I think that's a title still held by pre-codex 3rd Ed Necron with 5 total units, and no heavy support.
I'm not sure that's a fair comparison given it wasn't even a codex, if you want to go down that route, competitive fallen in 9th would like a word.
Oh, okay. If only Codex's count, then it goes to the first Custodes codex. They had 12 total units, including 6 characters. This one has 15 I believe.
Harlequins have 8 datasheets total and are perfectly fine as they have a diverse roster with speed, guns, melee and psychics crammed into a few choices (quality > quantity). WE is looking uninspiring so far as it's going to be premium melee cultists, premium melee berserker troops and premium melee berserker possessed - all paying premium points and all walking across the board.
EviscerationPlague wrote: So not just a worse version of the Blood Angels rules, but 8 Bound literally have no differences to Possessed besides a pregame move. fething amazing and totally worth a new codex with 5 unit entries.
Yeah this would be disappointing. While pregame moves are a staple for World Eaters, you'd think they toss them another bone with the fluff they've given the model.
Well, one of the big things is that's just the base statline, it doesn't include the actual weapons that the 8bound have. Personal speculation part: It's very likely the weapons push them into Strength 8 AP -3 with 8 attacks a model. This + the pregame move would put them pretty strong.
I don't think so. The exalted are called out as having chainfists and the like. These will likely be the WE Chainsword and Chainaxes that they are dual wielding. That being said, could end up being a similar profile.
Insularum wrote: WE is looking uninspiring so far as it's going to be premium melee cultists, premium melee berserker troops and premium melee berserker possessed - all paying premium points and all walking across the board.
Custodes are super premium melee, super-duper premium melee, and the only real speed in the army, jetbikes. At least Khorne Berserkers can take a Rhino, Custodes only transport is a 300 point-sink that is objectively the worst LandRaider in the game since it lacks AoC.
Insularum wrote: WE is looking uninspiring so far as it's going to be premium melee cultists, premium melee berserker troops and premium melee berserker possessed - all paying premium points and all walking across the board.
Custodes are super premium melee, super-duper premium melee, and the only real speed in the army, jetbikes. At least Khorne Berserkers can take a Rhino, Custodes only transport is a 300 point-sink that is objectively the worst LandRaider in the game since it lacks AoC.
Insularum wrote: WE is looking uninspiring so far as it's going to be premium melee cultists, premium melee berserker troops and premium melee berserker possessed - all paying premium points and all walking across the board.
Custodes are super premium melee, super-duper premium melee, and the only real speed in the army, jetbikes. At least Khorne Berserkers can take a Rhino, Custodes only transport is a 300 point-sink that is objectively the worst LandRaider in the game since it lacks AoC.
Custodes actually have shooting too
Not anti tank shooting, other than jet bikes. Chaos Land Raiders are better for that, and they have predators.
EviscerationPlague wrote: So not just a worse version of the Blood Angels rules, but 8 Bound literally have no differences to Possessed besides a pregame move. fething amazing and totally worth a new codex with 5 unit entries.
Yeah this would be disappointing. While pregame moves are a staple for World Eaters, you'd think they toss them another bone with the fluff they've given the model.
Well, one of the big things is that's just the base statline, it doesn't include the actual weapons that the 8bound have. Personal speculation part: It's very likely the weapons push them into Strength 8 AP -3 with 8 attacks a model. This + the pregame move would put them pretty strong.
EviscerationPlague wrote: So not just a worse version of the Blood Angels rules, but 8 Bound literally have no differences to Possessed besides a pregame move. fething amazing and totally worth a new codex with 5 unit entries.
Yeah this would be disappointing. While pregame moves are a staple for World Eaters, you'd think they toss them another bone with the fluff they've given the model.
Well, one of the big things is that's just the base statline, it doesn't include the actual weapons that the 8bound have. Personal speculation part: It's very likely the weapons push them into Strength 8 AP -3 with 8 attacks a model. This + the pregame move would put them pretty strong.
Sasori wrote: Compilation of some leaks here, as per usual take with a grain of salt as some of this is playtest info. This has come from some of the most reliable leakers so far but don't expect everything to be accurate. For the eyebrow raising entry, that seems to have survived multiple versions so seems pretty likely.
With how accurate the rumors have been for WE since the start of the year, I don't doubt any of this was playtested. It coincides with the other rumor: 10th is coming and WE will be the first real 10th codex. No reason to nerf WLT / Relics this hard.
Still, Angron should have gotten that +2 move and pregame move WLT. Really dropped the ball there.
Like sisters were made for 9e with rules that didn't work at all in 9e, no 9e things and got replaced early up?-)
cuda1179 wrote: Custodes are super premium melee, super-duper premium melee, and the only real speed in the army, jetbikes. At least Khorne Berserkers can take a Rhino, Custodes only transport is a 300 point-sink that is objectively the worst LandRaider in the game since it lacks AoC.
I now have this idea of World Eater jetbikes in my head, some kind of half-Juggernaut, half-jet-engine monstrosities dragging barbed chains across the battlefield, being ridden by howling maniacs with sharpened polo mallets and I dunno, reaper autocannons for weapons.
EviscerationPlague wrote: So not just a worse version of the Blood Angels rules, but 8 Bound literally have no differences to Possessed besides a pregame move. fething amazing and totally worth a new codex with 5 unit entries.
Yeah this would be disappointing. While pregame moves are a staple for World Eaters, you'd think they toss them another bone with the fluff they've given the model.
Well, one of the big things is that's just the base statline, it doesn't include the actual weapons that the 8bound have. Personal speculation part: It's very likely the weapons push them into Strength 8 AP -3 with 8 attacks a model. This + the pregame move would put them pretty strong.
cuda1179 wrote: Custodes are super premium melee, super-duper premium melee, and the only real speed in the army, jetbikes. At least Khorne Berserkers can take a Rhino, Custodes only transport is a 300 point-sink that is objectively the worst LandRaider in the game since it lacks AoC.
I now have this idea of World Eater jetbikes in my head, some kind of half-Juggernaut, half-jet-engine monstrosities dragging barbed chains across the battlefield, being ridden by howling maniacs with sharpened polo mallets and I dunno, reaper autocannons for weapons.
i did a juggerlord conversion using that khorne hellcannon chariot thing as a bike. it was pretty gnarly.
I now have this idea of World Eater jetbikes in my head, some kind of half-Juggernaut, half-jet-engine monstrosities dragging barbed chains across the battlefield, being ridden by howling maniacs with sharpened polo mallets and I dunno, reaper autocannons for weapons.
That sounds like a fun model! But I don't think the autocannons or any ranged weapons would make the cut
World Eaters Traits
+1 Attack on Charge/charged/HI +1 Strength on Charge/Charged/HI (May end up being diffrent)
WE Armywide Mechanic: Bloodtithe
Two current rumors:
Rumor 1 is you get a point for each unit destroyed and +1 bonus point for a vehicle/Monster the first time each turn and +1 for Titanic. So you could get up to 3 points if something like Angron was destroyed.
Rumor 2. Works similar to CK favors of the dark gods. Keep a Tally of total wound dealt by models destroyed (I.E. Ork Boyz give 1 point when killed, Custodes troops 3, etc)
Bloodtithe effects (which are PERMANENT)
6 to hit in Melee Auto wounds
+1 to hit
+1 AP for Melee Weapons
Attacks +1
Add 1 to Advance and Charge
5+ FNP to Mortals
6+ FNP to everything
Revive Angron (Puts him into deepstrike with 8 wounds and he deepstrikes next turn
Warlord Traits:
When your WL kills a unit, you get a bonus Bloodtithe point
WL takes half Damage in Melee
Fight First
Angron Trait: Remove OBSEC in 6'
Khârn: if 6 or more models within 3' of Karn gain D3 attacks
See Invoctus for other trait
Relics:
Every Dead model counts as 2 for morale
Relic Axe: +2 S -3 AP Damage 2, 6's to hit grant two additional hits
Select CORE unit with in 6' 6's to hit auto wound
Khârn
6 2 2 6 4 6 9 9 3+
Pistol 8 -3 2
Axe S:user AP-4 D2
4+ inv Core reroll 1's to hit
End of the movement phase if any friendly units are within 3", pick one, on a 2+ cause 2 mortals
Lord Invoctus
Has FLY
Ignores invulns, only unit that does so.
Warlord trait is pregame move 2 CORE WE units OR Select Core or Character within 9" can charge if it fell back. (From different versions)
Has an aura of +2 Movement of CORE WE Units
Jakhals:
6" 4 4 3 3 1 2 6 6 jak
6" 4 4 3 3 1 3 7 6+ leader
6" 4 4 4 3 1 2 6 6+ Dishonored
2 Attacks at AP -1
A couple can have +2S, -2 AP D2 -1 to hit upgrades
A couplemore can have User -2 AP D2 Double Attacks
Once per battle, can kill D3 of themselves and gain +1 Strength
8Bound
9" WS3 BS3 S6 T5 3W LD8 3+/5++
Pregame move built in
Exalted 8bound
9" WS2 BS3 S6 T5 3W LD8 3+/4++
Prevent Fallback
SGT can get two cahinfists that get Damage 3
Angron:
2+/4++ 18W
1 WLT - Removes enemy obsec within 6'
Warp Locus
Currently does not ignore Wound caps or invulns, but has so many attacks he can "Destroy anything in close combat pretty easily"
Can be revived with the bloodtithe mechanic
GENERAL STRATAGEMS:
+1 Damage for Exalte 8bound
KHORNE ARMY of RENOWN:
Khorne Daemons Only and... Land Raiders is the restriction
This means Angron + 8Bound + Maybe Lord Invoctaus from WE and of course the Khorne Daemons
Some AoR Stratagems:
8bound
+1 to Wound
6" Consolidate
If an opponent kills in 8bound in their shooting phase, but does not destroy the entire unit you can move it 9" (May have ended up being D6 instead)
Buff Stratagem choose 1: 1)Obsec, 2)wound roll of 6 causes 1 MW up to 6, 3) 4+ FNP against MW
BAD News:
Only 1 Relic/WLT. No Stratagems for extra
Only 3 WLT for non-special Characters
No Subfactions
I think people are failing to remember that this is most likely the last codex before 10th / the first true 10th codex. Everyone's going to get nerfed like this, WE are just the whipping boys here.
choppinboard wrote: I think people are failing to remember that this is most likely the last codex before 10th / the first true 10th codex. Everyone's going to get nerfed like this, WE are just the whipping boys here.
I really hope that's not true.
Because, while I'd love 40k to be a tight, well-balanced experience, I can acknowledge that that's incredibly unlikely.
But dammit, if it's gonna be a mess, at least let us customize our models within the rules!
Not to disagree that this is a rush job, but how would World Eaters subfactions even work? I think it was already contrived when they gave them to the Cult Legions and Grey Knights, and World Eaters subfactions would seem to be even tougher to demarcate.
Though at the end of the day, that's also GW's fault as the natural end state of excessive flanderization.
Not to disagree that this is a rush job, but how would World Eaters subfactions even work? I think it was already contrived when they gave them to the Cult Legions and Grey Knights, and World Eaters subfactions would seem to be even tougher to demarcate.
Though at the end of the day, that's also GW's fault as the natural end state of excessive flanderization.
Literal 30 second outpouring of their usual perks/things to include:
- yet another attack on charge
- +1 to wound on charge
- +1 attack if outnumbered
- -1 to hit outside of 18"
- Reroll 1's to hit if already lost a model in the unit
Name them after the various companies of the world eater and poof done.
Not to disagree that this is a rush job, but how would World Eaters subfactions even work? I think it was already contrived when they gave them to the Cult Legions and Grey Knights, and World Eaters subfactions would seem to be even tougher to demarcate.
Though at the end of the day, that's also GW's fault as the natural end state of excessive flanderization.
Literal 30 second outpouring of their usual perks/things to include:
- yet another attack on charge
- +1 to wound on charge
- +1 attack if outnumbered
- -1 to hit outside of 18"
- Reroll 1's to hit if already lost a model in the unit
Name them after the various companies of the world eater and poof done.
Tsons and DG didn't really get full subfactions like that. They got pretty much a stratagem, relic and WLT (Sub out stratagem for power for Tsons) This would be sort of worthless to WE since you only get one relic and WLT. You'd really just maybe getting a decent relic and a stratagem. As far as things that got cut, this is probably the most fine one.
Right, and to be clear, I was speaking 100% from a fluff perspective. I sorta see how different groups within the Thousand Sons and Death Guard would operate differently (same with the Grey Knights), but there wouldn't be tons of differences. But the World Eaters have been made so one dimensional - how do you further distinguish a faction that is blinded by rage and only fights in melee? You can't even do it by focusing on particular weapons; all berzerkers are armed the same way now, same with all the other bespoke WE units.
My point is that any WE subfactions would feel like subfactions for subfactions' sake.
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Right, and to be clear, I was speaking 100% from a fluff perspective. I sorta see how different groups within the Thousand Sons and Death Guard would operate differently (same with the Grey Knights), but there wouldn't be tons of differences. But the World Eaters have been made so one dimensional - how do you further distinguish a faction that is blinded by rage and only fights in melee? You can't even do it by focusing on particular weapons; all berzerkers are armed the same way now, same with all the other bespoke WE units.
My point is that any WE subfactions would feel like subfactions for subfactions' sake.
That's fair enough, with their limited roster you'd be stuck with:
- daemon engines
- loves bloodletters a lot
- lots of mortals
- really crazy guys
- gladiatorial themed duders
Not to disagree that this is a rush job, but how would World Eaters subfactions even work? I think it was already contrived when they gave them to the Cult Legions and Grey Knights, and World Eaters subfactions would seem to be even tougher to demarcate.
Though at the end of the day, that's also GW's fault as the natural end state of excessive flanderization.
There are multiple Khornate warbands out there that differ at least somewhat in their tactics and ideology. There's one that waits on a planet that is about to be attacked by another enemy so as to be able to bear the brunt of the assault, there's another called the Foresworn who focus on daemonic rituals, there's the Bloodblessed who are obsessed with becoming Chaos Spawn, and there's the Brazen Beasts who are like Khornate Iron Warriors. Granted, none of these are World Eaters, but there is room for a diversity of subfactions.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Figured what was putting me off the Lord on Jugger.
It’s….super plain. Nothing about it screams “I’m a character”. And…where are his Butcher’s Nails?
The old juggernaut lord could (and still can in Legends) be taken in any Chaos army that allows for Khorne-marked units. Maybe that will be the case here.
choppinboard wrote: I think people are failing to remember that this is most likely the last codex before 10th / the first true 10th codex. Everyone's going to get nerfed like this, WE are just the whipping boys here.
I really hope that's not true.
Because, while I'd love 40k to be a tight, well-balanced experience, I can acknowledge that that's incredibly unlikely.
But dammit, if it's gonna be a mess, at least let us customize our models within the rules!
Does every army really need so many subfactions? How many of the TS or DG subfactions actually see the table? If the WE Codex is just THE World Eaters, I think that's fine. Paint as you will and run your army as you will.
Sasori wrote: Lol, they were not compiled by B&CH. They just copied them out of the pastebin.
A few changes since last time include cleaning it up and the 8bound revealed to be CORE. That usually means they can be buffed out the nose. With a pre-game move built in and a shredder in each hand I could see these being really annoying to deal with.
Not to disagree that this is a rush job, but how would World Eaters subfactions even work? I think it was already contrived when they gave them to the Cult Legions and Grey Knights, and World Eaters subfactions would seem to be even tougher to demarcate.
Though at the end of the day, that's also GW's fault as the natural end state of excessive flanderization.
Kind of disagree. The different TS cults make a good show of the bunch of school of sorceries a legion devoted to tzeentch might get to. Especially a few gnarly looking sorcerers we get illustrations.
Likewise, if was paid to find a bunch of possible posses with the WE I wouldn't have trouble making some that make sense
Kid_Kyoto wrote: You're saying the rules don't have any way to reflect that!?
I know you're kidding around, but in all seriousness: Why shouldn't they have subfactions?
