I'd love to know what this kit actually comes with. If it's the regular Servo-Haulers kit with one Container sprue, then great, otherwise, this is confusing.
Its pretty clear if you look at the sprues for the existing kit. The large crane is a sprue by itself, while everything else including the trailer is on the other. This new box swaps the crane sprue for a container sprue.
I'll bet we'll see another battlezone range come out at some point in the future with reboxed sector mechanicus stuff, including that crane sprue.
xttz wrote: Its pretty clear if you look at the sprues for the existing kit.
The sprues don't tell you anything. They've shown us two images, one with the crane, and one with the container. Does it come with both sprues, or just one?
Dont get me wrong I can see some people with time o n their hands doing a narrative/crusade thing using these rules potentially maybe..??
But then those same people are likely going to be putting in lots a time making their own terrain thats just as good or better than GW generic ruin stuff.
So yeah I certainly don't see anyone paying attention to this at weekly FLGS pick up game. I maybe would have used the rules for some of the terrain if it was a free supplement or a WD thing and then if I liked it enough possibly buy some of the terrain to incorporate into terrain/basing projects... That's just me though.
xttz wrote: Its pretty clear if you look at the sprues for the existing kit.
The sprues don't tell you anything. They've shown us two images, one with the crane, and one with the container. Does it come with both sprues, or just one?
Especially because, if I remember correctly, one of the aerials for the crane lives on the servohauler sprue...or vice versa.
You are quite correct (happened to have one of each sprue lying around. I should probably file them before they attract HBMC’s. They’re lovely creatures, but hoard all your terrain)
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You are quite correct (happened to have one of each sprue lying around. I should probably file them before they attract HBMC’s. They’re lovely creatures, but hoard all your terrain)
I only reallly noticed after I sold the Conquest issue Crane on eBay (already having one from the initial release).
The buyer moaned about not having a full model. I could have pointed out that the eBay sale was for a 'Crane sprue as pictured' not a crane model but having the spare bit, I thought I'd forward on the extra bit from my bits box.
*Thanks for adding another layer of complexity GW. Just what this game needed...
8th edition players: Too little terrain rules please GW 9th edition players: Too much terrain rules please GW
8th didn't have too little terrain rules. It had too un-impactful terrain rules. They weren't enough to mitigate the hail of destruction and devastation that was units spending 9cp to quad-fire, fight twice in melee, fight when they die, get +3A, +2 to wound, reroll all to hits on all their attacks to have 150pts of unit scoop 500 points of army off the table in one go.
GW took one step forward with 9th, and then promptly took 2 steps back by making basically everything but Infantry just not get most terrain traits at all.
And then for good measure amp up the deadliness of the game another notch because one time a guy at the GW studio shot some eradicators at a tank and it didn't die So clearly this unit needs to deal 14.6 damage with average rolls in melta range vs standard tank defenses.
I just HATE when I shoot something at something else and my opponent doesn't have to immediately pull it off the table! It's soooooooooooo not fun!
I just HATE when I shoot something at something else and my opponent doesn't have to immediately pull it off the table! It's soooooooooooo not fun!
To be fair, that has been the most vocal criticism throughout 8th Edition from just about every 40K player.
Stuff getting deadlier with new Strats, more shots on Clown-Haywire or Knight super-Meltas, random shoot-twice abilites on Leman Russ or Fire Prims, etc..
Everybody cheers.
Some actually impactful defensive abilities like alaitoc and everyone get's out the pitch forks.
Hell, even moving from 8th to 9th, people hailed GW's genius for removing hit penalties from moving vehicles, capping modifiers, etc... God forbid people would actually take an efficiency penalty / trade-off between damage output and manouvering.
It's not GW employees that always rail against stuff not always hitting/wounding/auto-killing everything it's pointed at. It's the players.
Some of that is how bass-ackwards "to-hit" modifiers were applied, though - why does shooting your fast-moving or stealthy unit make my plasma gun more likely to explode?
Why do re-rolls kick in before the modifiers, leaving you (in most cases) unable to reroll certain values which both players know will miss, but which are a hit at the step where rerolls are determined?
What’s more, the damage output of Destroyer units is even more consistent when in range of their alphas – the fallen nobles that are Skorpekh Lords and Lokhust Lords – thanks to the United in Destruction aura ability.
"The fallen nobles that are Skorpekh Lords and Lokhust Lords"
So either the old Destroyer Lord stays and is renamed to Lokhust Lord, or we will get even more new models
Also the fact they apparently forgot they already showed us the datasheets for the Heavy Lokhust Destroyer as the "new" weapon stats are the same (except the Blase keyword)
OH. The heavy destroyer's emetic weapon has blast.
Which does the minimum 3 hits against units of 6-10, when it already has a minimum of 3 from being a 3d3 weapon, and then jumps to 9 against 11+ models. No, still bad.
---
Still nothing to indicate that te locust lord isn't just the current destroyer lord.
---
Very useless article overall. Thin layer known fluff over rules we already know (except blast) and didn't clear up any ambiguity,
Matrindur wrote: "The fallen nobles that are Skorpekh Lords and Lokhust Lords"
So either the old Destroyer Lord stays and is renamed to Lokhust Lord, or we will get even more new models
It's still a toss up as to which it will be. While the old Warriors and the Monolith have been removed from the online store, the Flayed Ones which GW has confirmed as getting a new plastic kit are still listed (albeit as temporarily out of stock).
With the codex just a few weeks away (and preorders a week less than that), I'd think that an article on destroyers would show off a new model if there was one.
Thouh I was surprised by new flayed ones. Maybe their marketing department is just that weird.
Not showing the 4/5 model kits that we expect to be coming at some point yet gives them more to show us later. I expect the Necron release to be split much like the Sisters was, so holding off on showing anything for them right now doesn't seem like too bad a concept.
Considering there is still a huge range refresh happening, splitting releases in this way works for me.
Matrindur wrote: "The fallen nobles that are Skorpekh Lords and Lokhust Lords"
So either the old Destroyer Lord stays and is renamed to Lokhust Lord, or we will get even more new models
It's still a toss up as to which it will be. While the old Warriors and the Monolith have been removed from the online store, the Flayed Ones which GW has confirmed as getting a new plastic kit are still listed (albeit as temporarily out of stock).
Yeah - I'm about 70% convinced that this is GW experimenting with which approach will sell more models – update the kit with a great new sculpt and give it 1 or 2 new (and powerful) weapons that you can only get in the new box (warriors/Monolith) VS. create a *nearly* identical parallel unit with similar weaponry and nerf or otherwise just ignore the old models until they drift off to Legends.
In addition to the seemingly unnecessary name change there's also the fact that the Heavy Gauss is changing into some weird autocannon-ish type gun. So they can say - ah yes these old Heavy destroyers are now a mid-range Infantry hunter - you have to get the new Lokhurst destroyers for the tank killing gun.
Voss wrote: OH. The heavy destroyer's emetic weapon has blast.
Which does the minimum 3 hits against units of 6-10, when it already has a minimum of 3 from being a 3d3 weapon, and then jumps to 9 against 11+ models. No, still bad.
---
Still nothing to indicate that te locust lord isn't just the current destroyer lord.
---
Very useless article overall. Thin layer known fluff over rules we already know (except blast) and didn't clear up any ambiguity,
Up the emetic weapon to damage 2 and it suddenly is less rubbish, not sure what it needs to become good as such, blast wasn't it though.
Matrindur wrote: "The fallen nobles that are Skorpekh Lords and Lokhust Lords"
So either the old Destroyer Lord stays and is renamed to Lokhust Lord, or we will get even more new models
It's still a toss up as to which it will be. While the old Warriors and the Monolith have been removed from the online store, the Flayed Ones which GW has confirmed as getting a new plastic kit are still listed (albeit as temporarily out of stock).
Yeah - I'm about 70% convinced that this is GW experimenting with which approach will sell more models – update the kit with a great new sculpt and give it 1 or 2 new (and powerful) weapons that you can only get in the new box (warriors/Monolith) VS. create a *nearly* identical parallel unit with similar weaponry and nerf or otherwise just ignore the old models until they drift off to Legends.
In addition to the seemingly unnecessary name change there's also the fact that the Heavy Gauss is changing into some weird autocannon-ish type gun. So they can say - ah yes these old Heavy destroyers are now a mid-range Infantry hunter - you have to get the new Lokhurst destroyers for the tank killing gun.
Yep, that's gw's typical cash grab tactic: People have bought most of model x they're going to. So we nerf the living out of model x! Then re roll out a most expen$ive replacement! MO' MONEY! MO' MONEY! MO' MONEY! Just look at the monolith on 8e.
Yeah, if I have to get some new models because the old ones get nerfed to death someone's gonna get money for them but it ain't gonna be GW...
Matrindur wrote: "The fallen nobles that are Skorpekh Lords and Lokhust Lords"
So either the old Destroyer Lord stays and is renamed to Lokhust Lord, or we will get even more new models
It's still a toss up as to which it will be. While the old Warriors and the Monolith have been removed from the online store, the Flayed Ones which GW has confirmed as getting a new plastic kit are still listed (albeit as temporarily out of stock).
Yeah - I'm about 70% convinced that this is GW experimenting with which approach will sell more models – update the kit with a great new sculpt and give it 1 or 2 new (and powerful) weapons that you can only get in the new box (warriors/Monolith) VS. create a *nearly* identical parallel unit with similar weaponry and nerf or otherwise just ignore the old models until they drift off to Legends.
In addition to the seemingly unnecessary name change there's also the fact that the Heavy Gauss is changing into some weird autocannon-ish type gun. So they can say - ah yes these old Heavy destroyers are now a mid-range Infantry hunter - you have to get the new Lokhurst destroyers for the tank killing gun.
Yep, that's gw's typical cash grab tactic: People have bought most of model x they're going to. So we nerf the living out of model x! Then re roll out a most expen$ive replacement! MO' MONEY! MO' MONEY! MO' MONEY! Just look at the monolith on 8e.
Yeah, if I have to get some new models because the old ones get nerfed to death someone's gonna get money for them but it ain't gonna be GW...
Yeah! Like how they put out the new warrior kit, and the NEW weapon that they packaged in it instead of the one that everyone already had was...
....
...oh wait it was worse, at best some thing you'd take in the niche situation of doing something to deep strike warriors so they'd actually get to use it.
Their original gun is almost always better as it keeps the warriors safer from melee and you make up for any loss in damage in the fact that you can attack with it out to 24".
...Huh.
And, hold on, it seems like the wholly new weapon that they just gave to Heavy Destroyers is actually the same. The only gun you'd ever dream of using is the single shot anti-tank weapon from the old heavy destroyer model.
Matrindur wrote: "The fallen nobles that are Skorpekh Lords and Lokhust Lords"
So either the old Destroyer Lord stays and is renamed to Lokhust Lord, or we will get even more new models
It's still a toss up as to which it will be. While the old Warriors and the Monolith have been removed from the online store, the Flayed Ones which GW has confirmed as getting a new plastic kit are still listed (albeit as temporarily out of stock).
Yeah - I'm about 70% convinced that this is GW experimenting with which approach will sell more models – update the kit with a great new sculpt and give it 1 or 2 new (and powerful) weapons that you can only get in the new box (warriors/Monolith) VS. create a *nearly* identical parallel unit with similar weaponry and nerf or otherwise just ignore the old models until they drift off to Legends.
In addition to the seemingly unnecessary name change there's also the fact that the Heavy Gauss is changing into some weird autocannon-ish type gun. So they can say - ah yes these old Heavy destroyers are now a mid-range Infantry hunter - you have to get the new Lokhurst destroyers for the tank killing gun.
Yep, that's gw's typical cash grab tactic: People have bought most of model x they're going to. So we nerf the living out of model x! Then re roll out a most expen$ive replacement! MO' MONEY! MO' MONEY! MO' MONEY! Just look at the monolith on 8e.
Yeah, if I have to get some new models because the old ones get nerfed to death someone's gonna get money for them but it ain't gonna be GW...
Yeah! Like how they put out the new warrior kit, and the NEW weapon that they packaged in it instead of the one that everyone already had was...
....
...oh wait it was worse, at best some thing you'd take in the niche situation of doing something to deep strike warriors so they'd actually get to use it.
Their original gun is almost always better as it keeps the warriors safer from melee and you make up for any loss in damage in the fact that you can attack with it out to 24".
...Huh.
And, hold on, it seems like the wholly new weapon that they just gave to Heavy Destroyers is actually the same. The only gun you'd ever dream of using is the single shot anti-tank weapon from the old heavy destroyer model.
How does that work?
I'm not saying they always make the new option more powerful - sometimes just the fact that it's new and untested makes it look appealing and helps sell more models. I don't even think it's necessarily a bad thing. It often gives you a reason to buy a cool model because you can keep using your old ones and build the new ones with the new weapon options. To act as if they don't do that is just disingenuous.
I just said that IF they did keep the old version of the destroyers around while also introducing the Lokhurst, then I suspect it would be an experiment to see which sells more - and a bit more underhanded IMO.
To address your other points:
1) Gauss reapers - Regardless of the power level and whether or not it will synergize well with the updated dynastic codes, smaller board sizes and demands to be more aggressive on the board - it's still a new weapon only available in that kit providing an incentive to get it as opposed to simply releasing an updated warrior box with identical weaponry.
1-b) Also the new monolith which is coming with mini-death rays...
2) If they release the new plastic lokhurst destroyers as outright replacements of the existing destroyers then yes, some people will just keep using their old Heavy Destroyers as Lokhurst with the Gauss Destructor. But IF (big if) they are testing out a new method and they keep the old destroyers in the codex or move them straight to Legends, it's going to be a lot harder to run old H.D. as the new Lockhurst - even in casual games.
After reading the article I'm actually more convinced that these are going simply be a replacement for existing destroyers - the only thing that's still confusing me is why they bothered to give them a weird new Heavy Gauss gun - and if they did want to make a different & more powerful version of it - why did they change it so much for the Triarch Stalker?
BroodSpawn wrote: Not showing the 4/5 model kits that we expect to be coming at some point yet gives them more to show us later. I expect the Necron release to be split much like the Sisters was, so holding off on showing anything for them right now doesn't seem like too bad a concept.
Considering there is still a huge range refresh happening, splitting releases in this way works for me.
?? What gives you the idea that there is a split release happening?
This seems one and done with the codex (with some kits the week or two after).
Danit wrote: I mean monolith needs a replacement, that thing is hell to put together
Well we are getting one "soon" though interestingly its perhaps one of the biggest new iconic models and yet I don't think we've had an article on it yet.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: They said the destroyers are sub divided into four types, Lokhust being one of them. We already know what the other three are.
Therefore, the destroyers from previous editions have been effectively replaced by Lokhusts.
Also, I noticed something odd about the wording for the destroyer rules: can I only reroll a single die that scored a one, or can I reroll all ones?
I don't think the intent is say "lol can't use your old destroyers" this is just GW adding a subtype name to the destroyers we know, as they roll out 3 additional varients of destroyers.
Danit wrote: I mean monolith needs a replacement, that thing is hell to put together
Well we are getting one "soon" though interestingly its perhaps one of the biggest new iconic models and yet I don't think we've had an article on it yet.
The close up pictures were in one the previews.
Its a blackrock fabrege egg now.
Probably won't have the same assembly problems as the old one (holding 4 flat panels together that warped in transit or manufacturing), but it looks like it will need to be built and painted in at least three layers.
I thinks its way too busy to be honest.
BroodSpawn wrote: Not showing the 4/5 model kits that we expect to be coming at some point yet gives them more to show us later. I expect the Necron release to be split much like the Sisters was, so holding off on showing anything for them right now doesn't seem like too bad a concept.
Considering there is still a huge range refresh happening, splitting releases in this way works for me.
?? What gives you the idea that there is a split release happening?
This seems one and done with the codex (with some kits the week or two after).
He didn't say it's split for sure. But good odds. And it's sheer # of kits that are coming. GW doing big releases in split isn't that unusual. Sisters got 16 kits and had not much to use and got split into 3 waves with 2 months between wave 2 and 3.
It would not be weird at all for necrons to have split releases.
Warriors
reanimator
skorpek destroyers
skorpek lord
3(?) new cryptek's
6 pistol guy
new "wraiths"
new monolith
silet king
void dragon
That's already 12 kits and I'm sure there's more besides that.
GW lives and dies by impulse purchases. They don't want to dilute releases as it's the first few months that determine basically how many kits they sell of each new releaseses. Release too many and they are eating each other's sales.
BroodSpawn wrote: Not showing the 4/5 model kits that we expect to be coming at some point yet gives them more to show us later. I expect the Necron release to be split much like the Sisters was, so holding off on showing anything for them right now doesn't seem like too bad a concept.
