Niiai wrote:
Did BOLS have a picture of a grey knight primaris?

No, because they don't exist.

I still think they should keep inquisitors and stuff around, just as an added ally and not an entire force.
Not all inquisitors are super high up so in a game of suspended belief they rule out entirely that they just can be fielded..
I’m leaning on that they don’t have or want to make new models for them and their rules writers can’t come up with anything but garbage for their rules.

The idea that they won't do Imperial Agents because they don't work well on the tabletop is really bizarre. I mean, they realise that's a problem of their own creation, right?

"We can't sell this car. The third wheel on the right side just makes it hard to drive!"

Then remove the 5th wheel and make it work.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
People really don't appreciate how much the chapterhouse lawsuit fethed with GW's head. EVERY design change GW has implemented in the past ten years, every single one, can be traced back to them losing that case.

Exactly! It affected everything.

Even their paint range changed as a result.

If the Formation bonuses cost 3-5 CP, I would still use them depending on what they are. I often don't use all my CP anyway. I hope the bonuses are decent though. It'll make me actually get his book.

From what I read, the Inquisition thing is because they don't think it fits thematically, not mechanically (saw something about a guy with a pistol/rapier not really fitting).

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
If the Formation bonuses cost 3-5 CP, I would still use them depending on what they are. I often don't use all my CP anyway. I hope the bonuses are decent though. It'll make me actually get his book.

I could see them as specific detachments that are -1 to 4 CP depending on the other bonuses, with the bonuses only affecting the units in the detachment.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
If the Formation bonuses cost 3-5 CP, I would still use them depending on what they are. I often don't use all my CP anyway. I hope the bonuses are decent though. It'll make me actually get his book.

I could see them as specific detachments that are -1 to 4 CP depending on the other bonuses, with the bonuses only affecting the units in the detachment.

Fair enough. In which case, I will still be able to run my Battalion and have a neat bonus affect the whole detachment rather than run a Spearhead in addition to the Battalion

Edit: So one of the SM Stratagems is Indomitus Veterans, which makes all Intercessors (but not the rest

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Even their paint range changed as a result.

Yea, I'm still not sure what the point of that was.

My take on the Slanesshi Heraldess..

They took away bewbs because of the chillldrennnn.. what will they think!

But, evidently a sinew harp being plucked out of ye olde human backside is .. OK?

Man.. I like the model and think it evokes the daemon stuff from creepy, but .. I feel mixed messages here.

Audustum wrote:
From what I read, the Inquisition thing is because they don't think it fits thematically, not mechanically (saw something about a guy with a pistol/rapier not really fitting).

Yeah it would clash with the guy that has a cigar/cutlass and monocle/codpiece.

 Breotan wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Even their paint range changed as a result.

Yea, I'm still not sure what the point of that was.

That was due to a change in suppliers I thought, so the paints wouldn't have been exactly the same anyway (and were being reinvented into different types at the same time).

 porkuslime wrote:
My take on the Slanesshi Heraldess..

They took away bewbs because of the chillldrennnn.. what will they think!

But, evidently a sinew harp being plucked out of ye olde human backside is .. OK?

Man.. I like the model and think it evokes the daemon stuff from creepy, but .. I feel mixed messages here.

Violence and Gore are apparently much more acceptable in normal society than nakedness. Course, Fiends ignored that and kept the caterpillar boobs.

It is a really nice model though. Makes me hope the Keeper of Secrets we might see in the future is just as gruesome.

 Breotan wrote:
Yea, I'm still not sure what the point of that was.

The almighty ™.

So if Imperial Agents are not necessary, we can safely remove Priests, Officer of the Fleet and Master of Ordnance?
Really dumb, I love having Inquisitors in the game, such as Greyfax.

 bullyboy wrote:
So if Imperial Agents are not necessary, we can safely remove Priests, Officer of the Fleet and Master of Ordnance?
Really dumb, I love having Inquisitors in the game, such as Greyfax.

Exactly, they should do away with a lot by that logic.. considering they created the issue of garbage rules and no model support themselves lol

 bullyboy wrote:
So if Imperial Agents are not necessary, we can safely remove Priests, Officer of the Fleet and Master of Ordnance?
Really dumb, I love having Inquisitors in the game, such as Greyfax.

You can still use them, just as an Auxillary Detachment. They won't have an overall army bonus though.

 bullyboy wrote:
So if Imperial Agents are not necessary, we can safely remove Priests, Officer of the Fleet and Master of Ordnance?
Really dumb, I love having Inquisitors in the game, such as Greyfax.

I'm not even sure if they meant what they said... a Kill Team Inquisition release would still provide 40k rules to the Inquisition. The real reason why an "Imperial Agents" miscellaneous codex wouldn't work is because it wouldn't fit the format set for the other codexes. A codex isn't just a book that has your units in it anymore, committing to a codex for an army means giving them proper full-faction treatment. A mini-dex intended to slot an Inquisition detachment into a larger Imperium force makes much more sense for how the faction operates within a 2000 point army.

Of course there could still be massive issues with what they're doing; if they do the same thing with Rogue Trader again and make KT: Inquisition about a specific Inquisitor's specific underlings and there are no options to customize your wargear or anything then that'd be wholly unsatisfying for existing Inquisition players, especially since it would mean you could only use that Inquisition detachment once in an army.

People should relax about those formation bonuses. etc... from the campaing book.

Yeah they will be able to be used in matched play... just like the advanced rules of City Fighting, and Planetary Strike, etc... and who the feth uses those in regular matched play games?

I seriously doubt this campaing book will be used regularly for matched play.

 Galas wrote:
People should relax about those formation bonuses. etc... from the campaing book.

Yeah they will be able to be used in matched play... just like the advanced rules of City Fighting, and Planetary Strike, etc... and who the feth uses those in regular matched play games?

I seriously doubt this campaing book will be used regularly for matched play.

Even if they are, it isn't like they don't come with a cost. If you have to give up a Battalion's level of CP to get a bonus to SPECIFIC units, I fail to see how that is going to be overpowered.

The Intercessor one that makes them Veterans, that will be what, +1 Attack? Hard to say that is overpowered.

Apparently the formations come in their own book, this is from page 9 of this thread:

Kdash wrote:
Just been talking to one of the guys that did the new "formations" book.

The book contains detachment "buffs" that you spend CP (i think only 1 but my interpretation of how he said things). You spend the cp on the different stratagems before the game to "buff" 1 detachment. All strats have different names so yoi could use it on more than 1 detachment. Each strat gives access to detachment bonuses like new strats. 1 example is the Stompa detachment that allows you to make 1 stompa a charatcher and give it a new wl trait and relics amongst "other things".

It doesn't sound like all the factions will have "formations" in this book. BUT this is numbered as "Book 1" on the spine, so we can expecy more soon.

At least 6 factions in it. Ad mech, Orks, Eldar, Marines, CSMs and i think GSC. Definite on the first 3 BUT the second 3 are off memory and i cant 100% remember

Hinted at December release.

Setup for "all forms of play".


Looking forward to see what they've done with the book, but also SUPER cautious about OP power creep that is almost 99% given. He did however say that they 100% learnt that free formations in 7th was a bad idea and they've learnt additional things.

Book was written over 12 months ago.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
p.s. i didnt manage to get into ylthe Vigilus seminar due to the queue. Running 11 til 12. I opted to spent an extra 90 mims in bed rather than spend 90 mims standing in the cold.

And from his description they sound insane, 1 CP to give a Stompa a relic and warlord trait is crazy. Hopefully he is wrong and it is more CP, but even so I have a hard time seeing how they can balance stuff like that when they struggle to balance the base game stratagems.

Meh, if you're bringing a stompa you've already lost and no relics or warlord traits are going to change that.

What's insane is the idea someone would use a Stompa in the first place...

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
What's insane is the idea someone would use a Stompa in the first place...

Not as insane as assuming all of the formations will be bad.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
What's insane is the idea someone would use a Stompa in the first place...

Not as insane as assuming all of the formations will be bad.

I never said that. But the Stompa one also has its own Warlord trait table attached to it, so it still might not be bad.

There is a formation for CSM that give +1 to wound to a unit of your choice. Imagine that on something like Havocs or Obliterators.

The Intercessor one says it makes them Veterans. Does that just mean +1 Attack, or does it mean more than that. Time will tell. If they get something weird like +1 WS/ +1 BS, I would use that Stratagem every game.

But I don't think all of them will be pants, but I hope the really good ones come with a really high CP cost

Kind of late to the party but I was really hoping to see some new Primaris terminator equivalent with shields and hammers or something of the sort instead of an Ultramarine character. Judging by the honor guard, I can't wait to see the eventual Primaris replacement for Sternguard.


In terms of how these things have gone in the past, are we expecting any more studio previews on Sunday?

 Red Corsair wrote:

Mr.Church13 wrote:
Unfortunately they seem to be slipping back to that 7E mentality with this formation idiocy.

Honestly I hope groups and tourneys both insta ban them on launch.

Actually it really depends. While I agree this is slippery ground, it is also potentially a way for them to give fluffy builds that are less commonly seen a boost. Take for example an all custode strike team, hot trash ATM from a competitive standpoint and largely do to lacking the CP needed (screening is another issue but chaf is another issue) but if they make a custode battalion formation and lets say it only required 1 HQ and troop but also required say 1 elite or FA (just spitballing) but still granted them a normal battalions CP then maybe folks would take it and stop using the loyal 32.

What killed formations before was giving out free transports and gear, free points. If they keep them restrained and use the focus for fluffy builds I could see it being a good thing. Like a nemesis SF with set requirements that lets them get CP and come in from reserve on turn 1 again. It's definitely something they need to be careful with though and I'd rather they focus on getting the detachments we already have sorted out before adding more of them to the game, but I'll at least keep an open mind for now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I couldn't agree more with GW with their stance on Imperial Agents. The codex should never have existed in the first place and should, at best, be wrapped up in another codex. They have no place on the battlefield. They'll no doubt give them a mini codex like the Gellarpox Infected which should suffice.

They should roll them back into grey knights, it would fix a lot of the problems that book gained since they removed them.

Exactly. It was only specific formations that you could complain about.

Just because Aspect Shrine was stupidly executed doesn't mean my Terminator Annihilation Force formation wasn't unbalanced in some manner. In fact everyone enjoys Chaos Terminators getting use.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

fe40k wrote:

 cole1114 wrote:
Wait, do people really not like that grey knights/deathwatch have their own armies? I can almost get that for GK because they've got a history of being poorly balanced, but the deathwatch models are fantastic and add a lot to the game IMO.

A different color of marine = whole different book
A different color of Xenos = different faction trait, in the same book

That’s the problem - one faction gets 10+ books because they paint their armor a different color; while some factions barely get a single book for all of their differently colored klans.

Imagine if each Klan/Dynasty/HiveFleet/Craftworld got their own book; man, wouldn’t that be something?

It is if you’re a space marine.

Different colors of xenos use the exact same units. World Eaters, Blood Angels, Thousand Sons, etc all have several different units focusing on various other aspects with limitations on selections to boot.

Loyalist Scum really don't have that many unique units that the Angels deserve a whole codex.

Hell a post in the Proposed Rules subforum inspired ways for me to consolidate Wolves. Really, all the chapters just need 2-4 unique units and 3 unique relics and you can call it a day.

Tastyfish wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Even their paint range changed as a result.

Yea, I'm still not sure what the point of that was.

That was due to a change in suppliers I thought, so the paints wouldn't have been exactly the same anyway (and were being reinvented into different types at the same time).

The rumor at the time was that the previous supplier turned out to own the existing paint names.

Quite why GW chose to replace them with the current absurdity rather than something more representative of actual colors is anyone's guess. If they just wanted trademarkable names, they could have still included actual colors in them.

 Carnikang wrote:

 porkuslime wrote:
My take on the Slanesshi Heraldess..

They took away bewbs because of the chillldrennnn.. what will they think!

But, evidently a sinew harp being plucked out of ye olde human backside is .. OK?

Man.. I like the model and think it evokes the daemon stuff from creepy, but .. I feel mixed messages here.

Violence and Gore are apparently much more acceptable in normal society than nakedness. Course, Fiends ignored that and kept the caterpillar boobs.

It is a really nice model though. Makes me hope the Keeper of Secrets we might see in the future is just as gruesome.

As a Slaanesh player it always irritates me that people focus so hard on the boob thing. I don’t mean to be rude but it always comes off as a weird neckbeard fascination. They generally prefer the 3rd edition Diaz models too. Which in my opinion are lamest Slaanesh models. They’re just boring naked elves with boobs. Boring and not representative at all. Slaanesh is in excess in all things. Not just sex and boobs. It is every sensation to its max. The fiends and daemonettes have the boob thing. And a more accurate version of it too. As Slaanesh itsself is supposed to be half male/female and the daemonettes shown that. The harp is pretty much everything I wanted, as a Slaanesh player, from a new herald. The horn size is excessive, the creation of the harp is as well. She’s straddling him in a provocative way. It’s just great. Absolutely nailed it in my opinion.

Why is it a big deal that Calgar's power fists are huge? They have to be big enough that Guilliman was able to wear them, and even in the days of "smaller" primarchs they'd have to be larger than what would be scaled for a normal Space Marine.

 porkuslime wrote:
My take on the Slanesshi Heraldess..

They took away bewbs because of the chillldrennnn.. what will they think!

But, evidently a sinew harp being plucked out of ye olde human backside is .. OK?

Man.. I like the model and think it evokes the daemon stuff from creepy, but .. I feel mixed messages here.

Except they haven’t taken away the boobs. Guessing you haven’t seen the new Fiend models?

Really like the minis that have been previewed. I know Calgar is getting a bit of hate, but I really like him. It’s almost tempted me to start some Ultramarines. Think I will wait a year or two and hope they resolve what they really want to do with the marine product line first though.

I think the Titan looks great, can see why others don’t like it too though. I just really like the armoured sections at the top with areas for guys to come out and man the artillery. Like a genuine walking fortress.

The stars of the show are undoubtedly the GSC models and the Noise Marine though. Gorgeous paint job on the marine too.

 CaptainBetts wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
If you read the reddit post a generous user linked to some pages back, it sounds like they just don't like the idea of certain Imperial Agent type units on a full fledged battlefield. They were specifically referring to Rogue Traders, but they said something along the lines of they make what they think is cool and they don't think dudes/dudettes with rapiers and dueling pistols belong in that context.

That was me who made the massive reddit post. That's pretty much correct - they said models like inquisition, rogue traders, assassins etc. don't fit very well at all. They used Inquisitor Eisenhorn as their main example actually.

That would be Inquisitor Eisenhorn who led a full-scale military invasion of a Xenos world that included several other Inquisitors?

See, this is the problem with their new stance - it's new, and makes no sense because GW themselves have provided plenty of examples in the fiction of it being just utterly wrong. Rogue Traders often have private armies on the scale of Guard regiments, pacts with Marine chapters, access to Xenos mercenaries etc. Inquisitors command armies as a matter of course. Assassins have been part of the 40K system since 2nd edition and have had their own codex several times.

It makes even less sense in the context of the other things they've been pushing forward for 40K recently. GSC are an opponent mostly more suited to local PDF and Arbites, yet the handful of late-stage scenarios where they launch a full blown insurrection war were considered sufficient justification to turn them into a full 40K army. They had to advance the setting's timeline by centuries and rip the galaxy in half to justify giving Custodes their own book, and it still seems vaguely daft that whole armies of them are running around now given their original background and their numbers. 40K is absolutely full of things that, strictly speaking, really "don't belong" in a system that's supposedly representing large scale military conflicts, but which exist within it anyway because they're cool and because the actual tabletop we play on typically limits itself to platoon or company sized forces, at which scale loads of things can comfortably muster a useful fighting force.

Frankly it sounds to me more like whoever's presently making the decisions in the studio just doesn't care for Agents and is casting about trying to find some kind of justification for their animus beyond simple dislike.

The Agents of the Imperium answer simply means that they aren't currently making that 'army'. Of any time since the release of Inquisitor, now seems like the most fitting time for it but hey ho.

 General Kroll wrote:
Really like the minis that have been previewed. I know Calgar is getting a bit of hate, but I really like him. It’s almost tempted me to start some Ultramarines. Think I will wait a year or two and hope they resolve what they really want to do with the marine product line first though.

I think the Titan looks great, can see why others don’t like it too though. I just really like the armoured sections at the top with areas for guys to come out and man the artillery. Like a genuine walking fortress.

The stars of the show are undoubtedly the GSC models and the Noise Marine though. Gorgeous paint job on the marine too.

Yup I love the new titan. People forget that way back in 1st edition AT that there where different classes of Reavers and Warlords and this kind of bridges that gap. I can't wait to get one and I will as soon as I finish off my Reaver.... the boss of me (AKA She who must be obeyed AKA the GF) says I can't get another big toy like that until I finish the last one off..... she knows me WAY to well

 cole1114 wrote:

 Niiai wrote:
Sooooo... does this means now that Calgar has a new body he can duke it out vs the swarmlord again? :-)

Adding +1T/+1W/+1A for him being a primaris in Gravis... no. He does 3.889 damage to the swarmlord versus the swarmlord doing 6.018 on average. Even if Calgar went first and got his average both times, meaning the swarmlord regressed 1S/1A, it would still do 5.046 damage which would kill Calgar. It's an improvement on the swarmlord just outright killing Calgar in one turn like it does now on average, but still not a win.

