The scifi model looks way better though

 Sir Arun wrote:
couple things that bother me:

- plasmapistol is still 15 points on a model that only has BS3. maybe you can justify this in that it gives the model a bigger stat boost than it does a marine, but:

- the fact that power weapons still remain at 15 points peeves me off. at least eldar have superior ws and initiative to make use of it, but a lone guardsman sergeant? come on. should have been 10 points, actually 5 points if I had a say in codex writing so people might actually consider taking them just for the heck of it / cool factor.

- boltpistol/bolter upgrade is too cheap. at 1 point, having him keep his laspistol/lasgun is pointless unless your armylist is full and you cant even lose 1 point. I would have priced it at 3 points, because going from S3 AP- to S4 AP5 is quite a difference.

- also, I cant believe that 5 years on GW has still not realised that putting the autocannon and the heavy bolter at the same price is slowed. HB should be 5 points cheaper. Nobody will want to trade +2S and 12" range for +1 shot. Having HB and mortar at the same points level would have been perfect.

Personally Mortar and AC should have the same price, I agree with you on AC and HB points issue.
But who will now get Bolters in IG army? Officier/ Vet. Sarge or an entire vet squad? (or even hillariously... Regular infantrymen!!)??

Well the more I read about the new rumours the more I decide to stick with my copy of IA3:2E's Elysian list. I just hope Forgeworld don't decide to release an FAQ for it for a while.

At this point, all i see more and more is that there is no point in me getting this new codex.

I used Bastonne, I used Al'harem, i used the Griffon model.

I know i am not going to use: The Hydra/Wyvern, Scion platoons (I used beastmen models, i don't have nearly enough to field an entire platoon), or the Taurox. I don't very much have enough tanks to field them as an HQ and then have more on the battlefield.

The only possible thing i could use are the warlord traits. Then again i never cared for them anyway.

It makes me feel like gak that several of the models i liked are now gone from something that should be an update. What GW should have done from a business standpoint is give me a reason to shell out 50 damn bucks on new rules for my army. All it made me do was question their mindset.

I had a specific vision for the tactics of my army. This new codex is seemingly removing half of them.

The absolute only thing that would make me buy their codex is by some miracle they include Regimental Doctrines. Otherwise, my money's staying in my bank account.

 IrishWristwatch wrote:


The absolute only thing that would make me buy their codex is by some miracle they include Regimental Doctrines. Otherwise, my money's staying in my bank account.

Sadly, they aren't

^ very much agree.

Currently I dont see any reason why I should abandon my Imperial Guard and switch to Astra Militarum other than the fact that its an "official update/transition".

There really are no new shiny toys for us to play with or units that got fixed. None. Just a couple of useful orders.

Btw does anyone know if Ratling snipers are going to be in the new codex?

Well if the chimera and vet nerf does happen,
I suppose I could always run coteaz and have 3 specials henchmen, a couple of monkeys and a few ablatives (maybe crusaders?) going around in a cheap inq chimera.

 Bla_Ze wrote:

 BrassScorpion wrote:
The Taurox looks like a fun model with lots of great detail, but the tracks are more than a little odd looking. If you're going to have four separate track sections for my taste this model has a better aesthetic.

Onslaught Miniatures
September 12, 2013
WIP render of the upcoming Juno APC for the Sisterhood:

Why replace fail with fail? The suspension system on the Taurox are badly designed and so is your scifi model.

The suspension is not worse than on a Chimera or Leman Russ. Flank armoured plates should never go down to the ground level, to let some free space for the wheels to absorb irregularities of the ground.
At least on "Juno APC", there is some room for the 4 tracks blocks to move upwards.

It does not really matters anyway, because this tank will not be available to play for WH40k anytime soon : it's an Epic 6mm scale miniature.

http://descansodelescriba.blogspot.se/2014/04/imagenes-del-codex-astra-militarum-en.html#comment-form

Okay. So the cheapest LR is now 120 pts?

wait, anyone know whats happened to the manticore? ap3??

Rostere wrote:
http://descansodelescriba.blogspot.se/2014/04/imagenes-del-codex-astra-militarum-en.html#comment-form

Okay. So the cheapest LR is now 120 pts?

Interesting if true, though it also appears from that link that the Hydra not only is now open topped but also lost its "ignore jink saves" rule, and Rough Riders sadly did not get the DKoK Death Rider treatment so many were hoping for.

Just an fyi for you guys my preorder of the codx has just been shipped today

Rostere wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:


The absolute only thing that would make me buy their codex is by some miracle they include Regimental Doctrines. Otherwise, my money's staying in my bank account.

Sadly, they aren't

What? So all those rumours were just words? So much for the nigh legendrary reliability of that source..

oh wait- it'll be a supplement down the road I'd reckon..

Oh, and now that i just saw that picture they havent changed Rough Riders at all? Really? You could not keep Al'harem, but for a unit that legitimately has no models at all you didn't even change them a little bit? Not even WS4 for models whose main focus is melee?

 Vaktathi wrote:

Rostere wrote:
http://descansodelescriba.blogspot.se/2014/04/imagenes-del-codex-astra-militarum-en.html#comment-form

Okay. So the cheapest LR is now 120 pts?

Interesting if true, though it also appears from that link that the Hydra not only is now open topped but also lost its "ignore jink saves" rule, and Rough Riders sadly did not get the DKoK Death Rider treatment so many were hoping for.

Indeed, although the special rules would be listed just below the armaments, after the image ends, (or in the description of Hydra autocannons!) as we see in the other examples.

Heavy Weapon Squads have a special rule that's called "Heavy Weapon Team". I wonder what that says?

Why replace fail with fail? The suspension system on the Taurox are badly designed and so is your scifi model.

I wasn't commenting on the realism, which doesn't enter into it at all when talking about 40K. I was commenting on the aesthetics only.

I can't help but laugh at any comments regarding realism regarding Warhammer, which is a game with psychics, daemons, possession, magic, an immortal being, Orks with Cockney accents building Stompas, teleporters, flying vehicles that have no aerodynamic stability whatsoever, ghost and zombie Space Marines, and thousands of other highly implausible or blatantly impossible elements that I won't even attempt to list in their entirety. Reality and the laws of physics do not apply when they are inconvenient to the story or fantasy elements in the universe of Warhammer 40K. It is a "fail" to talk about realism and 40K in the same sentence. LOL.

And I realize that model is a different scale, I wasn't suggesting it as a substitute, only pointing out it's possible to do a 4-track section design that isn't weird or ugly looking. I never use substitutes in 40K myself.

If some users wouldn't jump to conclusions there would be a lot less clutter in these threads. I'm again reminded why I don't post often, it's both exasperating and exhausting.

So apparently the Spanish IG Codex either has some errors

Or new Sentinels piloted by Daemons

Edit:

Or my Spanish is terrible

 Sir Arun wrote:
couple things that bother me:

- plasmapistol is still 15 points on a model that only has BS3. maybe you can justify this in that it gives the model a bigger stat boost than it does a marine, but:

- the fact that power weapons still remain at 15 points peeves me off. at least eldar have superior ws and initiative to make use of it, but a lone guardsman sergeant? come on. should have been 10 points, actually 5 points if I had a say in codex writing so people might actually consider taking them just for the heck of it / cool factor.

- boltpistol/bolter upgrade is too cheap. at 1 point, having him keep his laspistol/lasgun is pointless unless your armylist is full and you cant even lose 1 point. I would have priced it at 3 points, because going from S3 AP- to S4 AP5 is quite a difference.

- also, I cant believe that 5 years on GW has still not realised that putting the autocannon and the heavy bolter at the same price is slowed. HB should be 5 points cheaper. Nobody will want to trade +2S and 12" range for +1 shot. Having HB and mortar at the same points level would have been perfect.

- and finally, as if 10 points for flakk wasnt already overcosted in the SM book, GW continues this tradition for a BS3 army. smh

What is this "still" business? Plasma pistols aren't "still" 15 pts, they're 10 pts in the 5th ed codex. Same goes for power weapons, it was power FISTS that were 15 pts in the current book and you could only take them on platoon leaders or company commanders. This unnecessary nerfing is incredibly aggravating, what the hell possessed the studio to INCREASE the cost of these options? Were people complaining that power weapons and plasma pistols on Guard were totally OP? It's ridiculous.

 BrassScorpion wrote:

Why replace fail with fail? The suspension system on the Taurox are badly designed and so is your scifi model.

I wasn't commenting on the realism, which doesn't enter into it at all when talking about 40K. I was commenting on the aesthetics only.

I can't help but laugh at any comments regarding realism regarding Warhammer, which is a game with psychics, daemons, possession, magic, an immortal being, Orks with Cockney accents building Stompas, teleporters, flying vehicles that have no aerodynamic stability whatsoever, ghost and zombie Space Marines, and thousands of other highly implausible or blatantly impossible elements that I won't even attempt to list in their entirety. Reality and the laws of physics do not apply when they are inconvenient to the story or fantasy elements in the universe of Warhammer 40K. It is a "fail" to talk about realism and 40K in the same sentence. LOL.

And I realize that model is a different scale, I wasn't suggesting it as a substitute, only pointing out it's possible to do a 4-track section design that isn't weird or ugly looking. I never use substitutes in 40K myself.

Then we both fail at reading comprehension, i didint really comment on realism either, but design. And i do not agree that those "mini landraider" tracks look even remotely good.. Just like the Taurox.

 Mr.Omega wrote:


So apparently the Spanish IG Codex either has some errors

Or new Sentinels piloted by Daemons

Where do you see that?

Andador = Walker

Descubierto = Open Topped

Its a joke because theyre leadership 1

Pretty sure that L is meant to be initiative.

Though it really depends if they call it "iniciativa" in Spanish or something else entirely.

EDIT: As it turns out, I had it backwards. L is Attacks, and A is initiative.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Rostere wrote:
http://descansodelescriba.blogspot.se/2014/04/imagenes-del-codex-astra-militarum-en.html#comment-form

Okay. So the cheapest LR is now 120 pts?

Interesting if true, though it also appears from that link that the Hydra not only is now open topped but also lost its "ignore jink saves" rule, and Rough Riders sadly did not get the DKoK Death Rider treatment so many were hoping for.

There's the balancing act I suggested would happen, now my Leman Russes are 20-30 points cheaper my Chimera-LR pairs are 10 points cheaper overall (actually 20 considering the Vet price drop but I reckon this edition I'll be taking Vet doctrines) instead of 10 points more expensive.

L is for the attacks they have.

No guys it's no joke. It's simply spanish.
A->I=3
L->A=1
S->HP=2
Unfortunately there will not be any CC monster Sentinels...

 IrishWristwatch wrote:
Oh, and now that i just saw that picture they havent changed Rough Riders at all? Really? You could not keep Al'harem, but for a unit that legitimately has no models at all you didn't even change them a little bit? Not even WS4 for models whose main focus is melee?

Rough Riders have CCW's and pistols so now have an extra attack

Inquisitor Jex wrote:
L is for the attacks they have.

Yes, that would make sense.
I thought they had 3 attacks for a second

 creeping-deth87 wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
couple things that bother me:

- plasmapistol is still 15 points on a model that only has BS3. maybe you can justify this in that it gives the model a bigger stat boost than it does a marine, but:

- the fact that power weapons still remain at 15 points peeves me off. at least eldar have superior ws and initiative to make use of it, but a lone guardsman sergeant? come on. should have been 10 points, actually 5 points if I had a say in codex writing so people might actually consider taking them just for the heck of it / cool factor.

- boltpistol/bolter upgrade is too cheap. at 1 point, having him keep his laspistol/lasgun is pointless unless your armylist is full and you cant even lose 1 point. I would have priced it at 3 points, because going from S3 AP- to S4 AP5 is quite a difference.

- also, I cant believe that 5 years on GW has still not realised that putting the autocannon and the heavy bolter at the same price is slowed. HB should be 5 points cheaper. Nobody will want to trade +2S and 12" range for +1 shot. Having HB and mortar at the same points level would have been perfect.

- and finally, as if 10 points for flakk wasnt already overcosted in the SM book, GW continues this tradition for a BS3 army. smh

What is this "still" business? Plasma pistols aren't "still" 15 pts, they're 10 pts in the 5th ed codex. Same goes for power weapons, it was power FISTS that were 15 pts in the current book and you could only take them on platoon leaders or company commanders. This unnecessary nerfing is incredibly aggravating, what the hell possessed the studio to INCREASE the cost of these options? Were people complaining that power weapons and plasma pistols on Guard were totally OP? It's ridiculous.

When it comes to plasma pistols I agree, but not power weapons/power fists. Guard have access to priests now so it' really cheap and easy to give guard units both hatred and shred.

Power axe v meq=4 attacks drop 1 marine
Hate/shred power axe=4 attacks drops 2.25 marines

9 regular guardsmen charging meq with 18 attacks=1 dead marine
Add hate/shred=3.375 dead marines

With a priest making power axe attacks 125% more deadly and guardsmen 237.5% more deadly we should stop the QQ about a 5 point increase in power weapons.

 schadenfreude wrote:

 creeping-deth87 wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
couple things that bother me:

- plasmapistol is still 15 points on a model that only has BS3. maybe you can justify this in that it gives the model a bigger stat boost than it does a marine, but:

- the fact that power weapons still remain at 15 points peeves me off. at least eldar have superior ws and initiative to make use of it, but a lone guardsman sergeant? come on. should have been 10 points, actually 5 points if I had a say in codex writing so people might actually consider taking them just for the heck of it / cool factor.

- boltpistol/bolter upgrade is too cheap. at 1 point, having him keep his laspistol/lasgun is pointless unless your armylist is full and you cant even lose 1 point. I would have priced it at 3 points, because going from S3 AP- to S4 AP5 is quite a difference.

- also, I cant believe that 5 years on GW has still not realised that putting the autocannon and the heavy bolter at the same price is slowed. HB should be 5 points cheaper. Nobody will want to trade +2S and 12" range for +1 shot. Having HB and mortar at the same points level would have been perfect.

- and finally, as if 10 points for flakk wasnt already overcosted in the SM book, GW continues this tradition for a BS3 army. smh

What is this "still" business? Plasma pistols aren't "still" 15 pts, they're 10 pts in the 5th ed codex. Same goes for power weapons, it was power FISTS that were 15 pts in the current book and you could only take them on platoon leaders or company commanders. This unnecessary nerfing is incredibly aggravating, what the hell possessed the studio to INCREASE the cost of these options? Were people complaining that power weapons and plasma pistols on Guard were totally OP? It's ridiculous.

When it comes to plasma pistols I agree, but not power weapons/power fists. Guard have access to priests now so it' really cheap and easy to give guard units both hatred and shred.

Power axe v meq=4 attacks drop 1 marine
Hate/shred power axe=4 attacks drops 2.25 marines

9 regular guardsmen charging meq with 18 attacks=1 dead marine
Add hate/shred=3.375 dead marines

With a priest making power axe attacks 125% more deadly and guardsmen 237.5% more deadly we should stop the QQ about a 5 point increase in power weapons.

That's a really good point. Yes, that would explain the price increase balance-wise.

The stats simply have wrong names. It's not evident if you don't know Spanish. The Sentinel should have armour values, et.c. instead it's somehow got ordinary infantry stats like toughness, leadership, and so on.

It's funny people thought the Sentinel had Ld1 when an english version of the armoured sentinel is pictured just above that clearly showing the stats go I/A/HP of 3/1/2.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
It's funny people thought the Sentinel had Ld1 when an english version of the armoured sentinel is pictured just above that clearly showing the stats go I/A/HP of 3/1/2.

That is not the interesting point, the thing which caught people's attention was the misprint.

Rostere wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
It's funny people thought the Sentinel had Ld1 when an english version of the armoured sentinel is pictured just above that clearly showing the stats go I/A/HP of 3/1/2.

That is not the interesting point, the thing which caught people's attention was the misprint.

Oh ok, I see now, the titles of the stats appear to be incorrect.

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 Bla_Ze wrote:

 BrassScorpion wrote:
The Taurox looks like a fun model with lots of great detail, but the tracks are more than a little odd looking. If you're going to have four separate track sections for my taste this model has a better aesthetic.

Onslaught Miniatures
September 12, 2013
WIP render of the upcoming Juno APC for the Sisterhood:

Why replace fail with fail? The suspension system on the Taurox are badly designed and so is your scifi model.

The suspension is not worse than on a Chimera or Leman Russ. Flank armoured plates should never go down to the ground level, to let some free space for the wheels to absorb irregularities of the ground.
At least on "Juno APC", there is some room for the 4 tracks blocks to move upwards.

It does not really matters anyway, because this tank will not be available to play for WH40k anytime soon : it's an Epic 6mm scale miniature.

Place the front turret on the top and this vehicle can do the role of Taurox 'armored car'
Otherwise I can't figure out which roles of Imperial vehicle does it fills?

So, for a guy who only pops in and out, what has actually been removed? I saw that Marbo is rumored to be gone, which makes this book an absolute flop, in my eyes, as I think he was pretty much the coolest aspect of the IG book. Which tanks are gone? Just a quick list is fine. I'll facepalm after.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So, for a guy who only pops in and out, what has actually been removed? I saw that Marbo is rumored to be gone, which makes this book an absolute flop, in my eyes, as I think he was pretty much the coolest aspect of the IG book. Which tanks are gone? Just a quick list is fine. I'll facepalm after.

All FW artillery.

It's only really removed if they are removed from the FW books, isn't it?

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So, for a guy who only pops in and out, what has actually been removed? I saw that Marbo is rumored to be gone, which makes this book an absolute flop, in my eyes, as I think he was pretty much the coolest aspect of the IG book. Which tanks are gone? Just a quick list is fine. I'll facepalm after.