Considering there is still a huge range refresh happening, splitting releases in this way works for me.
?? What gives you the idea that there is a split release happening?
This seems one and done with the codex (with some kits the week or two after).
I'm basing it on the Sisters release. And Lumineth. Both were split releases
Half the kits at launch, other half of the kits 3-ish months later.
Or do you honestly expect everything to drop (Warriors, 3-4 non-character destroyer kits, monolith, Silent King, terrain, flayed ones, at least 3+ infantry-ish character kits) to drop over the same release weeks as the Marines and at the same time?
Sisters had 3 (or 4?) release waves counting the army box. Lumineth 2 I think, counting the army box. Updated Necrons having 3 (including Indomitus/New Edition starter) doesn't seem far-fetched
Now if you want to decide that the army boxes don't count as a release wave then that's on you. But that seems like we're quibbling over something small.
I still stand by - the amount of kits coming suggests a split (or break between) release wave(s)
Luminoth, Necrons and Marines are all getting fragmented releases because of Corona. It's messed up a lot of the original release plans and its very clear that they are not coming out as GW intended. I suspect Luminoth would have had their regular batteltome and model release quite soon after their launch box.
Meanwhile Necrons and Marines were likely meant to get their new codex probably a week or two after Indomitus along with an initial wave of models. October was likely also a release month for them, but likely providing a second wave rather than being the main wave. WE don't even know if they are getting everything in October or if its going to be a partial load of models along with the codex with a further release later in the year (December) or into 2021.
Suffice to say this years releases have been a mess due to the world pandemic and its potentially going to happen again if/when the uk locksdown.
BroodSpawn wrote: Not showing the 4/5 model kits that we expect to be coming at some point yet gives them more to show us later. I expect the Necron release to be split much like the Sisters was, so holding off on showing anything for them right now doesn't seem like too bad a concept.
Considering there is still a huge range refresh happening, splitting releases in this way works for me.
?? What gives you the idea that there is a split release happening?
This seems one and done with the codex (with some kits the week or two after).
I'm basing it on the Sisters release. And Lumineth. Both were split releases
Half the kits at launch, other half of the kits 3-ish months later.
Or do you honestly expect everything to drop (Warriors, 3-4 non-character destroyer kits, monolith, Silent King, terrain, flayed ones, at least 3+ infantry-ish character kits) to drop over the same release weeks as the Marines and at the same time?
Yep. Because they've only mentioned October when talking about this release. There might be some bleedover Into November but not much (because only the preorder date counts, as we've been reminded before, and October has a lot of Saturdays just by the way the calendar falls)
I think GW wants to get this stuff out and get back to something approximating their release schedule.
And... Warriors are likely to be just the indomitus sprues in a box.
Destroyers are 1 ez build kit for the heavy, the ophidians, and quite probably reboxing the skorpekh sprue. And they may not even do that. I won't be entirely surprised to see a chunk of indomitus get thrown into a 'start collecting' and those unit not get individual boxes, much like the EZ chaos warriors last year.
Characters are simple, they're traditionally tagalongs anyway. There are a couple other kits you didn't list, but 2, maybe 3 Saturday's will do it. The only thing that would stop GW from releasing things this way is if they really want to get something else out.
Marines are easier, since anything that doesn't fit in immediately in a week or two can come alongside the supplements that follow.
BroodSpawn wrote: Not showing the 4/5 model kits that we expect to be coming at some point yet gives them more to show us later. I expect the Necron release to be split much like the Sisters was, so holding off on showing anything for them right now doesn't seem like too bad a concept.
Considering there is still a huge range refresh happening, splitting releases in this way works for me.
?? What gives you the idea that there is a split release happening?
This seems one and done with the codex (with some kits the week or two after).
I'm basing it on the Sisters release. And Lumineth. Both were split releases
Half the kits at launch, other half of the kits 3-ish months later.
Or do you honestly expect everything to drop (Warriors, 3-4 non-character destroyer kits, monolith, Silent King, terrain, flayed ones, at least 3+ infantry-ish character kits) to drop over the same release weeks as the Marines and at the same time?
Yep. Because they've only mentioned October when talking about this release. There might be some bleedover Into November but not much (because only the preorder date counts, as we've been reminded before, and October has a lot of Saturdays just by the way the calendar falls)
I think GW wants to get this stuff out and get back to something approximating their release schedule.
And... Warriors are likely to be just the indomitus sprues in a box.
Destroyers are 1 ez build kit for the heavy, the ophidians, and quite probably reboxing the skorpekh sprue. And they may not even do that. I won't be entirely surprised to see a chunk of indomitus get thrown into a 'start collecting' and those unit not get individual boxes, much like the EZ chaos warriors last year.
Characters are simple, they're traditionally tagalongs anyway. There are a couple other kits you didn't list, but 2, maybe 3 Saturday's will do it. The only thing that would stop GW from releasing things this way is if they really want to get something else out.
Marines are easier, since anything that doesn't fit in immediately in a week or two can come alongside the supplements that follow.
I think I mentioned it earlier in this thread that I genuinely worry that we'll see marines spread over the supplements. It makes no difference really, its the same number of kits, but the complaining both for both having to wait 2-3 months for kits and "OMG ANOTHER MARINE RELEASE WEEK IT'S BEEN 3 MONTHS" will be unbearable.
Mr_Rose wrote: Then by that measure, Newcrons have had a split release; first Indomitus then the starters, now finally the codex and more new things.
But that is not what is typically thought of as a split release.
Sob had starter set and then 3 waves, 2 months between 2nd and 3rd.
So even without starter box it was 3 waves with comparable kit count and without being intermingled with marines with just as many if not more kits at around same time
BroodSpawn wrote: Not showing the 4/5 model kits that we expect to be coming at some point yet gives them more to show us later. I expect the Necron release to be split much like the Sisters was, so holding off on showing anything for them right now doesn't seem like too bad a concept.
Considering there is still a huge range refresh happening, splitting releases in this way works for me.
?? What gives you the idea that there is a split release happening?
This seems one and done with the codex (with some kits the week or two after).
I'm basing it on the Sisters release. And Lumineth. Both were split releases
Half the kits at launch, other half of the kits 3-ish months later.
Or do you honestly expect everything to drop (Warriors, 3-4 non-character destroyer kits, monolith, Silent King, terrain, flayed ones, at least 3+ infantry-ish character kits) to drop over the same release weeks as the Marines and at the same time?
Yep. Because they've only mentioned October when talking about this release. There might be some bleedover Into November but not much (because only the preorder date counts, as we've been reminded before, and October has a lot of Saturdays just by the way the calendar falls)
I think GW wants to get this stuff out and get back to something approximating their release schedule.
And... Warriors are likely to be just the indomitus sprues in a box.
Destroyers are 1 ez build kit for the heavy, the ophidians, and quite probably reboxing the skorpekh sprue. And they may not even do that. I won't be entirely surprised to see a chunk of indomitus get thrown into a 'start collecting' and those unit not get individual boxes, much like the EZ chaos warriors last year.
Characters are simple, they're traditionally tagalongs anyway. There are a couple other kits you didn't list, but 2, maybe 3 Saturday's will do it. The only thing that would stop GW from releasing things this way is if they really want to get something else out.
Marines are easier, since anything that doesn't fit in immediately in a week or two can come alongside the supplements that follow.
With sob they mentioned january. Didn't mean all came in january...gw unsurprisingly opted to maximize sales
Tyel wrote: Its strange, the Hexmark has grown on me. The Silent King has not.
I’m largely fine with his model, could be a bit more distinctive. Maybe give him a nice deathmask or something.
What I’m not fine with is the incomprehensible extent to which they’re mangling his lore so far.
yeah, a mega maniac with delusions of godhood? At what part of his lore has that ever happened? And he should be holding a deathmask. Of gold.... that looks like a certain fallen Primarch.
Definitely raised an eyebrow reading his lore.
Just didn't seem to fit with everything we know about the Silent King so far. Kinda cool his cloak is flayed c'tan though.
As for the whole Blood Angel/mask of the primarch shtick, I think it was revealed he hadn't met Sanguinius and was just trying to manipulate the Blood Angels. The whole timeline doesn't work, since he wouldn't have been in the galaxy when the primarchs were still around.
BroodSpawn wrote: Not showing the 4/5 model kits that we expect to be coming at some point yet gives them more to show us later. I expect the Necron release to be split much like the Sisters was, so holding off on showing anything for them right now doesn't seem like too bad a concept.
Considering there is still a huge range refresh happening, splitting releases in this way works for me.
?? What gives you the idea that there is a split release happening?
This seems one and done with the codex (with some kits the week or two after).
I'm basing it on the Sisters release. And Lumineth. Both were split releases
Half the kits at launch, other half of the kits 3-ish months later.
Or do you honestly expect everything to drop (Warriors, 3-4 non-character destroyer kits, monolith, Silent King, terrain, flayed ones, at least 3+ infantry-ish character kits) to drop over the same release weeks as the Marines and at the same time?
Yep. Because they've only mentioned October when talking about this release. There might be some bleedover Into November but not much (because only the preorder date counts, as we've been reminded before, and October has a lot of Saturdays just by the way the calendar falls)
I think GW wants to get this stuff out and get back to something approximating their release schedule.
And... Warriors are likely to be just the indomitus sprues in a box.
Destroyers are 1 ez build kit for the heavy, the ophidians, and quite probably reboxing the skorpekh sprue. And they may not even do that. I won't be entirely surprised to see a chunk of indomitus get thrown into a 'start collecting' and those unit not get individual boxes, much like the EZ chaos warriors last year.
Characters are simple, they're traditionally tagalongs anyway. There are a couple other kits you didn't list, but 2, maybe 3 Saturday's will do it. The only thing that would stop GW from releasing things this way is if they really want to get something else out.
Marines are easier, since anything that doesn't fit in immediately in a week or two can come alongside the supplements that follow.
I think I mentioned it earlier in this thread that I genuinely worry that we'll see marines spread over the supplements. It makes no difference really, its the same number of kits, but the complaining both for both having to wait 2-3 months for kits and "OMG ANOTHER MARINE RELEASE WEEK IT'S BEEN 3 MONTHS" will be unbearable.
I'm kind of resigned to the reality that there will be giants, necrons, marines and Death Guard*, and that's it for the rest of 2020. And then Dark Angels and finally something new in 'early 2021.'
*and DG may just be the book and one character.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
GaroRobe wrote: Definitely raised an eyebrow reading his lore.
Just didn't seem to fit with everything we know about the Silent King so far. Kinda cool his cloak is flayed c'tan though.
.
Yeah, I though the SK blurb in the last codex was that after biotransference, he slunk off embarassed and ashamed of what he'd done to his species. And now he wants to (somehow) switch back and is super scared the tyranids will eat everything first.
Thus was the Silent King’s order given, and as the last tomb world sealed its vaults, he destroyed the command protocols by which he had controlled his people, for he knew he had failed them utterly. Without a backward glance, Szarekh, last of the Silent Kings, sailed into the blackness of intergalactic space, there to find whatever measure of solace or penance he could.
This does not fit with the theme of hubris and 'insane megalomaniac with aspirations of godhood'
Granted, I didn't care about the SK then, and I still don't now, but I can't figure out how they went from what was essentially a twisted redemption arc to 'lol, another mad alien overlord!!!'
Voluntarily destroying the commands that gave him absolute control of his species absolutely does not fit with insane megalomania.
Tyel wrote: Its strange, the Hexmark has grown on me. The Silent King has not.
I’m largely fine with his model, could be a bit more distinctive. Maybe give him a nice deathmask or something.
What I’m not fine with is the incomprehensible extent to which they’re mangling his lore so far.
How did they ruin his lore?
"insane megalomaniac with aspirations of godhood."
Megalomaniac? Didn't he willingly destroy most of the controls he would have had over other necrons and exile himself for the galaxy?
Aspirations of godhood was never part of the Silent King's lore, as far as I'm aware. And we already have the necron wanting to be a god in the form of the Illuminor. It's just a weird description of the SK and just seems to contradict everything we've known so far.
Tyel wrote: Its strange, the Hexmark has grown on me. The Silent King has not.
I’m largely fine with his model, could be a bit more distinctive. Maybe give him a nice deathmask or something.
What I’m not fine with is the incomprehensible extent to which they’re mangling his lore so far.
How did they ruin his lore?
"insane megalomaniac with aspirations of godhood."
Megalomaniac? Didn't he willingly destroy most of the controls he would have had over other necrons and exile himself for the galaxy?
Aspirations of godhood was never part of the Silent King's lore, as far as I'm aware. And we already have the necron wanting to be a god in the form of the Illuminor. It's just a weird description of the SK and just seems to contradict everything we've known so far.
The silent king is effectively... He’s like if the Emperor survived his long string of screw ups intact, went into a long period of reflective seclusion then came back to deal with a threat he couldn’t ignore.
So he absolutely shouldn’t be characterised like a peak of the great crusade Emperor.
Super Ready wrote: How long has the Silent King been gone? ...who's to say his viewpoint hasn't changed in that time?
There’s not really a lot of point to doing damage control apologetics. If you can’t fully justify this change as good, interesting writing then vague half-explanations don’t add anything.
It’s okay to dislike a majority of GW’s modern lore output and still enjoy it when they actually manage to hit on something.
It’s okay to dislike a majority of GW’s modern lore output and still enjoy it when they actually manage to hit on something.
This is pretty much me in a nutshell. I went through a period years ago where I'd actually be annoyed by the mediocre or even abysmal lore they often give us. Now I just ignore whatever I don't like and appreciate the stuff that's still good. Works out a lot better for me.
Tyel wrote: Its strange, the Hexmark has grown on me. The Silent King has not.
I’m largely fine with his model, could be a bit more distinctive. Maybe give him a nice deathmask or something.
What I’m not fine with is the incomprehensible extent to which they’re mangling his lore so far.
How did they ruin his lore?
"insane megalomaniac with aspirations of godhood."
Megalomaniac? Didn't he willingly destroy most of the controls he would have had over other necrons and exile himself for the galaxy?
Aspirations of godhood was never part of the Silent King's lore, as far as I'm aware. And we already have the necron wanting to be a god in the form of the Illuminor. It's just a weird description of the SK and just seems to contradict everything we've known so far.
I suggest we wait til the Codex to see more detail about the Silent King's motivations. While not trying to be an apologetic for GW, the stuff in the Pariah Nexus and the Indomitus novel does suggest the Silent King is busy trying to A) shield the galaxy from the warp B) re-unify the Necrons whether they want to or not. Maybe B) is what the "megalomania" refers to.
Lore wise I'm loving that the Necrons are a big villan of the setting but just happen to want to beat the tyranids and chaos. Humans, Orks, eldar, Tau are all beneath them already.
But if they win the horrors of the pariah nexus are likely for the whole human race which is such great lore growth.
I know that 40K has sort of, cycled in and out it's big bad. Chaos had the place for a good time, tyranids had it, orks even had it for a while and now it's crons. Will Tau eventually have a turn as the prominent enemy of the scene?
cody.d. wrote: I know that 40K has sort of, cycled in and out it's big bad. Chaos had the place for a good time, tyranids had it, orks even had it for a while and now it's crons. Will Tau eventually have a turn as the prominent enemy of the scene?
Tau aren’t really powerful enough to be a ‘big bad’, or even really bad enough to be.
cody.d. wrote: I know that 40K has sort of, cycled in and out it's big bad. Chaos had the place for a good time, tyranids had it, orks even had it for a while and now it's crons. Will Tau eventually have a turn as the prominent enemy of the scene?
Tau are, at present, largely contained due to them not having regular warp travel capability.
However, the more Imperial Worlds they capture? The greater the chance of them converting Navigators. They may convert another warp capable species. If that happens? All bets are off.
buddha wrote: Lore wise I'm loving that the Necrons are a big villan of the setting but just happen to want to beat the tyranids and chaos. Humans, Orks, eldar, Tau are all beneath them already.
But if they win the horrors of the pariah nexus are likely for the whole human race which is such great lore growth.
Ugh. I'd rather the game didn't become an extended metaphor for crippling depression, thanks.
Orks, Tyranids Necrons and Chaos are the only factions that can currently rise to be the big bad of the galaxy. Eldar might if the Yinnari brings around a revival of their race and puts them back on the map. Dark Eldar and Tau are the two who are both just too small to make it big on the major scene. Though both Eldar and Dark Eldar might twist another faction to do their bidding (without the faction realising).