For years at this place people have been bleating about how the Traitor Legions aren't really Legions anymore but are all rando split-up warbands. That's always been an erroneous exaggeration, but there really is one Legion that fractured into many, many warbands and that Legion was the World Eaters.
So, more than anyone, they should have sub-factions to show how much they've spread apart from their original formations.
World Eaters Traits
+1 Attack on Charge/charged/HI +1 Strength on Charge/Charged/HI (May end up being diffrent)
WE Armywide Mechanic: Bloodtithe
Two current rumors:
Rumor 1 is you get a point for each unit destroyed and +1 bonus point for a vehicle/Monster the first time each turn and +1 for Titanic. So you could get up to 3 points if something like Angron was destroyed.
Rumor 2. Works similar to CK favors of the dark gods. Keep a Tally of total wound dealt by models destroyed (I.E. Ork Boyz give 1 point when killed, Custodes troops 3, etc)
Bloodtithe effects (which are PERMANENT)
6 to hit in Melee Auto wounds
+1 to hit
+1 AP for Melee Weapons
Attacks +1
Add 1 to Advance and Charge
5+ FNP to Mortals
6+ FNP to everything
Revive Angron (Puts him into deepstrike with 8 wounds and he deepstrikes next turn
Warlord Traits:
When your WL kills a unit, you get a bonus Bloodtithe point
WL takes half Damage in Melee
Fight First
Angron Trait: Remove OBSEC in 6'
Khârn: if 6 or more models within 3' of Karn gain D3 attacks
See Invoctus for other trait
Relics:
Every Dead model counts as 2 for morale
Relic Axe: +2 S -3 AP Damage 2, 6's to hit grant two additional hits
Select CORE unit with in 6' 6's to hit auto wound
Khârn
6 2 2 6 4 6 9 9 3+
Pistol 8 -3 2
Axe S:user AP-4 D2
4+ inv Core reroll 1's to hit
End of the movement phase if any friendly units are within 3", pick one, on a 2+ cause 2 mortals
Lord Invoctus
Has FLY
Ignores invulns, only unit that does so.
Warlord trait is pregame move 2 CORE WE units OR Select Core or Character within 9" can charge if it fell back. (From different versions)
Has an aura of +2 Movement of CORE WE Units
Jakhals:
6" 4 4 3 3 1 2 6 6 jak
6" 4 4 3 3 1 3 7 6+ leader
6" 4 4 4 3 1 2 6 6+ Dishonored
2 Attacks at AP -1
A couple can have +2S, -2 AP D2 -1 to hit upgrades
A couplemore can have User -2 AP D2 Double Attacks
Once per battle, can kill D3 of themselves and gain +1 Strength
8Bound
9" WS3 BS3 S6 T5 3W LD8 3+/5++
Pregame move built in
Exalted 8bound
9" WS2 BS3 S6 T5 3W LD8 3+/4++
Prevent Fallback
SGT can get two cahinfists that get Damage 3
Angron:
2+/4++ 18W
1 WLT - Removes enemy obsec within 6'
Warp Locus
Currently does not ignore Wound caps or invulns, but has so many attacks he can "Destroy anything in close combat pretty easily"
Can be revived with the bloodtithe mechanic
GENERAL STRATAGEMS:
+1 Damage for Exalte 8bound
KHORNE ARMY of RENOWN:
Khorne Daemons Only and... Land Raiders is the restriction
This means Angron + 8Bound + Maybe Lord Invoctaus from WE and of course the Khorne Daemons
Some AoR Stratagems:
8bound
+1 to Wound
6" Consolidate
If an opponent kills in 8bound in their shooting phase, but does not destroy the entire unit you can move it 9" (May have ended up being D6 instead)
Buff Stratagem choose 1: 1)Obsec, 2)wound roll of 6 causes 1 MW up to 6, 3) 4+ FNP against MW
BAD News:
Only 1 Relic/WLT. No Stratagems for extra
Only 3 WLT for non-special Characters
No Subfactions
Christ. The more I look at this the more it feels like it was intended as a Codex Supplement rather than a standalone Codex.....
Gene St. Ealer wrote: Not to disagree that this is a rush job, but how would World Eaters subfactions even work?
Like orks?
One would be rippy but teary, the other teary but rippy. And no one could agree on which is which
ArcaneHorror wrote: There are multiple Khornate warbands out there that differ at least somewhat in their tactics and ideology. There's one that waits on a planet that is about to be attacked by another enemy so as to be able to bear the brunt of the assault, there's another called the Foresworn who focus on daemonic rituals, there's the Bloodblessed who are obsessed with becoming Chaos Spawn, and there's the Brazen Beasts who are like Khornate Iron Warriors. Granted, none of these are World Eaters, but there is room for a diversity of subfactions.
That's the problem. These are Khornate warbands. Not WE. With other Khorne SM, you can see different approaches to war, duels, guns, tanks and other gak, but WE? They were literally lobotomized into being one dimensional, Friday show one on one gladiator matches product enforced by behavioral control. There is literally no room for anything else. I mean, look at 30K WE:
They are already doing only one thing, differing only in hack or smash preference, and that was before 10K years of degeneration. Why would they suddenly diversify and improve when the whole point of Chaos is falling downward?
Really, WE book was a mistake. GW really should have done Khornate legions book and made WE one of factions in there, with heavy restrictions (but capability of fielding Angron). As it is, they really didn't have much of a choice if they wanted WE book to be canon accurate.
H.B.M.C. wrote: For years at this place people have been bleating about how the Traitor Legions aren't really Legions anymore but are all rando split-up warbands. That's always been an erroneous exaggeration, but there really is one Legion that fractured into many, many warbands and that Legion was the World Eaters.
Being actually correct in lore instead of inventing dumb fanfiction marines ignoring all drawbacks is 'bleating' now?
Yes, they aren't legions anymore. They split along ideological and personal differences. WE, though? They don't have ideology and personality anymore. Just lobotomy turning them into druggies seeking next kill to stop withdrawal for a bit. Where such differences would come from when they are literally incapable of having them? The WE legion split because the leadership no longer cares, is too dumb to care now, or forgets about caring once mind control device rammed into their brains turns on, not because they wanted to. They all act similarly because they were modified to do so. Comparing them with other legions that actually have scope to deviate is just dumb, WE marines are in a sense even less flexible than Rubric ones and to deny this would be just ignoring 99% of their tragic story.
choppinboard wrote: I think people are failing to remember that this is most likely the last codex before 10th / the first true 10th codex. Everyone's going to get nerfed like this, WE are just the whipping boys here.
Last codex for edition doesn't mean it's at all related to new edition. Look at 8e sister codex. Rules that didn't work in 9e, nothing said 9e and 9e codeu came early.
choppinboard wrote: I think people are failing to remember that this is most likely the last codex before 10th / the first true 10th codex. Everyone's going to get nerfed like this, WE are just the whipping boys here.
I really hope that's not true.
Because, while I'd love 40k to be a tight, well-balanced experience, I can acknowledge that that's incredibly unlikely.
But dammit, if it's gonna be a mess, at least let us customize our models within the rules!
Does every army really need so many subfactions? How many of the TS or DG subfactions actually see the table? If the WE Codex is just THE World Eaters, I think that's fine. Paint as you will and run your army as you will.
.
No subfaction rules, power gamers unhappy about lack of free bonuses'
I think some folks mentioned it already, I just want to bring it up again: GW did a shortlived codex called "Khorne Daemonkin" in the distant past of early 2015.
Back then this codex had Khorne bikers and raptors, a list able to mix CSM and Daemons, and quite some background on a variety of warbands with different agendas and ways of waging war. It is understandable that not every current 40K customer is aware of it, but GW must be.
This makes the complete lack of WE subfactions so much more puzzling - the ground work has already been done! There really is no excuse.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: You're saying the rules don't have any way to reflect that!?
I know you're kidding around, but in all seriousness: Why shouldn't they have subfactions?
For years at this place people have been bleating about how the Traitor Legions aren't really Legions anymore but are all rando split-up warbands. That's always been an erroneous exaggeration, but there really is one Legion that fractured into many, many warbands and that Legion was the World Eaters.
So, more than anyone, they should have sub-factions to show how much they've spread apart from their original formations.
Absolutely agreed... but GW has limited SO MUCH the ways Khorne worshippers are depicted, that here we are. Again.
I don't get it, fluff wise as stated by others they're a fractured legion of warbands with their own methods and agendas. If I can think up 5-6 rule and fluff angles for subfactions it evidently isn't hard, certainly well within GWs remit.
I'm starting to think the people who are saying there shouldn't be subfactions are actually the ones flanderising the entire army down to hurr durr chop fings.
One would be rippy but teary, the other teary but rippy. And no one could agree on which is which
I would absolutely give GW all the credit in the world if they introduced the Brutal Murders (+1A +1S on charge) and the Murdering Brutalizers (+1S +1A on charge) and explained they are arch rivals.
Really, WE book was a mistake. GW really should have done Khornate legions book and made WE one of factions in there, with heavy restrictions (but capability of fielding Angron). As it is, they really didn't have much of a choice if they wanted WE book to be canon accurate.
Man Codex Khorne, Nurgle, whathisface, and Thatotherguy would be amazing. Daemons, cultists, traitor legions, mutants, daemon engines, and chaos marines together again for the first time. But then people would buy one book instead of 3 and we can't have that.
Irbis wrote: Really, WE book was a mistake. GW really should have done Khornate legions book and made WE one of factions in there, with heavy restrictions (but capability of fielding Angron). As it is, they really didn't have much of a choice if they wanted WE book to be canon accurate.
I wouldn't be surprised that when Emperor's Children finally get their update, we start to see a book structure similar to AOS. GW already started the process of splitting up the daemons codex in the new book. Recent rules mean the daemons for each god are more encouraged to fight alongside their related traitor legion than with each other.
Once Fulgrim & friends are ready for release we could see something like:
Codex: Khorne stuff (WE & daemons)
Codex: Nurgle stuff (DG & daemons)
Codex: Slaanesh stuff (EC & daemons)
Codex: Tzeentch stuff (TS & daemons)
Codex: Chaos (remaining CSM, unaligned daemons, perhaps R&H)
I would absolutely give GW all the credit in the world if they introduced the Brutal Murders (+1A +1S on charge) and the Murdering Brutalizers (+1S +1A on charge) and explained they are arch rivals.
Be sure to collect a royalties check on that idea Exalted
choppinboard wrote: I think people are failing to remember that this is most likely the last codex before 10th / the first true 10th codex. Everyone's going to get nerfed like this, WE are just the whipping boys here.
Last codex for edition doesn't mean it's at all related to new edition. Look at 8e sister codex. Rules that didn't work in 9e, nothing said 9e and 9e codeu came early.
I really wish people would stop using this example to prove a point. The 8th Edition Adepta Sororitas Codex was filled with rules that were made redundant by 9th Edition rules, not non-functional. They were basically 8th Edition unit rules rules that presaged universal 9th Edition rules.
As for World Eaters, only GW knows what they have planned. Given the thinness of what we have seen, and GWs love of all things Khorne, I find it hard to believe there isn't a second wave planned in the next few years. Still, this is looking like a most one dimensional codex.
Why should any codex have subfactions, really? They are one of the biggest sources of rules bloat, and 80% of them almost never get used. The things that need to have subfactions are already separate codexes that cover the distinction that the relevant subfactions have (Thousand Sons, Death Guard, Grey Knights) or are Codex Supplements (Space Marines in general), or are Armies of Renown. We don't need to put a selection of 6 special snowflake variant armies into every codex, only a small literal handful of armies have enough distinction within them that might warrant subfaction rules vs separate codecies/supplements (Astra Militarum, Craftworlds, etc.) - though arguments can be made there too.
Giving World Eaters subfactions is like giving subfactions for different Cadian regiments (i.e. the Cadian 51st Highlander Assault Regiment with a +1BS or the Cadian 666th Doomed Assault Company that can re-roll failed armor saves), its an unnecessary level of detail and specificity. And yes, get rid of the DG/Thousand Sons, etc. subfaction rules while we are at it.
chaos0xomega wrote: Why should any codex have subfactions, really? They are one of the biggest sources of rules bloat, and 80% of them almost never get used.
It cites the source for its claim or it gets the hose again
chaos0xomega wrote: Why should any codex have subfactions, really? They are one of the biggest sources of rules bloat, and 80% of them almost never get used.
It cites the source for its claim or it gets the hose again
It is kinda true, the faction purity rule hinge on subfaction being aligned, there's 2 layers of interlocked rules to begin with and as you love pointing out they the a result in a further 6 warlord traits per subfaction for Marines and a books worth of strats and relics.
Bin off subfactions and the "purity bonus" just becomes an army wide rule, you go down to id guess 6 warlord traits and a list of universal (in faction) relics and strats, slicing out a good dozen pages of rules from every book as a minimum.
I'm sure they do all get used, I like them for flavour and representing different forces, but they're definitely a source of bloat where in competitive balance land there is usually a "best".
I would absolutely give GW all the credit in the world if they introduced the Brutal Murders (+1A +1S on charge) and the Murdering Brutalizers (+1S +1A on charge) and explained they are arch rivals.
Be sure to collect a royalties check on that idea Exalted
I wish I could claim credit but it's a bit of old Ork fluff.
Mork and Gork, one is cunning but brutal, the other brutal but cunning, and no one is sure which is which.
blood reaper wrote: It would've been cool to do Teeth of Khorne armed with Plasma Cannons, imo. Like in the original art.
It would've made them distinct from CSM Havocs, added a bit of 'close support' ranged flavour, and felt like something new.
Instead, you get TWO varieties of possessed who look like they're wearing power armour shirts (I can't stand this aesthetic).
The unit fluff basically writes itself. Give them oversized, possessed or otherwise souped up plasma cannons, rocket launchers and the like, with a seriously powerful overcharged fire mode, but the downside/risk of damaging the unit or even other friendly units in some way, perhaps by some sort of scatter mechanism, or by being forced to fire into melee or something like that. ''Khorne does not care from where the blood flows'' is not necessarily limited to close combat.
Question, is the super ripped Jakhal supposed to be a Marine out of armour? I thought so the plugs in his skin were black carapace, but some of the weedier members have them too.
lord_blackfang wrote: Question, is the super ripped Jakhal supposed to be a Marine out of armour? I thought so the plugs in his skin were black carapace, but some of the weedier members have them too.
They seem to be augmented and definitely use combat stims. On some models the stim containers on their backs are linked to the plugs, so i guess they are some sort of IV port for combat drugs.
Also about half of the Jakhals are female, so they're probably not marines. The leader may be a failed aspirant or something like that though.
I feel like the one-dimensional nature of Khorne right now is a problem than needs to be resolved, not embraced. While I dislike the term for being overused, flanderized really fits in this case.
I was about to write a long post about how there are some other aspects of the WE and Khorne lore that make Khorne more than a one dimensional concept that goes beyond KillMainBurn. But while writing it I noticed that it is not just about adding new faces to Khorne. There are several damn cool lore takes: The tragic of Angorns Background, the fact that whenever Tzeentch plots lead to a war, Nurgles Despair drives people to aggression or Slaaneshs Excess leads to bloodshed, a tax to khorne has been already paid. The sole fact that even the imperium of man fuels him with their rage is so damn cool. Imagine Khorne providing loyal marines with his blessings to slowly subdue them. The ,He doesn’t care for whom blood flows‘ aspect alone is damn sweet, and AoS has done a great pickup on this with the Blood Tithe mechanic (which sadly was butchered ruleswise).
There are more dimensions to Khorne and the WE. The point is, that neither GW, nor many players actually care to read in to this or to pick up on these motifs. GW has previewed with the Eightbound to what level of whack nonse we can look forward to. Eight Deamons in a Box, great, the whole Meme is the number 8 and some old joke about a barfight. It is inconsistent and simply cheaply written. And while I understand that many people are outraged when GW publish such trash when we actually need some good lore building, I also feel that with todays internet mentality people tend to write off stuff way too early and go for the easier to consume memes. Not all the time and heck, I tend to fall in this pattern as well, but yeah.
