115290
Post by: MalfunctBot
With 2019 drawing to a close and the new Chapter Approved getting closer to release, what do you think GamesWorkshop is going to out in the book for Open, Narrative and (probably most importantly) Matched play to get people to buy it?
2017 had Warlord traits/Relics/Stratagems for remaining Index Armies, 2018 had the Renegade Knights Index, SoB Beta Codex and The Eight, what do you think/hope is going to be in Chapter Approved 2019?
111961
Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine
New points costs.
121442
Post by: flandarz
My guess is that they'll introduce the "pure sub-Faction" bonuses that Space Marines have seen for everyone. Ie: "if your whole Army is Tau Sept, here's a bonus for not souping."
But it's GW. On top of point adjustments and new missions, it could be anything.
Edit: I guess I should say that I *hope* that's what we see, but I have no idea what they'll actually do.
78092
Post by: Ginjitzu
You heard it here first: Genestealer Cult Knights
79409
Post by: BrianDavion
from the red gobbo post on WHC
"Da Red Gobbo will be joined by other Warhammer Legends this December, alongside the release of Chapter Approved 2019, where rules for other venerable denizens of the far future whose miniatures are no longer available will find their permanent home."
thus I suspect the hook will be legends data sheets for stuff thats currently not been given rules.
35086
Post by: Daedalus81
BrianDavion wrote:from the red gobbo post on WHC
"Da Red Gobbo will be joined by other Warhammer Legends this December, alongside the release of Chapter Approved 2019, where rules for other venerable denizens of the far future whose miniatures are no longer available will find their permanent home."
thus I suspect the hook will be legends data sheets for stuff thats currently not been given rules.
This. Dont expect some grand changes for traits.
79409
Post by: BrianDavion
I suspect it means we can also expect to see the offical retiring of indexes.
102537
Post by: Sgt. Cortez
Reprinted WD rules.
I also hope for some traits adjustments, at least make them apply to vehicles, too.
Edit: Death in the skies is the only Expansion that hasn't been refined yet, I wouldn't be surprised to see it in CA.
85299
Post by: Spoletta
What i hope: Minirules for pure subfactions for everyone.
What we will get: Legends datasheets
100848
Post by: tneva82
BrianDavion wrote:from the red gobbo post on WHC
"Da Red Gobbo will be joined by other Warhammer Legends this December, alongside the release of Chapter Approved 2019, where rules for other venerable denizens of the far future whose miniatures are no longer available will find their permanent home."
thus I suspect the hook will be legends data sheets for stuff thats currently not been given rules.
Pretty sure Legends has been said to be oniine so that would be related more to when.
As for ca19 hook points. Gw needs nothing else to sell book
119289
Post by: Not Online!!!
tneva82 wrote:BrianDavion wrote:from the red gobbo post on WHC
"Da Red Gobbo will be joined by other Warhammer Legends this December, alongside the release of Chapter Approved 2019, where rules for other venerable denizens of the far future whose miniatures are no longer available will find their permanent home."
thus I suspect the hook will be legends data sheets for stuff thats currently not been given rules.
Pretty sure Legends has been said to be oniine so that would be related more to when.
As for ca19 hook points. Gw needs nothing else to sell book
This here, no need for a hook if you hold a mandatory balance patch hostage.
79409
Post by: BrianDavion
it's only mandatory is you use points, not everyone does (or so GW thinks) . and GW useally includes a hook for narrative types. character creation rules, vehicle creation rules etc
102537
Post by: Sgt. Cortez
Nobody buys CA only for the points. Or if they do they have too much money, as you can get that information within few hours after release via Battlescribe.
In last years CA the missions were important but more so the refined terrain rules for the base game as well as Cities of Death.
In our group we also used the veteran rules but I can see that they're not that relevant for pure tournament players.
119289
Post by: Not Online!!!
Sgt. Cortez wrote:Nobody buys CA only for the points. Or if they do they have too much money, as you can get that information within few hours after release via Battlescribe.
In last years CA the missions were important but more so the refined terrain rules for the base game as well as Cities of Death.
In our group we also used the veteran rules but I can see that they're not that relevant for pure tournament players.
Got any proof for that generalisation?
117719
Post by: Sunny Side Up
New Missions and deployment rules (if they change them again) were traditionally the biggest thing in CA (unless you play homebrew missions like ITC).
The first CA also had Stratagems, Relics and WL traits, back in the day when armies outside of Marines didn't have them. Would be cool if non-Marines now get mono-faction bonuses to match doctrines and super-doctrines, though I kinda doubt it'll happen.
119289
Post by: Not Online!!!
Sunny Side Up wrote:New Missions and deployment rules (if they change them again) were traditionally the biggest thing in CA (unless you play homebrew missions like ITC).
The first CA also had Stratagems, Relics and WL traits, back in the day when armies outside of Marines didn't have them. Would be cool if non-Marines now get mono-faction bonuses to match doctrines and super-doctrines, though I kinda doubt it'll happen.
Can agree with that , hopefully they do something for FW aswell as GK and incentivice a bit more mono builds.
87092
Post by: Sim-Life
Not Online!!! wrote:Sgt. Cortez wrote:Nobody buys CA only for the points. Or if they do they have too much money, as you can get that information within few hours after release via Battlescribe.
In last years CA the missions were important but more so the refined terrain rules for the base game as well as Cities of Death.
In our group we also used the veteran rules but I can see that they're not that relevant for pure tournament players.
Got any proof for that generalisation?
This. We know for a fact a bunch of people buy it JUST for the points so that they can complain about having to buy it JUST for the points.
120227
Post by: Karol
Sgt. Cortez wrote:Nobody buys CA only for the points. Or if they do they have too much money, as you can get that information within few hours after release via Battlescribe.
In last years CA the missions were important but more so the refined terrain rules for the base game as well as Cities of Death.
In our group we also used the veteran rules but I can see that they're not that relevant for pure tournament players.
