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.

Of course by incredibly tough you mean lucky if they don't meet any capable players with units designed to kill Marines (ap2/power weapons).

Aren't you the guy who said eldar would suck when GW released their 4th edition codex... You know, when holo falcons were broke?

G

I thought that was the release of 5th when he felt so strongly about it he sold his very nicely painted Eldar force...

No it was during 4th edition when he panned the new eldar. It gained him some notoriety .

G

cerebaton wrote:Now that we essentially have a full codex to work from, does anyone else think it's worth moving to/starting a new discussion in the tactics forum?

Smart and could give a leg up on possible FAQ questions. Unlike currently unplayable without rules lawyering, arguing nids.

No it was during 4th edition when he panned the new eldar. It gained him some notoriety .

Haha, notoriety. It was indeed during the release of 5th when my absolutely stunningly painted tri-Falcon Eldar army was sent through ebay to a collector in USA.

Here's my Falcon babies: http://coolminiornot.com/234930

Really I'm the guy who just likes to play good armies against good opponents and generally does very well at tournaments. As far as Dakka goes it's a little sad that none of the old American tournament guys like mauleed post here. Casual gamers are trying to take over. I won't allow it.

jspyd3rx wrote:

cerebaton wrote:Now that we essentially have a full codex to work from, does anyone else think it's worth moving to/starting a new discussion in the tactics forum?

Smart and could give a leg up on possible FAQ questions. Unlike currently unplayable without rules lawyering, arguing nids.

Done http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/278236.page

Rending Lightning claws and powerfists here I come!!!

Unless the BAs have some new special rule that overrides the BGB, Rending does not work with special CCWs.

also, as was pointed out a few times before in this thread, Lemartes' special rule only applies to the unit's chainswords.

Therion wrote:

2000,even. May not be the most effective list,but would sure be a ton of fun to play with.

I think that's the bottom line with BA lists. "Woohoo air cav assault marines!" won't be much fun once you're getting tabled game after game.

Why I think DC are garbage is because they don't have any extra bang for the buck. They hit as hard as 50 point models have to be able to hit the minimum, but they die as easily as 15 point models. I see no use whatsoever for units like that. Be serious here. If a 600 point unit hits as hard as 3 200 point units but dies as easily as 1 200 point unit, just get 3 200 point units instead.

I think it just goes to show how incredibly narrow Space Marine design space has become. I'm not looking forward to the new Dark Angels or Black Templars, each with their own half a dozen of named units that fulfill old roles just a little bit differently.

Therion wrote:Really I'm the guy who just likes to play good armies against good opponents and generally does very well at tournaments. As far as Dakka goes it's a little sad that none of the old American tournament guys like mauleed post here. Casual gamers are trying to take over. I won't allow it.

Yes, how dare the majority act like their opinion is in any way important?

Therion wrote:Really I'm the guy who just likes to play good armies against good opponents and generally does very well at tournaments. As far as Dakka goes it's a little sad that none of the old American tournament guys like mauleed post here. Casual gamers are trying to take over. I won't allow it.

'Cuz GBF is the casual gamer exemplified. (No offense, GBF. )

Agamemnon2 wrote:I think it just goes to show how incredibly narrow Space Marine design space has become.

I'm not looking forward to the new Dark Angels or Black Templars, each with their own half a dozen of named units that fulfill old roles just a little bit differently.

It has to be, esp due to the poor early conceptual work saying BA and SW were Codex, along with DA being Codex with just a couple things renamed. Niching the sub-Codices is good design, making them distinct from default to justify their existence.

I'm looking forward to BT2, as the varying across Crusades hasn't been well explored to give players freedom in tailoring their BT Crusade. Right now, BT are still very cookie-cutter mono-build, mono-look. Having some defined breadth like the BA Faustian/Sanguiary, Inq Radical/Puritan, CSM Red Corsair/Cult can only help clarify the army's "proper" range.

DA3 is also going to be nice, as GW can finally flesh out the Unforgiven Chapters in more detail, similar to the BA FT/Sang. I look forward to major Fluff advances here.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

Therion wrote:

2000,even. May not be the most effective list,but would sure be a ton of fun to play with.

I think that's the bottom line with BA lists. "Woohoo air cav assault marines!" won't be much fun once you're getting tabled game after game.

