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.

Perfect Organism wrote:Anyone else a little put off by how specific the MT subfactions are? Not just one specific homeworld, but the exact regiment number as well? Or am I missing some background about how each homeworld only has one regiment number or something?

The specific factions are just ones they ripped out of the old book. Hopefully they’ll have something allowing one to replace the regiment with someone’s custom regiment like Blood Angels and their successors. Each training facility trains out war orphans. If there are enough, a new regiment is made. We don’t know the size of regiments, but they could range from 100 to 500 people, at least. If there aren’t enough progena, the new troopers are sent to reinforce an existing regiment.

Esmer wrote:The fact that the MT regiment names are basically just going down the Greek Alphabet makes me think that maybe these aren't homeworlds at all but instead, I don't know, Schola Progenium departments or something. Like, Schola Progenium Alpha has several orphanage networks throughout the Imperium, so does Schola Progenium Beta, Gamma, Delta and so on. The regiment number is indicating which particular institution inside their department they were brought up in. I mean, the fluff text for the "Iotan Gorgonnes" specifically mentions they were raised on a world called "Vedill I".

Could be just my crazy headcanon though.

There are multiple regiment with the same Greek designation, such as the Alphic Hydras and the Alphic Lions. The number is just a batch number. If there are enough new troopers in a training batch, a new regiment is made. If the batch isn’t big enough, the new troopers are sent to reinforce an existing regiment.

zamerion wrote:
curious the errata page

It's the first time they put something like that in a book, right?

Probably the correct price for neophytes.

THERE'S YOUR CA2019 FAQ FOLKS!!

zamerion wrote:
curious the errata page

It's the first time they put something like that in a book, right?

Please please please be just giving their chapter rules to gak...

I think the 2 for 1 casualties will prove to be really good. Isn’t there an Assassin that reduces LD?

All the stuff so far looks pretty good, at least for Tau Guard and Scions, the GSC I agree feel a bit eh. I'm pretty excited and anyone saying this looks marines level of broken, I'd like a little of what they got, as it must be some good stuff. This is the kind of exciting releases should be, marines are a poster child for what not to do to drive up a faction as they went over board.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 xeen wrote:
I think the 2 for 1 casualties will prove to be really good. Isn’t there an Assassin that reduces LD?

I bet you that scions trait will be a sleeper power one. It isn't out of hand strong but in the right hands using morale to push through wounds you get no save from could be very strong for promising either dead units without any recourse of any kind of save, force spending of command points/use strats or psychic power to safe guard squads and perhaps stick to cover hide out of range or otherwise alter their game plan from the risk of that doctrine and what it can do.

You can't under estimate how strong it can be to force the other player to change up what they need to do, waste CP or risk un wanted losses on what would usually be just a small inconvenience can now risk a whole squad wipe or heavy damage to the point it's useless. It's easy to see the benefit or extra range, extra AP, extra hits, etc. I like the thinking nature of this doctrine as it really forces proper target priority and anything that makes someone learn and isn't just an easy point and click I think is a net gain for the game as a whole.

Kaneda88 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Based on the fact all the weapons are short ranged, taking Eagles is stupid over Gorgonnes seems dumb.

Also again feth the rules writers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Doesn't matter though you're gonna be taking Dragons. It solves the actual issue with Scions.

Considering you want to be in half range with most of those weapons i find eagles to be the superior choice.

You need to actually get within half range though. It's not that likely compared to just getting closest target, which Scions would want. So basically you would need two targets that would be in half range where the one you REALLY want to target is further. That's a lot of requirements whereas one just wants the closest target. Far more generalist for the same effect.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dysartes wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Also again feth the rules writers.

Please show us on this Ratling where they touched you this time, Slayer...

You're the one supporting more rules bloat. It's fething 6th and 7th all over again.

It's up for pre-order.

The GSC section has an "Errata" bit.

That's unusual.