Or at least I hope that's all true, I don't know how well mathhammer sites do with D6/D3/etc damage.

I was thinking narativly.

 Niiai wrote:

 cole1114 wrote:

 Niiai wrote:
Sooooo... does this means now that Calgar has a new body he can duke it out vs the swarmlord again? :-)

Adding +1T/+1W/+1A for him being a primaris in Gravis... no. He does 3.889 damage to the swarmlord versus the swarmlord doing 6.018 on average. Even if Calgar went first and got his average both times, meaning the swarmlord regressed 1S/1A, it would still do 5.046 damage which would kill Calgar. It's an improvement on the swarmlord just outright killing Calgar in one turn like it does now on average, but still not a win.

Or at least I hope that's all true, I don't know how well mathhammer sites do with D6/D3/etc damage.

I was thinking narativly.

Heroes roll 6s

"Necrons don't seem to be getting much love from GW (as usual). Guess it's time to start a fluffy imperium list, but one I could still field in a game. I could buy those imperial assassin models I really like the look of......"

Why do I even bother. Glad my friend who collects GK might have a usable army tho.

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
"Necrons don't seem to be getting much love from GW (as usual)..

Forgebane.

He's obviously talking about the rules, my dude. Current indications seem to be that Necrons aren't getting any meaningful changes in Chapter Approved, where Grey Knights are.

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
"Necrons don't seem to be getting much love from GW (as usual). Guess it's time to start a fluffy imperium list, but one I could still field in a game. I could buy those imperial assassin models I really like the look of......"

Why do I even bother. Glad my friend who collects GK might have a usable army tho.

Dude you have a pretty full and reasonably modern set of models. You've received a new model this year. Chapter approved hasn't even come out yet. Necrons are far from the most ignored factions.

Danny76 wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
"Necrons don't seem to be getting much love from GW (as usual)..

Forgebane.

We got one model that isn't even sold separately, and that was months ago, prior to the codex. It doesn't address the bloated points cost, lack of synergy and lack of damage output.
Oh yes, I can certainly feel the love.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CassianSol wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
"Necrons don't seem to be getting much love from GW (as usual). Guess it's time to start a fluffy imperium list, but one I could still field in a game. I could buy those imperial assassin models I really like the look of......"

Why do I even bother. Glad my friend who collects GK might have a usable army tho.

Dude you have a pretty full and reasonably modern set of models. You've received a new model this year. Chapter approved hasn't even come out yet. Necrons are far from the most ignored factions.

Actually we don't.
Most of the necron range dates back to 5th edition. Warriors, scarabs, the monolith and destroyers are even older than that.

Reasonably modern - most of the models look very good. Warriors maybe not. You also have a wide array of options. It is a 'complete' army for the most part. You don't have 3rd ed finecast units.

There's no fluff justification for inquisitors and the like not to be present on battlefields (however this is rare, they are not a front line role traditionally) but I always thought it was weird with the rules that they tried to make them powerful and/or melee specialists. They'd be much greater as force multiplayer and support roles. Giving grey knights to hit and to wound roles against a deamonic character of their choice (true name), small fluffy things like that which they can do without tackling the daemon themselves.

Same with other agents, supporting roles would be best.

I was actually annoyed that I somehow acquired models for a faction (assassins, led by an Inquisitor no less!) even less loved than non-Ork xenos, but ok.

I'd be hopeful about the Kill Team expansions, but the restricted nature of them (No customisation, pre-named characters, patrol detachments only) isn't encouraging.

Boxed set expansions.. so far.

Wouldn’t it be great for KT rules to come with them as a faction itself.
The Starstriders are a specific group.
But model and rule release of Inquisition, Rogue Traders, Other Imperial Faction, New Xenos Race..

Perfect way to test things out.

A lot of the answers when they say, no we aren’t doing it, I always take to mean right now rather than never doing.

Before they started work on 40k Primaris stuff I’m sure they would have said the same, I mean before even concept art/writing ideas and all that etc..

(And there will definitely be more Primarchs to come, there is a vague answer about LoW for factions, it says only if this and that about them, not specifically Primarch models, just “Primarch like models” for other factions).

It's less the "we're not doing it" and more the reason they're putting forward as to why they're not doing it. If they just say "nope", then everyone knows there's an unspoken "for now" tacked on the end there, but that they feel the need to actually lay out some (dumb, very very dumb) reasoning as to why is concerning.

 Niiai wrote:
Did BOLS have a picture of a grey knight primaris?

No, just a silver-armored Primaris.

During the presentation, they specifically said GKs will not be getting Primaris.

Saying that imperial agents wont work well on the battlefield is just saying the games not good enough to fit them in or the designers aren't capable of writing decent rules for them, I cant believe they said it.


I think having them in a support role that can fit into other imperial armies as different roles instead of being an army themselves is alright, it allows for more variation like that. I would like them all to be in the same book though.

I feel like there is an important distinction as someone was saying Every earlier..

There is more than one campaign book in the style of vigilus coming.
Each setting has its own theme.
Imperium will be in each campaign setting

That’s of the More than one coming that they are talking about Imperium for.
So it doesn’t mean every campaign ever.
(Though it would be every one ever, as the amount of Imperial factions means there’d always be one about. But technically, there could be a xenos vs chaos thing somewhere )

 ImAGeek wrote:

 porkuslime wrote:
My take on the Slanesshi Heraldess..

They took away bewbs because of the chillldrennnn.. what will they think!

But, evidently a sinew harp being plucked out of ye olde human backside is .. OK?

Man.. I like the model and think it evokes the daemon stuff from creepy, but .. I feel mixed messages here.

Except they haven’t taken away the boobs. Guessing you haven’t seen the new Fiend models?

I assure you, I HAVE seen the new Fiend, and think it is wonderful.

If you want to do snark, then maybe think that I was talking about the change from Diaz Daemonettes and Seekers to the current plastics..

AT THE TIME.. GW said that they were making the Slaaneshi stuff more "Family Friendly".. which (as pointed out) is .. NOT the Slaaneshi vibe. Now the pendulum seems to be swinging back to more edgy stuff..

I wish the new Noise Marine was not just a one-off... Slaaneshi 40k was one of my original starting armies..

Speaking of Slaanesh, as anyone else noticed that the harp is sticking out of some poor bastard's back? That's pretty messed up...and is totally consistent with Slaanesh. I approve.

 porkuslime wrote:
AT THE TIME.. GW said that they were making the Slaaneshi stuff more "Family Friendly"...

Where/when did they say that?

So, stupid thought after seeing the quad pictures and re-reading the Goliath entry in the 7th ed GSC codex and I quote:

Though an ascendant cult will make use of any type of vehicle, from lunar quads to civilian stretch-cars to mobile industrial macro rigs, the Goliath truck is always the most sought after.

I'm still of the opinion we had a preview of the limo back end a while back(Yes I know, mechanicus has rounded corners, so do goliaths), anyone see anything that strikes you as a macro rig in the rumor engine previews? It'd be hilarious if this was all teased in the old codex.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Dirt bikers and this awesome guy. Wish they were for guard.

You and me both.

I like the new releases, especially the new GSC models. I'm actually starting to consider making an army of them now.

It's kind of ironic though that IG players have been wanting bikes for years, and the GSC beat them to the punch.

It also shows what GW are capable of. I've always thought that Stormtroopers should have bike squadrons, as befitting special forces types.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 porkuslime wrote:
AT THE TIME.. GW said that they were making the Slaaneshi stuff more "Family Friendly"...

Where/when did they say that?

Ok.. you caught me out.. I do not have the ability to dig thru many years of back issues of White Dwarf or conversations from 3rd/5th edition stuff.. I REMEMBER it, but cannot PROVE it.

 porkuslime wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 porkuslime wrote:
AT THE TIME.. GW said that they were making the Slaaneshi stuff more "Family Friendly"...

Where/when did they say that?

Ok.. you caught me out.. I do not have the ability to dig thru many years of back issues of White Dwarf or conversations from 3rd/5th edition stuff.. I REMEMBER it, but cannot PROVE it.

It was just internet conjecture. Just like the internet claiming for the last 3 years that Slaanesh is getting squatted.

Consider the ridiculousness of claiming that obvious hermaphrodites in one-boob corsets are family friendly.

 porkuslime wrote:
Ok.. you caught me out.. I do not have the ability to dig thru many years of back issues of White Dwarf or conversations from 3rd/5th edition stuff.. I REMEMBER it, but cannot PROVE it.

Mate, I'm not trying to be a dick about it. I just don't remember GW saying anything about Slaanesh.

Like blackfang said, the scuttlebutt surrounding Slaanesh was Internet conjecture, fulled by things like the start of AoS where the something showing the Chaos Gods was Nurgle, Khorne, Tzeentch and... Malarion? Where Archaon's mount had a head representing Nurgle, Khorne and Tzeentch, but not Slaanesh. How Slaanesh was missing/imprisoned. All of this led to the thought that maybe they were going away. The current Daemonette minis didn't help either.

And, like so many rumours and conspiracy theories, it grew not because of anything GW said, but more because they didn't say anything at all.

The best thing they could do with Inquistors would probably be to add them to the Imperial Guard book as an alternative HQ+retinue. Maybe with a stratagem/warlord trait that lets them treat x points/pl of Marines as having a matching keyword.

I read through the article, but maybe I missed it. Is there a release date for the previewed stuff?

I’m sure I saw somewhere that GSC is out before Christmas?

 Jadenim wrote:
The best thing they could do with Inquistors would probably be to add them to the Imperial Guard book as an alternative HQ+retinue. Maybe with a stratagem/warlord trait that lets them treat x points/pl of Marines as having a matching keyword.

Or, here's a radical idea, they could put Inquisitors and their retinues into a kind of compilation book that includes all the smaller 40K Imperial factions & forces which don't merit a full codex of their own, which all Imperial factions would have access to thanks to the way 8th Ed functions. They could call it "Codex: Regal Operatives" perhaps...

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m sure I saw somewhere that GSC is out before Christmas?

I doubt it. The videos for Wrath and Rapture, Calgar and Vigilus Defiant all say "December", while the GSC video only says "the day of ascension draws near". Looking like Jan/Feb for them.

I may have confused those dates then.

Ah well! All the more time to save up!

 Yodhrin wrote:
and it still seems vaguely daft that whole armies of them are running around now given their original background and their numbers. 40K is absolutely full of things that, strictly speaking, really "don't belong" in a system that's supposedly representing large scale military conflicts, but which exist within it anyway because they're cool and because the actual tabletop we play on typically limits itself to platoon or company sized forces, at which scale loads of things can comfortably muster a useful fighting force.

Frankly it sounds to me more like whoever's presently making the decisions in the studio just doesn't care for Agents and is casting about trying to find some kind of justification for their animus beyond simple dislike.

What's the systej that's supposea to represent big battles? Gw doesn't have one atm. 40k is super small skirmish. When 300 models is considered big and typical engagement is more like thousands if not tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands not being rare 40k is super zoomed up tiny piece of battle.

40k rules also don#t even represenp big battle commanding

On that count, I’m still hoping for Epic to make a proper return.

It’s a brilliant system (well, except Epic 40k), and it works nicely to put one in the shoes of a military overlord, unconcerned with casualties compared to objectives.

We needs it, precious, needs it!

By their own logic special characters and primarchs shouldn’t exist on the table top because they wouldn’t be involved in such small skirmishes and their presence would be extremely rare. GW is drunk

I'd rather see Warmaster or AoS Warmaster return before Epic.

No wait hear me out I love Epic -heck Titan Legions/Epic was my gateway into wargaming. However today I feel that 40K is getting spread thick and thin. There's already a LOT on its plate and I feel that Warmaster gives us afew things:

1) It brings back rank and file fighting in a scale that actually works REALLY well for rank and file. Both in terms of visual display, cost to build rank and file units and in the whole general style of that scale. I think its a fantastic way to give back to the fantasy segment something that AoS has changed/lost.

2) Whilst GW is marching full on with AoS; Warmaster could be an attempt for them to have an official Warhammer Classic game if they so wished. Then again they might simply make AoS into Warmaster scale. Either way honestly works

3) It builds right off the Total War experience so GW could push that game out in the next year or two and still beat the 3rd games launch and also tap into that market interest right now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pariah-Miniatures wrote:
By their own logic special characters and primarchs shouldn’t exist on the table top because they wouldn’t be involved in such small skirmishes and their presence would be extremely rare. GW is drunk

Not really, its openly accepted that the models we use likely represent variable numbers of real world models in the world. So for Tyranids those 30 gaunts might represent 30,000 whilst for the Marine player a marine might represent 5 or 10 marines etc.. So in that setting heroes makes full sense, one mighty lord who is an army unto themselves striding to war in a major conflict.

Assassins though, as a snigle dedicated faction, is where it breaks because they are not supposed to represent hundreds of warriors

CassianSol wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
"Necrons don't seem to be getting much love from GW (as usual). Guess it's time to start a fluffy imperium list, but one I could still field in a game. I could buy those imperial assassin models I really like the look of......"

Why do I even bother. Glad my friend who collects GK might have a usable army tho.

Dude you have a pretty full and reasonably modern set of models. You've received a new model this year. Chapter approved hasn't even come out yet. Necrons are far from the most ignored factions.

Indeed - anything in the range still metal?

Unless you are marine faction its a major thing to have mostly plastic models.

 Overread wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pariah-Miniatures wrote:
By their own logic special characters and primarchs shouldn’t exist on the table top because they wouldn’t be involved in such small skirmishes and their presence would be extremely rare. GW is drunk

Not really, its openly accepted that the models we use likely represent variable numbers of real world models in the world.

No, a small minority cling to a random designer side comment/musing in a rulebook several editions back (possibly for fantasy battle, which doesn't even exist anymore). The game rules are set up to function as one to one.

So for Tyranids those 30 gaunts might represent 30,000 whilst for the Marine player a marine might represent 5 or 10 marines etc.. So in that setting heroes makes full sense, one mighty lord who is an army unto themselves striding to war in a major conflict.

Assassins though, as a snigle dedicated faction, is where it breaks because they are not supposed to represent hundreds of warriors

Assassins aren't even vaguely the only place where it breaks down. Marines themselves don't work as any kind of multiplied representation, as we know the hard limit on a chapter's numbers (1000 line soldiers + a couple dozen officers/specialists) and their organizational breakdown to the squad level. A codex squad is 10 or a demi-squad of 5. While a squad might be less than 10 due to casualties, it is _never_ 25, 50 or 100 or the result of any other multiplier.

tneva82 wrote:

What's the systej that's supposea to represent big battles? Gw doesn't have one atm.

rules for Apocalypse were published in Chapter Approved 2017 and they are very good.

Also Titanicus is a thing. And some people still play Epic.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Jadenim wrote:
The best thing they could do with Inquistors would probably be to add them to the Imperial Guard book as an alternative HQ+retinue. Maybe with a stratagem/warlord trait that lets them treat x points/pl of Marines as having a matching keyword.

Or, here's a radical idea, they could put Inquisitors and their retinues into a kind of compilation book that includes all the smaller 40K Imperial factions & forces which don't merit a full codex of their own, which all Imperial factions would have access to thanks to the way 8th Ed functions. They could call it "Codex: Regal Operatives" perhaps...

The even better way is just run these oddbods as a counts-as character in your Marine or Guard army. There are existing rules to cover many options, tonnes of modelling potential and the synergies in-game exist already.

I have an Inquisitor in Terminator Armour for example. I just run him as a Deathwatch Captain, with Digital Lasers represented by the Powerfist with Meltagun, and Combi-Needler represented by Combi Weapon with Special Issue Ammunition. Paint scheme differs to his minions, so what? He’s a heroic leader who has deputised these dudes for the day, and it’s even fluffy for Deathwatch and Inquistors to work together.

I also use Guard Commander and Command Squad rules to represent a different Inquisitor and retinue I’ve converted. Again, all the rules I need exist to cater for his personal medic, gunner and bodyguards. They synergise with the army. What’s not to love?

You don’t actually need a Codex for a lot of stuff. Not everything needs to be doubleplus special with 19 special rules. There’s a lot of room to do bonkers conversions and still use existing rules and make things useful in-game.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 CaptainBetts wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
If you read the reddit post a generous user linked to some pages back, it sounds like they just don't like the idea of certain Imperial Agent type units on a full fledged battlefield. They were specifically referring to Rogue Traders, but they said something along the lines of they make what they think is cool and they don't think dudes/dudettes with rapiers and dueling pistols belong in that context.

That was me who made the massive reddit post. That's pretty much correct - they said models like inquisition, rogue traders, assassins etc. don't fit very well at all. They used Inquisitor Eisenhorn as their main example actually.

That would be Inquisitor Eisenhorn who led a full-scale military invasion of a Xenos world that included several other Inquisitors?

See, this is the problem with their new stance - it's new, and makes no sense because GW themselves have provided plenty of examples in the fiction of it being just utterly wrong. Rogue Traders often have private armies on the scale of Guard regiments, pacts with Marine chapters, access to Xenos mercenaries etc. Inquisitors command armies as a matter of course. Assassins have been part of the 40K system since 2nd edition and have had their own codex several times.

Not just that, but the entire -point- of Rogue Traders is to go out like Privateers and help expand the Imperium.

Yeah, baffling choice there. But man an 'agents' book could have been amazing. And even speaking as a Custodes player I wish they'd done one instead of Custodes as separate. I think they do work better thematically as a single strike team to buff up an existing Imperial force, or lead it. Just like Inquisition or whatever.

