40k codex release schedule rumor

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**the_scotsman**

Yeah, it's unfortunate. Dal'yth in concept is exactly how I'm painting up my Tau stuff - tons of different camoflage patterns with paint effects to make it look like it's projected on.

But the playstyle of that bonus is the exact opposite of what I want my Tau to feel like. I'm using every close range weapon available basically, so I'm going to need to be on the move pretty much continuously. So it looks like I'm giving that a miss.

**Kdash**

changemod wrote:
taemu_touhi wrote:
The Dal'yth warlord trait is just bad... Like real bad.

Depends. It's not exactly fluffy, but this codex does quite a lot to encourage many units to stay static.

Vespids won't be static though, and Kroot will only exist as a meat shield on the occasions you suddenly decide you no longer like Fire Warriors.

**Kanluwen**

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, it's unfortunate. Dal'yth in concept is exactly how I'm painting up my Tau stuff - tons of different camoflage patterns with paint effects to make it look like it's projected on.

But the playstyle of that bonus is the exact opposite of what I want my Tau to feel like. I'm using every close range weapon available basically, so I'm going to need to be on the move pretty much continuously. So it looks like I'm giving that a miss.

This is going to sound weird, but have we seen any of the updated rules for the Tidewall stuff?

In the Index: Tidewalls have <Sept>(I seriously did not notice this until just now and you made your post; I wanted to see whether or not it specifies that the units onboard count as having moved or not). The hilarity of a casually floating gunline of Fire Warriors that then just...park at short range is something that I love.

**Kdash**

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, it's unfortunate. Dal'yth in concept is exactly how I'm painting up my Tau stuff - tons of different camoflage patterns with paint effects to make it look like it's projected on.

But the playstyle of that bonus is the exact opposite of what I want my Tau to feel like. I'm using every close range weapon available basically, so I'm going to need to be on the move pretty much continuously. So it looks like I'm giving that a miss.

It does give you benefits to your Ghostkeels and Stealth Suits though, as you're "forward lines" - while your firebase castle at the back gets a nice bonus.

Whether that bonus outweighs +6" range though, will depend on how much cover/ruins you tend to play with on your tables.

**Kanluwen**

Kdash wrote:
changemod wrote:
taemu_touhi wrote:
The Dal'yth warlord trait is just bad... Like real bad.

Depends. It's not exactly fluffy, but this codex does quite a lot to encourage many units to stay static.

Vespids won't be static though, and Kroot will only exist as a meat shield on the occasions you suddenly decide you no longer like Fire Warriors.

Vespids won't be static, but this does allow for them to be part of an overwatch conga line--something they cannot currently do as they do not possess "For the Greater Good".

**Sunny Side Up**

Well, it may become a popular trait for that Stormsurge Super-Heavy Detachment.

**Kdash**

Kanluwen wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, it's unfortunate. Dal'yth in concept is exactly how I'm painting up my Tau stuff - tons of different camoflage patterns with paint effects to make it look like it's projected on.

But the playstyle of that bonus is the exact opposite of what I want my Tau to feel like. I'm using every close range weapon available basically, so I'm going to need to be on the move pretty much continuously. So it looks like I'm giving that a miss.

This is going to sound weird, but have we seen any of the updated rules for the Tidewall stuff?

In the Index: Tidewalls have <Sept>(I seriously did not notice this until just now and you made your post; I wanted to see whether or not it specifies that the units onboard count as having moved or not). The hilarity of a casually floating gunline of 2+ Fire Warriors is something that I love.

Works the same as open topped transports doesn't it? Meaning they will still suffer shooting penalties for moving and shooting heavy weapons - which in turn suggests they are considered to be moving... That and the units inside wouldn't be target-able anyway, so, wouldn't need to benefit from the rule.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:
Kdash wrote:
changemod wrote:
taemu_touhi wrote:
The Dal'yth warlord trait is just bad... Like real bad.

Depends. It's not exactly fluffy, but this codex does quite a lot to encourage many units to stay static.

Vespids won't be static though, and Kroot will only exist as a meat shield on the occasions you suddenly decide you no longer like Fire Warriors.