World Eaters have many open points in their lore which I am curious how GW will solve them: How does the Legion grow? How did it rebuild after the HH? How much of a role does Angron play? What are the goals of the faction? How do they manage to keep some basic logistics running? Do they have homeworlds? Or just warfleets? Are they still the old remaining warbands, or did Angron or another character managed to unite them? How important are the nails for the legion? And how much is the legion connected to the deamonic legions of their patron?
With what we know about the models, there is reason to be afraid that GW will just write gakky lore for a faction that has potential for a great release. With their weird model release decisions they ready confused many: Who is the new named guy? Why do we have Lords on Juggernauts bo no others models with them? Why do we have no new ranged options but instead elite berserkers with 8 deamons inside that doesn’t look possesed at all? Where are the red butchers?
All in all I think that a lot of frustration comes from fans who know at least some of the potential that so far seems unused
alextroy wrote: I really wish people would stop using this example to prove a point. The 8th Edition Adepta Sororitas Codex was filled with rules that were made redundant by 9th Edition rules, not non-functional. They were basically 8th Edition unit rules rules that presaged universal 9th Edition rules.
"It wasn't made completely useless, just redundant!"
alextroy wrote: I really wish people would stop using this example to prove a point. The 8th Edition Adepta Sororitas Codex was filled with rules that were made redundant by 9th Edition rules, not non-functional. They were basically 8th Edition unit rules rules that presaged universal 9th Edition rules.
"It wasn't made completely useless, just redundant!"
How is that any better, exactly?
They also didn't have to make it redundant or useless like they did with the 8th Edition Traitors Supplement, but here we are with people defending GW's paper selling.
alextroy wrote: I really wish people would stop using this example to prove a point. The 8th Edition Adepta Sororitas Codex was filled with rules that were made redundant by 9th Edition rules, not non-functional. They were basically 8th Edition unit rules rules that presaged universal 9th Edition rules.
"It wasn't made completely useless, just redundant!"
How is that any better, exactly?
People keep attempting to use the codex as proof that GW doesn't write late codexes of an edition with the next edition in mind because some of the rules didn't work in the new edition. Well, given those rules don't work because they are redundant in the edition because they were part of the basic rules of the edition shows that GW really did write the rules with the new edition in mind.
8th Edition Mortifiers had a rule that allowed them to change Heavy Flamers from Heavy d6 to Pistol d6, which allowed them to fire into a melee it is in. 9th Edition allowed all vehicles to fire Heavy weapons into melee it is in. The rule was a preview of 9th edition. The rule was no longer useful in 9th, since the ability was already given by the basic rules. However, the unit's function didn't change. That's writing a rule with the new edition in mind.
alextroy wrote: I really wish people would stop using this example to prove a point. The 8th Edition Adepta Sororitas Codex was filled with rules that were made redundant by 9th Edition rules, not non-functional. They were basically 8th Edition unit rules rules that presaged universal 9th Edition rules.
"It wasn't made completely useless, just redundant!"
How is that any better, exactly?
People keep attempting to use the codex as proof that GW doesn't write late codexes of an edition with the next edition in mind because some of the rules didn't work in the new edition. Well, given those rules don't work because they are redundant in the edition because they were part of the basic rules of the edition shows that GW really did write the rules with the new edition in mind.
8th Edition Mortifiers had a rule that allowed them to change Heavy Flamers from Heavy d6 to Pistol d6, which allowed them to fire into a melee it is in. 9th Edition allowed all vehicles to fire Heavy weapons into melee it is in. The rule was a preview of 9th edition. The rule was no longer useful in 9th, since the ability was already given by the basic rules. However, the unit's function didn't change. That's writing a rule with the new edition in mind.
Writing a rule with the new edition in mind is releasing Codex Adepta sororitas in 2020 and then another one in 2021.
choppinboard wrote: I think people are failing to remember that this is most likely the last codex before 10th / the first true 10th codex. Everyone's going to get nerfed like this, WE are just the whipping boys here.
Last codex for edition doesn't mean it's at all related to new edition. Look at 8e sister codex. Rules that didn't work in 9e, nothing said 9e and 9e codeu came early.
I really wish people would stop using this example to prove a point. The 8th Edition Adepta Sororitas Codex was filled with rules that were made redundant by 9th Edition rules, not non-functional. They were basically 8th Edition unit rules rules that presaged universal 9th Edition rules.
As for World Eaters, only GW knows what they have planned. Given the thinness of what we have seen, and GWs love of all things Khorne, I find it hard to believe there isn't a second wave planned in the next few years. Still, this is looking like a most one dimensional codex.
Hate it when shown last codex of edition isn't at all relevant to how 9e was?
There's nothing 9e'ish about sob 8e book. And it was replaced right away...
The "designed for new edition" is marketing speech for guillible people to be fooled by. It's there to screw you out.
alextroy wrote: I really wish people would stop using this example to prove a point. The 8th Edition Adepta Sororitas Codex was filled with rules that were made redundant by 9th Edition rules, not non-functional. They were basically 8th Edition unit rules rules that presaged universal 9th Edition rules.
"It wasn't made completely useless, just redundant!"
How is that any better, exactly?
People keep attempting to use the codex as proof that GW doesn't write late codexes of an edition with the next edition in mind because some of the rules didn't work in the new edition. Well, given those rules don't work because they are redundant in the edition because they were part of the basic rules of the edition shows that GW really did write the rules with the new edition in mind.
8th Edition Mortifiers had a rule that allowed them to change Heavy Flamers from Heavy d6 to Pistol d6, which allowed them to fire into a melee it is in. 9th Edition allowed all vehicles to fire Heavy weapons into melee it is in. The rule was a preview of 9th edition. The rule was no longer useful in 9th, since the ability was already given by the basic rules. However, the unit's function didn't change. That's writing a rule with the new edition in mind.
And what for crusade there was?
If it was for 9e WHY DID 9E BOOK COME AMONG FIRST ONES THEN?
The claim is just so that quillible people get fooled for money. Nothing more. Marketing speech.
On AOS side daughters of khaine were among last books in 2nd edition and got year later new book and there's nothing 3e'ish about 2e book either. Subfactions were same aos2 style rather than aos3 style. Same mandatory artefacts and warlord traits as other 2nd ed books.
It's marketing speech to deceive those who are easily deceived.
8th Edition Mortifiers had a rule that allowed them to change Heavy Flamers from Heavy d6 to Pistol d6, which allowed them to fire into a melee it is in. 9th Edition allowed all vehicles to fire Heavy weapons into melee it is in. The rule was a preview of 9th edition. The rule was no longer useful in 9th, since the ability was already given by the basic rules. However, the unit's function didn't change. That's writing a rule with the new edition in mind.
I suspect cases like this are somewhere in between. GW might have an idea of the general changes that a new edition will bring and write accordingly, but those rules changes won't all be set in stone at the time the codex is sent to print. No codex for X edition will ever be fully compatible for X+1 edition, incorporating these changes just mean a couple less FAQ lines to write.
The updated Sisters codex was undoubtedly released to sell all the new wave 2 kits alongside it - the current status of the rules had no bearing on that decision.
The "designed for new edition" is marketing speech for guillible people to be fooled by. It's there to screw you out.
Have GW ever advertised a codex like this? It always seemed to be an assumption from people chatting online rather than something they've said explictly.
8th Edition Mortifiers had a rule that allowed them to change Heavy Flamers from Heavy d6 to Pistol d6, which allowed them to fire into a melee it is in. 9th Edition allowed all vehicles to fire Heavy weapons into melee it is in. The rule was a preview of 9th edition. The rule was no longer useful in 9th, since the ability was already given by the basic rules. However, the unit's function didn't change. That's writing a rule with the new edition in mind.
I suspect cases like this are somewhere in between. GW might have an idea of the general changes that a new edition will bring and write accordingly, but those rules changes won't all be set in stone at the time the codex is sent to print. No codex for X edition will ever be fully compatible for X+1 edition, incorporating these changes just mean a couple less FAQ lines to write.
The updated Sisters codex was undoubtedly released to sell all the new wave 2 kits alongside it - the current status of the rules had no bearing on that decision.
The "designed for new edition" is marketing speech for guillible people to be fooled by. It's there to screw you out.
Have GW ever advertised a codex like this? It always seemed to be an assumption from people chatting online rather than something they've said explictly.
Advertised? No, but they are on record they designed the sisters book with 9th in mind as they were worked on at the same time, they discussed it in a few places, both in the streams for psychic awakening and I think in the white dwarf to explain why sisters didn't get any articles/content.
What I find so funny about this is that people are asking fans to come up with reasons why World Eaters deserve subfactions - not asking why GWs writers (the people paid to do this) why they could not have come up with subfactions. It is their job to you know, write the lore.
blood reaper wrote: What I find so funny about this is that people are asking fans to come up with reasons why World Eaters deserve subfactions - not asking why GWs writers (the people paid to do this) why they could not have come up with subfactions. It is their job to you know, write the lore.
Sure, however i think people know that GW doesn't do a good job in regards to lore and rules, or else we would have far more differing and interesting chaos codex lineup than we have now.
In one of these forum I complained about the lack of subfactions and someone answered me "who cares, nobody uses them, lol". Even if it's true (which is not) I don't like competitive and tournament play having such a hold on narrative play, on the lore and on the rest of the hobby.
I don't know, I painted my guys with khaki and dark red for them to not be just another Born Soldiers guard army. I like customisation on the rules, even if people doesn't care.
blood reaper wrote: What I find so funny about this is that people are asking fans to come up with reasons why World Eaters deserve subfactions - not asking why GWs writers (the people paid to do this) why they could not have come up with subfactions. It is their job to you know, write the lore.
The standard is what, 6 right? Here you go (ignoring all the canon warbands):
The Horde of Blood: What became of the hordes of Inductii made during the Horus Heresy and the apothecaries that facilitated them. Encourages lots of buffed up jackhal backed by character marines.
The Gorestained Tracks: What's left of the old Armored companies, giving bonuses to mounting/dismounting infantry and encouraging armored forces.
The Pit Fiends: Caedarae (rampagers too far gone), unlimited by the constraints of an organized legion. Heavy buffs to basic bezerkers, and in ideal world, extra wargear.
Angron's hand: What became of the devourers and other world eaters of similar low status, along with Red butchers. They use harshly guarded and cared for terminator suits to execute missions of great importance in assuring their primarch survives, even if he doesn't know it.
The Bulwark of Brass: What became of the Triarii that didn't form the Riven in the Black Legion. The Specialize in mass marine formations, hardened by their years fighting in the voids. Moreso a slow tanky wall approaching as opposed to charging haphazardly.
The Exalted of Khorne: What it says on the tin, focuses on exhalted and Daemon Engines, and buffing them into absolute beasts. In an ideal would, would encourage Bezerker-Surgeons.
And for fun, an Army of Renown:
The Bloodied: Kharn's personal warband, formed by those willing to follow him and accept the risks of being his ally, primarily focuses on using Kharn and buffing himself and others, at the potential cost of allied units.
Boom, 6 right there, using nothing but existing lore anectdotes.
Garrac wrote: In one of these forum I complained about the lack of subfactions and someone answered me "who cares, nobody uses them, lol". Even if it's true (which is not) I don't like competitive and tournament play having such a hold on narrative play, on the lore and on the rest of the hobby.
I don't know, I painted my guys with khaki and dark red for them to not be just another Born Soldiers guard army. I like customisation on the rules, even if people doesn't care.
I do.
Personally I hope that the approach taken with the Guard codex is used more often in 10e. It kinda sucks if several editions ago you committed to your models as Bad Moons or Imperial Fists, then a new codex shows up with them having the weakest sub-faction rules.
Just have a list of generic traits that players can mix & match to best suit their selected units & play style, and minimise the link between rules and colour scheme.
blood reaper wrote: What I find so funny about this is that people are asking fans to come up with reasons why World Eaters deserve subfactions - not asking why GWs writers (the people paid to do this) why they could not have come up with subfactions. It is their job to you know, write the lore.
The standard is what, 6 right? Here you go (ignoring all the canon warbands):
It's a little bit of a leap to go from "no subfaction rules in playtesting" to "world eaters have no subfactions". The handful of fluff pages in the WD article describes at least two warbands, and says that "Sons of Angron were a part of all eight spearheads of the so-called Blood Crusade, riding warp storms to world after world and leaving naught but carnage in their bloody wakes. "
I'd bet that at minimum World Eaters get fluff to cover 8 named warbands, in the same way TS got 9 cults and DG have 7 plague companies. Perhaps they'll also some token rules added for these too, perhaps not.
Mortarion: "Magnus I can explain-"
Magnus: "You're getting two separate entries for faction specific Temrinators in your Codex and I only get one?"
Angron: "Faction specific Terminators in the Codex? I'm only getting the regular ones!"
Fulgrim: "You guys are getting a Codex?"
Mortarion: "Magnus I can explain-"
Magnus: "You're getting two separate entries for faction specific Temrinators in your Codex and I only get one?"
Angron: "Faction specific Terminators in the Codex? I'm only getting the regular ones!"
Fulgrim: "You guys are getting a Codex?"
Garrac wrote: In one of these forum I complained about the lack of subfactions and someone answered me "who cares, nobody uses them, lol". Even if it's true (which is not) I don't like competitive and tournament play having such a hold on narrative play, on the lore and on the rest of the hobby.
I don't know, I painted my guys with khaki and dark red for them to not be just another Born Soldiers guard army. I like customisation on the rules, even if people doesn't care.
I do.
Personally I hope that the approach taken with the Guard codex is used more often in 10e. It kinda sucks if several editions ago you committed to your models as Bad Moons or Imperial Fists, then a new codex shows up with them having the weakest sub-faction rules.
Just have a list of generic traits that players can mix & match to best suit their selected units & play style, and minimise the link between rules and colour scheme.
Worst of all is, this is the treatment theyve given to the CSM. They have subfactions, yes- but not renegade chapters. So, sorry Fallen fans, you now can't use either CSM codex or Dark Angels, you are just fethed
I think guard-style faction choice of mix n match would work perfectly for renegades. But tbh I feel like the Legions/VotLW should have a different codex from 'regular' CSM that focuses on marine stuff and lets them take relic HH units. Renegades get unrestricted cultist options and Brood Brother-style ability to take guard or even vanilla marine units.
blood reaper wrote: What I find so funny about this is that people are asking fans to come up with reasons why World Eaters deserve subfactions - not asking why GWs writers (the people paid to do this) why they could not have come up with subfactions. It is their job to you know, write the lore.
The standard is what, 6 right? Here you go (ignoring all the canon warbands):
It's a little bit of a leap to go from "no subfaction rules in playtesting" to "world eaters have no subfactions". The handful of fluff pages in the WD article describes at least two warbands, and says that "Sons of Angron were a part of all eight spearheads of the so-called Blood Crusade, riding warp storms to world after world and leaving naught but carnage in their bloody wakes. "
I'd bet that at minimum World Eaters get fluff to cover 8 named warbands, in the same way TS got 9 cults and DG have 7 plague companies. Perhaps they'll also some token rules added for these too, perhaps not.
I mean, maybe, but we also have little-to-no proof otherwise. We have nothing but circumstantial evidence that they may add subfactions, and at least a few pieces of concrete evidence to the contrary. Occam's razor, you know? Either way, my post was moreso to prove the point that I can throw together 6 plus an army of Renown with little-to no effort, with no explicit lore issues (at least that I've found). Surely they can make that many, unless they are the most uncreative people I've ever met, in which case why are they writing codexes?
The "designed for new edition" is marketing speech for guillible people to be fooled by. It's there to screw you out.
Have GW ever advertised a codex like this? It always seemed to be an assumption from people chatting online rather than something they've said explictly.
Its usually retroactive when it comes up. A 'of course Rule XX was bad, it was designed with the new edition in mind, and now its so good its almost broken!'