Tau are out on their own and likely will remain so for a long time. At least until something major happens. Thing is even if they were to suddenly secure a few thousand worlds and become a major threat it would take time to breed up enough Tau so that it was Tau and not "Imperial Guard working for Tau" as the core of the army
Weren't Tau meant to be basically ''insert whatever small xenos race'' faction? Unless there will be a massive change in the fluff I cannot see them not only as the big bad but also as important galactic player.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: The Tau are the nicest faction anyway, they can't be the big bad. They could be the big Good, I guess.
There's good guys in 40k in a few different factions as like, individuals. Tau are one of them.
But try not to let the shiny battlesuits distract you from the nightmarish caste system. Heck: Consider that most fire warrior teams are 12 man, most battlesuit teams are 3 man, and that promotion to battlesuit pilot becomes available when you hit the age of 16.
That average lifespan of 40 years figure people throw around for Tau? Fire caste are pulling that average waaaay down.
In one story I saw that the tau had managed to reverse genestealer genetic corruption in humans.
Now genestealers are tyranid, and if the tau technology can undo genestealer genetic corruption in an alien species it makes me wonder of the tau's technology and science could create a genetic weapon against the tyranids that they could not overcome.
Tau have one main barrier which is population size. Next to the other great powers, even the fallen Eldar, the Tau are very numerically challenged. Heck if the Imperium really wanted they could likely crush the Tau under sheer weight of numbers.
The way I see it either tau will find a way to repopulate at a rapid rate or GW might fragment them into two armies. One being core tau with the pathfinders, warriors and battle suits; and another formed likely around a Kroot core, but essentially comprising of multiple Xenos races. Represenitng a larger allied force of Xenos on the fringe of the Imperium banding together to stand against them.
Which is basically what I believe the plan was for core Tau at launch; only the battlesuits really took off in a big way and GW ran with it, leaving the other xenos behind. Heck after Eldar, Kroot and Tau Xenos allied races are the next that should be in line for a major update.
Sotahullu wrote: Or Tau can embrace their precious, heretical AI technology and start producing robotic footsoldiers.
Excellent point...they start making modern Men of Iron...which become corrupted by Chaos (as per the Gaunt's Ghost novel) and become another faction...a machine intellect which drives a new schism in the Mechanicus AND the Dark Mechanicum.
cody.d. wrote: I know that 40K has sort of, cycled in and out it's big bad. Chaos had the place for a good time, tyranids had it, orks even had it for a while and now it's crons. Will Tau eventually have a turn as the prominent enemy of the scene?
Tau are, at present, largely contained due to them not having regular warp travel capability.
However, the more Imperial Worlds they capture? The greater the chance of them converting Navigators. They may convert another warp capable species. If that happens? All bets are off.
Tau have converted at least 4 Warp Capable species already(one of them an entirely psychic race). According to the Farsight novels, 3 of them(humanity, Nicassar, and Demiurg) have advisory seats on the Expansion Councils. Literally the only thing holding them back from using these species as more than allied agent species is the Ethereal Caste(in universe) and GW making it more a thing.
Overread wrote: Tau have one main barrier which is population size. Next to the other great powers, even the fallen Eldar, the Tau are very numerically challenged. Heck if the Imperium really wanted they could likely crush the Tau under sheer weight of numbers.
The way I see it either tau will find a way to repopulate at a rapid rate or GW might fragment them into two armies. One being core tau with the pathfinders, warriors and battle suits; and another formed likely around a Kroot core, but essentially comprising of multiple Xenos races. Represenitng a larger allied force of Xenos on the fringe of the Imperium banding together to stand against them.
Which is basically what I believe the plan was for core Tau at launch; only the battlesuits really took off in a big way and GW ran with it, leaving the other xenos behind. Heck after Eldar, Kroot and Tau Xenos allied races are the next that should be in line for a major update.
GW could/should follow the groundwork laid by Dawn of War. One warrior path with emphasis on suits, the other with emphasis on client races.
Overread wrote: Heck if the Imperium really wanted they could likely crush the Tau under sheer weight of numbers.
That's the traditional method. Tau severely struggle to fight guard due to the numerical disadvantage, but for marines they're pretty much the worst case scenario: Even a stealth suit is superior to standard power armour, a large Tau invasion should severely outnumber an entire chapter on crisis suits alone, they're well stocked on weapons that can punch clean through power armour, even their basic troop rifle is better than a bolter and their rapid hit and run hold no ground style of warfare is difficult to disrupt via standard marine tactics.
It's actually an inexcusable waste of resources to deploy marines against Tau most of the time.
changemod wrote: But try not to let the shiny battlesuits distract you from the nightmarish caste system.
Less nightmarish than the government on most Imperium planets.
High-ranking Tau don't hunt other tau for sport.
changemod wrote: Heck: Consider that most fire warrior teams are 12 man, most battlesuit teams are 3 man, and that promotion to battlesuit pilot becomes available when you hit the age of 16.
At 16 you can promote from a white shield to a full Imperial Guardsman! Much nicer than getting a silly battlesuit.
Overread wrote: Heck if the Imperium really wanted they could likely crush the Tau under sheer weight of numbers.
That's the traditional method. Tau severely struggle to fight guard due to the numerical disadvantage, but for marines they're pretty much the worst case scenario: Even a stealth suit is superior to standard power armour, a large Tau invasion should severely outnumber an entire chapter on crisis suits alone, they're well stocked on weapons that can punch clean through power armour, even their basic troop rifle is better than a bolter and their rapid hit and run hold no ground style of warfare is difficult to disrupt via standard marine tactics.
It's actually an inexcusable waste of resources to deploy marines against Tau most of the time.
hmm yes and no - a Tau suit is powerful and technologicaly advanced but designed around ranged combat, astartes excell in close combat - especially in cities etc where they can easily close in on enemies. Normal marines will and have destroy suits in close combat, Primaris just make it worse as they can enegage and survive more effectively at range.
Marines have been shown to be at disadvantage when fighting large Tau formations on their own, especially in open theatres.
But throw in support from Ad Mech or guard infantry and vehicles and the situation changes with the Astartes able to do what they do best - perform precise and devestating strikes.
The Tau hit and run only works if they do not have to protect ground/civilians/tech - take the war to them and the situation changes.
Tbh this whole "the end of the world is coming" is pointless if GW never actually go anywhere with it. I mean 8th was meant to be putting Chaos back in the hot seat - as far as I can tell however their only meaningful gains (sorry planet red shirt) were in the closing days of 7th.
Tau may be a small race, and Eldar a dying race - but they still outnumber Marines many times over. So in terms of putting them in the plot, its really just a matter of imagination. Because you know Marines will be there.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: The Tau are the nicest faction anyway, they can't be the big bad. They could be the big Good, I guess.
Only someone who never read any Tau fluff can say that.
Especially recent one. Or FFG where Tau create organizations worse than ISIS.
changemod wrote: That's the traditional method. Tau severely struggle to fight guard due to the numerical disadvantage, but for marines they're pretty much the worst case scenario: Even a stealth suit is superior to standard power armour, a large Tau invasion should severely outnumber an entire chapter on crisis suits alone, they're well stocked on weapons that can punch clean through power armour, even their basic troop rifle is better than a bolter and their rapid hit and run hold no ground style of warfare is difficult to disrupt via standard marine tactics.
Uh, what? Handguns don't win the wars. If they did, Soviet Union would rule the world, because AK-47 was vastly better gun than anything USA fielded until late 80s. In reality, single marine should easily slaughter whole Tau squads, because he is faster, thougher, and smarter to an absurd degree, has armour rivaling their battlesuits, and has more combat experience than the whole squad put together - his gun doing slightly smaller pew pew doesn't matter as long as it can reliably kill Tau (and it can). Alas, Tau books are written by people who think tabletop is holy and Tau are just as good as marines, instead of being slower, weaker, short-sighted human teenage conscripts. Add to that some GW writers forgetting Tau are supposed to be developing race and spanking them to above Necron levels and you have perfect blend resulting in Plot Sues.
Thankfully, the warp mess they made in their attempt of recreating Imperial FTL (instead of just making it 20x better as would be the case just edition ago) might indicate this is (slowly) starting to change.
1. How to play tactical terrain games. 2. How much terrain you can choose per the 4 various size of games. 3. The complete basic rules for 40K reprinted. 4. The above includes all the secondary objectives we already have, pus a few more building specific ones. 5. 6x4 missions, one set of 6 per size of game.
ugh. Every time I think I vaguely understand what GW's release model is, they do something even weirder.
I'm comparing this book to the CA2020: GT mission pack (the one that came with the points book).
They've done everyone the amazing disservice of reprinting at least half the book (secondary objectives, 'battle ready' definition, basic rules, actions, strats, strategic reserves, objective markers, rare rules, rules glossary), and by golly if all the page numbers aren't different. That sure makes communication and rules reference even more horribly complicated, good show there, you crazy editors.
Fun bonus: this book doesn't seem to have the force org charts either, because why have those in any handy size reference books on the go?
---
Anyway, comparing the table of contents, pages 4-17 seem to be new, and pages 26-70 are hopefully new missions. Everything else is copypasta, as far as I can tell.
Its a spiral bound flip book in the same style as the GT book, but 104 pages rather than 96 (but lacks the points book). Same New Zealand price (NZ$83), so $40 US 58 small format pages of new information (hopefully new, anyway)
@HBMC- interestingly, the store page claims 18 new missions, not 24. Unless some of your 6x4 missions aren't new, which is quite possible.
Hmm... I thought it was 6 missions per size of game. Guess it's only 3x6, as they're lumping 2000 point games and anything beyond 2000 points into the same category.
I mean, like it matters anyway? All 9th missions so far just appear to be some variation on setting up 4-8 objective markers in a vaguely symmetrical manner and then you score just store points in increments of 5.
Could they have made them any more dull? I'm not sure...
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: The Tau are the nicest faction anyway, they can't be the big bad. They could be the big Good, I guess.
Only someone who never read any Tau fluff can say that.
Especially recent one. Or FFG where Tau create organizations worse than ISIS.
changemod wrote: That's the traditional method. Tau severely struggle to fight guard due to the numerical disadvantage, but for marines they're pretty much the worst case scenario: Even a stealth suit is superior to standard power armour, a large Tau invasion should severely outnumber an entire chapter on crisis suits alone, they're well stocked on weapons that can punch clean through power armour, even their basic troop rifle is better than a bolter and their rapid hit and run hold no ground style of warfare is difficult to disrupt via standard marine tactics.
Uh, what? Handguns don't win the wars. If they did, Soviet Union would rule the world, because AK-47 was vastly better gun than anything USA fielded until late 80s. In reality, single marine should easily slaughter whole Tau squads, because he is faster, thougher, and smarter to an absurd degree, has armour rivaling their battlesuits, and has more combat experience than the whole squad put together - his gun doing slightly smaller pew pew doesn't matter as long as it can reliably kill Tau (and it can). Alas, Tau books are written by people who think tabletop is holy and Tau are just as good as marines, instead of being slower, weaker, short-sighted human teenage conscripts. Add to that some GW writers forgetting Tau are supposed to be developing race and spanking them to above Necron levels and you have perfect blend resulting in Plot Sues.
Thankfully, the warp mess they made in their attempt of recreating Imperial FTL (instead of just making it 20x better as would be the case just edition ago) might indicate this is (slowly) starting to change.
There’s a lot of fire warriors for each marine. Their gun being better than a bolter is therefore a factor given bolters are adequate for loyalists and heretics to shoot one another up.
Why do you think I listed that factor last though? It’s not a big enough deal on its own, but combined with the other factors it’s another nail in the coffin.
I’m not saying marines are completely useless against Tau, but they’re certainly the least efficient target to deploy marines against out of the races with codexes, especially when you consider guard are already just short of a hard counter to Tau.
Overread wrote: Orks, Tyranids Necrons and Chaos are the only factions that can currently rise to be the big bad of the galaxy. Eldar might if the Yinnari brings around a revival of their race and puts them back on the map. Dark Eldar and Tau are the two who are both just too small to make it big on the major scene. Though both Eldar and Dark Eldar might twist another faction to do their bidding (without the faction realising).
Tau are out on their own and likely will remain so for a long time. At least until something major happens. Thing is even if they were to suddenly secure a few thousand worlds and become a major threat it would take time to breed up enough Tau so that it was Tau and not "Imperial Guard working for Tau" as the core of the army
The "something" being gw deciding so. You think this is some real story gw just records. It's piece of text gw writes for sake of selling models. They want to push tau they can make them the big bad with snap of finger inventing whatever techno babble needed. They find race that sorts out ftl and hey presto they open up reserve vaults containing trillions of battle suits and battle fleet that have been waiting for this. Done.
Overread wrote: Orks, Tyranids Necrons and Chaos are the only factions that can currently rise to be the big bad of the galaxy. Eldar might if the Yinnari brings around a revival of their race and puts them back on the map. Dark Eldar and Tau are the two who are both just too small to make it big on the major scene. Though both Eldar and Dark Eldar might twist another faction to do their bidding (without the faction realising).
Tau are out on their own and likely will remain so for a long time. At least until something major happens. Thing is even if they were to suddenly secure a few thousand worlds and become a major threat it would take time to breed up enough Tau so that it was Tau and not "Imperial Guard working for Tau" as the core of the army
The "something" being gw deciding so. You think this is some real story gw just records. It's piece of text gw writes for sake of selling models. They want to push tau they can make them the big bad with snap of finger inventing whatever techno babble needed. They find race that sorts out ftl and hey presto they open up reserve vaults containing trillions of battle suits and battle fleet that have been waiting for this. Done.
Yes the lore can evolve, but we have to stick with what we've got otherwise discussions lose all common ground for discussion. If we all just invent things (like GW does) then we can't really discuss lore because we'd all be inventing different ideas for the future. So we have to discuss matters as they are now within the lore. So as of right now Tau can't rise to be a major threat.
Also you missed out the other idea. Instead of rising Tau up, you lower the others down. Tyranids spark a vast invasion theorised to be the motherload (10th edition after the 9th edition Necron build up). A vast war across all fronts, Ork, Man, Eldar, Necron and Tau standing shoulder to shoulder to hip only just winning. Leaving the Galaxy burned out; Humanity fragmented, Tyranids broken, Orks Ravaged, Eldar hanging on as they were but now no longer outnumbered etc.... Thus the Tau manage to rise up because the other races got knocked down multiple pegs and - tabletop wise - it has no impact.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: The Tau are the nicest faction anyway, they can't be the big bad. They could be the big Good, I guess.
Only someone who never read any Tau fluff can say that.
Especially recent one. Or FFG where Tau create organizations worse than ISIS.
changemod wrote: That's the traditional method. Tau severely struggle to fight guard due to the numerical disadvantage, but for marines they're pretty much the worst case scenario: Even a stealth suit is superior to standard power armour, a large Tau invasion should severely outnumber an entire chapter on crisis suits alone, they're well stocked on weapons that can punch clean through power armour, even their basic troop rifle is better than a bolter and their rapid hit and run hold no ground style of warfare is difficult to disrupt via standard marine tactics.
Uh, what? Handguns don't win the wars. If they did, Soviet Union would rule the world, because AK-47 was vastly better gun than anything USA fielded until late 80s. In reality, single marine should easily slaughter whole Tau squads, because he is faster, thougher, and smarter to an absurd degree, has armour rivaling their battlesuits, and has more combat experience than the whole squad put together - his gun doing slightly smaller pew pew doesn't matter as long as it can reliably kill Tau (and it can). Alas, Tau books are written by people who think tabletop is holy and Tau are just as good as marines, instead of being slower, weaker, short-sighted human teenage conscripts. Add to that some GW writers forgetting Tau are supposed to be developing race and spanking them to above Necron levels and you have perfect blend resulting in Plot Sues.
Thankfully, the warp mess they made in their attempt of recreating Imperial FTL (instead of just making it 20x better as would be the case just edition ago) might indicate this is (slowly) starting to change.
There’s a lot of fire warriors for each marine. Their gun being better than a bolter is therefore a factor given bolters are adequate for loyalists and heretics to shoot one another up.
Why do you think I listed that factor last though? It’s not a big enough deal on its own, but combined with the other factors it’s another nail in the coffin.
I’m not saying marines are completely useless against Tau, but they’re certainly the least efficient target to deploy marines against out of the races with codexes, especially when you consider guard are already just short of a hard counter to Tau.
Marines do fine against Tau when used effectively or as part of a combined arms force. Tau really don't like fighting against Marines either. If the Marines do not treat the Tau as an enemy worthy of respect (in terms of effectivness) - they will get owned - but thats the same as Tryanids, Necrons etc.
