Warhammer 40k news and rumours - Adepticon reveals page 312

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**

xttz wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

Their own roadmap was explicit in that imperial knights are after eldar. Rumours then pen chaos knights immediately after. So unless it's 2 books a month, April at the earliest for EC as a guess, so no need for GW to parade the whole range just yet, they may show off a new knight at LVO I imagine.

Army boxes don't count for the roadmaps, so it's very possible that we get Knights sandwhiched in between that and the full EC codex release. GW will also want to unveil the full EC range before releasing an army box, so I reckon LVO is the most likely time to see some/all of the kits.

Not long to find out either way!

**Dudeface**

Is this it now, a weekly gnashing of where is a fully army reveal of something we have 0 idea of when they're releasing it and obviously is at least 4th in line?

**Dudeface**

parakuribo wrote:
Best case is to go the Barnes & Noble Route and make Space Hulk into an AoS game. Sadly, I doubt they'd go with it since it is bigger than both Lost Patrol and Bloodchosen combined. There's also a problem in making the Sigmarines similar to termies(Skaven would be a no brainer: make Genestealers into Stormvermin).

Polite reminder the Barnes and Noble releases aren't available worldwide.

**Dudeface**

MajorWesJanson wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
parakuribo wrote:
Best case is to go the Barnes & Noble Route and make Space Hulk into an AoS game. Sadly, I doubt they'd go with it since it is bigger than both Lost Patrol and Bloodchosen combined. There's also a problem in making the Sigmarines similar to termies(Skaven would be a no brainer: make Genestealers into Stormvermin).

Polite reminder the Barnes and Noble releases aren't available worldwide.

Polite reminder that some GW releases and magazines aren't available outside the UK.

Oh, which are those? Because Hatchett seem to release to the US a year or so later, Barnes and Noble seem to stock in the UK... never?

Besides the fact nobody in the UK is asking specifically for geo-locked releases, whereas I was replying to a direct request for that, albeit likely of innocent ignorance.

**Dudeface**

Geifer wrote:
One would think Assault Terminators are the low hanging fruit now that embiggened Terminators are available. Presumably they would have done the sculpting for them alongside the Tactical Terminators.

Makes me wonder if Valrak is so far ahead that he's talking about the next edition (we are past the halfway point of the current one after all) or if it's an end of edition campaign series with a focus on Marines.

Imagine the Augustus release or whatever it was, but 10th ed.

**Dudeface**

Lord Damocles wrote:
Tastyfish wrote:
ArcaneHorror wrote:
I'm worried that this might lead to the end of the regular DG Chaos Lord being in the army, as well as all of the options for gear he had. The model doesn't look bad from what I can tell, but I'm not sure if it's all that necessary to the army. Also, Death Guard don't need more leaders, but rather more troops choices like a replacement for Possessed.

Gellar pox could partially fill that role for when the sprues leave Kill Team's classified list. Wouldn't be far off the accursed cultists.

Bloat For The Bloat God might be on brand for Nurgle, but this is a prime example of the problem caused by every colour of (spiky) Marines getting snowflake rules.

Green Spiky Marines lost access to Possessed for no lore reason, so they should be replaced by Gellerpox to duplicate the role of Accursed Cultists

I don't know if it's a problem as such, we all know GW want to strip away stuff that doesn't have a range appropriate mini so a nurgle lord is probably not a bad release, nor is it bloating entries in reality.

That said I do agree with those above that they need more units, not characters, but that's true of a lot of armies released 6th ed onwards.

**Dudeface**

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
If the shown spure was at least something with options like some of the Eldar or Space Marine chars recently I'd be willing to take it, but just another monopose probably resulting in every DG Lord suddenly being equipped with plasma pistol and whatever he hides there is... bad.

I can't really see how it matters too much, if you were using a bolt pistol enjoy a free upgrade. The size of the sword suggests it'll be heavier than a standard accursed weapon so that might be a result too for a lot of people. Fixed loadout = model as you please.

**Dudeface**

Dysartes wrote:
Fixed loadout = dull as dishwater, even dishwater that's been sat around long enough for stuff to start growing in it.

You don't have to defend GW's poor decisions every time, Dudeface.