Have you considered the possibility that the whole codex was meant to be in Arks of Omen: Angron, but this changed when they found we don't like that sort of thing?
Mortarion: "Magnus I can explain-"
Magnus: "You're getting two separate entries for faction specific Temrinators in your Codex and I only get one?"
Angron: "Faction specific Terminators in the Codex? I'm only getting the regular ones!"
Fulgrim: "You guys are getting a Codex?"
Fulgrim and Angron definitely have a claim to be disgruntled - Morty could ask Magnus about the number of faction-specific non-named-character psykers, though, I feel. If Magnus is going to bitch about having less of something that fits thematically with the Death Guard, then Morty could do the same regarding non-named-character psykers, I reckon.
Fulgrim should really be complaining about not getting a freaking dedicated Noise Marine kit yet, after how many years?
H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah so the World Eater sub-factions will be there, but everything will be Power Levels and no points.
How much sub-faction stuff has actually cost points so far, anyway?
Mortarion: "Magnus I can explain-"
Magnus: "You're getting two separate entries for faction specific Temrinators in your Codex and I only get one?"
Angron: "Faction specific Terminators in the Codex? I'm only getting the regular ones!"
Fulgrim: "You guys are getting a Codex?"
Meanwhile, Perturabo, Lorgar, Alpharius/Omegon (whichever one Dorn didn't kill), and the ghost of Curze are standing off in a corner asking each other: "What's all of this 'faction specific' stuff that they keep talking about?". And the ghost of Horus just laughs.
More/different leaks/rumors from someone in the World Eaters discord:
Berzerkers:
- Have an inbuilt ability where if they are shot by the opponent, if they aren't killed outright the berzerkers get to move d6" toward the closest enemy unit
- If they are performing an action and you use this ability, it auto-fails. If you have the Berzerker Icon and use this ability, it auto-completes the action.
- There is a stratagem unlocked by the Berzerker Icon that grants 3d6 discard the lowest result for charge distance.
Red Butchers:
- Is now a stratagem for 1 CP that applies to Terminators or Eightbound, grants +1 damage for the turn
Angron:
- Has an aura of totally preventing fallback within 6", no rolling, just can't do it, including friendly models
- Has an aura of re-roll hits for CORE
- Move 16" base S8
Eightbound:
- Do not get a pre-game move, but can arrive from strategic reserves turn 1
Exalted Eightbound:
- Can deep strike
Lord on Juggernaut:
- Can use chainsword or a chainaxe giving +1S -2 AP 2 damage
Blood Tithe:
- Reviving Angron costs 3 blood tithe points, and when Angron dies he gives up 3 blood tithe points
- The ability to grant the whole army auto-wounds on 6's to hit costs 4 blood tithe points
- Blood Tithe points are gained by units destroyed, enemy or friendly
Invocatus is totally an auto-include as the warlord in any game that doesn't use Angron. Assuming any of this is true, he is just lightyears better than any other choice.
Dudeface wrote: Compiled by Khornestar over on B&C:
More/different leaks/rumors from someone in the World Eaters discord:
Red Butchers:
- Is now a stratagem for 1 CP that applies to Terminators or Eightbound, grants +1 damage for the turn
A few more details added separately in Discord from the same sources:
The stratagem above isn't actually called "red butchers", it has a different name.
Red butchers strat upgrade is still 2cp & grants fight twice. Now adds +1 to hit rolls instead of strength.
Other unconfirmed new WE model(s) are apparently done but not being released with the codex, they're held back for a future wave.
Discord speculation: Berzerker-Surgeon character model (which has fluff in the WD Index) seems likely, there may also be a later Kill Team.
DreadfullyHopeful wrote: Really dropping the ball on the Hatebound. They do not wear termi armor and sure don't look as gnarly as Warp Talons why should they deepstrike ?
DreadfullyHopeful wrote: Really dropping the ball on the Hatebound. They do not wear termi armor and sure don't look as gnarly as Warp Talons why should they deepstrike ?
They're full of daemons. So I guess they just emerge from the warp.
I think most people would have preferred terminators.
DreadfullyHopeful wrote: Really dropping the ball on the Hatebound. They do not wear termi armor and sure don't look as gnarly as Warp Talons why should they deepstrike ?
Exalted ones. I figure as the moderately possessed looking ones they get to do the daemon thing and arrive via warp rift.
Dudeface wrote: Compiled by Khornestar over on B&C:
More/different leaks/rumors from someone in the World Eaters discord:
Red Butchers:
- Is now a stratagem for 1 CP that applies to Terminators or Eightbound, grants +1 damage for the turn
A few more details added separately in Discord from the same sources:
The stratagem above isn't actually called "red butchers", it has a different name.
Red butchers strat upgrade is still 2cp & grants fight twice. Now adds +1 to hit rolls instead of strength.
Other unconfirmed new WE model(s) are apparently done but not being released with the codex, they're held back for a future wave.
Discord speculation: Berzerker-Surgeon character model (which has fluff in the WD Index) seems likely, there may also be a later Kill Team.
Thanks for the clarification on Red Butchers, I was worried they were going to be downgraded significantly. +1 Hit over +1S seems fair.
Berzerkers:
- Have an inbuilt ability where if they are shot by the opponent, if they aren't killed outright the berzerkers get to move d6" toward the closest enemy unit. If they are performing an action and you use this ability, it auto-fails. If you have the Berzerker Icon and use this ability, it auto-completes the action.
OK so 10 man zerker units are now really annoying because you can't keep them alive on an objective or they'll just finish their action and run at you (because who ISN'T going to take an icon). You can't just whittle them down and hope to shift them or you may be handing the opponent points.
Kind of contradicts Blood Tithe's whole MSU purpose, UNLESS units now have a Blood Tithe "score" based off... something. Unit size? If a 5 man zerker unit gives X Tithe and a 10 man unit gives X+Y or something, I'd be totally down with that.
Not that the enemy will be doing much other than shooting Angron till he's dead for two turns in a row. Can't wait to see someone Bloodletter Bomb him LOL.
Sometimes anti-synergy is by design, as it gives diminishing returns on stacking powerful abilities. I support it, especially given Warhammer's track record of ability stacks being problematic.
Berzerkers:
- Have an inbuilt ability where if they are shot by the opponent, if they aren't killed outright the berzerkers get to move d6" toward the closest enemy unit. If they are performing an action and you use this ability, it auto-fails. If you have the Berzerker Icon and use this ability, it auto-completes the action.
OK so 10 man zerker units are now really annoying because you can't keep them alive on an objective or they'll just finish their action and run at you (because who ISN'T going to take an icon). You can't just whittle them down and hope to shift them or you may be handing the opponent points.
Kind of contradicts Blood Tithe's whole MSU purpose, UNLESS units now have a Blood Tithe "score" based off... something. Unit size? If a 5 man zerker unit gives X Tithe and a 10 man unit gives X+Y or something, I'd be totally down with that.
Not that the enemy will be doing much other than shooting Angron till he's dead for two turns in a row. Can't wait to see someone Bloodletter Bomb him LOL.
Yeah, having bonuses for going MSU or going with a large squad size seems good. No one clear answer in list building.
So, looks like the one who has said therell be another wave of minis was SirSarge, who to this point hasnt failed any leak so far? I guess then theyll be available when the Angron book for Arks of Omen releases
Garrac wrote: So, looks like the one who has said therell be another wave of minis was SirSarge, who to this point hasnt failed any leak so far? I guess then theyll be available when the Angron book for Arks of Omen releases
What makes you think that? The arks of omen book looks like timed into the codex launch, which given the info to hand will likely be Feb or at a push, March.
Garrac wrote: So, looks like the one who has said therell be another wave of minis was SirSarge, who to this point hasnt failed any leak so far? I guess then theyll be available when the Angron book for Arks of Omen releases
What makes you think that? The arks of omen book looks like timed into the codex launch, which given the info to hand will likely be Feb or at a push, March.
We really dont know that? Im just guessing, since World eaters are due to come in 2023, then an army set coming in january-february seems pretty plausible. I dont think we're an Arks of omen book for each moth, but who knows
Garrac wrote: So, looks like the one who has said therell be another wave of minis was SirSarge, who to this point hasnt failed any leak so far? I guess then theyll be available when the Angron book for Arks of Omen releases
What makes you think that? The arks of omen book looks like timed into the codex launch, which given the info to hand will likely be Feb or at a push, March.
The article said books 1&2 are Winter, books 3&4 are Spring. So most likely one each from Jan - April assuming we don't get the first one dropped before xmas.
GW may well want to get the Guard & WE full codexes releases done as close as possible to the January balance update / CA / points changes to avoid confusion.
It's very possible we get a split launch for WE, with the codex & combat patrol dropping in January followed by the Angron model & AoO book 2 in Feb.
Garrac wrote: So, looks like the one who has said therell be another wave of minis was SirSarge, who to this point hasnt failed any leak so far? I guess then theyll be available when the Angron book for Arks of Omen releases
What makes you think that? The arks of omen book looks like timed into the codex launch, which given the info to hand will likely be Feb or at a push, March.
We really dont know that? Im just guessing, since World eaters are due to come in 2023, then an army set coming in january-february seems pretty plausible. I dont think we're an Arks of omen book for each moth, but who knows
Well again, rumours point to no army set atm and just taking a step back, even if arks of omen isn't the same month as the codex, is it likely their 2nd totally unpreviewed wave will come with a book that doesn't contain matched play rules a month or two later, given no model no rules is a thing for all books.
Garrac wrote: So, looks like the one who has said therell be another wave of minis was SirSarge, who to this point hasnt failed any leak so far? I guess then theyll be available when the Angron book for Arks of Omen releases
What makes you think that? The arks of omen book looks like timed into the codex launch, which given the info to hand will likely be Feb or at a push, March.
The article said books 1&2 are Winter, books 3&4 are Spring. So most likely one each from Jan - April assuming we don't get the first one dropped before xmas.
GW may well want to get the Guard & WE full codexes releases done as close as possible to the January balance update / CA / points changes to avoid confusion.
It's very possible we get a split launch for WE, with the codex & combat patrol dropping in January followed by the Angron model & AoO book 2 in Feb.
That is possible, but this is in reference to a wave 2 of new minis, which seems less likely by an order of magnitudes
Is it just me that thinks planning for a second wave of models (that are supposedly ready now) requiring a second book purchase before the codex is even out is a real dick move?
Crispy78 wrote: Is it just me that thinks planning for a second wave of models (that are supposedly ready now) requiring a second book purchase before the codex is even out is a real dick move?
Depends how that "2nd wave" presents itself. The way Sisters were updated was a bit of a dick move, with the previous codex lasting under 18 months. However that situation is fairly rare and quite often factions will get new models before the next version of their book.
In this case the source has since clarified he was told there is another "sculpt" ready for WE, but doesn't have more details than that. It could be that there's a single character model coming in 2023/24, or there is a Kill Team box in the pipeline tied to a model release for another faction, neither of which would require a new WE codex.There might be several other WE units along with a 10th edition codex, but that seems less likely.
Crispy78 wrote: Is it just me that thinks planning for a second wave of models (that are supposedly ready now) requiring a second book purchase before the codex is even out is a real dick move?
Par for the course, Lumineth in Sigmar got through 3 army books in 4 years for the 3 waves of releases, Marines got 2 in 2 years at the turn of the edition. It's not great at all and given the off-putting anaemic release I have to assume there's a business reason behind the decisions other than "make more money" because this release will likely put a lot off.
I know there haven't been any rumours about any new army sets, but, I mean, come on, this is a new army. This NEEDS an army set, with a very big good reason having in mind that is the only thing that GW seems to be able to release on time.
Crispy78 wrote: Is it just me that thinks planning for a second wave of models (that are supposedly ready now) requiring a second book purchase before the codex is even out is a real dick move?
Par for the course, Lumineth in Sigmar got through 3 army books in 4 years for the 3 waves of releases, Marines got 2 in 2 years at the turn of the edition. It's not great at all and given the off-putting anaemic release I have to assume there's a business reason behind the decisions other than "make more money" because this release will likely put a lot off.
Didn't Daughters of Khaine get through books in pretty short order, too?
What's the last book with a major model wave that didn't come out as an army box? Cadians, Votaan, Black Templars, Beast Snaggas, Warriors of Chaos were all army boxes. Craftworlds and Chaos Marines had a battle box with new stuff for both factions.
What's the last book with a major model wave that didn't come out as an army box? Cadians, Votaan, Black Templars, Beast Snaggas, Warriors of Chaos were all army boxes. Craftworlds and Chaos Marines had a battle box with new stuff for both factions.
GW seems to require army boxes have entirely new models in, the only one on that list that didn't is templars. New kit count for this release is 5 including Angron. Logically the army box would be: 1 lord on juggernaut, 1 box of zerkers, 1 box of eightbound and 1 box of jakhals. That's all of the army in 1 box in essence, which you then can spam and rob them of sales down the line. I suppose is 5 kits a "major" model wave?
The WE Discord hasn't heard anything about an army box.
Personally I'm expecting just a Combat Patrol box with Kharn or MoE as the HQ, plus some combination of zerkers, jakhals, and eightbound. That leaves the juggerlord & Angron kits to be bought separately.
Crispy78 wrote: Is it just me that thinks planning for a second wave of models (that are supposedly ready now) requiring a second book purchase before the codex is even out is a real dick move?
It might just be the third 10th ed Codex, and if rumours are to be believed every existing book will be invalidated anyway.
Crispy78 wrote: Is it just me that thinks planning for a second wave of models (that are supposedly ready now) requiring a second book purchase before the codex is even out is a real dick move?
It might just be the third 10th ed Codex, and if rumours are to be believed every existing book will be invalidated anyway.
Which is just as bad, if not even worse. If they already have in the pipeline a replacement rulebook invalidating the codex they are yet to release, plus a replacement codex for the codex they are yet to release, maybe they should just hold off on the interim incomplete 9th edition codex and release the 10th edition codex along with 10th edition. I sure as gak won't be buying it anyway.
I will give the "rules writers" some credit with the Berserker Marines. If the running forward after being shot is true, it at least gives them more of a role compared to just being Chosen but bad.
Crispy78 wrote: Is it just me that thinks planning for a second wave of models (that are supposedly ready now) requiring a second book purchase before the codex is even out is a real dick move?
Par for the course, Lumineth in Sigmar got through 3 army books in 4 years for the 3 waves of releases, Marines got 2 in 2 years at the turn of the edition. It's not great at all and given the off-putting anaemic release I have to assume there's a business reason behind the decisions other than "make more money" because this release will likely put a lot off.
Didn't Daughters of Khaine get through books in pretty short order, too?
Crispy78 wrote: Is it just me that thinks planning for a second wave of models (that are supposedly ready now) requiring a second book purchase before the codex is even out is a real dick move?
Par for the course, Lumineth in Sigmar got through 3 army books in 4 years for the 3 waves of releases, Marines got 2 in 2 years at the turn of the edition. It's not great at all and given the off-putting anaemic release I have to assume there's a business reason behind the decisions other than "make more money" because this release will likely put a lot off.
Didn't Daughters of Khaine get through books in pretty short order, too?
About a year plus minus 2 months or so.
The whole matter is a bit complicated. DoK had a big gap between their first and second tomes, then the third hit quickly... but people were generally OK with it because the army needed a rewrite to smooth out some rough edges.
Now I know what you are thinking reader, wait for it.
Lumineth were released as a clearly incomplete army both in fluff and mechanics, then their second tome came in short order to replace it... BUT that tome hit the same time as a (cheaper) campaign book which contained all the new stuff for Lumineth, so a player that had the first tome + campaign book was good to go and had every page of the 2nd tome in their possession. GW also explicitly told us this on release, but weren't exactly energetic about keeping that notification current. Finally they recently got their 3rd tome, which they really needed because there were some serious rough spots in their design the most glaring of which went more or less completely unaddressed. These were also problems apparent when the first tome came out, so they could have fixed them with the 2nd tome's release but basically it was just an updated 'Battletome 1B' that consolidated the information from 1A and the campaign book into one place.
