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.

JWBS wrote:
Oh my word I am so happy with this GSC box. Truck, abbs, and a new commander, it's all I was hoping for

The female Magus is not a new sculpt. It is a great Combat patrol though. That lot is £157.50 at current GW RRP.

Yeah I know I didn't expect new new, but this is new to the GSC army box and I'm happy to get one of these instead of another Icon Ward (I would have been happy with literally any of the many many GSC command models I think they're all pretty nice)

Ah I get you, all those spare Iconwards are doing valiant service as additional Acolyte Hybrids in units.

Am kindof surprised that some of the more expensive units were not swapped out for the odd elite character here or there.

Yeah I feared that too, I wouldn't have been super bummed since there's so many of them that I will not buy them all individually, having them in a discount box wouldn't be the worst thing. This is still way better though.

That new combat patroll is so nice. I just pciked up my probably last copy of the old star collecting box.

By the end of the old codex I really enjoyed transports. With the new -1 damage it is probably better, even if they did increase in points.

And also Abberants actually beeing playable? Who knew.

 Niiai wrote:
That new combat patroll is so nice. I just pciked up my probably last copy of the old star collecting box.

By the end of the old codex I really enjoyed transports. With the new -1 damage it is probably better, even if they did increase in points.

And also Abberants actually beeing playable? Who knew.

Yeah it's much better than I expected. I had been hoping to see the old DWOK sprues with a magus HQ, but this is one of the better discounts on a Combat Patrol so far at ~45% off the multipart kits.

My only minor gripe is that 2 x Acolyte would probably more useful than 2 x Neophyte (thanks to the insane cost of the former). Still, everything here is useful.

Neophytes are possibly my favourite GW kit of all time at this point, but as a person that has also bought multiple SC GSC I am predicting they'll be dirt cheap on the pre-owned market now, 2x10 here, and most of us already have loads (I'm not even a gamer I just like the models). People will be selling these at £10 a shot soon I think.

That GSC combat patrol is incredibly tempting.

The Grey Knight and Thousand Sons Combat Patrol hasn't even landed right? Might be in for a wait.

A GSC bundle without the Iconward? I just can't conceptualise that...

Anyway, WinterSEO has his Custodes and extensive GSC reviews up:

 Arbitrator wrote:
The Grey Knight and Thousand Sons Combat Patrol hasn't even landed right? Might be in for a wait.

Still waiting on those, as well as the separate releases for the Infernal Master and Crowe.

That's actually a really tempting Combat Patrol

When I was trying to guess the contents of the CP I guessed what it was minus the second set of Neophytes. Time to grab a couple SCs then that for a decent start to an army.

I thought they'd put the female Magus in and swap the Ridgerunner for a Rockgrinder, so they've actually exceeded my minimal expectations.

If you need iconwards there are probably many on the secinderry marked. At least for the time beeing.

Regarding the 2 pack of neoohytes: I have had much suckess sanding them on the sides and gluing acolyte arms onto them. You stil need a lot of acolyte packs but you often have arms left over.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
A GSC bundle without the Iconward? I just can't conceptualise that...

Anyway, WinterSEO has his Custodes and extensive GSC reviews up:

Lmao, nice move Winters. Honestly, I don't blame him; he doesn't play GSC, it's not really feasible to play as many armies as he does and try and know and explain all the others (especially complex ones like GSC).

Winters also struggles with extreme depression and getting the energy to do things is tough, and GSC is the wordiest of the books

I am waiting for the Zara Kane GSC review, she really knows the army. Ash's at GMG was fair as well, but like most I am not sure if he either played the army/against it in previous editions. Cannot blame Winters for giving up at the word soup, GW rules seem to be increasingly inelegant.

By contrast, Goonhammer's review of the book is effusive. Notably praising the precision of the rules (though not the brevity!).

Ah, they did what I expected them to do with Custodes:

Have a 4++.
'These, no, these were never storm shields.'
'They're... um... The Precido was a cool movie, right?'
'Precidium shields. Yeah. Throw in an extra 'a' or something. And shut that mic off.'


Zoanthropes watch sadly from the sidelines. They know.
But honestly, I won't ever miss 3++ saves.

Umbros wrote:

By contrast, Goonhammer's review of the book is effusive. Notably praising the precision of the rules (though not the brevity!).

Isn't that all they do with new reviews these days though?