I happen to have a limited amount of money. And I bought the first CA just for the point changes. Same as everyone here. And absolutly no one in my area used the city death rules, the design your land raider etc stuff. CA just like a codex is required to play, and in case of my store you need physical copy of rules, or you are not allowed to use the store tables.
85299
Post by: Spoletta
The CA missions are surely the most important part of CA, even more important that points. (For non ITC players).
They always shake the meta in the right direction and until now have been an incredibly huge step forward each year.
My fear is actually that they will change them.
Right now they are close to perfect, but since there must always be a new set every year, they will be changed.
i'm not confident that they can do better than CA18 missions.
111605
Post by: Adeptus Doritos
You know what I'd love to see, in CA- and I know I won't.
Narrative campaign rules/guidelines. "Hero" games (Movie Marines, for example).
Goofy alternative ways to play with your models.
39309
Post by: Jidmah
I haven't bought a single CA yet, but I will buy this year's CA if it contains new missions.
The CA missions have gotten better and better with each book and I played both the eternal war and maelstrom missions from CA2018 a lot. If they continue this trend, I'm willing to pay them just for that.
As for the points? The only time I ever care about points is when I'm writing a list, for which I'm using battle scribe anyways, plus they are usually leaked a weak before release anyways. There is zero reason to buy CA for points.
What I'd love to see is rules to use with those hex-field campaign they released years ago.
111605
Post by: Adeptus Doritos
 Jidmah wrote:What I'd love to see is rules to use with those hex-field campaign they released years ago.
Urban Conquest?
That thing really drifted into irrelevance, didn't it?
78092
Post by: Ginjitzu
Karol wrote:Sgt. Cortez wrote:Nobody buys CA only for the points. Or if they do they have too much money, as you can get that information within few hours after release via Battlescribe.
In last years CA the missions were important but more so the refined terrain rules for the base game as well as Cities of Death.
In our group we also used the veteran rules but I can see that they're not that relevant for pure tournament players.
I happen to have a limited amount of money. And I bought the first CA just for the point changes. Same as everyone here. And absolutly no one in my area used the city death rules, the design your land raider etc stuff. CA just like a codex is required to play, and in case of my store you need physical copy of rules, or you are not allowed to use the store tables.
To be fair though, most of your posts make you sound like you live in a tragic drama about the 1970s Soviet Union. Your experience probably isn't a reflection of most people in general.
In my local store, the owner bought a copy of Chapter Approved and just left it there for everyone to use. As far as I know, no one has used anything outside of the missions. We all use Battle Scribe to build our lists.
111605
Post by: Adeptus Doritos
In my local store, I usually throw my books in a bag, I have photocopies of stuff from Forge World books, and I usually use photocopies or Battlescribe printouts.
If someone doesn't trust me enough that they need to go and check the stats for my mediocre just-for-fun list in a physical book from my bag- then I am gonna ask if they wanna see the proof of purchase and watch me manually add up all my points with a pencil and paper.
124882
Post by: Gadzilla666
Not Online!!! wrote:Sunny Side Up wrote:New Missions and deployment rules (if they change them again) were traditionally the biggest thing in CA (unless you play homebrew missions like ITC).
The first CA also had Stratagems, Relics and WL traits, back in the day when armies outside of Marines didn't have them. Would be cool if non-Marines now get mono-faction bonuses to match doctrines and super-doctrines, though I kinda doubt it'll happen.
Can agree with that , hopefully they do something for FW aswell as GK and incentivice a bit more mono builds.
Yeah I hate this concept of csm should play soup because they're not legions anymore they're "war bands ". Bs.
Gk definitely need help.
Depends on what "something for fw" means to gw. Does it mean fixing all the insane points hikes from ca2018? Or does it mean nerfing leviathans into the ground?
Some zone mortalis rules would be nice.
39309
Post by: Jidmah
 Adeptus Doritos wrote: Jidmah wrote:What I'd love to see is rules to use with those hex-field campaign they released years ago.
Urban Conquest?
That thing really drifted into irrelevance, didn't it?
I actually bought that book, but in short... it's not a good book and misses the mark by a long shot.
It's a lot like those FW books of the past, which described campaigns no one will ever be able to play.
I was referring to this:
The rules going with those tiles were quite fun to play with, but haven't aged well and are not compatible to 8th anymore.
84200
Post by: Emicrania
We should get some terrain rules. They are sorely needed.
111605
Post by: Adeptus Doritos
I don't know what that even is and I want it.
39309
Post by: Jidmah
It's called Planetary Empires and used to be made by GW. If you are lucky, you can grab a box off ebay.
123200
Post by: Waaaghbert
Did I read this right....Marines get point drops??? 
56409
Post by: Amishprn86
Its going to be Legends for sure, this book might be pretty big actually if they put all the legends datasheets in them and 1 more points change. We are talking about 40-50 datasheets (thats also FW) some of them might not make it to legends tho right away. I'm guess about 70% of them will at least. Having 2 datasheets per page, we are looking at 10+ pages just for datasheets IF they do what i think they are going to do.
I'm honestly wait to see what happens to legends, its the only thing i want to know about. I'm on the fence of 40k as it is (so much AoS lately)
35086
Post by: Daedalus81
I'm not clicking that. :p
Care to rehost on imgur?
95191
Post by: godardc
Is it worth it buying the first and second CA now ?
35310
Post by: the_scotsman
Not Online!!! wrote:tneva82 wrote:BrianDavion wrote:from the red gobbo post on WHC
"Da Red Gobbo will be joined by other Warhammer Legends this December, alongside the release of Chapter Approved 2019, where rules for other venerable denizens of the far future whose miniatures are no longer available will find their permanent home."
thus I suspect the hook will be legends data sheets for stuff thats currently not been given rules.
Pretty sure Legends has been said to be oniine so that would be related more to when.
As for ca19 hook points. Gw needs nothing else to sell book
This here, no need for a hook if you hold a mandatory balance patch hostage.
As if the points updates don't get leaked a month in advance of the book and appear on Battlescribe within a week...god damn, folks are melodramatic.
The only reason I've ever purchased a CA was to get the Cities of Death rules in CA2018, which alongside the new eternal war missions were more than worth the price to me.
