians-get-an-upgrade-sprue-crammed-with-characterful-components/

Marketing to the rescue! (I guess this was meant to be next Monday's article)

Whilst the leak wasn’t exactly Photato, nice to at least have some super clear piccies.












Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mystic Grotsnik predicts the gas mask bounces will be very popular.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Maybe in new book anyway but as is IG isn't in line for new codex for a while.

The new Guard book is done. We're just waiting on the general release.

Y’know I don’t think you even meant to make that pun…

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Maybe in new book anyway but as is IG isn't in line for new codex for a while.

The new Guard book is done. We're just waiting on the general release.

Yes. Which is why new one where options might be isn't due for a while...

Or you think the new book on general release would have options not in big box codex?

There won't be new options from these in a hurry as we know codex rules already.

It's nice - but honestly, they should have packaged it with the squad. I know retailers who would love it if they would cut down their SKUs and package things up together...

Is that Lt. Mira head top row #5?

 xttz wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/01/04/new-year-new-bayonets-the-cadians-get-an-upgrade-sprue-crammed-with-characterful-components/

Marketing to the rescue! (I guess this was meant to be next Monday's article)

A few details I have noticed:
- A ski hat, I think that's a first.
- He carries a hatched. A power hatchet? No. A cyber-hatchet? No, just a regular hatchet. This galaxy is weird.
- You are supposed to remove the magazine from the gun used as a grave marker.
- Speaking of guns, the sling holder in the front is in the way of the bayonet. So how does the bayonet fit onto the gun?
- I will forever miss Corporal Hentai Kamen.
- The belt-fed autogun looks a little bizarre, but plausibly bizarre: other than the belt feeding onto the wrong side the autogun has a cover to accustom the belt-fed firing mechanism. I like that detail.
- The two kneeling bodies display the kneepads correctly.
- I've spotted a guardsman with rolled-up sleeves on one of the pictures in the 'dex but I can't find those arms on either the Shock Troops sprue, the Command Squad sprue, or here. What gives?

Tank Commander scars match those of Pask

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Tank Commander scars match those of Pask

Cant be him though, he has 5 fingers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:
- I've spotted a guardsman with rolled-up sleeves on one of the pictures in the 'dex but I can't find those arms on either the Shock Troops sprue, the Command Squad sprue, or here. What gives?

We havent seen all the bits that make up the new Cadian HW Teams yet.

 AtoMaki wrote:

- He carries a hatched. A power hatchet? No. A cyber-hatchet? No, just a regular hatchet. This galaxy is weird.

Sometimes you just need to chop some firewood, get a couple of branches to camouflage your dugout or open a specially resistant can of corpse starch without obliterating everything in the vicinity with your HyperAdze3000

Ahh ok so now you really can build a Vet Guard Killteam using nuCads. Still prefer DKoK meself but I bet many guard fans will like this.

 AtoMaki wrote:

 xttz wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/01/04/new-year-new-bayonets-the-cadians-get-an-upgrade-sprue-crammed-with-characterful-components/

Marketing to the rescue! (I guess this was meant to be next Monday's article)

A few details I have noticed:
- A ski hat, I think that's a first.
- He carries a hatched. A power hatchet? No. A cyber-hatchet? No, just a regular hatchet. This galaxy is weird.
- You are supposed to remove the magazine from the gun used as a grave marker.
- Speaking of guns, the sling holder in the front is in the way of the bayonet. So how does the bayonet fit onto the gun?
- I will forever miss Corporal Hentai Kamen.
- The belt-fed autogun looks a little bizarre, but plausibly bizarre: other than the belt feeding onto the wrong side the autogun has a cover to accustom the belt-fed firing mechanism. I like that detail.
- The two kneeling bodies display the kneepads correctly.
- I've spotted a guardsman with rolled-up sleeves on one of the pictures in the 'dex but I can't find those arms on either the Shock Troops sprue, the Command Squad sprue, or here. What gives?

Would they even use their gun as a grave marker? Wouldn't the Ad Mech / Munitorum get really mad about perfectly good equipment being left behind?
The hatchet doesn't bother me; most irl armies have some sort of tool at their disposal. Not only for emergency self defense, but to break barricades, gather supplies, etc.

Doesn't the M249 have a cover mechanism like that? It can take magazines as well as belts, so maybe the designers used that as a template?
I actually like seeing them have an autogun. Not sure if it's fluffy (why boolet when lazor?), but its a nice little detail that mixes things up a little.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Would they even use their gun as a grave marker? Wouldn't the Ad Mech / Munitorum get really mad about perfectly good equipment being left behind?