I'm not going to criticise anything that doesn't require it either. If there's a "best" loadout, which invariably there is, that's the one you'll see 75+% of the time regardless and get called out for not taking the "best" loadout.

Having the option between gak gun a and gak gun b on a melee character isn't exactly the spice of life.

**Dudeface**

Shakalooloo wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Dysartes wrote:
Fixed loadout = dull as dishwater, even dishwater that's been sat around long enough for stuff to start growing in it.

You don't have to defend GW's poor decisions every time, Dudeface.

I'm not going to criticise anything that doesn't require it either. If there's a "best" loadout, which invariably there is, that's the one you'll see 75+% of the time regardless and get called out for not taking the "best" loadout.

Having the option between gak gun a and gak gun b on a melee character isn't exactly the spice of life.

Only because there's no points difference between loadouts now. If better loadouts cost more points than less 'optimal' ones, both would have a place.

History here shows this isn't the case largely. Either the plasma pistol is the better choice and worth the points or you never fire it and it is never taken. Either the powerfist etc. Is ubiquitous because it's innately better into most of the game, or it isn't and you keep the base weapon etc.

Outside of that, you fall into "well i want the rules to reflect the model" group, which ok, this kit doesn't have a bolt pistol, but you can model it with one and you get the better weapon free. Or it's the placebo effect of being able to fandangle 2-10 points in the list.

Obviously I don't think the same way as many but having stuff for the sakes of stuff isn't by default better imo.

**Dudeface**

xttz wrote:
Who wants some Kreigers and/or battlefield trophies?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/505blk2u/sunday-preview-the-death-korps-march-for-krieg/

The krieg box feels like it might suck for what is likely a £130ish price tag.

**Dudeface**

Someone built plague boi:

https://www.reddit.com/r/deathguard40k/s/1LhKBXZNZ5 if someone with more effort/skills than I wants to post the image then have a cookie.

**Dudeface**

GaroRobe wrote:
The lack of EC leaks is crazy.

Mortarion and Magnus leaked

Angron too, I believe

But despite the accurate rumors, we still had to wait for Fulgrim to be unveiled

I think it's because people are expecting them to release soon when they maybe aren't. If DG were nearer release than EC it would make sense that their stock was being boxed and more likely to slip out into the wild.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lathe Biosas wrote:
GaroRobe wrote:
The lack of EC leaks is crazy.

Mortarion and Magnus leaked

Angron too, I believe

But despite the accurate rumors, we still had to wait for Fulgrim to be unveiled

Try being a Knight player... all we know us that we are going to get a Codex... and an odd rumor of a knight that has an AWACS radar dome.

People do seem to forget knights are 3rd in line this year.

Being real it looks like guard jan-feb, eldar March hopefully, knights April then we're into who really knows territory.

**Dudeface**

I don't like that they're encouraging you to run the same identical minis as 3 sets of rules 3 times, that can't possibly be confusing right?

**Dudeface**

chaos0xomega wrote:
Insofar as i can tell though none of the units are keyworded though? Ie, nothing stopping you pr giving you reason tp not say that your vostroyans are best represented by cadian command squads leading dkok infantry squads supported by catachan heavy weapons, etc. Unlike previous editions where strats and special rules were all tied to specific cadia/catachan/krieg keywords, it doesnt look like those limitations apply here?

We don't know, the krieg Commissar might only attack to krieg units for exmaple.

**Dudeface**

If we extrapolate this to the poster boys: how long until we formally see a push for space marine deathwolf terminators walking alongside a unit of wolfanguary guard lead by marneus wolfgar?

**Dudeface**

chaos0xomega wrote:
On some level I understand the frustration of having generic infantry squads removed, but... seriously, does it matter that now instead of fielding your Elysians/Steel Legion/Vostroyans/Praetorians/Mordians/Tallarn/Tanith/Savlarans/Harkoni/Valhallans/Ventrillians/Baranites/whathaveyou as "Infantry Squad" they might, on paper, now be referred to as "Cadian Infantry Squad" or "Catachan Infantry Squad", etc?

There's the angle that all your valhallan infantry squads can be cadian/catachan/krieg all simultaneously with little to no visual indication to your opponent which is which.