Tau Fire Warriors are good, they are well trained, discplined and effective - but even hitting a moving Marine is not that easy, something that does not come across in the game.
we need to stop talking about "Big enemies" of an edition. The Death Guard, after all, factored into one big event and then where basicly forgotten about until their PA supplement. 9th edition isn't going to be the "all about necrons" edition.
BrianDavion wrote: we need to stop talking about "Big enemies" of an edition. The Death Guard, after all, factored into one big event and then where basicly forgotten about until their PA supplement. 9th edition isn't going to be the "all about necrons" edition.
Yeah it's less a narrative thing and more of an artwork theme, keeping all the genereic 40k products consistent. I'm sure there will be more scenery & starter sets coming with Ultramarines vs Necrons models on the box up until they're ready to switch to 10E.
Mr Morden wrote: Tau really don't like fighting against Marines either.
Really? Because the pattern I’ve seen is repeated humiliation. First major marine invasion of a tau world, they tried drop podding an entire company in to a population centre. The tau commander on the scene replied by equipping plasma guns to an entire cadre of crisis suits, counter dropping them and wiping the company out.
In a pretty recent campaign we had the speedy chapter and the stealth chapter try to take Tau on, speedy chapter got outran and outflanked at every turn to the point of complete frustration whilst, the chapter master of the stealth chapter took a decloaking fusion cannon to the chest at point blank range.
It’s absolutely not a matter of Tau superiority, they lack many, many advantages the imperials have... but they’re a pretty hard counter to marines in specific and the only way that could realistically be mitigated is by making marines a much less rare resource.
BrianDavion wrote: we need to stop talking about "Big enemies" of an edition. The Death Guard, after all, factored into one big event and then where basicly forgotten about until their PA supplement. 9th edition isn't going to be the "all about necrons" edition.
While true, it sure feels like there is a lot more going on here with the Necrons than the Deathguard in 8th.
We've already gotten crusade supplements for the Pariah Nexus, multiple novels coming, etc.
I'm sure that it won't be the entire edition or anything, but so far it does seem like there is a much bigger narrative and associated product push for 9th than there was for the Deathguard in 8th.
BrianDavion wrote: we need to stop talking about "Big enemies" of an edition. The Death Guard, after all, factored into one big event and then where basicly forgotten about until their PA supplement. 9th edition isn't going to be the "all about necrons" edition.
We already know that several hundred years after the Pariah Nexus was discovered... nothing much has happened, so there isn't really anywhere for the new 9th ed. Necron storyline to go.
Mr Morden wrote: Tau really don't like fighting against Marines either.
Really? Because the pattern I’ve seen is repeated humiliation. First major marine invasion of a tau world, they tried drop podding an entire company in to a population centre. The tau commander on the scene replied by equipping plasma guns to an entire cadre of crisis suits, counter dropping them and wiping the company out.
In a pretty recent campaign we had the speedy chapter and the stealth chapter try to take Tau on, speedy chapter got outran and outflanked at every turn to the point of complete frustration whilst, the chapter master of the stealth chapter took a decloaking fusion cannon to the chest at point blank range.
It’s absolutely not a matter of Tau superiority, they lack many, many advantages the imperials have... but they’re a pretty hard counter to marines in specific and the only way that could realistically be mitigated is by making marines a much less rare resource.
As I said
it goes both ways - IF the Marines do't treat the Tau as a formidable enemy - they can do very badly,.
I think the first one you mention is the original Taros campaign? In that yes, the Marines were finally forstalled and suffered heavy casulties in the city battle - but so did the Tau - lots of material and worse actual Tau. Later the combination of Warhounds and Marines is unstopable, destroying anything the Tau throw at them until
they deploy a modified Tiger Shark, killing one Warhound and making the Ad Mech withdraw.
In the recent campaign, the war is mixed, the Tau achieve considable victories against the Marines, but again when the Marines re assess their enemies its more even handed - as the raven Guard and Whiet Scars do achieve some victories.
The arrogance of the Astartes is its own weakness, plus often the assumption they can fight their way through, whatever the enemy.
Marines excell in brutalility and close quarter fighting - thats a place the Tau do not want to be facing them.
Voss wrote: Can the 'measuring contest' between tau and marines go somewhere else?
It has jack to do with any sort of releases.
In all fairness, I made a pretty straightforward point and now I’m having to inexplicably defend it against walls of text that seem to, at the most generous interpretation, have completely missed it.
Voss wrote: Can the 'measuring contest' between tau and marines go somewhere else?
It has jack to do with any sort of releases.
In all fairness, I made a pretty straightforward point and now I’m having to inexplicably defend it against walls of text that seem to, at the most generous interpretation, have completely missed it.
Before I am further misrepresented - I merely said its not that simple.....
Happy to talk elsewhere on this subject.
Switching to the actual topic - is there any actual new info on coming releases.
So the new tactical terrain book is kinda a mini rule book but without all the info you need to play the game? - force org charts being the most obvious omission?
Codexes and a few Marine things seem to be confirmed as pre-orders next week. Should hopefully be some big chunky War-com articles on the new codexes to bring it in. Feel its surprising we only got the Destroyer article this week.
Tyel wrote: Codexes and a few Marine things seem to be confirmed as pre-orders next week. Should hopefully be some big chunky War-com articles on the new codexes to bring it in. Feel its surprising we only got the Destroyer article this week.
Even more so considering the AoS Gargants hints they've been dropping all week. Unless its a triple release. Gartants is just 1 kit and a book.
Tyel wrote: Codexes and a few Marine things seem to be confirmed as pre-orders next week. Should hopefully be some big chunky War-com articles on the new codexes to bring it in. Feel its surprising we only got the Destroyer article this week.
Both codexes? If we get both out of the way quickly could that mean that they'll finally get around to the Imperial Armour Compendium?
That's not really surprising. Interesting that the dice cost more than the recently released fw legion dice.
Well, one more week to "wait and see" how the new codexes stack up to each other. Assuming they don't get leaked beforehand. When do we expect the reviews to be released?
Well, at the start of 8th there were books for DG, too, their Invasion of the the Plague stars was one of the few new chapters in the rulebook and then there was the whole Konor-campaign. After that there were the Gellarpox infected which featured together with DG on Vigilus, even if only as a sideplot. Overall I'd say DG had a pretty big showing in 8th, Chaos as a whole even more.
Speaking of Crusade, I didn't realise that Beyond the Veil was a ring bound rules reference until the pre order pics went up. With GW touting Crusade as a narrative system, I was kinda hoping for something with more fluff.
To be fair, the doom stalker and heavy destroyer being ETB does keep their price down a bit. Remember the ETB redemptor war 40 usd vs the 65 for full kit, and it was a pretty nice kit considering.
Maybe there will be some full kit versions of some of these in the future? I think the only things that stayed only ETB from 8th edition release wave were poxwalkers and the blight hauler?
Quasistellar wrote: To be fair, the doom stalker and heavy destroyer being ETB does keep their price down a bit. Remember the ETB redemptor war 40 usd vs the 65 for full kit, and it was a pretty nice kit considering.
Maybe there will be some full kit versions of some of these in the future? I think the only things that stayed only ETB from 8th edition release wave were poxwalkers and the blight hauler?
In 40k, yes. But if AOS is anything to go off of, I wouldn't hold my breath. The ballista, banshees, glaive wraith stalkers (which to be fair, had other models from the boxset), and maybe something else were only ever released as easy to build. The fact that the doom stalker isn't a dual kit with a reanimator is surprising. Especially since the latter wasn't released in one of those expansionary box sets.
Quasistellar wrote: To be fair, the doom stalker and heavy destroyer being ETB does keep their price down a bit. Remember the ETB redemptor war 40 usd vs the 65 for full kit, and it was a pretty nice kit considering.
Maybe there will be some full kit versions of some of these in the future? I think the only things that stayed only ETB from 8th edition release wave were poxwalkers and the blight hauler?
In 40k, yes. But if AOS is anything to go off of, I wouldn't hold my breath. The ballista, banshees, glaive wraith stalkers (which to be fair, had other models from the boxset), and maybe something else were only ever released as easy to build. The fact that the doom stalker isn't a dual kit with a reanimator is surprising. Especially since the latter wasn't released in one of those expansionary box sets.
I have long suspected a large portion of the Necron stuff is going to remain ETB. We don't have that many weapon options, so it makes somewhat sense.
The Reanimator and Doomstalker are also significantly diffrent in size, they were never going to be a dual kit.
Quasistellar wrote: To be fair, the doom stalker and heavy destroyer being ETB does keep their price down a bit. Remember the ETB redemptor war 40 usd vs the 65 for full kit, and it was a pretty nice kit considering.
Considering it was missing half the weapon options?
I remember looking at that a couple times, and thinking 'whyever would I buy it when I can't arm it effectively?'
Though I don't suspect that will happen with the necron stuff here. What we've seen is what they've got.
Maybe there will be some full kit versions of some of these in the future? I think the only things that stayed only ETB from 8th edition release wave were poxwalkers and the blight hauler?
Some how I suspect the necron EZ kits are much more likely to stay EZs, exactly like the poxwalkers and blight haulers.
Or the Chaos Warrior starter and quite a few other AoS models
The Shadowspear stuff isn't EZ build, but a lot of that never got a proper kit either (greater possessed, oblits, venomcrawler, nor even SM Suppressors.
I think a lot of the EZ kits are going to stick. If some of them turn out to be really popular, I can see a reassessment happening in the future, but GW seems to like this piecemeal approach.
The ATV and "I'm not an alien heavy loader" are two models that really stand out as odd in design for space marines. They just don't look like the sort of thing you charge into battle on, esp as marines. One is a loader from out of battle; suited for servitors; the other is a buggy that just doesn't look beefy not heavy enough for a marine and not like it can go offroad all that much either. It's too "race car" design.
Overread wrote: The ATV and "I'm not an alien heavy loader" are two models that really stand out as odd in design for space marines. They just don't look like the sort of thing you charge into battle on, esp as marines. One is a loader from out of battle; suited for servitors; the other is a buggy that just doesn't look beefy not heavy enough for a marine and not like it can go offroad all that much either. It's too "race car" design.
It's the sort of design an ork would use.
To be fair, it's not the first time marines are using something that wasn't intended for battle. I mean, look at terminator suits: These sealed environment suits enabled maintenance crews of spacecraft to operate in extremely hazardous environments such as hard vacuum or in other adverse atmospheric conditions.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Oh boy, a price increase for their already expensive rules that will be of mediocre quality and probably typos.
I agree that you are on to the most probable hypothesis based on past trends, but I am hoping that we got lucky this time and that what happened was that they just decided to push out a bunch of gak that was meant to occupy us while the real devs worked behind the scenes on 8th. I definitely would not be surprised if you were right though.
Gadzilla666 wrote:Well, one more week to "wait and see" how the new codexes stack up to each other.
Obviously there's always something else "over the rules horizon", but we should finally get to see if loyalists will continue to reign supreme and if Necrons are getting screwed.
Personally I'm more interested in what the Imperial Armour Compendium does for my favorite slab of resin and plastic. But that's still over that next hill it seems.....
At least the Compendium has been announced, which would normally put it in a "within three months" window, so I'd imagine you'll be able to get your corrupted little mitts on it by the end of the year.
Dysartes wrote: At least the Compendium has been announced, which would normally put it in a "within three months" window, so I'd imagine you'll be able to get your corrupted little mitts on it by the end of the year.
I hope you're right, I've been waiting for this ever since gw let that drunken intern write the points for the legion super heavys in CA2018. (Actually, maybe it was whoever designed the klos, how else were they ever going to get anyone to play that eyesore if the Legions had good looking super heavys with good rules available to them?)
I was pretty happy when they lowered Codex prices with 8th edition.
I think GW loses a lot of the goodwill they've built up over the last few years or let's say the start of 9th really seems heavy-handed to me and I don't think it's all because of Corona:
-The App was/ is an embarassment
- the new points costs might work once Codizes are out, but they could've just adjusted them in these
- the terrain expansion from this week seems extremely overpriced and the rules aren't in the book you buy for it
- Codex prices go up (maybe because they give you access to a digital version as well - for which, in order to use it, you have to pay again...)
- DLC style mission books (we are at 3 expansion books with additional missions already, right?)
I mean, I like what I've read about the actual 9th edition rules so far, even though the missions seem to be all the same, but GWs missions were never good and after 2,3 games people wrote their own missions anyway and I guess we'll continue that way in 9th, too. But everything aside from the basic rulebook and the Necron models seems to be... badly managed.
the missions books strikes me as more GW trying to gauge intreast in that style of content more then anything.
frankly I expect it'll largly peter out as GW realizes that the demand for such things isn't that high. people tend to when a supplement like PA had missions in it, largely ignore them
As far as I’m aware, the digital download of the codex only require the free app, so you don’t have to “pay again” for that.
I’m just hoping that they still do the excellent interactive iBook codices, but at this point it’s a faint hope. They want to herd us into their crappy app ecosystem and I can’t see that they leave a way around it like that.
Dysartes wrote: At least the Compendium has been announced, which would normally put it in a "within three months" window, so I'd imagine you'll be able to get your corrupted little mitts on it by the end of the year.
I hope you're right, I've been waiting for this ever since gw let that drunken intern write the points for the legion super heavys in CA2018. (Actually, maybe it was whoever designed the klos, how else were they ever going to get anyone to play that eyesore if the Legions had good looking super heavys with good rules available to them?)
Klos is plastic. Legion superheavies resin. gw has vested interest klos being more playable than resin.
Dysartes wrote: At least the Compendium has been announced, which would normally put it in a "within three months" window, so I'd imagine you'll be able to get your corrupted little mitts on it by the end of the year.
I hope you're right, I've been waiting for this ever since gw let that drunken intern write the points for the legion super heavys in CA2018. (Actually, maybe it was whoever designed the klos, how else were they ever going to get anyone to play that eyesore if the Legions had good looking super heavys with good rules available to them?)
Klos is plastic. Legion superheavies resin. gw has vested interest klos being more playable than resin.
Why, they produce and sell both, money goes into the same place and I dare say the fellblade costs less to get into production.
Dysartes wrote: At least the Compendium has been announced, which would normally put it in a "within three months" window, so I'd imagine you'll be able to get your corrupted little mitts on it by the end of the year.
I hope you're right, I've been waiting for this ever since gw let that drunken intern write the points for the legion super heavys in CA2018. (Actually, maybe it was whoever designed the klos, how else were they ever going to get anyone to play that eyesore if the Legions had good looking super heavys with good rules available to them?)
Klos is plastic. Legion superheavies resin. gw has vested interest klos being more playable than resin.
Why, they produce and sell both, money goes into the same place and I dare say the fellblade costs less to get into production.
Yeah, I don't know why they nerfed the legion super heavys so hard, but somehow I doubt it was because they don't want to sell the models
Dysartes wrote: At least the Compendium has been announced, which would normally put it in a "within three months" window, so I'd imagine you'll be able to get your corrupted little mitts on it by the end of the year.
I hope you're right, I've been waiting for this ever since gw let that drunken intern write the points for the legion super heavys in CA2018. (Actually, maybe it was whoever designed the klos, how else were they ever going to get anyone to play that eyesore if the Legions had good looking super heavys with good rules available to them?)
Klos is plastic. Legion superheavies resin. gw has vested interest klos being more playable than resin.
Why, they produce and sell both, money goes into the same place and I dare say the fellblade costs less to get into production.
Yeah, I don't know why they nerfed the legion super heavys so hard, but somehow I doubt it was because they don't want to sell the models
I can imagine a whole slew of reasons, last but not least the possible market, considering how disliked Resin is comparatively to plastic.
could also be GW trying to dischourage widespread use of old heresy era super heavies, we know GW sometimes over prices things if they want to dischourage their wide spread use
Dysartes wrote: At least the Compendium has been announced, which would normally put it in a "within three months" window, so I'd imagine you'll be able to get your corrupted little mitts on it by the end of the year.
I hope you're right, I've been waiting for this ever since gw let that drunken intern write the points for the legion super heavys in CA2018. (Actually, maybe it was whoever designed the klos, how else were they ever going to get anyone to play that eyesore if the Legions had good looking super heavys with good rules available to them?)
Klos is plastic. Legion superheavies resin. gw has vested interest klos being more playable than resin.
Why, they produce and sell both, money goes into the same place and I dare say the fellblade costs less to get into production.
Yeah, I don't know why they nerfed the legion super heavys so hard, but somehow I doubt it was because they don't want to sell the models
I can imagine a whole slew of reasons, last but not least the possible market, considering how disliked Resin is comparatively to plastic.
Maybe, but the Fellblade and Falchion are only partly resin, the inner hull is from the Baneblade kit. And if they hate resin so much, why did they make the new super heavy for their poster boy, most popular faction out of it?