I would assume the weapon is bust in some way the troops don't understand, or they can't carry it and want to mark the gravesite of a corpse they are leaving behind? I wonder what the reason behind historical practice was?

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Would they even use their gun as a grave marker? Wouldn't the Ad Mech / Munitorum get really mad about perfectly good equipment being left behind?

I would assume the weapon is bust in some way the troops don't understand, or they can't carry it and want to mark the gravesite of a corpse they are leaving behind? I wonder what the reason behind historical practice was?

So after a bit of a quick google it seems the weapons were used as temporary markers; what would happen is that they bury the soldier at the front lines, leave his gun there as a reminder and then come back later with a proper grave marker.
Presumably it works the same here with the guard.

And no, they would not leave the weapon loaded.



I guess GW was too lazy to model a lasgun without the power pack.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Would they even use their gun as a grave marker? Wouldn't the Ad Mech / Munitorum get really mad about perfectly good equipment being left behind?

I would assume the weapon is bust in some way the troops don't understand, or they can't carry it and want to mark the gravesite of a corpse they are leaving behind? I wonder what the reason behind historical practice was?

According to wiki it started in WW 1 as a sign of respect towards the fallen soldiers. I strongly suspect that it was an image that was used in carricature, newspaper drawings and propaganda media before it was a thing people actually did, because it is such a powerful image that conveys a lot of information and feelingss in a very simple way.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Doesn't the M249 have a cover mechanism like that? It can take magazines as well as belts, so maybe the designers used that as a template?

Oh, what I meant was that the belt feeding into the wrong side is bizarre but the designer bothering to give the gun a cover makes it plausible.

Also... I'm sad that nobody gets the hatchet reference .

Very cool upgrade kit. Hopefully more like this incoming, and for other armies too.

 Shadow Walker wrote:
Very cool upgrade kit. Hopefully more like this incoming, and for other armies too.

Quite a few good options for an upgrade kit like this- Kabalite Trueborn, Wych Bloodbrides, Farsight Enclaves, Ork Nobz, Deathwatch Kill Teams, GSC Brood Brothers

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Doesn't the M249 have a cover mechanism like that? It can take magazines as well as belts, so maybe the designers used that as a template?
I actually like seeing them have an autogun. Not sure if it's fluffy (why boolet when lazor?), but its a nice little detail that mixes things up a little.

I actually get more Stoner 63 vibes (combined with a bit of M1A1 Thompson) than M249.

 AtoMaki wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Doesn't the M249 have a cover mechanism like that? It can take magazines as well as belts, so maybe the designers used that as a template?

Oh, what I meant was that the belt feeding into the wrong side is bizarre but the designer bothering to give the gun a cover makes it plausible.

Also... I'm sad that nobody gets the hatchet reference .

Feeds like a PKM.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/01/04/cadia-stands-fast-with-this-months-free-in-store-miniature-and-coin/

January 28th for the miniature. So full Guard should be preorder on the 21st for release on the 28th since it was the same for the Votann mini and their army set

Is it just me, or are having better proportioned Guard models somehow made them seem all the more heroic?

No bulging muscles, just a pretty average bod. Yet there they, trusty Lasgun and one-size-fits-none uniform against the very worst the Galaxy has.

I kinda hope they end up doing an upgrade sprue for Catachans and Kreig as well. It would breath some more life into the models, especially if they flesh out the weapon options a bit

I’d rather a new Catachan kit first, then the upgrade!

Man those models were crap when they came out.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’d rather a new Catachan kit first, then the upgrade!

Man those models were crap when they came out.

Seconded, but at least the Cadian upgrade set shows that GW is willing to do both pretty much simultaneously, which is about the best case scenario.

Now they just have to go and actually redo those Catachans.

On the picture there is a arm with no hand, so i can give my sarge a pistol ? .

 skeleton wrote:
On the picture there is a arm with no hand, so i can give my sarge a pistol ? .

You already can. And the arm with no hand goes with the lasgun that has a bayonet on it.

 skeleton wrote:
On the picture there is a arm with no hand, so i can give my sarge a pistol ? .

Its to go with the rifle to the right which has a arm and 2 hands attached.

Kreig already got an upgrade sprue thanks to kill team. They would get more use out of a command squad kit, or a set of crew for field artillery. Or a Kreig HW squad with wheeled gun mounts.

Not a guard player, but I do love upgrade kits. Let's the players who want their cheap & basic models get them, while players who want to invest for customized models can do that too. Everyone wins!