It's a bold new age where they sell you erratas for the erratas they messed up the first time. Are they not merciful ?

With over a page of Errata (starts on page 72 and next section is on Page 74) it will be interesting to see exactly what is in the Errata section.

GSC players will have to hope it include a revision to what units get Cult Traits.

 alextroy wrote:
With over a page of Errata (starts on page 72 and next section is on Page 74) it will be interesting to see exactly what is in the Errata section.

GSC players will have to hope it include a revision to what units get Cult Traits.

That seems a stretch, even for GW's vague guidelines of what constitutes 'errata.'

Its usually just monkeying with the word salad, one sentence at a time, or 'oh, yeah, we totally forgot this bit.'

they could just be putting important errata into the book on the understanding that not everyone has the internet.

BrianDavion wrote:
they could just be putting important errata into the book on the understanding that not everyone has the internet.

That would be new. They didn't even do that for the "new" mini-brb.

Much as I might like buffs for my IG and Stormtroopers, this is all starting to look increasingly like 7E style powerbloat in the worst way, and I don't think the best way to represent lots of these factions is just through more ways to directly enhance the killing capability of stuff.

Also, I agree on the count that it's odd that GW is getting into specific MT regiments for bonus rules, this sort of micro differentiation done with very powerful rules is getting to be more than a wee bit silly.

So, they push so much through the net, and in fact leave some with the net being the only way to get some the rules, like the assassins rules for instance at this point, yet they decide to errata into the book to help people without net ? How did those netless people ever keep abreast of things up to this point then ? I'm actually pretty curious to see whats in this errata now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Much as I might like buffs for my IG and Stormtroopers, this is all starting to look increasingly like 7E style powerbloat in the worst way, and I don't think the best way to represent lots of these factions is just through more ways to directly enhance the killing capability of stuff.

Also, I agree on the count that it's odd that GW is getting into specific MT regiments for bonus rules, this sort of micro differentiation done with very powerful rules is getting to be more than a wee bit silly.

It's just now starting to get silly ? It's been heading this way for awhile now. I won't even say begun these bloat wars have, as we're already in the middle of it at this point.

It might just be the ancient changes to psychic onslaught and the errata to A Plan Generations in the Making (remember the times people thought two faction having the same strat, but one being better/cheaper was unacceptable ).

I do remember that, even if it was a long long time ago.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
It might just be the ancient changes to psychic onslaught and the errata to A Plan Generations in the Making (remember the times people thought two faction having the same strat, but one being better/cheaper was unacceptable ).

Well many a meta has shifted and gw's rule standard dropped immensly over time.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Much as I might like buffs for my IG and Stormtroopers, this is all starting to look increasingly like 7E style powerbloat in the worst way, and I don't think the best way to represent lots of these factions is just through more ways to directly enhance the killing capability of stuff.

I wouldn't worry so much. When Codex Guard 2.0 hits all this stuff will be rolled into it.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Much as I might like buffs for my IG and Stormtroopers, this is all starting to look increasingly like 7E style powerbloat in the worst way, and I don't think the best way to represent lots of these factions is just through more ways to directly enhance the killing capability of stuff.

I wouldn't worry so much. When Codex Guard 2.0 hits all this stuff will be rolled into it.

There is no "Codex 2.0 for everyone".

New codex at one point is inevitable. It is "print money" button.

Question isn't if but when. You really think gw decides not to get easy money with no new codexes? Recycling codexes been part of business model like 16 years. Ain't stopping anytime soon. Keep on living in fantasy land where even after 20 year you use same codex

I am not saying there wont be new Codexes.

Sure, there'll be a handful this year, and another handful next year, etc..usually tied to miniature releases. And Codexes written around the same 2-3 month period will likely share similar ideas that were en vogue with the writers at that time.


