Necron and Space Marine Codex and upcoming releases discussion

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.

**Dudeface**

Mr Morden wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
So you want 10-man Tac squads taking 2 heavy weapons?

Big problem with that is?

Fluff, tradition and overly encouraging castle gunline armies yet again?

**macluvin**

Mr Morden wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
So you want 10-man Tac squads taking 2 heavy weapons?

Big problem with that is?

As much as I grind my teeth at chaos space marine equivalent units being objectively worse space marines, I do think it’s fair that tac squads can bring 2 heavies because chaos can and let’s be honest it’s hardly a game changer. If it was you’d just bring devs/havocs. My only objection is if the codex Astartes dictates that optimal squad load outs involve one special and one heavy weapon (no more than one of each Per squad). Plus, limited resources have limited that document more to guidelines than actual rules... let the first born rock their preferred load outs.

**Spoletta**

Daedalus81 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
AduroT wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
I'm actually hoping that those list of changes are true, even if those thunder hammers really make everything suspicious.

Most of the changes are great both for internal and external balance.

The only dumb point are obviously the eradicators at 40 points, but at this point they are likely to be nerfed in the datasheet. Whoever did those spoilers did also miss the nerf on aggressors, so he probably didn't read the datasheets, just skimmed through points and stratagems.

Aggressor nerf?

We know from one of the playtesters that aggressors are being harshly nerfed, to the point that according to him we will no longer see them on competitive tables.

if centurions aren't core I'd expect agressors wouldn't be eaither.

Eradicators are CORE to Aggressors will very likely be so as well. Also, the nerf comment could be unreliable. We'll just have to wait and see. (REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE)

The rest of the changes (if true) make me slightly optimistic. They are well done, so it would be weird if they fine tuned all that stuff and then failed big on those 2 gravis models, especially considering that they are a well known problem at the moment.

**Mr Morden**

Dudeface wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
So you want 10-man Tac squads taking 2 heavy weapons?

Big problem with that is?

Fluff, tradition and overly encouraging castle gunline armies yet again?

You can already do this with two small squads?

Gunline armies - An extra Missile Launcher is not the issue when there is BS like Eradicators.
Fluff - well thats up to the person building their army - what era the Chapter is from, which Chapter etc. If you feel that a given Chapter, comany squad would have a single Special and a Single Heavy then you can do this
Tradition - ??? Well 8th and 9th have brought back more of the original RT style background and such

**Dudeface**

Mr Morden wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
So you want 10-man Tac squads taking 2 heavy weapons?

Big problem with that is?

Fluff, tradition and overly encouraging castle gunline armies yet again?

You can already do this with two small squads?

Gunline armies - An extra Missile Launcher is not the issue when there is BS like Eradicators.
Fluff - well thats up to the person building their army - what era the Chapter is from, which Chapter etc. If you feel that a given Chapter, comany squad would have a single Special and a Single Heavy then you can do this
Tradition - ??? Well 8th and 9th have brought back more of the original RT style background and such

If you double your missile launcher or heavy bolter count on top of eradicators it becomes an issue. You're right that if you spam 5 man squads you get the same effect but in 10 man units you use less spots then combat squad so its technically more efficient.

**Dysartes**

Hulksmash wrote:
Why, they've been elites for some armies before. It's not surprising at all. 10% of your army isn't the core of your army.

The only army I can think of where Scouts were an Elites choice at various time has been Space Wolves - and that's because in their case the Wolf Scouts are a veteran unit, not a bunch of trainees.

**Dudeface**

Dysartes wrote:
Hulksmash wrote:
Why, they've been elites for some armies before. It's not surprising at all. 10% of your army isn't the core of your army.

The only army I can think of where Scouts were an Elites choice at various time has been Space Wolves - and that's because in their case the Wolf Scouts are a veteran unit, not a bunch of trainees.

Dark angels scouts were elites for a while as well iirc 3rd-6th?

They also used to be a nice bridge in profile between a marine and human, seems they're artificially being put back there.

**Mr Morden**

Dysartes wrote:
Hulksmash wrote:
Why, they've been elites for some armies before. It's not surprising at all. 10% of your army isn't the core of your army.

The only army I can think of where Scouts were an Elites choice at various time has been Space Wolves - and that's because in their case the Wolf Scouts are a veteran unit, not a bunch of trainees.

He was referencing other armies not other Marines I think. The Space Wolf version is more in keeping with that - BUT a Space Marine Scout is already a formidable warrior - its only by comparison with other Marines that they are not Elite.

