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.

EDIT: sorry, double post.

Death By Monkeys wrote:Hm. While I was thinking about Vendettas, I decided to re-read the rules for skimmers. The part that caught my eye was the rule about "measuring distances" - the skimmer's base is ignored except when assaulting the skimmer and distances are measured to the hull. Anyone know how tall the new Valk bases are?

I'd say the flight stand is about 150mm if the oval base is the same 120mm base that comes with the LOTR Misty Mountains Dragon.

Aaaaaand as a final note. I've read somewhere that Ratlings have a Cake Bonus or something similar.

One of the models has a bag next to it in the coloured section and inside it are two apples and ( What GW have painted it up as ) a Battenburg cake. Google 'Battenburg' if that makes no sense to you.

Enclosed top for artillery tanks is still an option? Thank you, that makes me happy. My first Medusa is still playable after all, and 5 points cheaper, to boot :-)

The Medusa isn't modal, but has to choose one or the other? Unexpected. I think I'd go with the more reliable AP2.

middle wrote:Aaaaaand as a final note. I've read somewhere that Ratlings have a Cake Bonus or something similar.

One of the models has a bag next to it in the coloured section and inside it are two apples and ( What GW have painted it up as ) a Battenburg cake. Google 'Battenburg' if that makes no sense to you.

I saw the apple core in the Advance Orders photo for the Ratlings, but wasn't sure whether the 'cake' on the other Ratling's base was supposed to be a haggis, pork pie or some kind of hearty nutcake one might take on a ringquest or somesuch.

middle wrote:HB can be a Lascannon for 15.

I'd like everyone to note that this is a 5 point increase on the cost of a Hull Lascannon. Right now, Hull weapons on a Russ are +5 for an HB, +15 for a Lascannon. With the new 'Dex HB's come as standard, so the +15 is really a +20 from no weapon.

middle wrote:Sponson HB/HF for 20. MM for 30. PC for 40 ( All variants. Means Standard Russ can have PC / MM ). SB/HS 10. HK 10. Dozer 10. Extra armour 15. Entire squadron: Camo netting for 20.

Love to know what mythical magical land 2 BS3 Plasma Cannons are worth 40-fething-points.

middle wrote:Knight Commander Pask. 50. No force org. His tank is Bs4. If it Remains stationary it may re-roll to wound with all weapons. If it Remains stationary it may +1 to pen vehicles with all weapons.

Knight Commander Mandatory. Expect to see every first Exterminator or Executioner with this guy.

middle wrote:Hydra. 75. 1-3. 2 TL Hydra Autocannons. HB. Searchlight. Smokelaunchers. Auto targetting system. Skimmers and turbo-boosters may not use cover saves vs the hydra. HB may be a HF for free. SB/HS 10. HK 10. Extra armour 15. Entire squadron: Camo netting 20.

Two TL-Hydra cannons, ok. So we've got 4 R72 TL shots. Good to hear. And it messes skimmers up. I can hear Eldar players crying again...

Basilisk 125.
Medusa 135.
Colossus 140.
Griffon 75.

What makes the Colossus worth more than the Basilisk when the Col is S6 and the Bassy S9? Not a dig at the unit, but a genuine question? What's so good about it?

HB to a HF for free.

I can't imagine why you would. If a Bassy is ever shooting its hull weapon it's in trouble.

Manticore Rocket Launcher. 160. 4 Storm eagles. HB. Searchlight. Smoke launchers. HB may be a HF for free. SB/HS 10. HK 10. Dozer 10. Extra armour 15. Camo netting 30.

Old one with its S9 AP2 rockets better... A good +10 point upgrade to the Bassy that didn't make the Bassy redundant.

Deathstrike. 160!!! Deathstrike missile. HB. Searchlight. Smoke launchers. HB may be a HF for free. SB/HS 10. HK 10. Dozer 10. Extra armour 15. Camo netting 30.

Yeah. 160 points for a single shot weapon... or 125 for one pip of Strength less... let me think...

Codex Bi-Polar is looking to be a very strange book, almost as if written by two different teams of people that weren't allowed to talk to one another during its creation.

Why are Dozerblades 10pts?

That is extremely disconcerting for such an upgrade.

hrm....

What makes the Colossus worth more than the Basilisk when the Col is S6 and the Bassy S9? Not a dig at the unit, but a genuine question? What's so good about it?

It does not allow cover saves. think an AP3 hellhound ordnance blast.

Vaktathi wrote:Why are Dozerblades 10pts?

Because Arby says so.

Vaktathi wrote:It does not allow cover saves. think an AP3 hellhound ordnance blast.

For real? Confirmed?