 Kanluwen wrote:

Spoiler:

Reposting this for those who've commented about doing additional regiments via upgrade frames.

GW's been doing design work for awhile now. You can see the new Tallarn design there. That wouldn't work with just an upgrade frame sadly.

The Indigan Praefects(shotgunner) are commonly shown as a kitbashed faction and the Mordian and Tanith designs aren't super new.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Is it just me, or are having better proportioned Guard models somehow made them seem all the more heroic?

Yes, I do like to see a scale difference between the human armies and the super human armies, I feel it fits the narrative better for both sides.

I will totally make a unit with 6 respirator heads and 4 guys ordered to hold their breath in case they smell something suspicious.
Ofcourse you need a darned good reason to get the Munitorum to approve sending respirators to a full squad.
Great upgrade sprue all around.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Is it just me, or are having better proportioned Guard models somehow made them seem all the more heroic?

Kinda, but I don't think in the right way. With the more realistic proportions but otherwise quite detailed and packed appearance they look like a bunch of millennials LARPing as a 40k military force. They remind me of those guys who cosplayed as Elysian Drop Troops, it is the same overall somewhat-off-putting-cosplay feel between the proportions and the details.

Are there enough parts on this to cover the Veteran Guard kill team roster with this with this and 2 regular Cadian boxes?

 Fayric wrote:
I will totally make a unit with 6 respirator heads and 4 guys ordered to hold their breath in case they smell something suspicious.
Ofcourse you need a darned good reason to get the Munitorum to approve sending respirators to a full squad.
Great upgrade sprue all around.

Have the 4 guys wear berets with a yellow feathers

Ancient Otter wrote:
Are there enough parts on this to cover the Veteran Guard kill team roster with this with this and 2 regular Cadian boxes?

Only things missing are a sniper rifle, boltgun, plasma pistol and demolition charge from the top of my head. Most other roles can easily be represented by the parts provided in the upgrade kit.

The female Cadian heads look daft on the bodies. They should just sculpt something that better reflects a female silhouette. Really nice extras on that sprue though.

 BrookM wrote:

Ancient Otter wrote:
Are there enough parts on this to cover the Veteran Guard kill team roster with this with this and 2 regular Cadian boxes?

Only things missing are a sniper rifle, boltgun, plasma pistol and demolition charge from the top of my head. Most other roles can easily be represented by the parts provided in the upgrade kit.

I think the arm in the upgrade sprue holding a crate combined with the boltcutters is a reasonable facsimile for a demolitions expert, but it would be best to pinch the parts from the Kasrkin sprue.

You know what make a good improvised explosive?

A can of fuel. The kit has got you covered

Sprue looks nice enough, but I feel like I am the only person who thinks that for the price GW charges for things, it should just be in the damned baseline kit. If its priced in any way similar to the primaris upgrades, it will be 25-30$ just to glam up your squad a bit. I like all the bits on it, but it just seems a bit costly considering they are likely going to be asking 50$ for just the regular Cadian kit.

I suppose my complaints will be rescinded if it turns out much cheaper than expected.

The Kasrkin box had 13 spare respirators IIRC. One could mix those with the new respirator heads.

M.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Is that Lt. Mira head top row #5?

No, it isn't.

 kurhanik wrote:
Sprue looks nice enough, but I feel like I am the only person who thinks that for the price GW charges for things, it should just be in the damned baseline kit. If its priced in any way similar to the primaris upgrades, it will be 25-30$ just to glam up your squad a bit. I like all the bits on it, but it just seems a bit costly considering they are likely going to be asking 50$ for just the regular Cadian kit.

I suppose my complaints will be rescinded if it turns out much cheaper than expected.

In the leaked picture the box has GBP 15 scribbled on it. Seems your guess is about right.

As for the price and value, I'm sure you're not alone to think so. But it's not realistic to expect anything less than bonkers prices from GW, so it's easy to move past that and just talk about the actual product. Not much point in discussing what we can by and large agree on.

 kurhanik wrote:
Sprue looks nice enough, but I feel like I am the only person who thinks that for the price GW charges for things, it should just be in the damned baseline kit. If its priced in any way similar to the primaris upgrades, it will be 25-30$ just to glam up your squad a bit. I like all the bits on it, but it just seems a bit costly considering they are likely going to be asking 50$ for just the regular Cadian kit.

I suppose my complaints will be rescinded if it turns out much cheaper than expected.

Do all guard players really need one of these upgrade sprues for every guarsdman squad though? Unlike the marine version the sprue is full of stuff that you'd probably only want to include once or twice per army to avoid repetition (I'm avoiding the dreaded m-word here!), leaving a lot of excess bits that will never be used.