And even more baffling with GW's insistence on "Narrative" being something to push, where things like Rogue Trader or Inquisition expeditions would make even more sense!

I have nothing against Custodes players, and their army concept is fine (even if I find them unpleasant to play against crunch-wise), but I feel the existence of the Custodes and IK codices counters any argument based on "This faction shouldn't compose an entire army, it makes no sense in the narrative". If they don't want to admit it's just not on their radar/preference list, so be it, but the fact they supplied such a useless excuse is a bit worrying.

 Overread wrote:

Not really, its openly accepted that the models we use likely represent variable numbers of real world models in the world. So for Tyranids those 30 gaunts might represent 30,000 whilst for the Marine player a marine might represent 5 or 10 marines etc..

That's never been a thing in 40k, and wouldn't really make much sense with the way units are organised in the game compared to the fluff.

I am really bummed about the no Imperial Agents. I was really hyped that the recent appearances of Rogue Traders were just foreshadowing their full scale arrival in 40K. And of course the Inquisition is possibly my favourite thing in the setting. This is just sad.

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
I have nothing against Custodes players, and their army concept is fine (even if I find them unpleasant to play against crunch-wise), but I feel the existence of the Custodes and IK codices counters any argument based on "This faction shouldn't compose an entire army, it makes no sense in the narrative". If they don't want to admit it's just not on their radar/preference list, so be it, but the fact they supplied such a useless excuse is a bit worrying.

Totally agree.
If Inquisitors and assassins don't belong on the battlefield, take out GSC and Custodes. Knights have a place, however, as much as their presence is often annoying.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Jadenim wrote:
The best thing they could do with Inquistors would probably be to add them to the Imperial Guard book as an alternative HQ+retinue. Maybe with a stratagem/warlord trait that lets them treat x points/pl of Marines as having a matching keyword.

Or, here's a radical idea, they could put Inquisitors and their retinues into a kind of compilation book that includes all the smaller 40K Imperial factions & forces which don't merit a full codex of their own, which all Imperial factions would have access to thanks to the way 8th Ed functions. They could call it "Codex: Regal Operatives" perhaps...

The even better way is just run these oddbods as a counts-as character in your Marine or Guard army. There are existing rules to cover many options, tonnes of modelling potential and the synergies in-game exist already.

I have an Inquisitor in Terminator Armour for example. I just run him as a Deathwatch Captain, with Digital Lasers represented by the Powerfist with Meltagun, and Combi-Needler represented by Combi Weapon with Special Issue Ammunition. Paint scheme differs to his minions, so what? He’s a heroic leader who has deputised these dudes for the day, and it’s even fluffy for Deathwatch and Inquistors to work together.

I also use Guard Commander and Command Squad rules to represent a different Inquisitor and retinue I’ve converted. Again, all the rules I need exist to cater for his personal medic, gunner and bodyguards. They synergise with the army. What’s not to love?

You don’t actually need a Codex for a lot of stuff. Not everything needs to be doubleplus special with 19 special rules. There’s a lot of room to do bonkers conversions and still use existing rules and make things useful in-game.

And you could just do a Mechanicus army with Counts As as well(dead easy - Straken for a Techpriest, Scions for Skitarii, chuck in some SM Centurions for Secutors, and grab some Relic vehicles from FW to make them seem fancier), does that mean they shouldn't have bothered giving them a range and codex of their own?

Problems with your approach:

1. Counts As is great, but it's rarely as good as actual, proper, bespoke, thematic rules.
2. Counts As doesn't create a new range of models and a release slot to sell them to us.
3. There are still plenty of folk out there who consider stuff like Counts As as being tantamount to cheating, or at best consider it confusing and "unofficial"(which to some is as good as saying "banned") and will refuse to play against them, which they cannot get away with so easily if it's an actual proper release.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The even better way is just run these oddbods as a counts-as...

Counts-as is never the answer.

 bullyboy wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
I have nothing against Custodes players, and their army concept is fine (even if I find them unpleasant to play against crunch-wise), but I feel the existence of the Custodes and IK codices counters any argument based on "This faction shouldn't compose an entire army, it makes no sense in the narrative". If they don't want to admit it's just not on their radar/preference list, so be it, but the fact they supplied such a useless excuse is a bit worrying.

Totally agree.
If Inquisitors and assassins don't belong on the battlefield, take out GSC and Custodes. Knights have a place, however, as much as their presence is often annoying.

Totally Disagree

Inquisitors are often exteremely powerful combatants that lead warbands, companies or entire armies, their rules should reflect that once again.
They provide variety - rather than just differrent coloured Marines for instance that some seem to favour.

Its laughable to suggest removing genestealer Cults given that they are exactly the enemy that confront pretty much ALL factions at different levels.

Custodes are a huge and powerful fighting force, far more numerous than any single Space Marine Chapter. Like Astartes and Sororitas they have huge spiritual and inspirational effects on other warriros of the Imperium, acting a a powerful force multiplier before they even slay an enemy.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:
I have nothing against Custodes players, and their army concept is fine (even if I find them unpleasant to play against crunch-wise), but I feel the existence of the Custodes and IK codices counters any argument based on "This faction shouldn't compose an entire army, it makes no sense in the narrative". If they don't want to admit it's just not on their radar/preference list, so be it, but the fact they supplied such a useless excuse is a bit worrying.

Totally agree.
If Inquisitors and assassins don't belong on the battlefield, take out GSC and Custodes. Knights have a place, however, as much as their presence is often annoying.

Totally Disagree

Inquisitors are often exteremely powerful combatants that lead warbands, companies or entire armies, their rules should reflect that once again.
They provide variety - rather than just differrent coloured Marines for instance that some seem to favour.

Its laughable to suggest removing genestealer Cults given that they are exactly the enemy that confront pretty much ALL factions at different levels.

Custodes are a huge and powerful fighting force, far more numerous than any single Space Marine Chapter. Like Astartes and Sororitas they have huge spiritual and inspirational effects on other warriros of the Imperium, acting a a powerful force multiplier before they even slay an enemy.

You're missing their point - the argument is not "if we can't have Inquisitors et al, take away [other things]", it's "given [other things] exist as armies, it's ludicrous we can't have Inquisitors et al".

Internal logical consistency?

From GW?

HAHAHAHHAHAHA, oh, boy.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The even better way is just run these oddbods as a counts-as...

Counts-as is never the answer.

Well, if you wanna play 8th then it’s literally the only way right answer right now. You do you.

Another nail in the coffin of old marines. The writing was on the wall as soon as they announced the Adeptus Restartes with 8th edition and I'm actually surprised that it took this long to make good on that pre-release interview quote that mentioned the conversion of the now Secondus marines into Primaris. I'm a bit torn on the idea though as I like the look and scaling of the Mk X primaris but not the backstory.

Was somebody talking about the legacy of the Chapterhouse ruling here? Because yeah, that has triggered some sort if breakdown in GW. I love everything they do nowadays...except the names...the bloody names.

And they can’t seriously leave inquisitors out of the game can they?

 warboss wrote:
Another nail in the coffin of old marines. The writing was on the wall as soon as they announced the Adeptus Restartes with 8th edition and I'm actually surprised that it took this long to make good on that pre-release interview quote that mentioned the conversion of the now Secondus marines into Primaris. I'm a bit torn on the idea though as I like the look and scaling of the Mk X primaris but not the backstory.

If they ultimately replace all existing SM kits with Primaris versions, couldn't you just ignore the fluff and say they are regular oldmarines?

Pariah-Miniatures wrote:
By their own logic special characters and primarchs shouldn’t exist on the table top because they wouldn’t be involved in such small skirmishes and their presence would be extremely rare. GW is drunk

Nah. 5 turn matches are like 30 seconds of real-time combat, essentially. Those "small skirmishes" could easily just be the tip of the spearhead, or one battle out of a thousand raging just a few feet away from each other (aka the board edge).

That said, I totally agree that discriminating against Inquisitors is silly when Custodes and other highly-specialized forces are allowed their own army books.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Another nail in the coffin of old marines. The writing was on the wall as soon as they announced the Adeptus Restartes with 8th edition and I'm actually surprised that it took this long to make good on that pre-release interview quote that mentioned the conversion of the now Secondus marines into Primaris. I'm a bit torn on the idea though as I like the look and scaling of the Mk X primaris but not the backstory.

If they ultimately replace all existing SM kits with Primaris versions, couldn't you just ignore the fluff and say they are regular oldmarines?

Maybe...with some work. Primes could just become the new norms.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Another nail in the coffin of old marines. The writing was on the wall as soon as they announced the Adeptus Restartes with 8th edition and I'm actually surprised that it took this long to make good on that pre-release interview quote that mentioned the conversion of the now Secondus marines into Primaris. I'm a bit torn on the idea though as I like the look and scaling of the Mk X primaris but not the backstory.

If they ultimately replace all existing SM kits with Primaris versions, couldn't you just ignore the fluff and say they are regular oldmarines?

Possibly but that isn't the road GW has taken. If they had simply made a scale change just like they did after the RTB01 switch to 2nd and later 3rd edition plastics then I'd have been all on board. Cawl making new arms and armor to justify the new scale but keeping the rules the same for all would have been my preferred route to introduce them. Instead, we get functional equivalents like intercessors for tactical squads that are not identical beyond superficial similarities (they both have bolt-based rifles). The time to do that was two years ago and not now where people have built armies around the primaris as its not fair to them to switch gears so significantly.

 warboss wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Another nail in the coffin of old marines. The writing was on the wall as soon as they announced the Adeptus Restartes with 8th edition and I'm actually surprised that it took this long to make good on that pre-release interview quote that mentioned the conversion of the now Secondus marines into Primaris. I'm a bit torn on the idea though as I like the look and scaling of the Mk X primaris but not the backstory.

If they ultimately replace all existing SM kits with Primaris versions, couldn't you just ignore the fluff and say they are regular oldmarines?

Possibly but that isn't the road GW has taken. If they had simply made a scale change just like they did after the RTB01 switch to 2nd and later 3rd edition plastics then I'd have been all on board. Cawl making new arms and armor to justify the new scale but keeping the rules the same for all would have been my preferred route to introduce them. Instead, we get functional equivalents like intercessors for tactical squads that are not identical beyond superficial similarities (they both have bolt-based rifles). The time to do that was two years ago and not now where people have built armies around the primaris as its not fair to them to switch gears so significantly.

I am more talking what you yourself could do with fluffing your own army. As of right now, it isn't possible because Intercessors =/= Tactical Squads. Hellblasters =/= Devastators. And so on. But if we reach a point where literal replacements exist for all SM units, I don't see why you couldn't just ignore the Primaris fluff. I don't know if that will ever happen though. As long as oldmarines stuff sells a satisfactory amount, they will likely keep them in production.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Well, if you wanna play 8th then it’s literally the only way right answer right now. You do you.

Managed to ignore everything Yod said, and be a dick about it. Great job.

But to expand on what I said, without necessarily repeating Yod, 'counts-as' is a lousy excuse when it comes to increasing the variety and diversity of forces available in 40K. Would you have been one of the people saying 'Just counts-as!' before AdMech were a thing? Before Deathwatch were a thing? When the Legions went away for a long stretch of time?

40K is a game that has endless potential, and so often this remains untapped because of (quite frankly) boneheaded comments like the ones GW gave about Imperial Agents.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Was somebody talking about the legacy of the Chapterhouse ruling here? Because yeah, that has triggered some sort if breakdown in GW. I love everything they do nowadays...except the names...the bloody names.

And they can’t seriously leave inquisitors out of the game can they?

Never said they were going to, just they weren't redoing Codex Imperial Agents. Inquisitor focus will be in Kill team where you can go mad with your retinues without worrying about most of them just being there to catch a battlecannon round.

Tastyfish wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Was somebody talking about the legacy of the Chapterhouse ruling here? Because yeah, that has triggered some sort if breakdown in GW. I love everything they do nowadays...except the names...the bloody names.

And they can’t seriously leave inquisitors out of the game can they?

Never said they were going to, just they weren't redoing Codex Imperial Agents. Inquisitor focus will be in Kill team where you can go mad with your retinues without worrying about most of them just being there to catch a battlecannon round.

Well thats not being in 40k then is it? Fething stupid.

Anyone can catch a battlecannon round, Inquisitors might well have the forcefields (if they remember to actually give them them) to survive it. If anyone shoud have invulnerable saves - its Inquisitors.

Loving the new GSC bikers! Along with that new tactician, and the ‘masked gunslinger’, we’re getting some fun new models. Still holding out hope for a legit limo, but the aesthetic they seem to be following doesn’t look to be the ‘slick 30’s mobster’ feel, of the rogue trader era. Would be fun if they added that in though. Then we’d have the blue collar construction types, the road warrior bikers, and the snazzy gangsters. I’ll definitly employ some Delaque with a classed up ork dragster if GW won’t give me my uptown stealers.

At least give us a new special ed. ‘Big Fat’ patriarch on his throne, with his whispering magus advisor. Or just rerelease the metal one again! It would be amazing to have those old GSC metals redone!

 insaniak wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Not really, its openly accepted that the models we use likely represent variable numbers of real world models in the world. So for Tyranids those 30 gaunts might represent 30,000 whilst for the Marine player a marine might represent 5 or 10 marines etc..

That's never been a thing in 40k, and wouldn't really make much sense with the way units are organised in the game compared to the fluff.

Yeah, there's no way 40k is supposed to be a game where single figures represent a stand of figures from Epic (or more!). While sometimes anything that uses individually based figures is called "Skirmish scale", 40k is, and has always been, a platoon-scaled game, where 1 model = 1 man. Otherwise terrain makes no sense.

In the name of selling more expensive models in larger numbers, GW just keeps moving the goalposts about what should be put on the table- from the old days of a couple of squads, a couple vehicles, and a hero, up to the pseudo-Apocolypse gaming they have now where squads of Marines share the table with Knights and Baneblades.

40K is "supposed" to be the same game-scale as Bolt Action, Maelstrom's Edge, etc.

 skullking wrote:
Loving the new GSC bikers! Along with that new tactician, and the ‘masked gunslinger’, we’re getting some fun new models. Still holding out hope for a legit limo, but the aesthetic they seem to be following doesn’t look to be the ‘slick 30’s mobster’ feel, of the rogue trader era. Would be fun if they added that in though. Then we’d have the blue collar construction types, the road warrior bikers, and the snazzy gangsters. I’ll definitly employ some Delaque with a classed up ork dragster if GW won’t give me my uptown stealers.

Something more like a stretched Hummer or FJ cruiser, aesthetically, would probably work better than a limo with the current aesthetic. Big and flashy, but still rugged and industrial looking.

 CaptainBetts wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
If you read the reddit post a generous user linked to some pages back, it sounds like they just don't like the idea of certain Imperial Agent type units on a full fledged battlefield. They were specifically referring to Rogue Traders, but they said something along the lines of they make what they think is cool and they don't think dudes/dudettes with rapiers and dueling pistols belong in that context.

That was me who made the massive reddit post. That's pretty much correct - they said models like inquisition, rogue traders, assassins etc. don't fit very well at all. They used Inquisitor Eisenhorn as their main example actually.

Thanks for taking the time to report on what you heard. It's kind of encouraging to hear that they kind of let the design team run things and just do what they think is cool.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Tastyfish wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Was somebody talking about the legacy of the Chapterhouse ruling here? Because yeah, that has triggered some sort if breakdown in GW. I love everything they do nowadays...except the names...the bloody names.

And they can’t seriously leave inquisitors out of the game can they?

Never said they were going to, just they weren't redoing Codex Imperial Agents. Inquisitor focus will be in Kill team where you can go mad with your retinues without worrying about most of them just being there to catch a battlecannon round.

Well thats not being in 40k then is it? Fething stupid.

Anyone can catch a battlecannon round, Inquisitors might well have the forcefields (if they remember to actually give them them) to survive it. If anyone shoud have invulnerable saves - its Inquisitors.

But all the weird stuff in Kill team has also had 40K rules, by the time an Inquisitor (in general) is in a 40K game - they've played most of their cards and now have brought an army, or are using this as a distraction.
Against an army, they're just an officer with a dirty trick (some kind of reroll). But in the detailed one on one combat of kill team you'll see them come into their own. So the model we have now seems to make sense - fluff choice with basic rules and the odd quirk, but not the mainstay of an army.

Some Inquisitors will be different, but the generic inquisitor is an IG officer with a few dirty tricks and skills that are more suited to a smaller scale game where they can be an unstoppable force, likewise most of their henchmen.

So quick rules for 40K for campaign finales or big starts, but the detail for them zooms to the scale of the Inquisitor and their retinue to highlight each member and give them all a role to play individually, rather than just running about as a suboptimal elite squad.

 Luciferian wrote:
Thanks for taking the time to report on what you heard. It's kind of encouraging to hear that they kind of let the design team run things and just do what they think is cool.

Is that a good thing though?

The miniatures team shows up with a new Space Marine flyer that has Marines attached to the wings that it drops like bombs.

"Go write rules and fluff for this. It's coming out in 8 months."

I'm sure that's not how it works, but from the sounds of it miniatures call the shots, and the people writing the background have to march to their tune.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
Thanks for taking the time to report on what you heard. It's kind of encouraging to hear that they kind of let the design team run things and just do what they think is cool.

Is that a good thing though?

The miniatures team shows up with a new Space Marine flyer that has Marines attached to the wings that it drops like bombs.

"Go write rules and fluff for this. It's coming out in 8 months."