BrianDavion wrote:could also be GW trying to dischourage widespread use of old heresy era super heavies, we know GW sometimes over prices things if they want to dischourage their wide spread use
Why? Makes sense for loyalists, but the Legions wouldn't stop using them.
If I was to guess, I'd say it was because fw went and made them T9. I can't think of any other unit that's T9, maybe gw really does think everything should be capped at T8 without some kind of buff.
Dysartes wrote: At least the Compendium has been announced, which would normally put it in a "within three months" window, so I'd imagine you'll be able to get your corrupted little mitts on it by the end of the year.
I hope you're right, I've been waiting for this ever since gw let that drunken intern write the points for the legion super heavys in CA2018. (Actually, maybe it was whoever designed the klos, how else were they ever going to get anyone to play that eyesore if the Legions had good looking super heavys with good rules available to them?)
Klos is plastic. Legion superheavies resin. gw has vested interest klos being more playable than resin.
Why, they produce and sell both, money goes into the same place and I dare say the fellblade costs less to get into production.
You get more of price as pure profit. Plastic comes put mould and material to machine and push button.then just wait as automated process generates moulds at will.
Resin is much less automatea process.
Answer is profit margin.do you want 90 pound for every 100 pound you get or 40?
Dysartes wrote: At least the Compendium has been announced, which would normally put it in a "within three months" window, so I'd imagine you'll be able to get your corrupted little mitts on it by the end of the year.
I hope you're right, I've been waiting for this ever since gw let that drunken intern write the points for the legion super heavys in CA2018. (Actually, maybe it was whoever designed the klos, how else were they ever going to get anyone to play that eyesore if the Legions had good looking super heavys with good rules available to them?)
Klos is plastic. Legion superheavies resin. gw has vested interest klos being more playable than resin.
Why, they produce and sell both, money goes into the same place and I dare say the fellblade costs less to get into production.
You get more of price as pure profit. Plastic comes put mould and material to machine and push button.then just wait as automated process generates moulds at will.
Resin is much less automatea process.
Answer is profit margin.do you want 90 pound for every 100 pound you get or 40?
Its not hat clear cut though, if the design and resin mold costs 10k and the plastic 100k, it muddies the water, its still cheaper to do it in resin for the first x units.
Regular Codex and Canoptek for me! Necron dice are ok but nothing special. Silent King is a beast of a model but something for another day for me (esp as its clearly a big build and paint job). Heavy destroyer is very cool, but nothing beats Canoptek .
Sadly, Space Marine enthusiasts in Australia and New Zealand will have to wait a little longer to get their hands on this skull-masked hero. The mass-conveyer the Chaplains bound for the Antipodes were on has been delayed by a storm worthy of Fenrisian helwinter – we expect that you’ll be able to pre-order him around the 17th of October.
JWBS wrote: The ATV looks progressively worse with each fresh viewing.
I said this when it first dropped but it bears repeating...it would look better with Phobos or Scouts crewing it, not 'full' Primaris. Even better would be Chapter Serfs.
JWBS wrote: The ATV looks progressively worse with each fresh viewing.
I said this when it first dropped but it bears repeating...it would look better with Phobos or Scouts crewing it, not 'full' Primaris. Even better would be Chapter Serfs.
Now that's going to bug me. It would have been a logical choice for a Phobos army. Dang
Overread wrote: Other races - build long range artillery designed to hide behind terrain and fire in an upward and then falling arc
Necrons - build a crawling artillery unit that clambers up as high as it can go to get a direct line of devastating fire toward the enemy.
The last time I checked, energy rays can't bend in flight (to any appreciable degree). So only weapons that can take advantage of gravity or can redirect themselves in flight will allow you to shoot at things behind things.
Necrons being too high tech for tossing around physical projectiles just have to satisfy their need for dakka with ways to improve line of sight.
JWBS wrote: The ATV looks progressively worse with each fresh viewing.
I said this when it first dropped but it bears repeating...it would look better with Phobos or Scouts crewing it, not 'full' Primaris. Even better would be Chapter Serfs.
JWBS wrote: The ATV looks progressively worse with each fresh viewing.
I said this when it first dropped but it bears repeating...it would look better with Phobos or Scouts crewing it, not 'full' Primaris. Even better would be Chapter Serfs.
Overread wrote: Other races - build long range artillery designed to hide behind terrain and fire in an upward and then falling arc
Necrons - build a crawling artillery unit that clambers up as high as it can go to get a direct line of devastating fire toward the enemy.
The last time I checked, energy rays can't bend in flight (to any appreciable degree). So only weapons that can take advantage of gravity or can redirect themselves in flight will allow you to shoot at things behind things.
Necrons being too high tech for tossing around physical projectiles just have to satisfy their need for dakka with ways to improve line of sight.
At least two other races use tech that works the same way(Eldar with Vibro weapons and humanity with Conversion Beams) with regards to needing direct LoS and range determining damage dealt.
So let me se if I understand the entry point for someone wanting space wolves this year.... Buy:
Rulebook 40, Dex 30 and Spacewolf supplement 20 or 25?
Thats 90ish Pounds upfront before investing in models.
NAVARRO wrote: So let me se if I understand the entry point for someone wanting space wolves this year.... Buy:
Rulebook 40, Dex 30 and Spacewolf supplement 20 or 25?
Thats 90ish Pounds upfront before investing in models.
Same as any other Marine Chapter right?
of course only Marine subfactions are given their own supplements - no one else gets that level of support - but you want those extra bits and pieces right?
Its an extra 25 more than EVERYONE else has to pay to get your own entire book of lore (likely copy pasted but thats true of all Codexes)
JWBS wrote: The ATV looks progressively worse with each fresh viewing.
I said this when it first dropped but it bears repeating...it would look better with Phobos or Scouts crewing it, not 'full' Primaris. Even better would be Chapter Serfs.
Nah, slaved servitors. More grimdark.
Matrindur wrote:
Equipped with a carapace-mounted doomsday blaster, which increases in power the further away its target is
NAVARRO wrote: So let me se if I understand the entry point for someone wanting space wolves this year.... Buy:
Rulebook 40, Dex 30 and Spacewolf supplement 20 or 25?
Thats 90ish Pounds upfront before investing in models.
The only extra over what everyone else pays is the Supplement. Don't forget most other armies have subfactions who get a paragraph (if that) of alternative rule bonuses and equipment options and sometimes unit restrictions or allowances. They don't get unique models ("new"models allowed in are typically allied from another army); they don't even get shoulderpads or other unique model addons every so often. So yes you pay more, but at the same time you get way more support.
Plus you can easily pick up rule books for £20 or so from the split Indomitus set. Heck I've still got one I've yet to shift and sell.
JWBS wrote: The ATV looks progressively worse with each fresh viewing.
I said this when it first dropped but it bears repeating...it would look better with Phobos or Scouts crewing it, not 'full' Primaris. Even better would be Chapter Serfs.
I really wish they would do more with Serfs - same is true of the gun platform. Every single one has a Techmarine crewing it - right.....
My Point was more in the sense that entry point to play 40K in 2020 with their most popular factions is quite high.
I dare to say almost prohibitive for a ruleset.
Im ok paying 30 for my Deathguard but not ok to pay 50 for my space wolves no matter how much extra bits they have on supplement. it just adds to much.
In my little bubble I would have to spend Rulebook 40 SW 50 and DG 30 that's like120 on rules and fluff. OUCH!
I mean, I rather buy more models to paint and build and skip the game altogether... Im probably alone there, I know XD.
NAVARRO wrote: Yeah sure more support more rules more money.
My Point was more in the sense that entry point to play 40K in 2020 with their most popular factions is quite high.
I dare to say almost prohibitive for a ruleset.
Im ok paying 30 for my Deathguard but not ok to pay 50 for my space wolves no matter how much extra bits they have on supplement. it just adds to much.
In my little bubble I would have to spend Rulebook 40 SW 50 and DG 30 that's like120 on rules and fluff. OUCH!
I mean, I rather buy more models to paint and build and skip the game altogether... Im probably alone there, I know XD.
Not alone by far, most of us would prefer to spend more on models than on rules.
Like I said I dislike the £25 let alone potential £30 price for a codex; at the same time I do realise that the £12 versions were half as thick, softback and often only had a few colour pages rather than all colour. So I can at least see where the size and quality of the product has improved.
Technically, the Space Wolf chapter tactic rule is in the main codex so you don’t “need” the supplement.
That said I never bought the last marine codex or supplements so I’d don’t know what exactly would be in them.
Mr_Rose wrote: Technically, the Space Wolf chapter tactic rule is in the main codex so you don’t “need” the supplement.
That said I never bought the last marine codex or supplements so I’d don’t know what exactly would be in them.
The super doctrines, warlord traits, strats, psychic powers and chapter specific units, expanded fluff etc and assumingly crusade gubbins.
The supplements are the character and flavour of the chapter, the codex is the bare minimums to run a chapter.
Mr_Rose wrote: Technically, the Space Wolf chapter tactic rule is in the main codex so you don’t “need” the supplement.
That said I never bought the last marine codex or supplements so I’d don’t know what exactly would be in them.
The super doctrines, warlord traits, strats, psychic powers and chapter specific units, expanded fluff etc and assumingly crusade gubbins.
The supplements are the character and flavour of the chapter, the codex is the bare minimums to run a chapter.
technicly until the supplement comes out the PA books will still be valid so just use your super doctrines etc from it until your supplement comes out.
How much later is hard to say. I expect to see a second wave this month at the very least for both Marines and Necrons. Though I think it will take three or four waves to get everything previewed so far.
Necrons still have a bunch of stuff
Monolith
Void Dragon
6 armed gunslinging hero
Flayed ones
Wraith Destroyers
2 more Cryptek heroes
Add to that an expected Warriors set since right now the only way to get basic troops is split sets on ebay from Indomitus or the getting started sets.
There's also several heroes from the Indomitus set that don't have their own release in a box and the reanimator.
There's also several heroes from the Indomitus set that don't have their own release in a box and the reanimator.
Three for Marines(Judiciar, Chaplain, Bladeguard Ancient) two for Necrons(Destroyer Lord and Plasmancer plus Murderbuckets).
I'm wondering if the intention might be to pace the releases for both Necrons and Marines together? There's more than enough for both factions to justify that kinda thing. The only real 'equivalent' that Marines don't have is something tying to the Monolith and Void Dragon shard, while Necrons have a bit more characters and less 'basic' stuff to come.
Overread wrote: How much later is hard to say. I expect to see a second wave this month at the very least for both Marines and Necrons. Though I think it will take three or four waves to get everything previewed so far.
Necrons still have a bunch of stuff
Monolith
Void Dragon
6 armed gunslinging hero
Flayed ones
Wraith Destroyers
2 more Cryptek heroes
Add to that an expected Warriors set since right now the only way to get basic troops is split sets on ebay from Indomitus or the getting started sets.
There's also several heroes from the Indomitus set that don't have their own release in a box and the reanimator.
Necron-wise I expect everything non-indomitius related to be out in the October cycle. The stuff locked to the Starter set may stay locked there or a start collecting. The stuff that was on the combined sprue from Indomitus is probably a ways out from being released if I were to guess.
There's also several heroes from the Indomitus set that don't have their own release in a box and the reanimator.
Three for Marines(Judiciar, Chaplain, Bladeguard Ancient) two for Necrons(Destroyer Lord and Plasmancer plus Murderbuckets).
I'm wondering if the intention might be to pace the releases for both Necrons and Marines together?
There's more than enough for both factions to justify that kinda thing. The only real 'equivalent' that Marines don't have is something tying to the Monolith and Void Dragon shard, while Necrons have a bit more characters and less 'basic' stuff to come.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'm not sure why GW insist on calling Crusade "narrative" play...
Maybe because it provides tools to tell a story with an army, where battles have meaning and consequences, with characters and units getting more powerful or suffering wounds.
Wanting to play specific battles like the fall of cadia is fine, but that is reenactment rather than narrative.
Billagio wrote:So does this mean that Heavy Intercessors and the Gladiator are coming out later than the codex?
Very common for large releases. The Codex is released the first week, but the next week has additional models to from the codex that are not released the first week. Adepta Sororitas started with the codex, cards, dice, and three kits the first week, with 5 more kits the very next week week.
H.B.M.C. wrote:No Chaplain for us next week, huh? Ok.
The Primaris Chaplin on the bike is on the preorder list for next week. Are you expecting something else?
Think it will have to be a hard pass on the Collector's Edition this time around for the Space Marine book, was hoping for at least an alternate cover if not something closer to the Primaris edition from early 8th edition. At least it is a bit of cost saving.
Sadly, Space Marine enthusiasts in Australia and New Zealand will have to wait a little longer to get their hands on this skull-masked hero. The mass-conveyer the Chaplains bound for the Antipodes were on has been delayed by a storm worthy of Fenrisian helwinter – we expect that you’ll be able to pre-order him around the 17th of October.
Billagio wrote:So does this mean that Heavy Intercessors and the Gladiator are coming out later than the codex?
Very common for large releases. The Codex is released the first week, but the next week has additional models to from the codex that are not released the first week. Adepta Sororitas started with the codex, cards, dice, and three kits the first week, with 5 more kits the very next week week.
Gotcha, Dont think ive been involved in buying something during a large release like this except Orktober a few years back. Dont think they did a staggered release for that (except for the buggies being in the specialist game, but still available day 1 technically)
Billagio wrote:So does this mean that Heavy Intercessors and the Gladiator are coming out later than the codex?
Very common for large releases. The Codex is released the first week, but the next week has additional models to from the codex that are not released the first week. Adepta Sororitas started with the codex, cards, dice, and three kits the first week, with 5 more kits the very next week week.
Gotcha, Dont think ive been involved in buying something during a large release like this except Orktober a few years back. Dont think they did a staggered release for that (except for the buggies being in the specialist game, but still available day 1 technically)
I mean besides the fact that the orks were staggered and werent even released during October :p
Billagio wrote:So does this mean that Heavy Intercessors and the Gladiator are coming out later than the codex?
Very common for large releases. The Codex is released the first week, but the next week has additional models to from the codex that are not released the first week. Adepta Sororitas started with the codex, cards, dice, and three kits the first week, with 5 more kits the very next week week.
Gotcha, Dont think ive been involved in buying something during a large release like this except Orktober a few years back. Dont think they did a staggered release for that (except for the buggies being in the specialist game, but still available day 1 technically)
I mean besides the fact that the orks were staggered and werent even released during October :p
the bixd set was october with the individual releases in november IIRC
I'd expect them next weekend when the pre-orders go up. That's when most of the usual suspects will be able to give their thoughts on the preview copies they were sent.
Billagio wrote:So does this mean that Heavy Intercessors and the Gladiator are coming out later than the codex?
Very common for large releases. The Codex is released the first week, but the next week has additional models to from the codex that are not released the first week. Adepta Sororitas started with the codex, cards, dice, and three kits the first week, with 5 more kits the very next week week.
H.B.M.C. wrote:No Chaplain for us next week, huh? Ok.
The Primaris Chaplin on the bike is on the preorder list for next week. Are you expecting something else?
Sons of behemoth are coming week after codexes. Gw generally doesn't mix aos and 40k so odds are more models 24.10 earliest
Billagio wrote:So does this mean that Heavy Intercessors and the Gladiator are coming out later than the codex?
Very common for large releases. The Codex is released the first week, but the next week has additional models to from the codex that are not released the first week. Adepta Sororitas started with the codex, cards, dice, and three kits the first week, with 5 more kits the very next week week.
Gotcha, Dont think ive been involved in buying something during a large release like this except Orktober a few years back. Dont think they did a staggered release for that (except for the buggies being in the specialist game, but still available day 1 technically)
I mean besides the fact that the orks were staggered and werent even released during October :p
Orks were said to come october, all preorders were october. Only ones that can complaie are those who have deliberately ignored how gw counts stuff despite not being secret.
Yeah, the book needs a thorough review before building anything new. Even warriors - it looks like the new resurrection mechanic might change the way you want to equip them as superior durability may offset the shortcomings of the reaper.
Billagio wrote:So does this mean that Heavy Intercessors and the Gladiator are coming out later than the codex?
Very common for large releases. The Codex is released the first week, but the next week has additional models to from the codex that are not released the first week. Adepta Sororitas started with the codex, cards, dice, and three kits the first week, with 5 more kits the very next week week.
H.B.M.C. wrote:No Chaplain for us next week, huh? Ok.
The Primaris Chaplin on the bike is on the preorder list for next week. Are you expecting something else?