Would have been nice to include one of these in the combat patrol box though.

Would have like it when i did my gaurd army, 10 years ago.

This might sound like a really dumb question but is this cadian upgrade sprue compatible with the old cadian troops? Or is it only designed to fit with the new shock troops?

I've not seen the new cadians in real life yet so I'm not sure if scale creep means this sprue won't size well with the older plastic bits.


Helped my mum clean out the shed for a garage sale and found 92 old cadian troops all unassembled so I'm hoping the new sprue might give me hope one day to complete them

Noticeably different in proportions and scale.

The_Real_Chris wrote:
It's nice - but honestly, they should have packaged it with the squad. I know retailers who would love it if they would cut down their SKUs and package things up together...

For what they charge the squad set should come with a heavy weapon team, and this sprue, and a bottle of plastic cement.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Not a guard player, but I do love upgrade kits. Let's the players who want their cheap & basic models get them, while players who want to invest for customized models can do that too. Everyone wins!

Oh tell me where to find those cheap and basic models, I'd like to get some!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skeleton wrote:
Would have like it when i did my gaurd army, 10 years ago.

All the exaults. This is 10-20 years overdue.

I should be deliriously happy about the new IG but I'm just not. Between the daft limitations in the rules, losing several converted squads and of course the eye-stabbing prices, I'm just not.

Not that any of that stopped my from buying Cadia Stands, but it is definitely stopping me from like actually taking anything off of the sprue or painting it.

 kurhanik wrote:
Sprue looks nice enough, but I feel like I am the only person who thinks that for the price GW charges for things, it should just be in the damned baseline kit. If its priced in any way similar to the primaris upgrades, it will be 25-30$ just to glam up your squad a bit. I like all the bits on it, but it just seems a bit costly considering they are likely going to be asking 50$ for just the regular Cadian kit. I suppose my complaints will be rescinded if it turns out much cheaper than expected.

Tricky balance. Personally, as someone who like as many options as possible, I like the fact that upgrade sprues exist. There's limited space on a sprue, and including extra sprues increases the cost of the box.

Having a separate upgrade sprue keeps things cheaper for people who are primarily gamers, while giving more optional variety for people who are primarily hobbyists. It also allows for really visually distinct things that you probably only ever want one of (like a really distinctive/unique head/gesture) to exist.

JWBS wrote:
Noticeably different in proportions and scale.

Ok thank you for the info, that helps me out

lost_lilliputian wrote:

JWBS wrote:
Noticeably different in proportions and scale.

Ok thank you for the info, that helps me out

It's mostly apparent in the size of the head, there are some good comparision pics floating around like e.g. this one:




Source: https://taleofpainters.com/2022/11/scale-comparison-new-plastic-cadian-shock-troops/

You might get away with putting new heads on all the old models without looking too out of place.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
It's nice - but honestly, they should have packaged it with the squad. I know retailers who would love it if they would cut down their SKUs and package things up together...

For what they charge the squad set should come with a heavy weapon team, and this sprue, and a bottle of plastic cement.

Yes at times you do wish they had professional product people in the company. Other companies routinely repackage items together to increase sales, adding the old heavy weapon squad into the old squad box would have been a way to boost sales for a year before the new sets came out.

Tsagualsa wrote:

lost_lilliputian wrote:

JWBS wrote:
Noticeably different in proportions and scale.

Ok thank you for the info, that helps me out

It's mostly apparent in the size of the head, there are some good comparision pics floating around like e.g. this one:

You might get away with putting new heads on all the old models without looking too out of place.

Wow that is quite a difference! Thank you for the pic, good idea with the heads too.

I've got things to think about now for sure

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
It's nice - but honestly, they should have packaged it with the squad. I know retailers who would love it if they would cut down their SKUs and package things up together...

For what they charge the squad set should come with a heavy weapon team, and this sprue, and a bottle of plastic cement.

Yes at times you do wish they had professional product people in the company. Other companies routinely repackage items together to increase sales, adding the old heavy weapon squad into the old squad box would have been a way to boost sales for a year before the new sets came out.

For a long time Brood Brothers were the best way to build up your IG force.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
It's nice - but honestly, they should have packaged it with the squad. I know retailers who would love it if they would cut down their SKUs and package things up together...

For what they charge the squad set should come with a heavy weapon team, and this sprue, and a bottle of plastic cement.

Yes at times you do wish they had professional product people in the company. Other companies routinely repackage items together to increase sales, adding the old heavy weapon squad into the old squad box would have been a way to boost sales for a year before the new sets came out.

