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.

Like the title says, I was reading through the AT codex going "Cool, these models look neat, I like those APC"

.... flip to the unit choices...


"Wtf, there are 4 things in this codex and 2 of them are HQs)

What gives? Is this a suppliment to AM or is this actually meant to be a joke of a stand alone codex?

Stand alone codex. Like a strikeforce.
It should really have just been a supplement...

Militarum tempestus is a standalone codex.

Astra militarum has them as an elite choice, but they dont get their own orders, nor do they become troops.

Militarum Tempestus is the new term for Stormtroopers. They have a codex that comprises of 4 units, all of which are found in the AM codex, because GW likes money and knows that weak-willed and/or wealthy 40K fans would spend money on such a product, which they did.

ohh my gad guise, stahp dissing MT players

They're better off than LotD players

Really, the only codex worth being called a standalone so far is the Imperial Knights one. And even there, GW could have brainstormed more knight variants within 2 afternoon hours, but nope.

To be fair I'm happy the MT got a stand alone codex since it meant I never had to buy the AM one as well.

Thats just me though.

It also means you can ally AT to AM.

Blatant money grab by GW.

Nothing more, nothing less.

It's a lame attempt at a stand-alone Stormtrooper codex. They put very minimal effort into it, and it's not a terribly popular list, could easily have been folded into the main IG book. If you want a more interesting "Stormtrooper" army, check out IA12 and the Death Korps Assault Brigade.

I have to say that the MT command squad trumps the AM command squad in every possible way. Deepstrike? Check. Better guns? Check. Can give orders? Check.

It's a fairly barebones stand-alone codex that I think was meant to be allied for more degrees of freedom. I really like the scion models and idea of a Elysian-style army (with half the cost), so for what it's worth it works for me.

I don't think it will ever really be competitive. They're like IG meets DE. You have the most mobile army in the game, but unless you use it well and able to cripple your opponent turns 1-2 you aren't going to win with T3 4+ models.

They're also pretty cool to use with the built-in dataslate formations, especially since you can reroll your failed reserve rolls (making sudden death less likely)

I like the mt codex, they let me field them and benefit from their formations without buying into a pos am codex. I hopeople that next year gw boosts their army size and gives them a while bunch of New toys to play with. That would be cool . Id like to see a specific mbt and maybe a new commander I'd be a happy panda then.

 ionusx wrote:
I like the mt codex, they let me field them and benefit from their formations without buying into a pos am codex. I hopeople that next year gw boosts their army size and gives them a while bunch of New toys to play with. That would be cool . Id like to see a specific mbt and maybe a new commander I'd be a happy panda then.

So you're seriously saying you would be happy if GW move toward doing "codexes" with a handful of units in them and make people buy the rest of the unit rules as dataslates / DLC ?

... you want the Stormtroopers, who specialise in rapid aerial insertion, to get a main battle tank?

Does not compute.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
... you want the Stormtroopers, who specialise in rapid aerial insertion, to get a main battle tank?

Does not compute.

It's not like specialist troops sometimes work with other elements of the armed forces... or in multiple roles...

 SilverMK2 wrote:


It's not like specialist troops sometimes work with other elements of the armed forces... or in multiple roles...

It's not like we don't have an Allies system for that...

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:


It's not like specialist troops sometimes work with other elements of the armed forces... or in multiple roles...

It's not like we don't have an Allies system for that...

Sure, but you seemed to be agast that someone would run stormtroopers in some other fashion than that laid out in the 4 unit rip off that is the MT "codex". Personally a few more potential roles in the MT book would have been interesting to see, along with the appopriate hardware (suitably limited in terms of total number per force).

The problem is, the Stormtroopers are a single regiment with a specific role.

The problem with the Guard book, as with all Guard books, is that it doesn't really line up with the fluff organisation of the Guard.

Codex organisation: An army is made of a single regiment that contains infantry, tanks and aircraft, with abhuman and telepathica auxiliaries.