I am hoping there are both versions of Scouts in the main book - as Chapters like Raven Guard shoud have always had similar full Marine Scouts/Snipers/infiltrators but they were ignored "because the Wolves had them" .

You're right that if you spam 5 man squads you get the same effect but in 10 man units you use less spots then combat squad so its technically more efficient

As you say its something you can do now (and get an extra Sergant). Given the new bonuses against larger squads - the smaller version may still be prevelant.

**the_scotsman**

Assuming all is true here....

KurtAngle2 wrote:

- Honor the Chapter stratagem is now restricted to assault intercessors only Oof. I hate it. Personally I think 3Cp fight twice at the very end of the fight phase is probably not all that imbalanced, it's a significant investment and good lord knows that shooting units can do an insane amount of damage. But why in heaven would you limit it to freaking Assault Intercessors, which already throw out a suspension of disbelief-shredding number of melee attacks? Why not have it be some kind of "Veteran" keyword that includes terminators, vanvets, sternguard, dreadnoughts, etc etc etc.

-There's a new stratagem that states: if your warlord is alive in the command phase of your turn, select a unit (dont think its restricted to core) and that unit is treated as having all doctrines active. Presumably this means doctrines are around and unchanged. A critical thing I would have noted!

- Thunder hammers are a flat 20pts regardless if equipped to a character or non-character. and now they are -2ap not -3 (3 dmg still) Yeah no point in the crazy character cost with the MASSIVE nerfs to character damage ouptut. Good.

- Scouts are elites eh, scouts are basically dead with the 1w thing. They're obviously soft-squatting them.

- Whirlwind bombardment strat stops units in defensive positions from getting that benefit and makes them fight last in the fight phase. 1cp Is this a replacement for the current strat that makes a whirlwind shoot twice? Or a new strat?

- Master of sanctity upgrade was either 20 or 25pts (cant remember exactly) Sure. Whatever. Probably the least offensive SM character upgrade. honestly, probably worth 20pts more so than 1cp.

- Chapter master is 40pts and CM picks one unit in the command phase to get full rerolls. The captain reroll 1's aura is active otherwise Interesting. I'm guessing it's also CORE restricted. That's pretty interesting. I wonder if there's any other benefits, because that seems pretty weak for 40pts.

- Not all non primaris marines characters are getting the +1 wound too....Centurions remain at 4 wounds. Terminators, bikes etc DID get +1 wound though I didn't think CHARACTERS were changing in statline at all...do you just mean nonprimaris in general?

- There WERE army restrictions for the 3 odd chapters in the book (DA SW DW) Ew. Looks like between this and the bike comment, Deathwatch are in for their third edition-ual "Sorry bro those guys you bought arent legal no mo"

- Wisdom of the Ancients strat was changed to have 2 options for the aura provided (either reroll 1s to hit or reroll 1s to wound)Cool. Are Dreadnoughts CORE?

- Deathwatch seems to have lost special ammo and cant take bike squads oddly Well, we know that DW SW DA BA are getting "hold you over" rules presumably in PDF form until their supplement, SIA could be in there.

- Hellfire stratagem is back but it also deals 2d3 dmg to monsters
- Flakk missiles deals 2d3 dmg to fliers Wow I hate it.please tell me that the orbital bombardment stratagem is still super duper gakky so you can use a melta bomb to deal 2d3 mortal wounds but a giant laser from the sky still does like 1MW on a 6 or some gak.

- There werent many "new" strats iirc Honestly I think space marine players brains would probably scanners if they were to have many more to keep track of.

- The Reaper variant of the new floaty tank came to 230pts (without useless upgrades) Yeesh, well that's one way to make it not OP. Gonna be tough to make your points back with that crazy expensive thing.

- Theres a melta bomb stratagem that deals 2d3 MW in CC (to a vehicle or monster), 1 or 2 cp, unsure Hmm what haven't we given space marines yet oh I know a MORTAL WOUND STRATAGEM they definitely need more of those.

- The Hammer of Wrath stratagem got a bit of a rework and improved quite a bit I think MWs dealt by rolling equal to or higher than enemy units toughness. Number of dice equal to number of models in engagement range (i think) Boy sure was a lot of effort put into those mortal wound stratagems.

- Outriders are 3 per unit Erads and BGVs are 3-6

- BGVs and Erads are 35pts and 40pts respectively Former: Fine. Latter: Ugh. Ugh and "huh?" considering their damage output and defenses (9W T5 Sv3+) vs what the damage output and defenses is of the TWO HUNDRED FORTY POINT new tank (presumably 11W T7 Sv3+ as its impulsor based). Doesn't...really seem like double the value you're getting....

