Errata for Chapter Approved 2019?

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.

**ikeulhu**

March FAQ? Did everyone forget that became the April FAQ and are having unrealistic FAQ release expectations or did I miss something?

**AngryAngel80**

Lord Damocles wrote:
Ah; two weeks, four months - is there really any difference?

Four months is the new two weeks, thought we all knew that.

Edit: I did forget that FAQ thing is always delayed now, well there we go. Begun this April wait has.

**Apple fox**

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I mean I have plenty of army builds I find silly and don't enjoy, but wanting all of a certain thing gone because it's not my thing seems a bit poor taste eh ? As well FW is more than just dreads you realize.

I'll say I used to run a heavy dread force back in 4th ed as you could run an iron hands like list with a master of the forge commander and then use dreads in elites and heavy support and I'm one of the people who did. So you could say I like my dreads and have some in near every marine army I have, which is a few.

I think some army such as a full dread force are fine as a for fun thing, but really screw with the game balance as a whole outside of that.

Really they should encourage these sort of army with a core and support idea to design, or risk pushing the game more into bland specialty army’s that push more at the game design towards breaking.

**AngryAngel80**

Back in the day I'd have agreed but now with how the game works, full dread games don't break the game at all. They are basically just big infantry for most purposes. Though this isn't the time or place to keep up this Dread talk lest we draw down the wrath from above.

**Dysartes**

Apple fox wrote:
I think some army such as a full dread force are fine as a for fun thing, but really screw with the game balance as a whole outside of that.

Like an all Stormtrooper army would, if you had the HQ options to make it a reality?

**AngryAngel80**

Yeah them all storm trooper armies, they give me the creeps. That's why I made one.

**Not Online!!!**

Apple fox wrote:
AngryAngel80 wrote:
I mean I have plenty of army builds I find silly and don't enjoy, but wanting all of a certain thing gone because it's not my thing seems a bit poor taste eh ? As well FW is more than just dreads you realize.

I'll say I used to run a heavy dread force back in 4th ed as you could run an iron hands like list with a master of the forge commander and then use dreads in elites and heavy support and I'm one of the people who did. So you could say I like my dreads and have some in near every marine army I have, which is a few.

I think some army such as a full dread force are fine as a for fun thing, but really screw with the game balance as a whole outside of that.

Really they should encourage these sort of army with a core and support idea to design, or risk pushing the game more into bland specialty army’s that push more at the game design towards breaking.

Honestly, the all dreads army as Fun as it is, is mostly gw's fault due to slots for roles beeing basically available freely . Which is generally a symptom of the failings of the underlying detachment system.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Yeah them all storm trooper armies, they give me the creeps. That's why I made one.

Laughs in mechanized r&h.

Then remembers i ain't have any trait or special rule..

**ingtaer**

Seems staying on topic is really difficult for some people so I am locking this. Feel free to start a new thread when the errata comes out.