Fluff organisation: an army is made of many regiments, some of which provide infantry, some of which provide tanks, and some of which provide abhumans with the navy, telepathica, and other organisations providing the additional units.

In that sense, the Scion codex is complete. The only things you could really add are more types of infantry and additional navy support units. An ideal solution would be to have a separate army list (preferably held within the same codex) for each regimental type - light infantry, heavy infantry, tank regiment, and so on - and allow them to be taken as Detachments using the "multiple detachments if battleforged" rules.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
The problem is, the Stormtroopers are a single regiment with a specific role.

The problem with the Guard book, as with all Guard books, is that it doesn't really line up with the fluff organisation of the Guard.

Codex organisation: An army is made of a single regiment that contains infantry, tanks and aircraft, with abhuman and telepathica auxiliaries.

Fluff organisation: an army is made of many regiments, some of which provide infantry, some of which provide tanks, and some of which provide abhumans with the navy, telepathica, and other organisations providing the additional units.

In that sense, the Scion codex is complete. The only things you could really add are more types of infantry and additional navy support units. An ideal solution would be to have a separate army list (preferably held within the same codex) for each regimental type - light infantry, heavy infantry, tank regiment, and so on - and allow them to be taken as Detachments using the "multiple detachments if battleforged" rules.

Please consider re-reading the fluff section of the AM codex. It clearly states there that regiments regularly feature all of the units you mentioned above as these are attached to them by higher ups.

 knas ser wrote:

 ionusx wrote:
I like the mt codex, they let me field them and benefit from their formations without buying into a pos am codex. I hopeople that next year gw boosts their army size and gives them a while bunch of New toys to play with. That would be cool . Id like to see a specific mbt and maybe a new commander I'd be a happy panda then.

So you're seriously saying you would be happy if GW move toward doing "codexes" with a handful of units in them and make people buy the rest of the unit rules as dataslates / DLC ?

no what I'm saying is that as a standalone army they have a lot of potential and that I could see myself running an army of them standalone if they flesh out their unit options more. If possible I'd like to see a tank, perhaps an artillery piece or a variant on the sentinel. I'd pay good money if they got some cool options in the future.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Militarum Tempestus is the new term for Stormtroopers. They have a codex that comprises of 4 units, all of which are found in the AM codex, because GW likes money and knows that weak-willed and/or wealthy 40K fans would spend money on such a product, which they did.

Half the time people complain they do not get enough codex choices.
Half the time they complain GW is a bunch of money grubbing pirates.

Maybe they are a buisness that recognizes a want and are fulfilling it?

Unless you WANT them to go out of business?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ionusx wrote:

 knas ser wrote:

 ionusx wrote:
I like the mt codex, they let me field them and benefit from their formations without buying into a pos am codex. I hopeople that next year gw boosts their army size and gives them a while bunch of New toys to play with. That would be cool . Id like to see a specific mbt and maybe a new commander I'd be a happy panda then.

So you're seriously saying you would be happy if GW move toward doing "codexes" with a handful of units in them and make people buy the rest of the unit rules as dataslates / DLC ?

no what I'm saying is that as a standalone army they have a lot of potential and that I could see myself running an army of them standalone if they flesh out their unit options more. If possible I'd like to see a tank, perhaps an artillery piece or a variant on the sentinel. I'd pay good money if they got some cool options in the future.

Which is what the allies system is for.


Storm troopers usually work with space marines as large forces right?

They are elite in the AM codex as that is their role in that part of the military.

 Blacksails wrote:
Blatant money grab by GW.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Then why include all of those units in the AM codex? There is no logic to that whatsoever.

KommissarKarl wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Blatant money grab by GW.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Then why include all of those units in the AM codex? There is no logic to that whatsoever.