Ultimately, like many (though far from all) cases it is not so much corporate greed as sheer incompetence driving the chain of events. I think many find it comforting to attribute malice to corporations being what they are, because it means there is a distinct 'bad guy' who can be blamed without any moral consequence. Blaming an entity for being foolish can feel bad in a way, both morally and because it is even more hopeless. An evil corporation knows what the 'good' options are but makes a malicious choice not to use them. An incompetent one doesn't know WTF it is doing any more than the rest of us, and simply has such power & status that it's stupid decisions affect many rather than few. Unfortunately...
Voss wrote: A failure is a failure. It doesn't matter what their motives are. There isn't any reason to excuse it.
Speculative explanation =/= excuses
What purpose does the speculation serve other than making excuses?
@EviscerationPlague - to be fair, a bunch of folks running a garage operation wouldn't waste anyone's time with this kind of crap, including their own. They'd grasp keeping what customers they have happy.
Voss wrote: A failure is a failure. It doesn't matter what their motives are. There isn't any reason to excuse it.
Speculative explanation =/= excuses
What purpose does the speculation serve other than making excuses?
@EviscerationPlague - to be fair, a bunch of folks running a garage operation wouldn't waste anyone's time with this kind of crap, including their own. They'd grasp keeping what customers they have happy.
I don't think they're caring about making people happy, they know they'll sell 2 books this way in a short span. It'll be the bean counters at the top pushing it, until they see it not "working" they won't engage on a more customer friendly avenue.
I'm with the opinion that it was premature releasing the army in this state. Could have happily left them in CSM, dropped angron as a campaign model with pdf rules, get all the csm players buying him then release rhe rest in early 10th with a bigger release slot.
Speculation trying to determine why something is happening isn’t foolish. If anything it can prevent being hood winked later.
It’s not the best example but it’s what I have: When Fallout 76 came out the pump shotgun didn’t have a dynamic reload animation, it just loaded five or whatever shells each time.
People thought this was a “bug” and asked the dev to fix it.
Reality, the Fallout 4 engine, the current Creation Engine, which 76 is a heavily modified version of, did not have built-in coding for dynamic reload animations.
Modders who added them to 4 had to do lots of custom scripting and mesh editing to add all the correct nodes for the engine to work right. It was not simple.
Eventually the dev releases patch notes saying they “fixed” the reload bug. Nothing special comes of that BUT by the fact the dev could lie due to player ignorance means they could easily manipulate the players in some form in theory.
If anything, they could pretend to be fixing a feature that was totally ready for launch (sans bugs) rather than admitting that the game was even less ready in terms of FEATURES as well.
I truly wish I had a MUCH better example, but trying to logically deduce why something occurred makes it far less likely for you to fall for some “bull pucky”.
Anyways as for an Army Box; so long as a CP box comes nothing is needed for any army to be an affordable entry.
What people forget is that they don’t want to include too many of the new things in a box so that people will have lots of normal boxes to buy. The army box usually contains significantly different contents from the CP box, main exception is the Thousand Sons box. And the Cadian if the Limited Ed Codex is to go by (the AMCP box will be the same as the army box, according to the codex).
Point is, unless I missed something I’m only predicting 6 new kits: Angron, Kharn, Lord on Big Doggo / Named Lord on Big Doggo, Bloodletters, Jackals and Eightbound.
Angron’s not going in either box because it’s aimed for a CP game. Kharn might be in just to dissuade you from buying more than one box. At least one if not two bloodletters, then either Jackals or Eightbound.
I’d lean Kharn, 2 bloodletters and eightbound, assuming that makes a patrol. That’d leave jackal cultists, another eightbound ( for more of the same or exalted), and two possible lord doggos for the generic and named version.
Either way, there’s so little you’d get almost everything unique to the dex from two different boxes.
This is also why there isn’t a Harlequin CP box, by the time you put together a CP model list that costs $220+ or whatever the savings are supposed to be for CP boxes, you’d havd almost every single thing they sell in one box for the army.
Pro tip, two troupe and two voidweaver boxes will make a patrol for about $150 usd. Your HQ comes from the troupe box and after that, make one of the heavy support boxes a transport instead.
Also, the Templar Army box had the dreadnought that wasn’t new (with the templars release I mean) so that isn’t a fixed thing.
Versus boxes aren’t fixed either. Piety and Pain just had Lelith. GK versus TS had a redone named character and one new HQ split between armies. Custodes vs. GS had two new generic HQ’s (or was GS an elite?) split between armies.
But then Eldritch and Omens was almost entirely new save the Forgefiend.
TreeStewges wrote: Speculation trying to determine why something is happening isn’t foolish. If anything it can prevent being hood winked later.
It’s not the best example but it’s what I have: When Fallout 76 came out the pump shotgun didn’t have a dynamic reload animation, it just loaded five or whatever shells each time.
People thought this was a “bug” and asked the dev to fix it.
Reality, the Fallout 4 engine, the current Creation Engine, which 76 is a heavily modified version of, did not have built-in coding for dynamic reload animations.
Modders who added them to 4 had to do lots of custom scripting and mesh editing to add all the correct nodes for the engine to work right. It was not simple.
Eventually the dev releases patch notes saying they “fixed” the reload bug. Nothing special comes of that BUT by the fact the dev could lie due to player ignorance means they could easily manipulate the players in some form in theory.
If anything, they could pretend to be fixing a feature that was totally ready for launch (sans bugs) rather than admitting that the game was even less ready in terms of FEATURES as well.
I truly wish I had a MUCH better example, but trying to logically deduce why something occurred makes it far less likely for you to fall for some “bull pucky”.
Anyways as for an Army Box; so long as a CP box comes nothing is needed for any army to be an affordable entry.
What people forget is that they don’t want to include too many of the new things in a box so that people will have lots of normal boxes to buy. The army box usually contains significantly different contents from the CP box, main exception is the Thousand Sons box. And the Cadian if the Limited Ed Codex is to go by (the AMCP box will be the same as the army box, according to the codex).
Point is, unless I missed something I’m only predicting 6 new kits: Angron, Kharn, Lord on Big Doggo / Named Lord on Big Doggo, Bloodletters, Jackals and Eightbound.
Angron’s not going in either box because it’s aimed for a CP game. Kharn might be in just to dissuade you from buying more than one box. At least one if not two bloodletters, then either Jackals or Eightbound.
I’d lean Kharn, 2 bloodletters and eightbound, assuming that makes a patrol. That’d leave jackal cultists, another eightbound ( for more of the same or exalted), and two possible lord doggos for the generic and named version.
Either way, there’s so little you’d get almost everything unique to the dex from two different boxes.
This is also why there isn’t a Harlequin CP box, by the time you put together a CP model list that costs $220+ or whatever the savings are supposed to be for CP boxes, you’d havd almost every single thing they sell in one box for the army.
Pro tip, two troupe and two voidweaver boxes will make a patrol for about $150 usd. Your HQ comes from the troupe box and after that, make one of the heavy support boxes a transport instead.
Also, the Templar Army box had the dreadnought that wasn’t new (with the templars release I mean) so that isn’t a fixed thing.
Versus boxes aren’t fixed either. Piety and Pain just had Lelith. GK versus TS had a redone named character and one new HQ split between armies. Custodes vs. GS had two new generic HQ’s (or was GS an elite?) split between armies.
But then Eldritch and Omens was almost entirely new save the Forgefiend.
GW just isn’t consistent.
I'd say, in doubt, let's skip this release.
The WE vets can keep playing using the white dwarf make do rules. And those who wanted to start them can wait for a proper release in 6 months/ a year.
Maybe we still get a box or two of those shiny new Berzerkers. As a treat
Crispy78 wrote: Is it just me that thinks planning for a second wave of models (that are supposedly ready now) requiring a second book purchase before the codex is even out is a real dick move?
It might just be the third 10th ed Codex, and if rumours are to be believed every existing book will be invalidated anyway.
Oh I missed this! Releasing a new edition codex in the same year invalidating the former, or invalidating it with generic edition rules to be published in summer it's also a dick move.
TreeStewges wrote: What people forget is that they don’t want to include too many of the new things in a box so that people will have lots of normal boxes to buy. The army box usually contains significantly different contents from the CP box, main exception is the Thousand Sons box. And the Cadian if the Limited Ed Codex is to go by (the AMCP box will be the same as the army box, according to the codex).
Except they are more than willing to have all new kits + limited edition book to jack up price so buying multiples isn't that efficient.
There's even very recent(like 2 weeks old) example. Slaves to darkness. 14 all new models(3 even being never seen unit), battle tome, cards, price is discounted compared to buying individual items separately(even before factoring inevitable higher prices for newer version of daemon prince and chosens compared to old models).
Crispy78 wrote: Is it just me that thinks planning for a second wave of models (that are supposedly ready now) requiring a second book purchase before the codex is even out is a real dick move?
It might just be the third 10th ed Codex, and if rumours are to be believed every existing book will be invalidated anyway.
Oh I missed this! Releasing a new edition codex in the same year invalidating the former, or invalidating it with generic edition rules to be published in summer it's also a dick move.
Mind you that's just speculation at the moment. I keep hearing that but I haven't seen anybody provide actual concrete evidence suggesting GW changes their release patterns here.
To add some WE content to this post beore going on a tangent, one of the Discord sources says that the Combat Patrol will be Juggerlord, Berzerkers, and Jakhals.
The other says he was told 10E will not be a full rules reset as some are speculating.
Lumineth were released as a clearly incomplete army both in fluff and mechanics, then their second tome came in short order to replace it... BUT that tome hit the same time as a (cheaper) campaign book which contained all the new stuff for Lumineth, so a player that had the first tome + campaign book was good to go and had every page of the 2nd tome in their possession. GW also explicitly told us this on release, but weren't exactly energetic about keeping that notification current. Finally they recently got their 3rd tome, which they really needed because there were some serious rough spots in their design the most glaring of which went more or less completely unaddressed. These were also problems apparent when the first tome came out, so they could have fixed them with the 2nd tome's release but basically it was just an updated 'Battletome 1B' that consolidated the information from 1A and the campaign book into one place.
Ultimately, like many (though far from all) cases it is not so much corporate greed as sheer incompetence driving the chain of events. I think many find it comforting to attribute malice to corporations being what they are, because it means there is a distinct 'bad guy' who can be blamed without any moral consequence. Blaming an entity for being foolish can feel bad in a way, both morally and because it is even more hopeless. An evil corporation knows what the 'good' options are but makes a malicious choice not to use them. An incompetent one doesn't know WTF it is doing any more than the rest of us, and simply has such power & status that it's stupid decisions affect many rather than few. Unfortunately...
It sounds as though some combination of these events ocurred:
a) Marketing didn't want to go all-in on producing a new range of models until they saw how the initial wave sold, OR they wanted the first wave to help decide production quantities for wave 2.
b) Other projects (such as the 40k 9E launch) meant that their in-house toolmakers couldn't develop all of the Lumineth kits that had been designed in time, so rather than delay they decided to split the release in two
In either case, some combination of manufacturing & marketing decisions are dictating the shape of game rules.
Voss wrote: A failure is a failure. It doesn't matter what their motives are. There isn't any reason to excuse it.
Speculative explanation =/= excuses
What purpose does the speculation serve other than making excuses?
I don't think it's controversial to say that better understanding is a good thing. Perhaps I'm wrong.
Any business (or any other human being in general) is infinitely more likely to respond positively to a customer with constructive feedback (i.e. "I don't like you doing A because X Y Z"), over customers just yelling insults at them from dark corners of the Internet.
Sometimes when customers understand why decisions were made that way, they can offer workable feedback that results in positive changes. Case in point:
This time last year GW were putting out printed points updates with Chapter Approved. To the community this was a flawed system as due to print deadlines it meant any changes lagged months behind the actual game. When this system was changed to points available via free download, GW acknowledged that it was done because customers wanted the updates to be faster & more accurate. That change was achieved by enough people in the community understanding the situation and what caused things to not work.
There are other times decisions are being made with information or influences that average people have no idea or concept of. There's plenty of random and very boring problems involved in real world businesses that stand between you and the plastic space model you want mostest of all; international shipping, quality control, risk management, production planning, etc. Explaining & understanding those issues helps people to better set their expectations.
Alternatively, we can all just switch off our brains, and yell INCOMPETENCE and SHILL into the Internet forevermore while nothing improves.
xttz wrote: To add some WE content to this post beore going on a tangent, one of the Discord sources says that the Combat Patrol will be Juggerlord, Berzerkers, and Jakhals.
Would likely need at least one box duplicated then or that's very scary prospect for model prices.
a) Marketing didn't want to go all-in on producing a new range of models until they saw how the initial wave sold, OR they wanted the first wave to help decide production quantities for wave 2.
Nah by the time wave 1 came on sale wave 2 models were done and ready. Lead times. Especially as wave 1 was couple months late from supposed launch date.
More likely just not wanting to put in huge number of kits at once. The initial sales are biggest one and even GW knows players can't buy 20+ kits all at once. Better to spread them out. Same as how sisters of battle got their models in multiple waves.
If GW doubles kits they release at once does that means players hobby budget magically doubles for the month?
a) Marketing didn't want to go all-in on producing a new range of models until they saw how the initial wave sold, OR they wanted the first wave to help decide production quantities for wave 2.
Nah by the time wave 1 came on sale wave 2 models were done and ready. Lead times. Especially as wave 1 was couple months late from supposed launch date.
The injection molds would likely be done and ready and they may well have made some sprues already cast up, but a year is still plenty of time to tweak production planning. Confirmed sales figures from the wave 1 army box would let GW adjust between producing X, Y, or Z numbers of models for wave 2 and avoid over-producing stock.
tneva82 wrote: More likely just not wanting to put in huge number of kits at once. The initial sales are biggest one and even GW knows players can't buy 20+ kits all at once. Better to spread them out. Same as how sisters of battle got their models in multiple waves.
If GW doubles kits they release at once does that means players hobby budget magically doubles for the month?
This is true. It's less risky for GW to put out ~10 kits in one wave for long-time factions like CSM, Eldar, or Guard as they will have a wide established base of customers. For mostly new brand factions like Lumineth or World Eaters, it makes sense to keep some designs back for a future release.
TreeStewges wrote: Point is, unless I missed something I’m only predicting 6 new kits: Angron, Kharn, Lord on Big Doggo / Named Lord on Big Doggo, Bloodletters, Jackals and Eightbound.
I'm assuming that you mean the new Berserker kit when you've said Bloodletters here, but where are you getting the idea that we're getting another new plastic Kharn kit?
MajorWesJanson wrote: So 36 attacks at S9 AP3 hitting on a 2+. Good thing GW hasn't been trying to push horde units in a while.
Assuming he gets the world eaters trait of +1A on the charge, 39. He's a blender with a no fall back aura, kinda makes sense fluff wise he'd be out there trying to get max skulls out of infantry units.
MajorWesJanson wrote: So 36 attacks at S9 AP3 hitting on a 2+. Good thing GW hasn't been trying to push horde units in a while.
Assuming he gets the world eaters trait of +1A on the charge, 39. He's a blender with a no fall back aura, kinda makes sense fluff wise he'd be out there trying to get max skulls out of infantry units.
Not just infantry units, as his slash attack will making scrap out of tanks and Knights.
MajorWesJanson wrote: So 36 attacks at S9 AP3 hitting on a 2+. Good thing GW hasn't been trying to push horde units in a while.
Assuming he gets the world eaters trait of +1A on the charge, 39. He's a blender with a no fall back aura, kinda makes sense fluff wise he'd be out there trying to get max skulls out of infantry units.
Not just infantry units, as his slash attack will making scrap out of tanks and Knights.
Tbh against light vehicles t7 and under the smash is much worse, 11 hits, 9 and a bit wounds, likely no save so 27 + 9d3 damage?
Into a knight it's likely 5 wounds so thats still 15+5d3 so a good chance of killing one outright.
morganfreeman wrote: Little disappointed. It would've been very thematic for his attacks to go up, but other stats decrease, as he took more wounds.
