Jog my memory please, where's the regional pricing sheet on the trade page so I can check UK prices?
Its no longer there, probably got too known so they changed how they distribute the pricing sheet.
There is one person over on TGA that still gets the € prices somehow (probably a FLGS contact) and thats where I get them from when I post them here.
But if you just want the UK prices, you just need to find something in the store that costs 175€ and look up how much it is in £
There were some issues with the general availability of the pricing list. Heard something about scalperbots using it to make themselves look like official retailers.
Jog my memory please, where's the regional pricing sheet on the trade page so I can check UK prices?
Its no longer there, probably got too known so they changed how they distribute the pricing sheet.
There is one person over on TGA that still gets the € prices somehow (probably a FLGS contact) and thats where I get them from when I post them here.
But if you just want the UK prices, you just need to find something in the store that costs 175€ and look up how much it is in £
Ahh at least I'm not going crazy then, plus I'd wager seeing them early made people lose a degree of fomo urge.
I think the primary motive behind the change was to induce FOMO with the stores themselves. As far as I understand it, rather than sending in order forms at their leisure, stores now get phoned by a rep and have to commit there and then on how much stock they want.
Eh I can't see that working; esp since that would add to GW's operating costs if their rep has to phone around all the time to make each order with each partner. More likely GW might just shift to direct emailing the sheet to their trading partners rather than putting it live on an openly accessible website if GW want the price sheet "hidden".
Or just put it live on a website that has a super simple account and password system.
Overread wrote: Eh I can't see that working; esp since that would add to GW's operating costs if their rep has to phone around all the time to make each order with each partner. More likely GW might just shift to direct emailing the sheet to their trading partners rather than putting it live on an openly accessible website if GW want the price sheet "hidden".
Or just put it live on a website that has a super simple account and password system.
I never was able to find it on the US side of things; it always asked for a trade account ID.
So people won't be happy about this, buuuuuuuuut...
Since we’re on the topic, let’s talk about Crisis Battlesuits. One of the coolest things about the current edition of Warhammer 40,000 is that every unit gets its own special ability. While this is great for most, it hits a snag when massively flexible models need an ability that suits every possible loadout. After all, a bonus that’s ideal for close-range flamers might not be nearly as effective for long-range missile pods.
Imperial strategists have addressed this issue by spreading flexible tanks like the Leman Russ or Gladiator across different datasheets, and the T’au are nothing if not quick learners.The new Codex: T’au Empire splits Crisis Battlesuits into three distinct datasheets based around classic configurations,* and veteran T’au commanders might recognise a few names from lore of yore…
The Sunforge configuration melts down heavy targets with twin fusion blasters, Fireknife battlesuits mix and match plasma rifles and missile pods to crack elite troops, and Starscythe teams choose from a buffet of burst cannons and flamers to wipe out massed hordes.
They’re all still Crisis battlesuits, but now they get custom abilities that really help out their chosen roles. Take the Crisis Sunforge Battlesuits, for instance – their Sunforge ability helps to mitigate the low rate of fire on their fusion blasters by giving powerful re-rolls against their ideal targets. With the Retaliation Cadre Detachment rule in play, you’re firing Strength 10 shots at AP-5, each dealing D6+2 damage – with a re-roll on both Wound rolls and damage!
These new distinctions have another benefit for battlesuit aficionados. No army can contain the same datasheet more than three times,** but each of these configurations is a different datasheet. That means you can squeeze up to nine Crisis teams into your roster, ready to retaliate as pre-emptively as the Greater Good demands.
Don’t worry if your own Crisis Suits have different armaments. The current datasheet will be added to Legends so you can keep using a more diverse hardpoint combination if you wish.
Commanders can join all three of these new units, and retain their own flexible weapon options – so you can outfit them according to their chosen bodyguard. Their own abilities focus on supporting the entire unit, with the Enforcer Commander lowering the Armour Penetration of incoming fire, while the Coldstar Commander turbo-boosts its allies so they can keep up with its incredible speed.
More T’au Empire rules are on their way, as the awesome Kroot Hunting Pack – which is your first chance to get your hands on Codex: T’au Empire – goes up for pre-order this Saturday.
* This also allows their points costs to more accurately reflect their equipment, rather than the priciest possible loadout.
The Phazer wrote: Rivals of the Mirrored City is a lot cheaper than I expected.
Yeah, I only wanted Gitz but with that prize I may consider buying that pack. With a discount in some shops it may be really a nice surprise for a GW minis pack.
So people won't be happy about this, buuuuuuuuut...
Spoiler:
Since we’re on the topic, let’s talk about Crisis Battlesuits. One of the coolest things about the current edition of Warhammer 40,000 is that every unit gets its own special ability. While this is great for most, it hits a snag when massively flexible models need an ability that suits every possible loadout. After all, a bonus that’s ideal for close-range flamers might not be nearly as effective for long-range missile pods.
Imperial strategists have addressed this issue by spreading flexible tanks like the Leman Russ or Gladiator across different datasheets, and the T’au are nothing if not quick learners.The new Codex: T’au Empire splits Crisis Battlesuits into three distinct datasheets based around classic configurations,* and veteran T’au commanders might recognise a few names from lore of yore…
The Sunforge configuration melts down heavy targets with twin fusion blasters, Fireknife battlesuits mix and match plasma rifles and missile pods to crack elite troops, and Starscythe teams choose from a buffet of burst cannons and flamers to wipe out massed hordes.
They’re all still Crisis battlesuits, but now they get custom abilities that really help out their chosen roles. Take the Crisis Sunforge Battlesuits, for instance – their Sunforge ability helps to mitigate the low rate of fire on their fusion blasters by giving powerful re-rolls against their ideal targets. With the Retaliation Cadre Detachment rule in play, you’re firing Strength 10 shots at AP-5, each dealing D6+2 damage – with a re-roll on both Wound rolls and damage!
These new distinctions have another benefit for battlesuit aficionados. No army can contain the same datasheet more than three times,** but each of these configurations is a different datasheet. That means you can squeeze up to nine Crisis teams into your roster, ready to retaliate as pre-emptively as the Greater Good demands.
Don’t worry if your own Crisis Suits have different armaments. The current datasheet will be added to Legends so you can keep using a more diverse hardpoint combination if you wish.
Commanders can join all three of these new units, and retain their own flexible weapon options – so you can outfit them according to their chosen bodyguard. Their own abilities focus on supporting the entire unit, with the Enforcer Commander lowering the Armour Penetration of incoming fire, while the Coldstar Commander turbo-boosts its allies so they can keep up with its incredible speed.
More T’au Empire rules are on their way, as the awesome Kroot Hunting Pack – which is your first chance to get your hands on Codex: T’au Empire – goes up for pre-order this Saturday.
* This also allows their points costs to more accurately reflect their equipment, rather than the priciest possible loadout.
** Unless they have the BATTLELINE keyword.
Now we need to know whether these are the only possible configurations and if they aren't whether all the configurations are fixed like this or if you can still make your own.
So people won't be happy about this, buuuuuuuuut...
Spoiler:
Since we’re on the topic, let’s talk about Crisis Battlesuits. One of the coolest things about the current edition of Warhammer 40,000 is that every unit gets its own special ability. While this is great for most, it hits a snag when massively flexible models need an ability that suits every possible loadout. After all, a bonus that’s ideal for close-range flamers might not be nearly as effective for long-range missile pods.
Imperial strategists have addressed this issue by spreading flexible tanks like the Leman Russ or Gladiator across different datasheets, and the T’au are nothing if not quick learners.The new Codex: T’au Empire splits Crisis Battlesuits into three distinct datasheets based around classic configurations,* and veteran T’au commanders might recognise a few names from lore of yore…
The Sunforge configuration melts down heavy targets with twin fusion blasters, Fireknife battlesuits mix and match plasma rifles and missile pods to crack elite troops, and Starscythe teams choose from a buffet of burst cannons and flamers to wipe out massed hordes.
They’re all still Crisis battlesuits, but now they get custom abilities that really help out their chosen roles. Take the Crisis Sunforge Battlesuits, for instance – their Sunforge ability helps to mitigate the low rate of fire on their fusion blasters by giving powerful re-rolls against their ideal targets. With the Retaliation Cadre Detachment rule in play, you’re firing Strength 10 shots at AP-5, each dealing D6+2 damage – with a re-roll on both Wound rolls and damage!
These new distinctions have another benefit for battlesuit aficionados. No army can contain the same datasheet more than three times,** but each of these configurations is a different datasheet. That means you can squeeze up to nine Crisis teams into your roster, ready to retaliate as pre-emptively as the Greater Good demands.
Don’t worry if your own Crisis Suits have different armaments. The current datasheet will be added to Legends so you can keep using a more diverse hardpoint combination if you wish.
Commanders can join all three of these new units, and retain their own flexible weapon options – so you can outfit them according to their chosen bodyguard. Their own abilities focus on supporting the entire unit, with the Enforcer Commander lowering the Armour Penetration of incoming fire, while the Coldstar Commander turbo-boosts its allies so they can keep up with its incredible speed. More T’au Empire rules are on their way, as the awesome Kroot Hunting Pack – which is your first chance to get your hands on Codex: T’au Empire – goes up for pre-order this Saturday.
* This also allows their points costs to more accurately reflect their equipment, rather than the priciest possible loadout.
** Unless they have the BATTLELINE keyword.
Now we need to know whether these are the only possible configurations and if they aren't whether all the configurations are fixed like this or if you can still make your own.
Well, going off what it implies there?
It seems that Starscythe=anti-horde. They talk about Flamers+Burst Cannons there. Fireknife=anti-MEQ; they mention Plasma Rifle+Missile Pods. Sunforge=anti-vehicle; twin-linked Fusion Blasters here.
LOL, I forgot that two of the patterns are so common that the Dakka lexicon has them! Also, god I forgot how many options were on the Crisis suit that weren't in the kit.
lord_blackfang wrote: So I guess that was just a disingenuous way to say only a few loadouts were playable?
Yes. Index rules are mix and match whatever you want, but the effect of fixed price wargear and the faction rule penalising split fire heavily incentivises specialisation using the most effective loadouts.
In response to the redacted codex rumour from valrak, new video out today:
Death Company themed box (nicked the list off b&c)
- New Upgrade Sprue
- Jump Assault Intercessors (Not sure how many)
- Brutalis Dreadnought
- New Lemartes Model
Mentions sanguinor and sanguinary guard again. Krieg looking like next year, big new rules for kill team coming, new necronunda version on the way and redacted is agents for summer still.
i'd much rather see the datasheet get split in three so each can be balanced individually. doubt any of the three are going to have entirely static layouts, so imo this is a good change (the leman russ changes seem to have worked well for guard). anyone doomsaying over this is overreacting
Dudeface wrote: In response to the redacted codex rumour from valrak, new video out today:
Krieg looking like next year, big new rules for kill team coming, new necronunda version on the way and redacted is agents for summer still.
KT 3rd edition is probably on the horizon. felt that way for a little while now. Agents codex was already rumored and discussed in the thread
new necromunda version/edition is neat; had some thoughts about that in the other thread
StudentOfEtherium wrote: i'd much rather see the datasheet get split in three so each can be balanced individually. doubt any of the three are going to have entirely static layouts, so imo this is a good change (the leman russ changes seem to have worked well for guard). anyone doomsaying over this is overreacting
Dudeface wrote: In response to the redacted codex rumour from valrak, new video out today:
Krieg looking like next year, big new rules for kill team coming, new necronunda version on the way and redacted is agents for summer still.
KT 3rd edition is probably on the horizon. felt that way for a little while now. Agents codex was already rumored and discussed in the thread
new necromunda version/edition is neat; had some thoughts about that in the other thread
It's not "Oh, Crisis Suits are ruined forever!"
It's "GW did something really dumb with points and army construction this edition, and they're doubling down on it instead of changing it for the better."
As someone who gets decision paralysis assembling every kit with options and hates magnets, I kinda get where's that decison coming from. But I still believe they should prioritize the option to let people customize.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: i'd much rather see the datasheet get split in three so each can be balanced individually. doubt any of the three are going to have entirely static layouts, so imo this is a good change (the leman russ changes seem to have worked well for guard). anyone doomsaying over this is overreacting
Dudeface wrote: In response to the redacted codex rumour from valrak, new video out today:
Krieg looking like next year, big new rules for kill team coming, new necronunda version on the way and redacted is agents for summer still.