Medusa, Collossus, and Griffin, along with Bastonne, Harker, Marbo, and Chenkov.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
It's only really removed if they are removed from the FW books, isn't it?

Depends entirely on your playgroup. Some playgroups still don't like FW for whatever reason. While many events now do allow FW, most limit it to some extent and huge numbers of events still don't allow FW at all.

 schadenfreude wrote:


*snip*

With a priest making power axe attacks 125% more deadly and guardsmen 237.5% more deadly we should stop the QQ about a 5 point increase in power weapons.

So ah....maybe they should have raised the cost for the priest?
That is like raising the cost of a spacemarine because you could take a chaplain.

Truth is whenever points increase people get cranky because most the time it comes across as arbitrary at best, or perceived as a tool to increase sales of a given item.

Was not that long ago people were crying foul over a perceived point increase for LRBT and the "new" WD IG teaser talked about the lowered point cost of chimera!

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
It's only really removed if they are removed from the FW books, isn't it?

So most sane people think, but it's still a source of irritation.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So, for a guy who only pops in and out, what has actually been removed? I saw that Marbo is rumored to be gone, which makes this book an absolute flop, in my eyes, as I think he was pretty much the coolest aspect of the IG book. Which tanks are gone? Just a quick list is fine. I'll facepalm after.

Medusa, Collossus, and Griffin, along with Bastonne, Harker, Marbo, and Chenkov.

Harker is also gone?

 Insurgency Walker wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:


*snip*

With a priest making power axe attacks 125% more deadly and guardsmen 237.5% more deadly we should stop the QQ about a 5 point increase in power weapons.

So ah....maybe they should have raised the cost for the priest?
That is like raising the cost of a spacemarine because you could take a chaplain.

Truth is whenever points increase people get cranky because most the time it comes across as arbitrary at best, or perceived as a tool to increase sales of a given item.

Was not that long ago people were crying foul over a perceived point increase for LRBT and the "new" WD IG teaser talked about the lowered point cost of chimera!

But then if you don't take the power weapons you are wasting the extra points.
What makes the priest deadly is when there are powered weapons involved. Other wise...not so much.

 BrookM wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So, for a guy who only pops in and out, what has actually been removed? I saw that Marbo is rumored to be gone, which makes this book an absolute flop, in my eyes, as I think he was pretty much the coolest aspect of the IG book. Which tanks are gone? Just a quick list is fine. I'll facepalm after.

Medusa, Collossus, and Griffin, along with Bastonne, Harker, Marbo, and Chenkov.

Harker is also gone?

I could be wrong, I typed that mainly from memory.

BrookM wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So, for a guy who only pops in and out, what has actually been removed? I saw that Marbo is rumored to be gone, which makes this book an absolute flop, in my eyes, as I think he was pretty much the coolest aspect of the IG book. Which tanks are gone? Just a quick list is fine. I'll facepalm after.

Medusa, Collossus, and Griffin, along with Bastonne, Harker, Marbo, and Chenkov.

Harker is also gone?

I doubt he is, otherwise they have one catachan and then only cadian characters. I am betting Harker and Straken are still in (especially because the Harker model is shown in the IG book).

Wolf wrote:Just an fyi for you guys my preorder of the codx has just been shipped today

What? Mine says it is still being processed.

Yeah...I considered using Mantic Corporation Marines as IG...but seriously, Marbo was always gonna be part of that. Blah. I'll wait to hear what you guys all think before I touch that.

 BrookM wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So, for a guy who only pops in and out, what has actually been removed? I saw that Marbo is rumored to be gone, which makes this book an absolute flop, in my eyes, as I think he was pretty much the coolest aspect of the IG book. Which tanks are gone? Just a quick list is fine. I'll facepalm after.

Medusa, Collossus, and Griffin, along with Bastonne, Harker, Marbo, and Chenkov.

Harker is also gone?

No, he's not gone. Straken also appears to be in it still.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Insurgency Walker wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:


*snip*

With a priest making power axe attacks 125% more deadly and guardsmen 237.5% more deadly we should stop the QQ about a 5 point increase in power weapons.

So ah....maybe they should have raised the cost for the priest?
That is like raising the cost of a spacemarine because you could take a chaplain.

Truth is whenever points increase people get cranky because most the time it comes across as arbitrary at best, or perceived as a tool to increase sales of a given item.

Was not that long ago people were crying foul over a perceived point increase for LRBT and the "new" WD IG teaser talked about the lowered point cost of chimera!

But then if you don't take the power weapons you are wasting the extra points.
What makes the priest deadly is when there are powered weapons involved. Other wise...not so much.

Ok, watch this logic.
If you don't take the priest you are wasting the extra points.

I'm always disappointed by monobuild rules.

Now, what I really want to know is if enginseers went back to being independent characters

I don't know if this means anything at all, but Harker is in the HQ section of the website (Belgian webstore). As is Straken, and Al Rahem for that matter.

 Barksdale wrote:
I don't know if this means anything at all, but Harker is in the HQ section of the website (Belgian webstore). As is Straken, and Al Rahem for that matter.

Please, please let Al Rahem stay. I hope they don't give him the axe like they did to Marbo.

Is Marbo a guarantee to be gone? Or is it only speculation still?

 Barksdale wrote:
I don't know if this means anything at all, but Harker is in the HQ section of the website (Belgian webstore). As is Straken, and Al Rahem for that matter.

The GW store is all over the place, I wouldn't place any trust in things being in/out of stock as meaning something significant.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Is Marbo a guarantee to be gone? Or is it only speculation still?

Well really, it's a rumor until someone actually gets their hands on the codex.

But I've heard it from multiple sources, Marbo is gone. Be prepared to lose him.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Insurgency Walker wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:


*snip*

With a priest making power axe attacks 125% more deadly and guardsmen 237.5% more deadly we should stop the QQ about a 5 point increase in power weapons.

So ah....maybe they should have raised the cost for the priest?
That is like raising the cost of a spacemarine because you could take a chaplain.

Truth is whenever points increase people get cranky because most the time it comes across as arbitrary at best, or perceived as a tool to increase sales of a given item.

Was not that long ago people were crying foul over a perceived point increase for LRBT and the "new" WD IG teaser talked about the lowered point cost of chimera!

But then if you don't take the power weapons you are wasting the extra points.
What makes the priest deadly is when there are powered weapons involved. Other wise...not so much.

The priest actually improves regular guardsmen more than power weapons, and can really make 3 point conscripts deadly in cc. Plush a 2nd priest can give rerolls to armor saves taking a 1/3 chance to 5/9. The unit also gains fearless. They are a lot squishier than chaplains, but are almost 1/4 the price and give better buffs to their unit.

 schadenfreude wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Insurgency Walker wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:


*snip*

With a priest making power axe attacks 125% more deadly and guardsmen 237.5% more deadly we should stop the QQ about a 5 point increase in power weapons.

So ah....maybe they should have raised the cost for the priest?
That is like raising the cost of a spacemarine because you could take a chaplain.

Truth is whenever points increase people get cranky because most the time it comes across as arbitrary at best, or perceived as a tool to increase sales of a given item.

Was not that long ago people were crying foul over a perceived point increase for LRBT and the "new" WD IG teaser talked about the lowered point cost of chimera!

But then if you don't take the power weapons you are wasting the extra points.
What makes the priest deadly is when there are powered weapons involved. Other wise...not so much.

The priest actually improves regular guardsmen more than power weapons, and can really make 3 point conscripts deadly in cc. Plush a 2nd priest can give rerolls to armor saves taking a 1/3 chance to 5/9. The unit also gains fearless. They are a lot squishier than chaplains, but are almost 1/4 the price and give better buffs to their unit.

Wait, what? That's pretty nuts. How many priests can you take, and does it only affect armor?

So which russ is getting the super cheap price reduction? If it is the standard lrbt then I can see it being useful and it would compensate for the ordnance+heavy rule. Part of me thinks the exterminator though, as it is often seen as a weak weapon.

Demolishers with a point reduction could be evil. In fact, whichever tank is the cheap one will make good bodyguards for the HQ tank. After playing ABG, an AV14 warlord is not nearly as durable as it seems. A couple of cheap tanks in a squad will go an awful long way to denying slay the warlord.

New pics from the Codex leaked:
http://descansodelescriba.blogspot.de/
E.g.:

 Sir Arun wrote:
So let me get this straight:

1) Chenkov is gone
2) Al Rahem is gone
3) Bastonne is gone
4) Harker is gone
5) Sly Marbo is gone
6) The Griffon is gone
7) The awesome Colossus is gone
8) The Medusa is gone
9) The Penal Legion is gone
10) The Psyker Battle squad has been turned from a pretty cool, useful unit into a complete mess of a unit that is utterly unpredictable

...and we should buy a codex that also has a silly name on top of all this? Tell me IG players arent getting shafted right now. Next codex we could remove the Whirlwind for SM players and see how they react.

Currently Codices are all about reducing options to support the massive wave of (now or soon) discontinued metal and Finecast models, only slightly countered by the release of one or two new units noone needs.
And do you really think that all 50 Space Marine HQ models will keep rules in the next Codex?

 Mysterious Pants wrote:

 Barksdale wrote:
I don't know if this means anything at all, but Harker is in the HQ section of the website (Belgian webstore). As is Straken, and Al Rahem for that matter.

Please, please let Al Rahem stay. I hope they don't give him the axe like they did to Marbo.

Always been a fan but he was in the web store before the cool rules of 5th Ed codex and could remain without them to be used as a warlord without special character rules. Or maybe he is even better! I always thought he took a demotion as a platoon leader

Mysterious Pants wrote:

 Barksdale wrote:
I don't know if this means anything at all, but Harker is in the HQ section of the website (Belgian webstore). As is Straken, and Al Rahem for that matter.

Please, please let Al Rahem stay. I hope they don't give him the axe like they did to Marbo.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Barksdale wrote:
I don't know if this means anything at all, but Harker is in the HQ section of the website (Belgian webstore). As is Straken, and Al Rahem for that matter.

The GW store is all over the place, I wouldn't place any trust in things being in/out of stock as meaning something significant.

Right, it could just be that they had models leftover and didn't know where to put them while they wait for the stock to run down. So they just stuck them in the HQ section. Personally, I'm waiting for the Harker Dataslate. I'm hoping Marbo gets one as well.

Hey, you! Any word on tech-priests?

I've used them because they looked amazing, but they never seem to be worth their points. Do they get a point reduction? More options? Anything- maybe gun servitors cost less?

 schadenfreude wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Insurgency Walker wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:


*snip*

With a priest making power axe attacks 125% more deadly and guardsmen 237.5% more deadly we should stop the QQ about a 5 point increase in power weapons.

So ah....maybe they should have raised the cost for the priest?
That is like raising the cost of a spacemarine because you could take a chaplain.

Truth is whenever points increase people get cranky because most the time it comes across as arbitrary at best, or perceived as a tool to increase sales of a given item.

Was not that long ago people were crying foul over a perceived point increase for LRBT and the "new" WD IG teaser talked about the lowered point cost of chimera!

But then if you don't take the power weapons you are wasting the extra points.
What makes the priest deadly is when there are powered weapons involved. Other wise...not so much.

The priest actually improves regular guardsmen more than power weapons, and can really make 3 point conscripts deadly in cc. Plush a 2nd priest can give rerolls to armor saves taking a 1/3 chance to 5/9. The unit also gains fearless. They are a lot squishier than chaplains, but are almost 1/4 the price and give better buffs to their unit.

Yes, priests are looking good! Be nice if you could stick one on a horse.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mysterious Pants wrote:
Hey, you! Any word on tech-priests?

I've used them because they looked amazing, but they never seem to be worth their points. Do they get a point reduction? More options? Anything- maybe gun servitors cost less?

Once upon a time they were independent characters which rocked if you didn't want to field servitors with them.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Currently Codices are all about reducing options to support the massive wave of (now or soon) discontinued metal and Finecast models, only slightly countered by the release of one or two new units noone needs.
And do you really think that all 50 Space Marine HQ models will keep rules in the next Codex?

Are they? I own the current Codex Eldar, Tau and Space Marines, and in none of them were any characters dropped. In fact, new ones were added to the list (Illic Nightspear and Commander Longstrike). Some characters were lost from the transition from 3rd ed to 4th ed though (Iyanna Ariennal, Anghkor Prok but in that new edition several new ones were introduced like Yriel or Aun Va, so I'd call it a trade off)

 Lone Cat wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 Bla_Ze wrote:

 BrassScorpion wrote:
The Taurox looks like a fun model with lots of great detail, but the tracks are more than a little odd looking. If you're going to have four separate track sections for my taste this model has a better aesthetic.

Onslaught Miniatures
September 12, 2013
WIP render of the upcoming Juno APC for the Sisterhood:

Why replace fail with fail? The suspension system on the Taurox are badly designed and so is your scifi model.

The suspension is not worse than on a Chimera or Leman Russ. Flank armoured plates should never go down to the ground level, to let some free space for the wheels to absorb irregularities of the ground.
At least on "Juno APC", there is some room for the 4 tracks blocks to move upwards.

It does not really matters anyway, because this tank will not be available to play for WH40k anytime soon : it's an Epic 6mm scale miniature.

Place the front turret on the top and this vehicle can do the role of Taurox 'armored car'
Otherwise I can't figure out which roles of Imperial vehicle does it fills?

Not IG, but I think that would make an interesting alternate rhino hull. <edit>. maybe do a little bitz work to make a sort stug/jadgtiger version of a LRBT or chimera.

I was planning for this codex to be my last 40K book, now I'm not sure I even want to get it. None of the new models interest me - taurox looks dumb/seems to have horrid stats, no interest in wyvern/hydra seems questionable, and I was contemplating grabbing Eisenfurst models even before the scion box was redone. Nothing seems appealing, I think I'll cancel my FLGS book order. Only thing I MAY pick up is the cards. Maybe.

Well the cards show as sold out now.

So the Hydra is Open Topped, no Interceptor, no ignores jink?

Hrm, yeah, colour me uninspired. That means the Vendetta is still the option of choice for anti-air.

Is there a chance this Codex was made with the rumored new rule set in mind?

I find it hard to believe GW would make such drastic changes without a plan.

 primalexile wrote:
Is there a chance this Codex was made with the rumored new rule set in mind?

I find it hard to believe GW would make such drastic changes without a plan.

what changes would deduce you into thinking it was made for the new ruleset?

all rumors so far seem consistent with 6th.

 Barksdale wrote:
Personally, I'm waiting for the Harker Dataslate. I'm hoping Marbo gets one as well.

If they are actually removed, I'd expect them to return in a Catachan dataslate. The others, like Al'Rahem, I expect to be more individual dataslates.

decker_cky wrote:

 Barksdale wrote:
Personally, I'm waiting for the Harker Dataslate. I'm hoping Marbo gets one as well.

If they are actually removed, I'd expect them to return in a Catachan dataslate. The others, like Al'Rahem, I expect to be more individual dataslates.

so essentially what GW is doing, is realizing that taking softcover rulebooks for 18 pounds and turning them into hardcover rulebooks with some 20 extra pages for 30 pounds just isnt enough, now they start stripping ICs off of it and sell them as DLC..err...dataslates to make another half dozen more quid.

Yay! paying 36 pounds to get the same content I had gotten for 18 pounds last edition, now in hardback and full color and requiring an e-reader for the rest.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
By the way guys, did you notice how Astra Militarum is (I think) the first 6th edition codex that actually does NOT have more pages than the previous codex of that army?

They advertise the new Astra Militarum codex to be 104 pages thick like its some awesome thing when the old Imperial Guard codex had a thickness of.... 104 pages.

decker_cky wrote:

 Barksdale wrote:
Personally, I'm waiting for the Harker Dataslate. I'm hoping Marbo gets one as well.

If they are actually removed, I'd expect them to return in a Catachan dataslate. The others, like Al'Rahem, I expect to be more individual dataslates.

We don't know this. I personally think they'll be gone for good, with the exception of Marbo (who will come back in some way).

You think Marbo, with his ancient model, is more likely to return than the very recent Harker model?

I am convinced Sly Marbo has not been removed, he has just not been found in the codex yet. A year from now we will all have a good laugh as the rules for Marbo will be right where they have always been on page 51B.

 Sir Arun wrote:

By the way guys, did you notice how Astra Militarum is (I think) the first 6th edition codex that actually does NOT have more pages than the previous codex of that army?

They advertise the new Astra Militarum codex to be 104 pages thick like its some awesome thing when the old Imperial Guard codex had a thickness of.... 104 pages.

I actually only just noticed all 6th ed books except Space Marines are 104 pages.

decker_cky wrote:
You think Marbo, with his ancient model, is more likely to return than the very recent Harker model?

Yup because Marbo is one of very few IG characters who is used generally in almost every guard army I've seen. The official model is irrelevant- nobody I know bought the marbo model, they bash together their own.

If GW was not planning on doing something with Marbo, they will as they get the droves of 40K players clamoring for Marbos return.

People like Marbo, they want to use Marbo, and they'll pay for a dataslate with Marbo or whatever. I see no evidence anybody would buy a dataslate for Sergeant Bastone, the iron-body guy, or the faux-russian conscript leader.

 primalexile wrote:
Is there a chance this Codex was made with the rumored new rule set in mind?

I find it hard to believe GW would make such drastic changes without a plan.

Hard to believe... It's GW!