For a long time Brood Brothers were the best way to build up your IG force.

Stuff like the old 'mobile infantry' boxes where they just stuffed a tac squad and a rhino together were great too, who cares if the rhino has last editions accessory sprue.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Not a guard player, but I do love upgrade kits. Let's the players who want their cheap & basic models get them, while players who want to invest for customized models can do that too. Everyone wins!

Oh tell me where to find those cheap and basic models, I'd like to get some!
.

Wargames Atlantic?

Bonus in that at least their Deathfields range is pretty compatible with the old Cadians at least, and with the new Traitor Guard kit from my experience. Their historical kits too, though the weapons (and arms to an extent) will look a bit awkwardly large on them.

Apologist wrote:

 kurhanik wrote:
Sprue looks nice enough, but I feel like I am the only person who thinks that for the price GW charges for things, it should just be in the damned baseline kit. If its priced in any way similar to the primaris upgrades, it will be 25-30$ just to glam up your squad a bit. I like all the bits on it, but it just seems a bit costly considering they are likely going to be asking 50$ for just the regular Cadian kit. I suppose my complaints will be rescinded if it turns out much cheaper than expected.

Tricky balance. Personally, as someone who like as many options as possible, I like the fact that upgrade sprues exist. There's limited space on a sprue, and including extra sprues increases the cost of the box.

Having a separate upgrade sprue keeps things cheaper for people who are primarily gamers, while giving more optional variety for people who are primarily hobbyists. It also allows for really visually distinct things that you probably only ever want one of (like a really distinctive/unique head/gesture) to exist.

Oh I'm fine with an upgrade sprue, I actually like it, I just feel that for the price GW charges for this kind of stuff, I could do so much better elsewhere. Like if it ends up say 12$? I could deal, if its 27$ and the sprue is doubled in it, I could swallow it down for say buying 1 to spread amongst several squads. But the likely outcome of 25-30$ for a single sprue is just crazy to me. I suppose its a step up in that at least it doesn't have special wargear locked behind it like some of the Space Marine ones...

 xttz wrote:
Do all guard players really need one of these upgrade sprues for every guarsdman squad though? Unlike the marine version the sprue is full of stuff that you'd probably only want to include once or twice per army to avoid repetition (I'm avoiding the dreaded m-word here!), leaving a lot of excess bits that will never be used.

Well yes?

Sure, there are a lot of parts you only need 1-2 of, but if the sprue had 20 respirator heads (like it frankly should, also, why no officer/veteran/specialists heads with respirators?) it would became an instant bestseller. Not only for Cadians, for Ash Wastes/GSC/CSM cultists too, and given how dumb BT scouts look, probably them too. At just 5, it's way too inefficient and expensive for that purpose.

lost_lilliputian wrote:
This might sound like a really dumb question but is this cadian upgrade sprue compatible with the old cadian troops? Or is it only designed to fit with the new shock troops?

For old Cadians, this upgrade works a lot better:


Alas, looks like it vanished so the point is kinda moot anyway...

Worth mentioning the new Cadian trooper pictured has a female head. The male ones are more proportional to the provided bodies.

 Irbis wrote:

For old Cadians, this upgrade works a lot better:

Spoiler:

Alas, looks like it vanished so the point is kinda moot anyway...

I really like that upgrade sprue. You can still get it as part of the last gen Cadian Shock Troops kit, Element still has some in stock.

I've always been a fan of the older plastic Cadian bodies with headswaps, the Forge World upgrades had smaller heads and were perfect IMHO. In fact I prefer them to the newer models, despite the fact that the newer models are technically much better and have sharper details. Maybe nostalgia is playing a part here.

But yes, the standard heads on the old Cadians were too big.

It was never available outside of that box.

I'm not really sure the old Cadian heads were actually that over sized. They just applied logic to a helmet over a head, unlike the rest of the 40k range that treats helmets like balaclavas.

 kurhanik wrote:
Sprue looks nice enough, but I feel like I am the only person who thinks that for the price GW charges for things, it should just be in the damned baseline kit. If its priced in any way similar to the primaris upgrades, it will be 25-30$ just to glam up your squad a bit. I like all the bits on it, but it just seems a bit costly considering they are likely going to be asking 50$ for just the regular Cadian kit.

I suppose my complaints will be rescinded if it turns out much cheaper than expected.

15£

And if they were in base box price would be even higher for base box Seeing you don't need these 1=1 cheaper this way in the end...