119289
Post by: Not Online!!!
Well, that would get ugly damn fast
117719
Post by: Sunny Side Up
119289
Post by: Not Online!!!
With pricehike.
Which considering the allready steep pries on some cult marines is, off puting depending on the hike.
121442
Post by: flandarz
Bear in mind that these are rumors, so maybe don't take them as gospel just yet.
117719
Post by: Sunny Side Up
There seems to be some disagreements in the various wish-lists regarding point drops for Cultists vs. point-hike for Guardsmen as well as points for other CSM units though.
35086
Post by: Daedalus81
Yea the salt in that list if its true, holy gak. I doubt it though, because there have been a lot of contradicting rumors before this.
121068
Post by: Sterling191
Well this is certainly going to be entertaining to watch.
35086
Post by: Daedalus81
Sunny Side Up wrote:
There seems to be some disagreements in the various wish-lists regarding point drops for Cultists vs. point-hike for Guardsmen as well as points for other CSM units though.
This is the episode with TJ Lannigan (he's the source). Great listen, too, if you want to hear how Magnus can take on the current marines and reach top tables.
3750
Post by: Wayniac
Whatever is in CA19, I'm sure it will already be out of date because it's written so far in advance that it will adjust things that were "meta" 6 months ago and totally ignore what's meta now.
117719
Post by: Sunny Side Up
Cool. I'll give it a listen.
Chaos and Slaanesh rumours just have been a bit crazy this year, lol. I could almost swear some of those go back all the way to 6th Edition Slaanesh Daemonkin rumours after the Khorne Daemonkin dropped.
119289
Post by: Not Online!!!
If that get's in that way, AND GW seriously fethed up this badly, then god forbid anyone not playing marines to run into one.
98904
Post by: Imateria
I'm calling BS on this, we know from last year that any codex released after April 1st will not get any points changes other than wargear that can be found in other codexes. See the Drukhari codex, released 2 weeks after Tau and on the first weekend of April but wasn't included in CA2018.
As for those that don't buy CA for the points and just rely on Battlescribe, thats asking for trouble, the last two CA's have shown that we spend several weeks trying to deal with mistakes for everyfaction as points changes have been missed or incorrectly implemented to the files.
Looking forward to what they'll be doing for the missions, the current ones are quite fun and for the most part fairly balanced.
18622
Post by: Lord Clinto
I hope that AdMech rumor is either false or they buff Canticles along with it...
119949
Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn
Only thing I want is to make Landraiders cost about 200pts.
7680
Post by: oni
I hope that AdMech rumor is bogus or includes Questor Mechanicus. Not being able to include Imperial Knights with AdMech will kill the faction.
25359
Post by: TheAvengingKnee
That would be nice they are way overpriced now.
I would like to see the stormsurge buffed or get a sizable point drop, it’s just so bad.
Crisis suits need a hefty point drop.
Commander limits for Tau should be gone, just say they can only have 3 not one per detachment.
7680
Post by: oni
To the OP's question...
I hope we get an updated Planetary Onslaught from just before 7th editions exit. IMO, arguably the best book GW has ever made.
117719
Post by: Sunny Side Up
Seriously, people get way to upset about this little piece of trolling.
Did GW for some curious reason publish separate/different point values for Orks in the fall 2018 Codex and the CA 2018, just because? Or even for summer-releases like Drukhari or Knights?
I don't see why GW would take up that practice now.
85299
Post by: Spoletta
Obvious fake.
The fact that there are rule changes in there like "Eldar strat capped at -2" clearly marks it as a falied fake.
CA was never the place for fine targeted rule changes like that.
64268
Post by: Aenar
Spoletta wrote:Obvious fake.
The fact that there are rule changes in there like "Eldar strat capped at -2" clearly marks it as a falied fake.
CA was never the place for fine targeted rule changes like that.
I tend to agree, but a couple datasheets have been updated in CA.
One thing to note: the previous CAs have been released a few months later than the respective codex for basically every army, so updating rules in CA19 or CA18 didn't make much sense.
One year later in the meta I can see that updating rules in CA19 may be a necessity, especially if there is no new Codex coming up anytime soon.
111605
Post by: Adeptus Doritos
I don't place a lot of stock in "rumored changes", I do place some in rumored releases... more often that I should, because we damned sure didn't see new Primaris Black Templars and those Noise Marines haven't happened and they seem quite overdue.
My tinfoil hat theory is a lot of the bogus "rule/point change rumors" are just someone's wishful thinking.
85390
Post by: bullyboy
I bought the CAs for the missions (narrative and matched play), by far the best part of the books. I feel sorry for people in general who only ever play matched play (even worse, only ever play ITC) as there are some really fun ways to play 40K if you're open to it. If I look back on games played in my past, i generally have fonder memories of great narrative games over competitive, but that's just me.
People can play the way they like (I know time is very limited for some people), but I can tell you that you might be missing out a little if you haven't played a few narrative missions with some of those old models lamenting on your shelves.
93856
Post by: Galef
I really hope the 2W Cult Marine rumour is true, even with a 1-2ppm point increase, that would put them on par with Primaris Marines (well, before you factor in Traits, Strats and Combat Doctrines, at lease)
I'm also hoping for 11ppm Chaos Marines. Tac Marines at 12ppm feels right given all the extra rules they have, but for CSM and even SW, DA & BA that do not have Combat Docs, 11ppm is more appropriate.
It does seem like there is some contradiction on Cultists going back to 4ppm and/or Guardsmen goin to 5ppm. I hope both are true, but at the very least Cultists should never have been more points than Guardsmen
-
29836
Post by: Elbows
I would rather not see 2W cult troops. That would murder CSM even more than they already are. However, that may be the goal? Death Guard and Thousand Sons would become immensely better. They're both brand new model lines. Basic CSM would disappear from the face of the game, particularly if Cultists drop back down to 4 points (which they should).
I say this as a Renegade player who runs the occasional squad of Plague Marines. Seeing them boosted would murder any enthusiasm I have for putting normal CSMs on the table.