Sons of behemoth are coming week after codexes. Gw generally doesn't mix aos and 40k so odds are more models 24.10 earliest
Billagio wrote:So does this mean that Heavy Intercessors and the Gladiator are coming out later than the codex?
Very common for large releases. The Codex is released the first week, but the next week has additional models to from the codex that are not released the first week. Adepta Sororitas started with the codex, cards, dice, and three kits the first week, with 5 more kits the very next week week.
Gotcha, Dont think ive been involved in buying something during a large release like this except Orktober a few years back. Dont think they did a staggered release for that (except for the buggies being in the specialist game, but still available day 1 technically)
I mean besides the fact that the orks were staggered and werent even released during October :p
Orks were said to come october, all preorders were october. Only ones that can complaie are those who have deliberately ignored how gw counts stuff despite not being secret.
marines will likely be a prolonged rtelease as our supplements come out, which means we proably won't see EVERYTHING until eatly 2021 when the dork angels supplement comes out
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'd expect them next weekend when the pre-orders go up. That's when most of the usual suspects will be able to give their thoughts on the preview copies they were sent.
My favorite fellow is always "guy who reads the entire book breathlessly at just about the correct speed for me to type."
Ten bucks to that dude on patreon is what I pay for most of my 40k books.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'm not sure why GW insist on calling Crusade "narrative" play...
I'm not sure why you posted this because it's borderline baiting...
It's fine for people to have differing desires or opinions on a product but this video is completely out of touch and the arguments utterly nonsensical.
Additional rules that allow for army progression through a campaign = "You have to learn more rules on top of 9e and your army, so this only applies to people who like spreadsheets"
Yes, that is how supplements work. Is that even an argument?
It's like buying something from IKEA, taking it home, and opening it up just to complain that it only is appealing to handymen because you need to assemble it. Which is also completely ignoring that GW has already told everyone what sort of content the book had so there really shouldn't be any surprise...
Character and unit customization options = "GW is trying to ride the coat-tails of DnD because Critical Role and Stranger Things are popular"
I honestly don't even think this line of thought deserves a response. Seriously? It's not like GW has a history of releasing RPG-lite/RPG-adjacent supplements and products or anything...
"Narrative players really want story and narrative. I think we really want to play the Fall of Cadia or a setting for the 1st Tyranic War with some new hero characters, some new moments, and some new setting."
WHO wants that? I don't think I've ever seen anyone ask for either of those things, not the least because they already exist in some part. Gathering Storm covered the Fall of Cadia two editions ago and iirc the 1st Tyranic war dates back to either 3rd or 4th edition.
Also how many people actually replayed the "historical battles" from older 40k and AoS supplements? Like a handful of the overall player base?
And yeah, of course everyone wants more new named characters with their own individual rules. It's not like named characters are some of the most divisive units in the entire game that constantly get abused because they were previously the only way to get rules outside of the generic HQ options.
Also no one has ever asked for additional character customization like what Crusade is supposed to be providing... /s
"Narrative players want actual stories with beginnings, middles, and ends. This book only has 3 pages of setting, the rest is all rules. GW thinks narrative people want as little narrative as possible."
I... Has anyone ever... WHO! Again, who is begging for pre-written narratives with set story beats? 40k is the game of Your Dudes! And honestly, we all know that the Indomitus Crusade has a beginning, middle, and end.
[Beginning] Silent King shows up and Pariah Nexus appears.
[Middle] Imperium is mad about this. They send a lot of (insert Imperial faction here) to go fight the Necrons.
[End] Mid-way through 9e GW will declare the Indomitus Crusade over, someone will "win", but no faction will be significantly benefited or hampered on a macro scale.
Is there a place for 40k "historical" reenactment? Sure! Does is have to be in or replace the book that is designed to supposedly allow players to make their own narratives with their own dudes? NO!
"The book doesn't tell you how the Pariah Nexus effects Eldar, Tyranid Shadow in the Warp, Demons."
See these are really good questions that an actual useful review would point out. So I guess +1 point to winters SEO for...
"What about Cadia? How does the Pariah Nexus interact with Cadia? Did the writers forget that Cadia also had a warp dampening effect? What's the connection?"
FFS, what is his obsession with Cadia? They aren't even in the same Segmentum! Also we already know the connection and have basically know for 2 editions now!
Necrons! That's it. Necron pylons. They even did the Kooky Adventures of Trazyn and Cawl in Gathering Storm just in case anyone was still in doubt Crons had anything to do with Cadia.
"Are there any new heroes or villans..?"
MAKE YOUR OWN USING THE RULES IN THE BOOK! THAT'S WHAT IT EXISTS FOR!
"I guess they just want you to make your own. Which is fine but narrative players have been doing that since the dawn of time..."
NO! There is no "but". That's what this book is for. That's what this book was described as. That's what Crusade since it was announced has been described as.
It's a set of rules to aid you in playing homebrew narrative because good luck getting even close friends to agree on any sort of custom rules unless everyone has a lot of patience, is willing to accept and respect each others' criticism, and you have a very robust method of resolving differences in opinion. Or you nominate a single person as 40k Narrative DM. Otherwise it's almost impossible to get anyone to accept homebrew rules, especially after the first time someone makes something they think is reasonable but everyone else thinks is broken.
That's the function of Crusade. In theory the rules should have more design insight behind them than an average player can muster, and even in the even something is badly tuned then no one gets their feelings hurt because you can all just blame GW and house rule from there.
The Imperial Fists dice look nice. I certainly don't like the price and I'm not going to go out of my way to get them in the inevitable event that they are stupidly limited in quantity, but if my favorite online store happens to have them in stock long enough to actually order...
The Necron dice aren't bad either, and seem to be quite readable.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'm not sure why GW insist on calling Crusade "narrative" play...
I'm not sure why you posted this because it's borderline baiting...
It's fine for people to have differing desires or opinions on a product but this video is completely out of touch and the arguments utterly nonsensical.
Additional rules that allow for army progression through a campaign = "You have to learn more rules on top of 9e and your army, so this only applies to people who like spreadsheets"
Yes, that is how supplements work. Is that even an argument?
It's like buying something from IKEA, taking it home, and opening it up just to complain that it only is appealing to handymen because you need to assemble it. Which is also completely ignoring that GW has already told everyone what sort of content the book had so there really shouldn't be any surprise...
Character and unit customization options = "GW is trying to ride the coat-tails of DnD because Critical Role and Stranger Things are popular"
I honestly don't even think this line of thought deserves a response. Seriously? It's not like GW has a history of releasing RPG-lite/RPG-adjacent supplements and products or anything...
"Narrative players really want story and narrative. I think we really want to play the Fall of Cadia or a setting for the 1st Tyranic War with some new hero characters, some new moments, and some new setting."
WHO wants that? I don't think I've ever seen anyone ask for either of those things, not the least because they already exist in some part. Gathering Storm covered the Fall of Cadia two editions ago and iirc the 1st Tyranic war dates back to either 3rd or 4th edition.
Also how many people actually replayed the "historical battles" from older 40k and AoS supplements? Like a handful of the overall player base?
And yeah, of course everyone wants more new named characters with their own individual rules. It's not like named characters are some of the most divisive units in the entire game that constantly get abused because they were previously the only way to get rules outside of the generic HQ options.
Also no one has ever asked for additional character customization like what Crusade is supposed to be providing... /s
"Narrative players want actual stories with beginnings, middles, and ends. This book only has 3 pages of setting, the rest is all rules. GW thinks narrative people want as little narrative as possible."
I... Has anyone ever... WHO! Again, who is begging for pre-written narratives with set story beats? 40k is the game of Your Dudes! And honestly, we all know that the Indomitus Crusade has a beginning, middle, and end.
[Beginning] Silent King shows up and Pariah Nexus appears.
[Middle] Imperium is mad about this. They send a lot of (insert Imperial faction here) to go fight the Necrons.
[End] Mid-way through 9e GW will declare the Indomitus Crusade over, someone will "win", but no faction will be significantly benefited or hampered on a macro scale.
Is there a place for 40k "historical" reenactment? Sure! Does is have to be in or replace the book that is designed to supposedly allow players to make their own narratives with their own dudes? NO!
"The book doesn't tell you how the Pariah Nexus effects Eldar, Tyranid Shadow in the Warp, Demons."
See these are really good questions that an actual useful review would point out. So I guess +1 point to winters SEO for...
"What about Cadia? How does the Pariah Nexus interact with Cadia? Did the writers forget that Cadia also had a warp dampening effect? What's the connection?"
FFS, what is his obsession with Cadia? They aren't even in the same Segmentum! Also we already know the connection and have basically know for 2 editions now!
Necrons! That's it. Necron pylons. They even did the Kooky Adventures of Trazyn and Cawl in Gathering Storm just in case anyone was still in doubt Crons had anything to do with Cadia.
"Are there any new heroes or villans..?"
MAKE YOUR OWN USING THE RULES IN THE BOOK! THAT'S WHAT IT EXISTS FOR!
"I guess they just want you to make your own. Which is fine but narrative players have been doing that since the dawn of time..."
NO! There is no "but". That's what this book is for. That's what this book was described as. That's what Crusade since it was announced has been described as.
It's a set of rules to aid you in playing homebrew narrative because good luck getting even close friends to agree on any sort of custom rules unless everyone has a lot of patience, is willing to accept and respect each others' criticism, and you have a very robust method of resolving differences in opinion. Or you nominate a single person as 40k Narrative DM. Otherwise it's almost impossible to get anyone to accept homebrew rules, especially after the first time someone makes something they think is reasonable but everyone else thinks is broken.
That's the function of Crusade. In theory the rules should have more design insight behind them than an average player can muster, and even in the even something is badly tuned then no one gets their feelings hurt because you can all just blame GW and house rule from there.
Winters missed the point of the core crusade rules as well and his negative rant was actually a surprisingly good sales pitch for it. Ironically the number of expansions over the last 3 editions or so that contained reenactment battles for narrative play etc that were deemed a waste of pages, or of no interest because it wasn't matched play + extras is telling.
I sort of get some of Winters's issues with Crusade from a narrative players point of view. The rules are set up in such a way that they almost encourage people to min-max them, which is kind of a problem whenever you introduce "official" rules into any narrative setting.
However, I do think GW are in a bit of a tricky spot with narrative play in general. They were criticised in previous editions for paying it lip service, despite it being one of the 3 ways to play but now they're criticised for providing more substance too. Reduced to its absolute, most ridiculous minimum you can always claim you don't need *any* rules for narrative since that's the whole point, but I do kind of wonder what Winters expects. GW tried the wishy-washy historical story approach to things and people complained. Now they have a more structured set of rules and people complain. I think a good narrative player should be able to take the framework Crusade provides and build a really good narrative campaign with it.
I guess we'll see how hard GW push Crusade with the new Codices and expansions.
Slipspace wrote: I sort of get some of Winters's issues with Crusade from a narrative players point of view. The rules are set up in such a way that they almost encourage people to min-max them, which is kind of a problem whenever you introduce "official" rules into any narrative setting.
However, I do think GW are in a bit of a tricky spot with narrative play in general. They were criticised in previous editions for paying it lip service, despite it being one of the 3 ways to play but now they're criticised for providing more substance too. Reduced to its absolute, most ridiculous minimum you can always claim you don't need *any* rules for narrative since that's the whole point, but I do kind of wonder what Winters expects. GW tried the wishy-washy historical story approach to things and people complained. Now they have a more structured set of rules and people complain. I think a good narrative player should be able to take the framework Crusade provides and build a really good narrative campaign with it.
I guess we'll see how hard GW push Crusade with the new Codices and expansions.
I think the issue is peoples definition of "narrative" to some people it is replaying historical battles etc. although they're obviously locked into certain battlefields and factions etc. Crusade is still a narrative format but is more of an RPG, then you have the "I have a really cool idea lets make something special for it" crowd who like to make their own rules up. There is no right or wrong and it's not possible to cater to all 3, especially when the more vocal aspect of the community are centred around matched play.
I agree that it's not obvious what Winters wanted given they've done all of the above at some point in the past and almost uniformly nobody bothered with them and complained about ether not being enough content or taking up space that could be given to matched play. Obviously to each their own but piling salt on to say it's not what narrative players want as a whole is unfair.
I sort of understood some of his criticism to be based in the fact that in a universe spanning tens of thousands of years with many huge events and timey-winey stuff, they've narrowed the field of play considerably. I personally understand why they have done that here and don't personally have any qualms with it, to promote the new setting and models, but I can appreciate that with so much history for a majority of the player base who grew up on the back of the 13th crusade, tyrannic wars and Armageddon etc, that it might have been nice to back fill for those things first before diving straight in to something new as many of the characters we'd be likely to start with may have actually participated in those conflicts as newbies.
IE. Maybe I would like a Grey Knight strike squad member that fought in the first war for Armageddon who then got lost in the warp until the first tyrannic war (or vice-versa) where they earned their terminator honours, leading us into the Indomitus so has experience from three major theatres of war before modern day.
The effect of picking one very tiny part of the history to make such a fanfare about does limit and expand narrative play. It expands the rules but drags the setting toa very small point when the idea of narrative play was to explore the fluff and, inescapably so, the fluff includes and has been defined by these historic conflicts. I think had they come back with a historic book to cover the most recent conflicts it would have been less well received but then those conflicts should have been picked up in the rule book or highlighted as coming in related codexes to silence nay sayers.
And i've always wanted named, personal customised heroes. I don't know anyone that hasn't wanted that tbf. Own character design rules, RPG style, have been the top of most players lists i've ever known as we all want to escape using GW named characters to bring in our own for narrative reasons. Abaddon and Marneus can't be on every sodding planet...
Semper wrote: I sort of understood some of his criticism to be based in the fact that in a universe spanning tens of thousands of years with many huge events and timey-winey stuff, they've narrowed the field of play considerably. I personally understand why they have done that here and don't personally have any qualms with it, to promote the new setting and models, but I can appreciate that with so much history for a majority of the player base who grew up on the back of the 13th crusade, tyrannic wars and Armageddon etc, that it might have been nice to back fill for those things first before diving straight in to something new as many of the characters we'd be likely to start with may have actually participated in those conflicts as newbies.
IE. Maybe I would like a Grey Knight strike squad member that fought in the first war for Armageddon who then got lost in the warp until the first tyrannic war (or vice-versa) where they earned their terminator honours, leading us into the Indomitus so has experience from three major theatres of war before modern day.
The effect of picking one very tiny part of the history to make such a fanfare about does limit and expand narrative play. It expands the rules but drags the setting toa very small point when the idea of narrative play was to explore the fluff and, inescapably so, the fluff includes and has been defined by these historic conflicts. I think had they come back with a historic book to cover the most recent conflicts it would have been less well received but then those conflicts should have been picked up in the rule book or highlighted as coming in related codexes to silence nay sayers.
And i've always wanted named, personal customised heroes. I don't know anyone that hasn't wanted that tbf. Own character design rules, RPG style, have been the top of most players lists i've ever known as we all want to escape using GW named characters to bring in our own for narrative reasons. Abaddon and Marneus can't be on every sodding planet...
If you ran a crusade with grey knights and played against buddies with wolves and various khorne/chaos stuff, you could easily set that on Armageddon. Likewise your background fluff for your grandmaster is set by you, why not have that as his story and use relics and warlord traits to represent that past? Better yet, run the Amrageddon crusade part, then when that's done, take a lowly named strike squad member and use them as your grand master in the next one. Carry their name and story over.
The only thing the current rules lack are specific missions for armageddon and fixed force rosters, which are really one off battles and not campaigns in that sense.
Yes but you know how it works. People like their OFFICIAL RUELEZ to do it for them.
I've known more than one player in my life that won't work with anything if it's not written by the original publisher and there is an advantage to having a third party 'ombudsman' to settle debate (or cause it).
I don't personally mind myself. I'd create characters as it is and assign points to them, some of my mates will play them, others wont. We'd also make our own scenarios up but we're hardly the representative of the entire player base (Winters case and point).
H.B.M.C. wrote: I'm not sure why GW insist on calling Crusade "narrative" play...
I'm not sure why you posted this because it's borderline baiting...
It's fine for people to have differing desires or opinions on a product but this video is completely out of touch and the arguments utterly nonsensical.
Additional rules that allow for army progression through a campaign = "You have to learn more rules on top of 9e and your army, so this only applies to people who like spreadsheets"
Yes, that is how supplements work. Is that even an argument?
It's like buying something from IKEA, taking it home, and opening it up just to complain that it only is appealing to handymen because you need to assemble it. Which is also completely ignoring that GW has already told everyone what sort of content the book had so there really shouldn't be any surprise...