In base box for same price of course best but pigs have better chance to fly than that

 Kanluwen wrote:
It was never available outside of that box.

Yes Kan.

I don't think that anybody said it was available on its own?

 Dawnbringer wrote:
I'm not really sure the old Cadian heads were actually that over sized. They just applied logic to a helmet over a head, unlike the rest of the 40k range that treats helmets like balaclavas.

The visual effect is not mainly because the head is as big as it is, it's due to the fact that in 'heroic proportions' like GW does them, a human is around ~5 heads high, while in reality it's more like 7-8 heads for the usual range of human heights. Adding an even slightly oversized head on top of that general principle gets you pretty near to the head-to-heigth-ratio of e.g. toddlers or monkeys, and that just starts to look weird. Your brain basically goes ''This is an infant''.

 Dawnbringer wrote:
I'm not really sure the old Cadian heads were actually that over sized. They just applied logic to a helmet over a head, unlike the rest of the 40k range that treats helmets like balaclavas.

Quoted for truth. GW models tend to have bare and helmeted heads that are the same size because it just looks 'right' at first glance. Kind of like how Iron Man's armor fits like a jacket and cap.

When they break it for something more realistic the figures look a bit bobble headed.

Star Wars Storm Troopers have the same issue since they have to fit an actual actor in the armor.

A little disappointed the AM codex and the next wave of models aren't going on pre-order next week. I have the codex, but the sooner it is on general release, the sooner IA might get a faq and I can find out what's going on with some of the Krieg stuff.

Oh well, slaves to darkness was due first, I guess it will be last weekend of the month it goes on release so should be up for pre-order next week.

Seeing the AM coin is available 28th day you can bet on that being day it's in stores. This was known some time ago already

For clarification the AM coin was available from the 7th of January, it is the Guardsman miniature of the month that is available from the 28th...but your point stands.

GW still does not know what deltoids and bicepts are meant to look like. Deltoid is meant to just cap over the top of the arm and the bicept is two muscles not three, and you should not be able to see that level of definition on the outside of the arm. Its pretty simple stuff. And the bald head seems to be some variety of pinky tau? They tried to make him frowning but instead of two vertical folds between his eyes he has a horizontal one which to me makes him look like he has a prosthetic nose... axe is a bit funny only on account of being on an infantrymans arm. Sure every afv has pioneer tools like wood axes attached to it but the crew arm would be more suitable. And everyone knows infantrymen use shovels a hell of a lot more...if the knives are meant to be to scale they are a bit useless. They are too big for that style of general purpose knife- they are machete sized without the strength of being machete shaped, things like K-bars are not machete sized and work well in their role as a soldier's knoif for a reason. Some saw backed short machetes would have been better, along with some reasonable knives, if they are meant to be veterans some smaller fighting knives like the fairbairn and Stykes would be cool, they're a good size and shape for doing that kind of business. Other than that its really quite a respectable upgrade sprue. I like the rope. Its a really good addition. No entrenching tools so iam not sure how these guys actually expect to survive.

Well, I am pretty sure the knives are actually sword-bayonets, and they look entirely reasonable examples of such.

 OldMate wrote:
GW still does not know what deltoids and bicepts are meant to look like. Deltoid is meant to just cap over the top of the arm and the bicept is two muscles not three, and you should not be able to see that level of definition on the outside of the arm. Its pretty simple stuff. And the bald head seems to be some variety of pinky tau? They tried to make him frowning but instead of two vertical folds between his eyes he has a horizontal one which to me makes him look like he has a prosthetic nose... axe is a bit funny only on account of being on an infantrymans arm. Sure every afv has pioneer tools like wood axes attached to it but the crew arm would be more suitable. And everyone knows infantrymen use shovels a hell of a lot more...if the knives are meant to be to scale they are a bit useless. They are too big for that style of general purpose knife- they are machete sized without the strength of being machete shaped, things like K-bars are not machete sized and work well in their role as a soldier's knoif for a reason. Some saw backed short machetes would have been better, along with some reasonable knives, if they are meant to be veterans some smaller fighting knives like the fairbairn and Stykes would be cool, they're a good size and shape for doing that kind of business. Other than that its really quite a respectable upgrade sprue. I like the rope. Its a really good addition. No entrenching tools so iam not sure how these guys actually expect to survive.

Perhaps you expect to much from an upgrade kit.
Hold on, why do they announce an upgrade kit before the product its supposed to fix is actually on sale? Thats like releasing an errata for warlord traits before you release the proper codex, right?

 Haighus wrote:
Well, I am pretty sure the knives are actually sword-bayonets, and they look entirely reasonable examples of such.