**Dudeface**

chaos0xomega wrote:
Overread wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
On some level I understand the frustration of having generic infantry squads removed, but... seriously, does it matter that now instead of fielding your Elysians/Steel Legion/Vostroyans/Praetorians/Mordians/Tallarn/Tanith/Savlarans/Harkoni/Valhallans/Ventrillians/Baranites/whathaveyou as "Infantry Squad" they might, on paper, now be referred to as "Cadian Infantry Squad" or "Catachan Infantry Squad", etc?

I think the thing is that for decades the Imperial Guard has been more or less generic at its very core (even if they were all cadian models for the most part). So it was really easy to run your custom themed army either just calling it what you liked or using one of the sub-army rules if present in the codex for that edition. Formally calling everything Cadian etc.... Means that bit of flavour is fully lost.

It would be a bit like going to Tyrainds and saying "ok ALL Tyranids are now Hive Fleet Kraken, except for Carnifex which are Behemoth.

Its a bit of a narrative blow; especially as whilst we have Krieg and Cadian - its less likely that GW will give IG multiple different themed regiments like they did in the past in metal. Who knows perhaps they will and they've plans to take the IG in the same direction as Marines.

I can see why this isn't a popular choice for Guard players even if its purely a name at the top of a unit profile card

I guess im not seeing what changes or what flavor is being lost as a result of what is basically a change in administrative bookkeeping. My custom regiment is still my custom regiment, all the flavor and lore is atill there. The only thing that changed is what my units are referred to as on the piece of paper or my phone screen i hand my opponent before the game starts. After that, my infantet squads are infa try squads, command squads are command squads, etc.

Complaining that flavor is being lost because the units are specifically named is as nonsensical as doing the same if all the units were renamed to "unit 1", "unit 2", "unit 3". Its actually wholly irrelevant.

Now, loss of HWTs in infantry squads and loss of option flexibility? Yeah, thats a valid complaint.

It's more there's an onus and effort on you to delineate that which of your infantry squads are which type of infantry squad. Be it converting them, repainting them, rebasing them or use of a token etc.

Which sucks if you have a fully painted army or a metal one etc.

**Dudeface**

Lord Zarkov wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
Overread wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
On some level I understand the frustration of having generic infantry squads removed, but... seriously, does it matter that now instead of fielding your Elysians/Steel Legion/Vostroyans/Praetorians/Mordians/Tallarn/Tanith/Savlarans/Harkoni/Valhallans/Ventrillians/Baranites/whathaveyou as "Infantry Squad" they might, on paper, now be referred to as "Cadian Infantry Squad" or "Catachan Infantry Squad", etc?

I think the thing is that for decades the Imperial Guard has been more or less generic at its very core (even if they were all cadian models for the most part). So it was really easy to run your custom themed army either just calling it what you liked or using one of the sub-army rules if present in the codex for that edition. Formally calling everything Cadian etc.... Means that bit of flavour is fully lost.

It would be a bit like going to Tyrainds and saying "ok ALL Tyranids are now Hive Fleet Kraken, except for Carnifex which are Behemoth.

Its a bit of a narrative blow; especially as whilst we have Krieg and Cadian - its less likely that GW will give IG multiple different themed regiments like they did in the past in metal. Who knows perhaps they will and they've plans to take the IG in the same direction as Marines.

I can see why this isn't a popular choice for Guard players even if its purely a name at the top of a unit profile card

I guess im not seeing what changes or what flavor is being lost as a result of what is basically a change in administrative bookkeeping. My custom regiment is still my custom regiment, all the flavor and lore is atill there. The only thing that changed is what my units are referred to as on the piece of paper or my phone screen i hand my opponent before the game starts. After that, my infantet squads are infa try squads, command squads are command squads, etc.

Complaining that flavor is being lost because the units are specifically named is as nonsensical as doing the same if all the units were renamed to "unit 1", "unit 2", "unit 3". Its actually wholly irrelevant.

Now, loss of HWTs in infantry squads and loss of option flexibility? Yeah, thats a valid complaint.

It's more there's an onus and effort on you to delineate that which of your infantry squads are which type of infantry squad. Be it converting them, repainting them, rebasing them or use of a token etc.

Which sucks if you have a fully painted army or a metal one etc.