KT 3rd edition is probably on the horizon. felt that way for a little while now. Agents codex was already rumored and discussed in the thread
new necromunda version/edition is neat; had some thoughts about that in the other thread
It's not "Oh, Crisis Suits are ruined forever!"
It's "GW did something really dumb with points and army construction this edition, and they're doubling down on it instead of changing it for the better."
I'd argue this is better for the game than simply doing nothing and leaving there an obviously best option and flexibility to ignore the rest.
JNAProductions wrote: Right, but you could instead give different points for different wargear options on the same datasheet.
Or you could actually carve out roles for things to exist.
Frankly, if they left things as they were there'd be gripes about "oh but there's no option to take a bunch of them! Farsight isn't represented!" or "Why would I take anything else, since there's no points?" or "Why would I take anything else, since this option is so wildly obviously a better choice even with points?".
This way? There's 3x Crisis units to pick from. You can pick the one you want to include, then build the rest of the force around that choice.
JNAProductions wrote: Right, but you could instead give different points for different wargear options on the same datasheet.
but we're talking about 10th edition, which explicitly doesn't do that. making this the hill you want to die on, instead of engaging with the edition as it exists, is pretty pointless. if you don't care about the state of the rules this edition, and the very direct goal that GW has stated for it which includes removing points costs, then why are you talking about it? if you don't care for the rules in the current edition, can't you just play 9th edition? or 7th edition, or 3rd edition? if we're talking about 10th edition, you should talk about it in the context of 10th edition, and not the theoretical game you wish 10th edition was
JNAProductions wrote: Right, but you could instead give different points for different wargear options on the same datasheet.
Or you could actually carve out roles for things to exist.
Frankly, if they left things as they were there'd be gripes about "oh but there's no option to take a bunch of them! Farsight isn't represented!" or "Why would I take anything else, since there's no points?" or "Why would I take anything else, since this option is so wildly obviously a better choice even with points?".
This way? There's 3x Crisis units to pick from. You can pick the one you want to include, then build the rest of the force around that choice.
Give a detachment that makes Crisis Suits Batleline. 36 suits plus Commanders should be enough.
Why take anything else since there's no points? That's the problem.
Why would I take a choice other than the obviously superior choice even with points? Adjust the points so it's no longer an obvious choice.
JNAProductions wrote: Right, but you could instead give different points for different wargear options on the same datasheet.
but we're talking about 10th edition, which explicitly doesn't do that. making this the hill you want to die on, instead of engaging with the edition as it exists, is pretty pointless. if you don't care about the state of the rules this edition, and the very direct goal that GW has stated for it which includes removing points costs, then why are you talking about it? if you don't care for the rules in the current edition, can't you just play 9th edition? or 7th edition, or 3rd edition? if we're talking about 10th edition, you should talk about it in the context of 10th edition, and not the theoretical game you wish 10th edition was
I play at a GW primarily, so I don't have the chance to play older editions.
And I don't see why I can't point out flaws with the current edition.
JNAProductions wrote: Right, but you could instead give different points for different wargear options on the same datasheet.
Or you could actually carve out roles for things to exist.
Frankly, if they left things as they were there'd be gripes about "oh but there's no option to take a bunch of them! Farsight isn't represented!" or "Why would I take anything else, since there's no points?" or "Why would I take anything else, since this option is so wildly obviously a better choice even with points?".
This way? There's 3x Crisis units to pick from. You can pick the one you want to include, then build the rest of the force around that choice.
Give a detachment that makes Crisis Suits Batleline. 36 suits plus Commanders should be enough.
Funny how you're down for that, but were seemingly against doing the same for Infiltrators or Incursors.
Why take anything else since there's no points? That's the problem.
Why would I take a choice other than the obviously superior choice even with points? Adjust the points so it's no longer an obvious choice.
The fact that we have years, if not decades of proof to the contrary makes this a bold claim.
JNAProductions wrote: Right, but you could instead give different points for different wargear options on the same datasheet.
Or you could actually carve out roles for things to exist.
Frankly, if they left things as they were there'd be gripes about "oh but there's no option to take a bunch of them! Farsight isn't represented!" or "Why would I take anything else, since there's no points?" or "Why would I take anything else, since this option is so wildly obviously a better choice even with points?".
This way? There's 3x Crisis units to pick from. You can pick the one you want to include, then build the rest of the force around that choice.
Give a detachment that makes Crisis Suits Batleline. 36 suits plus Commanders should be enough.
Funny how you're down for that, but were seemingly against doing the same for Infiltrators or Incursors.
Why take anything else since there's no points? That's the problem.
Why would I take a choice other than the obviously superior choice even with points? Adjust the points so it's no longer an obvious choice.
The fact that we have years, if not decades of proof to the contrary makes this a bold claim.
I'm not sure I ever posted anything against Detachments switching Battleline. I might very well have said something along the lines of "Switching something to Battleline is NOT a freebie," because it very much has rules impact. But Detachments have rules. Changing Battleline could be one of them.
As for points, it'd be neat if every option was equally balanced against each other without them. But if something ends up being too strong/weak, you could adjust points for that alone. It's another lever to pull.
Historically, GW hasn't been good about it, but you can at least look to other wargames and see it's very much possible to do it well.
You could make that claim years ago maybe, but now? It does not seem to be the way people interact with tabletop games. Even ones cheaper than GW, the initial "interest posts" always seem to be "what's the best thing?" rather than "how can I make this thing I like work?".
Kanluwen wrote: You could make that claim years ago maybe, but now? It does not seem to be the way people interact with tabletop games. Even ones cheaper than GW, the initial "interest posts" always seem to be "what's the best thing?" rather than "how can I make this thing I like work?".
Why would the question need to be different? It's the answer that matters.
"What's the best Crisis Suit Loadout?"
Cyclic Ion Blasters with Shields.
"What's the best weapon upgrade for Steel Warriors?"
Depends what you want the unit to do. Autocannon is a good general pick, for Pinning; while the Flamer has It Burns! which is always good, but it's also short ranged. The more expensive options are the Missile Launcher and the Magma Cannon, both of which have Targeting Systems so you can split your fire, which is good because they have different targeting priorities. Missile Launcher has less raw damage, but great range; while the Magma has the same range as your standard guns and great damage.
JNAProductions wrote: It's not "Oh, Crisis Suits are ruined forever!"
It's "GW did something really dumb with points and army construction this edition, and they're doubling down on it instead of changing it for the better."
I think rather the reality is that costing battlesuit gear never worked. This gives abilities associated with loadouts that will be more interesting than "I take the best option and make sure I magnetize everything so I can switch out my weapons on the next pass".
If someone wants to take a crack at making a battlesuit datasheet that is fully balanced with costs for each weapon I'm sure some enterprising math hammer enthusiasts can validate it.
In either case - get used to it. Splitting sheets is how GW will eliminate units with mismatched gear and points.
So in light of the way that GW is handling equipment in 10th, regardless of whether that is good or bad it is how they are doing it, this is a very good idea and should be applied to many different data sheets in the game.
Now if my friend wants to use his flamer battlesuits, he is not paying the points premium for the competitive meta ion blasters to do so. This makes sense for many many data sheets that have wildly different equipment profiles like the D-Cannon v Shadow Weavers, or the IG field artillery guns, or even the Thousand Sons flamers rubrics v. bolter rubrics (who should be significantly cheaper than the flamers) and I am sure there are many many more.
JNAProductions wrote: It's not "Oh, Crisis Suits are ruined forever!"
It's "GW did something really dumb with points and army construction this edition, and they're doubling down on it instead of changing it for the better."
I think rather the reality is that costing battlesuit gear never worked. This gives abilities associated with loadouts that will be more interesting than "I take the best option and make sure I magnetize everything so I can switch out my weapons on the next pass".
If someone wants to take a crack at making a battlesuit datasheet that is fully balanced with costs for each weapon I'm sure some enterprising math hammer enthusiasts can validate it.
In either case - get used to it. Splitting sheets is how GW will eliminate units with mismatched gear and points.
This is knda where I'm at. I like the customizability, but there's too many options, and they're all so varied that trying to balancing against each other was something of a fools errand.
If this had happened in any other edition besides the one actively gutting options and removing choices, i'd support it. Here I'm... wary.
Kanluwen wrote: You could make that claim years ago maybe, but now? It does not seem to be the way people interact with tabletop games. Even ones cheaper than GW, the initial "interest posts" always seem to be "what's the best thing?" rather than "how can I make this thing I like work?".
Why would the question need to be different? It's the answer that matters.
"What's the best Crisis Suit Loadout?"
Cyclic Ion Blasters with Shields.
"What's the best weapon upgrade for Steel Warriors?"
Depends what you want the unit to do. Autocannon is a good general pick, for Pinning; while the Flamer has It Burns! which is always good, but it's also short ranged. The more expensive options are the Missile Launcher and the Magma Cannon, both of which have Targeting Systems so you can split your fire, which is good because they have different targeting priorities. Missile Launcher has less raw damage, but great range; while the Magma has the same range as your standard guns and great damage.
Agree that would have been better but as other say, not sure it's realistic here. Consolidated profiles would also work, "anti big thing" and "anti small thing" profiles and you use the relevant weapon bits to represent them. But I suspect that might annoy more people than what they did do.
One of the big issues is that your stuck playing in the unit design that GW came up with and frankly GW sucks at unit design. Why would I want to run a flamer and burst cannon together or a plasma and missile pod? They have different roles and so your stuck playing to the strength of the weakest link or your effectively gimped your units ability to function (needing to be in flamer range or else your spending a lot of points for a burst cannons worth of shooting).
Paying for wargear worked and having cheap load outs was a viable thing vs going with heavy firepower setups which costed more points and thus made them less expendable. Trying to force a power level system wrapped in a point value package doesn't work in a game with load out options. Instead of seeing the flaw of no wargear costs, they decide to remove the wargear options.... Real big brain thinking going on in Nottingham....
Balance or no balance, this feels driven more by the legal team than anything else. Crisis Suits were designed as a customizable unit and this spits in the face of their original purpose. If I wanted to play a game where units had no loadout options, I'd play Warmachine...
MagicJuggler wrote: Balance or no balance, this feels driven more by the legal team than anything else. Crisis Suits were designed as a customizable unit and this spits in the face of their original purpose. If I wanted to play a game where units had no loadout options, I'd play Warmachine...
...oh wait.
the kit is still customizable. there's three paths to take for it, but even within that, there's more choice than most modern kits have
My biggest question right now is if they've dropped the number of weapons down to 2 per suit, as the models shown in the article only seem to have a max of 2 each. Unless they've gone for the option to give one suit 2 burst, 1 flamer, another 2 flamer, 1 burst, and the last 1 of each as that's what the kit gives.....
warl0rdb0b wrote: My biggest question right now is if they've dropped the number of weapons down to 2 per suit, as the models shown in the article only seem to have a max of 2 each. Unless they've gone for the option to give one suit 2 burst, 1 flamer, another 2 flamer, 1 burst, and the last 1 of each as that's what the kit gives.....
warl0rdb0b wrote: My biggest question right now is if they've dropped the number of weapons down to 2 per suit, as the models shown in the article only seem to have a max of 2 each. Unless they've gone for the option to give one suit 2 burst, 1 flamer, another 2 flamer, 1 burst, and the last 1 of each as that's what the kit gives.....
When Tau originally came out it was 2 weapons and 1 system hard point, somewhere along the line this just became 3 hard points for whatever.
Wouldn’t be surprised if the new unit layouts have gone back to 2 weapons and 1 system. They want the systems to actually be used.
Not to mention that rules reflect lore and they've been unlocking more hard points progressively available as editions go on, would be awkward to jump back a few squares back again.
MagicJuggler wrote: Balance or no balance, this feels driven more by the legal team than anything else. Crisis Suits were designed as a customizable unit and this spits in the face of their original purpose. If I wanted to play a game where units had no loadout options, I'd play Warmachine...
ccs wrote: I certainly don't have any suits equipped how GWs just shown them.
But so long as the Legends entry allows for how my suits are equipped I'm fine.
ccs wrote: I certainly don't have any suits equipped how GWs just shown them.
But so long as the Legends entry allows for how my suits are equipped I'm fine.
Im curious to know, is there someone who has?
