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.

 Blacksails wrote:

KommissarKarl wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Blatant money grab by GW.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Then why include all of those units in the AM codex? There is no logic to that whatsoever.

That's exactly my point!

Nothing GW makes sense, and it was a quick way to get people to buy an expensive book before the IG book. People actually bought it in confusion thinking it was the IG book.

Further, it allowed them to make this book with one or two 'exclusive' features that aren't in the IG book (the two formations and scion orders) to entice people to buy it.

Regardless, its a cheap, lazy way to squeeze more money out of people without putting in any real effort to make a product worth buying.

Garbage.

I disagree with the thrust of your post, but don't for a minute think that I'm saying the AT codex is worthwhile or even worthy of being a codex (let alone at that price point). If GW were really trying to milk this for the £££ they would have excluded the scions and tauruses from the new ig codex, forcing players to buy the AT codex in order to field stormtroopers. But they didn't, we can still take scions in the AM codex, and we can even take them as platoons. The AT codex is clearly designed to give players the option of playing an all stormtrooper army with a few cool options, even though it's not very good at doing this. It would have cost them nothing to add in a few new special rules and some new units based on the scion kit.

I don't think anyone bought it confusing it with the Imperial Guard. It was very clearly marketed as a stormtrooper-type codex, not IG.

KommissarKarl wrote:

I disagree with the thrust of your post, but don't for a minute think that I'm saying the AT codex is worthwhile or even worthy of being a codex (let alone at that price point). If GW were really trying to milk this for the £££ they would have excluded the scions and tauruses from the new ig codex, forcing players to buy the AT codex in order to field stormtroopers. But they didn't, we can still take scions in the AM codex, and we can even take them as platoons. The AT codex is clearly designed to give players the option of playing an all stormtrooper army with a few cool options, even though it's not very good at doing this. It would have cost them nothing to add in a few new special rules and some new units based on the scion kit.

I don't think anyone bought it confusing it with the Imperial Guard. It was very clearly marketed as a stormtrooper-type codex, not IG.

Or even better, get rid of several pages of pictures that are wasted space in the IG codex and include the 4 or so pages (if that many) of necessary rules for an AT army in the IG codex. Which does kind of point towards the AT 'dex being a money grab....

I think if GW had gone the route KommissarKarl had mentioned and pulled the content out of AM and put it in C:MT, the backlash would have been tremendous. It would have been a unified opposition that almost everyone would decry, something of a PR nightmare more akin to the "Spots the Space Marine" debacle.

At it stands, it was in a more grey area where "If you don't like it, don't buy it" would have been argument enough for many people and therefore the opposition isn't great. That being said, I still think it represents a bad trend with GW these days.

Lol the pages detailing that Ork Campaign in the AM codex can fit all MT rules.

although the seperate codex imo is ab blatant money grab, I still like the idea of being able to field a all stormtroopers army " legally"

I haven`t played with them yet, but i suspect that in under 1000 point games, you can get pretty nice results with them. In bigger games the battefield probably will be redecorated with the blood and organs of your all your scions

 don_mondo wrote:

KommissarKarl wrote:

I disagree with the thrust of your post, but don't for a minute think that I'm saying the AT codex is worthwhile or even worthy of being a codex (let alone at that price point). If GW were really trying to milk this for the £££ they would have excluded the scions and tauruses from the new ig codex, forcing players to buy the AT codex in order to field stormtroopers. But they didn't, we can still take scions in the AM codex, and we can even take them as platoons. The AT codex is clearly designed to give players the option of playing an all stormtrooper army with a few cool options, even though it's not very good at doing this. It would have cost them nothing to add in a few new special rules and some new units based on the scion kit.

I don't think anyone bought it confusing it with the Imperial Guard. It was very clearly marketed as a stormtrooper-type codex, not IG.

Or even better, get rid of several pages of pictures that are wasted space in the IG codex and include the 4 or so pages (if that many) of necessary rules for an AT army in the IG codex. Which does kind of point towards the AT 'dex being a money grab....

And thats exactly what it was... Its like GW saying buy the new Ork codex, orrrrrr buy the Loota/Burna codex where you can use the same models with a different rule set as troops....... its utterly ridiculous that they didn't just include it in the IG dex. ("It" being a differing special rule set" very simple to do.)