I'm sure that's not how it works, but from the sounds of it miniatures call the shots, and the people writing the background have to march to their tune.

From snippets over the years, that's pretty much always how it's been, though, with the caveat that the accountants tend to jump in if they disagree strongly with the marketability of a given project, as supposedly was the case for so many years with Sisters.

I don't think it's that silo'd really, pretty sure the concept art/miniature and designers do talk to each other. They've probably got a decent idea of which armies each other plays and what the HQ narratives are, so it's unlikely things come completely out of the blue.

Plus manufacturing and production are going to have some sway in the truly off to wall designs that the miniature designers might come up with. Assuming that the sculptors aren't given a vague brief to begin with (you've got this many sprues to do this many units - talk to Jeff the concept artist and Dave the army champion to see if they've got anything to get you started.)

Tastyfish wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Tastyfish wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Was somebody talking about the legacy of the Chapterhouse ruling here? Because yeah, that has triggered some sort if breakdown in GW. I love everything they do nowadays...except the names...the bloody names.

And they can’t seriously leave inquisitors out of the game can they?

Never said they were going to, just they weren't redoing Codex Imperial Agents. Inquisitor focus will be in Kill team where you can go mad with your retinues without worrying about most of them just being there to catch a battlecannon round.

Well thats not being in 40k then is it? Fething stupid.

Anyone can catch a battlecannon round, Inquisitors might well have the forcefields (if they remember to actually give them them) to survive it. If anyone shoud have invulnerable saves - its Inquisitors.

But all the weird stuff in Kill team has also had 40K rules, by the time an Inquisitor (in general) is in a 40K game - they've played most of their cards and now have brought an army, or are using this as a distraction.
Against an army, they're just an officer with a dirty trick (some kind of reroll). But in the detailed one on one combat of kill team you'll see them come into their own. So the model we have now seems to make sense - fluff choice with basic rules and the odd quirk, but not the mainstay of an army.

Some Inquisitors will be different, but the generic inquisitor is an IG officer with a few dirty tricks and skills that are more suited to a smaller scale game where they can be an unstoppable force, likewise most of their henchmen.

So quick rules for 40K for campaign finales or big starts, but the detail for them zooms to the scale of the Inquisitor and their retinue to highlight each member and give them all a role to play individually, rather than just running about as a suboptimal elite squad.

Kill Team is not great for actual options - in fact its poor. Really poor.

IG officer equivalent - not really - Inquisitors often use Artificer and Terminator armour in actual combat, plus energy fields, Xenos weapons and some are psykers on top of that. Last codex / Index tonned them down massively.

A combat focussed Inquisitor with custom armour, stims , bio and/or cyber enchancements should be more like: M6 WS 2+, BS 2+, S4, T4, W 4, A3, Ld10, 2+/ 4++ Weapons like (Asssault class) Heavy Bolter and Power Fist. FNP6+

Did anyone read more into the mention of the Chaos character?

Referred to as a herald, stating he'd capture Vigilus within 80 days for the Warmaster (i.e. Abaddon). Abaddon model in the next 80 days? It seemed oddly worded and just cheeky enough to be GW's clandestine teasing.

 Elbows wrote:
Referred to as a herald, stating he'd capture Vigilus within 80 days for the Warmaster (i.e. Abaddon). Abaddon model in the next 80 days? It seemed oddly worded and just cheeky enough to be GW's clandestine teasing.

Yeah I noticed that as well.

Seems like a good set up to have Abaddon do his "Fine. I'll do it myself!" moment.

 insaniak wrote:
From snippets over the years, that's pretty much always how it's been, though, with the caveat that the accountants tend to jump in if they disagree strongly with the marketability of a given project, as supposedly was the case for so many years with Sisters.

Now I get this image of one of the rules team walking into the miniatures area and going:

"Hey guys. These new Marines you made. They're out of scale with the rest of the line."
"Yeah?"
"Well, they don't fit with the other Marines we've made."
"Your problem. Write them into the fluff as better Marines or something. Legal also wants them to have uncommon names, or even compound words that you make up, so we can trade mark them."

Again, I don't think it's that silo'd (as Tastyfish put it), but it paints a picture of a team of writers that sit around waiting for a new model to show up and then having to figure out how to make it work in the fluff, which just cannot be the case.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Referred to as a herald, stating he'd capture Vigilus within 80 days for the Warmaster (i.e. Abaddon). Abaddon model in the next 80 days? It seemed oddly worded and just cheeky enough to be GW's clandestine teasing.

Yeah I noticed that as well.

Seems like a good set up to have Abaddon do his "Fine. I'll do it myself!" moment.

Not only that, but according to the Warhammer World calendar there is an event on January 26-27th that just says "TBA", which falls within the 80 days. Don't want to put too much speculation into that weekend, just an observation. I may have missed an announcement on what that weekend would be.

 Elbows wrote:
Did anyone read more into the mention of the Chaos character?

Referred to as a herald, stating he'd capture Vigilus within 80 days for the Warmaster (i.e. Abaddon). Abaddon model in the next 80 days? It seemed oddly worded and just cheeky enough to be GW's clandestine teasing.

The 80 day time limit would possibly point to Abaddon saying he's had enough of this nonsense and coming to finish the job on his own. It'd be funny if GW made up an entirely new character for Calgar to beat up on with his fancy new power armor, only for Abaddon to slap him around with the exact same augmentations and warp mutations he's always had.

 insaniak wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
Thanks for taking the time to report on what you heard. It's kind of encouraging to hear that they kind of let the design team run things and just do what they think is cool.

Is that a good thing though?

The miniatures team shows up with a new Space Marine flyer that has Marines attached to the wings that it drops like bombs.

"Go write rules and fluff for this. It's coming out in 8 months."

I'm sure that's not how it works, but from the sounds of it miniatures call the shots, and the people writing the background have to march to their tune.

From snippets over the years, that's pretty much always how it's been, though, with the caveat that the accountants tend to jump in if they disagree strongly with the marketability of a given project, as supposedly was the case for so many years with Sisters.

Frankly, this is why FW with Alan Bligh calling most of the shots was the superior prospect for many - it was still driven by passion projects, but there was a more "integrated" approach with the fiction given something approaching equal billing and an eye squarely on the coherence of the final product.

 Whumbachumba wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Referred to as a herald, stating he'd capture Vigilus within 80 days for the Warmaster (i.e. Abaddon). Abaddon model in the next 80 days? It seemed oddly worded and just cheeky enough to be GW's clandestine teasing.

Yeah I noticed that as well.

Seems like a good set up to have Abaddon do his "Fine. I'll do it myself!" moment.

Not only that, but according to the Warhammer World calendar there is an event on January 26-27th that just says "TBA", which falls within the 80 days. Don't want to put too much speculation into that weekend, just an observation. I may have missed an announcement on what that weekend would be.

The calendar on Warhammer Community shows the 27th as the 'Blood Bowl New Years Blitz' at Warhammer World.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Is that a good thing though?

The miniatures team shows up with a new Space Marine flyer that has Marines attached to the wings that it drops like bombs.

"Go write rules and fluff for this. It's coming out in 8 months."

I'm sure that's not how it works, but from the sounds of it miniatures call the shots, and the people writing the background have to march to their tune.

In my opinion it's a good thing, but I'm in this primarily for the models. The modellers have been knocking it out of the park creatively for the past couple of years and I find myself consistently looking forward to what they'll come up with next. At the very least it's preferable to marketing or corporate completely dictating the creative direction. Although it also does mean that rules are practically an afterthought, and we end up with things like the Primaris fluff.

By going frame-by-frame through the Vigilus Defiant "trailer" book showcase, you can see an example of one of the new formation detachments - the Ork Blitz Brigade (Warlord Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
This is the video in question, from about 1:04 onwards: https://youtu.be/eqvsbgzzLKI

I consolidated all the Ork rules into a reddit post here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/comments/a0evgb/by_going_framebyframe_through_the_vigilus_defiant/

What do people think? Powerful? Not worth it?

Hmmm... you guys think these specialist formations will apply to non-Vigilus games?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Besides which, lets get real - the actual reason why we won't get an Imperial Agents codex is that in order to do the concept justice, the rules need to be flexible and highly customisable, which is completely alien to GW's present mode of thinking, which would limit you to Greyfax with whatever weapons are on the model and no more.

I think the main reason we won't see such a codex is because GW has deemed that the codex and associated models would not be profitable for their cost. A stance I agree with honestly.

Yuh-huh. Like Dark Eldar. And Sisters. And GSC.

Or, alternatively; people like good models and fun rules, and if you give Agents those they'll sell as well as anything else that isn't Marines.

The proof of the pudding is in its eating. Buy more Imperial Agents and prove that there's a market if you want new models. Start a petition to get them new models and rules. I'm sure if you (and other fans of Imperial Agents) took steps to prove that there is a market GW will follow the money.

Just saying, this is a really backwards way of looking at the economics of the hobby. GW determines what we consume; we don't determine what GW produces. Furthermore, GW evaluates its existing products in accordance with their product strategy, not our preferences. There are no Agents players today because there is no Agents product line. You can buy all of the Greyfaxes in the world, but that won't change their product strategy.

By way of contrast, there were no AdMech players a few years ago because there was no AdMech product line. Doesn't matter how many servitors and enginseers you buy.

And the examples of people spontaneously producing a product line are few and far between. The only example I can think of in recent memory is MTG Commander.

 Elbows wrote:
Did anyone read more into the mention of the Chaos character?

Referred to as a herald, stating he'd capture Vigilus within 80 days for the Warmaster (i.e. Abaddon). Abaddon model in the next 80 days? It seemed oddly worded and just cheeky enough to be GW's clandestine teasing.

Yep, first thing I thought when I saw this is that we are going to see Abaddon in about 3 months.

 CaptainBetts wrote:
By going frame-by-frame through the Vigilus Defiant "trailer" book showcase, you can see an example of one of the new formation detachments - the Ork Blitz Brigade (Warlord Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
This is the video in question, from about 1:04 onwards: https://youtu.be/eqvsbgzzLKI

I consolidated all the Ork rules into a reddit post here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/comments/a0evgb/by_going_framebyframe_through_the_vigilus_defiant/

What do people think? Powerful? Not worth it?

Hold On, Boyz seems really strong, though I'm not sure how useful it is for orkz since I'm pretty sure they have multiple ways of getting a fast charge off already. I find the idea of their relic being a normal megaphone to be extremely funny but again, not sure if it's useful enough for a relic slot.

For those of us not in the know re: the 8th edition rules, is the news of these upcoming detachments something akin to the formations back in 7th edition with gobs of special rules and such for no points costs? Or are they just like the modified force orgs they have in the 8th core book that just largely vary in how many command points you get?

 warboss wrote:
For those of us not in the know re: the 8th edition rules, is the news of these upcoming detachments something akin to the formations back in 7th edition with gobs of special rules and such for no points costs? Or are they just like the modified force orgs they have in the 8th core book that just largely vary in how many command points you get?

Seems like you're paying for the detachment with CP, and most of the advantages will be access to stratagems (which, again, will require further CP investment to use).

So it's not the "completely free abilities as long as you buy the undiscounted bundle on the webstore" like 7th was, though it could still be an issue since some armies have massively more access to CP than others.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Tastyfish wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Tastyfish wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Was somebody talking about the legacy of the Chapterhouse ruling here? Because yeah, that has triggered some sort if breakdown in GW. I love everything they do nowadays...except the names...the bloody names.

And they can’t seriously leave inquisitors out of the game can they?

Never said they were going to, just they weren't redoing Codex Imperial Agents. Inquisitor focus will be in Kill team where you can go mad with your retinues without worrying about most of them just being there to catch a battlecannon round.

Well thats not being in 40k then is it? Fething stupid.

Anyone can catch a battlecannon round, Inquisitors might well have the forcefields (if they remember to actually give them them) to survive it. If anyone shoud have invulnerable saves - its Inquisitors.

But all the weird stuff in Kill team has also had 40K rules, by the time an Inquisitor (in general) is in a 40K game - they've played most of their cards and now have brought an army, or are using this as a distraction.
Against an army, they're just an officer with a dirty trick (some kind of reroll). But in the detailed one on one combat of kill team you'll see them come into their own. So the model we have now seems to make sense - fluff choice with basic rules and the odd quirk, but not the mainstay of an army.

Some Inquisitors will be different, but the generic inquisitor is an IG officer with a few dirty tricks and skills that are more suited to a smaller scale game where they can be an unstoppable force, likewise most of their henchmen.

So quick rules for 40K for campaign finales or big starts, but the detail for them zooms to the scale of the Inquisitor and their retinue to highlight each member and give them all a role to play individually, rather than just running about as a suboptimal elite squad.

Kill Team is not great for actual options - in fact its poor. Really poor.

IG officer equivalent - not really - Inquisitors often use Artificer and Terminator armour in actual combat, plus energy fields, Xenos weapons and some are psykers on top of that. Last codex / Index tonned them down massively.

A combat focussed Inquisitor with custom armour, stims , bio and/or cyber enchancements should be more like: M6 WS 2+, BS 2+, S4, T4, W 4, A3, Ld10, 2+/ 4++ Weapons like (Asssault class) Heavy Bolter and Power Fist. FNP6+

Obviously Inquisitors can have anything, but most story ones don't. As they're Inquisiting rather than grand standing or purging some massive base single handedly. It's skills, connections, tenacity and contacts that makes them powerful - plus the threat of the full weight of the Pax Imperium if needs must. Investigative inquisitors, and retinues are what kill team is for - especially as it merges with Inq28.

Super mega dude with all the tricks and armour, there's a couple already in the various codexes - but this is a special case even for that guy half the time. An Inquisitor could have fancy armour, training and fancy weapons - to the point they are deathwatch. Most of the Inq characters stated out for 40K are just humans with powerswords and a pistol. Maybe power armour.

Requiring combat focused inquisitors is the whole reason they don't want to do them, they're not there to duel Chaos Lords as part of a pure Soup list - they're a terrible idea from a list building point of view. Inquisitors are cool, because of the setting/mission and the crazy guys they bring along, and 40K is just not the place for them. Coteaz and Torquemada not still options in the GK book?

Tastyfish wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Tastyfish wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Tastyfish wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Was somebody talking about the legacy of the Chapterhouse ruling here? Because yeah, that has triggered some sort if breakdown in GW. I love everything they do nowadays...except the names...the bloody names.

And they can’t seriously leave inquisitors out of the game can they?

Never said they were going to, just they weren't redoing Codex Imperial Agents. Inquisitor focus will be in Kill team where you can go mad with your retinues without worrying about most of them just being there to catch a battlecannon round.

Well thats not being in 40k then is it? Fething stupid.

Anyone can catch a battlecannon round, Inquisitors might well have the forcefields (if they remember to actually give them them) to survive it. If anyone shoud have invulnerable saves - its Inquisitors.

But all the weird stuff in Kill team has also had 40K rules, by the time an Inquisitor (in general) is in a 40K game - they've played most of their cards and now have brought an army, or are using this as a distraction.
Against an army, they're just an officer with a dirty trick (some kind of reroll). But in the detailed one on one combat of kill team you'll see them come into their own. So the model we have now seems to make sense - fluff choice with basic rules and the odd quirk, but not the mainstay of an army.

Some Inquisitors will be different, but the generic inquisitor is an IG officer with a few dirty tricks and skills that are more suited to a smaller scale game where they can be an unstoppable force, likewise most of their henchmen.

So quick rules for 40K for campaign finales or big starts, but the detail for them zooms to the scale of the Inquisitor and their retinue to highlight each member and give them all a role to play individually, rather than just running about as a suboptimal elite squad.

Kill Team is not great for actual options - in fact its poor. Really poor.

IG officer equivalent - not really - Inquisitors often use Artificer and Terminator armour in actual combat, plus energy fields, Xenos weapons and some are psykers on top of that. Last codex / Index tonned them down massively.

A combat focussed Inquisitor with custom armour, stims , bio and/or cyber enchancements should be more like: M6 WS 2+, BS 2+, S4, T4, W 4, A3, Ld10, 2+/ 4++ Weapons like (Asssault class) Heavy Bolter and Power Fist. FNP6+

Obviously Inquisitors can have anything, but most story ones don't. As they're Inquisiting rather than grand standing or purging some massive base single handedly. It's skills, connections, tenacity and contacts that makes them powerful - plus the threat of the full weight of the Pax Imperium if needs must. Investigative inquisitors, and retinues are what kill team is for - especially as it merges with Inq28.

Super mega dude with all the tricks and armour, there's a couple already in the various codexes - but this is a special case even for that guy half the time. An Inquisitor could have fancy armour, training and fancy weapons - to the point they are deathwatch. Most of the Inq characters stated out for 40K are just humans with powerswords and a pistol. Maybe power armour.

Requiring combat focused inquisitors is the whole reason they don't want to do them, they're not there to duel Chaos Lords as part of a pure Soup list - they're a terrible idea from a list building point of view. Inquisitors are cool, because of the setting/mission and the crazy guys they bring along, and 40K is just not the place for them. Coteaz and Torquemada not still options in the GK book?

Obviously plenty of folk disagree, including GW of a few years ago when they were giving each Ordo it's own entire codex(and the fact they never got around to Xenos is a damn travesty).

Besides which, again, this is a ludicrous double standard - where is the concern over GSC being defined purely by the brief outburst of violent insurrection right before they get eaten along with everything else, when the much more interesting part of the faction is their slow, insidious takeover of societies from within? If 40K characters with middling weaponry and equipment don't really merit inclusion, why do Guard get a bunch of auxiliary characters with middling weaponry and equipment?