I found it funny that some people pointed at the artwork and stock models showing mixed loadout units as a double standard, but I doubt people fielded those either.
main problem with this, for me at least and how I have been running the suits, yes you now have three options. wow, I used to be able to do that within the same unit, indeed my normal loadout was one in three being all flamer, the rest all CIB, then a commander, usually all CIB. some with shields, some with the BSS for fall back and fire
made for a very versatile unit not really locked into a given role, which for me at least seemed to be the point.
they had the ability to drop near a primary target, but to also engage a secondary with the flamers, e.g. a rear area chaff unit while trying to splat a primary target
this seems to now require two units to do.
I guess this is somehow "better"
in theory the "sub optimal" units will be cheaper, this however is GW who have a long demonstrated way of not identifying which units are "sub optimal" and seem to base points on how they think the game should be played.
frankly I think they have just gone with the legal stuff "no models, no rules" and will have created a triplet of loadouts that can be made from the box and the box alone and thats what you are getting. then written some fluff to try and present a seriously versatile unit becoming vastly less so as "positive"
leopard wrote: main problem with this, for me at least and how I have been running the suits, yes you now have three options. wow, I used to be able to do that within the same unit, indeed my normal loadout was one in three being all flamer, the rest all CIB, then a commander, usually all CIB. some with shields, some with the BSS for fall back and fire
made for a very versatile unit not really locked into a given role, which for me at least seemed to be the point.
they had the ability to drop near a primary target, but to also engage a secondary with the flamers, e.g. a rear area chaff unit while trying to splat a primary target
this seems to now require two units to do.
I guess this is somehow "better"
in theory the "sub optimal" units will be cheaper, this however is GW who have a long demonstrated way of not identifying which units are "sub optimal" and seem to base points on how they think the game should be played.
frankly I think they have just gone with the legal stuff "no models, no rules" and will have created a triplet of loadouts that can be made from the box and the box alone and thats what you are getting. then written some fluff to try and present a seriously versatile unit becoming vastly less so as "positive"
I mean I have a hard time having sympathy because your unit simply isn't flexible, or it is via the abuse of the CIB. In real terms for anyone not wanting to be at a disadvantage you take a big blob all with CIB and a commander, you just chucked in some flamers for extra horde clearance/overwatch. You still only used 2 weapons in the entire unit of 7 models, which displays notably less flexibility than if youd have 3 different weapons on each model or had shared the flamers amongst the CIB.
You have a near meta unit, which is a chunk of the reason why these changes are coming in.
thing is though "flexibility" with different loadouts on the same model usually means "performs far worse overall", I mean I could have stuck a pair of CIB and a flamer on each, get the same number of each weapon. however the configuration was to specifically keep the flamer as able to withdraw from combat and still fire - to avoid tarpit chaff, while the CIB handled the primary.
in theory other weapons were better in some cases, but overall the CIB was better, plasma a close second depending on local forces faced
not expecting sympathy either really, just pointing out that moving from flexible loadouts to fixed is not "better" when it was possible to do the new loadouts before
the fact essentially no one did is quite telling in terms of which is better
its not just the weapons on the models, its then the mix of abilities - as noted I had one able to jump back and fire, the CIB dudes had shields instead, wasn't too uncommon to find one or the other gets the wounds allocated first depending on situation.
as a very minor aesthetic thing it also made it easier to point the flamer dude in a different direction "covering our backs"
the solution was probably to add points to weapons so the triple CIB becomes expensive, but thats apparently far too complicated for GW so thats 10th all over.
and yes I used two weapons across in this case four models (unit of three + commander), I do have six of the base suits but often either ran two units or only had the four of them, the second commander never actually hitting the table.
I'm not sure why thats a problem though, it also made rolling the dice a lot faster, one pool for flamers, one for CIB, job done - then the hazard rolls per model
in the end it is what it is, it doesn't make me want to rush out and buy a load more crisis suits though (or print more), it makes me put the army back in its box and close the lid as a good chunk of its capability has been neutered
warl0rdb0b wrote: My biggest question right now is if they've dropped the number of weapons down to 2 per suit, as the models shown in the article only seem to have a max of 2 each. Unless they've gone for the option to give one suit 2 burst, 1 flamer, another 2 flamer, 1 burst, and the last 1 of each as that's what the kit gives.....
When Tau originally came out it was 2 weapons and 1 system hard point, somewhere along the line this just became 3 hard points for whatever.
Wouldn’t be surprised if the new unit layouts have gone back to 2 weapons and 1 system. They want the systems to actually be used.
You could always take 3 weapons but due to the rules of the game only allowing firing of 1 weapon unless you were a vehicle or monstrous creature it simply didn't make sense to do so.
Usually you would run a two different weapons with a multi-tracker to allow firing of both, or a twin-linked pair with another piece of wargear (shield generator, target lock, drone controller).
With the way GW has been pushing 10th, it certainly has become the era of WYSINWYG, with the Not thrown in there. I don’t care what weapons I have on my suits, I’ll just declare it as one of the three types and move on. Pretty much done with GW nonsense.
bullyboy wrote: With the way GW has been pushing 10th, it certainly has become the era of WYSINWYG, with the Not thrown in there. I don’t care what weapons I have on my suits, I’ll just declare it as one of the three types and move on. Pretty much done with GW nonsense.
Yeah, I think that's the correct way to play it. I have suits with three burst cannons each left over from early 9th. Those may or may not get lfamers, but they'll be fine.
Lord Damocles wrote: If it's impossible to balance Crisis Suits with variable equipment, how come the Commanders retained the ability to mix weapons..?
The advantage here is that they can give each suit type a special rule to help differentiate the strengths of the weapon options. The main draw to taking a commander is for the buff they provide over what weapon you take with them.
leopard wrote: thing is though "flexibility" with different loadouts on the same model usually means "performs far worse overall", I mean I could have stuck a pair of CIB and a flamer on each, get the same number of each weapon. however the configuration was to specifically keep the flamer as able to withdraw from combat and still fire - to avoid tarpit chaff, while the CIB handled the primary.
in theory other weapons were better in some cases, but overall the CIB was better, plasma a close second depending on local forces faced
not expecting sympathy either really, just pointing out that moving from flexible loadouts to fixed is not "better" when it was possible to do the new loadouts before
the fact essentially no one did is quite telling in terms of which is better
its not just the weapons on the models, its then the mix of abilities - as noted I had one able to jump back and fire, the CIB dudes had shields instead, wasn't too uncommon to find one or the other gets the wounds allocated first depending on situation.
as a very minor aesthetic thing it also made it easier to point the flamer dude in a different direction "covering our backs"
the solution was probably to add points to weapons so the triple CIB becomes expensive, but thats apparently far too complicated for GW so thats 10th all over.
and yes I used two weapons across in this case four models (unit of three + commander), I do have six of the base suits but often either ran two units or only had the four of them, the second commander never actually hitting the table.
I'm not sure why thats a problem though, it also made rolling the dice a lot faster, one pool for flamers, one for CIB, job done - then the hazard rolls per model
in the end it is what it is, it doesn't make me want to rush out and buy a load more crisis suits though (or print more), it makes me put the army back in its box and close the lid as a good chunk of its capability has been neutered
CIBs are just too good. How much of an overprize they had to be to make it balanced? People are always willing to pay for the best options, that's how the meta works.
Maybe removing CIBs from Crisis will lead to less toxic builds? Maybe CIBs on Crisis where a mistake long waiting to be corrected?
bullyboy wrote: With the way GW has been pushing 10th, it certainly has become the era of WYSINWYG, with the Not thrown in there. I don’t care what weapons I have on my suits, I’ll just declare it as one of the three types and move on. Pretty much done with GW nonsense.
Not that it matters for me but maybe interest to you but on facebook warhammer 40k official page staff said you can double up on weapons. So 2xplasma or 2xmissile fine. So some customization is still there.
JNAProductions wrote: It's not "Oh, Crisis Suits are ruined forever!"
It's "GW did something really dumb with points and army construction this edition, and they're doubling down on it instead of changing it for the better."
I think rather the reality is that costing battlesuit gear never worked. This gives abilities associated with loadouts that will be more interesting than "I take the best option and make sure I magnetize everything so I can switch out my weapons on the next pass".
If someone wants to take a crack at making a battlesuit datasheet that is fully balanced with costs for each weapon I'm sure some enterprising math hammer enthusiasts can validate it.
Given you're saying "fully balanced" there, I believe the response is "Don't let perfect be the enemy of good" - or, in this case, swap out "good" for "better".
Daedalus81 wrote: In either case - get used to it. Splitting sheets is how GW will eliminate units with mismatched gear and points.
Unpopular position, but I don't think Crisis Suits should have ever got CIBs so losing them doesn't bother me that much.
The fixed loadouts feels a bit stupid but I'll just apply WYSI(not exactly)WYG. I have some crisis suits with 3 plasma guns, and some with missile pods. They can group up together as... "Fire Knife suits". I think it will be reasonably obvious to all concerned even if they don't precisely match GW's loadout.
worst case, stick one of three coloured flashes on the shoulder/heads, there you are, three units. regardless of weapons the actual models are pretty much the same
job done
just a shame to see the gradual waves of bland enveloping faction after faction
the actual concepts behind 10th are decent, the card based scenario system is good (and should be in the main rulebook)
the execution is more variable to say the least
compare to Battletech, of a similar vintage where the core rules are, more or less, very similar to how it started with occasional refinements.
40k is in its 10th iteration, the game should be nailed on perfection by now, but its not, its profitable because of inertia and a very good line of models
its enjoyable, so long as you and your opponent don't take it too seriously and are willing to find ways past the WTF? moments and not try to break it
just a pity someone decided to make it so damned bland
ccs wrote: I certainly don't have any suits equipped how GWs just shown them.
But so long as the Legends entry allows for how my suits are equipped I'm fine.
Im curious to know, is there someone who has?
No one knows what the guns you have on are called. People barely know the marine guns, you could glue an AK-47 onto a Ghostkeel and call it a <removed - show some maturity for once..> and the average player wouldn't be able to tell you ANY of that was not correct per the codex.
leopard wrote: 40k is in its 10th iteration, the game should be nailed on perfection by now
You say this as though that was even their goal in the first place.
not really, its quiet evidently not their goal, the only game GW have that seems to have gotten better and not be fiddled with to basically break it every edition is Middle Earth SBG. the rest its obviously the update treadmill
Kothra wrote: From what I saw not everything was shown (like Pathfinders for example). I haven't seen a hard confirmation of only 4 detachments.
There are points costs listed in a table for 4 detachments. There are 4 detachments unless numbers 5+ do not have enhancements, and we know that isn't the case.
Yeah, definitely feels pretty underwhelming at best at first glance, which sucks since the Kroot models do look legit and I'm glad that they finally expanded into auxiliaries more, so I'm worried if sales tank due to meh rules that GW are going to take the wrong lesson from this and double down on the flanderization of suits in the T'au army for their next army update/codex.
Hey, I'm just psyched that Carnivores get a squad sergeant again. Their rules don't seem too bad (although hopefully they still have the option of 20 man squads). 5+ invulnerable, +1 to hit, +1 to wound seems legit for a chaff unit. Not to mention scout.
Grimskul wrote: Yeah, definitely feels pretty underwhelming at best at first glance, which sucks since the Kroot models do look legit and I'm glad that they finally expanded into auxiliaries more, so I'm worried if sales tank due to meh rules that GW are going to take the wrong lesson from this and double down on the flanderization of suits in the T'au army for their next army update/codex.
I guarantee you that the models will sell out regardless of rules quality. We whales don't care about rules.
Grimskul wrote: Yeah, definitely feels pretty underwhelming at best at first glance, which sucks since the Kroot models do look legit and I'm glad that they finally expanded into auxiliaries more, so I'm worried if sales tank due to meh rules that GW are going to take the wrong lesson from this and double down on the flanderization of suits in the T'au army for their next army update/codex.
I guarantee you that the models will sell out regardless of rules quality. We whales don't care about rules.
Whale on good sirs, whale on! We must keep the plastic spice going.
Grimskul wrote: Yeah, definitely feels pretty underwhelming at best at first glance, which sucks since the Kroot models do look legit and I'm glad that they finally expanded into auxiliaries more, so I'm worried if sales tank due to meh rules that GW are going to take the wrong lesson from this and double down on the flanderization of suits in the T'au army for their next army update/codex.
I guarantee you that the models will sell out regardless of rules quality. We whales don't care about rules.
Whale on good sirs, whale on! We must keep the plastic spice going.