Vespids won't be static, but this does allow for them to be part of an overwatch conga line--something they cannot currently do as they do not possess "For the Greater Good".

I suppose, but, i still don't see Vespids at all, and i'd personally imagine seeing them in a "sweeping" role around the battlefield, not hanging around a castle and Warlord several "s behind the screens.

**Kanluwen**

Kdash wrote:

Works the same as open topped transports doesn't it? Meaning they will still suffer shooting penalties for moving and shooting heavy weapons - which in turn suggests they are considered to be moving... That and the units inside wouldn't be target-able anyway, so, wouldn't need to benefit from the rule.

Don't you go raining on my vision of the Fun Police!

That's why I was asking specifically if we'd heard anything about updated rules for it; since the rules as they stand now would be pretty "eh".

**Daedalus81**

Kanluwen wrote:

Vespids won't be static, but this does allow for them to be part of an overwatch conga line--something they cannot currently do as they do not possess "For the Greater Good".

These things can be mutually exclusive if you want them to be. The Vespids can be out doing work and have overwatch and the rest of the army can be standing still getting an armor bonus.

**Red Corsair**

Well fire warriors dropped a point and they just suggested the alien auxiliaries went down to make up for not having a sept trait. So that is some pretty cheap chaff if kroot end up going down a point as well. Probably still better off with fire warriors though.

**Kdash**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:

Vespids won't be static, but this does allow for them to be part of an overwatch conga line--something they cannot currently do as they do not possess "For the Greater Good".

These things can be mutually exclusive if you want them to be. The Vespids can be out doing work and have overwatch and the rest of the army can be standing still getting an armor bonus.

Oh, i fully 100% accept that. I just fail to see how it benefits things like Vespids more than the other traits do. It's just, when i see something singled out as a beneficiary of fixed rules, i instantly look for synergy, and, it feels like, once again, gw has missed the mark on it. (btw this is from a guy with a T'au curiosity, as opposed to a hardcore T'au player - so, pinch of salt and all.)

**Therion**

So, am I reading this wrong or is it true that Dal’yth Sept units do not get a cover save if the opponent starts the game, because they only get a cover save for a subsequent turn after standing still for their game turn?

Seems like a trash tier trait, once again, unless I’m mistaken, in which case it’ll get a solid bump to ’mediocre’.

**taemu_touhi**

Daedalus81 wrote:
taemu_touhi wrote:
The Dal'yth warlord trait is just bad... Like real bad.

+1 armor on a static gunline army? Why is that bad?

That's the Sept trait, not warlord trait. The warlord trait wants you to clump your kroot with your commander to get "For the Greater Good", but then you might as well just bring firewarriors. Unless there a significant changes to kroot, which I assume not since it should have appeared in this preview.

The sept trait I admit can be useful, but any decent table should have enough area terrain to work with. And for a static gunline, I'm sure that Bork’an will be the go to sept.

**Kanluwen**

Therion wrote:
So, am I reading this wrong or is it true that Dal’yth Sept units do not get a cover save if the opponent starts the game, because they only get a cover save if they stand still for an actual game turn?

It's something that will probably need a FAQ; but seeing as how you cannot have a turn OR Movement phase before the game starts--I'd say that you would get your cover save if deployed out in the open.

Seems like a trash tier trait, once again, unless I’m mistaken, in which case it’ll get a solid bump to ’mediocre’.

Honestly, it seems like pretty much everything "seems like a trash tier trait" to you unless it's a -1 to hit.

**Togusa**

Therion wrote:
So, am I reading this wrong or is it true that Dal’yth Sept units do not get a cover save if the opponent starts the game, because they only get a cover save if they stand still for an actual game turn?

Seems like a trash tier trait, once again, unless I’m mistaken, in which case it’ll get a solid bump to ’mediocre’.

Correct, if you are going second, the trait is useless. It's so trash, I doubt I'd even give it another look.

**MinscS2**

Daedalus81 wrote:
taemu_touhi wrote:
The Dal'yth warlord trait is just bad... Like real bad.

+1 armor on a static gunline army? Why is that bad?

That's not the warlord trait.

