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.

Seeing the improvements to the leman Russ and regiment doctrines, I'm really looking forward to seeing what we'll get with Eldar and beyond (looking at you Dark Angels).
Index lists are going to be disadvantaged for a little while though.

If worried about index list disadvantage, I understand. In any campaign or tournament you can simply put codex users against their ilk and vice versa.

So far I'm rather pleased with the codex releases. Marines weren't hilariously OP like they are at the beginning of every new edition, and some of the underdogs got thrown a bone (CSM and Guard). However the GK codex was a resounding "meh" so it could go either way. I'm more anticipating Chapter Approved, as that will be GW's true test to see if they can actually balance the game or just screw it up even further.

Codexs have been a hit and miss, from a inspiration point of view. Space Marines has been good, Chaos Space Marines has been pretty good. Imperial Guard has been fantastic, at least by my metrics: It allows for a LOT of totally different but viable builds, and has a lot of character to it.

In the other hand, Grey Knights and Admechs I think have a bunch of problems and are a little... hmmm. I don't know how to express myself here. They are like, done with much less enthusiasm that the Imperial Guard or even Chaos Space Marines Codex.

I'm just hoping that the Guard codex doesn't signal the beginning of the inevitable codex creep.

No doubt Eldar or Tau will come along and have a need to 'do one better' than the others like the last 2 editions.

I'm really interested to see how they handle Nids/Orks.

 Galas wrote:
Codexs have been a hit and miss, from a inspiration point of view. Space Marines has been good, Chaos Space Marines has been pretty good. Imperial Guard has been fantastic, at least by my metrics: It allows for a LOT of totally different but viable builds, and has a lot of character to it.

In the other hand, Grey Knights and Admechs I think have a bunch of problems and are a little... hmmm. I don't know how to express myself here. They are like, done with much less enthusiasm that the Imperial Guard or even Chaos Space Marines Codex.

I would argue the Guard and CSM books both seem like such a big deal because compared to previous offerings they are just that. A lot of things CSM/IG players wanted are in the book (and a few they didn't probably), after years of lackluster releases the new stuff seems like a huge step forward.

Conversely SM have always been lavished with goodies, and this edition is no exception. Every edition SM players can expect new models and a new book fairly early in the edition cycle. All other factions occasionally use the same book across several editions and often go years without a single new model. The bar for what constitutes a particularly good release is much higher for SM. GK and Admech are doing well considering the last time CSM/IG had a decent book these factions amounted to two optional units for other factions.

AdMech, at least, have some interesting interactions with their dogmas. GK feels like it was just kicked out the door after duct taping the Chaplain and Stormtalons on (and they used whatever was left over to tape a grand master to a dreadknight).

The IG codex is either in an indicator that power creep is going to continue to rise and I will hope that the Necron book comes last or IG will be the Eldar masters of 8th, all will love them or despair. Or the third option, GW is incompetent in regards to game design and we are just seeing the range of this folly.

GK definitely felt uninspired. Just a rehash of the index and like you said a few minor changes.

With a no model release for them though I guess they didn't really have anything to build on. CSM/Ad Mech, whilst no models, they have legions/forgeworlds to build a bunch of rules and interactions out of

I don't think IG would be an indicator of power creep as from what I've seen so far the designers at least tried to tone back powerful units while buffing ones that people considered "bad" to "unusable". Just because a unit got a really nice buff doesn't automatically make it OP; people were all up in arms about how SM terminators got a point decrease in the new codex but Terminators aren't dominating the meta anymore than they were before this buff.

Now if they release the Tyranid Codex and Genestealers suddenly gained +1 attack and upgraded their invul save to 4+, then I'd call shenanigans and power creep (since Genestealers are hilariously good right now).

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I don't think IG would be an indicator of power creep as from what I've seen so far the designers at least tried to tone back powerful units

Gonna stop you right there: they buffed a few units already considered to be good, and absolutely failed to meaningfully nerf anything except scions and maybe mortar heavy weapon teams.

The IG codex is power creep, it is not compareable to previous codices in power.

SilverAlien wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I don't think IG would be an indicator of power creep as from what I've seen so far the designers at least tried to tone back powerful units

Gonna stop you right there: they buffed a few units already considered to be good, and absolutely failed to meaningfully nerf

I'm now gonna have to stop you right there.

See we haven't even seen the full rules yet beyond some second-hand posting on the internet and snippets from WarCom, so whether or not these nerfs are "meaningful" have yet to be seen. Until then, it is entirely your opinion whether or not these are effective. But at least they are nerfs, meaning GW isn't there, fingers stuck in ear, going "la la la" like they did 5 years ago. As for the buffs, people complained that Leman Russes, who were well known for their slow advance while firing due to their own rules from last edition, suddenly becoming BS5+ when they moved an inch, and Baneblades, who never suffered any sort of BS or shooting penalities before, suddenly all shoot like a drunk ork in the same situation. GW addressed both, directly. It shows a willingness to actually improve the game.

And again, this is why Chapter Approved is a far better measuring stick; they can stick whatever they want into codexes, but Chapter Approved will be their fine tuning of the game. If they screw THAT up, then we have a power creep scenario.