Dudeface wrote: Via GaroRobe in the adepticon thread, here's the Agents evidence:
How is that evidence? It's so blurry you can't read any of it. It could be just about anything.
A leak of pages from a printing factory, who are clearly under GW contract, with servo skulls and what appears to be images and references to units found in inquisitorial warbands and the agents roster. Plus a section about combating daemons.
Excited for inquisition to get full rules again, I really hope they allow lots of customisation though as most people have very unique converted armies
James12345 wrote: Excited for inquisition to get full rules again, I really hope they allow lots of customisation though as most people have very unique converted armies
It’s 10th edition, I think you’ll be sorely disappointed if expecting customization
Jadenim wrote: Either demand is lower than expected, or they've fixed some of the website issues, because I don't seem to be getting caught in a queue today.
The carnivores are kind of boring and theres 20 of them in the box I'm afraid.
James12345 wrote: Excited for inquisition to get full rules again, I really hope they allow lots of customisation though as most people have very unique converted armies
It’s 10th edition, I think you’ll be sorely disappointed if expecting customization
It's Imperial Agents. I think anyone expecting lots of Inquisitorial stuff would be disappointed anyways.
James12345 wrote: Excited for inquisition to get full rules again, I really hope they allow lots of customisation though as most people have very unique converted armies
It’s 10th edition, I think you’ll be sorely disappointed if expecting customization
It's Imperial Agents. I think anyone expecting lots of Inquisitorial stuff would be disappointed anyways.
It's also got a page dedicated to Grey Knights in the bottom right. You can see Terminators with nemesis halberds in the top left, and their chapter symbol is above the "Book of the Warp" header.
Opposite page looks like it has a Deathwatch Watchmaster standing behind an Inquisitor.
So get ready for people to get very cross/excited to get something like the old Daemonhunters book back.
a_typical_hero wrote: I'm just hoping for a cool, generic inquisitor model that is easily kitbashable.
the ideal is for it to be something like the exalted sorcerer kit for ksons. give us the option of building all three types of inquisitor, and give all of them their own weird options
a_typical_hero wrote: I'm just hoping for a cool, generic inquisitor model that is easily kitbashable.
Amen to that. I regret not picking up the store anniversary model a couple years ago, but I would love a proper kit for one that lent itself to being converted.
Jadenim wrote: Either demand is lower than expected, or they've fixed some of the website issues, because I don't seem to be getting caught in a queue today.
I can't think of much else in 40k with less actual demand behind it than Kroot to be fair.
Jadenim wrote: Either demand is lower than expected, or they've fixed some of the website issues, because I don't seem to be getting caught in a queue today.
I can't think of much else in 40k with less actual demand behind it than Kroot to be fair.
Jadenim wrote: Either demand is lower than expected, or they've fixed some of the website issues, because I don't seem to be getting caught in a queue today.
I can't think of much else in 40k with less actual demand behind it than Kroot to be fair.
Sisters of Battle before the massive update?
That said the whole queue system is normally for exceptional releases and limited print run releases. So things like one-off books or discount bundle sets and so forth. They should be rarer rather than common events.
Jadenim wrote: Either demand is lower than expected, or they've fixed some of the website issues, because I don't seem to be getting caught in a queue today.
I can't think of much else in 40k with less actual demand behind it than Kroot to be fair.
How about another Primaris Lieutenant?
Or another ten man unit in tacticus armor all armed with same weapon and no kit options.
James12345 wrote: Excited for inquisition to get full rules again, I really hope they allow lots of customisation though as most people have very unique converted armies
It’s 10th edition, I think you’ll be sorely disappointed if expecting customization
Yeah, my guess is that the Agents of the Imperium book will just be:
- The Inquisition Agents kit
- Eisenhorn(?)
- Greyfax
- Draxus
- The 4 Assassins
- Exaction
- Navy Breachers
- Starstriders
- Watchmaster
- Corvus Blackstar
- The 5 Plastic Grey Knight units
- Maybe 3-5 Marine units
* Intercessors/Jump/Assault
* Aggressors
* Redemptor Dread
* Impulsor
* Repulsor
- New Karamazov
- New Coteaz
That would be 27 Dataslates. So maybe if they add a new squad of Inquisitors or add the Palantine units from Necromunda they max out a codex.
Jadenim wrote: Either demand is lower than expected, or they've fixed some of the website issues, because I don't seem to be getting caught in a queue today.
I can't think of much else in 40k with less actual demand behind it than Kroot to be fair.
There seemed to be a lot of people excited by it when they did the reveal, including a lot of non-Tau / Kroot players. *shrugs* No skin off my nose, just that most weeks since the revamp, if I forget and try to go on the store on Saturday morning to look at something else, I have to abandon it because of the queue.
It would make more sense if Tempestus made up the bulk of the Imperial Agents lista rather than marines.
Tempestus has a close relation to the Inquisition, and it would be great if they could bring some new life and purpose to that range now that AM got their Kasrkin updated and integrated in the modern cadia design.
Jadenim wrote: Either demand is lower than expected, or they've fixed some of the website issues, because I don't seem to be getting caught in a queue today.
I can't think of much else in 40k with less actual demand behind it than Kroot to be fair.
They've sold out on the US store. The French, Spanish and Italian versions have also sold out. That doesn't seem like a failure of a launch.
They do seem to be doing better lately with their plastics lately. The old world big boxes came back in stock relatively quickly. It's the resin stuff that's been impossible to find.
a_typical_hero wrote: I'm just hoping for a cool, generic inquisitor model that is easily kitbashable.
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
hopes and expectations are two very different things
It's not entirely unwarranted to caution people like that even if you get technical about that difference. Which you should, in my opinion, but regardless of that, what's on the list? Cool? That's easy enough. GW makes a lot of models that are cool to some.
Generic? The trouble with that is that it's desirable for us, and has a point in an army list that features Inquisition as an army in its own right, but isn't something GW has been invested in for a while. It's worth keeping in mind that the Inquisition has been on a downward slope of neglect for twenty years now, including a fairly recent period in which the designers' stated belief was that the Inquisition has no place in the mainline game of 40k. Until the release of the Inquisition Kill Team, for a while the Inquisition existed pretty much because of a handful of named characters. We should by all rights get a generic Inquisitor model. Three would be better still. But that is firmly a hope. There's no reason to expect this of GW until they actually show some commitment to the Inquisition in 40k again.
Easily kitbashable? Why would you expect that of a GW character model? Most of them are fully monopose. There are a few characters that get lucky in that they have options in their kits, but even there you can't be sure that the joints are any kind of universal and bits interchangeable with other models from the same army. It's not something GW does a lot anymore.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Wish listing - I've always wanted an Inquisition codex where Grey Knights/Death Watch/Sisters were a troop choice depending on your Inquisitor's Ordo.
Maybe generic marines for the other ordos.
And then Storm Troopers/Arbites/IG Vets as the other troop choice.
So...basically 3rd edition books? Which fair, I love those books. I think the top of my wishlist would be to have the Inquisitorial Stormtroopers in plastic, those fantastic metal ones from 2000 I think? Over the years I've gathered close to 100 of them and I think I'd STILL pay out for some in plastic.
I remember what first drew me to Daemonhunters all those years ago was that it was so flexible since you could go all in on Grey Knights, or have an Inquisitor, their retinue and some Sormtroopers and then some allied Space Marines, or perhaps take some Grey Knights with inducted Guardsmen? While the book only had a handful of units, including I believe 'orbital strike', it just stoked 18 year old me's imagination. It also had the big page of "why might you be fighting x or y army" as well as the option of giving your opponent waves of daemons to throw at you to help explain your presence on the battlefield.
James12345 wrote: Excited for inquisition to get full rules again, I really hope they allow lots of customisation though as most people have very unique converted armies
It’s 10th edition, I think you’ll be sorely disappointed if expecting customization
Yeah, my guess is that the Agents of the Imperium book will just be:
- The Inquisition Agents kit
- Eisenhorn(?)
- Greyfax
- Draxus
- The 4 Assassins
- Exaction
- Navy Breachers
- Starstriders
- Watchmaster
- Corvus Blackstar
- The 5 Plastic Grey Knight units
- Maybe 3-5 Marine units
* Intercessors/Jump/Assault
* Aggressors
* Redemptor Dread
* Impulsor
* Repulsor
- New Karamazov
- New Coteaz
That would be 27 Dataslates. So maybe if they add a new squad of Inquisitors or add the Palantine units from Necromunda they max out a codex.
Interesting how you'd keep deathwatch independent but roll in GK. Unless you just forgot about them like GW does?
I didn't think about rolling the Grey Knights into it but it seems plausible. Add in Deathwatch and it helps to reign in codex releases they do not have near term plans for updated models.
Sarigar wrote: I didn't think about rolling the Grey Knights into it but it seems plausible. Add in Deathwatch and it helps to reign in codex releases they do not have near term plans for updated models.
in effect let it become "Codex: Imperial Specialists", it also removes the "need" to add yet more units to handle more general situations as the current lot have plenty of overlap.
though I do pity Deathwatch players getting models with "Deathwatch weapons" meant to be painted a bland shade of grey
Sarigar wrote: I didn't think about rolling the Grey Knights into it but it seems plausible. Add in Deathwatch and it helps to reign in codex releases they do not have near term plans for updated models.
in effect let it become "Codex: Imperial Specialists", it also removes the "need" to add yet more units to handle more general situations as the current lot have plenty of overlap.
though I do pity Deathwatch players getting models with "Deathwatch weapons" meant to be painted a bland shade of grey
They could roll in Custodes and SoS as well. But I doubt we will see those or any Marines in this 'Codex'. I think we'll see the same spare parts depot for other Imperial armies as before without the possibility to field an own army in matched play.
a "Talons of the Emperor" part to it would make sense, though custards probably have just about enough models now. but it would give them stuff to fill the "I need something to sit there and look dumb without costing how much!!!" bit.
and yes inclined to agree, the result will be a book thats not viable on its own and ends up with half baked rules they keep having to adjust to allow bits to deploy alongside other imperial formations.
indeed "Codex: stuff all Imperial players can use" makes sense if done right (as would Codex: Generic chaos and renegade stuff")
They could roll in Custodes and SoS as well. But I doubt we will see those or any Marines in this 'Codex'. I think we'll see the same spare parts depot for other Imperial armies as before without the possibility to field an own army in matched play.
I mean, there's always the possibility that GK, DW, SoB and Talons retain their codices but also have their basic unit reprinted in Agents. Look at how CSM can take their own Legionnaires and also take Berzerkers, Rubrics, and Plague Marines.
They could roll in Custodes and SoS as well. But I doubt we will see those or any Marines in this 'Codex'. I think we'll see the same spare parts depot for other Imperial armies as before without the possibility to field an own army in matched play.
I mean, there's always the possibility that GK, DW, SoB and Talons retain their codices but also have their basic unit reprinted in Agents. Look at how CSM can take their own Legionnaires and also take Berzerkers, Rubrics, and Plague Marines.
Exept, CSMIndex dont "reprint" those units, it clearly point to the respective indexes for rules. .
Kanluwen wrote: Yes, and? You don't pay for the index rules via the app or official GW downloads.
We haven't gotten one of the "can take blahblahblah as part of your army" factions as codices yet. CSM are the first book coming up with that setup.
I was just pointing out that CSM rules are a bad reference for you to bring in, as they are are exactly contrary to your point -a small box allowing you to take few special units from an other ruleset in your army. This while your point was that its entierly plausible for GW to make a book made up of units from many different factions.
Perhaps a better reference would have been the crazy Eldar Index that include the ynnari, corsairs and harlequin units and then goes on to also allow you to take in Drukkhari units, although they are not printed in the codex.
They could roll in Custodes and SoS as well. But I doubt we will see those or any Marines in this 'Codex'. I think we'll see the same spare parts depot for other Imperial armies as before without the possibility to field an own army in matched play.
I mean, there's always the possibility that GK, DW, SoB and Talons retain their codices but also have their basic unit reprinted in Agents. Look at how CSM can take their own Legionnaires and also take Berzerkers, Rubrics, and Plague Marines.
Looking at this edition and the enduring tournament fixation combined with the state of Imperial Agents in the last couple of editions I highly doubt they will release such a chimera codex now.
Regarding CSM: I wouldn't be that surprised if those options are going straight into Legends.
Kanluwen wrote: Yes, and? You don't pay for the index rules via the app or official GW downloads.