Youre completely right, i completely missed the rifle with bayonet attached. Now the hilarious thing is why it HAS TO be a sword bayonet. Its not mounted on the end of the rifle, to get a regular bayonet legth of steel past the muzzle it needs to ne a sword bayonet LOL.

I like the wire cutters and the medic's blood bag though. They are always a good addition. There is a lot of good bits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Perhaps you expect to much from an upgrade kit.
Hold on, why do they announce an upgrade kit before the product its supposed to fix is actually on sale? Thats like releasing an errata for warlord traits before you release the proper codex, right?

Well i do not think its a bad idea releasing them both at the same time, an upgrade sprue with more options is always welcome and it will sell alongside the sta dard kit pretty well so there is no point in holding off releasing it. i like most the items its just that some are of less utility. And GW's lack of understanding of human musculature is fun to point and jeer at.
I mean ultimately its nothing a hobby knife won't quickly and easily fix.

Some people will be fine with this I’m sure, but I have to say that announcing an upgrade sprue with parts that could easily have been (and in days gone by would have been) part of the main kit *before it’s even out* feels pretty tacky to me: It’s got big ‘day 1 DLC content that was blatantly cut from the disc’ energy.

Can’t say I’m surprised though, this is kind of where they’ve been going for a while now.

 OldMate wrote:
GW still does not know what deltoids and bicepts are meant to look like. Deltoid is meant to just cap over the top of the arm and the bicept is two muscles not three, and you should not be able to see that level of definition on the outside of the arm. Its pretty simple stuff.

The arm is not showing the 3x muscles on the bicep, it is not even showing the 2x muscles of biceps, it is showing the bicep, the brachialis and the lateral head of the tricep and is anatomically correct.... A bit forged in the hellfires of the most holy roid juice, but correct. The deltoids are also correct for very developed deltoids, again, most commonly found on body builders but they can come quite considerably down onto the arm, mine certainly do.

Roll Three Dice wrote:
Some people will be fine with this I’m sure, but I have to say that announcing an upgrade sprue with parts that could easily have been (and in days gone by would have been) part of the main kit *before it’s even out* feels pretty tacky to me: It’s got big ‘day 1 DLC content that was blatantly cut from the disc’ energy.

Can’t say I’m surprised though, this is kind of where they’ve been going for a while now.

We don't know when GW planned on announcing this particular item nor releasing it beyond the "heels of the Cadian Shock Troops box" statement in the article.

We do know that pictures had escaped into the wild and nowadays GW doesn't ignore those unplanned releases. Instead they rapidly provide a proper preview to cut down on speculation and give everyone a good look at the spoiled product.

Personally, I wouldn't be too putout if GW released a decent full kit along with a simultaneous release of an upgrade kit. That seems to be the case here, so why no enjoy a little optional bonus?

Pictures were out in the wild looooong before any of that eBayer's pics of stolen goods.

The parts are literally shown in the codex.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Pictures were out in the wild looooong before any of that eBayer's pics of stolen goods.

Stolen goods? Are you actually angry at someone scooping GW?

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 OldMate wrote:
GW still does not know what deltoids and bicepts are meant to look like. Deltoid is meant to just cap over the top of the arm and the bicept is two muscles not three, and you should not be able to see that level of definition on the outside of the arm. Its pretty simple stuff.

The arm is not showing the 3x muscles on the bicep, it is not even showing the 2x muscles of biceps, it is showing the bicep, the brachialis and the lateral head of the tricep and is anatomically correct.... A bit forged in the hellfires of the most holy roid juice, but correct. The deltoids are also correct for very developed deltoids, again, most commonly found on body builders but they can come quite considerably down onto the arm, mine certainly do.

Found a picture of the condition you describe. Am currently washing my eyeballs. As i always say, though, better more material than less. You can always trim their arms down to a more sensible size if you don't want your shor sleeved Cadians to just be miniature catachans with body armour.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Pictures were out in the wild looooong before any of that eBayer's pics of stolen goods.

That's a very bold claim you're making. Do you have proof that it was stolen goods or are you committing an act of libel by accusing the seller of a crime without any evidence?

Probably that second one. I highly doubt GW has the issue of "lunchtime special" they do over in Vietnam and China.

Commissar Yarrick and more on Made to Order.

It's fairly Commissar heavy. Plus two metal Inquisitors.

Hmm, I would actually like those commissars, particularly the metal ones. Shame some of them are still finecast.

Another chance to own the classic Yarrick!

My only wish now, would be 3rd-ed banshees and a 2nd-ed Screamer-Killer. Life would be complete.