If GW is smart I do think they need to introduce a Doctrine style thing to all of the factions. The power gulf is too much at the moment with Space Marines head and shoulders above other factions. I'm not really even playing much any more, but the game needs some work, for sure.
122989
Post by: VladimirHerzog
Ginjitzu wrote:Karol wrote:Sgt. Cortez wrote:Nobody buys CA only for the points. Or if they do they have too much money, as you can get that information within few hours after release via Battlescribe.
In last years CA the missions were important but more so the refined terrain rules for the base game as well as Cities of Death.
In our group we also used the veteran rules but I can see that they're not that relevant for pure tournament players.
I happen to have a limited amount of money. And I bought the first CA just for the point changes. Same as everyone here. And absolutly no one in my area used the city death rules, the design your land raider etc stuff. CA just like a codex is required to play, and in case of my store you need physical copy of rules, or you are not allowed to use the store tables.
To be fair though, most of your posts make you sound like you live in a tragic drama about the 1970s Soviet Union. Your experience probably isn't a reflection of most people in general.
In my local store, the owner bought a copy of Chapter Approved and just left it there for everyone to use. As far as I know, no one has used anything outside of the missions. We all use Battle Scribe to build our lists.
Same at my store. Everyone uses datacards + battlescribe for their faction rules. (I still bring my codexes at the very least and theres a computer available of we ever have to dig in a faq to find a new rules update)
oni wrote:I hope that AdMech rumor is bogus or includes Questor Mechanicus. Not being able to include Imperial Knights with AdMech will kill the faction.
not really, admech is at its strongest when ran as monofaction anyway, knights die too quickly and when they do, you lose a big part of your army.
79409
Post by: BrianDavion
honestly this reads like something deliberatly designed to trigger people.
I mean no points change to CSMs, across the board points drops to space marines?
honestly if thats the case then CA 2019 is gonna be DOA.
93856
Post by: Galef
 Elbows wrote:I would rather not see 2W cult troops. That would murder CSM even more than they already are. However, that may be the goal? Death Guard and Thousand Sons would become immensely better. They're both brand new model lines. Basic CSM would disappear from the face of the game, particularly if Cultists drop back down to 4 points (which they should). I say this as a Renegade player who runs the occasional squad of Plague Marines. Seeing them boosted would murder any enthusiasm I have for putting normal CSMs on the table. If GW is smart I do think they need to introduce a Doctrine style thing to all of the factions. The power gulf is too much at the moment with Space Marines head and shoulders above other factions. I'm not really even playing much any more, but the game needs some work, for sure.
But they'd only be Troops for DG, Tsons, WE or EC respectively. They'd be Elites still for all other legions/warbands, including Renegades. So assuming Chaos Marines get a points drop, there really isn't much competition between them. And if we also give Chosen 2W, Chaos would have "proper" Primaris equivalents -
120227
Post by: Karol
So you would run them in a vanguard detachment and then a battalion with 4pts cultists? Automatically Appended Next Post:  Ginjitzu wrote:To be fair though, most of your posts make you sound like you live in a tragic drama about the 1970s Soviet Union. Your experience probably isn't a reflection of most people in general.
In my local store, the owner bought a copy of Chapter Approved and just left it there for everyone to use. As far as I know, no one has used anything outside of the missions. We all use Battle Scribe to build our lists.
You think that in soviet union, the soviet public television was making series about how tough the life in soviet union is? If your a russian ex pat then your a bad one.
117111
Post by: TwinPoleTheory
 Galef wrote:But they'd only be Troops for DG, Tsons, WE or EC respectively. They'd be Elites still for all other legions/warbands, including Renegades. So assuming Chaos Marines get a points drop, there really isn't much competition between them. And if we also give Chosen 2W, Chaos would have "proper" Primaris equivalents
I'm pretty skeptical that this is happening, it's such a half-baked concept. So what happens for Cult terminators? What happens for normal terminators? Do they increase Chosen? Possessed? I don't really see them going through every unit that should be affected by a change like this and making adjustments.
CA2019 is going to be Legends and points adjustments I suspect, anything else is just wishful thinking.
3750
Post by: Wayniac
BrianDavion wrote:
honestly this reads like something deliberatly designed to trigger people.
I mean no points change to CSMs, across the board points drops to space marines?
honestly if thats the case then CA 2019 is gonna be DOA.
I'm not going to lie, part of me wants this to happen just to show how doing a once a year update in print form, so it has to be written months in advance, is useless because it's fixing things from months ago that likely no longer even matter.
108267
Post by: macluvin
Making 4ppm troops 5ppm is a step in the right direction... and as a chaos player, I feel like cultists should be worse as a troop option than guardsmen... not significantly so as more expensive, and no special rules, no orders, all at the same time, but GEQ should not be the go to troop option of a a space marine army. The only thing that makes me regret those feelings is that the imperial guard works with the space marines in soup lists, so my caveat is that renegade and heretics should be brought up to approximately the same level as guard so we have access to the same sort of soup. Or balance cultists against guard in cheaper point cost but no special rules...
35086
Post by: Daedalus81
Elbows wrote:I would rather not see 2W cult troops. That would murder CSM even more than they already are. However, that may be the goal? Death Guard and Thousand Sons would become immensely better. They're both brand new model lines. Basic CSM would disappear from the face of the game, particularly if Cultists drop back down to 4 points (which they should).
I say this as a Renegade player who runs the occasional squad of Plague Marines. Seeing them boosted would murder any enthusiasm I have for putting normal CSMs on the table.
If GW is smart I do think they need to introduce a Doctrine style thing to all of the factions. The power gulf is too much at the moment with Space Marines head and shoulders above other factions. I'm not really even playing much any more, but the game needs some work, for sure.
CSM is also a brand new model line? They have as many, if not more, kits than Thousand Sons. DG certainly have quite a few though, but there is no consistent logic to that statement.
CSM also has access to cult troops - troops they rarely use. I wouldn't mind Rubrics and PM being used in BL again. Rubrics would suddenly be a bear of an objective holder and it isn't like losing +6" to spells kills them for that purpose.