I'm still generally optimistic for the Guard, if the rumors about LR point costs are true I'll probably start fielding those again (I have way too many, it's about time they come back). Orders and Warlord traits seem solid, and platoons might be pretty good with the Priests. I didn't pre order a codex, but my FLGS has to order a few of them so I'll go check it out on Friday/Saturday and then join in with the whiners if it's actually terrible.

Okay. So the Heavy Weapon Squad's free weapon upgrades might be a misprint. Apparently, it says in the Italian codex that you can take any weapon from the "Heavy Weapon List" - however, that list does not contain any points costs. Seems like a misprint to me, can't be 100% sure though.

I'm actually contemplating on going Green and using the Taurox as an Ork Battlewagon or looted vehicle.

I like the kit, but it's not a "Guard Kit" if you know what I mean?

 410mcollins wrote:
People should remember that these are only rumors, untill Saturday. I'm know we won't like some things GW will do but nobody likes change. For those who really dont like anything from GW anymore i will see you on eBay

Wednesday is when they show up in stores in North America. I should have mine before the Saturday and unless someone beats me to it, I'll do a review/ overview/ Q&A here like I have with nearly every dex since Tau.

can someone link the warlord tables

 Ravenous D wrote:

 410mcollins wrote:
People should remember that these are only rumors, untill Saturday. I'm know we won't like some things GW will do but nobody likes change. For those who really dont like anything from GW anymore i will see you on eBay

Wednesday is when they show up in stores in North America. I should have mine before the Saturday and unless someone beats me to it, I'll do a review/ overview/ Q&A here like I have with nearly every dex since Tau.

Looking forward to it. Make sure you do comparisons to the current IG codex to help people compare and contrast the two books

I usually don't have time, I post and answer questions fast enough and do comparisons off the top of my head.

Generally the thread gathers those who are too afraid to post about the new book though which is generally the purpose. It gets the information out there so people can make an informed decision. GW doesn't allow the return of books, which is sneaky as feth IMO, you essentially get to spend a stupid amount of money to find out if you have super expensive paper weights.

 primalexile wrote:
Is there a chance this Codex was made with the rumored new rule set in mind?

I find it hard to believe GW would make such drastic changes without a plan.

Without a plan..?



Essentially what you have is a book that has gone to ridiculous levels to re-brand IP and ensure that no horrible little garage companies make so much as a cent off GW's prestigious IP. Creativity, dynamism, rule balance and an exciting book for your fans be damned.

Out of interest, a chap mentioned previously carrying on using the existing Imperial Guard codex. As this is technically a 'new' title (with a new name), is there anything to stop you ignoring this release and just carrying on with the previous codecies, forge world books or whatever, and playing 'Imperial Guard'?

I will get it on friday at noon, also at $37.

I got a really awesome local store.

can someone link the warlord tables

 jae4x4 wrote:
can someone link the warlord tables

http://natfka.blogspot.se/2014/04/astra-militarum-rules-pask-bullgryns.html#more

 Pacific wrote:
Out of interest, a chap mentioned previously carrying on using the existing Imperial Guard codex. As this is technically a 'new' title (with a new name), is there anything to stop you ignoring this release and just carrying on with the previous codecies, forge world books or whatever, and playing 'Imperial Guard'?

Imma ally my Imperial Guard with Astra Militarum for much needed goodness.

 Pacific wrote:

 primalexile wrote:
Is there a chance this Codex was made with the rumored new rule set in mind?

I find it hard to believe GW would make such drastic changes without a plan.

Without a plan..?

Spoiler:

Essentially what you have is a book that has gone to ridiculous levels to re-brand IP and ensure that no horrible little garage companies make so much as a cent off GW's prestigious IP. Creativity, dynamism, rule balance and an exciting book for your fans be damned.

Out of interest, a chap mentioned previously carrying on using the existing Imperial Guard codex. As this is technically a 'new' title (with a new name), is there anything to stop you ignoring this release and just carrying on with the previous codecies, forge world books or whatever, and playing 'Imperial Guard'?

No more than they could stop you using any older codex because you liked it better. People willing to play against it will let you run it. People not willing to won't take well to anyone arguing that the name change on the cover lets you use the old one anyway.

so the only useful thing regular ogryns gained, is hammer of wrath and krak grenades.

but they lost frag grenades.

has their ranged weapon changed?

what do you think constitutes "ancient commander", Creed or other named commanders or you will be able yo buy a ancient commander upgrade?

also will all commanders have voice of command?

 Rostere wrote:
Okay. So the Heavy Weapon Squad's free weapon upgrades might be a misprint. Apparently, it says in the Italian codex that you can take any weapon from the "Heavy Weapon List" - however, that list does not contain any points costs. Seems like a misprint to me, can't be 100% sure though.

Apparently this is the case, I'm also reading that Italian codex list lacks heavy weapons upgrade prices.
So the only relevant information we have about HWS is : 3 * mortars cost 45 points, instead of 60 pts in V5, and instead of 80 pts in V4 (damn, that was insane ! ).

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
So the Hydra is Open Topped, no Interceptor, no ignores jink?

Hrm, yeah, colour me uninspired. That means the Vendetta is still the option of choice for anti-air.

Wow, seriously?

Most sensible people: the Hydra is kind of weak, it used to be awesome in 5th but making it skyfire-only was a pretty big nerf and it's too fragile to stay alive long enough to shoot down its targets. We should make it better in the new codex, let's try adding Tau-style optional skyfire so it can still shoot at ground targets effectively.

GW: the Hydra is kind of weak, let's give it a new model and then make the rules even worse so that nobody will buy it.

Why exactly do these incompetent morons still have a job?

Why exactly do these incompetent morons still have a job?

Because people still buy lots of Space Marines

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
So the Hydra is Open Topped, no Interceptor, no ignores jink?

Hrm, yeah, colour me uninspired. That means the Vendetta is still the option of choice for anti-air.

Wow, seriously?

Most sensible people: the Hydra is kind of weak, it used to be awesome in 5th but making it skyfire-only was a pretty big nerf and it's too fragile to stay alive long enough to shoot down its targets. We should make it better in the new codex, let's try adding Tau-style optional skyfire so it can still shoot at ground targets effectively.

GW: the Hydra is kind of weak, let's give it a new model and then make the rules even worse so that nobody will buy it.

Why exactly do these incompetent morons still have a job?

Hopefully its part of the Hydra autocannon rules, because otherwise its still a dust collector when you can have the much better sabre platforms.

 Ravenous D wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
So the Hydra is Open Topped, no Interceptor, no ignores jink?

Hrm, yeah, colour me uninspired. That means the Vendetta is still the option of choice for anti-air.

Wow, seriously?

Most sensible people: the Hydra is kind of weak, it used to be awesome in 5th but making it skyfire-only was a pretty big nerf and it's too fragile to stay alive long enough to shoot down its targets. We should make it better in the new codex, let's try adding Tau-style optional skyfire so it can still shoot at ground targets effectively.

GW: the Hydra is kind of weak, let's give it a new model and then make the rules even worse so that nobody will buy it.

Why exactly do these incompetent morons still have a job?

Hopefully its part of the Hydra autocannon rules, because otherwise its still a dust collector when you can have the much better sabre platforms.

Hopefully. It was off the Spanish site, google translate:

And the Hydra, as I said has lost a lot of rules, but my little bird tells me that only costs 70 points. "Neither interceptor, or ignore cover or nah"

I'm never a fan of units that are extremely rock-paper-scissorsy, so if the Hydra is as they say it is, it really doesn't appeal to me.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

And the Hydra, as I said has lost a lot of rules, but my little bird tells me that only costs 70 points. "Neither interceptor, or ignore cover or nah"

Wow. So if you accept the codex price of enclosed crew compartment at 15 points as the value of open-topped vs. not, then the Hydra actually got more expensive while losing special rules. Holy GW's rule authors are stupid.

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

And the Hydra, as I said has lost a lot of rules, but my little bird tells me that only costs 70 points. "Neither interceptor, or ignore cover or nah"

Wow. So if you accept the codex price of enclosed crew compartment at 15 points as the value of open-topped vs. not, then the Hydra actually got more expensive while losing special rules. Holy GW's rule authors are stupid.

I'm hoping we're missing something, because it's just a bit too stupid that it got a nerf AND a price rise when it was never that popular to start.

Of course I wouldn't put it past GW to nerf a unit that didn't need a nerf...

*Skink looks teary eyed at his 'nid codex*

I'm fairly convinced GW is still playing 5th edition.

 Kirasu wrote:
I'm fairly convinced GW is still playing 5th edition.

I'm fairly convinced GW isn't playing at all.

We're collectors, not gamers :p

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

And the Hydra, as I said has lost a lot of rules, but my little bird tells me that only costs 70 points. "Neither interceptor, or ignore cover or nah"

Wow. So if you accept the codex price of enclosed crew compartment at 15 points as the value of open-topped vs. not, then the Hydra actually got more expensive while losing special rules. Holy GW's rule authors are stupid.

Grrr why didn't GW turn an AA vehicle into a dull, auto-take spammable anti-ground unit! How stupid!

Its still reasonable. Against AV12 skimmers and flyers, you're getting 1 hull point off a turn average before jink, with a 50%~ chance for a penetrate if my Maths is correct. As a result of that, you're either forcing a jink on the latter that makes its firepower naff for a turn, or having an opportunity to potentially destroy it. You're easily forcing grounding tests on FMC's in addition, and absolutely screwing anyone taking the Tyranid FMC's.

That makes it about as effective as an Autocannon HWS at 24'' greater range against Skimmers, but without any of the LD issues (lose one base, 58% chance to lose the entire unit to a rout) and with Skyfire included.

Lets not forget at this juncture that Wave Serpent spam with 60'' shield barrages (hence you could get one turn out of range too) that wipe out light armour is a key problem.

At 70 points, it has good redundancy and it can be fielded in squadrons. With its massive range and reasonable armour, it forms a good alternative to the Vendetta as it isn't invalidated by your opponent's quality AA choices, and it can be held out of harm's way of some AT weapons.

 Crablezworth wrote:
We're collectors, not gamers :p

But we're going to write rules.

And charge much money for them.

And not fix them through FAQ/Errata.

I can do a better job not being paid in my off time from my paid job.

 Kirasu wrote:
I'm fairly convinced GW is still playing 5th edition.

LOL thinking the same here !
They might keep a track record of which units seems powerful against what, but this track record certainly needs a refresh and more input from optimised armies.

 Mr.Omega wrote:
Grrr why didn't GW turn an AA vehicle into a dull, auto-take spammable anti-ground unit! How stupid!

1) Mandatory skyfire is stupid fluff-wise. The Hydra's guns are capable of pivoting down to engage ground targets, and the fluff talks about how terrifyingly effective it is against light ground targets when there are no aircraft around to draw its attention. But yet somehow it gets out-shot by orks against ground targets?

2) The Hydra is a better dedicated AA tank right now and nobody is taking it because it can only hit aircraft. The new rules make it considerably worse by making it open-topped and taking away the jink save counter. How exactly is this supposed to make it an appealing choice?

Its still reasonable. Against AV12 skimmers and flyers, you're getting 1 hull point off a turn average before jink, with a 50%~ chance for a penetrate if my Maths is correct.

But that ignores the biggest problem with the Hydra: without interceptor it has to wait until the flyer (and the opponent's ground units) gets the first shot to attempt to fire back. Hydras have a habit of dying before they get to shoot any flyers, and with mandatory skyfire they can't even put some hits on ground targets while they wait and/or before they die.

As a result of that, you're either forcing a jink on the latter that makes its firepower naff for a turn, or having an opportunity to potentially destroy it.

Except the current Hydra ignores jink saves. This is a major nerf to the new Hydra.

That makes it about as effective as an Autocannon HWS at 24'' greater range against Skimmers

Err, what? TL BS 1 is approximately BS 2, so 1.333 hits against a skimmer from the Hydra. The HWS gives an average of 3 hits against a skimmer. Since when is "less than half the damage" enough to qualify as "about as effective"?

as it isn't invalidated by your opponent's quality AA choices

Any AA choice that can invalidate a Vendetta is going to invalidate Hydras just as well. The Vendetta loses most of its special defense against dedicated AA, but it still has the same AV 12 and doesn't get slaughtered by non-AA units while it waits for the AA battle.

Kirasu wrote:I'm fairly convinced GW is still playing 5th edition.

Ravajaxe wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
I'm fairly convinced GW is still playing 5th edition.

LOL thinking the same here !
They might keep a track record of which units seems powerful against what, but this track record certainly needs a refresh and more input from optimised armies.

Methinks the same thing, they seem to consistently be an edition or two behind on what they try to balance with each codex.

I still can't wrap my head around why they did what they did to the poor hydra.

Peregrine wrote:Stuff

It's best not to engage Omega, as apparently no matter what, every change is for the best, no units are bad, and everything that got nerfed deserved it and is just as useable as it was before and saying anything different is just whining.

The best thing about a new 40k codex release for me is reading the whining before the codex is even out! Why am I so amused by this? i just can't stop reading all the complaining!

rothrich wrote:
whining

Criticism is not whining.

I hope Omega is paid well by GW.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
We're collectors, not gamers :p

But we're going to write rules.

And charge much money for them.

And not fix them through FAQ/Errata.

I can do a better job not being paid in my off time from my paid job.

And then remove rules and then make them separate and charge more!

Guys, it looks like this codex release is going to be worse than how Tyranids were treated. When I read what Peregrine said about the Hydra my mouth dropped.
I wanted to buy two of them, but I guess I can still make some Wyvern.

Also Ogryns are still complete garbage? Come on GW I want to buy your stuff! I am beginning to think they are completely incompetent because I was ready to spend a lot of money, but now I don't want to buy anything.

Tau got Riptides and Eldar got Wraithknights but it is all good guys because we get the Taurox and cheaper Sentinels? WTF?

We are going to be worse off then we were? We were already struggling. When was the last major tournament IG won without allies? 5th edition?

 Blacksails wrote:

rothrich wrote:
whining

Criticism is not whining.

I hope Omega is paid well by GW.

"Incompetent morons ! Screeeeee!!" Is not criticism.

Differing opinions doesn't make someone a stooge. Stop being such ridiculous parodies of gamers and have a normal damn discussion.

Orthon wrote:
Guys, it looks like this codex release is going to be worse than how Tyranids were treated. When I read what Peregrine said about the Hydra my mouth dropped.
I wanted to buy two of them, but I guess I can still make some Wyvern.

Also Ogryns are still complete garbage? Come on GW I want to buy your stuff! I am beginning to think they are completely incompetent because I was ready to spend a lot of money, but now I don't want to buy anything.

Tau got Riptides and Eldar got Wraithknights but it is all good guys because we get the Taurox and cheaper Sentinels? WTF?

We are going to be worse off then we were? We were already struggling. When was the last major tournament IG won without allies? 5th edition?

I have seen nids doing very well. Just because they are not a "tournament" army dose not mean that they are not fun to play or that they don't have some strong army lists. I am sure that the next time tau and eldar come around they will be nerfed to fit with everyone else. Auto take and spamable units like the riptide, wave serpent and, hell drake are not good for the game. A codex where no one unit stands out as the end all beat all chice is good for the game.

Does fun to play mean having to buy venomthropes and huddling everything together? I play zombies and that can be fun but I would think nid players would want to build more than venomthropes or flying MC spam.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

I'm never a fan of units that are extremely rock-paper-scissorsy, so if the Hydra is as they say it is, it really doesn't appeal to me.

Yeah, it is the same problem as with the SM AA tanks: if the enemy does not bring flyers, they're useless.

rothrich wrote:

Orthon wrote:
Guys, it looks like this codex release is going to be worse than how Tyranids were treated. When I read what Peregrine said about the Hydra my mouth dropped.
I wanted to buy two of them, but I guess I can still make some Wyvern.

Also Ogryns are still complete garbage? Come on GW I want to buy your stuff! I am beginning to think they are completely incompetent because I was ready to spend a lot of money, but now I don't want to buy anything.

Tau got Riptides and Eldar got Wraithknights but it is all good guys because we get the Taurox and cheaper Sentinels? WTF?

We are going to be worse off then we were? We were already struggling. When was the last major tournament IG won without allies? 5th edition?

I have seen nids doing very well. Just because they are not a "tournament" army dose not mean that they are not fun to play or that they don't have some strong army lists. I am sure that the next time tau and eldar come around they will be nerfed to fit with everyone else. Auto take and spamable units like the riptide, wave serpent and, hell drake are not good for the game. A codex where no one unit stands out as the end all beat all chice is good for the game.

Tyranids old codex wasn't great and the new one mostly just made them worse. Terrible internal balance. There's a couple of powerful builds, but a couple of powerful builds does not make a good codex. There's so many units in the 'nid 'dex that are just blatantly obviously crap and several units that weren't powerful before and were nerfed anyway. Also, the removal of several units.

Guard are getting something similar, it's hard to judge internal balance at this point, but there definitely seems to be units getting a nerf that didn't need a nerf (I accept the Vendetta nerf was needed, the Chimera and Hydra nerfs look bad) and we are losing several units, more than 'nids lost.

One of my freind got a nid army, and after the shock of reading the new codex (and wanting to throw his nids into the garbage) he got back at it and saw that the trick was to forget everything he did in the past and start anew.

I know synapse is more iportant now, back then a creature went out of it..they gained rage (which is not that much of a negative effect in 6th)
I'm afraid that may be the case with guard. We may well have to forget all the old tactics and ways of doing things and start anew

 Crimson wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

I'm never a fan of units that are extremely rock-paper-scissorsy, so if the Hydra is as they say it is, it really doesn't appeal to me.

Yeah, it is the same problem as with the SM AA tanks: if the enemy does not bring flyers, they're useless.