Why I think DC are garbage is because they don't have any extra bang for the buck. They hit as hard as 50 point models have to be able to hit the minimum, but they die as easily as 15 point models. I see no use whatsoever for units like that. Be serious here. If a 600 point unit hits as hard as 3 200 point units but dies as easily as 1 200 point unit, just get 3 200 point units instead.

I think it just goes to show how incredibly narrow Space Marine design space has become. I'm not looking forward to the new Dark Angels or Black Templars, each with their own half a dozen of named units that fulfill old roles just a little bit differently.

Therion wrote:Really I'm the guy who just likes to play good armies against good opponents and generally does very well at tournaments. As far as Dakka goes it's a little sad that none of the old American tournament guys like mauleed post here. Casual gamers are trying to take over. I won't allow it.

Yes, how dare the majority act like their opinion is in any way important?

So, what? Because the majority of gamers are casual, their opinions matter the most?

I'm a casual 40K player but a diehard MTG tournament player. Casual players - in any game - are ridiculously easy to please. They don't care about statistics, probability, or balance. They care about their own initial impression of a given unit or card - the "coolness" factor- and run it without a second though. Casual players see 8-CMC legends, mistakenly call them 'broken', and make terrible decks to play against their casual friends and lose in tournaments. And they're important because their collective purchases help keep the game going.

40K is the same way. When I saw the Trygon for the first time, I didn't care what its stats are. Same goes for the Storm Harbinger, the concept of jump shcok troops rushing out is just too cool to ignore. Hell, I play Necrons and routinely get my ass handed to me by veteran players. But I still keep playing because that crap doesn't matter to me (it does a little, but still) because I am a casual player.

So since I'm so easily pleased by the "coolness factor" of the fluff and models, designers need to work harder on balance and making competitive players have a healthy game to play. If they released a 10 point S6 T6 FNP PW calvalry model with relentless and twin-linked assault cannons, it would screw up the tournament environment and casual players would go nuts. If they made it 100 points, guess what? Casual players would still go nuts, and although tournament players might lament that it's not a terribly competitive model, they're not directly harmed by its inclusion. If anything it helps them steamroll weaker players because it's a "skill tester", like many of the jank rares in MTG.

Can someone fill in the glossary for DC HG AS for dakka?
Im guessing DC = Death Company but dunno the other 2

Honor Guard , Assault Squad

RED ALERT

I have it from a very trusted source the so called codex floating on the Internet is another hoax.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:RED ALERT

I have it from a very trusted source the so called codex floating on the Internet is another hoax.

G

Awwww, I was kinda getting used to this one. Early, not final draft I'd be willing to believe, but an outright hoax? People have too much time on their hands.

Green Blow Fly wrote:I have it from a very trusted source the so called codex floating on the Internet is another hoax.

Colour me completely unsurprised.

If the Storm Harbinger can really transport bikes I'm gonna loot the crap out of it.

The stolen Space Marine Transport was flying across the Battlefield. Through a monitor Warlord Korrag could see that the enemy command squad would soon be in reach. He put on his helmet and hammered the button which lowered the front ramp. With an evil smile on his face he put on his helmet and started his engines.

Commander Vultus couldn't believe what he saw. Not only did the Orks somehow manage to get their filthy claws on a Storm Harbinger, it was moving in on them. Then the assault ramp was lowered and in a huge cloud of black smoke 5 huge Orks on Motorcycles were jumping out of the flyer, somehow charging them in the process.

Yes please.

Yes, how dare the majority act like their opinion is in any way important?

That's not what I mean and you know it.

I have it from a very trusted source the so called codex floating on the Internet is another hoax.

I sure hope so. The only thing that I sort of like is the Storm Harbinger assault cannons counting as one weapon system so they can all be fired on the move.

Therion wrote:

2000,even. May not be the most effective list,but would sure be a ton of fun to play with.

I think that's the bottom line with BA lists. "Woohoo air cav assault marines!" won't be much fun once you're getting tabled game after game.

Why I think DC are garbage is because they don't have any extra bang for the buck. They hit as hard as 50 point models have to be able to hit the minimum, but they die as easily as 15 point models. I see no use whatsoever for units like that. Be serious here. If a 600 point unit hits as hard as 3 200 point units but dies as easily as 1 200 point unit, just get 3 200 point units instead.