If the 40K rules are broad enough to encompass artillery officers, minor astropaths, lowly priests, and naval attachés all the way up to Titans, the idea that an Inquisitor and their gaggle of specialists are beyond the pale is sheer farce. Especially when such characters have repeatedly been depicted as leaders of armies - hell, Rogue Traders often end up named as Lords of whole Crusades that can comprise dozens of Guard regiments and exceptionally large deployments of Marines.

And no, Coteaz and co are not still options in the GK book, that's one of the reasons people want a sodding Agents book so the rules for all the bits and bobs that have been stripped away from the supposed Chambers Militant of the Inquisition so the poor ickle marinelets don't have to share their spotlight with anybody will get proper non-Index rules.

The verb for inquisitor is "inquire," not "inquisite."

I actually think an Agents codex would be pretty straightforward. However, it definitely would have to come after the Sisters codex.

At its core would be a special detachment called an Inquisitorial Retinue. The Retinue is essentially a Battalion, but you are only allowed to have one such detachment. You also must take one and only one Inquisitor in it, and that Inquisitor must be your Warlord and must take a relic in addition to the one it already carries; two relics if it is a custom Inquisitor. The WLT and relics should both grant auras or powerful once-per-game effects.

You may then freely take any unit from the Agents codex, which should includes the Inquistors' usual suspects, Sisters of Silence, Officio Assassinorum, Ecclesiarchy, Scholastia Psykana, and maybe Arbites and gangers. None of these units have special chapter tactics-style rules. Also, depending on your Inquisitor's Ordo, you can add units to the Retinue from certain codexes. Ordo Malleus can take Grey Knights; Ordo Xenos can take Deathwatch; and Ordo Hereticus can take Sisters of Battle. These units can keep their chapter tactics as long as they all have the same chapter tactic. They can also freely use any of the stratagems from their respective codexes.

 CaptainBetts wrote:
By going frame-by-frame through the Vigilus Defiant "trailer" book showcase, you can see an example of one of the new formation detachments - the Ork Blitz Brigade (Warlord Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
This is the video in question, from about 1:04 onwards: https://youtu.be/eqvsbgzzLKI

I consolidated all the Ork rules into a reddit post here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/comments/a0evgb/by_going_framebyframe_through_the_vigilus_defiant/

What do people think? Powerful? Not worth it?

Nice work. Pretty tame so far.

Though it seems like these will be Vigilus specific and not available for general matches play anyway.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

 CaptainBetts wrote:
By going frame-by-frame through the Vigilus Defiant "trailer" book showcase, you can see an example of one of the new formation detachments - the Ork Blitz Brigade (Warlord Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
This is the video in question, from about 1:04 onwards: https://youtu.be/eqvsbgzzLKI

I consolidated all the Ork rules into a reddit post here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/comments/a0evgb/by_going_framebyframe_through_the_vigilus_defiant/

What do people think? Powerful? Not worth it?

Hold On, Boyz seems really strong, though I'm not sure how useful it is for orkz since I'm pretty sure they have multiple ways of getting a fast charge off already. I find the idea of their relic being a normal megaphone to be extremely funny but again, not sure if it's useful enough for a relic slot.

You can't charge after Hold On.

 CaptainBetts wrote:
By going frame-by-frame through the Vigilus Defiant "trailer" book showcase, you can see an example of one of the new formation detachments - the Ork Blitz Brigade (Warlord Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
This is the video in question, from about 1:04 onwards: https://youtu.be/eqvsbgzzLKI

I consolidated all the Ork rules into a reddit post here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/comments/a0evgb/by_going_framebyframe_through_the_vigilus_defiant/

What do people think? Powerful? Not worth it?

Seems like an equivalent of the other pregame Strategems to be honest. I think people can be relaxed.

 insaniak wrote:

 skullking wrote:
Loving the new GSC bikers! Along with that new tactician, and the ‘masked gunslinger’, we’re getting some fun new models. Still holding out hope for a legit limo, but the aesthetic they seem to be following doesn’t look to be the ‘slick 30’s mobster’ feel, of the rogue trader era. Would be fun if they added that in though. Then we’d have the blue collar construction types, the road warrior bikers, and the snazzy gangsters. I’ll definitly employ some Delaque with a classed up ork dragster if GW won’t give me my uptown stealers.

Something more like a stretched Hummer or FJ cruiser, aesthetically, would probably work better than a limo with the current aesthetic. Big and flashy, but still rugged and industrial looking.

Mount a gun and some icons on a Hummer 2, and you are done already. Fits right in.

Suzuteo wrote:
The verb for inquisitor is "inquire," not "inquisite."

I actually think an Agents codex would be pretty straightforward. However, it definitely would have to come after the Sisters codex.

At its core would be a special detachment called an Inquisitorial Retinue. The Retinue is essentially a Battalion, but you are only allowed to have one such detachment. You also must take one and only one Inquisitor in it, and that Inquisitor must be your Warlord and must take a relic in addition to the one it already carries; two relics if it is a custom Inquisitor. The WLT and relics should both grant auras or powerful once-per-game effects.

You may then freely take any unit from the Agents codex, which should includes the Inquistors' usual suspects, Sisters of Silence, Officio Assassinorum, Ecclesiarchy, Scholastia Psykana, and maybe Arbites and gangers. None of these units have special chapter tactics-style rules. Also, depending on your Inquisitor's Ordo, you can add units to the Retinue from certain codexes. Ordo Malleus can take Grey Knights; Ordo Xenos can take Deathwatch; and Ordo Hereticus can take Sisters of Battle. These units can keep their chapter tactics as long as they all have the same chapter tactic. They can also freely use any of the stratagems from their respective codexes.

Yeah that's a big No to just bundling in Sisters of Silence to Inquisition.
Thats terrible treatment of a faction thats already been short changed once by GW because god forbid they be included ib a codex talons, nope had to be codex bling biker boys only.
It also removes a chance to actually bring less cheesey female faction into the game.
While Sister of battle next year is possibly a good thing for those that want it they do fallow the classic nuns with guns theme way to obviously.

Ice_can wrote:

Suzuteo wrote:
The verb for inquisitor is "inquire," not "inquisite."

I actually think an Agents codex would be pretty straightforward. However, it definitely would have to come after the Sisters codex.

At its core would be a special detachment called an Inquisitorial Retinue. The Retinue is essentially a Battalion, but you are only allowed to have one such detachment. You also must take one and only one Inquisitor in it, and that Inquisitor must be your Warlord and must take a relic in addition to the one it already carries; two relics if it is a custom Inquisitor. The WLT and relics should both grant auras or powerful once-per-game effects.

You may then freely take any unit from the Agents codex, which should includes the Inquistors' usual suspects, Sisters of Silence, Officio Assassinorum, Ecclesiarchy, Scholastia Psykana, and maybe Arbites and gangers. None of these units have special chapter tactics-style rules. Also, depending on your Inquisitor's Ordo, you can add units to the Retinue from certain codexes. Ordo Malleus can take Grey Knights; Ordo Xenos can take Deathwatch; and Ordo Hereticus can take Sisters of Battle. These units can keep their chapter tactics as long as they all have the same chapter tactic. They can also freely use any of the stratagems from their respective codexes.

Yeah that's a big No to just bundling in Sisters of Silence to Inquisition.
Thats terrible treatment of a faction thats already been short changed once by GW because god forbid they be included ib a codex talons, nope had to be codex bling biker boys only.
It also removes a chance to actually bring less cheesey female faction into the game.
While Sister of battle next year is possibly a good thing for those that want it they do fallow the classic nuns with guns theme way to obviously.

What are you talking about? They don't follow the nuns with guns theme, they ARE the nuns with guns theme. Everyone else is following them.

And less cheesy? Are you talking about the mute skinheads with bane masks that freak normies out because they don't have souls? That's an emo 12 years old's crappy deviant art page, not an idea for a 'less cheesy' faction.

Were there any hints about when the Warbringer titan would be released (other than "soon", as mentioned on the community site)?

I'm kind of suspecting an initial release at the HH weekender with a general release a month or so later, but that does then put it at a release nearly 4 months after the reveal, though I guess that's not unheard of for FW stuff.

Tavis75 wrote:
Were there any hints about when the Warbringer titan would be released (other than "soon", as mentioned on the community site)?

I'm kind of suspecting an initial release at the HH weekender with a general release a month or so later, but that does then put it at a release nearly 4 months after the reveal, though I guess that's not unheard of for FW stuff.

Given current trends 4-5 months is spot on, also it'll likely be before any meaningful rules books.

The latest Warhammer community article about the warbringer says it will be out in time for christmas

CaptainBetts wrote:By going frame-by-frame through the Vigilus Defiant "trailer" book showcase, you can see an example of one of the new formation detachments - the Ork Blitz Brigade (Warlord Traits, Stratagems, etc.).
This is the video in question, from about 1:04 onwards: https://youtu.be/eqvsbgzzLKI

I consolidated all the Ork rules into a reddit post here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/comments/a0evgb/by_going_framebyframe_through_the_vigilus_defiant/

What do people think? Powerful? Not worth it?

Formations and formation like detachments played a major role in ruining 7th edition W40K. I'm very disappointed to see things like this being used again, even if it's just for Narrative play. Just my $0.02.

 oni wrote:

Formations and formation like detachments played a major role in ruining 7th edition W40K. I'm very disappointed to see things like this being used again, even if it's just for Narrative play. Just my $0.02.

And the return to strictly Detachment based organization ruined my Skitarii. I welcome Formations returning if it means I can run Skitarii without fricking Techpriests again.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 skullking wrote:
Loving the new GSC bikers! Along with that new tactician, and the ‘masked gunslinger’, we’re getting some fun new models. Still holding out hope for a legit limo, but the aesthetic they seem to be following doesn’t look to be the ‘slick 30’s mobster’ feel, of the rogue trader era. Would be fun if they added that in though. Then we’d have the blue collar construction types, the road warrior bikers, and the snazzy gangsters. I’ll definitly employ some Delaque with a classed up ork dragster if GW won’t give me my uptown stealers.

Something more like a stretched Hummer or FJ cruiser, aesthetically, would probably work better than a limo with the current aesthetic. Big and flashy, but still rugged and industrial looking.

Mount a gun and some icons on a Hummer 2, and you are done already. Fits right in.

Dear god, I hope you mean an actual military vehicle, and not an H2!? They can use those to take the little neophytes to soccer practice.

The original limos weren’t just classy, they looked rugged too. I think the point being to lure hive gangers in with all that bling. Though one of the original limos looks more 30’s mobster, the other feels more blinged out gangsta.


I’d assume it would be fast, but very low on armor. A really cheap transport for getting the mob across the board. Good for seizing objectives till the bigger ‘rugged’ vehicles can get there. You could convert some akira style bikers to accompany them.

I just figured if they can shift gears so much to add in the road warrior bikers, why not do the limo as well? The delaque REALLY look like GSC too.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 oni wrote:

Formations and formation like detachments played a major role in ruining 7th edition W40K. I'm very disappointed to see things like this being used again, even if it's just for Narrative play. Just my $0.02.

And the return to strictly Detachment based organization ruined my Skitarii. I welcome Formations returning if it means I can run Skitarii without fricking Techpriests again.

You should probably stop bringing up in random contexts that you want to not take your factions HQ because of an arbitrary standard you’ve set as if you expect any level of sympathy.

I’d love a skitatii character from the perspective of having a cheaper HQ for smaller games and filling detachment requirements, but “I’m super upset I need to take tech priests in my admech army” is never going to be a coherent point.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 oni wrote:

Formations and formation like detachments played a major role in ruining 7th edition W40K. I'm very disappointed to see things like this being used again, even if it's just for Narrative play. Just my $0.02.

And the return to strictly Detachment based organization ruined my Skitarii. I welcome Formations returning if it means I can run Skitarii without fricking Techpriests again.

My only concern is they are going to make us Skitarii (not Cult Mech) players pay CP just to have a Skitarii army. And given that Skitarii Alpha Primes exist in the fluff, I don't even know why we should not have an HQ in the first place. I suppose because people would never have a reason to buy a Techpriest ever again.

changemod wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 oni wrote:

Formations and formation like detachments played a major role in ruining 7th edition W40K. I'm very disappointed to see things like this being used again, even if it's just for Narrative play. Just my $0.02.

And the return to strictly Detachment based organization ruined my Skitarii. I welcome Formations returning if it means I can run Skitarii without fricking Techpriests again.

You should probably stop bringing up in random contexts that you want to not take your factions HQ because of an arbitrary standard you’ve set as if you expect any level of sympathy.

I’d love a skitatii character from the perspective of having a cheaper HQ for smaller games and filling detachment requirements, but “I’m super upset I need to take tech priests in my admech army” is never going to be a coherent point.

You should probably read the comment I replied to before throwing your little "YOU CAN'T TALK ABOUT THAT!" hissyfit.

For the record though:
Skitarii were a fully fleshed out faction. Full. Stop. They were able to be fielded and played (fairly) effectively without needing huge amounts of Allies. They only really suffered against Eldar and GMCs(but that's not something they were alone in).
The same was not true of the dumpsterfire that was Cult Mechanicus. Cult had expensive Troops, expensive Elites, expensive Heavy Supports, and expensive HQs...and an army that got better with the more units on the table that had the army's special rule.

The point of a Skitarii HQ isn't "a cheaper HQ for smaller games and filling detachment requirements"(that already exists with the Techpriest Enginseer, which you'd know if you had a clue as to what you were talking about) but to allow for someone to field an all Skitarii army and to add an HQ choice that allows for Skitarii to get some synergy, no matter the Forge World one is playing. Right now, Stygies is more or less used as an 'Allied' Outrider Detachment with Sydonian Dragoons filling up the slots and Mars is the 'go to' because of Cawl and what he grants.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 oni wrote:

Formations and formation like detachments played a major role in ruining 7th edition W40K. I'm very disappointed to see things like this being used again, even if it's just for Narrative play. Just my $0.02.

And the return to strictly Detachment based organization ruined my Skitarii. I welcome Formations returning if it means I can run Skitarii without fricking Techpriests again.

My only concern is they are going to make us Skitarii (not Cult Mech) players pay CP just to have a Skitarii army.

At this point? It'd be a welcome change--especially if accompanied by a rule for Squadrons of Onagers since they've been so heavily neutered thanks to the rule of 3.

I am with you there on the Onagers. Definitely would be a welcome change (I only have two Onagers currently, but I know plenty of people want more). And being able to skip out on a 100 pt model that doesn't even fit our army in the fluff would be fine by me, as long as the CP cost is not catastrophic (heck, the Formation bonus could be that it elevates one Skitarii Alpha to Character status and it can gain Warlord Traits).

Edit: *Gasp* I did a roll call of my Skitarii, and it appears I completely dreamed an Onager into existence because I only have one!

 Yodhrin wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
Thanks for taking the time to report on what you heard. It's kind of encouraging to hear that they kind of let the design team run things and just do what they think is cool.

Is that a good thing though?

The miniatures team shows up with a new Space Marine flyer that has Marines attached to the wings that it drops like bombs.

"Go write rules and fluff for this. It's coming out in 8 months."

I'm sure that's not how it works, but from the sounds of it miniatures call the shots, and the people writing the background have to march to their tune.

From snippets over the years, that's pretty much always how it's been, though, with the caveat that the accountants tend to jump in if they disagree strongly with the marketability of a given project, as supposedly was the case for so many years with Sisters.

Frankly, this is why FW with Alan Bligh calling most of the shots was the superior prospect for many - it was still driven by passion projects, but there was a more "integrated" approach with the fiction given something approaching equal billing and an eye squarely on the coherence of the final product.

Of course this is also a good example of the problems that occurred once he was no longer around. With him gone it seems FW ground to a halt to scramble for things.

robbienw wrote:
The latest Warhammer community article about the warbringer says it will be out in time for christmas

Gosh, that's sooner than expected! Good in some ways but thought I was going to have a few months to prepare my wallet! At least I got a free £20 FW gift voucher last week, that's about a third of an arm!

Awwwwwwwwww yisss: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/11/26/to-kill-a-dark-kinggw-homepage-post-3/

Just like with Malign Portents, free short stories to flesh out Vigilus!

Very cool (didn't our clever assassin think about the name of the cult, the clue is right there)

Makes me think if only the Genestealers could break away from the Tyranids and go back to being what they were once before, independent and creepy rather than just a fragment of the hive mind

Meh'Lindi wouldn't have missed.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
Thanks for taking the time to report on what you heard. It's kind of encouraging to hear that they kind of let the design team run things and just do what they think is cool.

Is that a good thing though?

The miniatures team shows up with a new Space Marine flyer that has Marines attached to the wings that it drops like bombs.

"Go write rules and fluff for this. It's coming out in 8 months."

I'm sure that's not how it works, but from the sounds of it miniatures call the shots, and the people writing the background have to march to their tune.

From snippets over the years, that's pretty much always how it's been, though, with the caveat that the accountants tend to jump in if they disagree strongly with the marketability of a given project, as supposedly was the case for so many years with Sisters.

Frankly, this is why FW with Alan Bligh calling most of the shots was the superior prospect for many - it was still driven by passion projects, but there was a more "integrated" approach with the fiction given something approaching equal billing and an eye squarely on the coherence of the final product.