We haven't gotten one of the "can take blahblahblah as part of your army" factions as codices yet. CSM are the first book coming up with that setup.
I was just pointing out that CSM rules are a bad reference for you to bring in, as they are are exactly contrary to your point -a small box allowing you to take few special units from an other ruleset in your army. This while your point was that its entierly plausible for GW to make a book made up of units from many different factions.
I said what I said for a reason.
The "basic troop" for those Chambers Militant would be a single unit. Sororitas to accompany a Hereticus Inquisitor, Deathwatch Veterans for a Xenos Inquisitor, and Grey Knights for a Malleus Inquisitor.
Then that adds Sisters of Silence and Custodes for the "Talons" portion.
Given that we already know what makes up Imperial Agents right now, there's going to have to be something in there to make it an actual codex. And given that the leaked page layouts had art of a Grey Knight, it's not unreasonable to make the speculative point that I did.
Either way, we'll get a better idea when Codex: Chaos Space Marines drops.
Perhaps a better reference would have been the crazy Eldar Index that include the ynnari, corsairs and harlequin units and then goes on to also allow you to take in Drukkhari units, although they are not printed in the codex.
Both of those modifications are printed in the Battle Host Detachment on the army builder, rather than the Army Rules like GSC's "Brood Brothers" and CSM's "Lost and the Damned".
It's not beyond the realm of belief that not every Aeldari detachment will feature it.
They could roll in Custodes and SoS as well. But I doubt we will see those or any Marines in this 'Codex'. I think we'll see the same spare parts depot for other Imperial armies as before without the possibility to field an own army in matched play.
I mean, there's always the possibility that GK, DW, SoB and Talons retain their codices but also have their basic unit reprinted in Agents. Look at how CSM can take their own Legionnaires and also take Berzerkers, Rubrics, and Plague Marines.
Looking at this edition and the enduring tournament fixation combined with the state of Imperial Agents in the last couple of editions I highly doubt they will release such a chimera codex now.
That's what I would have said about Agents getting a codex, period.
Regarding CSM: I wouldn't be that surprised if those options are going straight into Legends.
They could roll in Custodes and SoS as well. But I doubt we will see those or any Marines in this 'Codex'. I think we'll see the same spare parts depot for other Imperial armies as before without the possibility to field an own army in matched play.
I mean, there's always the possibility that GK, DW, SoB and Talons retain their codices but also have their basic unit reprinted in Agents. Look at how CSM can take their own Legionnaires and also take Berzerkers, Rubrics, and Plague Marines.
Looking at this edition and the enduring tournament fixation combined with the state of Imperial Agents in the last couple of editions I highly doubt they will release such a chimera codex now.
That's what I would have said about Agents getting a codex, period.
I'm not surprised they get a codex, I mean they have some Kill Teams and characters to get out of their gratis download section.
Regarding CSM: I wouldn't be that surprised if those options are going straight into Legends.
Those units exist elsewhere though.
So do several CSM units that aren't available for the Cult Legions, even if they did in the past (Possessed for DG for example) or would make sense. Like I said, I wouldn't be surprised if the option is dropped. We'll see.
While I get your point, I have a simple and strong opinion about that. High gothic is effectively pseudo Latin. So no one ownes the pronunciation. Latin itself did not have an agreed way of usage all across the Roman empire. So I doubt there is one in the galaxy spanning Imperium.
Apart from that, your best bet is learning italien pronunciation, being a phonetic language that is likely the closest we have to actual Latin in the city of Rome itself. English will not help you at all here.
Jadenim wrote: Either demand is lower than expected, or they've fixed some of the website issues, because I don't seem to be getting caught in a queue today.
I can't think of much else in 40k with less actual demand behind it than Kroot to be fair.
Sisters of Battle before the massive update?
That said the whole queue system is normally for exceptional releases and limited print run releases. So things like one-off books or discount bundle sets and so forth. They should be rarer rather than common events.
The kroot box is discount bundle(with new codex as added bonus) so should be popular enough.
Maybe kroot rules are too bad? Tau itself seems to have got divisive response.
James12345 wrote: Excited for inquisition to get full rules again, I really hope they allow lots of customisation though as most people have very unique converted armies
It’s 10th edition, I think you’ll be sorely disappointed if expecting customization
Yeah, my guess is that the Agents of the Imperium book will just be:
- The Inquisition Agents kit
- Eisenhorn(?)
- Greyfax
- Draxus
- The 4 Assassins
- Exaction
- Navy Breachers
- Starstriders
- Watchmaster
- Corvus Blackstar
- The 5 Plastic Grey Knight units
- Maybe 3-5 Marine units
* Intercessors/Jump/Assault
* Aggressors
* Redemptor Dread
* Impulsor
* Repulsor
- New Karamazov
- New Coteaz
That would be 27 Dataslates. So maybe if they add a new squad of Inquisitors or add the Palantine units from Necromunda they max out a codex.
Interesting how you'd keep deathwatch independent but roll in GK. Unless you just forgot about them like GW does?
The astartes units would just need the shoulders and theyd be fine. 3 or 4 weapons arent reason enough for an entire codex.
It will never happen, but I think the best way to do it would be three generic troop options:
Light (acoyltes, stormtroopers, arbites etc)
Medium(sisters, death watch, grey knights)
Heavy(terminators)
All fully customisable and able to be fitted out in any way.
Add one inquisitior + henchmen to lead them.
So glad the jump pack chaos lord has returned! Not unexpected, but I would also have preferred they just gave the Chaos Lords their weapon options back. So annoying that they still can't carry bolt pistols or combi-weapons, or even have a pistol to go with their power fist.
Matrindur wrote: New CSM combat patrol posted on twitter. Probably a mistake since it was posted instead of the second battleforce but revealed now anyway:
I like the concept of CP being a small, kinda balanced mode for new players.
James12345 wrote: It will never happen, but I think the best way to do it would be three generic troop options:
Light (acoyltes, stormtroopers, arbites etc)
Medium(sisters, death watch, grey knights)
Heavy(terminators)
All fully customisable and able to be fitted out in any way.
Add one inquisitior + henchmen to lead them.
Then you choose an ordo to add special rules.
Yeah that's more or less what my dream Codex would look like. Create an Inquisition Only version of the 3 Chambers Militant (Grey Knights Daemon Hunter Expeditionary Force or something) so you don't have to reprint the whole codex. And then:
Chopstick wrote: They sculpted the foot Lord to grip the weapon that misaligned with the edge/striking part and it looks pretty dumb.
Its at rest in a loose grip, he's clearly just surveying the battlefield.
There're literally no reason to grip a weapon like that, other than a better look at the weapon when taking a frontal photoshot, in that case he can just rotate his arm to reveal the weapon. It's actually much harder for these guy to grip the weapon wrong since their instinct is to always line up the edge correctly, especially for cylindrical hilt.
mortar_crew wrote: I dislike with a passion the design of the jumpack.
Stupid rack inherited from the one of a previous character but still.
And the pose is well, off?
Lord on foot is a nice redo of a classic.
I think he'll look better if the head is turned the other way for a more aggressive silhouette.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Ordo Xenos
Death Watch OR Xeno warband (no idea how these rules would work, but darn wouldn't an Inquisitor with an Ork, Eldar and Kroot be fun?)
Allow the following: Any kroot, Eldar Rangers, Corsair Voidreavers/scarred, Votann Pioneers, and a range of basic ork Freebooters.
Speaking of mixing things from other armies, does anyone else feel they missed a trick with the T'au codex by not giving them the option to take a number of units from the Guard/Votann lists similar to how Imp Agents work, to represent Auxiliaries other than Kroot or Vespid?
warl0rdb0b wrote: Speaking of mixing things from other armies, does anyone else feel they missed a trick with the T'au codex by not giving them the option to take a number of units from the Guard/Votann lists similar to how Imp Agents work, to represent Auxiliaries other than Kroot or Vespid?
Maybe they don't want to do that without GSC-style upgrade kits, and don't want to bother doing that right now?
I doubt that it ever actually occurred to GW, but Gue'vesa don't really bring anything to the T'au list. They're just cheaper(er) bodies to dump on objectives instead of actual Tau.
Lord Damocles wrote: They're just cheaper(er) bodies to dump on objectives instead of actual Tau.
Which is their fluff role BTW - meat shields for their Tau masters. That aside I think more aliens variety (and updated Vespids) would be preferable to humans.
I agree with that. I would much rather see more varieties of alien in the Tau armies and more human options in the Imperial Guard and the Agents of the Imperium.
I am always shocked GW doesn't invest in that since it allows them to produce almost endless new sets that would encourage new purchases versus re-doing existing kits.
Lord Damocles wrote: I doubt that it ever actually occurred to GW, but Gue'vesa don't really bring anything to the T'au list. They're just cheaper(er) bodies to dump on objectives instead of actual Tau.
That really depends on how they set them up as a unit. A guevesa squad structured like an Astra militarum infantry squad would be an invaluable source of infantry based Heavy/special weapons that Tau don't really have access to otherwise outside of pathfinder squads.
Lord Damocles wrote: I doubt that it ever actually occurred to GW, but Gue'vesa don't really bring anything to the T'au list. They're just cheaper(er) bodies to dump on objectives instead of actual Tau.
That really depends on how they set them up as a unit. A guevesa squad structured like an Astra militarum infantry squad would be an invaluable source of infantry based Heavy/special weapons that Tau don't really have access to otherwise outside of pathfinder squads.
Fire Warrior Squads get a heavy weapons team equivalent simply for standing still now.
Lord Damocles wrote: Just adding units to remove what were once deliberate gaps in an army's roster is terrible game design.
I get the sentiment here, but when you've got a game that's been running this long you do eventually have to fill those gaps just for balancing reasons. Otherwise you'll end up with entire editions at a time where factions just can't interact with the game.
New Valrak rumours Genestealers getting a single psyker character that looks similar to the necromunda Delaque Psyker
Also getting a boxset with 2x Goliath Rockgrinders and an unspecified number of Neophytes and "Hulking Brutes" which he probably meant the Aberrants with. No specific information if the new HQ is in here but its very likely looking at every other box.
Sister of Battle get a new Canoness with Jump Pack and the boxset will have Seraphim/Zephyrim and two tanks but no info which tank.
Matrindur wrote: New Valrak rumours Genestealers getting a single psyker character that looks similar to the necromunda Delaque Psyker
Also getting a boxset with 2x Goliath Rockgrinders and an unspecified number of Neophytes and "Hulking Brutes" which he probably meant the Aberrants with. No specific information if the new HQ is in here but its very likely looking at every other box.
Sister of Battle get a new Canoness with Jump Pack and the boxset will have Seraphim/Zephyrim and two tanks but no info which tank.
Matrindur wrote: New Valrak rumours Genestealers getting a single psyker character that looks similar to the necromunda Delaque Psyker
Also getting a boxset with 2x Goliath Rockgrinders and an unspecified number of Neophytes and "Hulking Brutes" which he probably meant the Aberrants with. No specific information if the new HQ is in here but its very likely looking at every other box.
Sister of Battle get a new Canoness with Jump Pack and the boxset will have Seraphim/Zephyrim and two tanks but no info which tank.
Matrindur wrote: New Valrak rumours Genestealers getting a single psyker character that looks similar to the necromunda Delaque Psyker
Also getting a boxset with 2x Goliath Rockgrinders and an unspecified number of Neophytes and "Hulking Brutes" which he probably meant the Aberrants with. No specific information if the new HQ is in here but its very likely looking at every other box.
Sister of Battle get a new Canoness with Jump Pack and the boxset will have Seraphim/Zephyrim and two tanks but no info which tank.
Oh good, Sisters rumors on April fools day.
Only the tanks are a new part of that rumor. Rest has been mentioned some time ago as well. Wouldn't mind this to be in the box, I'm interested in more Zephyrim and the tanks are a nice bonus (that I may or may not keep).
Matrindur wrote: New Valrak rumours Genestealers getting a single psyker character that looks similar to the necromunda Delaque Psyker
Also getting a boxset with 2x Goliath Rockgrinders and an unspecified number of Neophytes and "Hulking Brutes" which he probably meant the Aberrants with. No specific information if the new HQ is in here but its very likely looking at every other box.
Sister of Battle get a new Canoness with Jump Pack and the boxset will have Seraphim/Zephyrim and two tanks but no info which tank.
Oh good, Sisters rumors on April fools day.