Unless you just pick one of the three you feel best represents your regiment and use that consistently.

It’s mainly because of NMNR ludicrously restricting the options of each one that it’s a problem.

Pretty much, but there's no requirement to do so.

**Dudeface**

tauist wrote:
Looking at the recent WHC guard articles, I cannot see a single FW vehicle in any of the DKoK illustrations. I highly suspect Malcadors, Crassus et al going to legends with the new codex.

Was just reading the meltdown at B&C over the loss of the generic guard unit. over ten pages of agony over there! Time will tell if the "these Krieg are actually catachans, and those Krieg are Cadian, but this Cadian unit is Krieg" woes will turn out to be show-stopping..

Probably not show stopping but I do foresee extra TO comments or rules about it for formal events and some people will be more impacted than others.

**Dudeface**

ccs wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
parakuribo wrote:
Best case is to go the Barnes & Noble Route and make Space Hulk into an AoS game. Sadly, I doubt they'd go with it since it is bigger than both Lost Patrol and Bloodchosen combined. There's also a problem in making the Sigmarines similar to termies(Skaven would be a no brainer: make Genestealers into Stormvermin).

Polite reminder the Barnes and Noble releases aren't available worldwide.

B&N doesn't do international shipping?

I mean they do, but it its not exactly cheap and convenient compared to simply selling it domestically. If someone has a B&N box to hand I'd be curious where it was manufactured as well.

**Dudeface**

The Phazer wrote:
ccs wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
parakuribo wrote:
Best case is to go the Barnes & Noble Route and make Space Hulk into an AoS game. Sadly, I doubt they'd go with it since it is bigger than both Lost Patrol and Bloodchosen combined. There's also a problem in making the Sigmarines similar to termies(Skaven would be a no brainer: make Genestealers into Stormvermin).

Polite reminder the Barnes and Noble releases aren't available worldwide.

B&N doesn't do international shipping?

They don't do international shipping to the UK and EU, no.

https://help.barnesandnoble.com/hc/en-us/articles/5334789599771-International-Shipping

I didn't go that far down the page tbh, but good spot.

Who knows anyway, when we become the 53rd state at president Musks behest, we might get them then.

**Dudeface**

Insularum wrote:
Voss wrote:
tauist wrote:
Guard dex points values leaked, should show what got dropped from the new dex

Sentinel squadrons got dropped to 1-2 models rather than 1-3. That seems... odd, since they aren't sold in a 2-pack.
It's standard - unit sizes are 1-2 boxes if it's a small unit, or 0.5-1 boxes if it's a big unit. Very few units have made it out of the initial indices into codex with units made from 3 boxes of models.

This one bothers me. I don't get it. They now can/will sell you fewer sentinels. The fact it's a unit isn't the problem because you can take pairs still. So why? Bit weird to upend 2-3 decades of precedent and fluff for no reason.

**Dudeface**

Insularum wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Insularum wrote:
Voss wrote:
tauist wrote:
Guard dex points values leaked, should show what got dropped from the new dex

Sentinel squadrons got dropped to 1-2 models rather than 1-3. That seems... odd, since they aren't sold in a 2-pack.
It's standard - unit sizes are 1-2 boxes if it's a small unit, or 0.5-1 boxes if it's a big unit. Very few units have made it out of the initial indices into codex with units made from 3 boxes of models.

This one bothers me. I don't get it. They now can/will sell you fewer sentinels. The fact it's a unit isn't the problem because you can take pairs still. So why? Bit weird to upend 2-3 decades of precedent and fluff for no reason.
Take your comment, and apply it everywhere in the game. 20 man chaos marine squads? Buy more models. You want duplicate weapon options? Buy more models. Sometimes some people are allergic to success.

I really don't understand what you're trying to say. You've gone from being able to field 18 sentinels to 12. There is no buying more models.

**Dudeface**

kodos wrote:
and everyone who has 18 Sentinels need to put 6 in the shelf and buy something new to fill the points again = more models sold

everyone who has a number not divided by 2 might also buy more sentinels to get the 2 per units, = more models sold

changing things always results in more models sold, not necessary the same models but overall

Gotcha, hadn't considered it from that angle. That said I doubt anyone was rocking 18 sentinels and had exactly 2k worth of guard!