Also if your opponent brings flyers and destroys your AA tanks before they can actually fire. Many flyers have the capability to destroy a Hydra on the turn they arrive, especially if it's weakened by a hull point or two before they show up. I'd love to be playing Eldar with Crimson Hunters against a Guard player crazy enough to take Hydras, lol.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Inquisitor Jex wrote:
One of my freind got a nid army, and after the shock of reading the new codex (and wanting to throw his nids into the garbage) he got back at it and saw that the trick was to forget everything he did in the past and start anew.

I know synapse is more iportant now, back then a creature went out of it..they gained rage (which is not that much of a negative effect in 6th)
I'm afraid that may be the case with guard. We may well have to forget all the old tactics and ways of doing things and start anew

The problem with nids isn't that you can't make a competitive list (though they certainly aren't the most competitive army either), it's that the army is full of auto-takes and crap units you'll never take. Go look at almost all 'nid armies now and they have a Flyrant because at 35pts extra you'd be crazy to take a walking Tyrant. Raveners are outclassed by almost everything. Tyranid Warriors suck, the only reason to take them is Synapse redundancy. Lictors are terrible. The Scything Talon nerf hit a few units hard that really didn't need to be nerfed.

I don't want to have to rejig my army each codex release because there's a new monobuild that reduces an army down to only a handful of viable options and even worse some units have been completely removed. It's not that I don't like change, it's that I don't like crappy unbalanced codices.

I don't even think GW does it intentionally to sell new models, I think they are genuinely incompetent enough to not realise what is going on.

what do you think constitutes "ancient commander", Creed or other named commanders or you will be able yo buy a ancient commander upgrade?

also will all commanders have voice of command?

I think that's the translation for "senior officer".

The Leman Russ rules are the same as in old codex the only difference is that Demolisher at 170 pt. from natfka. Nothing new for the tank rules but if the Demo is the most princely one what does it say of the executioner? A giant price decrease?

So I just saw that on the GW's news page...


How you like them' latin names?

Zengu wrote:
The Leman Russ rules are the same as in old codex the only difference is that Demolisher at 170 pt. from natfka. Nothing new for the tank rules but if the Demo is the most princely one what does it say of the executioner? A giant price decrease?

Apparently 150 is the mean cost with the standard Leman Russ being 120.

I am seeing the new IG book being more mechanized than previous iterations. At least I will be running mech lists.

 Happygrunt wrote:

Zengu wrote:
The Leman Russ rules are the same as in old codex the only difference is that Demolisher at 170 pt. from natfka. Nothing new for the tank rules but if the Demo is the most princely one what does it say of the executioner? A giant price decrease?

Apparently 150 is the mean cost with the standard Leman Russ being 120.

I am seeing the new IG book being more mechanized than previous iterations. At least I will be running mech lists.

If this is true then the executioner my favorite russ will be some what of a steal compared to today.

Zengu wrote:

 Happygrunt wrote:

Zengu wrote:
The Leman Russ rules are the same as in old codex the only difference is that Demolisher at 170 pt. from natfka. Nothing new for the tank rules but if the Demo is the most princely one what does it say of the executioner? A giant price decrease?

Apparently 150 is the mean cost with the standard Leman Russ being 120.

I am seeing the new IG book being more mechanized than previous iterations. At least I will be running mech lists.

If this is true then the executioner my favorite russ will be some what of a steal compared to today.

I'm hoping that this rumor is true. I would assume it was made cheaper specifically to address the loss of Lumbering Behemoth. Seriously, side sponsons are never worth taking on the vanilla russ & demolisher because they lost that rule. Though Demolishers getting more EXPENSIVE at the same time seems peculilar...

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

And the Hydra, as I said has lost a lot of rules, but my little bird tells me that only costs 70 points. "Neither interceptor, or ignore cover or nah"

Wow. So if you accept the codex price of enclosed crew compartment at 15 points as the value of open-topped vs. not, then the Hydra actually got more expensive while losing special rules. Holy GW's rule authors are stupid.

The Hydra didnt have skyfire in the old codex. The GW FAQ adding it in basically broke the Hydra because it became waay too cheap with its combination of ignoring jink.

However, it was still only Heavy 2. If I am not mistaken, the new Hydra is heavy 4? If not, then yes youre right they suck. Even if they have long range, just compare them with the Schpess Muhreen Stalker and you'll get an idea why Gee Dubs loves their mureenz as their special child.

Honestly those Russ points go a long way toward mitigating the chimera increase.

I'm looking forward to getting my hands on the book. There seems to be a lot of new methods of play opening up for the army. I've always loved te idea of priests and they now seem super interesting to use. My only gripes are the loss of the one sw option in vets and the fact that ogryns didn't go down in price.

 Sir Arun wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

And the Hydra, as I said has lost a lot of rules, but my little bird tells me that only costs 70 points. "Neither interceptor, or ignore cover or nah"

Wow. So if you accept the codex price of enclosed crew compartment at 15 points as the value of open-topped vs. not, then the Hydra actually got more expensive while losing special rules. Holy GW's rule authors are stupid.

The Hydra didnt have skyfire in the old codex. The GW FAQ adding it in basically broke the Hydra because it became waay too cheap with its combination of ignoring jink.

However, it was still only Heavy 2. If I am not mistaken, the new Hydra is heavy 4?

Wait, you thought the Hydra became broken gaining skyfire w/o interceptor at 75 points? When a hydra is alway outclassed by a Quadgun?

 Happygrunt wrote:

Zengu wrote:
The Leman Russ rules are the same as in old codex the only difference is that Demolisher at 170 pt. from natfka. Nothing new for the tank rules but if the Demo is the most princely one what does it say of the executioner? A giant price decrease?

Apparently 150 is the mean cost with the standard Leman Russ being 120.

I am seeing the new IG book being more mechanized than previous iterations. At least I will be running mech lists.

Holy Nutballs, so I can get 3 tanks in roughly 500 with the trimmings? That's a steal.

Omg, in 750 pt games, I could get a Tank Commander, two infantry in Chimera and a couple more LRBT.

This has become a lot more interesting to me.

Also... In the perspective 1850-2000 pt games, would you run a Baneblade?

 Sir Arun wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

And the Hydra, as I said has lost a lot of rules, but my little bird tells me that only costs 70 points. "Neither interceptor, or ignore cover or nah"

Wow. So if you accept the codex price of enclosed crew compartment at 15 points as the value of open-topped vs. not, then the Hydra actually got more expensive while losing special rules. Holy GW's rule authors are stupid.

The Hydra didnt have skyfire in the old codex. The GW FAQ adding it in basically broke the Hydra because it became waay too cheap with its combination of ignoring jink.

However, it was still only Heavy 2. If I am not mistaken, the new Hydra is heavy 4?

It had 2 Heavy 2 guns. I think you're only one that thought it was broken for that.

If I played IG I would be super pissed, cutting all the big arty units is a massive no-no, what about all the people who invsted countless hours into their collections, do they not even consider them when they update gak? At least nothing in my SM collection became suddenly unusable with 6th....

Imagine if they got rid of Predators and Whirlwinds with 6th, its the same thing as not including some of Guards popular vehicles.

I really don't want to despise the dumb mother fethers that run the company, but they are practically making it impossible for me not to.

And no Catachans, just so people will pay more for the inevitable dataslate?

feth that... I would retire Harker and Guardsman Marbo to the big bits bin in the sky.

 Insurgency Walker wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Insurgency Walker wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:


*snip*

With a priest making power axe attacks 125% more deadly and guardsmen 237.5% more deadly we should stop the QQ about a 5 point increase in power weapons.

So ah....maybe they should have raised the cost for the priest?
That is like raising the cost of a spacemarine because you could take a chaplain.

Truth is whenever points increase people get cranky because most the time it comes across as arbitrary at best, or perceived as a tool to increase sales of a given item.

Was not that long ago people were crying foul over a perceived point increase for LRBT and the "new" WD IG teaser talked about the lowered point cost of chimera!

But then if you don't take the power weapons you are wasting the extra points.
What makes the priest deadly is when there are powered weapons involved. Other wise...not so much.

The priest actually improves regular guardsmen more than power weapons, and can really make 3 point conscripts deadly in cc. Plush a 2nd priest can give rerolls to armor saves taking a 1/3 chance to 5/9. The unit also gains fearless. They are a lot squishier than chaplains, but are almost 1/4 the price and give better buffs to their unit.

Yes, priests are looking good! Be nice if you could stick one on a horse.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mysterious Pants wrote:
Hey, you! Any word on tech-priests?

I've used them because they looked amazing, but they never seem to be worth their points. Do they get a point reduction? More options? Anything- maybe gun servitors cost less?

Once upon a time they were independent characters which rocked if you didn't want to field servitors with them.

Ok here are the stats on priests.

Cost=5 guardsmen. 3 attacks standard guard profile. 5++ invo I think Has access to power weapons.

Leadership. They have to pass a ld test to activate a war hymm. Commissars cost the same as a priest and if the priests squad is within 6" of a commissar leadership goes up to 9.

They have zealot giving their squad hatred and fearless and have 3 hymms.

Hymm#1: Shred for the entire squad assault phase only
Hymm#2: Reroll armor saves and invo saves for the entire squad assault phase only
Hymm#3 The priest and only the priest gains smash. A power mace then becomes S5 AP2 I3 A3, or S8 AP2 I1 A2 plus charge bonus

Italian translations so bare with me. These are from what appears to be the official codex that was posted in Italian a few pages ago.

Warlord traits:

1. Grand strategy (primary detachment only) I.E. D3 units get this special rule.


2. old grudges- during deployment, before you deploy the infiltrators and scouts, choose a codex warhammer 40k. The General and his unit have a special rule favored enemy against all enemy units chosen from the codex.


3. iron discipline- units from Codex: AM within 12 "of the general dont take morale when they suffer losses of 25% or more.


4. unrelenting determination- General and its units have the Unbreakable special rule.


5. booming voice- The General rule Voice of the special command. If you already possess it, then you can issue orders to units of the codex: AM that are within 18 "of him.


6. Master of the command- The General rule Voice of the special command. If it already has, then he can give an additional order each round.


Not sure if anyone did it already and it wasnt easy... lol a few typo's i am sure but the general knowledge is there... hope you enjoy.

portugus wrote:Does fun to play mean having to buy venomthropes and huddling everything together? I play zombies and that can be fun but I would think nid players would want to build more than venomthropes or flying MC spam.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

rothrich wrote:

Orthon wrote:
Guys, it looks like this codex release is going to be worse than how Tyranids were treated. When I read what Peregrine said about the Hydra my mouth dropped.
I wanted to buy two of them, but I guess I can still make some Wyvern.

Also Ogryns are still complete garbage? Come on GW I want to buy your stuff! I am beginning to think they are completely incompetent because I was ready to spend a lot of money, but now I don't want to buy anything.

Tau got Riptides and Eldar got Wraithknights but it is all good guys because we get the Taurox and cheaper Sentinels? WTF?

We are going to be worse off then we were? We were already struggling. When was the last major tournament IG won without allies? 5th edition?

I have seen nids doing very well. Just because they are not a "tournament" army dose not mean that they are not fun to play or that they don't have some strong army lists. I am sure that the next time tau and eldar come around they will be nerfed to fit with everyone else. Auto take and spamable units like the riptide, wave serpent and, hell drake are not good for the game. A codex where no one unit stands out as the end all beat all chice is good for the game.

Tyranids old codex wasn't great and the new one mostly just made them worse. Terrible internal balance. There's a couple of powerful builds, but a couple of powerful builds does not make a good codex. There's so many units in the 'nid 'dex that are just blatantly obviously crap and several units that weren't powerful before and were nerfed anyway. Also, the removal of several units.

Guard are getting something similar, it's hard to judge internal balance at this point, but there definitely seems to be units getting a nerf that didn't need a nerf (I accept the Vendetta nerf was needed, the Chimera and Hydra nerfs look bad) and we are losing several units, more than 'nids lost.

portugus wrote:Does fun to play mean having to buy venomthropes and huddling everything together? I play zombies and that can be fun but I would think nid players would want to build more than venomthropes or flying MC spam.

I don't think that internal ballance as you put it is all that important. If a game is planned out like it supposed to be instead of random pick up games or the TAC tournament gak that some people seem to be interested in then you are left with a wide variety of units that can be used in say a game that takes place inside a space hulk, or in the center of a hive city. The battle for planet bowing ball where the whiner oops winner is the one who kill the most of the opposing players units are not fun games or games that are intended to be played by the game designers. People really hate the term "forging a narrative" but the more new releases that come out and though out the theme of the main rule book it becomes more and more obvious that it is really the only way to have a balanced game. I am really not trying to be a jerk here. It is just the way that GW wants there product to be. They really don't care at all for power gaming or tournaments in the GT style. The hydra for example sounds like a great unit to have if say you are playing a battle where a necron invasion force is flying in in there night scythes in an attempt to take over a strategic world held by humanity. It however sounds like a terrible unit to be in a battle where a transport ship adrift in the warp is being over run by the deamons which inhabit the warp. See what I mean?

 mattyrm wrote:
If I played IG I would be super pissed, cutting all the big arty units is a massive no-no, what about all the people who invsted countless hours into their collections, do they not even consider them when they update gak? At least nothing in my SM collection became suddenly unusable with 6th....

Imagine if they got rid of Predators and Whirlwinds with 6th, its the same thing as not including some of Guards popular vehicles.

I really don't want to despise the dumb mother fethers that run the company, but they are practically making it impossible for me not to.

And no Catachans, just so people will pay more for the inevitable dataslate?

feth that... I would retire Harker and Guardsman Marbo to the big bits bin in the sky.

I only play IG, and the amount of feths I give are pretty low. I've already pre-ordered the new codex, and instead of coming here to bitch and moan I'll just adapt to the new rules, because at the end of the day we're still just a bunch of jackasses pushing plastic across a table.

 mattyrm wrote:
If I played IG I would be super pissed, cutting all the big arty units is a massive no-no, what about all the people who invsted countless hours into their collections, do they not even consider them when they update gak? At least nothing in my SM collection became suddenly unusable with 6th....

Imagine if they got rid of Predators and Whirlwinds with 6th, its the same thing as not including some of Guards popular vehicles.

I really don't want to despise the dumb mother fethers that run the company, but they are practically making it impossible for me not to.

And no Catachans, just so people will pay more for the inevitable dataslate?

feth that... I would retire Harker and Guardsman Marbo to the big bits bin in the sky.

I abandoned my DKOK as steel legion army the second I heard this was a year away. My medusas would have been made useless, and my 1850 army suddenly jumped to 2150. I had a gut feeling that this codex could only go 2 directions, and neither was up, and as it looks they got very little for what is being taken away. It looks like they are stripping the guardsmen ability to deal with 2+ saves and reducing their durability. That codex was still good just needed more options and minor tweaks, what it seems to have gotten was GWs sledgehammer that is an edition behind in complaints.

It honestly looks like the devs and their new play testers have zero fething clue on how do their jobs, well other then take away options from the more expensive book and release them for $20 dataslates.

 Stus67 wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
If I played IG I would be super pissed, cutting all the big arty units is a massive no-no, what about all the people who invsted countless hours into their collections, do they not even consider them when they update gak? At least nothing in my SM collection became suddenly unusable with 6th....

Imagine if they got rid of Predators and Whirlwinds with 6th, its the same thing as not including some of Guards popular vehicles.

I really don't want to despise the dumb mother fethers that run the company, but they are practically making it impossible for me not to.

And no Catachans, just so people will pay more for the inevitable dataslate?

feth that... I would retire Harker and Guardsman Marbo to the big bits bin in the sky.

I only play IG, and the amount of feths I give are pretty low. I've already pre-ordered the new codex, and instead of coming here to bitch and moan I'll just adapt to the new rules, because at the end of the day we're still just a bunch of jackasses pushing plastic across a table.

Best post ever give this guy a cookie! if it aint fun don't play right primo?!

 schadenfreude wrote:


Ok here are the stats on priests.

Cost=5 guardsmen. 3 attacks standard guard profile. 5++ invo I think Has access to power weapons.

Leadership. They have to pass a ld test to activate a war hymm. Commissars cost the same as a priest and if the priests squad is within 6" of a commissar leadership goes up to 9.

They have zealot giving their squad hatred and fearless and have 3 hymms.

Hymm#1: Shred for the entire squad assault phase only
Hymm#2: Reroll armor saves and invo saves for the entire squad assault phase only
Hymm#3 The priest and only the priest gains smash. A power mace then becomes S5 AP2 I3 A3, or S8 AP2 I1 A2 plus charge bonus

That matches with the Priests out of the Sisters Codex so that is great to hear if it is accurate! Good to know Commissars got cheaper too, but the increase to power weapon costs put off any positives gained.

rothrich wrote:


...the whiner oops winner is the one who kill the most of the opposing players units are not fun games or games that are intended to be played by the game designers....

...The hydra for example sounds like a great unit to have if say you are playing a battle where a necron invasion force is flying in in there night scythes ...


See what I mean?

Well you shot yourself in the foot with the first line. Luckily your idea of fun is not everyone elses idea of fun, we're all different. And you imply GW is actively designing their game instead of maintaining a library of IP and selling stuff at the highest cost the market will bear.

What we are implying is the hydra is actually terrible for the scenario you listed. It has no interceptor. It would be very easy for those night scythes to either shake, stun, or destroy the hydras before they get a single chance to retalliate.