Well, my understanding of the release of C:MT was the following:

It came out one week before the release of C:AM, correspondingly with the Scions and Taurox kits. I heard a lot of stories about customers purchasing C:MT thinking it was C:AM. Now, is it the customers fault they didn't educate themselves better about what they were buying? Of course, I'm not disputing that. But it feels lousy; the codex went to being out-of-stock in most places, and then eventually made it back to direct-only. And in conjunction, C:MT cost the exact same amount as C:AM, even though C:MT contains only maybe a 5th of the units as C:AM, most of which are already in C:AM as it stands! You are basically paying for a small segment of the Astra Militarum codex with a couple of formations and orders sprinkled in.

All of that coupled with the fact that C:MT contained a lot of stretched-out fluff (i.e. pictures of Scions all in the same pose, with different uniforms) and it just felt like the book was very much a cash-grab. That's not to say the book couldn't have been released, I just think charging full price was pretty lousy.

KommissarKarl wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Blatant money grab by GW.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Then why include all of those units in the AM codex? There is no logic to that whatsoever.

That's exactly my point!

Nothing GW makes sense, and it was a quick way to get people to buy an expensive book before the IG book. People actually bought it in confusion thinking it was the IG book.

Further, it allowed them to make this book with one or two 'exclusive' features that aren't in the IG book (the two formations and scion orders) to entice people to buy it.

Regardless, its a cheap, lazy way to squeeze more money out of people without putting in any real effort to make a product worth buying.

Garbage.

The Knights Codex is 2 units, well really 1 unit with a different weapon option hah. While I actually still really like it, I think it should be cheaper.

Yeah, that's another codex I don't like. Not because Knights break the game (I don't think they do...entirely. Maybe just the Knights-for-days armies), but because there is literally one unit in the entire book. The fluff, from my understanding, is a bit better since it's not as rehashed and repetitive, but then again I could be wrong about that. It's just way too expensive for what it is.

The only thing I can see that could be redeeming is FW adding content to it through releases of additional knights. The Knight lancer has rules that fit right into the codex:

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/L/lancer.pdf

As usual FW seems to be doing things right. I don't really get why GW can't do the same

Well ...I dunno how the same 40K community that loves to hate GW gives FW a pass; I love the FW sculpts but everything is that horrible RESIN and the models cost a Fortune! ...the rules are 'balanced' in that they have very little variety (like space marines versus space marines). Heck I'm still onboard haha, I just prefer GW plastic.

The reason I'm giving Forgeworld a pass on this is (1) the rules for the Lancer are free and explained how they can be implemented in the Knights codex.

I won't argue that the models aren't insanely expensive; I don't hate the resin and I feel like the details of their kits are much better. That, in conjunction with GW prices getting closer to or even surpassing FW, and I tend to be more supportive of FW.

Oh, also they're going to be at the GenCon this year! (I'm moving up to Indy for grad school, so it's a happy coincidence) It seems to me that FW at least tries to work for their customers, maybe that's why I don't balk at them so much.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:


It's not like specialist troops sometimes work with other elements of the armed forces... or in multiple roles...

It's not like we don't have an Allies system for that...

Well, actually, you don't. You can take IG and AT as two separate Combined Arms Detachments (so minimum 1 HQ, 2 Troops in each) but you cannot take one as your Primary Detachment and the other as an Allied Detachment (Allied detachment cannot be same Faction as Primary, and supplements are considered same faction as codex they are a supplement of).

What you can also do tho (unless AT has something that says otherwise) is include units from BOTH codexes in the same CAD, since CAD is limited to a single Faction, not to a single Codex. So AT Command squad, AT Troops choice, IG Troops choice, IG Heavy choice, etc etc.

 Gunzhard wrote:
and the models cost a Fortune!

if you order from forgeworld...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 don_mondo wrote:
What you can also do tho (unless AT has something that says otherwise) is include units from BOTH codexes in the same CAD, since CAD is limited to a single Faction, not to a single Codex. So AT Command squad, AT Troops choice, IG Troops choice, IG Heavy choice, etc etc.

So the minimum 1 HQ and 2 Troops requirements for a AM/MT Combined Arms Detachment could be 1 MT Command Squad, 1 Stormtrooper Scion squad, and 1 IG Veteran squad?