I 'spose this is kind of the 'best' alternative, as he's still incredibly dangerous right up until he's dead.
Kinda like Skarbrand in AOS who goes from "meh he's okay" toward "omg he will wipe out pretty much anything he touches!" based on how much hurt he has taken Hilarious unit there. Gives opponent pause for thought if he's not sure he can take him out.
You should also be able to take eight of him in an army.
MajorWesJanson wrote: So 36 attacks at S9 AP3 hitting on a 2+. Good thing GW hasn't been trying to push horde units in a while.
I know it's way late to be saying this, but reading those numbers makes me sick. 40k is in such a terrible state. If I didn't know that the design studio is worthless, I'd root for the rumored reset for 10th ed.
You should also be able to take eight of him in an army.
MajorWesJanson wrote: So 36 attacks at S9 AP3 hitting on a 2+. Good thing GW hasn't been trying to push horde units in a while.
I know it's way late to be saying this, but reading those numbers makes me sick. 40k is in such a terrible state. If I didn't know that the design studio is worthless, I'd root for the rumored reset for 10th ed.
Geifer wrote: You should also be able to take eight of him in an army.
MajorWesJanson wrote: So 36 attacks at S9 AP3 hitting on a 2+. Good thing GW hasn't been trying to push horde units in a while.
I know it's way late to be saying this, but reading those numbers makes me sick. 40k is in such a terrible state. If I didn't know that the design studio is worthless, I'd root for the rumored reset for 10th ed.
Same rumour sources apparently say no reset for 10th.
Geifer wrote: You should also be able to take eight of him in an army.
MajorWesJanson wrote: So 36 attacks at S9 AP3 hitting on a 2+. Good thing GW hasn't been trying to push horde units in a while.
I know it's way late to be saying this, but reading those numbers makes me sick. 40k is in such a terrible state. If I didn't know that the design studio is worthless, I'd root for the rumored reset for 10th ed.
Same rumour sources apparently say no reset for 10th.
I suppose. I'm not invested nor leaning either way myself. I'm doing the old waiting and seeing because I don't think the game is going to change for the better regardless. Still too early for that. Maybe for 12th ed if GW feels enough economic pressure in the meantime to feel forced to make changes for the better.
Oh well, at least we get some fun models regardless of the state of the game. I'm looking forward to getting a box of those Khorne cultists.
Hate to go all amogus but this is a bit sus. Quite a few pieces of data don't line up as they would do if this datasheet was made with InDesign like normal.
Feels more like those Knight datasheet 'leaks' from earlier in the year.
Could be the perspective as well, looks like someone made a picture if a screen. I still doubt this to be real, no generic Bloodthirster Rageflamethrower, Attacks decreasing and not increasing like I would expect, also both meele weapons share a profile which is odd
charles_the_dead_lizzard wrote: Could be the perspective as well, looks like someone made a picture if a screen. I still doubt this to be real, no generic Bloodthirster Rageflamethrower, Attacks decreasing and not increasing like I would expect, also both meele weapons share a profile which is odd
Paired Weapons sharing a profile has been a thing for quite awhile now(Hunger and Slake, the Daemon Weapon claws in CSM, etc.). Also, he's already swinging 36/39 dice. You want MORE?
Platuan4th, I think the other guys means that the attack numbers should simply be flipped for the wound track. IE Angron starts at 8, then 10 and finally 12.
But as for the insane numbers period, so long as the game has us activating our whole army at a time, big powerful units need to be obscene (to a degree) because they’ll be lucky to survive one turn. It’s why models like Abbaddon have wound caps per phase.
Sure, nerfing damage would help, but it’s been a problem for forever to some degree as far as I can tell.
I don't mind Angron taking the fire for one turn and then paying for his own comeback while the rest of my murderers charge up the board. Named juggerlord + eightbound are also a very scary combo to keep alive just to take out Angron temporarily.
It’s very hard to find right handed melee weapons. A few models have them and your best bet is the chaos raptor set. Sadly arms are already joined to the hands.
Lord Damocles wrote: Judging by the preview, it looks like there are no spare/alternate pauldrons in the kit...
Except it clearly says there are at least 22 in the box?
Wow. Two whole pads for the champion and then twenty for the ten normal dudes. Hope you like the gladiator pads which seem to have to go with bare arms.
So you have to give them all World Eaters iconography - mildly annoying if you wanted to use them in another Legion - especially as the basic Legionaries kit only has four (?) spares (one of while is moulded into a missile launcher).
GaroRobe wrote: It’s very hard to find right handed melee weapons. A few models have them and your best bet is the chaos raptor set. Sadly arms are already joined to the hands.
Take 'em from fantasy models. The old (current?) Chaos warriors have weapon arm pieces only as long as their gauntlet.
GaroRobe wrote: Weird article. They forgot the champions helmet and I’d have preferred to see the whole sprue or at least the weapon hands or bodies too
I think the champions helmet is the middle model in the first unit picture. The one that sort of looks like Khornes symbol. It doesn't line up with the CAD pictures of the other 10 at least.
Lord Damocles wrote: Wow. Two whole pads for the champion and then twenty for the ten normal dudes. Hope you like the gladiator pads which seem to have to go with bare arms.
So you have to give them all World Eaters iconography - mildly annoying if you wanted to use them in another Legion - especially as the basic Legionaries kit only has four (?) spares (one of while is moulded into a missile launcher).
It's still some spares. And yeah, they all have WE iconography because it's supposed to be WE box. You want other legion, you need to source CSM pads. Like I said, IMHO focus on WE was a mistake and it really should have been generic Khornate marines book/minis, but it is what it is.
Lord Damocles wrote: Judging by the preview, it looks like there are no spare/alternate pauldrons in the kit...
Except it clearly says there are at least 22 in the box?
Wow. Two whole pads for the champion and then twenty for the ten normal dudes. Hope you like the gladiator pads which seem to have to go with bare arms.
So you have to give them all World Eaters iconography - mildly annoying if you wanted to use them in another Legion - especially as the basic Legionaries kit only has four (?) spares (one of while is moulded into a missile launcher).
Weren't cult marines removed from the vanilla codex? I think they're WE locked now, aren't they?
Weren't cult marines removed from the vanilla codex? I think they're WE locked now, aren't they?
Cult marines can be taken as Elites in a CSM army, or as Troops in their respective legions.
I think the question then becomes, when taken as elites are they Khorne marked CSMs from their own legion / warband, or are they some World Eaters that got misplaced on the school bus trip. Given the recent IG codex I think we can infer which route GW will take.
Weren't cult marines removed from the vanilla codex? I think they're WE locked now, aren't they?
Cult marines can be taken as Elites in a CSM army, or as Troops in their respective legions.
I think the question then becomes, when taken as elites are they Khorne marked CSMs from their own legion / warband, or are they some World Eaters that got misplaced on the school bus trip. Given the recent IG codex I think we can infer which route GW will take.
I mean its not a mystery, the chaos marine codex covers it, they become <legion>.
Weren't cult marines removed from the vanilla codex? I think they're WE locked now, aren't they?
Cult marines can be taken as Elites in a CSM army, or as Troops in their respective legions.
I think the question then becomes, when taken as elites are they Khorne marked CSMs from their own legion / warband, or are they some World Eaters that got misplaced on the school bus trip. Given the recent IG codex I think we can infer which route GW will take.
I mean its not a mystery, the chaos marine codex covers it, they become <legion>.
Chaos Marines don't always stay with their original Legion - look how many different types have joined the Black Legion. Just because a handful of frothing-at-the-mouth murderers are genetically World Eaters doesn't mean they couldn't paint their armor black to show they've thrown their lot in with Abaddon.
But if it bothers you that much, just use different pads.
Weren't cult marines removed from the vanilla codex? I think they're WE locked now, aren't they?
Cult marines can be taken as Elites in a CSM army, or as Troops in their respective legions.
I think the question then becomes, when taken as elites are they Khorne marked CSMs from their own legion / warband, or are they some World Eaters that got misplaced on the school bus trip. Given the recent IG codex I think we can infer which route GW will take.
I mean its not a mystery, the chaos marine codex covers it, they become <legion>.
Chaos Marines don't always stay with their original Legion - look how many different types have joined the Black Legion. Just because a handful of frothing-at-the-mouth murderers are genetically World Eaters doesn't mean they couldn't paint their armor black to show they've thrown their lot in with Abaddon.
But if it bothers you that much, just use different pads.
Weren't cult marines removed from the vanilla codex? I think they're WE locked now, aren't they?
Cult marines can be taken as Elites in a CSM army, or as Troops in their respective legions.
I think the question then becomes, when taken as elites are they Khorne marked CSMs from their own legion / warband, or are they some World Eaters that got misplaced on the school bus trip. Given the recent IG codex I think we can infer which route GW will take.
I mean its not a mystery, the chaos marine codex covers it, they become <legion>.
Chaos Marines don't always stay with their original Legion - look how many different types have joined the Black Legion. Just because a handful of frothing-at-the-mouth murderers are genetically World Eaters doesn't mean they couldn't paint their armor black to show they've thrown their lot in with Abaddon.
But if it bothers you that much, just use different pads.
Weren't cult marines removed from the vanilla codex? I think they're WE locked now, aren't they?
Cult marines can be taken as Elites in a CSM army, or as Troops in their respective legions.
I think the question then becomes, when taken as elites are they Khorne marked CSMs from their own legion / warband, or are they some World Eaters that got misplaced on the school bus trip. Given the recent IG codex I think we can infer which route GW will take.
AFAIK it remains they are members of whatever Legion, but Khorne-marked with the Butcher's Nails DLC.
GaroRobe wrote: It’s very hard to find right handed melee weapons. A few models have them and your best bet is the chaos raptor set. Sadly arms are already joined to the hands.
Take 'em from fantasy models. The old (current?) Chaos warriors have weapon arm pieces only as long as their gauntlet.
If you plan that route hurry up. That kit is going away as evident by twin weapon option going away in new book. Once new book comes so comes new box and old goes away.
I like the irony of the Rubrics for the 1kSons, what with them being the unchanging marines of the change god... but they don't really work for me as regular, "generic" Tzeentch marines the way berserkers or plague marines do.
I refuse to have literally half my World Eater-army invalidated due to GW's laziness.
Untill GW pulls their heads out of their behinds and makes a proper WE-codex (might never happen, granted) I'll use the rules for Red Corsairs / Word Bearers / Creations of Bile (haven't decided yet) for my World Eaters.
I can accept a new codex with poor rules for my army.
I won't accept a new codex that removes a bunch of my army without properly giving something in return.
MinscS2 wrote: I refuse to have literally half my World Eater-army invalidated due to GW's laziness.
Untill GW pulls their heads out of their behinds and makes a proper WE-codex (might never happen, granted) I'll use the rules for Red Corsairs / Word Bearers / Creations of Bile (haven't decided yet) for my World Eaters.
I can accept a new codex with poor rules for my army.
I won't accept a new codex that removes a bunch of my army without properly giving something in return.
That's the power of using Marines as your main army. For every gak codex GW does, you'll be able to find rules that aren't trash. Substitute away, my friend!
MinscS2 wrote: Untill GW pulls their heads out of their behinds and makes a proper WE-codex (might never happen, granted) I'll use the rules for Red Corsairs / Word Bearers / Creations of Bile (haven't decided yet) for my World Eaters.
Look on the bright side: At least we can use the Chaos Codex to rep the various Legions.
Once upon a time Chaos Marine rules were so bad playing them as Loyalists was the only way to make them resemble the rules they lost after 3.5.
MinscS2 wrote: Untill GW pulls their heads out of their behinds and makes a proper WE-codex (might never happen, granted) I'll use the rules for Red Corsairs / Word Bearers / Creations of Bile (haven't decided yet) for my World Eaters.
Look on the bright side: At least we can use the Chaos Codex to rep the various Legions.
Once upon a time Chaos Marine rules were so bad playing them as Loyalists was the only way to make them resemble the rules they lost after 3.5.
I still maintain that, bad internal balance aside and some weird choices for rules, only being able to use the Traitor Legion supplement in 7th for less than a year was a goddamn insult.
EviscerationPlague wrote: I still maintain that, bad internal balance aside and some weird choices for rules, only being able to use the Traitor Legion supplement in 7th for less than a year was a goddamn insult.
I think that the only "Khorne" model I have now that isn't in the rumored army list is a Defiler and an Armorcast Cannon of Khorne I've been using as a Vindicator.
Whoops, my bad. Okay, I lost the Vindicator, but regained my Jugger-lord. I guess it's just a lateral shift for me then. Nothing for me to complain about.
EviscerationPlague wrote: I still maintain that, bad internal balance aside and some weird choices for rules, only being able to use the Traitor Legion supplement in 7th for less than a year was a goddamn insult.
T'was a sad day.
Spoiler:
RIP fun. Options. Customisation. Flavour. Choice.
I'd argue there's still a good amount of customization via Warlord Traits and Relics, but how other wargear has been handled has been pretty bad. That said, there were definitely choices that were more of an illusion. Nobody takes the Aura of Dark glory over the Sigil after all.
Gordy2000 wrote: Such a missed opportunity that the helmeted heads don’t have the fanged mouth like the FW upgrade ones do.
This. The heads we got look like every person's custom berserker helmet, where they cut off some AOS bloodwarrior helmets and glued the bunny ears on a generic CSM head. The FW heads were and are some of the coolest upgrade heads IMO and its a shame the plastic kit falls short
Assuming you're not attacking something like an Avatar that halves damage, the slash attack has extra AP and a mininum damage of 4 (and up to 6) so against tougher targets it will almost always outperform using three D1 attacks.
Even when hitting something with -1D then you can still land 3-5 damage per attack.
Edit: also Angron can likely up to 42 attacks between the legion trait and blood tithe upgrade that grants armywide +1A
At least, his profile is a good representation of what the Codex will be : reversed T'au.
No resistance (Vanquishers, Railguns, Magna-Rail are gonna have a great day against him), not particularly fast (no Raptors, no Bikes but hey, one of the Eightbound units gets a pre-game move and Lord Invocatus is mandatory for the same reason), no ranged phase, no psychic phase => it needs to have an incredibly killy profile to be somewhat useful.
And I say "somewhat" useful. Because of the size of his base, he might struggle hard to land near what he wants to charge. Wouldn't be surprised if he ends up as a counter-charge unit, hiding and waiting behind a building without windows.
Selfcontrol wrote: At least, his profile is a good representation of what the Codex will be : reversed T'au.
No resistance (Vanquishers, Railguns, Magna-Rail are gonna have a great day against him), not particularly fast (no Raptors, no Bikes but hey, one of the Eightbound units gets a pre-game move and Lord Invocatus is mandatory for the same reason), no ranged phase, no psychic phase => it needs to have an incredibly killy profile to be somewhat useful.
And I say "somewhat" useful. Because of the size of his base, he might struggle hard to land near what he wants to charge. Wouldn't be surprised if he ends up as a counter-charge unit, hiding and waiting behind a building without windows.
*sigh*
He's a distraction or objective clearer, you kill him, he gets back up, don't kill him, you never get that middle objective. He's tough enough to eat a chunk of firepower, which is then rendered moot in part by him getting back up. Whilst that happens rhinos full of zerkers charge up unmolested.
Selfcontrol wrote: And I say "somewhat" useful. Because of the size of his base, he might struggle hard to land near what he wants to charge. Wouldn't be surprised if he ends up as a counter-charge unit, hiding and waiting behind a building without windows.
If the rumors are true (and let's face it the rumors have been true all year), he will pay for himself to revive when he dies. There's no reason to be coy with him. Charge him up the board and force your opponent to focus fire him or risk getting their units deleted. Meanwhile your other troops are rollin' up like it's Thanksgiving dinner.
EviscerationPlague wrote: When you're making 36 attacks at S9 to begin with, how necessary is a multidamage profile?
Assuming he gets the legion trait, 39* but I think the multi damage kills knights etc better.