Of course this is also a good example of the problems that occurred once he was no longer around. With him gone it seems FW ground to a halt to scramble for things.

True, but that's not something that's inherent to the idea of a more "holistic" approach to the IP, it was the situation at FW because Alan was evidently handling the workload of several people(whether by choice or due to miserly funding from GWHQ I don't know). But you don't need one guy doing most of the work in order to have the fiction guys and the rules guys and the model guys actively collaborating, and occasionally putting the needs & desires of the model guys second to preserve the integrity of the IP.

On the 80 days topic:

A) game time differs to ours, so could well take longer, so I wouldn’t want people getting too excited.

Having said that I do think it could be a tease, so...

B) 80 days from when? When this Vigilus book comes out it will presumably have the same fluff, he has 80 days to take the world. So that would be when to start counting no?
It seems everyone has jumped on last weekend to start the count.
Whereas I’m not so sure it’ll be as soon as Feb for Abaddon necessarily, though saying it like that, what else could be coming in that time after GSC, it must be him

Another piece of Vigilus fiction: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/11/27/tales-from-vigilus-02gw-homepage-post-3/

Not sure why the enemy here is Death Guard again instead of Black legion, though I suppose it was inevitable that Mortarion's Plague Bois would be coming to Vigilus too. Interesting that the Astar Militarum in the story are Valhallans, as GW hasn't sold any Valhallan models for months now - if only 't were a sign of a coming plastic kit... (But probably not.)

 Insane Ivan wrote:
Another piece of Vigilus fiction: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/11/27/tales-from-vigilus-02gw-homepage-post-3/

Not sure why the enemy here is Death Guard again instead of Black legion, though I suppose it was inevitable that Mortarion's Plague Bois would be coming to Vigilus too. Interesting that the Astar Militarum in the story are Valhallans, as GW hasn't sold any Valhallan models for months now - if only 't were a sign of a coming plastic kit... (But probably not.)

I agree, was wondering why Death Guard are the main “foe” in this story. I thought they were literally on the other side of the galaxy messing around with BobbyG in Ultramar etc.

UNLESS, it is Typhus? He has been missing for some time, so it could be a mini tie-in, but still, no idea why they’d use him, when there are so many other options available right now.

We haven't gotten a Kill-Team set yet for Death Guard, so no real ideas what's happening on that front.

Hesitant guess is that this is their "arrival" to the warzone, with them potentially working with the Black Legion.

To be fair calgar was defending ultramar last we heard of him yet he's now front and centre at vigilus so maybe him and the death guard have just moved on.

As for the 80 days well when the book drops would be day 1 you'd have to expect. It's very specific not to be something other than Abaddons arrival. Late Feb early March we should start seeing the new chaos hopefully

When did gathering storm start?

I feel like we can use that as a base point. I believe that was the first major release of that year

 warboss wrote:
For those of us not in the know re: the 8th edition rules, is the news of these upcoming detachments something akin to the formations back in 7th edition with gobs of special rules and such for no points costs? Or are they just like the modified force orgs they have in the 8th core book that just largely vary in how many command points you get?

Currently we have stratagems for abilities that only affect 1 unit. Examples of a good stratagem are like..."this unit can shoot twice this turn" for 3 CP "or this unit is -1 to hit this phase" for 2 CP. In other words - stratagems are very powerful in their own right. These "formation bonus" use the same resource as stratagems called command points (CP). So it sounds like formation bonus will be in the range of the cost of 3 stratagems. They will likely give you some sort of bonus all game.

My theory here:

Formations are coming and are going to give big bonuses. They will likely cost CP.

GW just said they want to get out of soup by offering bonuses to non-soup, rather than penalize soup lists and players.

(Guess) Formations will give their bonuses at a reduced cost for armies that are battle-forged and have no soup.

 drazz wrote:
My theory here:

Formations are coming and are going to give big bonuses. They will likely cost CP.

GW just said they want to get out of soup by offering bonuses to non-soup, rather than penalize soup lists and players.

(Guess) Formations will give their bonuses at a reduced cost for armies that are battle-forged and have no soup.

The formations costing CP was confirmed by people present at the event.

The refusal to penalize soup lists is infuriatingly confusing at this point though.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 drazz wrote:
My theory here:

Formations are coming and are going to give big bonuses. They will likely cost CP.

GW just said they want to get out of soup by offering bonuses to non-soup, rather than penalize soup lists and players.

(Guess) Formations will give their bonuses at a reduced cost for armies that are battle-forged and have no soup.

The formations costing CP was confirmed by people present at the event.

The refusal to penalize soup lists is infuriatingly confusing at this point though.

It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 drazz wrote:
My theory here:

Formations are coming and are going to give big bonuses. They will likely cost CP.

GW just said they want to get out of soup by offering bonuses to non-soup, rather than penalize soup lists and players.

(Guess) Formations will give their bonuses at a reduced cost for armies that are battle-forged and have no soup.

The formations costing CP was confirmed by people present at the event.

The refusal to penalize soup lists is infuriatingly confusing at this point though.

Not really. What the Balance Brigade have to grasp is that Soup is not an accident. Neither was Allies. GW want people crafting armies out of units from multiple factions, because it lets them make fluffy lists and - probably more importantly - increases the chance that people will keep buying stuff.

Once you accept the basic fact that GW want Soup to be as viable as any other option, and that interfering sufficiently with Soup to make it equivalent to or less powerful than monofaction armies would also likely wreck the entire point of Soup, layering on another mechanism to boost monofaction stuff instead isn't even remotely confusing, it's the most logical response given GW's position.

gak, just be glad it's not a few years ago, they wouldn't even be trying to level the playing field.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 drazz wrote:
My theory here:

Formations are coming and are going to give big bonuses. They will likely cost CP.

GW just said they want to get out of soup by offering bonuses to non-soup, rather than penalize soup lists and players.

(Guess) Formations will give their bonuses at a reduced cost for armies that are battle-forged and have no soup.

The formations costing CP was confirmed by people present at the event.

The refusal to penalize soup lists is infuriatingly confusing at this point though.

Not really. What the Balance Brigade have to grasp is that Soup is not an accident. Neither was Allies. GW want people crafting armies out of units from multiple factions, because it lets them make fluffy lists and - probably more importantly - increases the chance that people will keep buying stuff.

Once you accept the basic fact that GW want Soup to be as viable as any other option, and that interfering sufficiently with Soup to make it equivalent to or less powerful than monofaction armies would also likely wreck the entire point of Soup, layering on another mechanism to boost monofaction stuff instead isn't even remotely confusing, it's the most logical response given GW's position.

gak, just be glad it's not a few years ago, they wouldn't even be trying to level the playing field.

Except by using CP as the base for the formation benifits, it still make it another incentive to soup for cheap CP.

At no point is GW going to hand out a big enough bonus to make not soupibg in cheap CP just the defacto more competitive option.

Additionally the firced mono codex of Necrons and Tau have already pretty much been confirmed to be not getting formations so please explain how that helps mono vrs soup balance?

 Cephalobeard wrote:

It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

"Intentional and fluffy" would be requiring you to use an "Auxiliary Detachment", not being able to bring an 'auxiliary' detachment that's larger than your original faction's.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 drazz wrote:
My theory here:

Formations are coming and are going to give big bonuses. They will likely cost CP.

GW just said they want to get out of soup by offering bonuses to non-soup, rather than penalize soup lists and players.

(Guess) Formations will give their bonuses at a reduced cost for armies that are battle-forged and have no soup.

The formations costing CP was confirmed by people present at the event.

The refusal to penalize soup lists is infuriatingly confusing at this point though.

We have had some rumors about CP being limited to detachment. That would nerf soup pretty drastically.

Ice_can wrote:


Additionally the firced mono codex of Necrons and Tau have already pretty much been confirmed to be not getting formations so please explain how that helps mono vrs soup balance?

Where was that?

Necrons and Tau aren't in Vigilus Defiant, the campaign book with narrative scenarios and additional rules for some armies (e.g. new Calgar, Haarken Worldclaimer).

Necrons and Tau are in Urban Conquest, the boxed set with narrative map-based campaigns and specialist detachments - at least as far as anyone knows. Tau are even front and center in the promo pic for Urban Conquest on the Warhammer Community site.

 Yodhrin wrote:

Not really. What the Balance Brigade have to grasp is that Soup is not an accident. Neither was Allies. GW want people crafting armies out of units from multiple factions, because it lets them make fluffy lists and - probably more importantly - increases the chance that people will keep buying stuff.

Once you accept the basic fact that GW want Soup to be as viable as any other option, and that interfering sufficiently with Soup to make it equivalent to or less powerful than monofaction armies would also likely wreck the entire point of Soup, layering on another mechanism to boost monofaction stuff instead isn't even remotely confusing, it's the most logical response given GW's position.

The problem is that there isn't "any other option" for some armies. And the soup issue will continually impact those armies chosen to fill holes in the soup lists, not the players that abuse the soup lists.

gak, just be glad it's not a few years ago, they wouldn't even be trying to level the playing field.

They still aren't. It's been noted multiple times that there are a ton of different ways that could be utilized to neuter soup without affecting the base factions but then the Soup Chefs always show up to shout about how it hurts their "fluffy" list of a Custodes jetbike list or a single Castellan and a Slamguinius if the Guard don't give you CPs...and how it's the Guard's fault that their units are so cheap compared to yours.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

"Intentional and fluffy" would be requiring you to use an "Auxiliary Detachment", not being able to bring an 'auxiliary' detachment that's larger than your original faction's.

Soup =/= Auxilary detachments.

I will agree with you that an allied Knight Valiant or something in a single detachment should likely not be a thing, and in my opinion should certainly not have access to stratagems or command points, but that is completely different from someone using Guard, Marines, and whatever other flavor of soup they want to add to their armies.

Allies are intentional.

It's part of the game, its been there for over a year, everything they do continues to support that.

I feel pretty confident that these formation bonuses will require you to have a mono faction, more or less removing the benefit of mixing armies. At least that's what I'd do.

Want all these things from different armies? Forfeit your bonuses. Simple.

But depending on these bonuses they may not be good enough to sway people over to mono factions

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

"Intentional and fluffy" would be requiring you to use an "Auxiliary Detachment", not being able to bring an 'auxiliary' detachment that's larger than your original faction's.

Soup =/= Auxilary detachments.

That's your opinion. There's a reason I put 'auxiliary' like I did--the role they're playing when it's the common Soup Chef lists?
Guard are there to provide CPs and bodies, a kitted out Marine HQ and Knights are there to do the heavy lifting.

They're functioning in an auxiliary role to the 'main' army. Or are you going to try to argue that all of a sudden Guard players needed Slamguinius and a Knight Castellan to be effective? With how broken people crow the Guard book is, I'd be surprised if that were the case!

I will agree with you that an allied Knight Valiant or something in a single detachment should likely not be a thing, and in my opinion should certainly not have access to stratagems or command points, but that is completely different from someone using Guard, Marines, and whatever other flavor of soup they want to add to their armies.

Let's stop pretending that it's strictly "fluff" for the majority of these ridiculous lists. It's effectiveness driving it, fluff is secondary.

Allies are intentional.

It's part of the game, its been there for over a year, everything they do continues to support that.

Allies are intentional and part of the game and so were the "Auxiliary Support Detachments". You know, the things where you sacrifice a CP and get a single unit?

That's where "Allies" would be coming into play. Not with you taking a Brigade of Guardsmen, a Patrol or Battalion of Blood Angels, and a single Knight Castellan.

I quite like formations, I like the flavour that some of them added, they worked fine before as well before they started giving free transports away !

 Rayvon wrote:
I quite like formations, I like the flavour that some of them added, they worked fine before as well before they started giving free transports away !

Yeah, I think the main danger is in putting free units on the table, making army x with detachment y inherently worth more points than others for the same cost.

 Asmodai wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Additionally the firced mono codex of Necrons and Tau have already pretty much been confirmed to be not getting formations so please explain how that helps mono vrs soup balance?

Where was that?

Necrons and Tau aren't in Vigilus Defiant, the campaign book with narrative scenarios and additional rules for some armies (e.g. new Calgar, Haarken Worldclaimer).

Necrons and Tau are in Urban Conquest, the boxed set with narrative map-based campaigns and specialist detachments - at least as far as anyone knows. Tau are even front and center in the promo pic for Urban Conquest on the Warhammer Community site.

That's good news, I was going on the reports I had seen from the vigilusnweekender which made it sounds like the formations where in the vigilous defient book which is only about factions on vigilous.
Maybe I'm just too used to GW ignoring Xeno's factions infavour of choas and imperium.

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 drazz wrote:
My theory here:

Formations are coming and are going to give big bonuses. They will likely cost CP.

GW just said they want to get out of soup by offering bonuses to non-soup, rather than penalize soup lists and players.

(Guess) Formations will give their bonuses at a reduced cost for armies that are battle-forged and have no soup.

The formations costing CP was confirmed by people present at the event.

The refusal to penalize soup lists is infuriatingly confusing at this point though.

It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

PErsonal reason being generally game balance. As long as soup exists game is impossible to balance.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

"Intentional and fluffy" would be requiring you to use an "Auxiliary Detachment", not being able to bring an 'auxiliary' detachment that's larger than your original faction's.

Soup =/= Auxilary detachments.

That's your opinion. There's a reason I put 'auxiliary' like I did--the role they're playing when it's the common Soup Chef lists?
Guard are there to provide CPs and bodies, a kitted out Marine HQ and Knights are there to do the heavy lifting.

They're functioning in an auxiliary role to the 'main' army. Or are you going to try to argue that all of a sudden Guard players needed Slamguinius and a Knight Castellan to be effective? With how broken people crow the Guard book is, I'd be surprised if that were the case!

I will agree with you that an allied Knight Valiant or something in a single detachment should likely not be a thing, and in my opinion should certainly not have access to stratagems or command points, but that is completely different from someone using Guard, Marines, and whatever other flavor of soup they want to add to their armies.

Let's stop pretending that it's strictly "fluff" for the majority of these ridiculous lists. It's effectiveness driving it, fluff is secondary.

Allies are intentional.

It's part of the game, its been there for over a year, everything they do continues to support that.

Allies are intentional and part of the game and so were the "Auxiliary Support Detachments". You know, the things where you sacrifice a CP and get a single unit?

That's where "Allies" would be coming into play. Not with you taking a Brigade of Guardsmen, a Patrol or Battalion of Blood Angels, and a single Knight Castellan.

ASD are for when a single unit, eg an assassin, joins your force. Having a brigade of infantry working with a space marine chapter makes perfect sense. The Knight is literally in an Auxiliary detachment in your example. It's just that it's a superheavy.

You can dislike the ally system all you want from a balance PoV, I get that. But from a fluff PoV it makes perfect sense in most cases. Heck, you SHOULDN'T play tank and infantry Guard of the same regimental tactic, for example. They're Tank Regiments and Infantry Regiments and so on, and they're usually from different worlds even if they're currently fighting one the same one.

And why wouldn't Khorne Daemons and World eaters get along? Why wouldn't Sisters of Battle work together with Inquisitors?

I am very excited for these new "formations?" "Rites of War?" Whatever they are. I suspected that this time around GW was going to take their time and try to balance stuff out a lot more. Using command points on these is really the way to go! I'm also really excited for the planetary campaigns!

But most of all, not a single model they showed made me sad. They are all fantastic! I'm really excited to see what-else is coming, but I'm willing to hazard that guess that if the Plastic Oblits are real, they'll be in this box with that named BL character.

nekooni wrote:

ASD are for when a single unit, eg an assassin, joins your force.

Realistically, it's for any "single unit that isn't your main army" joins your force. That's why there wasn't any real limitation as to how many you could take or of what, barring that you lost a Command Point for every Auxiliary slot you took.

Having a brigade of infantry working with a space marine chapter makes perfect sense.

But that's not what happens here. What happens here is the "primary force" of Space Marines effectively is outnumbered by the "auxiliary force" with the whole purpose being that the Marines get Command Points fed into their Slamguinius that he wouldn't have access to otherwise thanks to the Guard having an abundance of Command Points and very few Stratagems to actually bother spending them on.

And I'll note, again, that the "brigade" in this sense is a specific Detachment. Your example of a "space marine chapter" can be literally anything.

What needs to happen at this point is the removal of people to take anything larger than a Patrol, Vanguard, Outrider, or Spearhead outside of their faction--and really there needs to be a limitation that they can't take named characters in those "auxiliary" detachments as well.

The Knight is literally in an Auxiliary detachment in your example. It's just that it's a superheavy.

Auxiliary Superheavy Detachments are an exception to the rule seeing as how they don't remove a Command Point and Lord of War choices aren't available outside of the Superheavy Detachment that is mandatory of 3, Supreme Command Detachment, or the Auxiliary Superheavy Detachment.

Christ, you can take Flyers easier than you can LoWs.

You can dislike the ally system all you want from a balance PoV, I get that. But from a fluff PoV it makes perfect sense in most cases. Heck, you SHOULDN'T play tank and infantry Guard of the same regimental tactic, for example. They're Tank Regiments and Infantry Regiments and so on, and they're usually from different worlds even if they're currently fighting one the same one.

There's more fluff for "tank and infantry guard of the same homeworld" being in the same theater than there is for Blood Angels sending a Captain and a bunch of Scouts, a Knightly House showing up with a Castellan, and a bunch of Straken's Catachans with Manticores and Mortars being in the same spot over and over again.

Not the least of which is that regiments would be raised at the same time, allowing for them to be sent to the same warzone and retaining their same command elements.