So no, we don't see what you mean. We know what you are saying, we aren't slow. However, a better designed and balanced game is better for all forms of play, competitive or not. The reason why "forge the narrative" is used in a sarcastic manner is that it's an active excuse being used by GW not to troubleshoot their rules. And then charge a premium over any other company.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Mr.Omega wrote:
Grrr why didn't GW turn an AA vehicle into a dull, auto-take spammable anti-ground unit! How stupid!

1) Mandatory skyfire is stupid fluff-wise. The Hydra's guns are capable of pivoting down to engage ground targets, and the fluff talks about how terrifyingly effective it is against light ground targets when there are no aircraft around to draw its attention. But yet somehow it gets out-shot by orks against ground targets?

Fluff is not always =/= gameplay, and theme is often the most direct influence on it.

2) The Hydra is a better dedicated AA tank right now and nobody is taking it because it can only hit aircraft. The new rules make it considerably worse by making it open-topped and taking away the jink save counter. How exactly is this supposed to make it an appealing choice?

Except you're completely wrong, because it can hit FMC's, Flyers and Skimmers at full BS. Re-read the rules on skyfire.

Its still reasonable. Against AV12 skimmers and flyers, you're getting 1 hull point off a turn average before jink, with a 50%~ chance for a penetrate if my Maths is correct.

But that ignores the biggest problem with the Hydra: without interceptor it has to wait until the flyer (and the opponent's ground units) gets the first shot to attempt to fire back. Hydras have a habit of dying before they get to shoot any flyers, and with mandatory skyfire they can't even put some hits on ground targets while they wait and/or before they die.

With AV12, the ease of being able to target flyers all over the board, and the resultant ability to comfortably hide in 25% LOS blocking cover, potentially with a cheap as chips camo net, you're already doing fine.

2-3 Hydras is not going to be a walk in the park to kill for flyers, the Storm Raven, the Vendetta and the Night Scythe are the only flyers you're likely to see that pose any chance of killing just one upon coming in, and even then that's a 70 point unit and an entire turn free from their firepower, as compared to losing a 170 point Vendetta, a staple of your anti-MC and AT firepower as well.

Plus, your whole point here becomes moot just by putting the Hydras in reserve, taking an Astropath and having them come in turn 2 on a 2+, able to fire immediately at flyers that have just appeared.

Against infantry/heavy infantry you shouldn't exactly be struggling, especially since our LRBT's are cheaper now. And before you even chant the words "FOC" allow me to remind you that with the new tank commanders/Pask you can have 6 Leman Russes in your HQ section.

As a result of that, you're either forcing a jink on the latter that makes its firepower naff for a turn, or having an opportunity to potentially destroy it.

Except the current Hydra ignores jink saves. This is a major nerf to the new Hydra.

The previous Hydra was written for 5th, and quite rightly GW has realised that giving the new Hydra ignores jink is a tad over the line. There is a fallacy here and with everyone else in this thread that the previous Codex's good units are always done right - the only exception is the Vendetta because of how blatant that it is, and still people have whined in here about it being nerfed.

That makes it about as effective as an Autocannon HWS at 24'' greater range against Skimmers

Err, what? TL BS 1 is approximately BS 2, so 1.333 hits against a skimmer from the Hydra. The HWS gives an average of 3 hits against a skimmer. Since when is "less than half the damage" enough to qualify as "about as effective"?

Oh, really now? You couldn't go re-read the description of one rule, so assured in your wisdom you were?

Re-read the Skyfire rule. Full BS is also granted against skimmers.

as it isn't invalidated by your opponent's quality AA choices

Any AA choice that can invalidate a Vendetta is going to invalidate Hydras just as well.

[citation needed]

Uh, no? This is a such a sweeping statement, the only AA choice I can think of that even comes close to potentially invalidating Hydras is Wave Serpents, and frankly, Hydras are one of the best new counters to them, so that pretty much cancels out.

The big three flyers I outlined earlier are probably going to at most, kill one Hydra a turn.

Just re-read that statement right there.

The Vendetta loses most of its special defense against dedicated AA, but it still has the same AV 12 and doesn't get slaughtered by non-AA units while it waits for the AA battle.

The Hydra can stay out of range comfortably in cover with 72'' range, is far more expendable and doesn't form a considerable staple of a list's AT and Anti-MC as well. Plus, you're getting 2 Hydras for the price of 1 Vendetta and 30 spare points.

I'm not even suggesting the Vendetta shouldn't be taken- because I don't think that's the case. I think it would work as a fine companion to a squadron of Hydras, and if so you say, the Hydras take heavy casualties, it is a good back up interceptor.

Plus, the Hydras mean that the Vendetta's other key useful strength, anti-MC and AT, is more likely to be exploited when it arrives.

 Stus67 wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
If I played IG I would be super pissed, cutting all the big arty units is a massive no-no, what about all the people who invsted countless hours into their collections, do they not even consider them when they update gak? At least nothing in my SM collection became suddenly unusable with 6th....

Imagine if they got rid of Predators and Whirlwinds with 6th, its the same thing as not including some of Guards popular vehicles.

I really don't want to despise the dumb mother fethers that run the company, but they are practically making it impossible for me not to.

And no Catachans, just so people will pay more for the inevitable dataslate?

feth that... I would retire Harker and Guardsman Marbo to the big bits bin in the sky.

I only play IG, and the amount of feths I give are pretty low. I've already pre-ordered the new codex, and instead of coming here to bitch and moan I'll just adapt to the new rules, because at the end of the day we're still just a bunch of jackasses pushing plastic across a table.

No bigger jackasses exist than those who dismiss other jackasses' loss of time and money when models are removed from a codex. If you don't care about the removed units you either didn't own them, or you have more money than sense. Either way, trying to out cool those who are upset by their removal is rather childish.

Me? I'm gonna go push my voided artillery around the table making "vrooooooom!" noises as a final eulogy to my culled toys.

Which is its own kind of childishness, but a more fun kind than indulging in hipster-schadenfreude.

Anyone got any idea what the Militarum Vendorum might be?

Puscifer wrote:

 Happygrunt wrote:

Zengu wrote:
The Leman Russ rules are the same as in old codex the only difference is that Demolisher at 170 pt. from natfka. Nothing new for the tank rules but if the Demo is the most princely one what does it say of the executioner? A giant price decrease?

Apparently 150 is the mean cost with the standard Leman Russ being 120.

I am seeing the new IG book being more mechanized than previous iterations. At least I will be running mech lists.

Holy Nutballs, so I can get 3 tanks in roughly 500 with the trimmings? That's a steal.

Omg, in 750 pt games, I could get a Tank Commander, two infantry in Chimera and a couple more LRBT.

This has become a lot more interesting to me.

Also... In the perspective 1850-2000 pt games, would you run a Baneblade?

They probably start at 120 for the exterminator. Then add 30 to 40pts for a battle cannon.

 Perfect Organism wrote:
Anyone got any idea what the Militarum Vendorum might be?

It's where the Astra Militarum get their Chipus Saltus et Vinegarum and their Dieta Cokus.

 mattyrm wrote:
If I played IG I would be super pissed, cutting all the big arty units is a massive no-no, what about all the people who invsted countless hours into their collections, do they not even consider them when they update gak? At least nothing in my SM collection became suddenly unusable with 6th....

Imagine if they got rid of Predators and Whirlwinds with 6th, its the same thing as not including some of Guards popular vehicles.

I really don't want to despise the dumb mother fethers that run the company, but they are practically making it impossible for me not to.

And no Catachans, just so people will pay more for the inevitable dataslate?

feth that... I would retire Harker and Guardsman Marbo to the big bits bin in the sky.

they have not been gotten rid of, the rules still exist in FW, and they absolutely will be making a DLC data slate for artillary.

that being said, I approve of data slates giving new rules and acting as a way to give new rules inbetween codexes... but WTF, should NOT be taking old rules and putting them into separate purchases without adding some really new stuff to it at least.

 plastictrees wrote:

 Perfect Organism wrote:
Anyone got any idea what the Militarum Vendorum might be?

It's where the Astra Militarum get their Chipus Saltus et Vinegarum and their Dieta Cokus.

Brilliantus!

I'm psyched about the Leman Russ Punisher revamp.

The idea of making it my HQ tank and a commander who makes all 32 of those shots BS4 ...and for the first time ever, rending, means it will mow down anything and everything.

 Sir Arun wrote:
I'm psyched about the Leman Russ Punisher revamp.

The idea of making it my HQ tank and a commander who makes all 32 of those shots BS4 ...and for the first time ever, rending, means it will mow down anything and everything.

The rending part of those shots alone, without considering preferred enemy (the complex calculations aren't possible on the two Mathhammer apps I use, Mathhammer 40k and Battlescribe, because the former doesn't let you put that many dice into the machine lol and the latter can't factor rolls of a 1) causes 3.5 AP2 wounds on everything and 2.37 unsaved wounds on a Riptide. (the latter part here not factoring non AP2 wounds)

Any worrd on a possible point reduction to the Russ tanks?

 PuddlePirate wrote:
Any worrd on a possible point reduction to the Russ tanks?

An anonymous source on Faeit is saying no change except for a price increase on the Demolisher, the Spanish dude who's given many leaks recently has said a price range of 120-170 points.

It remains to be seen, really.

When I rolled the Pask Punisher shots (punisher cannon alone), I got around 5-6 rending shots against a land raider, and had 4 glancing hits. With some lucky rolling, the PP can cut a land raider in half.

of course the downside being, it is only 24". but that way it will be balanced although I doubt anyone will take the punisher without pask.

now if only it could fire overwatch...

Pask Punisher - HBS, stubber, Punisher Cannon, Heavy Bolter hull sponson -

9 HBS shots, 20 Punisher shots, 3 Stubber shots - BS4, Shred


Yes please I will take those 32 shots at BS4! My Pask Punisher just got terrifying! Even more so than before, but hey who doesn't love even more Pask?

3 punishers, 3 vendettas, 3 chimeras all useful and in the 'I already own this' group.

Outstanding. I'll just throw an antennae on one and call it Pask.

I'm kind of shocked that pask is still around because you know.... he's metal......

 Stus67 wrote:

I only play IG, and the amount of feths I give are pretty low. I've already pre-ordered the new codex, and instead of coming here to bitch and moan I'll just adapt to the new rules, because at the end of the day we're still just a bunch of jackasses pushing plastic across a table.

Just pretty low? So you do give some feths then?

If you don't care when models you bought, built and painted get binned, you are in a very strange minority. The vast majority of gamers would be rightly annoyed, there is absolutely nothing "entitled" or whiny about it, and I am not a big gamer or a GW hater, far from it, I find the endless complaints of some people on here to be trifling and childish, but feth me, you have to sit on the fence if you want to have any credibility, and if I spent a good 20 hours on some of my best vehicles, and they suddenly got binned, of course I am going to get irritated, to suggest you don't care at all is illogical.

I mean, I don't REALLY care because I don't play Guard and like I said, the SM (my only army) have been relatively unaffected by these shenanigans, but obviously I feel for other players. If they ditched my very well painted TFC or Predator from the codex and provided no explanations or acceptable alternatives I could play it is, of course I would be annoyed.

Its logical and fair to say that suddenly having items that you invest time and money become useless is annoying, and I don't see how you can square that circle by just saying "I don't care because I am rich/cool"

Even if you don't care because you are rich and cool and pay for other people to assemble and paint your models, surely you can understand the annoyance on the part of others?

In Italian a Senior Officer is called Ufficiali Superiori not anziani, that means older (and who knows what else they got wrong). The Spanish version is worse with unit names no longer translated and mistakes in the formating... and they are asking me to pay 39€ for that. I shudder thinking how GW translated the IG codex to Japanese. Can we ask for a rebate for every mistake?

I'm sure GW must be the best company in the world to be working for right now, if the interns (masters in their own right of finetranslating(TM)) apparently get to do the important stuff unsupervised must be because the devs are brainstorming the next codex all day long under the warm caribbean sun.

M.

Reposting this from another forum, I'd like to provoke a good debate on this:

Rough Riders are extremely underrated.

On average, just to give a few examples of why, a unit of 10 Rough Riders beats the following on a charge:

10 BA Assault Marines, 70% of the time 180~+ pts
10 Dark Eldar Incubi, 70% of the time 250~+ pts
10 Striking Scorpions, 55~% of the time 160+~ pts (probably considerably more than that)
1/3 of the time they can single handedly beat 25 Ork Boys without any support 180~ pts
10 Grey Hunters, 70% of the time -150~ points
10 Khorne Berserkers, 70% of the time 200~+ pts

(Calculated using 40k Combat Simulator)

How much is a unit of 10 Rough Riders? 110 points.

This does not factor the extra attack they have with the new Dex either, as the app hasn't been updated to consider that. You just need to make sure you don't throw them out in open ground or in a place where they'll get shot up and expect them to survive. They are not the sort of unit you throw at the enemy and expect to reap huge kill counts, they are a counter attack unit.

you guys complain a lot... from what i have heard this book is going to be amazing... I don't get this "Most play groups don't allow forge world" business, most people i play against run triple riptide or wraithknight. If your playing 40k to be tournament competitive your in the wrong game, go play chess or poker. Everything in the new book seems good, so they got rid of some special characters, ITS THE IMPERIAL GUARD! where billions and billions of men die every year, who cares for special characters!

Stealing a photo from our own Xanthos
Close the hatch and there you are LR with Pask upgrade.

M

 jae4x4 wrote:
you guys complain a lot... from what i have heard this book is going to be amazing... I don't get this "Most play groups don't allow forge world" business, most people i play against run triple riptide or wraithknight. If your playing 40k to be tournament competitive your in the wrong game, go play chess or poker. Everything in the new book seems good, so they got rid of some special characters, ITS THE IMPERIAL GUARD! where billions and billions of men die every year, who cares for special characters!

You have some other rumor source? Or do you mean amazing like how project red dragon saved money?

 Mr.Omega wrote:
Reposting this from another forum, I'd like to provoke a good debate on this:

Rough Riders are extremely underrated.

On average, just to give a few examples of why, a unit of 10 Rough Riders beats the following on a charge:

10 BA Assault Marines, 70% of the time 180~+ pts
10 Dark Eldar Incubi, 70% of the time 250~+ pts
10 Striking Scorpions, 55~% of the time 160+~ pts (probably considerably more than that)
1/3 of the time they can single handedly beat 25 Ork Boys without any support 180~ pts
10 Grey Hunters, 70% of the time -150~ points
10 Khorne Berserkers, 70% of the time 200~+ pts

(Calculated using 40k Combat Simulator)

How much is a unit of 10 Rough Riders? 110 points.

This does not factor the extra attack they have with the new Dex either, as the app hasn't been updated to consider that. You just need to make sure you don't throw them out in open ground or in a place where they'll get shot up and expect them to survive. They are not the sort of unit you throw at the enemy and expect to reap huge kill counts, they are a counter attack unit.

Back in 5th my friend ran these in reserve, but the time I got to his lines they'd come in and counter attack me, and always made their points back, even against deepstriking Space Wolves with counter attack and special weapons out the wazoo. I think the problem with them now is the game is so shooting oriented, are there any hth units getting close to an IG gunline that would warrant a dedicated counter attack unit?

 jae4x4 wrote:
you guys complain a lot... from what i have heard this book is going to be amazing... I don't get this "Most play groups don't allow forge world" business, most people i play against run triple riptide or wraithknight. If your playing 40k to be tournament competitive your in the wrong game, go play chess or poker. Everything in the new book seems good, so they got rid of some special characters, ITS THE IMPERIAL GUARD! where billions and billions of men die every year, who cares for special characters!

My wallet which can't stand the strain of spending lots of money to buy the " billions and billions of men" I need. I asked it and it would rather spend money on a special character that makes the Guardsmen I have more efficient.

 Sir Arun wrote:


The Hydra didnt have skyfire in the old codex. The GW FAQ adding it in basically broke the Hydra because it became waay too cheap with its combination of ignoring jink.

what? I would much rather the hydra have not gained skyfire at all, it would have been a much better unit. 75 points for 4 twin-linked AC shots was borderline overpowered in 5th, though not particularly impressive in modern Taudar nonsense. Gaining Skyfire just meant it was garbage against anything but fliers and skimmers, and generally just got blown up by them the turn they came in. Right now in the 5th edition codex it's a paperweight unit, so of course GW nerfs it?

 mattyrm wrote:

 Stus67 wrote:

I only play IG, and the amount of feths I give are pretty low. I've already pre-ordered the new codex, and instead of coming here to bitch and moan I'll just adapt to the new rules, because at the end of the day we're still just a bunch of jackasses pushing plastic across a table.

Just pretty low? So you do give some feths then?

If you don't care when models you bought, built and painted get binned, you are in a very strange minority. The vast majority of gamers would be rightly annoyed, there is absolutely nothing "entitled" or whiny about it, and I am not a big gamer or a GW hater, far from it, I find the endless complaints of some people on here to be trifling and childish, but feth me, you have to sit on the fence if you want to have any credibility, and if I spent a good 20 hours on some of my best vehicles, and they suddenly got binned, of course I am going to get irritated, to suggest you don't care at all is illogical.

I mean, I don't REALLY care because I don't play Guard and like I said, the SM (my only army) have been relatively unaffected by these shenanigans, but obviously I feel for other players. If they ditched my very well painted TFC or Predator from the codex and provided no explanations or acceptable alternatives I could play it is, of course I would be annoyed.

Its logical and fair to say that suddenly having items that you invest time and money become useless is annoying, and I don't see how you can square that circle by just saying "I don't care because I am rich/cool"

Even if you don't care because you are rich and cool and pay for other people to assemble and paint your models, surely you can understand the annoyance on the part of others?

