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.

Hello everyone, I have a quick question regarding the current state of the 40k armies and codexs.

I am coming back to the hobby after a year out and am interested with the new rules coming out in starting back up.

I am curious of which out of the armies are currently doing well and maybe some pros and cons for the armies.

I am mostly considering the new hardback codex armies only currently.

So yh, just any information on which of the newer done armies would be best to pick up, pros, cons, info, anything really.

Cheers

7th Edition Core Rulebook comes out on Saturday, so I'd wait a week.

You've missed a LOT in the last year. Including...

- Tau got a new codex that lets them ignore all the rules and gunline you mercilessly.

- Eldar got a new codex that gave them a partial restoration of their old skimmer cheese. Not necessarily the worst thing by itself except...

- Taudar lists have risen with an alliance of the two, combining the best of gunlines and mech gunlines into the giga-gunline.

- Stronghold assault came out, which means you can now gunline with bigger buildings, but few people take them.

- Escalation came out and said "You know all that stuff you get in apocalypse? Here, just play with them in regular 40k."

- A move towards micro-transactions by the introduction of formations and dataslates. Most of them have actually been pretty decent, but still, it's DLC in 40k. I guess at least you don't need to buy WDs anymore.

- Imperial Guard got a new codex, renaming them to the Astra Militarum. The new codex is practically identical to the old.

- We have two new armies. One is Militarum Tempestus, which is basically just guard stormtroopers: the army. The other is Imperial Knights, which basically lets you play with an army of mini-titans without needing to bother with small stuff.

- A new Inquisition codex came out with a special ally chart that lets you take them as "secondary allies" in addition to any primary force or allied force you already have.

- After less than two years on the table, 6th ed is about to get replaced by 7th. Many people are already taking rumors as absolute truths. Sane people will know what changes have actually happened in a few weeks.

- GW has been taking purposeful steps to reveal just how much 40k hasn't ever been a strategy game. Lots of serious players are comparing it to everything from forced labor deathcamps to the great Hitlersharkapocanadoquake of end times. Every one else is waiting for them to just stop playing 40k already and leave the rest of us alone with our fun.


That's all the big stuff I can think of off the top of my head.

People are making this worse than it is. Just play friendly games, not competative ones,.

How are daemons of chaos in 40k?, And is it fairly easy to magnetize the bases for use in fantasy also?

 Ailaros wrote:


- GW has been taking purposeful steps to reveal just how much 40k hasn't ever been a strategy game. Lots of serious players are comparing it to everything from forced labor deathcamps to the great Hitlersharkapocanadoquake of end times. Every one else is waiting for them to just stop playing 40k already and leave the rest of us alone with our fun.


That's all the big stuff I can think of off the top of my head.

This

 anyeri wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:


- GW has been taking purposeful steps to reveal just how much 40k hasn't ever been a strategy game. Lots of serious players are comparing it to everything from forced labor deathcamps to the great Hitlersharkapocanadoquake of end times. Every one else is waiting for them to just stop playing 40k already and leave the rest of us alone with our fun.


That's all the big stuff I can think of off the top of my head.

This

Say what you want, Alairos, we'll never agree on this one

Take Tomorrow's War. It is probably one of the best wargames I've played. And yet, if you attempt to play it outside the scenarios provided in the book, you'll find that even a small force of the US, Russia, France or Brazil can beat their DPRG or RA opponents to a pulp. This is because Tomorrow's War draws heavily from present-day combat doctrines (and its authors' extensive combat experience) and given that noone has decided to bash heads with Russia just yet, our experience in symmetrical warfare after WWII is limited to say the least. TW, like all of Ambush Alley's products, puts an emphasis on realism, and by chances of history "realism" is inextricably linked to asymmetrical and guerrilla warfare. But of course, the authors of Tomorrow's War realized it would be moot to write some rules just to show how a single fireteam armed with top-notch gear can slice through dozens of civilians armed with rusty kalashnikovs. They had to make a game. A strategy game. One in which the less fortunate Insurgent player still had the tools and tricks to outmaneouver or outsmart their better armed foes. That's why they introduced scenarios to balance things out.

Now, 40k is a strategy game too. As I've said many times in the past, it has the rules of a napoleonic wargame hidden deep at its core, and not a bad one to boot. And unlike Tomorrow's War, it is not bound by realism: They can do pretty much whatever they want. The 20+ years of history add some weight over its shoulders, true: You can't alter the generic marine statline to give them a better or worse WS or armor save without causing inordinate ammounts of rage, but they can certainly make adjustments. And of course, they can create units and rules out of thin air if they want. 40k could be a finely balanced game. But it isn't.

Blame not the rulebook. You should fight your own faction from time to time: When playing against a fellow Ork player, 6th edition 40k has unfolded before us in all its beauty. When fighting an Eldar player with six Serpents and an allied BeastStar with Sathonix, I've thrice-cursed the writers of this thrice-cursed game. Everything we hate about this game boils down to one thing: Army books. Codices.

Even the universally despised allies rule suffers from the ill effect that army books written with six or more years and sometimes a full edition of rules between them, or by separate teams or individual writers with no contact with each other, have in the game. Tomorrow's War requires scenarios to work. 40k needs not such a thing, but relies on units, their abilities and availability instead. In two weeks we'll have a nice new book that will settle things down for a while until someone inserts something in Codex: Blood Angels, Codex: Space Wolves or Codex: Orks that breaks the delicate balance again.