Keeping the assumption of +1a on the charge, sweep is 18.06 damage to a knight, smash is 36.11
You don't think it's kinda amazing that it still almost kills a Knight? If you ran into a slightly damaged Knight, you could legit kill it with the horde profile.
EviscerationPlague wrote: When you're making 36 attacks at S9 to begin with, how necessary is a multidamage profile?
Assuming he gets the legion trait, 39* but I think the multi damage kills knights etc better.
Keeping the assumption of +1a on the charge, sweep is 18.06 damage to a knight, smash is 36.11
You don't think it's kinda amazing that it still almost kills a Knight? If you ran into a slightly damaged Knight, you could legit kill it with the horde profile.
Might be fun sometimes, more concerning if there are 2 slightly damaged knights, he can reliably take them both on, kill them, get obliterated in return, instant res and maybe finish off a 3rd depending what he comes back at. 1k plus return on a 360pt model. Ofc if WE go 2nd he's getting popped like a pustule turn 1 unless there's some whopping terrain pieces.
Given how tasty Angry Ron is, and how little the Codex is bringing to the table? I’m fearing we won’t see World Eaters lists without him.
I’ve not seen any other unit rules mind, just that Angry Ron is so incredibly Killy, and the variety so utterly lacking, I really do think he’ll pop up with boring frequency.
EviscerationPlague wrote: When you're making 36 attacks at S9 to begin with, how necessary is a multidamage profile?
Assuming he gets the legion trait, 39* but I think the multi damage kills knights etc better.
Keeping the assumption of +1a on the charge, sweep is 18.06 damage to a knight, smash is 36.11
You don't think it's kinda amazing that it still almost kills a Knight? If you ran into a slightly damaged Knight, you could legit kill it with the horde profile.
You could...but why would you?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Given how tasty Angry Ron is, and how little the Codex is bringing to the table? I’m fearing we won’t see World Eaters lists without him.
I’ve not seen any other unit rules mind, just that Angry Ron is so incredibly Killy, and the variety so utterly lacking, I really do think he’ll pop up with boring frequency.
Well this is nuGw codex we are talking about so no surprise. They want their named models to be used.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Given how tasty Angry Ron is, and how little the Codex is bringing to the table? I’m fearing we won’t see World Eaters lists without him.
I’ve not seen any other unit rules mind, just that Angry Ron is so incredibly Killy, and the variety so utterly lacking, I really do think he’ll pop up with boring frequency.
With the playtesting info we have so far there's a few details that make this less likely:
Angron must be your warlord if taken (of course), and his mandatory warlord trait switches off obsec for nearby enemies.
Lord Invocatus has a strong warlord trait that grants a pregame move to CORE units, along with an aura for +2" movement
Apparently there is no stratagem in the codex to grant multiple warlord traits
Invocatus is a W9 character model that can be easily protected while Angron is a giant W18 bullet magnet.
At this point it seems more likely that the meta world eaters play will be a pressure list with the new juggerlord character opening up a very fast melee build with mostly berserkers and eightbound.
EviscerationPlague wrote: When you're making 36 attacks at S9 to begin with, how necessary is a multidamage profile?
What I find hilarious is that tank-lenght daemon sword wielded by primarch the size of Godzilla has 1D to begin with, while ton of gak that has no business having more than 1D actually has 2 (or even 3 if your codex is Tau/Eldar, 3D is new iteration of 8th edition 2D creep)
Giving uglysquat models 2W was biggest mistake GW ever made, not only it greatly accelerated stupid 2D stat inflation and ruined verisimiltude but at the same time virtually eliminated vehicles and big models from the game by effectively cutting their wounds by half while keeping points unaffected...
36 attacks from one model. Go home GW you are drunk.
I guess GW weren't selling enough dice?
10th edition will be this.
Players deploy armies, then take it in turns to empty several buckets of dice onto the table. Models that fall over from dice are counted as dead. After 6 turns the player who has the most standing wins.
stonehorse wrote: 36 attacks from one model. Go home GW you are drunk.
Eh there's been before models you need more than 36 dice to resolve even one gun...Nevermind rest
If you think this is excessive you have been sleeping past years 40k wise
I sort of gave up on 40k around 7th/8th edition. Keep looking in on it now and again due to nostalgia, and to see if the game is something I'd want to play.
It is excessive, the trend in modern tabletop gaming for buckets of dice is a sign of lazy game design.
stonehorse wrote: 36 attacks from one model. Go home GW you are drunk.
Eh there's been before models you need more than 36 dice to resolve even one gun...Nevermind rest
If you think this is excessive you have been sleeping past years 40k wise
I sort of gave up on 40k around 7th/8th edition. Keep looking in on it now and again due to nostalgia, and to see if the game is something I'd want to play.
It is excessive, the trend in modern tabletop gaming for buckets of dice is a sign of lazy game design.
Oh no disagreement there.
GW just went off the track on number of dice rolling required loooooooooooong time ago.
Add to that all the rerolls and it gets just silly. 8e arco flagelants needed in general ~200 dice rolls to resolve their attacks(depends a bit on opponent T due to how many saves opponent needs to do). That's before any possible feel no pain rolls...
That's from 10 infantry models that isn't even particularly expensive...Luckily they had stratagem to automatically cause maximum attacks so while you could use that to improve lethality best reason was to reduce 30d3 rolls to determine how many attacks you actually made...
I could swear GW has some sort of deal with dice making companies...
GW just went off the track on number of dice rolling required loooooooooooong time ago.
They very much did in 8th, but under 9th that seems to have been reigned back in a bit. A great example is termagant devourers; which in the last codex were 3 shots per model and were able to shoot twice for some reason. That meant up to 180 dice in one go, but the maximum is now 60. Genestealers are now capped at 10 models, limiting them to 40 attacks rather than 80+. Tyrannofex fleshborer hives had 40 shots previously, now they're 30.
9th has mostly removed shoot-twice rules and generally avoided increasing numbers of attack dice beyond 20-40 per unit, usually opting to buff other stats instead.
I'd argue that in Angron's case, 30+ attacks are a necessary option because with less it would be very easy to tarpit and shut him down with expendable units like gaunts or poxwalkers. However more often he'll want to be charging into elite units or vehicles, and using the slash profile instead. He won't be rolling 40 dice every turn.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Yes, a single model with 12 attacks that hit on a 2+ is going to be bogged down by Gaunts.
Were you serious typing that out?
I'd gladly spend 210 points (30 Gants) to bog down Angron for a turn or two.
12 attacks, hitting on a 2+
10 hits, wounding on a 2+
50/6 or 25/3 wounds, no saves (unless they get an invuln, which I'm pretty sure they can)
It'd take him three rounds of combat to chew his way out on a good day.
Not to mention, Gants are usually gonna be ObSec. Do that on an objective, and Angron's stuck there doing around 60 points of damage per turn while losing on Victory Points.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Yes, a single model with 12 attacks that hit on a 2+ is going to be bogged down by Gaunts.
Were you serious typing that out?
Wow, just embarassing.
JNAProductions wrote: I'd gladly spend 210 points (30 Gants) to bog down Angron for a turn or two.
12 attacks, hitting on a 2+
10 hits, wounding on a 2+
50/6 or 25/3 wounds, no saves (unless they get an invuln, which I'm pretty sure they can)
It'd take him three rounds of combat to chew his way out on a good day.
Yeah they also have access to:
A 5++ from zoanthropes
5+++ from catalyst psychic power
Restore 2D6 dead models from a nearby terivgon
Restore D3+3 dead models for 1CP
Of course you don't need all of those benefits for only 12 attacks. However 30-40 is a very different picture, and losing the unit before being able to replace losses is far more likely.
This "12 attacks, bogged down by gaunts" scenario is, in a hypothetical world where Angron doesn't have access to the 3x attack rolls per attack stat weapon profile?
ph34r wrote: This "12 attacks, bogged down by gaunts" scenario is, in a hypothetical world where Angron doesn't have access to the 3x attack rolls per attack stat weapon profile?
EviscerationPlague wrote: Yes, a single model with 12 attacks that hit on a 2+ is going to be bogged down by Gaunts.
Were you serious typing that out?
I'd gladly spend 210 points (30 Gants) to bog down Angron for a turn or two.
12 attacks, hitting on a 2+
10 hits, wounding on a 2+
50/6 or 25/3 wounds, no saves (unless they get an invuln, which I'm pretty sure they can)
It'd take him three rounds of combat to chew his way out on a good day.
Not to mention, Gants are usually gonna be ObSec. Do that on an objective, and Angron's stuck there doing around 60 points of damage per turn while losing on Victory Points.
Why would he choose 12 attacks though when he can choose 36? (39 if he gets we traits).
Do you often delibertely plck worst choice just for lolz?
EviscerationPlague wrote: Yes, a single model with 12 attacks that hit on a 2+ is going to be bogged down by Gaunts.
Were you serious typing that out?
I'd gladly spend 210 points (30 Gants) to bog down Angron for a turn or two.
12 attacks, hitting on a 2+
10 hits, wounding on a 2+
50/6 or 25/3 wounds, no saves (unless they get an invuln, which I'm pretty sure they can)
It'd take him three rounds of combat to chew his way out on a good day.
Not to mention, Gants are usually gonna be ObSec. Do that on an objective, and Angron's stuck there doing around 60 points of damage per turn while losing on Victory Points.
Why would he choose 12 attacks though when he can choose 36? (39 if he gets we traits).
Do you often delibertely plck worst choice just for lolz?
The point of the post was that Angron needs the 3 Hit Rolls per attack Option so that he won't get tied down by 30 Gaunts.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Yes, a single model with 12 attacks that hit on a 2+ is going to be bogged down by Gaunts.
Were you serious typing that out?
I'd gladly spend 210 points (30 Gants) to bog down Angron for a turn or two.
12 attacks, hitting on a 2+
10 hits, wounding on a 2+
50/6 or 25/3 wounds, no saves (unless they get an invuln, which I'm pretty sure they can)
It'd take him three rounds of combat to chew his way out on a good day.
Not to mention, Gants are usually gonna be ObSec. Do that on an objective, and Angron's stuck there doing around 60 points of damage per turn while losing on Victory Points.
Why would he choose 12 attacks though when he can choose 36? (39 if he gets we traits).
Do you often delibertely plck worst choice just for lolz?
The point of the post was that Angron needs the 3 Hit Rolls per attack Option so that he won't get tied down by 30 Gaunts.
He's already almost twice the base attacks of Mortarion.
12 attacks for a single model is already over the top, but the option for 36 is pure absurdity nobody should be defending.
Once again, credit goes to Khornestar over on B&C for the compilation:
Juicy strats from playtesting: (slight language barrier but I think they’re clear enough):
Ok Brothers, some information about stratagems of WE codex
First of all, the stratagems of two different army are separated. As a World Eater player, you are not allow to use stratagems of the Disciples of the Red Angel, and neither do the AoR player to use the World Eaters Stratagems.
Stratagems for World Eaters：
- Skull for the Skull Throne: 1/2CP, use it after a character from your army destroyed an enemy warlord. 1CP choose 1 from 2 below, 2CP for adopt them all.
1) you get 2 tithe
2) the character who destroyed enemy warlord got +1 to advance and charge for rest of game
Banner of Blood, 1CP, let an ICON berzerker charge at 3D6 and drop the lowest.
Stoke the nail, 1CP, use when choose a core/character to fight. Each wound roll of 6 cause 1 extra mortal, at most 6 from this stratagem
Wild fury, 1/2CP. An core unit fight to death. If it is troop, despite the unit size, 1CP. Otherwise 2CP.
Kill! Maim! Burn!, 1CP, a World Eater unit heroic intervention for 6 inches as if they are character.
Smoke launcher, 1CP, you all know what it is
Scorn of society, 1CP, you all know what it is
Red butchers, 2CP, a unit of terminator/eightbound +1 to damage until the fight resolved when choose to fight.
####################
Army of Renown stratagems
Those we already know:
- 1CP for world eater unit add one to wound roll when fighting below half strength
- 1CP for any eightbound to consolidate 6 inches when enemy retreat
- 1CP for a unit of eightbound to move if they got somebody in unit died after a round of enemy shooting in enemy shooting phase.
AND HERE IS SOMETHING WE DONT KNOW BEFORE
- 1/2CP for a vehicle full damage table despite current wound remain, titanic 2CP, otherwise 1CP
- 1CP when nominating your world eater boys go charging and who he gonna charge. Target cannot over watch or set to defense, then -1 to hit until the end of following fight phase
- 1CP, when you go advance on your world eater unit, don’t make the roll, make it 6.
- 1CP for a world eater unit to ignore any or all charge modifications
- 1CP when a world eater unit destroy an enemy unit. They got an aura for -2 leadership and +1 to casualty test for enemy within 6 inches until end of the turn.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Looks like this may actually be a "10th ed book"
ph34r wrote: This "12 attacks, bogged down by gaunts" scenario is, in a hypothetical world where Angron doesn't have access to the 3x attack rolls per attack stat weapon profile?
Yes, that’s right.
Or that Angry Ron (the Angriest of all Rons, and in my experience most Rons are pretty furious) is faster than them, and presumably thanks to wings can just hop on over them.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Yes, a single model with 12 attacks that hit on a 2+ is going to be bogged down by Gaunts.
Were you serious typing that out?
I'd gladly spend 210 points (30 Gants) to bog down Angron for a turn or two.
12 attacks, hitting on a 2+
10 hits, wounding on a 2+
50/6 or 25/3 wounds, no saves (unless they get an invuln, which I'm pretty sure they can)
It'd take him three rounds of combat to chew his way out on a good day.
Not to mention, Gants are usually gonna be ObSec. Do that on an objective, and Angron's stuck there doing around 60 points of damage per turn while losing on Victory Points.
Why would he choose 12 attacks though when he can choose 36? (39 if he gets we traits).
Do you often delibertely plck worst choice just for lolz?
The point of the post was that Angron needs the 3 Hit Rolls per attack Option so that he won't get tied down by 30 Gaunts.
Which just highlights one of the major problems with GW's game design approach.
The option to tie down a big scary close combat monster should exist. It's infuriating that GW keeps handing out these split profiles so players don't actually have to think about that they're doing or make meaningful decisions. Angron can Fly and is extremely fast. If your opponent manages to charge him with 20 Gaunts to tie him down you absolutely should be punished for that. Instead you get this big expensive model that is basically non-interactive in the Fight phase because, as the opponent, you have no options for dealing with it due to the split profile.
Slipspace wrote: The option to tie down a big scary close combat monster should exist.
And it does, for many big scary monsters. I don't have a problem with the occasional ones - especially very important and seriously demi-god style characters, like Daemon Primarchs - not having much trouble with chaff.
The idea that Angron can just cut his way through all the little people milling at his giant daemonic feet seems highly thematic to me.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Yes, a single model with 12 attacks that hit on a 2+ is going to be bogged down by Gaunts.
Were you serious typing that out?
I'd gladly spend 210 points (30 Gants) to bog down Angron for a turn or two.
12 attacks, hitting on a 2+
10 hits, wounding on a 2+
50/6 or 25/3 wounds, no saves (unless they get an invuln, which I'm pretty sure they can)
It'd take him three rounds of combat to chew his way out on a good day.
Not to mention, Gants are usually gonna be ObSec. Do that on an objective, and Angron's stuck there doing around 60 points of damage per turn while losing on Victory Points.
Why would he choose 12 attacks though when he can choose 36? (39 if he gets we traits).
Do you often delibertely plck worst choice just for lolz?
The point of the post was that Angron needs the 3 Hit Rolls per attack Option so that he won't get tied down by 30 Gaunts.
Which just highlights one of the major problems with GW's game design approach.
The option to tie down a big scary close combat monster should exist. It's infuriating that GW keeps handing out these split profiles so players don't actually have to think about that they're doing or make meaningful decisions. Angron can Fly and is extremely fast. If your opponent manages to charge him with 20 Gaunts to tie him down you absolutely should be punished for that. Instead you get this big expensive model that is basically non-interactive in the Fight phase because, as the opponent, you have no options for dealing with it due to the split profile.