If so, then the Griffon just won the race to see which Arty tank could be made redundant before the Codex was released.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Codex Bi-Polar is looking to be a very strange book, almost as if written by two different teams of people that weren't allowed to talk to one another during its creation.

That would, I suspect, be the most elegant explanation for the results we're seeing. Alas, Occam's Razor isn't so easily applied, and in the absence of proper dialogue between the designer and the audience, we'll never know for certain.

Vaktathi wrote:Why are Dozerblades 10pts?

That is extremely disconcerting for such an upgrade.

An odd chance for an option nobody ever takes, certainly.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:It does not allow cover saves. think an AP3 hellhound ordnance blast.

For real? Confirmed?

If so, then the Griffon just won the race to see which Arty tank could be made redundant before the Codex was released.

To be fair, the Griffon still has the overwhelming advantage of cost. You can get very nearly two of them for the price of a Colossus.

Hm. Let's see what fun tricks we can do with Pask, shall we?

- Pask in a Punisher w/ Hull HB and HB Sponsons = against T3, ~19 wounds; against T4, ~16 wounds

- Pask in a Vanquisher w/ Hull Las = against AV 14, ~20 % kill (and this is with a target out in the open - no cover)

I'd do the Executioner vs. Terminators but I don't trust my math on blast templates.

Colossus ignore cover saves. Didn't notice that that wasn't on the french pdf.

Griffon re-rolls to hit too.

Agreed on the flying stand, it's easily 6" tall. And for anyone who has looked at it and winced, The flying stand sinks into Valk by a good 5mm. Also the stand is quite think, say around 2mm. People have been picking it up and setting it down all day and sweeping it round shouting ' NYAAAAWWWWWMMMMMM ! PCHU PCHU ! ' all week and it hasn't broken yet.

I have to say, on the whole, this looks great. There are parts I do not like, especially Ogryns as they were the unit I was most hoping to see improved as I love the models and background.

In its entirety though, I am very excited for this. I think Guard will get a substantial power boost, have TONS of options to play and be very cool.

I can't wait to buy some more tanks! My Catachans got some love for the firs time in a long time.

And I agree, holy crap, the Vendetta is infinetely better than the Valk. The only thing I can see the Valk being useful for is letting units deepstrike while moving (unless the Vendetta can do that too). Three twin linked las cannons on a fast skimmer for 130 points is captain insano good.

Agamemnon2 wrote:That would, I suspect, be the most elegant explanation for the results we're seeing. Alas, Occam's Razor isn't so easily applied, and in the absence of proper dialogue between the designer and the audience, we'll never know for certain.

Oh I don't actually think it was designed in the way I described, but there is just such a huge disconnect between sections of this book that you really have to wonder how many hands went into designing it, and how much of it was 'by committee'. It's almost as if office politics spilled over into the design of this book, and that's just bizzare.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:That would, I suspect, be the most elegant explanation for the results we're seeing. Alas, Occam's Razor isn't so easily applied, and in the absence of proper dialogue between the designer and the audience, we'll never know for certain.

Oh I don't actually think it was designed in the way I described, but there is just such a huge disconnect between sections of this book that you really have to wonder how many hands went into designing it, and how much of it was 'by committee'. It's almost as if office politics spilled over into the design of this book, and that's just bizzare.

Your description made me remember that there's actually a gaming product that exhibits the same telltale marks of a truly bipolar design. A little-known RPG called F.A.T.A.L., easily the worst game ever devised by mankind. It is to human leisure activities what Nurgle is to public healthcare.

I'm actually considering picking up some RRs for my Mech Guard now. 75 for 6 with Power Weapon Vet isn't too shabby.

Reecius wrote:Three twin linked las cannons on a fast skimmer for 130 points is captain insano good.

Quoted for truth as well as for the fact that you used the name "Captain Insano"!

Yeah. Seems RR's got through this completely unscathed. They went down a point really, but the Vet is mandatory (but who cares, +1A is actually useful for him unlike other Vet Sergeants in a Guard army).

Shame about the models...

I'm happy that RRs did not in fact get hit with the nerfhammer. They appear to still fulfill the same old role, and you can give the squad a special weapon as well, which might be worth it on some matchups. Of course, people who were using them without lances got shafted.

Death By Monkeys wrote:Quoted for truth as well as for the fact that you used the name "Captain Insano"!

SCIENCE!!!!!!!!

(Hopefully someone gets the reference...)

Not I!

So, H.B.M.C..... In a non cheeky way, what do you make of the rumours so far? You're fairly vocal about KP's and stuff making Guard currently mildly cack, and seem to be respected about the Guard.

Any good? Show promise? Steaming pile of poop? Godsend?