Only the tanks are a new part of that rumor. Rest has been mentioned some time ago as well. Wouldn't mind this to be in the box, I'm interested in more Zephyrim and the tanks are a nice bonus (that I may or may not keep).
I know, it's also a really tame rumor to be your big 'April Fools!' joke.
I just really fething hate this holiday. I still haven't forgiven the 'War Mammoths for Space Wolves' thing.
Matrindur wrote: New Valrak rumours Genestealers getting a single psyker character that looks similar to the necromunda Delaque Psyker
Also getting a boxset with 2x Goliath Rockgrinders and an unspecified number of Neophytes and "Hulking Brutes" which he probably meant the Aberrants with. No specific information if the new HQ is in here but its very likely looking at every other box.
Sister of Battle get a new Canoness with Jump Pack and the boxset will have Seraphim/Zephyrim and two tanks but no info which tank.
Oh good, Sisters rumors on April fools day.
Only the tanks are a new part of that rumor. Rest has been mentioned some time ago as well. Wouldn't mind this to be in the box, I'm interested in more Zephyrim and the tanks are a nice bonus (that I may or may not keep).
I know, it's also a really tame rumor to be your big 'April Fools!' joke.
I just really fething hate this holiday. I still haven't forgiven the 'War Mammoths for Space Wolves' thing.
I don't think this is an April's fools thing though.
Matrindur wrote: New Valrak rumours Genestealers getting a single psyker character that looks similar to the necromunda Delaque Psyker
Also getting a boxset with 2x Goliath Rockgrinders and an unspecified number of Neophytes and "Hulking Brutes" which he probably meant the Aberrants with. No specific information if the new HQ is in here but its very likely looking at every other box.
Sister of Battle get a new Canoness with Jump Pack and the boxset will have Seraphim/Zephyrim and two tanks but no info which tank.
Oh good, Sisters rumors on April fools day.
Only the tanks are a new part of that rumor. Rest has been mentioned some time ago as well. Wouldn't mind this to be in the box, I'm interested in more Zephyrim and the tanks are a nice bonus (that I may or may not keep).
I know, it's also a really tame rumor to be your big 'April Fools!' joke.
I just really fething hate this holiday. I still haven't forgiven the 'War Mammoths for Space Wolves' thing.
I don't think this is an April's fools thing though.
But you can never know, can you?
NFL player Vontae Davis (famous for retiring at halftime during a game) was found dead in his apartment today.
Or was he? It would be a tasteless April Fools joke, but wouldn't be unprecedented.
I won't know 100% for sure that he's dead until tomorrow. That's an extreme example, but it does codify why I find the entire holiday irritating.
Matrindur wrote: New Valrak rumours Genestealers getting a single psyker character that looks similar to the necromunda Delaque Psyker
Also getting a boxset with 2x Goliath Rockgrinders and an unspecified number of Neophytes and "Hulking Brutes" which he probably meant the Aberrants with. No specific information if the new HQ is in here but its very likely looking at every other box.
a new psyker would actually be really cool since the army really only has the magus right now, if this was an edition where psychic mattered
Matrindur wrote: New Valrak rumours Genestealers getting a single psyker character that looks similar to the necromunda Delaque Psyker
Also getting a boxset with 2x Goliath Rockgrinders and an unspecified number of Neophytes and "Hulking Brutes" which he probably meant the Aberrants with. No specific information if the new HQ is in here but its very likely looking at every other box.
a new psyker would actually be really cool since the army really only has the magus right now, if this was an edition where psychic mattered
We also have the patriarch, and the Magos is supposed to be a top-level psyker (relatively speaking), so i'm not sure we need another one. Unless it's a low-level one you can distribute widely among the army. Maybe like Eldar warlocks? Take them as a group or individuals.
We also have the patriarch, and the Magos is supposed to be a top-level psyker (relatively speaking), so i'm not sure we need another one. Unless it's a low-level one you can distribute widely among the army. Maybe like Eldar warlocks? Take them as a group or individuals.
Literally a big part of the lore for GSC is that the early expansion of a brood targets psykers to bring the psyker gene into the pool and to remove the potential of psychic detection of the Broodlord.
Introducing another Psyker isn't terrible. Especially if it ends up being more of a "combat psyker" than the Magus, who's more of a "support psyker".
A psyker in and itself isn't terrible, but GSC don't need more HQ units, they need some more tanks/vehicles and a shooty infantry unit. Give them a Termite or some kind of slow tracked giant mining laser. Make a unit of Abberants that are less good in combat but fire bio-plasma from their maws. Give a unit of familiars sniper rifles etc etc.
(Note: it would be nice if 40k's design space remained where not giving some armies stuff worked, but it has moved on, so every army at this point needs to have units that do every thing to be realistically playable.)
Honestly most GW armies today don't need more HQ options - however GW are very much trying to keep attention on armies with small releases and that has manifested as them doing lots of leader models; because those fit 1 model moulds really easily.
As for psy if its anything like how Tyranids and other 10th armies have gone then chances are more psy leaders will work because we have lost the whole tool-box approach to psychers this edition.
So chances are you'll have the offence, debuff and buff versions with one or two abilities each.
The Phazer wrote: A psyker in and itself isn't terrible, but GSC don't need more HQ units, they need some more tanks/vehicles and a shooty infantry unit.
The term you're looking for is "characters", as "HQ" isn't a thing anymore. Some "characters" feature a "Leader" rule while others have "Lone Operative".
Also, I'm down with them getting "more tanks/vehicles and a shooty infantry unit"...thrown into the codex and the absolute, 100% removal of the garbage "Brood Brothers" rule that exists right now.
Give them a Termite or some kind of slow tracked giant mining laser. Make a unit of Abberants that are less good in combat but fire bio-plasma from their maws. Give a unit of familiars sniper rifles etc etc.
(Note: it would be nice if 40k's design space remained where not giving some armies stuff worked, but it has moved on, so every army at this point needs to have units that do every thing to be realistically playable.)
Literally except for GSC, whose ability to pick from the Guard range is fairly unprecedented and needs to be reined in significantly.
The Phazer wrote: A psyker in and itself isn't terrible, but GSC don't need more HQ units, they need some more tanks/vehicles and a shooty infantry unit.
If they make five shooty characters for the next five codices, they can consolidate them into a shooty unit in the sixth codex.
I should pitch this idea to GW.
Overread wrote: Honestly most GW armies today don't need more HQ options - however GW are very much trying to keep attention on armies with small releases and that has manifested as them doing lots of leader models; because those fit 1 model moulds really easily.
It's good in a way, but also cheap. Slaangors have a small sprue and no options. Chaos Cultists have a small sprue and no options. But they add an extra non-character option to their respective armies. If GW can't be bothered with a normal units with all the bells and whistles*, they should at least consider small monopose unit additions instead of mindlessly cranking out more characters.
* Bells and whistles have been rationalized. We now call the absence of bells and whistles bells and whistles because it's the highest standard GW offers.
Another Valrak video about Eldar
This image is basically a summary of what he is talking about:
I'm not sure if anything here is even new or if its just old rumours again but at least the image summarizes it nicely.
The Swooping Hawk are part of the rumours about Kill Team going up into the air so maybe part of the next season or a box between seasons instead of the fourth of the current one?
He is planning to make another video about Kill Team soon with more info.
Besides forgetting Karandras that sounds like a pretty decent spread for the end of 2024-start of 2025 for Eldar.
That takes pretty much everything up to plastics for their model range right? Save for the FW models of course.
Yes they'd still have some older vehicle designs, but at least they'd have plastics for their whole army range and whilst things like vypers and falcons are old they are still decent designs where if we got new versions they'd likely be refined rather than ground-up redesigned.
Yeah, the Falcon is still great. I'd assume it would be a "new" kit in the same vein as the "new" Leman Russ and Chimera kits we got a decade ago. New and improved, but still basically the same thing.
cuda1179 wrote: Yeah, the Falcon is still great. I'd assume it would be a "new" kit in the same vein as the "new" Leman Russ and Chimera kits we got a decade ago. New and improved, but still basically the same thing.
Yep and to be fair that's how most of the other Eldar updates have come too. Scorpions and Banshee are very much refinements not redesigns.
Makes me wonder if we'll see them move several FW models over into plastics in time.
It's a grey area, if he doesn't accompany the eldar release we can never say if it was because they "forgot" or chose to wait. I'd opt to read it as "not this time".
for 'forgot' i can believe that a sculptor was assigned a bundle of eldar stuff to do, managed to do most of it but not Karandras and then left GW (or was moved onto a different project)
Management thinks it's done until the sculpts are further down the posing, cutting, sprue layout, moulding etc pathway and by the time they do realise the 'eldar' slot has been used up and its something elses turn
easier to skip Karandras for now rather than disrupt a whole bunch of other stuff, especially since they're running so close to the wire on all this stuff now
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: for 'forgot' i can believe that a sculptor was assigned a bundle of eldar stuff to do, managed to do most of it but not Karandras and then left GW (or was moved onto a different project)
Management thinks it's done until the sculpts are further down the posing, cutting, sprue layout, moulding etc pathway and by the time they do realise the 'eldar' slot has been used up and its something elses turn
easier to skip Karandras for now rather than disrupt a whole bunch of other stuff, especially since they're running so close to the wire on all this stuff now
Yeah esp if they are moving projects around to short term sculptors. Another element is it could just be one department is overworked or got a flood of orders go through. So no one left, but the model just got kicked down in priority over other things being pushed through. Not forgotten just put to one side constantly until whoever was supposed to do it or approve it forgot it had been put to the side. Then you fastforward and someone from marketing or shipping wants the photos for the box art and such and suddenly "Oh wait we were doing that?"
Considering how many projects GW is handling right now I could see things like that slipping. In the end GW make toys, so whilst I'm sure they've got checks to try and avoid things slipping, I'm sure they do.
genestealers currently have 13 characters and 9 non-characters. soon to be 14 characters and 10? non-characters. not sure if the new kill team will be its own unit, but i suspect it will
Part of me did wonder if this was sort of the point. I might be misremembering but didn't the last narrative arc for the eldar have them fight and Karandras run off defeated?
Yeah esp if they are moving projects around to short term sculptors. Another element is it could just be one department is overworked or got a flood of orders go through. So no one left, but the model just got kicked down in priority over other things being pushed through. Not forgotten just put to one side constantly until whoever was supposed to do it or approve it forgot it had been put to the side. Then you fastforward and someone from marketing or shipping wants the photos for the box art and such and suddenly "Oh wait we were doing that?"
Considering how many projects GW is handling right now I could see things like that slipping. In the end GW make toys, so whilst I'm sure they've got checks to try and avoid things slipping, I'm sure they do.
I can't see this happening at all. People at every step of the process would be asking "What about Karandras?" The designer would ask when assigned the project; if they forgot, their superiors and the schedulers would be asking when checking in on projects. The other designers sat next to the designer making the Striking Scorpions would be asking "Are you making Karandras as well?" The painters prepping for the project would be asking… And, as others have mentioned, the evidence is that Jes Goodwin is still closely involved.
I can imagine oversights in terms of allocating time and other resources and deciding therefore that Karandras would be the thing to be dropped, but 'forgetting' when they intended to make one… I don't see it. Sounds like someone using a clumsy phrase to describe the decision to wait.
lolwut? The last release for Aeldari had more named special characters in it than some factions/subfactions have!
Do we actually have to pull out the GSC characters to compare now? The Eldar characters is an update of decade old resin models (which are still not complete by the way) while majority of the GSC characters are literally characters no one asked for but the guy who sculpted them. The only surprised Eldar release over the past year was Corsair, I was asking for the fanatic, the one who goes above and beyond while the guy on paycheck just made what he was told to do, and it looked like he didn't even remember to sculpt Karandras, classic.
If you want another "fanatic" example look at Death Guards,it were sculpted by a Death Guard fanatic and it shown. If there're a person like that for Eldar we might even have Space Marine heroes version of Eldar.
Dude, if you believe that Jes fething Goodwin let them "forget" Karandras...I've got pristine mountain top property to sell you in the Everglades.
And really, it's interesting the goalposts moved. You said "Eldar/Ynnari characters". We saw 2 Phoenix Lords, the Avatar of Khaine, and a second Autarch kit, and a Warlock double kit.