**Dudeface**

There are a few oddities in this release that feel like a foreshadowing of direction change. Similar to that 9th ed free wargear patch and the WE codex loosely following the detachments format.

The "subfaction" - unit might be a thing they start shoving into other armies.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dawnbringer wrote:
I think it is also a balance thing as raised earlier. If stratagems and abilities from characters only impact one unit, limiting the max unit size limits the impact of those to avoid 'gotcha' moments that GW playtesters never seem to catch.

Sorry, you'd have to explain to me what you could apply to 3 sentinels that breaks them compared to 2.

**Dudeface**

Fayric wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

Dawnbringer wrote:
I think it is also a balance thing as raised earlier. If stratagems and abilities from characters only impact one unit, limiting the max unit size limits the impact of those to avoid 'gotcha' moments that GW playtesters never seem to catch.

Sorry, you'd have to explain to me what you could apply to 3 sentinels that breaks them compared to 2.

If you can have 3 units of sentinels, the change from 3 to 2 per unit make a difference. And for cold calculated lists small variation can make or break a spam unit.

We're talking about 1 lascannon shot or something. Maybe a defensive buff, but I don't see it being gamebreaking exactly?

**Dudeface**

Fayric wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Fayric wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

Dawnbringer wrote:
I think it is also a balance thing as raised earlier. If stratagems and abilities from characters only impact one unit, limiting the max unit size limits the impact of those to avoid 'gotcha' moments that GW playtesters never seem to catch.

Sorry, you'd have to explain to me what you could apply to 3 sentinels that breaks them compared to 2.

If you can have 3 units of sentinels, the change from 3 to 2 per unit make a difference. And for cold calculated lists small variation can make or break a spam unit.

We're talking about 1 lascannon shot or something. Maybe a defensive buff, but I don't see it being gamebreaking exactly?

Honestly, personally I could not make a competetive list if my life depended upon it. Still the point was its a difference between 6 or 9 lascannons in total, and also (more important) that GW make sweeping changes because they cant see the impact or consequences of synnergy and spam units. It dont necessary say that Sentinels would break the meta, just that GW use collective punishment when trying to balance the game.

So I think we can safely say it isn't an in-game or balance reason, given that they found a way for you to field 9 heavy weapon teams each with 3 of the same weapon as sentinel.

So I'll now buy into the "max squad size = 2 boxes" theory.

**Dudeface**

Via goonhammer: "We would like to thank Games Workshop for providing us with a review copy of the Codex. In addition, we have been provided with details of some day-1 FAQs accompanying this book, plus an early look at a set of points that are going to be provided online alongside the launch of the Army box for use with the Codex before its full release. The recommendation from GW will remain that tournaments shouldn’t use the new book till full release, but they’ve learned from the last few army boxes that people want a way to use their new toys in casual and practice games straight away."

Scions confirmed to get deepstrike back day 1.

**Dudeface**

Geifer wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Via goonhammer: "We would like to thank Games Workshop for providing us with a review copy of the Codex. In addition, we have been provided with details of some day-1 FAQs accompanying this book, plus an early look at a set of points that are going to be provided online alongside the launch of the Army box for use with the Codex before its full release. The recommendation from GW will remain that tournaments shouldn’t use the new book till full release, but they’ve learned from the last few army boxes that people want a way to use their new toys in casual and practice games straight away."

Scions confirmed to get deepstrike back day 1.

Isn't Goonhammer generally positive about GW? That highlighted part is a polite way of saying something very rude about GW. Even if it's absolutely believable that folks at GW might actually be that clueless.

There were a few comments to that extent tbh, the comment elsewhere was they were glad some stuff is immediately fixed, but were dissapointed it needed to be in the first place etc.

**Dudeface**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:
I see GW demand planning is just as good as always.

Day 3 and roughly 75% of the IG line is sold out.

https://www.warhammer.com/en-US/40K-Imperium-AstraMilitarum-FP

I swear if that happened at a company I worked for people would be fired.

Stuff sells when it's shiny and new, you need to have enough on the shelves or they'll forget about it.

Did you forget that they haven't had their 10th ed release yet or something? 3 days since an early release book, which if anything might be symptomatic of this release method sucking balls.