Apostle
MoP
Sorcerer
CSM
Abaddon
Termies
Havocs
VC
Oblits
vs
Ahriman
Exalted
Rubrics
Scarabs
Magnus
Tzaangors
Shaman
Enlightened
Automatically Appended Next Post:
 TwinPoleTheory wrote: Galef wrote:But they'd only be Troops for DG, Tsons, WE or EC respectively. They'd be Elites still for all other legions/warbands, including Renegades. So assuming Chaos Marines get a points drop, there really isn't much competition between them. And if we also give Chosen 2W, Chaos would have "proper" Primaris equivalents
I'm pretty skeptical that this is happening, it's such a half-baked concept. So what happens for Cult terminators? What happens for normal terminators? Do they increase Chosen? Possessed? I don't really see them going through every unit that should be affected by a change like this and making adjustments.
CA2019 is going to be Legends and points adjustments I suspect, anything else is just wishful thinking.
I personally wouldn't complain about Scarabs and Deathshroud being W3. But it does otherwise cause some internal balance issues for CSM. I'm not sure points solves all of it, but the flexibility of Chosen has its own value. Possessed would likely stay. CSM are already looked over - marines are 12 now, but CSM should honestly be cheaper with the doctrine disparity.
18622
Post by: Lord Clinto
 oni wrote:I hope that AdMech rumor is bogus or includes Questor Mechanicus. Not being able to include Imperial Knights with AdMech will kill the faction.
I don't see how they couldn't include Imperial Knights, I mean they're in the codex itself; GW had done some strange things in the past but....
107289
Post by: Kitane
There's a disturbing bit in the latest WD, Codex: Inquisition under Authority of the Inquisition
"..That INQUISITOR unit does not prevent other units in your army benefiting from Detachment abilities (e.g. Chapter Tactics) and does not prevent abilities that require every model in your army to have that ability (e.g. Combat Doctrines, Canticles of the Omnissiah)."
This wouldn't be necessary with the current version of Canticles.
3750
Post by: Wayniac
So what would that mean, finally an end to cross-detachment soup? AKA the fix battle brothers should have been years ago?
Or just a nerf to Admech?
115943
Post by: Darsath
Kitane wrote:There's a disturbing bit in the latest WD, Codex: Inquisition under Authority of the Inquisition
"..That INQUISITOR unit does not prevent other units in your army benefiting from Detachment abilities (e.g. Chapter Tactics) and does not prevent abilities that require every model in your army to have that ability (e.g. Combat Doctrines, Canticles of the Omnissiah)."
This wouldn't be necessary with the current version of Canticles.
I still refuse to believe this rumour. There's now way Games Workshop would be THAT stupid. Maybe just future-proofing.
122989
Post by: VladimirHerzog
Darsath wrote:Kitane wrote:There's a disturbing bit in the latest WD, Codex: Inquisition under Authority of the Inquisition
"..That INQUISITOR unit does not prevent other units in your army benefiting from Detachment abilities (e.g. Chapter Tactics) and does not prevent abilities that require every model in your army to have that ability (e.g. Combat Doctrines, Canticles of the Omnissiah)."
This wouldn't be necessary with the current version of Canticles.
I still refuse to believe this rumour. There's now way Games Workshop would be THAT stupid. Maybe just future-proofing.
IF they end up going for that nerf, i expect that its because canticle got reworked. at the moment, its a pretty gak faction bonus when compared to all the stuff numarines get. Yes, shroudpsalm and reroll 1's is good, the rest are.... meh.
107289
Post by: Kitane
The codex is out already, that piece could be used to craft a convincing rumor. I mean, it does sound absolutely stupid. Even for GW.
But if it's true, I can imagine that GW is currently that guy crushed by Austin Powels on a steamroller, screaming while the inevitable release of CA19 is getting closer and closer.
Also...termagants for 5 points? Really? What's next, 6 point hormies and 7 point gargoyles?
124182
Post by: Mariongodspeed
Kitane wrote:There's a disturbing bit in the latest WD, Codex: Inquisition under Authority of the Inquisition "..That INQUISITOR unit does not prevent other units in your army benefiting from Detachment abilities (e.g. Chapter Tactics) and does not prevent abilities that require every model in your army to have that ability (e.g. Combat Doctrines, Canticles of the Omnissiah)." This wouldn't be necessary with the current version of Canticles.
Current wording on Canticles of the Omnisiah - "If you have a Battle-forged army, units only receive the bonus if every model in their Detachment has this ability." It seams they should have included this in the Detachment wide example instead of the army-wide example, the way I read it.
664
Post by: Grimtuff
For once the army with two wounds might actually have something going for it... 
119289
Post by: Not Online!!!
Darsath wrote:Kitane wrote:There's a disturbing bit in the latest WD, Codex: Inquisition under Authority of the Inquisition
"..That INQUISITOR unit does not prevent other units in your army benefiting from Detachment abilities (e.g. Chapter Tactics) and does not prevent abilities that require every model in your army to have that ability (e.g. Combat Doctrines, Canticles of the Omnissiah)."
This wouldn't be necessary with the current version of Canticles.
I still refuse to believe this rumour. There's now way Games Workshop would be THAT stupid. Maybe just future-proofing.
>points at 7th edition, scatbikes, Lashprinces, and even the last Ca hiking the price on R&H cultists, which are even worse then their CSM counterpart..
Are you sure about that?
i'd say it is distinctly a possibility.
121442
Post by: flandarz
It's possible. The only reason I can think of to do it would be for it to work like the "mono" bonuses Marines get. But, unless they get a significant buff as well, I don't see the point in it.
Another possibility is that GW is going to add a few new Canticles to your list that only work in Mono. So, it's not necessarily a bad thing.
121430
Post by: ccs
Sgt. Cortez wrote:Nobody buys CA only for the points. Or if they do they have too much money, as you can get that information within few hours after release via Battlescribe.
For that matter I can also get the rest of the book without paying for it if I choose to....