I didn't say I don't give any feths. Just not many. Not having it in the main codex doesn't really effect much when you can just use the FW rules anyway. Find the profiles and write them down on cards or something. Either way I can feel for those that won't do that, and lost the ability to field their arty, but if they really invested that much time into it just plop it in a display case at their local GW or shop or something so at least people can appreciate their painting or conversion skills. Then when we get our DLC slates that inevitably add them back in they can dust off their models and play them again. Not like it's hard to get the rules online for slates anyway.

Really I just don't get end is nigh attitude that so many people have in this thread. With the amount of crying here you'd think some GW employes literally went into their backyard and strangled their dog to death in broad daylight in front of their kids or something,

 jae4x4 wrote:
you guys complain a lot... from what i have heard this book is going to be amazing... I don't get this "Most play groups don't allow forge world" business, most people i play against run triple riptide or wraithknight. If your playing 40k to be tournament competitive your in the wrong game, go play chess or poker. Everything in the new book seems good, so they got rid of some special characters, ITS THE IMPERIAL GUARD! where billions and billions of men die every year, who cares for special characters!

Yeah! I mean, who cares about a few special characters. It's like, millions of humans die on the front lines, you can just take any old commander whose special rules allow you to outflank a whole platoon, or send in wave after wave of conscripts, or the one guy who can literally appear directly behind another unit.

There are millions of those guys lying around, exactly. () The only problem is, we don't have the damn rules available to us anymore.

Jesus, , you would think a special character here is like any other codex. Imagine if they removed Pedro Kantor from Space Marines. You think some people wouldn't be a bit ticked off?

Rough riders just need the outflank special rule. Congratulations they are now viable.

 Stus67 wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:

 Stus67 wrote:

I only play IG, and the amount of feths I give are pretty low. I've already pre-ordered the new codex, and instead of coming here to bitch and moan I'll just adapt to the new rules, because at the end of the day we're still just a bunch of jackasses pushing plastic across a table.

Just pretty low? So you do give some feths then?

If you don't care when models you bought, built and painted get binned, you are in a very strange minority. The vast majority of gamers would be rightly annoyed, there is absolutely nothing "entitled" or whiny about it, and I am not a big gamer or a GW hater, far from it, I find the endless complaints of some people on here to be trifling and childish, but feth me, you have to sit on the fence if you want to have any credibility, and if I spent a good 20 hours on some of my best vehicles, and they suddenly got binned, of course I am going to get irritated, to suggest you don't care at all is illogical.

I mean, I don't REALLY care because I don't play Guard and like I said, the SM (my only army) have been relatively unaffected by these shenanigans, but obviously I feel for other players. If they ditched my very well painted TFC or Predator from the codex and provided no explanations or acceptable alternatives I could play it is, of course I would be annoyed.

Its logical and fair to say that suddenly having items that you invest time and money become useless is annoying, and I don't see how you can square that circle by just saying "I don't care because I am rich/cool"

Even if you don't care because you are rich and cool and pay for other people to assemble and paint your models, surely you can understand the annoyance on the part of others?

I didn't say I don't give any feths. Just not many. Not having it in the main codex doesn't really effect much when you can just use the FW rules anyway. Find the profiles and write them down on cards or something. Either way I can feel for those that won't do that, and lost the ability to field their arty, but if they really invested that much time into it just plop it in a display case at their local GW or shop or something so at least people can appreciate their painting or conversion skills. Then when we get our DLC slates that inevitably add them back in they can dust off their models and play them again. Not like it's hard to get the rules online for slates anyway.

Really I just don't get end is nigh attitude that so many people have in this thread. With the amount of crying here you'd think some GW employes literally went into their backyard and strangled their dog to death in broad daylight in front of their kids or something,

You have to understand, i don't consider any of this doom and gloom, but it is damn dissapointing.

I spent untold hours painting and converting my army. I spent money i shouldn't have probably spent on my army because i considered it a labor of love. I customized my army based on characters in the Codex. I tried to minimize Forge world models because they often contained rules that are a little bit out there. The Hades breaching drill literally used to send up a large melta blast wherever it wanted to.

Lets say i wanted to use Marbo again, would i use the rules from 5th editon? Sure my opponents might just let me, but then where does it stop. Should i just be able to take whatever i want from any codex and stick it in my list? Should i be able to get the best of both codexes and stick them together?

Ive already talked to my group of friends, and the answer is no.

There is no good way to go about this. I could either stick to my 5th edition codex and maybe be ousted from pickup games, or i go 6th and basically shoo away half of what i liked about my army. It's a fething gakky situation. There is no true facts pointing to GW ever giving us the option to use these models at a later date. Why should it make me feel better that i might have to spend money later to get to use the models i was already using.

People have spent time and money on these armies, some of which are the most original and customized in all of 40k, and now GW have gone and removed half of our special characters and added nothing but a bunch of mostly useless vehicles and some arguably good warlord traits and tank commanders.

It's not doom and gloom, it just sucks big donkey

 TheSilo wrote:
Rough riders just need the outflank special rule. Congratulations they are now viable.

I dunno, given how fragile they are and that in 6th ed. you can't charge out of reserve means even with this advantage in placement they'll be shot up pretty easily with little effort especially from current top-meta armies like Tau since they can just use EWO to shoot the crap out of them when they arrive.

 Grimskul wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:
Rough riders just need the outflank special rule. Congratulations they are now viable.

I dunno, given how fragile they are and that in 6th ed. you can't charge out of reserve means even with this advantage in placement they'll be shot up pretty easily with little effort especially from current top-meta armies like Tau since they can just use EWO to shoot the crap out of them when they arrive.

You just described just about every Infantry/Cavalry/Biker unit in the game. [There are always exeptions]

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:
Rough riders just need the outflank special rule. Congratulations they are now viable.

I dunno, given how fragile they are and that in 6th ed. you can't charge out of reserve means even with this advantage in placement they'll be shot up pretty easily with little effort especially from current top-meta armies like Tau since they can just use EWO to shoot the crap out of them when they arrive.

You just described just about every Infantry/Cavalry/Biker unit in the game. [There are always exeptions]

Nurgle Bikers.

I do suppose you mentioned exceptions, but I feel obligated to point it out.

In any case, if you can find some LoS blocking terrain, Cavalry's ability to move 12" and charge helps a bit.

I really love how so many people are going on about how GW is just out to grab money. WHOA! Businesses are out to make money? Get outta town! It does suck when you've put a lot of effort into an army and now you'd need to switch things up but having these kinds of expectations are absurd. Its like asking companies that make video games to continue making ones that operate on old systems so everyone doesnt need to upgrade their pc's or consoles. I work in automotive retail and I hear this same argument everyday.
Me: You need new brakes.
Customer: But I just bought tires a month ago! Can't you do them for free?!
Me: No... that's not how companies stay open.
Seriously knock off the damn whining. If you don't want to buy the new stuff then don't! this is a hobby. People would cry a lot more if GW went belly up and there were no more updates at all. /endrant

You are right, things change and we have to adapt but for some this feels more like:

Me: You need new brakes.
Customer: But I just bought tires a month ago! Can't you do them for free?!
Me: No... that's not how companies stay open. BTW I just went ahead and slashed the back tires.

(and I agree with that feeling even if personally I'm not that concerned for my IG army)
M.

Any news if the Hydra has optional skyfire like Soulgrinders?
Also, do the Primaris Psykers have divination?

I'm hoping they bring back Solar Macharius.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:
Rough riders just need the outflank special rule. Congratulations they are now viable.

I dunno, given how fragile they are and that in 6th ed. you can't charge out of reserve means even with this advantage in placement they'll be shot up pretty easily with little effort especially from current top-meta armies like Tau since they can just use EWO to shoot the crap out of them when they arrive.

You just described just about every Infantry/Cavalry/Biker unit in the game. [There are always exeptions]

The big difference is that the vast majority of biker units that are relevant have actual ranged capability and survivability via jink/cover saves unlike rough riders. White Scar bikers in particular have S5 HoW hits on the charge and can rinse+repeat a near-continuous cycle of shooting and charging thanks to hit and run, unlike the Rough Riders who are effectively a one-shot wonder. Also as mentioned previously other biker units typically have at least T4-5 which requires a much more concentrated amount of firepower to get rid of a sizable unit. Eldar jetbikes are even faster which still at least have T4 and of course they're wonderful pseudo-rending-shuriken weaponry that is also twin-linked. In comparison, the rough riders are both outgunned in dakka and out-damaged in melee. Note that none of these require outflanking to be useful.

Even daemon calvary like seekers or bloodcrushers at least have a 5++ invuln. save which allows them to weather some sort of firepower.

 korghan wrote:
I really love how so many people are going on about how GW is just out to grab money. WHOA! Businesses are out to make money? Get outta town! It does suck when you've put a lot of effort into an army and now you'd need to switch things up but having these kinds of expectations are absurd. Its like asking companies that make video games to continue making ones that operate on old systems so everyone doesnt need to upgrade their pc's or consoles. I work in automotive retail and I hear this same argument everyday.
Me: You need new brakes.
Customer: But I just bought tires a month ago! Can't you do them for free?!
Me: No... that's not how companies stay open.
Seriously knock off the damn whining. If you don't want to buy the new stuff then don't! this is a hobby. People would cry a lot more if GW went belly up and there were no more updates at all. /endrant

Your example would make more sense if it was:
GW: You need new tires
Customer: But i just bought your new tires a month ago! Why can't i keep my damn tires?
GW: Other companies are using some of our tire designs, and we don't want them making any money on our designs.
Customer: But they are YOUR tires, i bought them from you. How are you going to make sure i can't use my old tires anyway?
GW: Well we have an agreement with the government that says that the new rules of the road say you can't use those tires anymore?
Customer: How are they going to stop me from using my old tires?
GW: Well i guess you can use them, as long as you don't want to take any major highways and use only bumpy back dirt roads. Have fun with that.

You see, it is a business practice, but this is dumb business practice. In what context is it smart to piss off your customer base? This is marketing 101.

Having spent a fair amount of money on metal figs to make a Tallarn army using Al'rahem and (a "counts-as") Marbo, I'm getting the distinct impression that I'm going to continue using my 5th Edition IG codex until the 7th Edition IG codex comes out...

I don't think you know what 'marketing' means.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And to be fair, neither do GW, but hey ho.

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

Lets say i wanted to use Marbo again, would i use the rules from 5th editon? Sure my opponents might just let me, but then where does it stop. Should i just be able to take whatever i want from any codex and stick it in my list? Should i be able to get the best of both codexes and stick them together?

Yes; its a game. The only rules that really exist are those that you and your opponents agree on.

Also, whats stopping you from using counts as? All those artillery models can make perfectly fine demolishers or even wyverns. Its not a perfect solution, but it is definitely a solution.

It is not the job of businesses to make money. It is to make a product or provide service, and making money is a by-product. And when they practice poor ideas in order to wring more money out of the customers, they fail at the job. We should not excuse a corp's actions as "Oh well they have to make money", otherwise what is the point of standards?.

Cause hey, using rancid meat in your food product? Probably done to make money

Whoops, didn't realize you can't charge from reserves/outflank, my meta has been doing it wrong.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
It is not the job of businesses to make money. It is to make a product or provide service, and making money is a by-product. And when they practice poor ideas in order to wring more money out of the customers, they fail at the job. We should not excuse a corp's actions as "Oh well they have to make money", otherwise what is the point of standards?.

Cause hey, using rancid meat in your food product? Probably done to make money

You are kidding me right???????? not the job of businesses to make money?????

Necromunda Eschers just got new jobs as "street preachers". Good times.

 Miguelsan wrote:
You are right, things change and we have to adapt but for some this feels more like:

Me: You need new brakes.
Customer: But I just bought tires a month ago! Can't you do them for free?!
Me: No... that's not how companies stay open. BTW I just went ahead and slashed the back tires.

(and I agree with that feeling even if personally I'm not that concerned for my IG army)
M.

GW is a retail company. It's no different than a food chain or an electronics store. The only way to stay open is to sell things. Expecting them to put out a codex that strengthens everything people already own is ludicrous. It would be like a game developer putting out free DLC's because they "care about their client base". What sense would that make? None. The 6th edition codices all (for the most part) follow this model. I have been on the fence about starting an IG army. With the rumors for this codex I'm sold. The things that did get nerfed honestly needed them. Anyone that says the Vendetta only needed a moderate price increase is naive at best. It was the most under priced unit in the game (barring grey hunters). All of the good things are still there. Guard are supposed to be about massed everyday joes get thrown through the meat grinder. That aspect has only gotten better. How about massed tank formations? Yep. With the introduction of tank HQ's that got better too. Lets look at the Chimera for a moment. Yea.. it has av10 side armor.. but 55 points for it was pretty darn cheap. I'm honestly thrilled about the new orders. They are something that other armies just don't get. Sure, we all would've loved regimental doctrines too but we cant have it all. I think this codex will be that diamond in the rough. As far as special characters go, I am sad to see Marbo go. I've used an allied detachment just to get him. But he was far from competitive. The important ones are still there. So why don't we all just relax and wait for the thing to actually drop before we decry GW for actually trying to turn a profit to stay in business?

 plastictrees wrote:
I don't think you know what 'marketing' means.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And to be fair, neither do GW, but hey ho.

Hold on, ill bring out my Advertising Textbook: Marketing- is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerins that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large.

What GW is doing is in itself bad marketing. They want to deliver on a product, what product is it? An update to a book people already own. What GW has to do is twofold, get people who do not own an Astra Militarum army to buy one, and to get those who already own one to buy the new book and new models it comes with.

This idea might work for people who do not have an army already, but for those who do, you effectively took out a whole bunch of units people DID care about. This is not effective marketing. If you were to take something out, you would have to put something back in of equal value so that the customer at least on a surface level FEELS like he is getting a good deal.

GW has failed from a marketing standpoint.

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
I don't think you know what 'marketing' means.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And to be fair, neither do GW, but hey ho.

Hold on, ill bring out my Advertising Textbook: Marketing- is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerins that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large.

What GW is doing is in itself bad marketing. They want to deliver on a product, what product is it? An update to a book people already own. What GW has to do is twofold, get people who do not own an Astra Militarum army to buy one, and to get those who already own one to buy the new book and new models it comes with.

This idea might work for people who do not have an army already, but for those who do, you effectively took out a whole bunch of units people DID care about. This is not effective marketing. If you were to take something out, you would have to put something back in of equal value so that the customer at least on a surface level FEELS like he is getting a good deal.
GW has failed from a marketing standpoint.

So by your perspective they should hope to stay open by codex sales?

So the way I'm reading that Tank Commander rule, it sounds like you don't actually get more tanks in your list than normal? It reads like the Commander himself is HQ but the tank squadron he's in isn't HQ until the game actually starts. So the max Leman Russes in a list is still 9 as opposed to like 15. Is that how everyone else read that rule?

Anyway, I'm looking forward to having my traitor guard tank army led by actual tank commanders.

The blob is dead. 6th edition belongs to the conscripts

50 strong power blob with 5 power axes=300 points.
50 conscripts with 3 priests 1 power axe and 2 power mauls=270 points

At this point the conscripts are fearless and the blob absolutely needs an IC with ATSKNF or ld10 stubborn. The conscripts can really use another character to help ld7 priests pass their leadership tests for their battle hymns. A ld9 commissar in the new book is 25 + 15 for a power axe, but for the purpose of the math hammer being used we’ll just say it’s the same allied ld10 inquisitor or space marine HQ that the old codex would use for the blob and call both squads even Steven on leadership. As far as the priests passing tests. Odds of passing 3 out of 3 tests=57% Odds of a priest failing a single ld10 test=83% Odds of failing 2 out of 2 is 2.9% Odds of failing all 3 is less than 0.5% For simplicity’s take I’m going to assume 1 out of the 3 priests fails their test. Shred will be the first power activated. 2nd power will be reroll armor saves unless fighting a MC then it would be smash on a single priest.

Now let’s get down to the nitty gritty of CC. For simplicity’s sake I’m going to calculate to total killing power of the entire blob or conscripts unit even though we all know the entire thing will not get into cc and often a meh charge will only get 50% of the killing power into cc.

Against T4 MEQ with the blob charging
Blob has 90 attacks, 45 hit, 15 wound, 5 marines die
Blob’s power axes 20 attacks, 10 hit, 5 marines die
Blob’s total=10 marines
Conscripts 100 attacks, 75 hit, 41.6 wound, 13.888 die
Power axe priest 4 attacks, 3 hit, 2.25 dead marines
Power mauls 8 attacks, 6 hits, 5.333 wounds, 1.77 dead marines
Conscript’s total=17.9 dead marines

Dakka of the blob is 50% better, but the actual conscripts are ½ the price as the 3 IC can detach from the squad if it becomes too mauled.

The blob can add 5 plasma guns, but that’s the same cost as 25 more conscripts.

Conscripts are WS2 they die to easy=false mathematical assumption. It only means WS3 targets hit them on a 3+, and even then the math hammer goes as follows.
S3 WS3 versus blob ½ the attacks hit ½ wound 2/3 fail armor test=16.66% chance per attack to kill
S3 WS3 versus conscripts 2/3 hit ½ wound 4/9 fail armor test=14.8% chance per attack to kill
Final verdict: Conscripts are more durable against all opponents except WS3 MC and their attacks are wasted on 3 point conscripts.

Conscripts are WS2, but they still hit WS4 on a 4+ WS3 only matters when fighting WS3 targets which are usually squishy in CC anyways, or when fighting WS5 targets. How much worse does the conscripts do against a WS5 target?
Against Khorne Berserkers WS5
Power blob has same result as regular MEQ 10 dead zerkers
Conscripts 100 swings, 55.5 hits, 30.86 wounds, 10.28 dead berserkers. Power weapons still hit on a 4+ so the total is 14.3 dead berserkers to the blob’s 10.