GWs game 'design' is in a weird spot where they are artificially hampered by restrictions that are not fundamentally part of the game per se - they want to sell models, and many models at that, so one of the core assumptions that can not be challenged at all is that one model needs to be represent something meaningful on the table, and that the relative position of single models means something, and soon. And a lot of problems directly derive from that. Some editions ago, when we still had templates for blast weapons and flamers, a lot of the various FAQ und rules articles went on and on, in endless detail, about what exactly counts as being touched by a template, how and when you had to check for unit cohesion, what exactly counted for 'contact' for close combat, how exactly single models as part as a unit needed to pile on into close combat and stuff like that. Still a lot of rules baggage, e.g. questions about area terrain and such, directly results from that ironclad principle of single models being the fundamental 'unit' game pieces are measured in. They took some steps to walk away from that, like the removal of templates, or larger models having degrading profiles, but the fundamental flaw is still there. It worked well enough for the times of 2nd edition, when each side had a couple dozen models at most, you could take your time to place templates and units, transports and such were a rare occurence and the atmosphere in general was more friendly, but with increasing army sizes and the presence of a lot of 'non-standard' units, the rule system really starts to crack around the edges and their weird workarounds are coming under more and more strain.
Slipspace wrote: Which just highlights one of the major problems with GW's game design approach.
The option to tie down a big scary close combat monster should exist. It's infuriating that GW keeps handing out these split profiles so players don't actually have to think about that they're doing or make meaningful decisions. Angron can Fly and is extremely fast. If your opponent manages to charge him with 20 Gaunts to tie him down you absolutely should be punished for that. Instead you get this big expensive model that is basically non-interactive in the Fight phase because, as the opponent, you have no options for dealing with it due to the split profile.
It's just a symptom of the game catering for such a wide scale, from gaunts up to bio-titans. It would be a bigger issue if centrepiece units were too easily tied down and made useless by 'gamey' interactions like just drowning them in expendable chaff.
Two weapon profiles is a decent solution. If anyone in 40k can carve through tanks or guardsmen with equal ease it should be Angron.
Slipspace wrote: Which just highlights one of the major problems with GW's game design approach.
The option to tie down a big scary close combat monster should exist. It's infuriating that GW keeps handing out these split profiles so players don't actually have to think about that they're doing or make meaningful decisions. Angron can Fly and is extremely fast. If your opponent manages to charge him with 20 Gaunts to tie him down you absolutely should be punished for that. Instead you get this big expensive model that is basically non-interactive in the Fight phase because, as the opponent, you have no options for dealing with it due to the split profile.
It's just a symptom of the game catering for such a wide scale, from gaunts up to bio-titans. It would be a bigger issue if centrepiece units were too easily tied down and made useless by 'gamey' interactions like just drowning them in expendable chaff.
Two weapon profiles is a decent solution. If anyone in 40k can carve through tanks or guardsmen with equal ease it should be Angron.
On a battlefield where e.g. a single guardsman or an individual chaos cultist has to mean something as a game piece even stuff like a Custodes stretches 'fluff accuracy' to the limit, and on the other hand on a battlefield where things like Angron or Titans can be meaninfully challenged and are not just some unstoppable force of nature a single guardsman should be almost irrelevant. It's just a fundamental mismatch of scale and scope. But people want Angron, and people want the single guardsman being meaningful.
Slipspace wrote: Which just highlights one of the major problems with GW's game design approach.
The option to tie down a big scary close combat monster should exist. It's infuriating that GW keeps handing out these split profiles so players don't actually have to think about that they're doing or make meaningful decisions. Angron can Fly and is extremely fast. If your opponent manages to charge him with 20 Gaunts to tie him down you absolutely should be punished for that. Instead you get this big expensive model that is basically non-interactive in the Fight phase because, as the opponent, you have no options for dealing with it due to the split profile.
It's just a symptom of the game catering for such a wide scale, from gaunts up to bio-titans. It would be a bigger issue if centrepiece units were too easily tied down and made useless by 'gamey' interactions like just drowning them in expendable chaff.
It's depressing that tying down units with suboptimal targets is seen as gamey now. It's especially depressing when said unit can Fly and has a huge Movement stat so the only realistic way this can happen is by good positional play from the opponent or a mistake from the WE player.
I don't think this is a symptom of the scale of the game. You don't need to have units that can deal with all threats, regardless of how varied the scale of the game is.
Slipspace wrote: Which just highlights one of the major problems with GW's game design approach.
The option to tie down a big scary close combat monster should exist. It's infuriating that GW keeps handing out these split profiles so players don't actually have to think about that they're doing or make meaningful decisions. Angron can Fly and is extremely fast. If your opponent manages to charge him with 20 Gaunts to tie him down you absolutely should be punished for that. Instead you get this big expensive model that is basically non-interactive in the Fight phase because, as the opponent, you have no options for dealing with it due to the split profile.
It's just a symptom of the game catering for such a wide scale, from gaunts up to bio-titans. It would be a bigger issue if centrepiece units were too easily tied down and made useless by 'gamey' interactions like just drowning them in expendable chaff.
It's depressing that tying down units with suboptimal targets is seen as gamey now. It's especially depressing when said unit can Fly and has a huge Movement stat so the only realistic way this can happen is by good positional play from the opponent or a mistake from the WE player.
I don't think this is a symptom of the scale of the game. You don't need to have units that can deal with all threats, regardless of how varied the scale of the game is.
I think deal with all threats is a tricky string these days as well. In the world of everything can hurt everything, that should be enough imo that 30 gaunts theoretically can grind down a knight or whatever that not every army should have a hard answer for everything as well (looking at you old US meta of 1850 or 1999+1 games). I'm personally of the mind that being able to play the objectives better and/or being able to bog stuff down to a degree is a viable strategy and should be respected.
If you can successfully feed Angron an infantry squad a turn or something similar, he's no choice but to dramatically overkill his target and not really contribute much, that is and should be a valid tactic the same way deliberately trying to feed him a unit he can't kill in 1 turn. That's just less possible with near 40 attacks.
I've always felt that damage overspill should be universal but a weapon can never deal more damage than the wounds characteristic of the target. A lot cleaner mechanically and avoids unfun situations where d3s need to be rolled individually for 2-wound model units, FNP is an issue, etc.
Melee weapons, on the other hand, should IMO have full spillover UNLESS the profile says otherwise. Because yeah, when Angron swings that axe more than one gaunt is going to die.
Totally not to keep the thread alive or anything...
But with Zerks rumored to move D6 when shot at, plus the heroic intervention strat, plus the fight on death strat: are YOU (the reader) leaning towards 5 man MSU squads or 10 man ROLL TIDE squads?
I find myself leaning towards MSU for the tithe and just because It would look awesome honestly. They're killy enough but with the added bonus of an always on six + D6 inch melee threat range they will be super annoying to deal with. "OK, you killed this unit of five, I've got three more within six inches of the mid objectives. Also: Angron's back so have fun with that."
But with Zerks rumored to move D6 when shot at, plus the heroic intervention strat, plus the fight on death strat: are YOU (the reader) leaning towards 5 man MSU squads or 10 man ROLL TIDE squads?
I find myself leaning towards MSU for the tithe and just because It would look awesome honestly. They're killy enough but with the added bonus of an always on six + D6 inch melee threat range they will be super annoying to deal with. "OK, you killed this unit of five, I've got three more within six inches of the mid objectives. Also: Angron's back so have fun with that."
I'm thinking a mix, something like one full-size unit then several MSU zerkers. The codex seems to be full of buffs that can be applied to individual CORE units, so having one large unit that's capable of killing virtually any target seems useful.
Jakhals seem like a better option as expendable tithe units, at about 60% the cost of 5 zerkers
But with Zerks rumored to move D6 when shot at, plus the heroic intervention strat, plus the fight on death strat: are YOU (the reader) leaning towards 5 man MSU squads or 10 man ROLL TIDE squads?
I find myself leaning towards MSU for the tithe and just because It would look awesome honestly. They're killy enough but with the added bonus of an always on six + D6 inch melee threat range they will be super annoying to deal with. "OK, you killed this unit of five, I've got three more within six inches of the mid objectives. Also: Angron's back so have fun with that."
I'm thinking a mix, something like one full-size unit then several MSU zerkers. The codex seems to be full of buffs that can be applied to individual CORE units, so having one large unit that's capable of killing virtually any target seems useful.
Jakhals seem like a better option as expendable tithe units, at about 60% the cost of 5 zerkers
I don't disagree with you regarding Jakhals but they just seem... confused. Expensive for a backfield objective holder, slow(?) and weak(?) for a spearhead unit. Blades of Khorne could whip their chaff waaaay up the board (not sure anymore but they could when I played them years ago). There's no strat (that we know of) to make them go faster so it has to be on the datasheet if it's anywhere. There's been no rumors about them going faster than regular cultists. Maybe the blood they carry will "stim" them to move faster but more likely it just makes them fight harder.
choppinboard wrote: I don't disagree with you regarding Jakhals but they just seem... confused. Expensive for a backfield objective holder, slow(?) and weak(?) for a spearhead unit. Blades of Khorne could whip their chaff waaaay up the board (not sure anymore but they could when I played them years ago). There's no strat (that we know of) to make them go faster so it has to be on the datasheet if it's anywhere. There's been no rumors about them going faster than regular cultists. Maybe the blood they carry will "stim" them to move faster but more likely it just makes them fight harder.
Honestly I'm not certain how they'll play yet, but I'm expecting to field them in a few games because:
Jakhals seem like they'd do some work once a few blood tithes have been unlocked
One of the playtesters said in Discord that they're good units, certainly the best cultists
There's 20 in the combat patrol lmao
I might try a gimmick tactic where the Jakhals start on the board next to a Rhino. On turn 1 they kill D3 of their own models for +1 strength, allowing them to board the Rhino and leave space for Kharn or a MoE to join in. Meanwhile my berzerkers just hotfoot it because they get the free D6" move and benefit from the juggerlord +2" aura.
Edit: I'm also pretty sure that Jakhals will be one of those troop units whose usefulness will be mainly decided by the faction secondaries available, rather than what's on the datasheet.
8bound are looking a lot tastier now with the 6 base, 7 on the charge attacks. They'll mulch quite a few things, though berzerkers in Rhinos seems great for racking up Bloodtithe.
Don't forget that we knew the contents in advance as well, since it's literally the Combat Patrol bundled with the codex, but didn't really have any news(at least that's immediately springing to my brain dealing with time running endlessly together) of an army set.
Don't forget that we knew the contents in advance as well, since it's literally the Combat Patrol bundled with the codex, but didn't really have any news(at least that's immediately springing to my brain dealing with time running endlessly together) of an army set.
Right, this is the point I am making. The army set was reveled with some of the models on Warhammer day, before even all the models from the full release were. It wasn't revealed some months after the entire content of the army had been revealed. If WE had an army set coming it would have been revealed by now.
Don't forget that we knew the contents in advance as well, since it's literally the Combat Patrol bundled with the codex, but didn't really have any news(at least that's immediately springing to my brain dealing with time running endlessly together) of an army set.
Right, this is the point I am making. The army set was reveled with some of the models on Warhammer day, before even all the models from the full release were. It wasn't revealed some months after the entire content of the army had been revealed. If WE had an army set coming it would have been revealed by now.
Right, and the point I am making is that the army set reveal happened on their timetable.
The only firm thing they have said about World Eaters models and releases is this, from the Narrative Grand Finale or whatever the hell it was called:
We’ll have more on these new miniatures as we get closer to their release – which is in early 2023.
And it's worth pointing out that those reveals were after a leak namedropping everything specifically.
Don't forget that we knew the contents in advance as well, since it's literally the Combat Patrol bundled with the codex, but didn't really have any news(at least that's immediately springing to my brain dealing with time running endlessly together) of an army set.
Right, this is the point I am making. The army set was reveled with some of the models on Warhammer day, before even all the models from the full release were. It wasn't revealed some months after the entire content of the army had been revealed. If WE had an army set coming it would have been revealed by now.
Right, and the point I am making is that the army set reveal happened on their timetable.
The only firm thing they have said about World Eaters models and releases is this, from the Narrative Grand Finale or whatever the hell it was called:
We’ll have more on these new miniatures as we get closer to their release – which is in early 2023.
And it's worth pointing out that those reveals were after a leak namedropping everything specifically.
That same leak saying there isn't an army box? Not really sure what your point is here but it feels like you're agreeing?
choppinboard wrote: I don't disagree with you regarding Jakhals but they just seem... confused. Expensive for a backfield objective holder, slow(?) and weak(?) for a spearhead unit. Blades of Khorne could whip their chaff waaaay up the board (not sure anymore but they could when I played them years ago). There's no strat (that we know of) to make them go faster so it has to be on the datasheet if it's anywhere. There's been no rumors about them going faster than regular cultists. Maybe the blood they carry will "stim" them to move faster but more likely it just makes them fight harder.
Honestly I'm not certain how they'll play yet, but I'm expecting to field them in a few games because:
Jakhals seem like they'd do some work once a few blood tithes have been unlocked
One of the playtesters said in Discord that they're good units, certainly the best cultists
There's 20 in the combat patrol lmao
I might try a gimmick tactic where the Jakhals start on the board next to a Rhino. On turn 1 they kill D3 of their own models for +1 strength, allowing them to board the Rhino and leave space for Kharn or a MoE to join in. Meanwhile my berzerkers just hotfoot it because they get the free D6" move and benefit from the juggerlord +2" aura.
Edit: I'm also pretty sure that Jakhals will be one of those troop units whose usefulness will be mainly decided by the faction secondaries available, rather than what's on the datasheet.
I didn't know they were doing work in the playtesting. With that in mind I may field 20 Jakhals, 1x10 zerk unit, 4x5 zerk units. From their chainblades and buffing potential, even a few Jakhals should be able to punch above their weight class, so having a unit of 20 move up the board should be a scary prospect.
Speaking of Berzerker units: do we think we can take two Khornate Eviserators per five units or one per five? Plasma pistols are one per five, so it wouldn't be out of pocket for it to be two per five.
choppinboard wrote: Speaking of Berzerker units: do we think we can take two Khornate Eviserators per five units or one per five? Plasma pistols are one per five, so it wouldn't be out of pocket for it to be two per five.
Calvary is cool. Very fitting for the sci-fantasy setting of 40k to have the boss riding some sort of giant critter. And I’m game for elves on dinos if their time gets here.
I’m more concerned with the ignores invuln proliferation. It’s a little more palatable on a special character, but still...
One of these days I’ll start collecting skulls, but too many other projects right now.
...what's so cool about the spot outside Jerusalem when Jesus was said to be crucified?
Look, I’m lucky I’ve got it together enough to string words together. Spelling is right out, and autocorrect/spellcheckers will only go so far.
While I’m sure there are situations where the incorrect word choice might cause confusion, I doubt this is one of them. Unless someone is reading this through a translator site, and it’s not smart enough to catch the context error.
And this is a World Eater thread. I’m sure a little crucifixion would fit in just fine...
cuda1179 wrote: I kind of find it odd that GW is making cavalry HQs more common these days. Space wolves, Orks, Khorn, daemons, Imperial Guard.
If only this World Eater HQ had any level of synergy with the army he's leading.
Y'know, like access to bikes or units of Berzerkers on Juggers.
I totally agree. Units of berserkers on juggernauts would be amazing, especially if they teamed up with berserker bikers. Might only have 35 models in a 2000 point list, but I'd do it.
cuda1179 wrote: I kind of find it odd that GW is making cavalry HQs more common these days. Space wolves, Orks, Khorn, daemons, Imperial Guard.
If only this World Eater HQ had any level of synergy with the army he's leading.
Y'know, like access to bikes or units of Berzerkers on Juggers.
He can roll out with a pack of Flesh hounds or Mauler fiends like a real boss. Transports would also give him LOS so back him with some Rhinos packed with zerkers.