- There was a strat for reuplsors to fall back and shoot at full BS Cool, wish it was land raiders too, but, fine.

- The SM-only secondary objectives were all awful

- Incursors lost their combat knives exploding on 6s to hit in cc (are ap-1) So their damage output is going to be basically the same.

- Blood Angel assault squads cant take meltaguns anymore

- More stuff that I thought seem to have the CORE keyword. Exmaple of what dont: Centurions and Invictor warsuits

- Transhuman was there and appears to be the same

- There was a strat for phobos units to be put into reserves from the battlefield

- Non codex chapters do appear to get access to all the marine psychic powers and warlord traits and relics

- Speed of the Primarch was mentioned as the Blood Angel- only WL trait in the dex (fight first on wl)

- Only in death does duty end got nerfed can only use it if you havent already fought in the fight phase Cool, honestly I would have been fine with this being (effectively)_removed and honor the chapter stay in the game. But if GW wants to do a systematic strip-out of all the fight/shoot twice abilities in the game I am cooooooooooool with that.

**AduroT**

Make a ten man squad, two heavies, then combat squad them and put both heavies in the same half. Leave them back to shoot and hold the back field while the others go forward.

**BrianDavion**

regarding scouts being elite this has been basicly a known thing for awhile, and I think it's a good thing. How many Marine lists over the years have consisted of "1 captain, 3 5 man scout squads and *insert whatever marines are spamming at the moment*"? the core of a marine army should be tac marines/intercessors not scouts.

**Kanluwen**

BrianDavion wrote:
regarding scouts being elite this has been basicly a known thing for awhile, and I think it's a good thing. How many Marine lists over the years have consisted of "1 captain, 3 5 man scout squads and *insert whatever marines are spamming at the moment*"? the core of a marine army should be tac marines/intercessors not scouts.

This is literally the first we've seen mentioning Scouts as Elites in the vanilla book.

Space Wolves had them, but their Scouts have always been different.

**Hulksmash**

Dark angels had them as elites as well. Scouts were ever only troops because otherwise marines only had 1 troop. They arent the core of a marine army and being elite is fine.

**Kanluwen**

Eh. With the addition of the "Core" keyword to the game, it's plausible that Scouts don't get it.

**Ragnar69**

Kanluwen wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
regarding scouts being elite this has been basicly a known thing for awhile, and I think it's a good thing. How many Marine lists over the years have consisted of "1 captain, 3 5 man scout squads and *insert whatever marines are spamming at the moment*"? the core of a marine army should be tac marines/intercessors not scouts.

This is literally the first we've seen mentioning Scouts as Elites in the vanilla book.

Space Wolves had them, but their Scouts have always been different.

In the first GW teaser video for the new dex we could see the contents and the chapter tactics. And scouts had been sorted with the other elite slots and not with the troops.
It might not be the fluffiest change but good for the game.

Maybe if we see the Elite slot not as really elite but rather than as rarer or different from core troops. I mean lots of elite slots have the same profile as troop marines, just different gear. Sure, real "elites" like Veterans are also in this slot, but not all of them, i.e. Vanguard Vets.

**Kanluwen**

The Elite slot for Scouts, tbh, makes no sense unless they're still going to have the "Core" keyword.

But hey, what do I know. They've put Servitors in Elite for multiple iterations now.

**Jidmah**

It's probably the same reason why gretchin have gone to 5 points. GW doesn't want marines to have large parts of their army consist of scouts, so they get a nerf to ensure that players won't bring as many anymore.

**nekooni**

Dudeface wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
So you want 10-man Tac squads taking 2 heavy weapons?

Big problem with that is?

Fluff, tradition and overly encouraging castle gunline armies yet again?

Yes, the tactical squad gunline castle..what ? You can just spam MSU tacticals and get a free sarge upgrade for every second squad, and still have the same number of heavy weapons.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
So you want 10-man Tac squads taking 2 heavy weapons?

Big problem with that is?

Fluff, tradition and overly encouraging castle gunline armies yet again?

You can already do this with two small squads?