The blob is dead. 6th edition belongs to the conscripts

 Las wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

Lets say i wanted to use Marbo again, would i use the rules from 5th editon? Sure my opponents might just let me, but then where does it stop. Should i just be able to take whatever i want from any codex and stick it in my list? Should i be able to get the best of both codexes and stick them together?

Yes; its a game. The only rules that really exist are those that you and your opponents agree on.

Also, whats stopping you from using counts as? All those artillery models can make perfectly fine demolishers or even wyverns. Its not a perfect solution, but it is definitely a solution.

To me it is a bad solution. I have already come to the conclusion that there are several different segments of people who play Warhammer. There are those who play competitively, and those who play for a more visual and narrative sense. When i look on the tabletop, i want to feel that my army looks like it should be there. I created an army from a polluted death world, and so everything had to build to that ascetic.

My friends see it differently, they see it as more of a competitive environment. I don't blame them, i just disagree with them. Ultimately it takes an agreement from both of us whether i can use a model's rules or not. In their eyes, it is either use one book, but do not combine rules from both.

I'm sure we will get all of the famous guard commanders back in the form of data slates for no other reason beyond money grab.

Playing any other game with a competitive meta and you see a patch list or changes, usually you go "oh that makes sense, this sucks but makes sense."

But GW just changes things like as if they play on a whole different level that didn't exist. Also removing things is just lame considering the obvious amounts of DLC it will just become in the future.

GW really hasn't done much to get me or alot of IG players excited, so I wouldn't be surprised if people just keep playing 5th edition or move on to other things.

 korghan wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
I don't think you know what 'marketing' means.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And to be fair, neither do GW, but hey ho.

Hold on, ill bring out my Advertising Textbook: Marketing- is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerins that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large.

What GW is doing is in itself bad marketing. They want to deliver on a product, what product is it? An update to a book people already own. What GW has to do is twofold, get people who do not own an Astra Militarum army to buy one, and to get those who already own one to buy the new book and new models it comes with.

This idea might work for people who do not have an army already, but for those who do, you effectively took out a whole bunch of units people DID care about. This is not effective marketing. If you were to take something out, you would have to put something back in of equal value so that the customer at least on a surface level FEELS like he is getting a good deal.
GW has failed from a marketing standpoint.

So by your perspective they should hope to stay open by codex sales?

One of Marketings biggest purposes is to keep customers. The best thing a brand can have is Brand Loyalty. If a person is going to go out and drop down his hard earned cash on a product, the company wants to know for sure that person is spending it on his brand.

GW is playing with the welfare of it's loyal customers. That is stupid marketing. They are uncommunicative and keep their design decisions close to their chest. It is not only codex sales, it is having a person buy a GW product, and have them keep buying GW products.

I have been loyal for a few years now, but they have strained my and many other peoples relationship with their actions.

I learned this gak in Advertising class at a community college, what the feth is GW actively thinking?

 BunkerBob wrote:
I'm sure we will get all of the famous guard commanders back in the form of data slates for no other reason beyond money grab.

Wouldn't be shocked by this... Maybe Major Koran and the Iron saint will show up.... He love orc battle wagons...

Because GW is trying to turn a profit by doing things that are questionable or abusive. Nerfs notwithstanding how would you feel if you were charged premium prices for second rate product?
And we have some evidence of this by going with the images posted on other places that GW is doing this. Not only rules are messy but in some places are unplayable; in the Italian dex HWT don't have a price and the translation appears to be rushed and incorrect, in the Spanish one mistranslations and formating errors are all over the place (don't wanna know what's going to happen when the Japanese dex arrives). Still GW plans to charge me full price for a defective product and according to a spanish shopowner GW doesn't allow them to return books???

What the Heck GW?

M.

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 korghan wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
I don't think you know what 'marketing' means.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And to be fair, neither do GW, but hey ho.

Hold on, ill bring out my Advertising Textbook: Marketing- is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerins that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large.

What GW is doing is in itself bad marketing. They want to deliver on a product, what product is it? An update to a book people already own. What GW has to do is twofold, get people who do not own an Astra Militarum army to buy one, and to get those who already own one to buy the new book and new models it comes with.

This idea might work for people who do not have an army already, but for those who do, you effectively took out a whole bunch of units people DID care about. This is not effective marketing. If you were to take something out, you would have to put something back in of equal value so that the customer at least on a surface level FEELS like he is getting a good deal.
GW has failed from a marketing standpoint.

So by your perspective they should hope to stay open by codex sales?

One of Marketings biggest purposes is to keep customers. The best thing a brand can have is Brand Loyalty. If a person is going to go out and drop down his hard earned cash on a product, the company wants to know for sure that person is spending it on his brand.

GW is playing with the welfare of it's loyal customers. That is stupid marketing. They are uncommunicative and keep their design decisions close to their chest. It is not only codex sales, it is having a person buy a GW product, and have them keep buying GW products.

I have been loyal for a few years now, but they have strained my and many other peoples relationship with their actions.

I learned this gak in Advertising class at a community college, what the feth is GW actively thinking?

I agree with you. GW does need to maintain loyalty. But you can't shove profit margins of a public company by the wayside to maintain that loyalty. I also agree that it's downright crappy to have to rebuild an awesome army because of a codex update. I'm not a fan of it either. The difference is that I understand why they are doing this. The last few quarterly reviews have not been good. I love this damn game and I have since 4th. I plan on playing well past 9th. The only way for that to continue is that GW turns a profit. If someone knows of a forum where people complain about having to buy a PS4 or XboxOne to play new games point me to it. It's the same beast. We have to pay to play.

 korghan wrote:
It would be like a game developer putting out free DLC's because they "care about their client base".

But that's exactly what they used to do, before they became obsessed with trying to extract every possible dollar out of the annual version of Call of Battlefield or SportsBall instead of innovating and producing new games. Companies would release add-on bits for free, which improved customer loyalty and made the game a more appealing product. GW is in the same position: if they weren't a company full of short-sighted incompetents they could focus on making the best possible rules, and let the models sell themselves. Under that kind of policy buying, say, a Chimera kit is appealing because I know it will have high-quality rules forever and any problems will be fixed. If, instead, you have GW's buff/nerf cycle then the Chimera becomes a less appealing purchase because I have no confidence that it will be useful for more than a year or two before I have to buy something else instead. In fact, I might even just quit playing GW games entirely and give my money to a company that cares more about good rules than sacrificing quality to make a quick sale. So GW makes some extra money by facing veterans to re-buy their armies, but loses potential sales from people who get tired of the whole thing and stop buying.

And when you're analyzing GW's decisions here remember that most of GW's sales are to new players who don't own any models yet and will be buying new stuff either way. If anything the buff/nerf cycle hurts GW's sales there since ragequitting veterans flood the ebay market with cheap models instead of keeping them forever.

IG be like what the F...

Hopefully the new IG have some weapons to deal with these while still being able to capture objectives.

 Mr.Omega wrote:

 PuddlePirate wrote:
Any worrd on a possible point reduction to the Russ tanks?

An anonymous source on Faeit is saying no change except for a price increase on the Demolisher, the Spanish dude who's given many leaks recently has said a price range of 120-170 points.

It remains to be seen, really.

I'll just keep hoping the Spainiard is correct

 Mr.Omega wrote:
The previous Hydra was written for 5th, and quite rightly GW has realised that giving the new Hydra ignores jink is a tad over the line. There is a fallacy here and with everyone else in this thread that the previous Codex's good units are always done right - the only exception is the Vendetta because of how blatant that it is, and still people have whined in here about it being nerfed.

I'll just ignore the rest of your post, because this is all that matters: your claim that the current Hydra is overpowered is laughably wrong. Hydras are already considered a weak choice that hardly anyone uses, and the new rules make them indisputably worse. The only reason to nerf them is if you're an incompetent moron who thinks that the game should be balanced for 6th edition based on what happened in early 5th edition. Unfortunately that kind of stupidity seems to be mandatory for working at GW...

 Stus67 wrote:


Really I just don't get end is nigh attitude that so many people have in this thread. With the amount of crying here you'd think some GW employes literally went into their backyard and strangled their dog to death in broad daylight in front of their kids or something,

Yeah fairy-nuff. Point taken and agreed with, I think that often dakka is too full of endless misery and needless crying as well, I'm just saying that this is something I do believe that some of the whinging is perfectly valid. I particularly like some of the models that were dropped, so like Irish said, I sympathize. If they removed several of the main SM characters and some of the most popular vehicles, I would be pissed.

If you want to retain credibility during these debates, as far as I see it, you need to weigh all the arguments and decide every issue on its merits, I have been called a "white knight" plenty of times by the needless haters, and now It seems I'm getting called a "hater" I think everyone could do with taking a leaf out of my book, and rather than choosing a camp and sticking with it incessantly, discussed each issue on its merits.

And while I am definitely not an endless whiner and I don't think the wheels have completely fallen off the GW wagon, many of the companies decisions of late have irritated me, and this is another one. As I said, plenty of the complaints you see on here are childish and involve throwing the baby out with the bathwater, all I am saying is that I don't for a second think that complaining about plenty of character and vehicle staples from a well known codex is one of them.

I also disagree with gypping people for things that were always part of the rulebook.

Harker and Straken for example, are two of my favorite IG minis, if they whip them out only to charge $10 for a 30 page data-slate in a month, I reckon it is fair to say that is taking the slash too. Its like dropping Lysander and Pedro from my codex and then charging me extra $20 for a "Dorns Sons" supplement a month later.

I just feel that if these things have always been a staple of the codex, they are kicking the arse out of demanding more purchases from people.

 korghan wrote:

GW is a retail company. It's no different than a food chain or an electronics store. The only way to stay open is to sell things. Expecting them to put out a codex that strengthens everything people already own is ludicrous. It would be like a game developer putting out free DLC's because they "care about their client base". What sense would that make? None.

And by contrast, expecting people to buy into a system with no give and take is equally nonsensical.

At some point a company has to meet you in the middle or there's no business transaction.

 korghan wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 korghan wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
I don't think you know what 'marketing' means.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And to be fair, neither do GW, but hey ho.

Hold on, ill bring out my Advertising Textbook: Marketing- is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerins that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large.

What GW is doing is in itself bad marketing. They want to deliver on a product, what product is it? An update to a book people already own. What GW has to do is twofold, get people who do not own an Astra Militarum army to buy one, and to get those who already own one to buy the new book and new models it comes with.

This idea might work for people who do not have an army already, but for those who do, you effectively took out a whole bunch of units people DID care about. This is not effective marketing. If you were to take something out, you would have to put something back in of equal value so that the customer at least on a surface level FEELS like he is getting a good deal.
GW has failed from a marketing standpoint.

So by your perspective they should hope to stay open by codex sales?

One of Marketings biggest purposes is to keep customers. The best thing a brand can have is Brand Loyalty. If a person is going to go out and drop down his hard earned cash on a product, the company wants to know for sure that person is spending it on his brand.

GW is playing with the welfare of it's loyal customers. That is stupid marketing. They are uncommunicative and keep their design decisions close to their chest. It is not only codex sales, it is having a person buy a GW product, and have them keep buying GW products.

I have been loyal for a few years now, but they have strained my and many other peoples relationship with their actions.

I learned this gak in Advertising class at a community college, what the feth is GW actively thinking?

I agree with you. GW does need to maintain loyalty. But you can't shove profit margins of a public company by the wayside to maintain that loyalty. I also agree that it's downright crappy to have to rebuild an awesome army because of a codex update. I'm not a fan of it either. The difference is that I understand why they are doing this. The last few quarterly reviews have not been good. I love this damn game and I have since 4th. I plan on playing well past 9th. The only way for that to continue is that GW turns a profit. If someone knows of a forum where people complain about having to buy a PS4 or XboxOne to play new games point me to it. It's the same beast. We have to pay to play.

I understand what you are getting at, completely. But this is coming from a Marketing perspective. When it comes down to it, an individual sale is worthless. It is only with repeat business from consistent customers that companies as big as GW actually make money.

There is the concept of IMC, Integrated Marketing Communications. Bacially, it is designed to develop relationship with it's customers. To use the store Target as an example, everything in the store is dedicated to the concept and slogan of "Expect more, Pay less." You get really interesting items you might not see at a place like Walmart for considerably low prices.

What does GW try to do with it's IMC? I have been trying to decipher this and i can't come up with a good picture. Who does GW market to? This hobby is very inclusive. There is only a select group of people who can and would want to play it. Their prices are high enough to only attract more wealthy people, meanwhile many of the people who should be playing a game like this are supposed to be teens to young adults. That is what the rule of cool universe really applys to, right?

It's interesting you point out Playstation and Xbox, think of how the console wars basically did free advertising for Sony and Microsoft. People screaming at eachother why one is better than the other only helped in getting more specialized positioning in what is essentially the same market. There is no effective difference between consoles when it all comes down to it, only that one has a select group of customers who identify as "Xbox" or "Playstation."

Schadenfreude: I think blobs still have a place even with dirt cheap Conscripts.

A.) They can take a single priest for the re-rolls. They don't need multiple prayers as badly to be good at fighting, but just getting Hatred really ups their killing power.

B.) Sergeants can protect the Priests from challenges.

C.) Shooting is a lot better. I know you said this, but it matters, and so it's a reason to take blobs. Especially since you're much more likely to bring all your shooting to bear more often than all your close-combat power.

D.) Sergeants can take Meltabombs (presumably)

Also, the blob's killing power is more concentrated, but also vulnerable, so it's a wash.

I think the close-combat blob isn't what you really want, though. You make a shooty blob that beats down the survivors in close combat.

Trade in your 5 power weapons (75 points) and some change for 5 Meltabombs and a divination Inquisitor. You put out a wall of light, followed up by a horrific stand and shoot. You don't need to be better at combat against whatever is left after the lasgun fusillade. Meltabombs mean you can't get bogged down in close combat by MCs and walkers. Massed S3 re-rolled to hit means anything you can hurt will be quickly reduced. If you have the points, a priest for getting Shred is just icing on the cake.

That being said, rad grenade inquisitor + Smashing Eviscerator armed Priest = Instakilling T6 models. Stupid but awesome.

To come with the DLC game companies used to put out, they sometime charged you for them, called an 'expansion', which was better, as long/longer and with new extras than the original game.

so that would be like GW releasing the Codex, then coming out with another book witha crapload of options like actual doctrines (not just orders being re branded for the Storm Troopers), new vehicles, new troops, new characters, all of course, for a fraction of the price the codex costed you.

Then you'd wake up and had to go to work realizing that it was just some dream.

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 korghan wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 korghan wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
I don't think you know what 'marketing' means.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And to be fair, neither do GW, but hey ho.

Hold on, ill bring out my Advertising Textbook: Marketing- is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerins that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large.

What GW is doing is in itself bad marketing. They want to deliver on a product, what product is it? An update to a book people already own. What GW has to do is twofold, get people who do not own an Astra Militarum army to buy one, and to get those who already own one to buy the new book and new models it comes with.

This idea might work for people who do not have an army already, but for those who do, you effectively took out a whole bunch of units people DID care about. This is not effective marketing. If you were to take something out, you would have to put something back in of equal value so that the customer at least on a surface level FEELS like he is getting a good deal.
GW has failed from a marketing standpoint.

So by your perspective they should hope to stay open by codex sales?

One of Marketings biggest purposes is to keep customers. The best thing a brand can have is Brand Loyalty. If a person is going to go out and drop down his hard earned cash on a product, the company wants to know for sure that person is spending it on his brand.

GW is playing with the welfare of it's loyal customers. That is stupid marketing. They are uncommunicative and keep their design decisions close to their chest. It is not only codex sales, it is having a person buy a GW product, and have them keep buying GW products.

I have been loyal for a few years now, but they have strained my and many other peoples relationship with their actions.

I learned this gak in Advertising class at a community college, what the feth is GW actively thinking?

I agree with you. GW does need to maintain loyalty. But you can't shove profit margins of a public company by the wayside to maintain that loyalty. I also agree that it's downright crappy to have to rebuild an awesome army because of a codex update. I'm not a fan of it either. The difference is that I understand why they are doing this. The last few quarterly reviews have not been good. I love this damn game and I have since 4th. I plan on playing well past 9th. The only way for that to continue is that GW turns a profit. If someone knows of a forum where people complain about having to buy a PS4 or XboxOne to play new games point me to it. It's the same beast. We have to pay to play.

I understand what you are getting at, completely. But this is coming from a Marketing perspective. When it comes down to it, an individual sale is worthless. It is only with repeat business from consistent customers that companies as big as GW actually make money.

There is the concept of IMC, Integrated Marketing Communications. Bacially, it is designed to develop relationship with it's customers. To use the store Target as an example, everything in the store is dedicated to the concept and slogan of "Expect more, Pay less." You get really interesting items you might not see at a place like Walmart for considerably low prices.

What does GW try to do with it's IMC? I have been trying to decipher this and i can't come up with a good picture. Who does GW market to? This hobby is very inclusive. There is only a select group of people who can and would want to play it. Their prices are high enough to only attract more wealthy people, meanwhile many of the people who should be playing a game like this are supposed to be teens to young adults. That is what the rule of cool universe really applys to, right?

It's interesting you point out Playstation and Xbox, think of how the console wars basically did free advertising for Sony and Microsoft. People screaming at eachother why one is better than the other only helped in getting more specialized positioning in what is essentially the same market. There is no effective difference between consoles when it all comes down to it, only that one has a select group of customers who identify as "Xbox" or "Playstation."