Character and unit customization options = "GW is trying to ride the coat-tails of DnD because Critical Role and Stranger Things are popular"
I honestly don't even think this line of thought deserves a response. Seriously? It's not like GW has a history of releasing RPG-lite/RPG-adjacent supplements and products or anything...
"Narrative players really want story and narrative. I think we really want to play the Fall of Cadia or a setting for the 1st Tyranic War with some new hero characters, some new moments, and some new setting."
WHO wants that? I don't think I've ever seen anyone ask for either of those things, not the least because they already exist in some part. Gathering Storm covered the Fall of Cadia two editions ago and iirc the 1st Tyranic war dates back to either 3rd or 4th edition.
Also how many people actually replayed the "historical battles" from older 40k and AoS supplements? Like a handful of the overall player base?
And yeah, of course everyone wants more new named characters with their own individual rules. It's not like named characters are some of the most divisive units in the entire game that constantly get abused because they were previously the only way to get rules outside of the generic HQ options.
Also no one has ever asked for additional character customization like what Crusade is supposed to be providing... /s
"Narrative players want actual stories with beginnings, middles, and ends. This book only has 3 pages of setting, the rest is all rules. GW thinks narrative people want as little narrative as possible."
I... Has anyone ever... WHO! Again, who is begging for pre-written narratives with set story beats? 40k is the game of Your Dudes! And honestly, we all know that the Indomitus Crusade has a beginning, middle, and end.
[Beginning] Silent King shows up and Pariah Nexus appears.
[Middle] Imperium is mad about this. They send a lot of (insert Imperial faction here) to go fight the Necrons.
[End] Mid-way through 9e GW will declare the Indomitus Crusade over, someone will "win", but no faction will be significantly benefited or hampered on a macro scale.
Is there a place for 40k "historical" reenactment? Sure! Does is have to be in or replace the book that is designed to supposedly allow players to make their own narratives with their own dudes? NO!
"The book doesn't tell you how the Pariah Nexus effects Eldar, Tyranid Shadow in the Warp, Demons."
See these are really good questions that an actual useful review would point out. So I guess +1 point to winters SEO for...
"What about Cadia? How does the Pariah Nexus interact with Cadia? Did the writers forget that Cadia also had a warp dampening effect? What's the connection?"
FFS, what is his obsession with Cadia? They aren't even in the same Segmentum! Also we already know the connection and have basically know for 2 editions now!
Necrons! That's it. Necron pylons. They even did the Kooky Adventures of Trazyn and Cawl in Gathering Storm just in case anyone was still in doubt Crons had anything to do with Cadia.
"Are there any new heroes or villans..?"
MAKE YOUR OWN USING THE RULES IN THE BOOK! THAT'S WHAT IT EXISTS FOR!
"I guess they just want you to make your own. Which is fine but narrative players have been doing that since the dawn of time..."
NO! There is no "but". That's what this book is for. That's what this book was described as. That's what Crusade since it was announced has been described as.
It's a set of rules to aid you in playing homebrew narrative because good luck getting even close friends to agree on any sort of custom rules unless everyone has a lot of patience, is willing to accept and respect each others' criticism, and you have a very robust method of resolving differences in opinion. Or you nominate a single person as 40k Narrative DM. Otherwise it's almost impossible to get anyone to accept homebrew rules, especially after the first time someone makes something they think is reasonable but everyone else thinks is broken.
That's the function of Crusade. In theory the rules should have more design insight behind them than an average player can muster, and even in the even something is badly tuned then no one gets their feelings hurt because you can all just blame GW and house rule from there.
Winters was my 2nd favorite batrep guy but he has lost so much respect from me with his 2 crusade rants. Crusade gives the framework for people to do literally what he does on his channel, yet he says it's terrible. Watch his saga of the wolf stuff--it's almost EXACTLY what crusade is trying to do, yet he says crusade makes no sense? His arguments are really the definition of stupid.
I'm sorry but he's clearly got some old man "get off my lawn thing" going on, and he hasn't even tried Crusade.
He says people want to re-enact campaigns and stuff, but those products exist from GW and he's also never used them, and even panned them on his channel as well.
Even though the names may be familiar to many of you, some of the Chapter Tactics have undergone subtle changes that really help to hit home the character, attitude and fighting methods of the Chapter. Take the Space Wolves, for example, whose hunger for glory and ferocity on the counter-attack are legend. The new Chapter Tactic means that now it’s not just their Characters who can make Heroic Interventions, but ALL of their eligible units!
That’s not all – if you’ve created your own Space Marines Chapter, you’ll be pleased to know the new codex includes full rules for creating your own Successor Tactics, too. All you need to do is pick the two Successor Tactics that best identify the character or play style you have in mind from those listed, and boom – instant Chapter Tactics! Here are a few examples:
Dudeface wrote: Long range marksmen is altered a fair bit is it not?
Doesnt work on flamers anymore but all flamers are getting +4 range this eddition...They are getting it for free now LOL.
So Space wolves/DA/BA are all getting a +1 stat and another useful ability.
Sure hope Ultras get something useful. This +1 LD just don't cutt it man. Fall back and shoot is so meh...even if they remove the -1 to hit part of it - it's so meh.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BroodSpawn wrote: The only major clarification I think that's needed is if the successors are still benefitting from the Parent super-doctrine bonus or not.
Do we even have an info about superdoctrines still being a thing?
Dudeface wrote: Long range marksmen is altered a fair bit is it not?
Doesnt work on flamers anymore but all flamers are getting +4 range this eddition...They are getting it for free now LOL.
So Space wolves/DA/BA are all getting a +1 stat and another useful ability.
Sure hope Ultras get something useful. This +1 LD just don't cutt it man. Fall back and shoot is so meh...even if they remove the -1 to hit part of it - it's so meh.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BroodSpawn wrote: The only major clarification I think that's needed is if the successors are still benefitting from the Parent super-doctrine bonus or not.
Do we even have an info about superdoctrines still being a thing?
Since doctrines still exist and the supplements aren't invalidated, yes the super doctrines still exist. The only unknown is what the normal doctrines do, WD confirmed they're a thing but didn't state if they were still -1 ap.
Another interesting change here: The name of the Deathwatch Chapter Tactics has changed from "mission tactics" to "Xenos Hunters."
I have a sinking feeling that yet another aspect of the Deathwatch's rules is being changed to only take effect if you're playing against 1 of 8 different factions in this game with 26 factions in it.
I actually really like Crusade - it's 40K Necromunda to me, and that's awesome - but there is a point to be made when the Narrative section of a rulebook is filled to the gills with rules over actual narrative play stuff as it was in 8th.
I guess they just should have never put Crusade under the heading of "Narrative Play", and just had it as "Crusade".
Additional rules that allow for army progression through a campaign = "You have to learn more rules on top of 9e and your army, so this only applies to people who like spreadsheets"
Yes, that is how supplements work. Is that even an argument?
Lol. If he compares crusade to spreadsheet maybe he should stick with rock paper scissor
the_scotsman wrote: Another interesting change here: The name of the Deathwatch Chapter Tactics has changed from "mission tactics" to "Xenos Hunters."
I have a sinking feeling that yet another aspect of the Deathwatch's rules is being changed to only take effect if you're playing against 1 of 8 different factions in this game with 26 factions in it.
26 is pushing it a bit, I'd not encourage an officio assassinorum army.
The new grim resolve looks really strong. If you are charged on your opponents turn you should get +1 to hit sense it excludes pile in and consolidation moves.
Dudeface wrote: Long range marksmen is altered a fair bit is it not?
Doesnt work on flamers anymore but all flamers are getting +4 range this eddition...They are getting it for free now LOL.
So Space wolves/DA/BA are all getting a +1 stat and another useful ability.
Sure hope Ultras get something useful. This +1 LD just don't cutt it man. Fall back and shoot is so meh...even if they remove the -1 to hit part of it - it's so meh.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BroodSpawn wrote: The only major clarification I think that's needed is if the successors are still benefitting from the Parent super-doctrine bonus or not.
Do we even have an info about superdoctrines still being a thing?
Since doctrines still exist and the supplements aren't invalidated, yes the super doctrines still exist. The only unknown is what the normal doctrines do, WD confirmed they're a thing but didn't state if they were still -1 ap.
They haven't been invalidated but that doesn't mean that super doctrines won't change. They said everything else was still valid, and then the erratas were released. The Black Legion stuff in Vigilus still works, but specialist detachments are gone from competitive play. They could change.
Seems like RP is a more fiddly 5+++ then, except for multiwound models you'll need to hit the roll for EVERY WOUND they would have. Drastically reduces how good it is for units like destroyers.
All the C'Tan are characters (at least the 3 named shards are) so it's in;ine with the Deceiver/Nightbringer.
The RP though .. has questions.
Lychguard are 2w. Say one of them 'dies', that's 2 dice in the pool. To reanimate the Lychguard both dice would have to be 5+'s as you need as many 5+'s as the model has wounds to make them stand back up?
Am I missing something with that, or is it a lot harder to reanimate multi-wound models just with RP?
BroodSpawn wrote: All the C'Tan are characters (at least the 3 named shards are) so it's in;ine with the Deceiver/Nightbringer.
The RP though .. has questions.
Lychguard are 2w. Say one of them 'dies', that's 2 dice in the pool. To reanimate the Lychguard both dice would have to be 5+'s as you need as many 5+'s as the model has wounds to make them stand back up?
Am I missing something with that, or is it a lot harder to reanimate multi-wound models just with RP?
You aren't missing anything. It is weaker for mutli wound models.
Blood Hawk wrote: The new grim resolve looks really strong. If you are charged on your opponents turn you should get +1 to hit sense it excludes pile in and consolidation moves.
Quite strong yes, but their second part is pretty useless is it not?
With the squad sizes along with atsknf, how often will a DA unit ever actually take a combat attrition test?
Also, if they are charged, you would expect the enemy to be confident of doing enough damage to mean it won't matter, unless they interrupt, as they should be mostly dead anyway.
BroodSpawn wrote: All the C'Tan are characters (at least the 3 named shards are) so it's in;ine with the Deceiver/Nightbringer.
The RP though .. has questions.
Lychguard are 2w. Say one of them 'dies', that's 2 dice in the pool. To reanimate the Lychguard both dice would have to be 5+'s as you need as many 5+'s as the model has wounds to make them stand back up?
Am I missing something with that, or is it a lot harder to reanimate multi-wound models just with RP?
You're not missing anything, that's exactly how it works. Which makes sense in a way. The higher wound and more powerful units are harder to bring back; whilst your weaker and cheaper warriors are much easier. It stands to reason that bringing units back from the dead is easier for a lower wound model and thus prevents you building elite "unkillable" armies.
BroodSpawn wrote: All the C'Tan are characters (at least the 3 named shards are) so it's in;ine with the Deceiver/Nightbringer.
The RP though .. has questions.
Lychguard are 2w. Say one of them 'dies', that's 2 dice in the pool. To reanimate the Lychguard both dice would have to be 5+'s as you need as many 5+'s as the model has wounds to make them stand back up?
Am I missing something with that, or is it a lot harder to reanimate multi-wound models just with RP?
You aren't missing anything. It is weaker for mutli wound models.
Yeah, Multi-wound models are looking rough to reanimate right now.
Reanimation protocols seems very wordy and it's unclear if failed attempts get added to the next round of attacks.
Void dragon is a tank hunter who seems a little meh to me unless he's a character.
Hexmark sadly seems a decent chaff clearer but that's about it.
Monolith has been hitting the gym though.
I disagree the wording is unclear.
Once the entire unit’s attacks are resolved, the Necron player then resolves a batch of Reanimation Protocol rolls. Anything not resurrected is described as phasing out, so they don’t get to roll again.
Example to explain my understanding.
I have 20 Necron Warriors in a unit.
Enemy Unit A shoots them up, resulting in 5 “dead” models once all their attacks are made.
I then roll 5 D6 (that being the total wounds of the fallen models). Let’s say I roll 2, 2, 4, 5 and 6, with no modifiers in play. That result means I can start healing two wounds. Warriors having a single wound, two are turned to play.
The remaining three are removed from the game, being so badly damaged they phase out.
Enemy Unit B then shoots them up again (poor Warriors!). This time, they manage to cause 6 casualties.
I then roll 6 D6 for Reanimation Protocols.
Now....multi-wound models, such as Destroyers work differently. If they have 3 wounds, Unit A’s attack would drop a single model. As only one has been destroyed, I’m only rolling 3 D6, not the original 5. If I make all of them, that Destroyer returns to play, hale and healthy as if nothing ever happened. But, Unit B’s arrack? That’s enough to ‘destroy’ two of the unit’s models. Provided at least one remains in play, I still roll 6 D6, requiring a minimum of 3 5+ results to return a Destroyer to play.
This of course means units consisting entirely of single wound models are really, really tough to eradicate, as each success is one back. Multi-wound models? Your opponent might want to get clever, and only spang enough damage on them to ensure I’m only ever rolling a single model, given the likelihood of sparing all the wounds is pretty slim, even with modifiers and re-rolls.
Reanimation protocols seems very wordy and it's unclear if failed attempts get added to the next round of attacks.
Nope after unit attacks a unit with Reanimation Protocols the RP activates and completes for that round of attacks. At the end of resolving any dice left in the pool are lost. Your opponent can then resume their turn and use another unit for whatever, even attacking the same unit.
Each RP pool exists for only one unit completing a round of attacks against the unit with RP.
This means taking out a unit of necrons is easier if
1) Your opponent can wipe out the unit with one attack.
2) If they attack with lots of units, but each one dealing only a small amount of damage each time - thus having few dice in the pool to reanimate with. Especially against multi wound models.
Oh wait, the multi-wound model reanimating thing is even weirder.
Lychguard again. 1 dies. 2 dice rolled to reanimate - 1x 5, 1x2.
The 5 goes into the pool.
Next time the same Lychguard unit has to roll RP (assuming still 1 dead) that's 2 dice to roll, any 5's go into the pool. Pool has at least 2 in it, revive a Lychguard.
The question now turns into do you only roll RP after the unit (Lychguard in this example) have been attacked / shot / hit in melee or do they get to to it more often than that?
Multi-wound models could come back by just 'banking' the successes until you have enough to revive one?
Reanimation protocols seems very wordy and it's unclear if failed attempts get added to the next round of attacks.
Void dragon is a tank hunter who seems a little meh to me unless he's a character.
Hexmark sadly seems a decent chaff clearer but that's about it.
Monolith has been hitting the gym though.
I disagree the wording is unclear.
Once the entire unit’s attacks are resolved, the Necron player then resolves a batch of Reanimation Protocol rolls. Anything not resurrected is described as phasing out, so they don’t get to roll again.
Example to explain my understanding.
I have 20 Necron Warriors in a unit.
Enemy Unit A shoots them up, resulting in 5 “dead” models once all their attacks are made.
I then roll 5 D6 (that being the total wounds of the fallen models). Let’s say I roll 2, 2, 4, 5 and 6, with no modifiers in play. That result means I can start healing two wounds. Warriors having a single wound, two are turned to play.
The remaining three are removed from the game, being so badly damaged they phase out.
Enemy Unit B then shoots them up again (poor Warriors!). This time, they manage to cause 6 casualties.
I then roll 6 D6 for Reanimation Protocols.
Now....multi-wound models, such as Destroyers work differently. If they have 3 wounds, Unit A’s attack would drop a single model. As only one has been destroyed, I’m only rolling 3 D6, not the original 5. If I make all of them, that Destroyer returns to play, hale and healthy as if nothing ever happened. But, Unit B’s arrack? That’s enough to ‘destroy’ two of the unit’s models. Provided at least one remains in play, I still roll 6 D6, requiring a minimum of 3 5+ results to return a Destroyer to play.
This of course means units consisting entirely of single wound models are really, really tough to eradicate, as each success is one back. Multi-wound models? Your opponent might want to get clever, and only spang enough damage on them to ensure I’m only ever rolling a single model, given the likelihood of sparing all the wounds is pretty slim, even with modifiers and re-rolls.
Isn't there about a 4% chance of managing 3 5+'s? It seems overly harsh to the multiwound models.
However, with W2+ models; kill one model and it's not likely to reassemble. Kill multiple W2+ models and now the odds of reassembly increase as more dice are added to the pool.
BroodSpawn wrote: Oh wait, the multi-wound model reanimating thing is even weirder.
Lychguard again. 1 dies. 2 dice rolled to reanimate - 1x 5, 1x2.
The 5 goes into the pool.
Next time the same Lychguard unit has to roll RP (assuming still 1 dead) that's 2 dice to roll, any 5's go into the pool. Pool has at least 2 in it, revive a Lychguard.