Finally, the last Commissar from 3rd Ed that I needed!


And the last metal Commissar from 5th edition I needed.



Powerfist Commissars never made it into any of my old lists, but I always liked the models.

 Haighus wrote:
Hmm, I would actually like those commissars, particularly the metal ones. Shame some of them are still finecast.

The only things that are resin are Yarrick, Raine, the Lord-Commissar, and Creed.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
Hmm, I would actually like those commissars, particularly the metal ones. Shame some of them are still finecast.

The only things that are resin are Yarrick, Raine, the Lord-Commissar, and Creed.

Yeah, and Raine was never metal. Still, I would have preferred a metal version of the Lord-Commissar.

 KidCthulhu wrote:
Finally, the last Commissar from 3rd Ed that I needed!

Spoiler:

And the last metal Commissar from 5th edition I needed.

Spoiler:

Powerfist Commissars never made it into any of my old lists, but I always liked the models.

Same, except it's the Commissar Lord. You certain these are metal? / Oh, says Lord is resin.

Finally I shall have a pointing gun hand behind back commissar.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
Hmm, I would actually like those commissars, particularly the metal ones. Shame some of them are still finecast.

The only things that are resin are Yarrick, Raine, the Lord-Commissar, and Creed.

Warhammer Community wrote:Along with Yarrick and Raine, you’ll also be able to pick up these five classic Commissar miniatures. Whatever combination of sword, pistol, fist, and book you’re after, they’ve got you covered. Thanks to the classic peaked cap and long coat combo, they’ll still look great alongside your newer Commissars.*** Four of these are cast in metal, with the fifth wielding a sword and bolt pistol in resin.

The masked Inquisitor will be resin as well.

It's like watching the devolution of Commissar sculpts.

Never had classic yarrick back in the day. Now it’s time to fix that.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
Hmm, I would actually like those commissars, particularly the metal ones. Shame some of them are still finecast.

The only things that are resin are Yarrick, Raine, the Lord-Commissar, and Creed.

And the Pistol/Sword Inquisitor.

I wonder why the Steel Legion guy was left out. I liked him back in the day, hasn't stood the test of time though.

I no longer collect Imperial Guard, but I was always sad I missed out on some of those models, wonder how much they're gonna cost.

Came across a great unit profile for an Imperial Guard High Commander and retinue in one of the White Dwarfs added to the vault today (from 2005). The commander themselves is a Ld10 officer with some extra command benefits. They get the normal command squad guardsmen and veteran options (incl. a master vox operator to extend the officer's leadership range) and some neat combat options like grenadier bodyguards and melee combat servitor bodyguards. No heavy weapons teams though. However, the retinue has several cool options for boosting your whole army, like 0-3 staff officers who provide three levels of buffs depending on how many are taken. The maximum size of the unit was 12 incl. the commander, theoretically bumping up to 15 if you added a commissar, priest, and sanctioned psyker using the advisors rule. The unit entry was solely for use within a particular campaign based in the Battle for Cadia during the 13th Black Crusade, for which it allegedly underwent playtesting. Quite a lot of effort for a super niche unit, although a great modelling opportunity.

It made me feel sad for what we have today in the 9th ed codex. Weird lone senior officers roaming the lines and a supreme commander with zero retinue and an ability to only command as far as he can shout.

GW Commissar splash release had me looking around today. Wargames Exclusive has some decent ones https://wargameexclusive.com/?s=commissar&post_type=product

I always liked the Commissar models. Thinking about getting these to do an all Commissar Stargrave Crew

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I always liked the Commissar models. Thinking about getting these to do an all Commissar Stargrave Crew

Someone needs to do a plastic Greatcoat and Peaked Cap set, it would sell like cakes that are hot.

Alas this release is missing the one 2nd edition Commissar I need, the tall chap walking calmly with a sword and gun. They later added a gasmask to make him the Steel Legion Commissar.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I always liked the Commissar models. Thinking about getting these to do an all Commissar Stargrave Crew

Someone needs to do a plastic Greatcoat and Peaked Cap set, it would sell like cakes that are hot.

Alas this release is missing the one 2nd edition Commissar I need, the tall chap walking calmly with a sword and gun. They later added a gasmask to make him the Steel Legion Commissar.

Hate to add to your buying queue but Bulldog cap heads and Les Grognards bodies from WA could scratch that itch.

Of course, they wouldn't be ostentatious 40K Commissar caps but beggars, choosers and all that.

They could make nice Commissar Cadets or Terrax Guard though.