121715
Post by: Ishagu
Legends is getting introduced in the new Chapter Approved.
Marines will get some point drops?
Some changes to rebalance faction units.
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
Yeah, let's hope not. They're ridiculous at CURRENT points values.
121442
Post by: flandarz
I think Marines are too close to their release date to realistically see any kind of point adjustments in CA. Especially if the book IS written months in advance. But, this is GW, and trying to predict what they'll do is like trying to figure out what the weather will be next week on an exoplanet we haven't discovered yet.
85299
Post by: Spoletta
Let that rumor rest guys.
It is an obvious fake from so many points of view...
EDIT: AAaaand rumor debunked from the usual French source, not much of a surprise.
102537
Post by: Sgt. Cortez
ccs wrote:Sgt. Cortez wrote:Nobody buys CA only for the points. Or if they do they have too much money, as you can get that information within few hours after release via Battlescribe.
For that matter I can also get the rest of the book without paying for it if I choose to....
Of course you can. But that other information is not automatically inserted in the army builder most people use. Really, I never even looked at the points pages of either CA, but read all the other, far more interesting stuff. Yet Dakka year after year discusses only these, which seems pretty strange to me. Even if you care for organized matched play only at least the missions and Updates to terrain rules should be of more interest than some arbitrary points that may be outdated 3 - 12 months later anyway.
120227
Post by: Karol
If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.
79409
Post by: BrianDavion
Karol wrote:
If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.
LOGIC dictates that they simply don't touch points costs for any thing that's being worked on by anothet team for a new codex between that time, trusting the new codex to address any points disreprencies needed (and passing along any relevant data that was assmbled) but well... logic doesn't always apply/
120458
Post by: small_gods
Karol wrote:
If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.
I think eldar flyers will definately be getting a points bump, similarly to what they did to the Castellan. Even afrer the nerfs they bumped points also.
I think some aspect warriors, nidd, death company and csm models (Dark Apostle, CSM and cultists) could see a little drop to coincide with psychic awakening.
116670
Post by: Ordana
Karol wrote:
If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.
Yes, production time means CA is reacting to an old Meta but they know the SM books are going to come out before CA while writing it so it won't include changes for them.
In the same way that Ca2018 did not include any changes for Orks because they released in November.
(and yes I kind of expect a points increase for Eldar flyers because on their perceived dominance before the SM codex)
120227
Post by: Karol
I don't think that is how GW works. Just because they know something was bad or good 6months in the past, but supposed to be fixed or not now, doesn't mean they are going to be reacting to the stuff now. I mean when knights came out, they knew the rules way in advance, and that the meta will shift. But the CA and FAQ following the knight book did nothing to knights, but a lot older meta armies, which often were already being demolished by knights at that time.
But I do hope you are right. Automatically Appended Next Post: BrianDavion wrote:Karol wrote:
If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.
LOGIC dictates that they simply don't touch points costs for any thing that's being worked on by anothet team for a new codex between that time, trusting the new codex to address any points disreprencies needed (and passing along any relevant data that was assmbled) but well... logic doesn't always apply/
Isn't the whole stupido like a handful of dudes, and even those are split between AoS, w40k and the side games GW makes. It would make it harder to pull off, unless they hired a second team or kicked out the old one. Plus from that articles someone posted a week or so ago, GW logic is sound and focused on marketing. If something is going to be bought in multiples, by many people, then it is great. The more sold the better.
3750
Post by: Wayniac
Karol wrote:Isn't the whole stupido like a handful of dudes, and even those are split between AoS, w40k and the side games GW makes. It would make it harder to pull off, unless they hired a second team or kicked out the old one. Plus from that articles someone posted a week or so ago, GW logic is sound and focused on marketing. If something is going to be bought in multiples, by many people, then it is great. The more sold the better.
There are separate teams now for 40k and AOS. The issue is the 40k team is all the old guys from 6th and 7th (Cruddace, Grant, maybe *shudder* Ward again) while the AOS team has a lot of new faces many of whom are also tournament players.
18622
Post by: Lord Clinto
Karol wrote:
Isn't the whole stupido like a handful of dudes, and even those are split between AoS, w40k and the side games GW makes. It would make it harder to pull off, unless they hired a second team or kicked out the old one. Plus from that articles someone posted a week or so ago, GW logic is sound and focused on marketing. If something is going to be bought in multiples, by many people, then it is great. The more sold the better.
I'm sure you meant "studio" but I'm also sure that "stupid" could describe a lot of GW's rule choices/modifications over the years too. Well played sir! =)
35086
Post by: Daedalus81
Karol wrote:
If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.
There is almost no chance of marine drops.
CA is softback. That means they print it in the UK and the turn around time is much faster instead of sending books to print in China and waiting for them to get shipped.
Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse space.
56409
Post by: Amishprn86
Wayniac wrote:Karol wrote:Isn't the whole stupido like a handful of dudes, and even those are split between AoS, w40k and the side games GW makes. It would make it harder to pull off, unless they hired a second team or kicked out the old one. Plus from that articles someone posted a week or so ago, GW logic is sound and focused on marketing. If something is going to be bought in multiples, by many people, then it is great. The more sold the better.
There are separate teams now for 40k and AOS. The issue is the 40k team is all the old guys from 6th and 7th (Cruddace, Grant, maybe *shudder* Ward again) while the AOS team has a lot of new faces many of whom are also tournament players.