The question now turns into do you only roll RP after the unit (Lychguard in this example) have been attacked / shot / hit in melee or do they get to to it more often than that?
Multi-wound models could come back by just 'banking' the successes until you have enough to revive one?
Nope read the last bit - the "pool" is dumped after each combat resolution. So you can't save them up, you get one separate pool per unit attacking you.
BroodSpawn wrote: Oh wait, the multi-wound model reanimating thing is even weirder.
Lychguard again. 1 dies. 2 dice rolled to reanimate - 1x 5, 1x2.
The 5 goes into the pool.
Next time the same Lychguard unit has to roll RP (assuming still 1 dead) that's 2 dice to roll, any 5's go into the pool. Pool has at least 2 in it, revive a Lychguard.
The question now turns into do you only roll RP after the unit (Lychguard in this example) have been attacked / shot / hit in melee or do they get to to it more often than that?
Multi-wound models could come back by just 'banking' the successes until you have enough to revive one?
Any leftover dice or failed models are removed, so nope :(
BroodSpawn wrote: Oh wait, the multi-wound model reanimating thing is even weirder.
Lychguard again. 1 dies. 2 dice rolled to reanimate - 1x 5, 1x2.
The 5 goes into the pool.
Next time the same Lychguard unit has to roll RP (assuming still 1 dead) that's 2 dice to roll, any 5's go into the pool. Pool has at least 2 in it, revive a Lychguard.
The question now turns into do you only roll RP after the unit (Lychguard in this example) have been attacked / shot / hit in melee or do they get to to it more often than that?
Multi-wound models could come back by just 'banking' the successes until you have enough to revive one?
No. See the last sentence of the rule, as the pool empties each time.
However, with W2+ models; kill one model and it's not likely to reassemble. Kill multiple W2+ models and now the odds of reassembly increase as more dice are added to the pool.
Exactly so your opponent has to think carefully how to attack multiwound models.
Any dice still in the pool are discarded after you've finished rolling, so no banking successes.
The weirdness to me is this: you're encouraged to commit enough shots to wipe out a unit then fire. But, you will get more multi wound models back if you roll more RP dice together. So, if you undershoot and get 18 wounds on a 20 wound unit, a good chunk of it is going to jump back up. Far more than if you'd done 18x 1 damage attacks seperately! EDIT: apologies, this is the point oni made above :slowpoke:
Dudeface wrote: Long range marksmen is altered a fair bit is it not?
Doesnt work on flamers anymore but all flamers are getting +4 range this eddition...They are getting it for free now LOL.
So Space wolves/DA/BA are all getting a +1 stat and another useful ability.
Sure hope Ultras get something useful. This +1 LD just don't cutt it man. Fall back and shoot is so meh...even if they remove the -1 to hit part of it - it's so meh.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BroodSpawn wrote: The only major clarification I think that's needed is if the successors are still benefitting from the Parent super-doctrine bonus or not.
Do we even have an info about superdoctrines still being a thing?
Since doctrines still exist and the supplements aren't invalidated, yes the super doctrines still exist. The only unknown is what the normal doctrines do, WD confirmed they're a thing but didn't state if they were still -1 ap.
The way I read it, you keep re-rolling (with a pool reduced by successes each time) until you have not enough successes to reanimate a model, or all the models are reanimated. In that way, it's even better than FnP for 1 wounds models.
Given GW has worded it quite clearly it might well be that the codex offers multiple ways to boost at at different stages of the RP process. Hence why they've spelled it out clearly.
You might get options to boost the dice roll (only by +-1); or the ability to add dice to the pool or the ability to preserve the pool etc... There's quite a lot of flexibility in there to change the result.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Quasistellar wrote: The way I read it, you keep re-rolling (with a pool reduced by successes each time) until you have not enough successes to reanimate a model, or all the models are reanimated. In that way, it's even better than FnP for 1 wounds models.
You only roll once at the start. All the dice you roll which are 5+ get put into the pool. You then reduce the number of dice by wounds restored until you've not enough dice left to restore a model to full wounds; or you have no more models to restore. At that point all the dice left in the pool are lost.
If that unit gets attacked again by a different attacking unit then you'd roll again and create a brand new pool.
Doohicky wrote: Is it just me, or is that a really wordy way of giving them a worse version of FNP?
It's FNP which can be negated by wiping out squad and is less useful on multi wound models basically.
Only small advantage is being able to replace models in new positions
It's likely because there are going to be ways to bring back models that have failed their RP. Rites of Reanimation, Res Orbs, Stratagems, etc.
I hope you are right here, would be nice if there is a command phase reanimation on top of this one triggered by one/some of the above you mentioned.
On a separate note, seeing the new c'tan get the 'max wounds per phase' how likely do people think this will be added to other big models such as primarchs/daemon primarchs?
Doohicky wrote: Is it just me, or is that a really wordy way of giving them a worse version of FNP?
It's FNP which can be negated by wiping out squad and is less useful on multi wound models basically.
Only small advantage is being able to replace models in new positions
It's likely because there are going to be ways to bring back models that have failed their RP. Rites of Reanimation, Res Orbs, Stratagems, etc.
Based on the wording of RP being quite involved with referencing models destroyed by the attack, I'm now quite inclined to believe that Rites is a 'heal D3 wounds/models'-type ability like the Hospitaller or the Bonereapers.
Ohhhh, I think I get it now. If Reaimation Protocols activates, you get roll a number of RP dice equal to the total wounds of all models that were destroyed. Then, if you successfully reanimated one of more models, those dice are removed from the pool, and you roll again. If you fail to reanimate any models, you stop rolling.
Yeah as someone who already had an all destroyer cult 2000 point gimmick army from early 7th and was looking forwards to adding variety to it, this form of reanimation seems very poorly thought out.
A good take on reanimation should apply to troops, elite units and characters equally. Whilst the decurion was abysmally thought out garbage that you could see was anti-fun from a mile off, the basic reanimation rules from 7th at least managed that by being just FNP with few attached frills.
Maybe a wargame prone to bloat already doesn’t need a faction wide rule that took them half a page to explain, actually.
unitled wrote: Seems like RP is a more fiddly 5+++ then, except for multiwound models you'll need to hit the roll for EVERY WOUND they would have. Drastically reduces how good it is for units like destroyers.
Nah it is actually better than FNP. For 1 wound models that are destroyed - you only need 1 roll regardless of damage. Its still better than fnp on on larger wounds models too. Overkill is ignored and 1 5 plus can restore all your wounds. It is more swingy - but in the long run it ignores a lot of damage that FNP has to take account for. It's basically the best army wide rule now. It immediately puts crons on the map. I mean hell...All your infantry have a 4+++ if they are near a cryptec (provided a single unit does not wipe them). This is incredible durability.
Nope, on larger models you need a 5+ for each wound on its profile. You lose 1 skorpekh, you need 3 5+ or its gone permanently.
Darsath wrote: Ohhhh, I think I get it now. If Reaimation Protocols activates, you get roll a number of RP dice equal to the total wounds of all models that were destroyed. Then, if you successfully reanimated one of more models, those dice are removed from the pool, and you roll again. If you fail to reanimate any models, you stop rolling.
I don't think you roll again each time. I think it's just you roll for the pool once. and then start removing the 5+s and reanimation accordingly with the wounds.
One thing that strikes me as a little odd - the Ctan shard is only 9 Wounds, despite clearly being rather large and pretty dangerous. If it's a Character (and I'd be surprised if it's not), it's going to benefit from Look Out Sir.
unitled wrote: Any dice still in the pool are discarded after you've finished rolling, so no banking successes.
The weirdness to me is this: you're encouraged to commit enough shots to wipe out a unit then fire. But, you will get more multi wound models back if you roll more RP dice together. So, if you undershoot and get 18 wounds on a 20 wound unit, a good chunk of it is going to jump back up. Far more than if you'd done 18x 1 damage attacks seperately! EDIT: apologies, this is the point oni made above :slowpoke:
Remember that you're supposed to resolve all attacks made with weapons that have the same profile before resolving attacks with the next.
Darsath wrote: Ohhhh, I think I get it now. If Reaimation Protocols activates, you get roll a number of RP dice equal to the total wounds of all models that were destroyed. Then, if you successfully reanimated one of more models, those dice are removed from the pool, and you roll again. If you fail to reanimate any models, you stop rolling.
Nope you only roll ONCE. You then remove dice from the pool to reanimate each model in the unit until you run out of dice/models to reanimate (or don't have enough dice to reanimate a model to its full number of wounds - 1 dice = 1 wound).
Darsath wrote: Ohhhh, I think I get it now. If Reaimation Protocols activates, you get roll a number of RP dice equal to the total wounds of all models that were destroyed. Then, if you successfully reanimated one of more models, those dice are removed from the pool, and you roll again. If you fail to reanimate any models, you stop rolling.
No. You roll as many dice as wounds of models destroyed in that enemy unit’s attack sequence (!). Each 5+ is your pool and you return as many models as you can make with that pool.
Models not returned are permanent-lost and not even in the pool for the roll after the next attack.
Darsath wrote: Ohhhh, I think I get it now. If Reaimation Protocols activates, you get roll a number of RP dice equal to the total wounds of all models that were destroyed. Then, if you successfully reanimated one of more models, those dice are removed from the pool, and you roll again. If you fail to reanimate any models, you stop rolling.
I don't think you roll again each time. I think it's just you roll for the pool once. and then start removing the 5+s and reanimation accordingly with the wounds.
Basically, yes. The initial rolls to create the pool are made together, however you then treat each particular model that's reanimated individually.
That probably becomes important due to interaction with some stratagem, or something - at first I thought it might be important for coherency reasons, but I note that the rule doesn't require you to set the reanimated models up in coherency. So you'd be ok to add an entire chunk back in one go specifically for that purpose.
Kanluwen wrote: Remember that you're supposed to resolve all attacks made with weapons that have the same profile before resolving attacks with the next.
That isn't relevant for Reanimation Protocols, though.
"Each time an enemy unit shoots or fights, after it makes its attacks"
In other words, after you've resolved attacks from the entire unit.
Darsath wrote: Ohhhh, I think I get it now. If Reaimation Protocols activates, you get roll a number of RP dice equal to the total wounds of all models that were destroyed. Then, if you successfully reanimated one of more models, those dice are removed from the pool, and you roll again. If you fail to reanimate any models, you stop rolling.
I see where you’re coming from, and going wrong (sorry if that sounds snippy, it’s not meant to!)
The Pool always refers to the successful dice.
And it’s from that Pool we remove dice once a single model has all its wounds healed, and this is technically done one at a time. So for Warriors healing from a pool of 5 successful rolls, it’s 1, 1, 1, 1, 1. No successful rolls are wasted.
For multi-wound models, from that same 5 success example? It’s 2, 2. Two models return to play. The remaining success is wasted, and does not carry over.
I really like the new RP rule. It’s very long winded but I like the result. Multi wound models are harder to bring back (though still easier in a way with it being after every time an enemy unit attacks them), and makes weaker stuff more likely to keep coming back. Makes warriors and immortals cooler, and might stop so much destroyer spam like before.
The line: 'Repeat until there are no more reanimating models ...'
Makes me think there will be ways to roll more dice than total wounds of the models, otherwise that line is not needed
So maybe reanimation orb does something like roll 2 dice for each wound instead of 1.
Or gives a set number of extra dice etc etc.
I definitely feel there is a way to roll extra dice.
unitled wrote: Seems like RP is a more fiddly 5+++ then, except for multiwound models you'll need to hit the roll for EVERY WOUND they would have. Drastically reduces how good it is for units like destroyers.
Though if you don't get wiped out you roll and roll and roll...though yes 1w units biggest benefitters if enemy can't wipe unit in one go(looks at aggressors...)
BroodSpawn wrote: All the C'Tan are characters (at least the 3 named shards are) so it's in;ine with the Deceiver/Nightbringer.
The RP though .. has questions.
Lychguard are 2w. Say one of them 'dies', that's 2 dice in the pool. To reanimate the Lychguard both dice would have to be 5+'s as you need as many 5+'s as the model has wounds to make them stand back up?
Am I missing something with that, or is it a lot harder to reanimate multi-wound models just with RP?
To an extent, it IS better than a FNP on low/1 wound models because it ignores multi damage. If your opponent is paying points for additional damage on weapons to kill primaris, they're points wasted against you as your bulky troop options straight up ignore it.
The real winners are obviously going to be Immortals (remember these lads are supposedly going to T5 as well!) and Warriors. Immortals are actually around as durable as Plague Marines are now, with the sole exception of if your opponent manages to get [SQUAD SIZE] of damage past your toughness and armour saves.
Tiberius501 wrote: I really like the new RP rule. It’s very long winded but I like the result. Multi wound models are harder to bring back (though still easier in a way with it being after every time an enemy unit attacks them), and makes weaker stuff more likely to keep coming back. Makes warriors and immortals cooler, and might stop so much destroyer spam like before.
They get 1 try at getting up then dead. It's way worse for big models.
Tiberius501 wrote: I really like the new RP rule. It’s very long winded but I like the result. Multi wound models are harder to bring back (though still easier in a way with it being after every time an enemy unit attacks them), and makes weaker stuff more likely to keep coming back. Makes warriors and immortals cooler, and might stop so much destroyer spam like before.
Yes. though the pool is only 5+ of dice for wounds of models lost to a given enemy unit's attacks, not models lost previously. So the multiple roles for multi-wound models are likely to be a lot less efficient with more "wasted successes" than just one roll for everything lost at the end of a phase / turn / etc.. (aside from the unit being completely wiped).
Overread wrote: Given GW has worded it quite clearly it might well be that the codex offers multiple ways to boost at at different stages of the RP process. Hence why they've spelled it out clearly.
You might get options to boost the dice roll (only by +-1); or the ability to add dice to the pool or the ability to preserve the pool etc... There's quite a lot of flexibility in there to change the result.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Quasistellar wrote: The way I read it, you keep re-rolling (with a pool reduced by successes each time) until you have not enough successes to reanimate a model, or all the models are reanimated. In that way, it's even better than FnP for 1 wounds models.
You only roll once at the start. All the dice you roll which are 5+ get put into the pool. You then reduce the number of dice by wounds restored until you've not enough dice left to restore a model to full wounds; or you have no more models to restore. At that point all the dice left in the pool are lost.
If that unit gets attacked again by a different attacking unit then you'd roll again and create a brand new pool.
I'm sure you're right--it references "this pool", and the only pool mentioned is the pool of successful dice. I believe the "repeat this process" they are referring to is simply the placement of the reanimated models using successes.
Anyone gonna talk about how CRAZY the void dragon is?!
It's essentially morathi from aos. With the healing as well it is crazy
Essentially, if it doesn't take wounds in the first battle round and it kills a vehicle then it will last for the entire game. If it takes full 3 every round, but it kills 4 vehicles, it will last the entire game. Coupled with a brutal vehicle killer shooting attack and combat profile.
And that's on top of all the ctan MW shenanigans. Chuck this into someone's lines and it is a repeatedly exploding bomb of MW that physically cannot be removed.
Seriously, this is primarch level power here. Better than that as it can hide and it cannot be focused.
Will need to see the whole dex, particularly strategems, to get a feel on the new RP. Off the bat it looks good for any 1W models. Multi-wound though looks rough. If they would have let you revive with just the number of successes you made that would have made more sense.
Also, still a number of questions on characters and RP. It will next to useless if you need to roll five 5+ dice for an overlord or something to work.
Will need to know if Ctan keep the character rule.
Seems weird to create a new RP rule that doesn't scale well with multi-wound models. W1 models are cool with this, but as soon as you get above W1 suddenly it becomes very hard to reanimate.
I guess that explains why Immortals stayed at W1 then...
And there's something amusing about the Shard of the Void Dragon having a Toughness value lower than a Wraithlord. GW remain petrified of Toughnesses above 7 for most things, despite introducing weapon Strengths that can go to infinity.
Dudeface wrote: The new RP doesn't trigger off psychic powers or vehicles exploding etc. Since it specifies an attack sequence.
Given GW's usual writing standards I wonder if the person who concocted this new rule actually realised that.
Tiberius501 wrote: I really like the new RP rule. It’s very long winded but I like the result. Multi wound models are harder to bring back (though still easier in a way with it being after every time an enemy unit attacks them), and makes weaker stuff more likely to keep coming back. Makes warriors and immortals cooler, and might stop so much destroyer spam like before.
They get 1 try at getting up then dead. It's way worse for big models.
It seems that you roll for each dead model like before, for every time you roll.
out of model x! Then re roll out a most expen$ive replacement! 
So what is in it?
NO! There is no "but". That's what this book is for. That's what this book was described as. That's what Crusade since it was announced has been described as.