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Militarum Tempestus is the new term for Stormtroopers. They have a codex that comprises of 4 units, all of which are found in the AM codex, because GW likes money and knows that weak-willed and/or wealthy 40K fans would spend money on such a product, which they did.

I wanted to add a Storm Trooper allied detachment to my Inquisitor Army. I was much happier buying the Militarium Tempestus book to do so as opposed to having to buy the new Guard book. I am neither weak-willed nor wealthy, not that wealth of any description is needed to purchase GW products. It's a shame that you resort to name calling and insults when others find value in a product that you do not.

Stupid post, please ignore :/

Solis Luna Astrum wrote:
not that wealth of any description is needed to purchase GW products.

You may want to recalibrate your concept of wealth.

As an aside, why is MT being refered to as AT? My tablet won't show what the abreviation is for, and I'm registering it as wrong and it's driving me nuts. Sorry for the bout of OCD.

As for contributing, I wanted to field an all scion force, but the full AM codex wouldn't let me, so it filled that niche. I do agree that charging full codex price for it is grox gak.

 don_mondo wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:


It's not like specialist troops sometimes work with other elements of the armed forces... or in multiple roles...

It's not like we don't have an Allies system for that...

Well, actually, you don't. You can take IG and AT as two separate Combined Arms Detachments (so minimum 1 HQ, 2 Troops in each) but you cannot take one as your Primary Detachment and the other as an Allied Detachment (Allied detachment cannot be same Faction as Primary, and supplements are considered same faction as codex they are a supplement of).

What you can also do tho (unless AT has something that says otherwise) is include units from BOTH codexes in the same CAD, since CAD is limited to a single Faction, not to a single Codex. So AT Command squad, AT Troops choice, IG Troops choice, IG Heavy choice, etc etc.

Codex: Militarum Tempestus is not a supplements of Codex: Astra Militarum. Unlike Black Legion, Clan Raukaan, Farsight Enclaves, Iyanden and Crimson Slaughter, Codex: Militarum Tempestus is a stand-alone Codex, silly as that seems given how short it is.

Militarum Tempestus and Legion of the Damned are in a weird place where they clearly should be Armies of the Imperium, but aren't actually listed in the book. It would make sense for them to be supplements of Astra Militarum and Space Marines respectively, but they aren't that either. They therefore, I think, still use the Ally matrix in their own books (which, unless I'm mistaken, is indentical to that of Armies of the Imperium, save the Legion of the Damned has no defined relationship with MT or Imperial Knights)

GW being GW. Now even their most recent books are out of whack regarding the Allies Matrix ^^

Solis Luna Astrum wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Militarum Tempestus is the new term for Stormtroopers. They have a codex that comprises of 4 units, all of which are found in the AM codex, because GW likes money and knows that weak-willed and/or wealthy 40K fans would spend money on such a product, which they did.

I wanted to add a Storm Trooper allied detachment to my Inquisitor Army. I was much happier buying the Militarium Tempestus book to do so as opposed to having to buy the new Guard book. I am neither weak-willed nor wealthy, not that wealth of any description is needed to purchase GW products. It's a shame that you resort to name calling and insults when others find value in a product that you do not.

Just so I can understand, what value do you get in allying C:MT as opposed to the full army in C:AM? AM has all of the options as MT minus a couple of orders and formations. Was it the fact that Scions are troops in MT worth $50 and a loss of all the additional content you could have gotten for the same price? (and, as allies, aren't the Scions even more equivalent between the two armies? That I'm not positive about).

 Furyou Miko wrote:
... you want the Stormtroopers, who specialise in rapid aerial insertion, to get a main battle tank?

Does not compute.

Are you the type if person who would want a different space marine book for every company, like most codices the IG book represents parts of an army on the same battlefield that happen to be there, like in Flames of War lists or codices represent base forces with auxillaries attached. Guard is like a Flames of War list for an infantry battlegroup. Even the lists that base on auxiliaries like german looted tanks have attached infantry and other things that if it was a pure battalion regiment or ect. it wouldnt have. It is rare for a force in a war to field itself in its pure form with no auxiliaries whatsoever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I guess what i am saying is it doesnt make sense to have an army that goes into battle without auxiliaries to cover its bumhole, that is the main problem i have with the tempest scrotums, that and it should have been a supplement for the ass military.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Miko, sorry if i was offensive, the tempest scrotum codex is something i hate, even more than i hate 2++ rerolls. I am apologizing in advance if you were offended.