But it's even more ridiculous that GW somehow set (and managed to hit) a "new balance / power-level" underpinned by a consistent design philosophy for 15+ Codexes, then also went back and wrote some 9-ish campaign books that would pre-view that new philosophy / game-power-level but for some reason NOT bring armies up to that level. Than started releasing the first of 15+ consistently balanced and designed new 2.0 Codexes with Marines, as well as the first PA books that would "preview" that new standard for other armies, but not match it for some reason. And then roll out that entire thing in the coming year or two.


GW is writing these books largely one or two at a time. The next Codex or two might or might not share similarities with the new Marine book, but it won't be long before staff changes again, new ideas come in, etc.. and the "philosophy" changes again, probably before the summer is over. And certainly future books wont be meticulously balanced to meet the Marine Codex, both because GW hasn't meticulously balanced in the past and because the Marine book is an enormous outlier to begin with.

And on top of that, the PA books aren't part of some masterplan to either balance against Marine 2.0 and much less "not-balance-against-Marines-2.0-but-give-a-preview-of-the-eventual-balanced-Codex-2.0"-Master series. They are just a dump of rules they throw together in a week or two alongside writing new Codexes, and new AoS stuff and perhaps working on 9th Edition or the next version of Apocalypse or whatever.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Much as I might like buffs for my IG and Stormtroopers, this is all starting to look increasingly like 7E style powerbloat in the worst way, and I don't think the best way to represent lots of these factions is just through more ways to directly enhance the killing capability of stuff.

I liked the idea at first but the sheer number of chapters, regiments etc. available seems to be getting out of hand.

Well that didn't take long!

Sunny Side Up wrote:
There is no "Codex 2.0 for everyone".

You know that for a fact, do you? And I don't particularly care if they've got a "II" label on them like the Chaos Codex currently does, more that the changes in these PA books will be wrapped up into whatever the next Codex for each force is.

i cant listen the reviews videos today.

If anyone can write what the cult faqs are about, I would be very grateful

no relics for the cult, interesting...

stratagems on the other hand feels a bit heavy on the powercreep section, many +1 hit/wounds/attacks, rerolls.

cp hungry as hell.

not convinced.

 Imateria wrote:
So, looking at the contents page, no relics and warlord traits for Genestealer Cults and Guard, just Tau and Scions. Oh, and a page of Errata for GSC.

Damn, that's even less for the Guard than I anticipated. So basically they're getting stratagems and a new doctrines system, and that's it?

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

 Imateria wrote:
So, looking at the contents page, no relics and warlord traits for Genestealer Cults and Guard, just Tau and Scions. Oh, and a page of Errata for GSC.

Damn, that's even less for the Guard than I anticipated. So basically they're getting stratagems and a new doctrines system, and that's it?

Yup, it's largely back to AOS for me. Should of known better to expect something. Largely it's meh, the only real winners in the book are ridge runners and bladed cog with their new psychic power.

If you don't want to sit through a Youtube video, these articles summarise the changes well.

https://www.goonhammer.com/psychic-awakening-the-greater-good-review-astra-militarum-imperial-guard/

https://www.goonhammer.com/psychic-awakening-the-greater-good-genestealer-cults-review/

https://www.goonhammer.com/psychic-awakening-the-greater-good-review-the-tau-empire/

zamerion wrote:
i cant listen the reviews videos today.

If anyone can write what the cult faqs are about, I would be very grateful

Winters says it just tidies up the wording for Cult Ambush.

 xttz wrote:
If you don't want to sit through a Youtube video, these articles summarise the changes well.

https://www.goonhammer.com/psychic-awakening-the-greater-good-review-astra-militarum-imperial-guard/

https://www.goonhammer.com/psychic-awakening-the-greater-good-genestealer-cults-review/

https://www.goonhammer.com/psychic-awakening-the-greater-good-review-the-tau-empire/

I just read the Tau review... There is a stratagem to permanently boost the BS of Crisis teams to 3+, but it is only for Farsight Enclaves... How I wish that was available for all Septs!