Gunline armies - An extra Missile Launcher is not the issue when there is BS like Eradicators.
Fluff - well thats up to the person building their army - what era the Chapter is from, which Chapter etc. If you feel that a given Chapter, comany squad would have a single Special and a Single Heavy then you can do this
Tradition - ??? Well 8th and 9th have brought back more of the original RT style background and such

If you double your missile launcher or heavy bolter count on top of eradicators it becomes an issue. You're right that if you spam 5 man squads you get the same effect but in 10 man units you use less spots then combat squad so its technically more efficient.

You know that tacticals are troop choices,right ?

**Tiberius501**

In the fluff, don’t scouts usually fill a more specialised roll than front line troops? I know they aren’t exactly elite in the fluff, but they do fill a roll more specific than being a shock trooper. Maybe I’m wrong, but I always thought being troops also didn’t suit them.

**the_scotsman**

Tiberius501 wrote:
In the fluff, don’t scouts usually fill a more specialised roll than front line troops? I know they aren’t exactly elite in the fluff, but they do fill a roll more specific than being a shock trooper. Maybe I’m wrong, but I always thought being troops also didn’t suit them.

i would challenge you to find a meaningfully distinct tactical role fulfilled by Scouts that is not fulfilled by Primaris Infiltrators.

**Tiberius501**

the_scotsman wrote:
Tiberius501 wrote:
In the fluff, don’t scouts usually fill a more specialised roll than front line troops? I know they aren’t exactly elite in the fluff, but they do fill a roll more specific than being a shock trooper. Maybe I’m wrong, but I always thought being troops also didn’t suit them.

i would challenge you to find a meaningfully distinct tactical role fulfilled by Scouts that is not fulfilled by Primaris Infiltrators.

Well you’re right, infiltrators are also a strange thing to have as troops, but I presume it’s with their new thing of having a type of troop in all the types of armour. So in that sense they work as the infantry section of vanguard groups, who do larger scale covert assaults. Scouts, on the other hand, are younglings who fulfil the niche roll of scouting missions and rarely see frontline combat in full fights, to my understanding.

Tell me if I’m wrong though, I’m not the biggest on this sort of fluff but this is just how I’ve seen it.

**Irbis**

Kanluwen wrote:
Eh. With the addition of the "Core" keyword to the game, it's plausible that Scouts don't get it.

Yeeeah, because people reeeally care about buffing the throwaway screening squads that were all expected to die T1 anyway and denying them core will change anything

Mr Morden wrote:
Gunline armies - An extra Missile Launcher is not the issue when there is BS like Eradicators.

Meanwhile, in real life, more and more tournament armies drop them in favour of spamming grav pods, las contemptors, FW land speeders, and other resin pay to win gak. Funny that.

I wish people read less hysteric paperhammer nonsense, which in eradicator case is especially hilarious as a lot of

who accuse them of being broken previously attacked limits on (far stronger) quad fusion commanders as unfair and claimed one of the most broken units in the game was totally balanced (and the less said about defence of reapers, the better...)

**the_scotsman**

Irbis wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
Eh. With the addition of the "Core" keyword to the game, it's plausible that Scouts don't get it.

Yeeeah, because people reeeally care about buffing the throwaway screening squads that were all expected to die T1 anyway and denying them core will change anything

Mr Morden wrote:
Gunline armies - An extra Missile Launcher is not the issue when there is BS like Eradicators.

Meanwhile, in real life, more and more tournament armies drop them in favour of spamming grav pods, las contemptors, FW land speeders, and other resin pay to win gak. Funny that.

I wish people read less hysteric paperhammer nonsense, which in eradicator case is especially hilarious as a lot of who accuse them of being broken previously attacked limits on (far stronger) quad fusion commanders as unfair and claimed one of the most broken units in the game was totally balanced (and the less said about defence of reapers, the better...)

I really, reeeeeeeeeeeally want to see the data from these tournaments where the real smart competitive players are ditching eradicators for....forgeworld land speeders?

**Kanluwen**

Tiberius501 wrote:
In the fluff, don’t scouts usually fill a more specialised roll than front line troops? I know they aren’t exactly elite in the fluff, but they do fill a roll more specific than being a shock trooper. Maybe I’m wrong, but I always thought being troops also didn’t suit them.

What didn't suit them was being able to be taken en masse. Scouts were, fluffwise, supposed to play a fairly important role in preparing the battlefield for the remainder of a Chapter's forces.

**Dudeface**

the_scotsman wrote:
Irbis wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
Eh. With the addition of the "Core" keyword to the game, it's plausible that Scouts don't get it.

Yeeeah, because people reeeally care about buffing the throwaway screening squads that were all expected to die T1 anyway and denying them core will change anything

Mr Morden wrote:
Gunline armies - An extra Missile Launcher is not the issue when there is BS like Eradicators.