Although their sept tenet is pretty bad as well, especially since it's inactive on turn 1 if your opponent goes first.

Given how many units Tau have that actually want to move in some way or another, it would be a pretty bad sept tenet even if it was active on turn 1.

**Therion**

Kanluwen wrote:
Therion wrote:
So, am I reading this wrong or is it true that Dal’yth Sept units do not get a cover save if the opponent starts the game, because they only get a cover save if they stand still for an actual game turn?

It's something that will probably need a FAQ; but seeing as how you cannot have a turn OR Movement phase before the game starts--I'd say that you would get your cover save if deployed out in the open.

Seems like a trash tier trait, once again, unless I’m mistaken, in which case it’ll get a solid bump to ’mediocre’.

Honestly, it seems like pretty much everything "seems like a trash tier trait" to you unless it's a -1 to hit.

It doesn’t need a FAQ as it’s quite clear (no save against enemy turn 1a alpha strike). I was just asking someone to re-check in case something had gone wrong with my eyesight after reading too many trash tier Tau leaks.

**BoomWolf**

Therion wrote:
So, am I reading this wrong or is it true that Dal’yth Sept units do not get a cover save if the opponent starts the game, because they only get a cover save for a subsequent turn after standing still for their game turn?

Seems like a trash tier trait, once again, unless I’m mistaken, in which case it’ll get a solid bump to ’mediocre’.

You are not.
It really is a very bad trait.
And its paired with a bad warlord trait.
Unless they stratagem is outright broken-nobody will ever play this sept.

As for the "wall of mirrors" stratagem

What's even the point?
Stealths has fly, they can leave combat if they want to anyway-and it depends on your positioning last turn to even be used.
In what scenario do you even bother with this?

**changemod**

Wall of mirrors could be used for an alpha strike: Daisy chain your stealth suits to be in range of a Ghostkeel but reaching as far towards the enemy as possible, use stratagem, place beacon, manta strike in your units.

After that it's probably worthless because of fly being a thing, yes. Might have some niche uses for a long-stretch redeploy.

**Pottsey**

the_scotsman wrote:
So, when I first calculated this I did have one mistake in my math (I forgot vs the powerfist commander a standard vehicle would get a 6+ armor save). The Catachan commander does 1.66 wounds on average vs a standard T7 Sv3+ tank, the Onager Commander does 1.77. If you give both the warlord trait (funnily enough, the Catachan warlord trait "Lead from the front" is exactly identical to the Farsight warlord trait) the catachan commander does 2.5 wounds on average to the onager commander's 2.37 wounds on average. And the Catachan commander can also order himself to fight twice if he wants, potentially doubling his damage.

My overall point is this: The Onager Gauntlet is not a particularly worrying/overly powerful weapon because it just takes this guy who is in no way a melee threat and makes him a very very slight melee threat. To the point where he's pretty much an equal of a 38-point model who is not particularly considered a big melee powerhouse. Start comparing him to any kind of basic Space Marine captain with a powerfist or thunder hammer, or a hive tyrant costing equivalent points, he gets blown out of the water.

The farsight-specific relic, the fusion blades, are a whole lot scarier, actually, but generally they will still probably get blown out of the water by some shooting based or support based relic.

The difference is you are doing that Onager Gauntlet after shooting quad weapon fire and the Onager Gauntlet is to finish off if the target survives. The Onager Gauntlet is enough to push you over the edge and kill that tank in 1 round. Something the Catachan commander is not going to be doing.

**Kanluwen**

BoomWolf wrote:

As for the "wall of mirrors" stratagem

What's even the point?
Stealths has fly, they can leave combat if they want to anyway-and it depends on your positioning last turn to even be used.
In what scenario do you even bother with this?

I can see it being used as a bit of a response to weird deployment or attempts to bait poor deployment if you go first.
Depending on GW rules it, you could also use this as a way to move them into better positions for deploying Homing Beacons or for deploying a Homing Beacon and moving them away from it or stuff like that.

**Elbows**

Dakka never fails to deliver. Let the angst flow through you...yesssss...yesssss...