Yep this, and if you been watching the AoS and the 40k podcasts it is VERY clear AOS wants balance in their game between armies and the RnG be more of the special rules (like who goes first each turn, and the realms, etc..) they also are very clear ont he rules and that is a major priority for them, they even want all the rules to be write the same way. But if you listen to the 40k team it is clear they are more narrative focus and expect their players to be able to handle making changes on the table to make a better game while understanding it is RAI and not RAW. Just listen to... I think #2 from AOSshorts? its the Beastmen one, they talk for at least a good 15-20min how they spent a FULL YEAR making inhouse rules to follow when designing a new codex to make sure they stay as balance as they can. While some armies are lower tier (I mean new books, like Goblins) they still have some very powerful lists, but a lot of the times other armies counter other armies very well, take HoS for example, one of the better armies, but armies like Skaven or CoS can easily hard counter it, but might not be able to counter SCE, i play BoC and IDK, my BoC is consider middle tier, being one of the newer 2.0 books with the new balances in mind it is clear they were still "scared" to make them ot strong in melee, as we are the fastest "walking" army in the game, i can easily move 15-21" and charge for a normal movement, so making a melee army with almost no Psychic that can move that fast to strong in melee can have problems, instead we win by out moving, body blocking and picking 1 objectives a turn to flank it hard and take it. It is fully possible to win 5-0 in GT's with them. Even the lowest tier armies can go 3-2 at GT's. Just some perspective from a person that does do GT's with mutli-armies from AOS and still also plays tournaments in 40k (tho only 10-16man ones for 40k as i like AOS better).
3750
Post by: Wayniac
 Amishprn86 wrote:Yep this, and if you been watching the AoS and the 40k podcasts it is VERY clear AOS wants balance in their game between armies and the RnG be more of the special rules (like who goes first each turn, and the realms, etc..) they also are very clear ont he rules and that is a major priority for them, they even want all the rules to be write the same way. But if you listen to the 40k team it is clear they are more narrative focus and expect their players to be able to handle making changes on the table to make a better game while understanding it is RAI and not RAW. Just listen to... I think #2 from AOSshorts? its the Beastmen one, they talk for at least a good 15-20min how they spent a FULL YEAR making inhouse rules to follow when designing a new codex to make sure they stay as balance as they can. While some armies are lower tier (I mean new books, like Goblins) they still have some very powerful lists, but a lot of the times other armies counter other armies very well, take HoS for example, one of the better armies, but armies like Skaven or CoS can easily hard counter it, but might not be able to counter SCE, i play BoC and IDK, my BoC is consider middle tier, being one of the newer 2.0 books with the new balances in mind it is clear they were still "scared" to make them ot strong in melee, as we are the fastest "walking" army in the game, i can easily move 15-21" and charge for a normal movement, so making a melee army with almost no Psychic that can move that fast to strong in melee can have problems, instead we win by out moving, body blocking and picking 1 objectives a turn to flank it hard and take it. It is fully possible to win 5-0 in GT's with them. Even the lowest tier armies can go 3-2 at GT's. Just some perspective from a person that does do GT's with mutli-armies from AOS and still also plays tournaments in 40k (tho only 10-16man ones for 40k as i like AOS better).
Precisely. AOS at least, while it still has the GW balance issues (although it is a heated topic of debate if it's intentional to reward "system mastery" of finding the broken combos), at least has a common language for rules (or they are trying to standardize). The 40k team is more fast and loose and seem to still think it's okay to be vague and expect players to discuss/use common sense/etc. the confusion away. Because, again, it's the same people who used "forge then narrative" as an excuse for crap rules in 6th and 7th on the 40k team, at least from the bits that we know now about who is on what team. It's known though that at least some of the AOS team are are tournament guys (Ben Johnson springs to mind) who enjoy cutthroat competitive games as well as laid back throw whatever together games with friends.
95410
Post by: ERJAK
Wayniac wrote: Amishprn86 wrote:Yep this, and if you been watching the AoS and the 40k podcasts it is VERY clear AOS wants balance in their game between armies and the RnG be more of the special rules (like who goes first each turn, and the realms, etc..) they also are very clear ont he rules and that is a major priority for them, they even want all the rules to be write the same way. But if you listen to the 40k team it is clear they are more narrative focus and expect their players to be able to handle making changes on the table to make a better game while understanding it is RAI and not RAW.
Just listen to... I think #2 from AOSshorts? its the Beastmen one, they talk for at least a good 15-20min how they spent a FULL YEAR making inhouse rules to follow when designing a new codex to make sure they stay as balance as they can.
While some armies are lower tier (I mean new books, like Goblins) they still have some very powerful lists, but a lot of the times other armies counter other armies very well, take HoS for example, one of the better armies, but armies like Skaven or CoS can easily hard counter it, but might not be able to counter SCE, i play BoC and IDK, my BoC is consider middle tier, being one of the newer 2.0 books with the new balances in mind it is clear they were still "scared" to make them ot strong in melee, as we are the fastest "walking" army in the game, i can easily move 15-21" and charge for a normal movement, so making a melee army with almost no Psychic that can move that fast to strong in melee can have problems, instead we win by out moving, body blocking and picking 1 objectives a turn to flank it hard and take it. It is fully possible to win 5-0 in GT's with them. Even the lowest tier armies can go 3-2 at GT's.
Just some perspective from a person that does do GT's with mutli-armies from AOS and still also plays tournaments in 40k (tho only 10-16man ones for 40k as i like AOS better).
Precisely. AOS at least, while it still has the GW balance issues (although it is a heated topic of debate if it's intentional to reward "system mastery" of finding the broken combos), at least has a common language for rules (or they are trying to standardize). The 40k team is more fast and loose and seem to still think it's okay to be vague and expect players to discuss/use common sense/etc. the confusion away. Because, again, it's the same people who used "forge then narrative" as an excuse for crap rules in 6th and 7th on the 40k team, at least from the bits that we know now about who is on what team. It's known though that at least some of the AOS team are are tournament guys (Ben Johnson springs to mind) who enjoy cutthroat competitive games as well as laid back throw whatever together games with friends.
As someone who plays both AoS and 40k in tournament settings fairly frequently, AoS is a FAR superior tournament game, whether 40k players want to acknowledge it or not, for exactly the reasons you described.
Yeah, it's got some balance issues. Armies with summoning, especially slaanesh, are a bit outside the power curve. Some books are janke and oddly lopsided(Stormcasts) but overall, there are almost always at least 10-12 different factions in the top 16 with 5-10 more you wouldn't be surprised to see there. You also don't have nearly as many 'gotchas' and the super combos aren't nearly as deadly or obnoxious as 40k's are.