Meanwhile, in real life, more and more tournament armies drop them in favour of spamming grav pods, las contemptors, FW land speeders, and other resin pay to win gak. Funny that.

I wish people read less hysteric paperhammer nonsense, which in eradicator case is especially hilarious as a lot of who accuse them of being broken previously attacked limits on (far stronger) quad fusion commanders as unfair and claimed one of the most broken units in the game was totally balanced (and the less said about defence of reapers, the better...)

I really, reeeeeeeeeeeally want to see the data from these tournaments where the real smart competitive players are ditching eradicators for....forgeworld land speeders?

Seconded. I'd also like to see where the broken resin units were in the daemon and orks lists that placed highly recently.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

nekooni wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
So you want 10-man Tac squads taking 2 heavy weapons?

Big problem with that is?

Fluff, tradition and overly encouraging castle gunline armies yet again?

Yes, the tactical squad gunline castle..what ? You can just spam MSU tacticals and get a free sarge upgrade for every second squad, and still have the same number of heavy weapons.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
So you want 10-man Tac squads taking 2 heavy weapons?

Big problem with that is?

Fluff, tradition and overly encouraging castle gunline armies yet again?

You can already do this with two small squads?

Gunline armies - An extra Missile Launcher is not the issue when there is BS like Eradicators.
Fluff - well thats up to the person building their army - what era the Chapter is from, which Chapter etc. If you feel that a given Chapter, comany squad would have a single Special and a Single Heavy then you can do this
Tradition - ??? Well 8th and 9th have brought back more of the original RT style background and such

If you double your missile launcher or heavy bolter count on top of eradicators it becomes an issue. You're right that if you spam 5 man squads you get the same effect but in 10 man units you use less spots then combat squad so its technically more efficient.

You know that tacticals are troop choices,right ?

Thats kinda my point, you're giving troops who can willing split into 2 smaller 5 man units the ability to plonk multiple 5 man 2 heavy weapon units as their troops tax. Why even bother with devastators at that point?

**Mr Morden**

Irbis wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
Eh. With the addition of the "Core" keyword to the game, it's plausible that Scouts don't get it.

Yeeeah, because people reeeally care about buffing the throwaway screening squads that were all expected to die T1 anyway and denying them core will change anything

Mr Morden wrote:
Gunline armies - An extra Missile Launcher is not the issue when there is BS like Eradicators.

Meanwhile, in real life, more and more tournament armies drop them in favour of spamming grav pods, las contemptors, FW land speeders, and other resin pay to win gak. Funny that.

I wish people read less hysteric paperhammer nonsense, which in eradicator case is especially hilarious as a lot of who accuse them of being broken previously attacked limits on (far stronger) quad fusion commanders as unfair and claimed one of the most broken units in the game was totally balanced (and the less said about defence of reapers, the better...)

Any actual "Real Life" examples you can show? or are you just making BS up?

And Mate when I have ever defended Fusion commanders - answer I didn.t

**Bosskelot**

Irbis wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
Eh. With the addition of the "Core" keyword to the game, it's plausible that Scouts don't get it.

Yeeeah, because people reeeally care about buffing the throwaway screening squads that were all expected to die T1 anyway and denying them core will change anything

Mr Morden wrote:
Gunline armies - An extra Missile Launcher is not the issue when there is BS like Eradicators.

Meanwhile, in real life, more and more tournament armies drop them in favour of spamming grav pods, las contemptors, FW land speeders, and other resin pay to win gak. Funny that.

I wish people read less hysteric paperhammer nonsense, which in eradicator case is especially hilarious as a lot of who accuse them of being broken previously attacked limits on (far stronger) quad fusion commanders as unfair and claimed one of the most broken units in the game was totally balanced (and the less said about defence of reapers, the better...)

You must have missed all of the numerous GT's recently featuring Marine lists with 9 Eradicators.

**Kanluwen**

Necrons Stratagems
There's some looks at new types of stratagems in here.

"Epic Stratagem":

"Requisition Stratagem":

"Strategic Ploy Stratagem" and "Wargear Stratagems" round out the categories.

"Empyric Damping" looks like a solid bit to deal with Psykers:

**Ghaz**

Play this when your Reanimation Protocols haven’t been as successful as you would have liked. Just when your opponent thinks they have an advantage, your dead Necrons return to the fray.

**buddha**

Need to know very badly the rules for Rites of Reanimation.