 Arbitrator wrote:

Umbros wrote:

By contrast, Goonhammer's review of the book is effusive. Notably praising the precision of the rules (though not the brevity!).

Isn't that all they do with new reviews these days though?

Tell me you haven't read any of the reviews without telling me you haven't read any of the reviews.

Oh my my those combat patrols are seeeeexy. I'll be picking up one of the custodes (which is more or less precisely what I needed to round out my custodes and SoS collection) and at least 2 of the GSC one.

ERJAK wrote:
Tell me you haven't read any of the reviews without telling me you haven't read any of the reviews.

I quite like their reviews - but I'm struggling to think a book where they said "this just sucks okay".

Their GSC review is probably fair. If you can set up Crossfire/Exposed as easily as they imply (and I can't see why a few 60 point 5 man handflamer acolyte units+sniper characters won't work) then it seems likely the book is going to be crazy powerful. I mean a boring 10 man Shotgun Neophyte squad is getting a 50% return into Intercessors with Crossfire/Exposed before you apply any other buffs. More handflamer acolytes would potentially be even better, because you get about the same damage from shooting and then have a fairly impactful charge.

Metamorphs just seem designed to destroy assault-focused lists.

Its interesting how a day can shift me from soft doomerism to "this is the most broken thing I've read in 40k since last month".

Tyel wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
Tell me you haven't read any of the reviews without telling me you haven't read any of the reviews.

I quite like their reviews - but I'm struggling to think a book where they said "this just sucks okay".

Well, would you say one codex of 9th straight up sucks? I think they are all very fair and I enjoy those reviews way more than some doom and gloom. For this I can always visit dakkadakka

For me so much of it is the nature of positivity--are they honest about the strong points? Are they contrasting those with weak points? What sort of language are they using? A positive review could come in the form of an optimistic analysis of what's there or it could be written like a political advertisement, and there's a big difference.

Tyel wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
Tell me you haven't read any of the reviews without telling me you haven't read any of the reviews.

I quite like their reviews - but I'm struggling to think a book where they said "this just sucks okay".

Their GSC review is probably fair. If you can set up Crossfire/Exposed as easily as they imply (and I can't see why a few 60 point 5 man handflamer acolyte units+sniper characters won't work) then it seems likely the book is going to be crazy powerful. I mean a boring 10 man Shotgun Neophyte squad is getting a 50% return into Intercessors with Crossfire/Exposed before you apply any other buffs. More handflamer acolytes would potentially be even better, because you get about the same damage from shooting and then have a fairly impactful charge.

Metamorphs just seem designed to destroy assault-focused lists.

Its interesting how a day can shift me from soft doomerism to "this is the most broken thing I've read in 40k since last month".

So specifically what he was implying was that all of their book reviews offer 'effusive praise'. Which is blatantly false. Their reviews are detailed enough that tone is rarely consistent all the way through, some things being seen as negative for being too weak, too strong, or too bland. Other things being more positive due to being strong (but not necessarily OP) interesting, or unique.

The most common tone for their final summations tends to be cautiously optimistic. Their most negative reviews have actually been in regards to books that seemed too strong with the excitement at all the powerful tools being overshadowed by the lingering dread of what the book would do to the game as a whole (as was the case with the Drukhari and Admech reviews.) They also tend to make comments on previous books that puts them in a more negative light as time goes on (again, drukhari).

They haven't actively shat on a book, but negativity isn't inherently more honest than positivity. People like Arbitrator forget that dunking on things has just as much susceptibility to corruption as positivity. There's an entire subgenre of shock-jock review ghouls on Youtube that make their money dumping on anything that's popular, regardless of what they actually think of it.

So yeah, Goonhammer haven't made a 35 minute diss-track about any of the books; not all of their reviews have been 'effusive praise' either.

They do tend to be vocal when they think something is particularly weak or confusing, at the very least.

Probably the biggest criticism of their reviews is they're very tournament oriented. But they do a 'crusade review' separately for each, which is probably less so.

One weakness is they sometimes gloss over something because it doesn't fit their focus or a unit's potential passes over their reviewer because it doesn't fit with the units they usually use. Usually someone else chimes in with a different opinion, sometimes there's even a 'hear me out...' blurb, but sometimes units get so little focus you'd think they're not even in the codex.

But for the overall state of a new book, they're pretty reliable. They do point out missed opportunities and rules weirdness.

nvm