And why wouldn't Khorne Daemons and World eaters get along?

Not my problem.

Why wouldn't Sisters of Battle work together with Inquisitors?

Sisters of Battle with an Inquisitor is easily done using an Auxiliary Support Detachment by the way.

Ice_can wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Additionally the firced mono codex of Necrons and Tau have already pretty much been confirmed to be not getting formations so please explain how that helps mono vrs soup balance?

Where was that?

Necrons and Tau aren't in Vigilus Defiant, the campaign book with narrative scenarios and additional rules for some armies (e.g. new Calgar, Haarken Worldclaimer).

Necrons and Tau are in Urban Conquest, the boxed set with narrative map-based campaigns and specialist detachments - at least as far as anyone knows. Tau are even front and center in the promo pic for Urban Conquest on the Warhammer Community site.

That's good news, I was going on the reports I had seen from the vigilusnweekender which made it sounds like the formations where in the vigilous defient book which is only about factions on vigilous.
Maybe I'm just too used to GW ignoring Xeno's factions infavour of choas and imperium.

It is. Whats so hard to figure out about campaign books only giving things for armies that are featured in that campaign?

I'd be more worried about the idea that Vigilius is going to be here for a long time, because that does suggest that the same few factions are going to be getting repeated updates for an extended peried of time, which is absolutely a bad thing.

Soup would be less of an issue of the Force Org Charge actually meant something.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

Yeah. When people bring three Custodes HQs and no other Custodes units in their Guard/Blood Angel/Knight army. That's real fluffy.

Soup would be fine if units were actually balanced and CP were not tied to filling detachments with cheap chaff.

It's not that stupid. Marines are well reported in the fluff to send out individual marines on missions or as advisors to other forces. Given the extremely limited number of Custodes out there it's not that foolish for them to be parcelled out in small numbers to specific flashpoints. Also there is lots of precedence for rag tag groups of survivors from different formations grouped together for a desperate action or last stand.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Soup would be less of an issue of the Force Org Charge actually meant something.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

Yeah. When people bring three Custodes HQs and no other Custodes units in their Guard/Blood Angel/Knight army. That's real fluffy.

Shhh...Shhh... Power gaming is just people playing a fluffy army. Mind you, it is only fluffy to THEM, but it is still fluffy. Right? RIGHT?!

Soup needs to go. The best course of action would be for the CP generated by a detachment to be only available to that detachment.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Soup would be less of an issue of the Force Org Charge actually meant something.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

Yeah. When people bring three Custodes HQs and no other Custodes units in their Guard/Blood Angel/Knight army. That's real fluffy.

Shhh...Shhh... Power gaming is just people playing a fluffy army. Mind you, it is only fluffy to THEM, but it is still fluffy. Right? RIGHT?!

Soup needs to go. The best course of action would be for the CP generated by a detachment to be only available to that detachment.

My admech and knights is very fluffy while being strong, thank you for noticing.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Soup would be less of an issue of the Force Org Charge actually meant something.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

Yeah. When people bring three Custodes HQs and no other Custodes units in their Guard/Blood Angel/Knight army. That's real fluffy.

To be honet it does seem kind of fluffy to me- The Cutodes are as a group the best trained group of military minds in the Imperium, and always have been. There is also an established precedent for them going out to do missions solo or in pairs or small groups, an certainly to fulfill the function of being the eyes, ears, and voice of the emperor when needed.

It's not big jump to think that in thier new proactive era that if they couldn't be there in force they would just take over command.

As I said, soup would not be a problem is the Force Org Chart had any meaning in 8th.

Once upon a time the FOC was a limiter. You couldn't bring whatever you wanted because you were restricted to certain slots. With the current system you can just take whatever formation gives you the slots you want, and ignore the rest. There's no restriction, and no real penalty for just taking what you want. And if you run out of slots... take a new FOC on top of that! It's no better than Formations from 7th, except without all the free transports/ugprades.

The cynic in my knows that this was done because FOC = limits on what minis people can buy. It's the reason we don't see 0-1 choices these day outside of Special Characters and maybe a few others. Limitations = no mini sale.

Soup is allowed to exist because it sells miniatures, not because of any thematic or balance reasons.

I like the concept of allies, but right now the game is almost "Bring whatever you want!", which isn't the same thing.

Carlovonsexron wrote:
To be honet it does seem kind of fluffy to me- The Cutodes are as a group the best trained group of military minds in the Imperium, and always have been. There is also an established precedent for them going out to do missions solo or in pairs or small groups, an certainly to fulfill the function of being the eyes, ears, and voice of the emperor when needed.

It's not big jump to think that in thier new proactive era that if they couldn't be there in force they would just take over command.

Sending out small groups of Custodes, sure. Like a squad. Or a leader and his retinue.

Not three top-ranking HQs.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Carlovonsexron wrote:
To be honet it does seem kind of fluffy to me- The Cutodes are as a group the best trained group of military minds in the Imperium, and always have been. There is also an established precedent for them going out to do missions solo or in pairs or small groups, an certainly to fulfill the function of being the eyes, ears, and voice of the emperor when needed.

It's not big jump to think that in thier new proactive era that if they couldn't be there in force they would just take over command.

Sending out small groups of Custodes, sure. Like a squad. Or a leader and his retinue.

Not three top-ranking HQs.

Fluff-wise, 'Shield-Captain' isn't an official rank and is more a signification that you can lead a group (not necessarily are) and that you're super awesome even among the super awesome. Lexicanum specifically states it's not uncommon to see one Shield-Captain leading other Shield-Captains. " It is not uncommon to see a multiple Shield-Captains in battle, nor is it for one to command others - groupings such as the Golden Brothers or the Heralds Three have won remarkable renown through their impressive accomplishments. This does not result in any tension, for the Shield-Captains are frank in discussing their respective merits and quick to recognize their own strengths and weaknesses".

I mean, all of this complaining about soup but... I've never seen anyone actually bring the lists that people complain about to a local shop. I've seen Knights, I've seen Custodes, I've seen Blood Angels, and I've seen Guard, but seldom in lists together.

I think this is a complaint for tournament players, and if you're going to big events where you're fighting against the tournament meta, then either beat it or join it. That's what you do.

drbored wrote:
I mean, all of this complaining about soup but... I've never seen anyone actually bring the lists that people complain about to a local shop. I've seen Knights, I've seen Custodes, I've seen Blood Angels, and I've seen Guard, but seldom in lists together.

I think this is a complaint for tournament players, and if you're going to big events where you're fighting against the tournament meta, then either beat it or join it. That's what you do.

You may not, but I've seen it plenty in pick up games and small time tournaments (6-20 players) in my area. Generally it's people practicing for Adepticon or some such. But they're running around in the wild, it's not just a big tourney issue.

Audustum wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Carlovonsexron wrote:
To be honet it does seem kind of fluffy to me- The Cutodes are as a group the best trained group of military minds in the Imperium, and always have been. There is also an established precedent for them going out to do missions solo or in pairs or small groups, an certainly to fulfill the function of being the eyes, ears, and voice of the emperor when needed.

It's not big jump to think that in thier new proactive era that if they couldn't be there in force they would just take over command.

Sending out small groups of Custodes, sure. Like a squad. Or a leader and his retinue.

Not three top-ranking HQs.

Fluff-wise, 'Shield-Captain' isn't an official rank and is more a signification that you can lead a group (not necessarily are) and that you're super awesome even among the super awesome. Lexicanum specifically states it's not uncommon to see one Shield-Captain leading other Shield-Captains. " It is not uncommon to see a multiple Shield-Captains in battle, nor is it for one to command others - groupings such as the Golden Brothers or the Heralds Three have won remarkable renown through their impressive accomplishments. This does not result in any tension, for the Shield-Captains are frank in discussing their respective merits and quick to recognize their own strengths and weaknesses".

No, no. Don't go letting them know Shield Captains aren't Chapter masters. They're gonna be very mad to find out that Custodes leave Terra, and even in master of mankind team up with, quite specifically, a jump pack blood angel while fighting alongside imperial guard.

We're filthy powergamer waac lepers and should be shunned.

Also, unironically complaining about shield captains after everyone has their codex? Hilarious, Custodes aren't bullying anyone at this point.

Edit:

Before we push the goal post and say that "That fight doesn't count", or "That's just one example" or something along those lines, let me be very clear.

I'm not the one who cares how people use their dolls. You play your army however you damn well please, and I will never, ever apply a pejorative to you for choosing to do so.

However if your goal is to say these people or their armies don't count, or try and pretend they're the ones ruinng fun when you're quite literally gatekeeping and posturing your toxic attitude, just know the argument isn't based in reality.

I don’t think anyone seriously wants Soup to be banned. It’s against what us grognards from earlier editions believe the game should be, but we have to recognise that’s the way the wind is blowing now.

No, what the Balance Brigade really want is for Soup to be an option, not the only option if you want to be even mildly competitive. I have been championing a solution to balance the strengths of Soup with a downside since the start of the Edition, but now that GW have said they don’t want to penalise armies only reward them, that idea’s dead in the water.

What we really want is a bonus for Pure armies that is genuinely good enough to create a real choice between going Soup or Pure.

I'm a big fan of giving mono-list armies 6CP to start instead of the usually 3.

kombatwombat wrote:
I don’t think anyone seriously wants Soup to be banned. It’s against what us grognards from earlier editions believe the game should be, but we have to recognise that’s the way the wind is blowing now.

No, what the Balance Brigade really want is for Soup to be an option, not the only option if you want to be even mildly competitive. I have been championing a solution to balance the strengths of Soup with a downside since the start of the Edition, but now that GW have said they don’t want to penalise armies only reward them, that idea’s dead in the water.

What we really want is a bonus for Pure armies that is genuinely good enough to create a real choice between going Soup or Pure.

Exactly this. I don't dislike Soup, per se, I dislike that it has become the absolute norm now. And there really isn't a great way for mono-armies to compete with it. Why would I invest points on another Battalion of Space Marines when I can run a Guard Brigade for that price and have a ton more CP to throw around with my heavy hitter units.

And I agree that mono-armies need a bonus of some sort. Perhaps they should be the only armies that get the 3CP for being Battleforged. It isn't like the Soup armies are generally hurting for CP. For the most part, there isn't much for synergy between the armies(there are definitely cases of synergy though). People are doing this for CP, for the most part. Or, perhaps if your entire army is composed of one codex, you get one of those fancy Formations for free. Or maybe Formations should be exclusive to mono-armies. I dunno, just spit-balling.

Yeah I’m not sure what the solution is now either. I had a really nice one worked out for an escalating synergy depending on how many keywords your army shared, but now that GW have said they don’t want to penalise I have to come up with something new.

I don’t think it’s only a CP issue though (despite that being a goodly part of the problem), so I don’t think CP bonuses can be the whole solution. I’ll give you an example of the problem - I played a game last weekend against a Genestealer Cults list. Guard have great artillery but terrible close combat. GSC have great close combat but terrible shooting. Big squads of Genestealers and Hormagaunts backed up by Guard Artillery and a pack of Zoanthropes to dominate the Psychic phase; exactly what weakness was I supposed to leverage?

kombatwombat wrote:
Yeah I’m not sure what the solution is now either. I had a really nice one worked out for an escalating synergy depending on how many keywords your army shared, but now that GW have said they don’t want to penalise I have to come up with something new.

I don’t think it’s only a CP issue though (despite that being a goodly part of the problem), so I don’t think CP bonuses can be the whole solution. I’ll give you an example of the problem - I played a game last weekend against a Genestealer Cults list. Guard have great artillery but terrible close combat. GSC have great close combat but terrible shooting. Big squads of Genestealers and Hormagaunts backed up by Guard Artillery and a pack of Zoanthropes to dominate the Psychic phase; exactly what weakness was I supposed to leverage?

GSC take a turn to be able to do cult ambush so then would've probably been your best chance to do something.

Ice_can wrote:
Yeah that's a big No to just bundling in Sisters of Silence to Inquisition.
Thats terrible treatment of a faction thats already been short changed once by GW because god forbid they be included ib a codex talons, nope had to be codex bling biker boys only.
It also removes a chance to actually bring less cheesey female faction into the game.
While Sister of battle next year is possibly a good thing for those that want it they do fallow the classic nuns with guns theme way to obviously.

Terrible treatment? You have to be joking. One of the primary reasons why the Sisters of Battle are allowed to continue existing at all is because they are sworn to the service of the Imperial Inquisition as the Ordo Hereticus's Chamber Militant. Indeed, the Ecclesiarchy no longer has the remit to go around rooting out the heretic; that's the Inquisition's job. So really, without the Inquisition, they would just be nuns, not nuns with guns.

Also, why complain specifically about Sisters? The Deathwatch and Grey Knights also serve at the beck and call of the Inquisition. You're complaining about very vanilla stuff.

Oh, and to be clear, the Agents codex wouldn't replace the Sisters codex. It would simply be an Inquisition-focused codex. And the nature of the Inquisition is to assemble Retinues of crack troops. Inquisitors also can summon their Chamber Militant to the field. So imagine Sisters, Scions, and a Jokaero riding in a Chimera, popping out, and just laying waste to heretic vehicles.

Suzuteo wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Yeah that's a big No to just bundling in Sisters of Silence to Inquisition.
Thats terrible treatment of a faction thats already been short changed once by GW because god forbid they be included ib a codex talons, nope had to be codex bling biker boys only.
It also removes a chance to actually bring less cheesey female faction into the game.
While Sister of battle next year is possibly a good thing for those that want it they do fallow the classic nuns with guns theme way to obviously.

Terrible treatment? You have to be joking. One of the primary reasons why the Sisters of Battle are allowed to continue existing at all is because they are sworn to the service of the Imperial Inquisition as the Ordo Hereticus's Chamber Militant. Indeed, the Ecclesiarchy no longer has the remit to go around rooting out the heretic; that's the Inquisition's job. So really, without the Inquisition, they would just be nuns, not nuns with guns.

Also, why complain specifically about Sisters? The Deathwatch and Grey Knights also serve at the beck and call of the Inquisition. You're complaining about very vanilla stuff.

They said Sisters of Silence, not Sisters of Battle.

Ohhh. Ignore what I said then. I misread that. Must have been the part at the end about nuns with guns. Haha.

I think Sisters of Silence should have a place in the Agents codex because they are an agency of the Imperium, just like the Inquisition and Assassins. Specifically, they help harvest and regulate psykers. I highly doubt they would get their own codex, but then again, I didn't see Custodes coming either.

 kastelen wrote:

GSC take a turn to be able to do cult ambush so then would've probably been your best chance to do something.

I play a combat army, so he didn’t have to Cult Ambush; he could just hide behind the Hornagaunt screen and wait for me to come to him. I dunno, it was just one of those games where I felt like a spectator rather than a player and couldn’t see any way to change that.

Edit: Come to think of it, feeling like a spectator rather than a player has happened to me about a dozen times this edition, and they’re fall into two camps: playing against a Soup army that makes me feel like I’ve brought a bent butterknife to a nuclear war, or playing against lots of Mortal Wounds that make me feel like I might as well go grab a beer while my opponent removes my models at their discretion.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
No, no. Don't go letting them know Shield Captains aren't Chapter masters. They're gonna be very mad to find out that Custodes leave Terra, and even in master of mankind team up with, quite specifically, a jump pack blood angel while fighting alongside imperial guard.

We're filthy powergamer waac lepers and should be shunned.

Gonna need you to point out where I said any of that.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Also, unironically complaining about shield captains after everyone has their codex? Hilarious, Custodes aren't bullying anyone at this point.

Did completely miss my point?

My point, for the third damned time, is that the Force Org Chart means nothing. Because you can just take another one, and how there are 15 bazillion different versions, each allowing you to get exactly what units you want, it makes the whole thing completely purposeless.

And let's not kid ourselves, people taking 3 Shield Captains aren't doing so because of fluff any more than people taking 2 pre-nerf Smashcaptains. Or a pre-nerf Guard commander for the CP stealing/refunding ability.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
I'm not the one who cares how people use their dolls. You play your army however you damn well please, and I will never, ever apply a pejorative to you for choosing to do so.

I have a very different take.

I think tournaments are great, and I have zero interest in ever participating in one (again). I think that fluffy armies should be the most powerful lists out there, and that the rules should be balanced (ie. perfect imbalance - as actual balance is impossible) to allow for that. I don't like what I actually see at tournaments, which is mass soup armies abusing the pathetically lax "Force Org Chart" system to bring whatever the feth they want in the most cut-throat combinations possible.

"But it's a tournament! That's the point!" Yes, but, again, the most cut-throat most dangerous lists should be the ones that follow the fluff. The fact that they don't is a failing of the game, not the players.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
... gatekeeping ... toxic attitude...

This ain't Tumblr. Ditch the zero content buzzwords.

 cuda1179 wrote:
I'm a big fan of giving mono-list armies 6CP to start instead of the usually 3.

How does an additional 3 CP compare to simply building a good list?

Stratagems are made out to be far more important than they actually are. Games aren't won because someone used CPs to bend the rules. Games are won because someone made optimal choices in building their list and played to their army's strengths.

Saying this as a Black Legion player. The most soup I ever run is a Bloodletter bomb. I don't play it often, but I'd go crazy if the option was taken away.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
... gatekeeping ... toxic attitude...

This ain't Tumblr. Ditch the zero content buzzwords.