In fact, sidebar here: AoS has a much bigger problem with units that are too weak than units that are too strong. Because they have a tendency to make some units do too little damage for their base stats so they can't drop the price on them enough to make them useful without making them something you'd want to spam 100 of just for their raw # of wounds.
3750
Post by: Wayniac
It's a big reason why I feel like playing AOS, but not 40k. There are too many wonky things, too much of a crazy and random power curve and insane rules sometimes. Sure AOS has balance issues but the power curve, barring the major outliers, is more like a series of hills than a rollercoaster.
I doubt CA19 will fix that. If the rumors of a not-9th edition next year are true, I hope they do something similar to what they did with AOS 2.0 and clean things up, but not invalidate everything. The guts of 8th edition aren't that bad, it's just everything else layered on top of it that's bloated it up again, perhaps even worse than 7th edition was at this point.
120227
Post by: Karol
 Lord Clinto wrote:Karol wrote:
Isn't the whole stupido like a handful of dudes, and even those are split between AoS, w40k and the side games GW makes. It would make it harder to pull off, unless they hired a second team or kicked out the old one. Plus from that articles someone posted a week or so ago, GW logic is sound and focused on marketing. If something is going to be bought in multiples, by many people, then it is great. The more sold the better.
I'm sure you meant "studio" but I'm also sure that "stupid" could describe a lot of GW's rule choices/modifications over the years too. Well played sir! =)
Ment studio. Auto correct is an evil thing, I have to live with, considering my english skill being on the low.
Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse
Well lets hope that is the case. I know that soft cover school books in Poland have to be ordered to print months in advance, and any last minute changes cost extra, so no one does it, they just expect students and teachers to fix the books themselfs. Last year we had a math book, where our teachers just told us to remove some pages to not get confused. Automatically Appended Next Post: Wayniac wrote:It's a big reason why I feel like playing AOS, but not 40k. There are too many wonky things, too much of a crazy and random power curve and insane rules sometimes. Sure AOS has balance issues but the power curve, barring the major outliers, is more like a series of hills than a rollercoaster.
.
it is true that AoS tournament results are a very interesting thing to read. Slanesh demons are the best army, and hard counter to many list. yet those hardcountered by the best army right now lists still win tournaments, and not just once every 16 months in a 20 men mini event.
7680
Post by: oni
VladimirHerzog wrote:
oni wrote:I hope that AdMech rumor is bogus or includes Questor Mechanicus. Not being able to include Imperial Knights with AdMech will kill the faction.
not really, admech is at its strongest when ran as monofaction anyway, knights die too quickly and when they do, you lose a big part of your army.
There are very specific, very limited builds that take advantage of a finite set of rules that can be mediocre at best. None of which I care to play. I'm not a meta chaser.
Lord Clinto wrote: oni wrote:I hope that AdMech rumor is bogus or includes Questor Mechanicus. Not being able to include Imperial Knights with AdMech will kill the faction.
I don't see how they couldn't include Imperial Knights, I mean they're in the codex itself; GW had done some strange things in the past but....
Right, but the AdMech codex does not include Armigers and using the IK datasheets from the AdMech codex means a loss of Household Traditions rule(s), IK stratagems, relics and warlord traits. That's an absolute massive blow to play-ability.
98904
Post by: Imateria
 Daedalus81 wrote:Karol wrote:
If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.
There is almost no chance of marine drops.
CA is softback. That means they print it in the UK and the turn around time is much faster instead of sending books to print in China and waiting for them to get shipped.
Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse space.
It would have helped if you'd actually looked at a Chapter Approved, quite clearly says "Printed by C & C in China".
35086
Post by: Daedalus81
 Imateria wrote: Daedalus81 wrote:Karol wrote:
If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.
There is almost no chance of marine drops.
CA is softback. That means they print it in the UK and the turn around time is much faster instead of sending books to print in China and waiting for them to get shipped.
Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse space.
It would have helped if you'd actually looked at a Chapter Approved, quite clearly says "Printed by C & C in China".
Well, I stand corrected though the entire point of softback is a cheaper book with quicker turn around. I'm still quite doubtful of marine drops, but I guess we'll see soon enough.
98904
Post by: Imateria
Daedalus81 wrote: Imateria wrote: Daedalus81 wrote:Karol wrote:
If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.
There is almost no chance of marine drops.
CA is softback. That means they print it in the UK and the turn around time is much faster instead of sending books to print in China and waiting for them to get shipped.
Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse space.
It would have helped if you'd actually looked at a Chapter Approved, quite clearly says "Printed by C & C in China".
Well, I stand corrected though the entire point of softback is a cheaper book with quicker turn around. I'm still quite doubtful of marine drops, but I guess we'll see soon enough.
Only if you're doing it in small numbers, like the FW indexes, and/or it's a rush job like the Shadow War Aramgeddon rules book was. Something like CA would need a significant run, which means China becuase you can do it for considerably cheaper.
113031
Post by: Voss
Imateria wrote: Daedalus81 wrote: Imateria wrote: Daedalus81 wrote:Karol wrote:
If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.
There is almost no chance of marine drops.
CA is softback. That means they print it in the UK and the turn around time is much faster instead of sending books to print in China and waiting for them to get shipped.
Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse space.
It would have helped if you'd actually looked at a Chapter Approved, quite clearly says "Printed by C & C in China".
Well, I stand corrected though the entire point of softback is a cheaper book with quicker turn around. I'm still quite doubtful of marine drops, but I guess we'll see soon enough.
Only if you're doing it in small numbers, like the FW indexes, and/or it's a rush job like the Shadow War Aramgeddon rules book was. Something like CA would need a significant run, which means China becuase you can do it for considerably cheaper.
Yep. For whatever reason, printers in Europe and the States charge a lot more than printers in Asia. Some don't even bother to keep up on printing advances.
So cheaper printing and a slow boat is most cost effective, but it makes for significant turn around times, but by and large 'quicker turn around' isn't anyone's goal with softbound. Its purely cost (though hardbound and even leather bound aren't particularly costlier in the Asian market, at least not compared to the outrageous mark up western printers put on those formats).
|
|