For what it's worth, I will be using the stock Valkyrie. I love the look of the kit, especially with the missile pods, and that to me is reason enough not to go dilly-dallying with trying to fit six inelegant lascannons onto it.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah. Seems RR's got through this completely unscathed. They went down a point really, but the Vet is mandatory (but who cares, +1A is actually useful for him unlike other Vet Sergeants in a Guard army).

Shame about the models...

They're still rumored for wave 1.5...

Saw an interesting conversion of Rough Riders today. Cadians with the Lances, standing atop modified Gundrones, ala the old RT era Powerboards.

Not exactly the most genius conversion ever, but they looked effective in the context of the rest of the army.

Thats it from me for tonight folks. That much writing was like being at Uni again.

Same again, any questions / worries send them on a postcard to the usual address and i'll get back to you.

Enjoy !

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:That would, I suspect, be the most elegant explanation for the results we're seeing. Alas, Occam's Razor isn't so easily applied, and in the absence of proper dialogue between the designer and the audience, we'll never know for certain.

Oh I don't actually think it was designed in the way I described, but there is just such a huge disconnect between sections of this book that you really have to wonder how many hands went into designing it, and how much of it was 'by committee'. It's almost as if office politics spilled over into the design of this book, and that's just bizzare.

Maybe instead of trying to write the rules so that their kids could understand them they just had them help.

Your description made me remember that there's actually a gaming product that exhibits the same telltale marks of a truly bipolar design. A little-known RPG called F.A.T.A.L., easily the worst game ever devised by mankind. It is to human leisure activities what Nurgle is to public healthcare.

I'm taking game design courses right now (both board/card/and computer) and you would be amazed how easy it is to make bi polar design decisions. Not for me of course, I tend to edge on too little variation, but some people just don't understand how to balance a game system. Often times these people are the wacky artsy types that would want to make a game like FATAL (or besm, fatals cousin). To be serious though, this is well within their modus operandi. The ork book was incredibly bi polar and the 4E tyranid codex was practically written by a man with 12 personalities. All of them Lincoln. 40k has always suffered from this kind of thing, though rarely so pronounced as vendetta vs valkyrie.

Okay - just went back through the last 4-5 pages to cut and paste all this lovely info into a single word document. That way, if GW decides to strike down with furious anger, I've got it backed up and can still play with lists until the Codex comes out.

middle wrote:Thats it from me for tonight folks. That much writing was like being at Uni again.

Same again, any questions / worries send them on a postcard to the usual address and i'll get back to you.

Enjoy !

Thanks much, middle! You're the hero of the day!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:So, H.B.M.C..... In a non cheeky way, what do you make of the rumours so far?

In a word? Schizophrenic.

I'm used to the whole some bad some good thing GW does, it's cool, but the bad in this 'Dex is so bad, and the good so good that, as I said, it's like two different teams designed sections of the book without consulting each other at any point.

It's weird.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:You're fairly vocal about KP's and stuff making Guard currently mildly cack

Nice try Grotsnik, but KP's didn't make Guard 'mildly' bad. They made them damn-near auto-lose 1/3rd of their games. Huge fething difference.

But GW's solution, the Amorphus Blob Platoon, is something I like because it's a choice, not an either/or. You can place some squads in a blob, whilst leaving others in that same platoon by themselves. That's great. The alternatives were no Amorphus Blob Platoons, meaning KP missions are still auto-lose for Guard (and Epic Fail for GW for not seeing it) or, equally as bad, a rule that meant that when you join squads, all squads in the platoon must merge.

But they didn't do that. They, for once, found the middle ground, which makes a refreshing change from the hard-core pendulum swinging GW loves to do.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Any good? Show promise? Steaming pile of poop? Godsend?

I don't think it will be a bad Codex in that it will be a weak Codex, uncompetative, etc. etc., but then again neither is the 'Chaos' Codex - its perfectly workable as an army and you can make good lists from it - and that Codex is still steaming pile of poop because it's so utterly fething boring as flying rodent gak with all the 3rd Ed life sucked from it.

I doubt Guard will end up in the same position as the 'Chaos' Codex, a book that's fine as an army but a pale shadow of its former glory, but it's looking like there aren't going to be many 'power builds' thanks to the extreme costs of most of the upgrades and the strange and nonsensical arbitrary restrictions that seem to have been heaped upon it.

Vaktathi wrote:Why are Dozerblades 10pts?

That is extremely disconcerting for such an upgrade.

hrm....

Well it turns your 1/6 chance of losing a vehicle in a squadron down to 1/36, I'd probably take it on vehicles I'm intending to move.

Someone remind me again; who's writing this codex? It would set a lot of things straight.