GSC is basically harlequins. They should barely be a separate army. They have more than enough new models and don’t need much else. Eldar still have a long way to go to flesh out their line.
bullyboy wrote: GSC is basically harlequins. They should barely be a separate army. They have more than enough new models and don’t need much else. Eldar still have a long way to go to flesh out their line.
i don't really agree? GSC have a lot more than quins, even without brood brothers (which is a big part of the army's identity). it's three distinct infantry boxes which build four kits, vs just troupes for quins. GSC are also much more distinct in their models compared to eldar vs quins
bullyboy wrote: GSC is basically harlequins. They should barely be a separate army. They have more than enough new models and don’t need much else. Eldar still have a long way to go to flesh out their line.
Tell me you have no clue of GSC without telling me you have no clue about GSC.
GSC have, in terms of kits and models unique to them: Neophytes, Acolytes/Metamorphs, Aberrants, Rockgrinder/Truck, Ridgerunner, Jackals, plus 12 different character models. They share Genestealers and (kinda) the Patriarch/Broodlord with Tyranids and have access to a good chunk of the Imperial Guard range - plus an upgrade set for Brood Brother Cadians. And GSC were a thing in the background fighting as forces of their own way longer than Harlequins.
Harlequins, in comparison: Troupe, Skyweaver, Starweaver/Voidweaver, plus three character models. They are no longer in a codex of their own. While technically they were playable as part of an Eldar codex over 40Ks history for longer than GSC, they had less overall time in a book of their own - and their background never supported them fighting as "a proper 40K army".
I get that personal preferences can cloud judgements, but this one is so off it is not even funny. It must be frustrating for fans of Harlequins, and I share their anger over GWs treatment of them, but still... get real.
bullyboy wrote: Eldar still have a long way to go to flesh out their line.
lolwut? The last release for Aeldari had more named special characters in it than some factions/subfactions have!
Do we actually have to pull out the GSC characters to compare now? The Eldar characters is an update of decade old resin models (which are still not complete by the way) while majority of the GSC characters are literally characters no one asked for but the guy who sculpted them. The only surprised Eldar release over the past year was Corsair, I was asking for the fanatic, the one who goes above and beyond while the guy on paycheck just made what he was told to do, and it looked like he didn't even remember to sculpt Karandras, classic.
If you want another "fanatic" example look at Death Guards,it were sculpted by a Death Guard fanatic and it shown. If there're a person like that for Eldar we might even have Space Marine heroes version of Eldar.
To be fair there's not much for an Eldar "fanatic" designer to get their teeth into when the brief is "replicate this 2006 kit as closely as possible with modern design technology". The appearances of the 4th Ed Aspect Warriors seem to be practically canon now. (My pet theory is that Goodwin is taking no chances on a repeat of the 3rd Ed Scorpions.) We know what the new Dragons are going to look like. The Spears, on the other hand, who had no 4th Ed models, got a proper glow-up. Since neither Hawks nor Spiders had them either, it'll be interesting to see whether there's a more creative update there.
Maybe "forgetting" Karandras coincided with the decision to put a finished 40k kit with no natural release slot into Kill Team. But it would seem a bit of a coincidence. I still assume he is waiting in the wings.
I feel there needs to be some sort of "law of time in regards to GW hobbying".
When you start, and/or are following every day, a year, perhaps even 6 months, can feel like an eternity.
If you've been here for 20 years, 3 years feels like a lazy Sunday afternoon, and anything released in the last decade counts as "new".
I mean its not Eldar related - but I've wanted to buy the new Fabius Bile model. And I keep thinking "its only been out a few months" - but in reality, its 4 years in June.
But in any case - the idea Eldar are not well served is mad to me.
And I agree GSC could do with a few more units rather than the seemingly endless plethora of characters.
bullyboy wrote: GSC is basically harlequins. They should barely be a separate army. They have more than enough new models and don’t need much else. Eldar still have a long way to go to flesh out their line.
To add to the points raised above, even in the Lore there's a stark difference in how they are portrayed.
Harlies are often single characters or small troops. They augment an Eldar force (Craftworld most often) rather than define a whole standing arm themselves. This is the issue they hit when they splintered off on their own, they just didn't have much material to build a huge diverse army out of without vast investment and changes to the lore and so forth.
It's like when GW tries to make Imperials Agents their own army - it ends up being a motley of other Imperial forces being drafted in to augment the handful of unique models that the Inquisition brings.
Genestealer Cults are vastly different and are closer, if you want an Eldar comparison, to the Pirates or Exodites. They are a full faction capable of major military operations who act on their own. Heck the only time they work with Tyranids is during the early parts of an invasion of a system - once the Tyranids win there is a high chance that most of the cult will be consumed with perhaps only leaders being allowed to escape/leave to spread the infection to other worlds.
Now I do agree, when they started the Cults were pretty dull and were mostly an Imperial Guard army with a few symbols and one or two unique models. However with their second wave of models and drip fed leaders they are now pretty distinct. Taking Imperial models is optional and somewhat restricted, whilst their core models can form a whole diverse and powerful army in their own right. As they gain more kits I fully expect this pattern to continue to the point where Imperial forces might just be one or two units or a tank or such. With perhaps a sub-faction optoin within the book to take basically an IG army with a few Cult models.
Harlies just never reached that stage, they remained a specialist force of a handful of models that relied on either spamming their own models or taking major allies.
Honestly many of the small splinter armies that GW tried ot make work failed- harlies, agents, knights. Knights did survive, but are in a tricky spot where they can really mess with the game balance because of their nature.
Now I do agree, when they started the Cults were pretty dull and were mostly an Imperial Guard army with a few symbols and one or two unique models. However with their second wave of models and drip fed leaders they are now pretty distinct. Taking Imperial models is optional and somewhat restricted whilst their core models can form a whole diverse and powerful army in their own right. As they gain more kits I fully expect this pattern to continue to the point where Imperial forces might just be one or two units or a tank or such. With perhaps a sub-faction optoin within the book to take basically an IG army with a few Cult models.
Is there some alternate universe definition of "restricted" going on here? Do people just not read what the Brood Brothers rules are?
GSC get access to almost the entirety of the Guard codex:
No Astra Militarum models in your army can be your Warlord, and they cannot be given Enhancements.
You cannot include units with any of the following keywords in your army using these rules:
Epic Hero; Ogryn; Ratling; Militarum Tempestus; Commissar; Regimental Preacher; Regimental Enginseer; Munitorum Servitors; Aircraft
Do they have a limited amount of points to spend? Sure. But their "restrictions" aren't.
bullyboy wrote: Eldar still have a long way to go to flesh out their line.
Now you're just trolling.
He's... really not? Both dark and craft have serious holes to fill. Excluding Votann as a new army, they probably have the biggest range gaps out of everything in 40k.
Now I do agree, when they started the Cults were pretty dull and were mostly an Imperial Guard army with a few symbols and one or two unique models. However with their second wave of models and drip fed leaders they are now pretty distinct. Taking Imperial models is optional and somewhat restricted whilst their core models can form a whole diverse and powerful army in their own right. As they gain more kits I fully expect this pattern to continue to the point where Imperial forces might just be one or two units or a tank or such. With perhaps a sub-faction optoin within the book to take basically an IG army with a few Cult models.
Is there some alternate universe definition of "restricted" going on here? Do people just not read what the Brood Brothers rules are?
GSC get access to almost the entirety of the Guard codex:
No Astra Militarum models in your army can be your Warlord, and they cannot be given Enhancements.
You cannot include units with any of the following keywords in your army using these rules:
Epic Hero; Ogryn; Ratling; Militarum Tempestus; Commissar; Regimental Preacher; Regimental Enginseer; Munitorum Servitors; Aircraft
Do they have a limited amount of points to spend? Sure. But their "restrictions" aren't.
Almost the entirety Somewhat restricted At this point this isn't even being pedantic, since you've literally shown they're "somewhat restricted" by listing the minor restrictions. It's not like Overread said they were hamstrung by their restrictions or anything.
Almost the entirety Somewhat restricted At this point this isn't even being pedantic, since you've literally shown they're "somewhat restricted" by listing the minor restrictions. It's not like Overread said they were hamstrung by their restrictions or anything.
When someone says they're "restricted", the onus is on them to show the severity of it. Their posting reads as though it's some actual, meaningful restrictions.
In a codex of 60 units, not being able to take a grand total of 18 units doesn't really seem "restricted" to me.
-No Ursula Creed, Gaunt's Ghosts, Harker, Straken, Marbo, Nork Deddog, or Lord Solar Leontus knocks 6 Epic Heroes out.
-No Commissar, Regimental Preacher, Enginseer or Munitorum Servitors knocks out another 4 datasheets.
-Ogryn knocks out 3 datasheets: Bullgryn, Ogryn, and Ogryn Bodyguard
-Ratling knocks out 1 datasheet.
-Tempestus knocks out the Tempestus Command squad and the Tempestus squad.
-Aircraft knocks out the Valkyrie.
And that doesn't get into the Imperial Armour bits, which are also available to GSC via the Brood Brothers rules.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: from how kan talks, you'd think that 40k games only use the 500 points that GSC can use for brood brothers
It's a % slide for how many points Brood Brothers can take up. 250/1000 pts, 500/2000pts, 750/3000pts.
But I mean, you knew that. You just don't actually care that you have the ability to outright play a whole second army as "just a special rule". You don't care that your faction has been an absolute weight around the neck of Guard since the first incarnation of these whole "Pick and Choose" Brood Brothers rules. It was a wildly different story when there was a singular set of items put straight into your codex codex.
You're really just being obtuse by ignoring the "somewhat" part of "somewhat restricted", especially when you then admit GSC can't use almost 1/3 of the Guard datasheets, even if they are mostly for minor units.
Also "an absolute weight around the neck of Guard"? There's no need to be so dramatic about it.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: You're really just being obtuse by ignoring the "somewhat" part of "somewhat restricted", especially when you then admit GSC can't use almost 1/3 of the Guard datasheets, even if they are mostly for minor units.
And I feel like you're being obtuse by adding a context that wasn't presented.
Also, that 1/3 is just the stuff from the main index cards. They get another 23 items from Imperial Armour.
Also "an absolute weight around the neck of Guard"? There's no need to be so dramatic about it.
We literally had units given restrictions because of their interactions with the previous Brood Brothers "add a keyword" bit.
I stand by my comment on GSC.
They were basically a tiny offshoot passion project of players after some small inclusion in the game many years ago, just like Harlequins. GW could have chose to do the same for Harlies, turn them into a full fledged army by adding character after character and new units, but GSC got that love.
It’s still just an offshoot army that was given full attention by GW, it was never a mainstream force.
It could easily have remained a few units and suck in the Guard book or mid book just like Harlies have now been relegated to.
Voss wrote: He's... really not? Both dark and craft have serious holes to fill. Excluding Votann as a new army, they probably have the biggest range gaps out of everything in 40k.
I mean I can put my DE hat on and say yes - the faction's not really gained anything except flyers since 1998...
But Eldar? What holes are possibly in need of filling? There's a few bits of forgeworld for those who are still refusing to buy that but they are probably the largest, and certainly most rounded army apart from Space Marines.
Voss wrote: He's... really not? Both dark and craft have serious holes to fill. Excluding Votann as a new army, they probably have the biggest range gaps out of everything in 40k.
I mean I can put my DE hat on and say yes - the faction's not really gained anything except flyers since 1998...
But Eldar? What holes are possibly in need of filling? There's a few bits of forgeworld for those who are still refusing to buy that but they are probably the largest, and certainly most rounded army apart from Space Marines.
Still need Warp spiders, swooping hawks, fire dragons, many Phoenix lords to finish the line. I’m fond of the old falcon and Vyper kit so don’t care for an upgrade. It’s really just the aspects which GW has been addressing over the past few years now (reapers, banshees, spears and recently scorpions)
Still need Warp spiders, swooping hawks, fire dragons, many Phoenix lords to finish the line.
Resculpts aren't the same thing as gap-filling.
I’m fond of the old falcon and Vyper kit so don’t care for an upgrade. It’s really just the aspects which GW has been addressing over the past few years now (reapers, banshees, spears and recently scorpions)
Also Guardians, weapon platforms, Rangers, and even a new Ranger biker unit...
Darnok wrote: And GSC were a thing in the background fighting as forces of their own way longer than Harlequins.
Erm.. no. Harlequin forces were first, though not much.
bullyboy wrote: I stand by my comment on GSC.
They were basically a tiny offshoot passion project of players after some small inclusion in the game many years ago, just like Harlequins.