Do you one better. Word salad is a defense for people with no point.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Suzuteo wrote:
Ohhh. Ignore what I said then. I misread that. Must have been the part at the end about nuns with guns. Haha.

I think Sisters of Silence should have a place in the Agents codex because they are an agency of the Imperium, just like the Inquisition and Assassins. Specifically, they help harvest and regulate psykers. I highly doubt they would get their own codex, but then again, I didn't see Custodes coming either.

Consider GW ruled out an Agents of the Imperium Codex, why are we still talking about it?

Sure, it would make me happy, but so would things with a realistic chance of happening.

Carlovonsexron wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Soup would be less of an issue of the Force Org Charge actually meant something.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
It's almost like it's intentional and fluffy, despite people not liking it for personal reasons.

Yeah. When people bring three Custodes HQs and no other Custodes units in their Guard/Blood Angel/Knight army. That's real fluffy.

To be honet it does seem kind of fluffy to me- The Cutodes are as a group the best trained group of military minds in the Imperium, and always have been. There is also an established precedent for them going out to do missions solo or in pairs or small groups, an certainly to fulfill the function of being the eyes, ears, and voice of the emperor when needed.

It's not big jump to think that in thier new proactive era that if they couldn't be there in force they would just take over command.

It just happens to be huge % of their commanders and not say normal custodians. After all there's more shield captains than there are regular bike custodians eh?

Can one of the mods change the title and location of this thread please? I've looked here a few times for rumours on CA/Vigilus models and every time see discussion around something completely unrelated. It's becoming tedious.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Can one of the mods change the title and location of this thread please? I've looked here a few times for rumours on CA/Vigilus models and every time see discussion around something completely unrelated. It's becoming tedious.

To be fair, if speculation is allowed on a Rumours forum, then speculating about changes to Soup and CP generation are theoretically on-topic.

Whether or not multiple Shield Captains is fluffy probably isn’t, though.

kombatwombat wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Can one of the mods change the title and location of this thread please? I've looked here a few times for rumours on CA/Vigilus models and every time see discussion around something completely unrelated. It's becoming tedious.

To be fair, if speculation is allowed on a Rumours forum, then speculating about changes to Soup and CP generation are theoretically on-topic.

Whether or not multiple Shield Captains is fluffy probably isn’t, though.

Well, Vigilus is re-introducing formations and that is going to have a big impact on CPs.

Has GW actually said anything about the new Vigilus release and soup? The only things I read were that they have no plans to change it.

Where is the news or rumour about any changes to Soup or CP generation in this thread though?

The chat has gone off topic since the last pics of new models. Speculation does not belong in the news and rumours space of the board, which as my understanding is for actual news and rumours. Speculation is general chat territory isn't it?

You know what’s definitely not on topic?







Discussing whether the thread is on topic.

kombatwombat wrote:
You know what’s definitely not on topic?







Discussing whether the thread is on topic.

Unless there are specific rules for going off topic in the Vigilus campaign book. I've been through the video twice now and can't seem to find any.

I just was thinking on the Indomitus Veterans Stratagem. It should be +1 Attack and +1 Ld right? That is actually pretty decent if it affects all Intercessors in a detachment. Ld 9 MSU Squads are basically immune to morale then.

Allegedly there might be a Space Wolves Stratagem as well, so it makes me wonder if they will be able to use Indomitus Veterans.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I just was thinking on the Indomitus Veterans Stratagem. It should be +1 Attack and +1 Ld right? That is actually pretty decent if it affects all Intercessors in a detachment. Ld 9 MSU Squads are basically immune to morale then.

Allegedly there might be a Space Wolves Stratagem as well, so it makes me wonder if they will be able to use Indomitus Veterans.

Ultramarines already have the +1Ld already, and frankly people either just remove MSU marines unit by unit usually with wounds to spare or Ld isn't going to be a major issue.

The +1A is much more interesting intercessors with 3A each though might finally be able to do something in CC finally also makes that powersword on the sargent so worth while.

Some people have said that formation is just intercessors others have said it's all primaris infantry. +1A to new Guilliman could certainly be interesting.

Not like marines have a mountain of useful strategums to use CP on either.

Ice_can wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I just was thinking on the Indomitus Veterans Stratagem. It should be +1 Attack and +1 Ld right? That is actually pretty decent if it affects all Intercessors in a detachment. Ld 9 MSU Squads are basically immune to morale then.

Allegedly there might be a Space Wolves Stratagem as well, so it makes me wonder if they will be able to use Indomitus Veterans.

Ultramarines already have the +1Ld already, and frankly people either just remove MSU marines unit by unit usually with wounds to spare or Ld isn't going to be a major issue.

The +1A is much more interesting intercessors with 3A each though might finally be able to do something in CC finally also makes that powersword on the sargent so worth while.

Some people have said that formation is just intercessors others have said it's all primaris infantry. +1A to new Guilliman could certainly be interesting.

Not like marines have a mountain of useful strategums to use CP on either.

Well, I know I am going to be surrounding Pedro Kantor with Intercessors with a Power Fist Sergeant. 4 Attack Intercessors and a 5 Attack Power Fist Sergeant, rerolling all misses? That is going to be nuts. Especially when I put three MSU Squads of Intercessors, not just one.

Are you sure indomitus veterans means “veteran statline” and not just “veterans of the indomitus campaign with a rule added to reflect that”?

I’ll start a thread in the proposed rules forum asap, but I’ll say it here too; I think one way to fix soup is to take the current system and put it into reverse. Make it go backwards. Instead of starting with 3 CPs and gaining more for adding detachments (which leads to the abuse), start with 9, 10, 12 or whatever CPs and lose them as you add detachments. A brigade loses you no CPs...a battalion loses you only 1...patrols only lose you 2...but the others lose you 3 or more. I haven’t worked out the finer details, but the aim is to put the breaks on soup lists and reward you for going as mono build as you can, whilst still allowing you to make soup if you want.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I’ll start a thread in the proposed rules forum asap, but I’ll say it here too; I think one way to fix soup is to take the current system and put it into reverse. Make it go backwards. Instead of starting with 3 CPs and gaining more for adding detachments (which leads to the abuse), start with 9, 10, 12 or whatever CPs and lose them as you add detachments. A brigade loses you no CPs...a battalion loses you only 1...patrols only lose you 2...but the others lose you 3 or more. I haven’t worked out the finer details, but the aim is to put the breaks on soup lists and reward you for going as mono build as you can, whilst still allowing you to make soup if you want.

Needs a way to scale with army size- 10cp at 500pts is a lot more effective than at 3000pts.

Maybe the number of CP needs to be tied to points level? Something like 5CP minimum, and an additional 5cp for every 500pts after the first 500 (rounding down). Maybe 15CP at 1500pts is too much though. Does make the games more tactically complex I suppose.

I guess my fluffy army of Relictors is done since they can’t have allied inquisitors (radical).

The new Vigilus short story on Warhammer Community has Reivers riding in a Valkyrie. Can’t put them in a Rhino, though!

Erren wrote:
The new Vigilus short story on Warhammer Community has Reivers riding in a Valkyrie. Can’t put them in a Rhino, though!

To be fair they reference that in the story (since the Black Legion turned up there has been a blurring of Imperial forces as the rush to respond)
I actually came here to see if there were any rumors that this would be a game affecting change from one of the new books (blanket change in Chapter Approved, Formation rule from Vigilus campaign book or City Fight stratagem)

I can't imagine they would write something deliberately referencing a common point of mockery about the game. I mean that's the whole point of the story, Guard and Marines interacting in a way that wasn't allowed before...then again this is GW...

Future War Cultist wrote:I’ll start a thread in the proposed rules forum asap, but I’ll say it here too; I think one way to fix soup is to take the current system and put it into reverse. Make it go backwards. Instead of starting with 3 CPs and gaining more for adding detachments (which leads to the abuse), start with 9, 10, 12 or whatever CPs and lose them as you add detachments. A brigade loses you no CPs...a battalion loses you only 1...patrols only lose you 2...but the others lose you 3 or more. I haven’t worked out the finer details, but the aim is to put the breaks on soup lists and reward you for going as mono build as you can, whilst still allowing you to make soup if you want.

I can get behind this. it (to me) makes sense everybody starts out with the same amount of CP's and you spend them to allow/change/bonus detachments

Erren wrote:The new Vigilus short story on Warhammer Community has Reivers riding in a Valkyrie. Can’t put them in a Rhino, though!

So this means valkyries for everyone, DA you get a valkyrie, Ultras you get a valkyrie....

I think you lot are perhaps reading too much into a short story about the Imperium doing whatever it can to stop the encroaching tide.

Unless the story is an elaborate teaser of an upcoming stratagem involving Reivers, a Valkyrie and the ability to dismount, wreck something and remount the circling Valkyrie in one fell swoop.

It would be easy enough to have a "desperate times" rule or stratagem that applies to the Vigilus campaign.

 BrookM wrote:
I think you lot are perhaps reading too much into a short story about the Imperium doing whatever it can to stop the encroaching tide.

Unless the story is an elaborate teaser of an upcoming stratagem involving Reivers, a Valkyrie and the ability to dismount, wreck something and remount the circling Valkyrie in one fell swoop.

Or it's an example of what the Reivers deploy from normally, using their Grav-Chutes...since it just says they deploy offboard and arrive later.

 BrookM wrote:
I think you lot are perhaps reading too much into a short story about the Imperium doing whatever it can to stop the encroaching tide.

It's funny because I shot a message off to my wife about the scuttle butt I figured that would generate off the first couple paragraphs, then they got me by giving the reivers demolition charges a week after I was lamenting them not having melta bombs. I doubt any of this really has weight in what's going to happen, but man what a tease. Give the saboteurs the big bombs dangit!

 Flinty wrote:
It's not that stupid. Marines are well reported in the fluff to send out individual marines on missions or as advisors to other forces. Given the extremely limited number of Custodes out there it's not that foolish for them to be parcelled out in small numbers to specific flashpoints. Also there is lots of precedence for rag tag groups of survivors from different formations grouped together for a desperate action or last stand.

Right.

Totally normal for three Custodes to show up. That makes sense.

But, three Custodes Captains on Relic-level bikes to support a handfull of infantry in skirmish? I don't like the smell of it.

According to some fluff, every Power Fist in a Space Marine arsenal is a relic.

 drazz wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
It's not that stupid. Marines are well reported in the fluff to send out individual marines on missions or as advisors to other forces. Given the extremely limited number of Custodes out there it's not that foolish for them to be parcelled out in small numbers to specific flashpoints. Also there is lots of precedence for rag tag groups of survivors from different formations grouped together for a desperate action or last stand.

Right.

Totally normal for three Custodes to show up. That makes sense.

But, three Custodes Captains on Relic-level bikes to support a handfull of infantry in skirmish? I don't like the smell of it.

All that is missing is a young upstart to challenge each one to a duel on his first day in Paris. At least one book and probably several movies worth of stories there.

In terms of fluff I think you're protesting too much.

Ibfind it more realistic that in an Imperium of a million worlds, and only 10000 Custodes that they are sent out to be commanders nd champions as opposed to going out in force and leaving the seat and the emperor less guarded.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To add; while I love the models, I dont really think they needed thierbown codex. A tiny sprinkle of them in Inperium armies where they are both in command, and very powerful individual models that can sway the course of a battle is EXACTLY how they should be.

Carlovonsexron wrote:
In terms of fluff I think you're protesting too much.

Ibfind it more realistic that in an Imperium of a million worlds, and only 10000 Custodes that they are sent out to be commanders nd champions as opposed to going out in force and leaving the seat and the emperor less guarded.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To add; while I love the models, I dont really think they needed thierbown codex. A tiny sprinkle of them in Inperium armies where they are both in command, and very powerful individual models that can sway the course of a battle is EXACTLY how they should be.

Except they are never in command they leave commander CP in charge
They arn't leading they cower behind other units then leap forward to steel the glory
1 relic jetbike and 1 relic armour set just happens to have been given to 2 out of every 3 dawneagle dbags?
Real fluffy

Ice_can wrote:

Carlovonsexron wrote:
In terms of fluff I think you're protesting too much.

Ibfind it more realistic that in an Imperium of a million worlds, and only 10000 Custodes that they are sent out to be commanders nd champions as opposed to going out in force and leaving the seat and the emperor less guarded.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To add; while I love the models, I dont really think they needed thierbown codex. A tiny sprinkle of them in Inperium armies where they are both in command, and very powerful individual models that can sway the course of a battle is EXACTLY how they should be.

Except they are never in command they leave commander CP in charge
They arn't leading they cower behind other units then leap forward to steel the glory
1 relic jetbike and 1 relic armour set just happens to have been given to 2 out of every 3 dawneagle dbags?
Real fluffy

You can make that argument for literally ANY relic though. That's especially true with Deathwatch, who would of course have all those relics and unique equipment to fight bad guys.

People often forget the notion of forging their own narrative.

Guilliman probably never fought himself and clones of his own chapter ontop of a giant table with beer cans and old duplo blocks for terrain, but here we are all the same.

The game's what you make of it.

Ice_can wrote:

Except they are never in command they leave commander CP in charge
They arn't leading they cower behind other units then leap forward to steel the glory
1 relic jetbike and 1 relic armour set just happens to have been given to 2 out of every 3 dawneagle dbags?
Real fluffy

I'm with the relic part; by my reckoning everything the custodes own is a relic.

As per how people play, I can't control that and don't actually play 40k itself at all. But from where I sit I prefer the Custodes being in small groups as opposed to entire army of them.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I’ll start a thread in the proposed rules forum asap, but I’ll say it here too; I think one way to fix soup is to take the current system and put it into reverse. Make it go backwards. Instead of starting with 3 CPs and gaining more for adding detachments (which leads to the abuse), start with 9, 10, 12 or whatever CPs and lose them as you add detachments. A brigade loses you no CPs...a battalion loses you only 1...patrols only lose you 2...but the others lose you 3 or more. I haven’t worked out the finer details, but the aim is to put the breaks on soup lists and reward you for going as mono build as you can, whilst still allowing you to make soup if you want.

What your suggestion kills, however, are those forces that don't utilize battalions. I strongly dislike that the battalion is the be all, end all detachment, and if you don;t run one, you should be penalized. Ravenwing and Deathwing both depend on Outrider and Vanguard detachments for construction and are already heavily penalized for not having troops (except for the group that always says.."just take scouts"). Iyanden Spirit Hosts also rely on Vanguards. If GW had the smarts to address these forces (and others like it...say White Scars with bikes, etc) I would be OK with the CP situation. As it stands, extremely lore-fluffy lists are penalized heavily in the CP department.

Personally, I think the detachments should scale with points. A Brigade, Supreme Command, and Air Wing should not be taken until games reach 2001pts or more. I would have said the same for Super heavy too, but knghts being there own thing killed that and I wouldn't want to make someone's army unplayable.

Everyone starts with 6CP, Patrols add 0CP, Spearhead, Vanguard and Outrider add 1CP, Battalions add 3CP, and Brigades add 6CP.

In the "start with 1 cp per 10 points and lose them for each detachment" you'll have more CP running two vanguards @ 2k (20-3-3) than you would given the current 5 cp per bat or even your proposal (1+1+6).

It's the best way I've seen to stop pushing people to spam cheap batts outside of faction locking CP or tying CP directly to the amount of points spent in a detachment. I'd throw in a penalty for detachments that don't match your warlord and some formation stuff where armies pay less for certain detachments (for your death/ravenwing, dark eldar patrols, IG armor...)

All that being said it would be a pretty major re-design and I honestly doubt it would happen. Although I haven't bought my loyal 32 yet in the vain hope that GW figures out how to balance that gak.

Found this little tidbit about Karanak and the Flesh Hounds on the Age of Sigmar Facebook page:

Warhammer Age of Sigmar wrote: Hey there Issac. The new Flesh Hounds are on 60mm x 35mm oval bases while Karanak is on a 75mm x 42mm oval base.

Current Flesh Hounds are on 50mm round bases.

 Ghaz wrote:
Current Flesh Hounds are on 50mm round bases.

Which was always a mistake. Glad to see GW fixing that.

-

Another short story.https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/11/29/tales-from-vigilus-04-amidst-the-flamesgw-homepage-post-3/

GoatboyBeta wrote:
Another short story.https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/11/29/tales-from-vigilus-04-amidst-the-flamesgw-homepage-post-3/

Spoiler:

Bird masks and flames makes me think Tzeentch cultists

Hoping for Dark Mechanicus too, given the setting of the story. I feared it was yet another GSC story but it feels unlikely. For some reason I really dislike the GSC fluff.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
People often forget the notion of forging their own narrative.

Guilliman probably never fought himself and clones of his own chapter ontop of a giant table with beer cans and old duplo blocks for terrain, but here we are all the same.

The game's what you make of it.

Because forge the narrative is marketing nonsense.

Guillimans clones are far more likely to happen in actual games, it has zip to do with background or snappy rhetorical catch phrases for sales.

Carlovonsexron wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Except they are never in command they leave commander CP in charge
They arn't leading they cower behind other units then leap forward to steel the glory
1 relic jetbike and 1 relic armour set just happens to have been given to 2 out of every 3 dawneagle dbags?
Real fluffy

I'm with the relic part; by my reckoning everything the custodes own is a relic.

As per how people play, I can't control that and don't actually play 40k itself at all. But from where I sit I prefer the Custodes being in small groups as opposed to entire army of them.

A 2000pt Custodes army is like 20 guys, I’d say thats a small group.

I think we're done here TBH.