**Daedalus81**

taemu_touhi wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
taemu_touhi wrote:
The Dal'yth warlord trait is just bad... Like real bad.

+1 armor on a static gunline army? Why is that bad?

That's the Sept trait, not warlord trait. The warlord trait wants you to clump your kroot with your commander to get "For the Greater Good", but then you might as well just bring firewarriors. Unless there a significant changes to kroot, which I assume not since it should have appeared in this preview.

The sept trait I admit can be useful, but any decent table should have enough area terrain to work with. And for a static gunline, I'm sure that Bork’an will be the go to sept.

Yea, sorry, misread your post. I mean Krootox guns are not terrible and Carnivores at 5 points are a Guardman with a 5+ save and a stronger gun, but with no orders.

**Kanluwen**

Daedalus81 wrote:
taemu_touhi wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
taemu_touhi wrote:
The Dal'yth warlord trait is just bad... Like real bad.

+1 armor on a static gunline army? Why is that bad?

That's the Sept trait, not warlord trait. The warlord trait wants you to clump your kroot with your commander to get "For the Greater Good", but then you might as well just bring firewarriors. Unless there a significant changes to kroot, which I assume not since it should have appeared in this preview.

The sept trait I admit can be useful, but any decent table should have enough area terrain to work with. And for a static gunline, I'm sure that Bork’an will be the go to sept.

Yea, sorry, misread your post. I mean Krootox guns are not terrible and Carnivores at 5 points are a Guardman with a 5+ save and a stronger gun, but with no orders.

Guardsmen have 5+ saves...?

**CthuluIsSpy**

taemu_touhi wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:
taemu_touhi wrote:
The Dal'yth warlord trait is just bad... Like real bad.

+1 armor on a static gunline army? Why is that bad?

That's the Sept trait, not warlord trait. The warlord trait wants you to clump your kroot with your commander to get "For the Greater Good", but then you might as well just bring firewarriors. Unless there a significant changes to kroot, which I assume not since it should have appeared in this preview.

The sept trait I admit can be useful, but any decent table should have enough area terrain to work with. And for a static gunline, I'm sure that Bork’an will be the go to sept.

Kroot are better at CC than fire warriors.
So if a unit of fire warriors gets charged, you can overwatch with the kroot and then charge in your turn while the fire warriors retreat.
That's my view of it.

**Daedalus81**

Kanluwen wrote:

Guardsmen have 5+ saves...?

Sorry I worded that poorly. Just highlighting their improved save akin to IG.

Err scratch that. Got ahead of myself and let them have the sept trait.

**MilkmanAl**

I'm not impressed with this reveal at all. At least the Farsight ones were food for thought and have some interesting options. Aside from Ghostkeels getting buffed, this one just sucks. That's a terrible Sept trait, though I did chuckle a bit at the idea of the Stormsurge detachment. That might actually work if they don't cost 800 points each anymore, but is it worth giving up 6" of range on that many weapons? Eh...tough call. Overall, I like my Tau mobile, so this one definitely is not for me. Also, the warlord trait is beyond awful. Borkan or bust, baby!

**FirePainter**

I have to agree. Tau should be mobile. This is also a lot more restricted than the tyranids jormungdr trait. Granted we have a lot if flying units so that trait would also be bad for us but the Stark difference between the two speaks volumes imo.

**Daedalus81**

FirePainter wrote:
I have to agree. Tau should be mobile. This is also a lot more restricted than the tyranids jormungdr trait. Granted we have a lot if flying units so that trait would also be bad for us but the Stark difference between the two speaks volumes imo.

Then use a trait that lets you be mobile?

**John Prins**

BoomWolf wrote:

As for the "wall of mirrors" stratagem

What's even the point?
Stealths has fly, they can leave combat if they want to anyway-and it depends on your positioning last turn to even be used.
In what scenario do you even bother with this?

I can see only one real use, it's a fairly long range re-positioning. You go from 6" to one side of the Ghost to 12" on the other side, moving the unit 18" plus the width of the base of the Ghostkeel. I'm not sure if you can then move the Stealth Suits even further, but if you can, that's something like a 30" potential redeployment.

Situational and highly dependent on where enemy units are.