Actually,air cav assault causes a lot of problems for a lot of different armies. Necrons are boned. Tau can't deal with it. Infantry heavy IG are in trouble. 'zilla nids. Pretty much any army build that relies on surviving CC charges by whittling the assaulting units down with fire as they come accross the board is going to have problems. Now,there's builds that will give DS/SH/AM builds problems,too,and there should be. It's called game balance. If you can just roll over every army in existance with a single build,then the army is broken from a rules perspective.

They don't die as easily as 15 point models. They have FNP. They die as easily as 15 point models against certain weapons,of which a typical squad will carry a maximum of 3. FNP isn't designed to make the unit invincible from everything. It's designed to make them more resiliant to the mundane weapons that make up at least 70% of every army list. What do you expect? Sure,a 5+ Invuln instead of FNP would make them more resilient to PG's and PW's. It makes them MORE vulnerable to boltguns and mundane attacks,however. A 5 point Imperial Guardsman dies just as easily from a Plasma Gun as a 15 point Grey Hunter. Does that make Grey Hunters overcosted? No,of course not.

If you prefer to spam 10-man Tac Squads in Rhinos,then spam 10-man Tac Squads in Rhinos. However,just because you'd prefer multiple 10-man Tac Squads in Rhinos,doesn't mean that higher-priced units aren't worth it.

Green Blow Fly wrote:RED ALERT

I have it from a very trusted source the so called codex floating on the Internet is another hoax.

G

Do you have any more info? I say this because, I mean, there's the actual leak, which in my opinion isn't polished, but is';t too outlandish. There's also the matter of this email from GW to stores which adds a point to the 'confirmed' column, and that's from several sources.

Its a trap.......

If it's a hoax its a very elaborate one. It is more than likely just an early-ish beta version.

Next month we'll likely see another version.

Commander Endova wrote: I say this because, I mean, there's the actual leak, which in my opinion isn't polished, but is';t too outlandish.

Not too outlandish?

The 'Blood-Forged Blade'... a cringeworthily-named unique sword found by the Flesh Tearers, but for some reason available to generic Blood Angel Captains?

The 'Storm Harbinger'...?

insaniak wrote:

Commander Endova wrote: I say this because, I mean, there's the actual leak, which in my opinion isn't polished, but is';t too outlandish.

Not too outlandish?

The 'Blood-Forged Blade'... a cringeworthily-named unique sword found by the Flesh Tearers, but for some reason available to generic Blood Angel Captains?

The 'Storm Harbinger'...?

Considering the near complete lack of fluff restrictions in modern day rules and encouragement of counts-as I don't see anything absurd with your first point at all.

I think someone was having a bit of fun and now hopefully we will wait until we see something more substantial. Rumors are conflicting with rumors. If something sounds too good to be true then in all likelihood it is. Every codex is touted as unbelievably awesome prior to it's release. We've been through this type of exercise many times before. To me it's funny that still no one knows who wrote the codex. When we have a name to go with the codex then I think we will be closer to the truth.

G

Whatever1 wrote:Actually,air cav assault causes a lot of problems for a lot of different armies. Necrons are boned. Tau can't deal with it. Infantry heavy IG are in trouble. 'zilla nids. Pretty much any army build that relies on surviving CC charges by whittling the assaulting units down with fire as they come accross the board is going to have problems.

And you don't think that's the point? To force 40k armies to mech up?

Let's suppose some of the rumors are based on truth... A close combat unit with jump packs and meltas deepstrikes in a lander. The lander is a fast skimmer and can fire the quad linked assault cannon at one vehicle then the jump pack unit either shoots and assaults another vehicle or assaults whatever spills out of the first destroyed vehicle. This sequence could potentially wreck any mechanized army.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Let's suppose some of the rumors are based on truth... A close combat unit with jump packs and meltas deepstrikes in a lander. The lander is a fast skimmer and can fire the quad linked assault cannon at one vehicle then the jump pack unit either shoots and assaults another vehicle or assaults whatever spills out of the first destroyed vehicle. This sequence could potentially wreck any mechanized army.

Frankly, with TL Flamers or TL Plasma and the Tantalus, foot-based armies aren't going to have an easy time of it either. I'd rather take my chances meching up - consider it one more obstacle to take care of before killing my troops.