Harlequins were the second Eldar army list after Eldritch Raiders (basically corsars with Zoats). They used scavenged Imperial stuff like robots and tanks for their performance and were a full-fledged army.
Genestealers on the other hand weren't Tyranids at the time they got their two lists (Invasion Force and Genestealer Cult). They had access to Chaos stuff back then, but also to vehicles, guns, brood brothers (infected humans back then, not hybrids), beastmen, mutants etc.
Both are very old armies - both could be played in 2nd edition though. But as the factions developed, a combinded force of Eldar and Harlequins was far more reasonable as Tyranids with the option of tanks and guns.
Shakalooloo wrote: Harlequins are small troupes of players putting on performances based on fixed, ritualistic roles.
Genestealer Cults are planetwide insurrections spawned from amongst the wide variety of human worlds.
Which range should be larger?
Well... Harlequin troupes could be pretty 'large', more than a hundred individuals. And they can appear wherever they want. Even better than Space Marines, and those also usually don't have that much manpower when they attack. And a normal 40k game isn't exactly a world-wide conflict.
GSC aren't that flexible, they are usually only active on a planet or sub-sector. I can see the criticism about them being a main faction when others are not.
Well, yes, personally I don't care, I played GSC since 2nd edition, so I'm okay with them being a faction and with access to Imperial stuff.
Shakalooloo wrote: Harlequins are small troupes of players putting on performances based on fixed, ritualistic roles.
Genestealer Cults are planetwide insurrections spawned from amongst the wide variety of human worlds.
Which range should be larger?
Well... Harlequin troupes could be pretty 'large', more than a hundred individuals. And they can appear wherever they want. Even better than Space Marines, and those also usually don't have that much manpower when they attack. And a normal 40k game isn't exactly a world-wide conflict.
Harlequins' big deal back in the day was that their 'armies' were very few models on the tabletop, even pricier than Space Marines and able to wipe the floor with them with just a squad or two.
Harlequins should be the faction getting lots of monopose characters to represent roles, while the diverse GSC should be getting new mobs of degenerate Imperials. And a goddamned limo!
Eldar did pretty well out of 9th Ed. That there’s still plenty to go is more testament to how badly GW trod water with them in the past.
Let’s look at Aspect Warriors.
1st-3rd Ed? The same models. Then the utterly awful Mike McVey ones came out. They were uglier and less detailed than the originals. And still in metal. But I think they at least got plastic Dire Avengers.*
We then got a redo pretty quickly. First in metal, then ported to Finecast
And it’s only until really recently that we started to get plastic Aspects.
Now. Eldar haven’t hurt for new units in that time, and some stuff did get plastic kits. War Walker, Wraithlord, Wraith Knight, Support Weapons, plastic Heavy Weapon Sprue, Jetbikes, Fire Prism, Shadow Weaver, Crimson Hunter**, Wraith Fighter, probably some others I’m forgetting.
But the core was left to rot and wither. Warp Spiders for instance are older than a healthy percentage of all 40K players, being originally released in what, 1993 at a guess?
9th was sadly the first really big, really effective update. And at least they’ve done better than other Xenos with the new “we won’t necessarily wait for a Codex to do new models” approach of recent GW.
Hopefully 10th will see most of what’s left polished off. I’d of course like to see it all polished off, but I’ll take what I can get for now.
*except Warp Spiders. Poor Warp Spiders. Now what have you learned about being hideously beardy in 2nd Ed?
Eldar did pretty well out of 9th Ed. That there’s still plenty to go is more testament to how badly GW trod water with them in the past.
Let’s look at Aspect Warriors.
1st-3rd Ed? The same models. Then the utterly awful Mike McVey ones came out. They were uglier and less detailed than the originals. And still in metal. But I think they at least got plastic Dire Avengers.*
We then got a redo pretty quickly. First in metal, then ported to Finecast
And it’s only until really recently that we started to get plastic Aspects.
Now. Eldar haven’t hurt for new units in that time, and some stuff did get plastic kits. War Walker, Wraithlord, Wraith Knight, Support Weapons, plastic Heavy Weapon Sprue, Jetbikes, Fire Prism, Shadow Weaver, Crimson Hunter**, Wraith Fighter, probably some others I’m forgetting.
But the core was left to rot and wither. Warp Spiders for instance are older than a healthy percentage of all 40K players, being originally released in what, 1993 at a guess?
9th was sadly the first really big, really effective update. And at least they’ve done better than other Xenos with the new “we won’t necessarily wait for a Codex to do new models” approach of recent GW.
Hopefully 10th will see most of what’s left polished off. I’d of course like to see it all polished off, but I’ll take what I can get for now.
*except Warp Spiders. Poor Warp Spiders. Now what have you learned about being hideously beardy in 2nd Ed?
3rd Ed Dire Avengers were metal heads and loin cloths for the plastic guardians that came out with C:CE. I remember how horrible those were to put together.
The fully plastic ones came with the 4th Ed Codex.
Dark Eldar need fleshing out not so much in new units, but in options for existing units. Heck, I'd like to see the return of more weapons options across the board for all armies, but DE seem to hurt BAD in this regard.
Also the whole "this unit contains exactly this combination of models" line had GOT to go.
cuda1179 wrote: Dark Eldar need fleshing out not so much in new units, but in options for existing units. Heck, I'd like to see the return of more weapons options across the board for all armies, but DE seem to hurt BAD in this regard.
Also the whole "this unit contains exactly this combination of models" line had GOT to go.
Dark Eldar hit their peak in 5th edition, then have lost characters, units, and options in every edition since. And had about one plastic kit per edition, half of which were characters
cuda1179 wrote: Dark Eldar need fleshing out not so much in new units, but in options for existing units. Heck, I'd like to see the return of more weapons options across the board for all armies, but DE seem to hurt BAD in this regard.
Also the whole "this unit contains exactly this combination of models" line had GOT to go.
Amen to all of that. GW's insistence on box contents tying to the rules is exhausting and nonsensical. Whoever proposed that policy should be launched into the sun.
1st-3rd Ed? The same models. Then the utterly awful Mike McVey ones came out. They were uglier and less detailed than the originals. And still in metal. But I think they at least got plastic Dire Avengers.
I had to check, but Mike McVey wasn't even the most significant culprit in the 3rd Ed Aspect Warriors debacle. He did the Reapers (pretty bad but the Exarch is nice) and the Hawks (the current kit, which is actually pretty good in my view).
Chris Fitzpatrick did the Banshees (awkward-looking but with interesting elements) and the Dragons (I have actually always liked those rather more than the Goodwin ones, apart from the fist-waggling Exarch).
It was Gary Morley, also responsible for the hilarious first Nagash model, who did the abominations that were the Scorpions. Also the Spears riders who were... fine I guess?
I can't find who did the Avengers Exarch and upgrades, but the (decent) Guardians they are based on are credited to Goodwin and McVey.
In the age of no model no rules, there are no gaps to fill.
Gsc didn't have a kellermorph gap, but they still got one out of nowhere.
Dark angels didn't have a risen gap, but they still got the unit.
Harlequins are so old as an army that they actually DO have unit gaps, gaps that are almost 40 years old (but due to nmnr don't have rules despite having them previously):
Great Harlequins
Master mimes
Mime units
Don't have models.
Not to mention they had wraithlords and special ghost warriors that were also part of the troupes.
twoseventwo wrote: There were never any Mime units. It was weird. They were given profiles, but no army list entries.
Surely just normal Harlequin models but with a white striped outfit and a tear painted on their cheek. I suppose they need alt heads with oversized berets.
Tyel wrote: But Eldar? What holes are possibly in need of filling?
It's a small one, but one that bugs me - Great Harlequin.
The other characters came back, but not the chief.
Arguably Shining Spear & WS Phoenix Lords, too - I believe we have a name for the former now, at least.
Eh... I wouldn't consider these holes.
I mean lets say they do issue a "Great Harlequin" - who is what, a Troupe Master with an extra wound and attack? Its not exactly going to blow Harlequin list building wide open.
I guess Autarchs don't completely slot in for missing Phoenix Lords - but again, functionally they can serve much the same purpose.
I mean what's missing from the Eldar Range?
They have:
Psychic Characters
Choppy Characters
Choppy Monster Characters
Basic shooty troops and basic choppy Troops (that no one would ever take but what are you going to do...)
They've got snipers.
They've got almost every elite infantry unit concept under the sun in Aspect warriors.
They've got heavy infantry (shooty and choppy).
They've got basic bikers. They've got elite bikers. They've got sniper-bikers.
They've got light vehicles. They've got tanks. They've got artillery. They've got artillery tanks.
They've got light walkers, heavy walkers and super-heavy walkers.
They've got fliers.
They've got transports.
Chuck in Harlequins for even more redundancy in these slots.
Apart from Marines, I don't think there's a broader roster in the game.
Appears GW have also purged some 40k kits silently from the web store (via Auspex Tactics).
* The four remaining Deamon characters in finecast (not surprising but I am confused why they weren't in yesterday's announcement given they had AOS rules too).
* The older Dark Angel upgrade sprues (again, not a huge shock given they have been replaced tbh.)
* Primaris Lieutenant Zakariah (genuinely baffled by this one. Had it had a repack with the new logo since release? That's literally the only reason I can think of)
* The old Brood Brothers kit (about to be replaced with a massively better version in Kill Team)
* The Ork and Custodes combat patrols (likely to be replaced with worse versions shortly no doubt).
* FW Wraithknight with inferno lances (was this still playable? I'm amazed)
* FW Malcador Defendor (this specific variant doesn't have a 30k plastic kit yet but I can't imagine anyone was buying the resin rather than kitbashing the plastic even if it's not coming)
* The individually packed Sector Frontieris terrain (the bigger box remains and they were awful value in comparison tbh).
I mean what's missing from the Eldar Range?
...
Apart from Marines, I don't think there's a broader roster in the game.
I think the perception that Eldar are lacking something just comes from 2nd edition Phoenix Lords and Warp Spiders primarily plus the stuff that's still in finecast like Fire Dragons and Swooping Hawks.
They don't have any glaring needs. Anything new they could get would just be nice to have like a Farseer kit with options similar to the most recent Autarch kit.
Yes, CWE primarily need updates to their remaining resin models rather than kits filling dropped units. It wouldn't be such a big issue if Aspect warriors were not such a prominant part of Eldar lore.
So the "holes" are more weakpoints with ancient models. I feel for poor Asurmen, first of the Pheonix Lords and probably last to be updated.
Dark Eldar absolutely need a massive influx of new character options, etc.
GSC got a great expansion but that could easily have been an army like Harlies.
Just takes imagination.
Apart from current models, could have easily added other units/models..
Mimes, great avatar, marionette walkers, webway guardians (aren’t they supposed to be some type of horrific beings guarding the webway?), a larger transport (open topped, with top looking like a stage), different bike units, you could go on and on if you chose. GSC had the same flesh out, added new units that never existed before.
For anyone who may be interested, just in case its not been posted elsewhere, the Kroot Carnivore arms will fit any of the bodies without modification, not something that the instructions mention at all. Feels almost like a kit from 20 years ago with new tech and detailing.
Harlequins should be the faction getting lots of monopose characters to represent roles, while the diverse GSC should be getting new mobs of degenerate Imperials. And a goddamned limo!
I think it would be pretty cool to get some new harlequin models that are characters like the death jester or whatever else, that could join each little unit you have. Or just be stand alone.
Would just be more fitting for them.
I’m not an Eldar player at all, but I do like the harlequin visual..
Dinoriders should be a whole army of their own. GW has teased Exodites for so long they deserve a fully army of wild space elves and dinosaurs and dinosaurs with lasers on their heads!
And bright stallion warlocks - there's so much that they can do for them that I'm honestly surprised they've never touched on Exodites at all over the years.
Even a single hero leader or unit or such.
I think the only model is 1 bright lance model they made ages ago for Epic/Titan Legions. There might be one or two more kicking around, but again only in the really really old stuff.
Granted GW has also been teasing Codex Zoats for 2 years running now in Christmas themed videos
And we have a zoat model even. But if they want to tease exodites, best way to do it would be some enslaved dinosaurs as part of a Dark Eldar beastmaster menagerie
Due to monopose I only need 10 snaggas and I'm not really fond of the Boss either... will have to think about it but I can always just take 1 box of snaggas and 1 box of riders...
They're named on the instructions booklet.