You're right there. But I actually wish this model was in place when I first started. Back in late 4th/early 5th I combed the internet for tips on how to start and it was usually only net lists. Now we have a ridiculous amount of codecies/dataslates/minidexes. The new comer can tailor his army just about any way he/she wants to. To those that have been here for a while it seems offensive. But I think it is actually made this way to attract new gamers. I've seen a dozen new comers at my local store in the past month that just wanted to pick the "old guys" brains. I think we are in the middle of a grand transition. Nobody likes change but I think that a year from now we can look back and laugh. Hell I've dumped more money into this hobby than I have my dang car and I have no regrets. As far as GW marketing.. yea.. its atrocious. no arguments there! But I really feel like a lot of the internet sentiment leans way too towards the sky is falling. Again, the new models look awesome (aside from the taurox). The new orders for MT also look great. I think if we just hold on it'll all be ok.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Inquisitor Jex wrote:
To come with the DLC game companies used to put out, they sometime charged you for them, called an 'expansion', which was better, as long/longer and with new extras than the original game.

so that would be like GW releasing the Codex, then coming out with another book witha crapload of options like actual doctrines (not just orders being re branded for the Storm Troopers), new vehicles, new troops, new characters, all of course, for a fraction of the price the codex costed you.

Then you'd wake up and had to go to work realizing that it was just some dream.

ok you've got me there!

 korghan wrote:

 Miguelsan wrote:
You are right, things change and we have to adapt but for some this feels more like:

Me: You need new brakes.
Customer: But I just bought tires a month ago! Can't you do them for free?!
Me: No... that's not how companies stay open. BTW I just went ahead and slashed the back tires.

(and I agree with that feeling even if personally I'm not that concerned for my IG army)
M.

GW is a retail company. It's no different than a food chain or an electronics store. The only way to stay open is to sell things. Expecting them to put out a codex that strengthens everything people already own is ludicrous. It would be like a game developer putting out free DLC's because they "care about their client base". What sense would that make? None. The 6th edition codices all (for the most part) follow this model. I have been on the fence about starting an IG army. With the rumors for this codex I'm sold. The things that did get nerfed honestly needed them. Anyone that says the Vendetta only needed a moderate price increase is naive at best. It was the most under priced unit in the game (barring grey hunters). All of the good things are still there. Guard are supposed to be about massed everyday joes get thrown through the meat grinder. That aspect has only gotten better. How about massed tank formations? Yep. With the introduction of tank HQ's that got better too. Lets look at the Chimera for a moment. Yea.. it has av10 side armor.. but 55 points for it was pretty darn cheap. I'm honestly thrilled about the new orders. They are something that other armies just don't get. Sure, we all would've loved regimental doctrines too but we cant have it all. I think this codex will be that diamond in the rough. As far as special characters go, I am sad to see Marbo go. I've used an allied detachment just to get him. But he was far from competitive. The important ones are still there. So why don't we all just relax and wait for the thing to actually drop before we decry GW for actually trying to turn a profit to stay in business?

There are other retail models out there that do not feel the need to reinvent the wheel with each cycle in order to get you to buy new things. I play warmachine/hordes, and I am an active participant on their forums. Rarely do you see people threatening to "rage quit" when a new release cycle starts. They are happy to adapt and move on. GW seems to be actively courting people to be rage quitting by creating unbalanced retail plans. I myself plan on doing it within the week with the primary hope of being able to purchase more PP models. I'll even post my barter town link here for those calling my "bluff". Hopefully you'll buy my Chimera's.

GWs plan with the IG is flawed, Cutting a pile of models supported by a company that they own is insane. I'd be pissed if I had ever bought those medusa's that I had meant to. Frankly I'm pissed that I would have to buy several more boxes of figures to keep my army remotely competitive, since vets can only take two specials. PP releases add to an army and it's flexibility, and does not subtract and require new investments in order to even play the game. You can argue "hey just play fifth", but I play with a really cool group., and they are even doing full group escalation leagues that require current rules. Should I have to request from the entire group yo make an exception just got me? Why does GW need to change things? Why don't they just add on to current rules to create new excitement? I'd be happy to buy cool new *#}*!, but you have to release entire new rule books, and reinvent every fricken unit unit!

The only reason to change primary rules is to adjust balance issues, and we all know that they sure as hell are not balancing things. Hell i don't even play or care about a real tournament scene to even encourage balance! I even say this as someone who enjoys painting cool ass miniatures over playing the game. If you think this is BS go to a major CON like gencon, Adepticon, or templecon and compare the type of people playing each of the major games. It might make you rethink your allegiances to faceless corporations.

Frankly with the incivility of people over the last 150+ pages of this thread (although I skipped the last thirty pages) I wonder where the hell the MODs are? Why isn't it ok to criticize GW. Are all these people employees of the company? Is this their new marketing plan to win over Vet players? Shame them into buying crappy models? WTF?

If you wish to flame me you should probably PM me, since I don't plan on scrolling through ten pages of posts a second time to read the vindictive reply's to my opinion. Please keep giving GW your money, because you will be even more unhappy when the company does a crash and burn and you are left with nothing save the knowledge that your hard earned cash is in investor's pockets. I suppose that you can keep playing the current edition until old age when you enter hospice.

 Tomb King wrote:
Italian translations so bare with me. These are from what appears to be the official codex that was posted in Italian a few pages ago.

Warlord traits:

1. Grand strategy (primary detachment only) I.E. D3 units get this special rule.


2. old grudges- during deployment, before you deploy the infiltrators and scouts, choose a codex warhammer 40k. The General and his unit have a special rule favored enemy against all enemy units chosen from the codex.


3. iron discipline- units from Codex: AM within 12 "of the general dont take morale when they suffer losses of 25% or more.


4. unrelenting determination- General and its units have the Unbreakable special rule.


5. booming voice- The General rule Voice of the special command. If you already possess it, then you can issue orders to units of the codex: AM that are within 18 "of him.


6. Master of the command- The General rule Voice of the special command. If it already has, then he can give an additional order each round.


Not sure if anyone did it already and it wasnt easy... lol a few typo's i am sure but the general knowledge is there... hope you enjoy.

Now lets get down to the nitty gritty, what special characters get what warlord traits? I would like to think these awesome awesome traits combined with characters would be impressive indeed.

1. Creeeeeedd! Obviously, he already had this ability before
2. I will assume Yarrick, since he really really hates Orks.
3. Not sure about this one, I would almost assume it would belong to something like DKOK or a Mordian (possibly a new character, or possibly pask, who knows?!)
4. Straken, I keep hearing hes gone, but this one makes me think harker all the way. (if its fearless)
5. while this one fluff wise sounds like something Kell could do, 5 and 6 sound be the extra bits meant for generic commanders only.

edited for Straken instead of Harker, my bad

 korghan wrote:


GW is a retail company. It's no different than a food chain or an electronics store. The only way to stay open is to sell things. Expecting them to put out a codex that strengthens everything people already own is ludicrous. It would be like a game developer putting out free DLC's because they "care about their client base". What sense would that make? None. The 6th edition codices all (for the most part) follow this model. I have been on the fence about starting an IG army. With the rumors for this codex I'm sold.

GW is far from the same as a random food chain or electronics store or most retail stores. They CONTROL the production of, the distribution of and the design of 100% of their products. Additionally, they have a player base that requires THEIR products and for the most part have to go through them to those products (Yeah you got 3rd party companies, but honestly they're a super small piece of the pie). Furthermore, GW has many independent stores which sell their product without being a franchise or owned by GW (Local stores), which allows them to be said distributor of the product.

Very few companies operate in such a manner (IE Apple) and it's pretty absurd how bad GW is at so many elements despite having complete operational control over all aspects of the hobby.

 korghan wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 korghan wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 korghan wrote:

 IrishWristwatch wrote:

 plastictrees wrote:
I don't think you know what 'marketing' means.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And to be fair, neither do GW, but hey ho.

Hold on, ill bring out my Advertising Textbook: Marketing- is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerins that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large.

What GW is doing is in itself bad marketing. They want to deliver on a product, what product is it? An update to a book people already own. What GW has to do is twofold, get people who do not own an Astra Militarum army to buy one, and to get those who already own one to buy the new book and new models it comes with.

This idea might work for people who do not have an army already, but for those who do, you effectively took out a whole bunch of units people DID care about. This is not effective marketing. If you were to take something out, you would have to put something back in of equal value so that the customer at least on a surface level FEELS like he is getting a good deal.
GW has failed from a marketing standpoint.

So by your perspective they should hope to stay open by codex sales?

One of Marketings biggest purposes is to keep customers. The best thing a brand can have is Brand Loyalty. If a person is going to go out and drop down his hard earned cash on a product, the company wants to know for sure that person is spending it on his brand.

GW is playing with the welfare of it's loyal customers. That is stupid marketing. They are uncommunicative and keep their design decisions close to their chest. It is not only codex sales, it is having a person buy a GW product, and have them keep buying GW products.

I have been loyal for a few years now, but they have strained my and many other peoples relationship with their actions.

I learned this gak in Advertising class at a community college, what the feth is GW actively thinking?

I agree with you. GW does need to maintain loyalty. But you can't shove profit margins of a public company by the wayside to maintain that loyalty. I also agree that it's downright crappy to have to rebuild an awesome army because of a codex update. I'm not a fan of it either. The difference is that I understand why they are doing this. The last few quarterly reviews have not been good. I love this damn game and I have since 4th. I plan on playing well past 9th. The only way for that to continue is that GW turns a profit. If someone knows of a forum where people complain about having to buy a PS4 or XboxOne to play new games point me to it. It's the same beast. We have to pay to play.

I understand what you are getting at, completely. But this is coming from a Marketing perspective. When it comes down to it, an individual sale is worthless. It is only with repeat business from consistent customers that companies as big as GW actually make money.

There is the concept of IMC, Integrated Marketing Communications. Bacially, it is designed to develop relationship with it's customers. To use the store Target as an example, everything in the store is dedicated to the concept and slogan of "Expect more, Pay less." You get really interesting items you might not see at a place like Walmart for considerably low prices.

What does GW try to do with it's IMC? I have been trying to decipher this and i can't come up with a good picture. Who does GW market to? This hobby is very inclusive. There is only a select group of people who can and would want to play it. Their prices are high enough to only attract more wealthy people, meanwhile many of the people who should be playing a game like this are supposed to be teens to young adults. That is what the rule of cool universe really applys to, right?

It's interesting you point out Playstation and Xbox, think of how the console wars basically did free advertising for Sony and Microsoft. People screaming at eachother why one is better than the other only helped in getting more specialized positioning in what is essentially the same market. There is no effective difference between consoles when it all comes down to it, only that one has a select group of customers who identify as "Xbox" or "Playstation."

You're right there. But I actually wish this model was in place when I first started. Back in late 4th/early 5th I combed the internet for tips on how to start and it was usually only net lists. Now we have a ridiculous amount of codecies/dataslates/minidexes. The new comer can tailor his army just about any way he/she wants to. To those that have been here for a while it seems offensive. But I think it is actually made this way to attract new gamers. I've seen a dozen new comers at my local store in the past month that just wanted to pick the "old guys" brains. I think we are in the middle of a grand transition. Nobody likes change but I think that a year from now we can look back and laugh. Hell I've dumped more money into this hobby than I have my dang car and I have no regrets. As far as GW marketing.. yea.. its atrocious. no arguments there! But I really feel like a lot of the internet sentiment leans way too towards the sky is falling. Again, the new models look awesome (aside from the taurox). The new orders for MT also look great. I think if we just hold on it'll all be ok.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Inquisitor Jex wrote:
To come with the DLC game companies used to put out, they sometime charged you for them, called an 'expansion', which was better, as long/longer and with new extras than the original game.

so that would be like GW releasing the Codex, then coming out with another book witha crapload of options like actual doctrines (not just orders being re branded for the Storm Troopers), new vehicles, new troops, new characters, all of course, for a fraction of the price the codex costed you.

Then you'd wake up and had to go to work realizing that it was just some dream.

ok you've got me there!

I guess that is a way to think about it. I'm so glad to have a civilized discussion about this really. Recently i have been going to a store that has opened much more locally. It is situated right next to a local high school, so suddenly i am seeing much more young people playing the game.

There was a game going on with SOB vs. Nids. I looked over on their table and saw that the guy was using Dinosaur toys on cardboard bases to represent things like Carnifexes. Basically he did not want to spend mutliple 50 bucks to get something that should be core to an army.

I think the best thing GW could do is adjust the prices of it's products. The people who should be buying into the hobby are having a hard time especially if they are coming into it fresh. I only started a few years ago when i was in high school. All the money for it came out of my own pocket. It still makes me cringe.

 Mr.Omega wrote:
On average, just to give a few examples of why, a unit of 10 Rough Riders beats the following on a charge:

Too bad you'll never successfully charge with a unit of 10 rough riders. We've known for years that rough riders slaughter anything they charge as long as it isn't wearing terminator armor, the problem is delivering them to a target without getting the whole squad of T3/no-save guardsmen killed. They were a decent counter-charge unit in 5th when you could assault out of reserve, but now you have to spend at least one turn on the table getting shot to death before you can charge. People rarely use them now for very good reasons, and the new rules don't make them better in any relevant way.

This does not factor the extra attack they have with the new Dex either

What extra attack? They have one attack base in the new codex, and lances are now specialist weapons. In fact, because of the specialist weapon thing they lose an attack compared to what they have now.

To assume that you can make 100% of of your customer base happy is kind of silly. I'm not a GW fan boy but it seems that way too many people are happy with complaining. Things aren't so bad!

 IrishWristwatch wrote:


I think the best thing GW could do is adjust the prices of it's products. The people who should be buying into the hobby are having a hard time especially if they are coming into it fresh. I only started a few years ago when i was in high school. All the money for it came out of my own pocket. It still makes me cringe.

A nice sentiment..but we both know that GW's logic means that lowering prices equals less profit rather than selling more and making a profit.

This is IG thread. Not a study in economics. Start your own thread instead of hijacking this one please.

 korghan wrote:
To assume that you can make 100% of of your customer base happy is kind of silly.

Nobody is expecting that. We're just expecting GW to make most of its customers happy. Right now they aren't even coming close to that. If you ignore the kids buying space marines because they're SO COOL and look at older players with higher standards there are a lot of very unhappy customers, and a lot more than aren't exactly thrilled with what they're getting but just haven't decided to ragequit yet. GW's position here seems to be "who cares if we make 90% of our customers unhappy tomorrow as long as we sell an extra 5% today".

Things aren't so bad!

What exactly isn't bad? The rules are garbage, the models are inconsistent, the prices are absurd, and GW doesn't seem to have any plan for the future beyond the next financial report. I honestly can't see anything in this release that should be praised.

I'm honestly just a bit heartbroken that there is no plastic medusa on the way. On top of that it's looking like that rumour of FW in store won't be happening. :(

 Zuul wrote:
I'm honestly just a bit heartbroken that there is no plastic medusa on the way. On top of that it's looking like that rumour of FW in store won't be happening. :(

Uh what are you talking about.. a "medusa"? I didn't realize GW was in the business of greek mythology. Is that a homebrew IG vehicle or something? Me..du..sa? I don't understand. You must mean a WYVERN, yes that's the vehicle you want to buy.

Biophysical wrote:
Schadenfreude: I think blobs still have a place even with dirt cheap Conscripts.

A.) They can take a single priest for the re-rolls. They don't need multiple prayers as badly to be good at fighting, but just getting Hatred really ups their killing power.

B.) Sergeants can protect the Priests from challenges.

C.) Shooting is a lot better. I know you said this, but it matters, and so it's a reason to take blobs. Especially since you're much more likely to bring all your shooting to bear more often than all your close-combat power.

D.) Sergeants can take Meltabombs (presumably)

Also, the blob's killing power is more concentrated, but also vulnerable, so it's a wash.

I think the close-combat blob isn't what you really want, though. You make a shooty blob that beats down the survivors in close combat.

Trade in your 5 power weapons (75 points) and some change for 5 Meltabombs and a divination Inquisitor. You put out a wall of light, followed up by a horrific stand and shoot. You don't need to be better at combat against whatever is left after the lasgun fusillade. Meltabombs mean you can't get bogged down in close combat by MCs and walkers. Massed S3 re-rolled to hit means anything you can hurt will be quickly reduced. If you have the points, a priest for getting Shred is just icing on the cake.

That being said, rad grenade inquisitor + Smashing Eviscerator armed Priest = Instakilling T6 models. Stupid but awesome.

Smash and a power maul cap out at S10 with hammer hand. I'm not sure if we get eviscerators, and if we do they would probably want 25 points for one.

A single priest with shred is all a unit really needs to become super deadly

In order to get conscripts an AM player needs to buy 20 guardsmen. I think it will be normal to see some 30 and 40 blobs near a giant conscript unit. Each unit will probably have a single priest for fearless. If a unit gets too shot up the priest can ditch it. If a unit is going to get an uber charge priests can detach and join the unit that's about to charge.

 Kirasu wrote:

 Zuul wrote:
I'm honestly just a bit heartbroken that there is no plastic medusa on the way. On top of that it's looking like that rumour of FW in store won't be happening. :(

Uh what are you talking about.. a "medusa"? I didn't realize GW was in the business of greek mythology. Is that a homebrew IG vehicle or something? Me..du..sa? I don't understand. You must mean a WYVERN, yes that's the vehicle you want to buy.

Unfortunately this is so true in some shops.

M.