It seems to me that they may have different, distinct teams working on the codexes. IG reads like a labor of love, while CSM is only a workmanlike improvement and AdMech not even that.

I played with the Conscript nerf yesterday in an otherwise index list, and I think I'll be playing more regular infantry squads from now on. With both scions and conscripts, neither nerf kills the unit, but it does force a reevaluation. Scions are unique enough in their role that you'll still want them like before, but conscripts can now wiff on their Move! Move! Move! which can really throw a spanner in one's plans.

im so excited to ge some Ork clan rules again finally! I've been trying to find a pdf copy of their old rules. Skarboyz and Boar Boyz and junka trukks.

Also makes me kinda kick myself for painting every unit of Boyz in different Clan colors...

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

SilverAlien wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I don't think IG would be an indicator of power creep as from what I've seen so far the designers at least tried to tone back powerful units

Gonna stop you right there: they buffed a few units already considered to be good, and absolutely failed to meaningfully nerf

I'm now gonna have to stop you right there.

See we haven't even seen the full rules yet beyond some second-hand posting on the internet and snippets from WarCom, so whether or not these nerfs are "meaningful" have yet to be seen. Until then, it is entirely your opinion whether or not these are effective. But at least they are nerfs, meaning GW isn't there, fingers stuck in ear, going "la la la" like they did 5 years ago. As for the buffs, people complained that Leman Russes, who were well known for their slow advance while firing due to their own rules from last edition, suddenly becoming BS5+ when they moved an inch, and Baneblades, who never suffered any sort of BS or shooting penalities before, suddenly all shoot like a drunk ork in the same situation. GW addressed both, directly. It shows a willingness to actually improve the game.

And again, this is why Chapter Approved is a far better measuring stick; they can stick whatever they want into codexes, but Chapter Approved will be their fine tuning of the game. If they screw THAT up, then we have a power creep scenario.

The codex is pretty much fully revealed if you check youtube so I wouldnt consider it "second hand posting".

My point still stands, we haven't had people take these lists to competitive events and generally get a chance to play with them yet, so any declarations to the nerf being meaningful or not is speculation at best. Plus again GW has the chance to further fix them via Chapter Approved or just issue FAQs and Erratas (like they did with the flyers).

IG lists were not winning tournaments. Conscripts, Scions and Forgeworld Earthshakers in conjunction with some soup were winning tournaments. The Codex toned down 2/3 of those units (the only two it had access to) with Scion plasma guns taking a very large point cost increase. Other IG units, which had no competitive presence at all, were buffed and a bunch of very fun looking and useful rules and stratagems were added.

I think part of the problem with the perception of this Codex being "WAUW OP", even though the only, to my knowledge, game played with it so far (the TTTs game) ended with a Guard loss to a bad DG list, is that Guard have been bad for so long that people simply are not used to them being on the same level as actual competitive armies. This includes some Guard players who seem to have some kind of imperial stockholm syndrome where they've come to love being a garbage underdog after so many years of it and think that having some kind of list building freedom, on a competitive level, is a bad thing worthy of self flagellation.

The other issue is that people erroneously equated Scions, Conscripts and Earthsakers with "all of the IG" and, seeing as the Codex has numerically more buffs than nerfs, their thought process is "IG was crushing tournaments. IG was given more buffs than nerfs. More buffs than nerfs makes IG stronger, therefore, IG is stronger than before making them OP". The problem of course is what we already established, namely that "all of the IG" was not crushing tournaments, only Scions, Conscripts and FW. Even though the book contained more buffs than nerfs, the nerfs hit the units that mattered in a competitive sense. The end result is that we have no idea how IG will perform in the tournament scene yet seeing as their tournament level units were nerfed, and we will just have to wait and see.

Correction: Guard won the TTT game I mentioned (21 to 20 maelstrom points) but the game was extremely close.

 Otto von Bludd wrote:
IG lists were not winning tournaments. Conscripts, Scions and Forgeworld Earthshakers in conjunction with some soup were winning tournaments. The Codex toned down 2/3 of those units (the only two it had access to) with Scion plasma guns taking a very large point cost increase. Other IG units, which had no competitive presence at all, were buffed and a bunch of very fun looking and useful rules and stratagems were added.

I think part of the problem with the perception of this Codex being "WAUW OP", even though the only, to my knowledge, game played with it so far (the TTTs game) ended with a Guard loss to a bad DG list, is that Guard have been bad for so long that people simply are not used to them being on the same level as actual competitive armies. This includes some Guard players who seem to have some kind of imperial stockholm syndrome where they've come to love being a garbage underdog after so many years of it and think that having some kind of list building freedom, on a competitive level, is a bad thing worthy of self flagellation.

The other issue is that people erroneously equated Scions, Conscripts and Earthsakers with "all of the IG" and, seeing as the Codex has numerically more buffs than nerfs, their thought process is "IG was crushing tournaments. IG was given more buffs than nerfs. More buffs than nerfs makes IG stronger, therefore, IG is stronger than before making them OP". The problem of course is what we already established, namely that "all of the IG" was not crushing tournaments, only Scions, Conscripts and FW. Even though the book contained more buffs than nerfs, the nerfs hit the units that mattered in a competitive sense. The end result is that we have no idea how IG will perform in the tournament scene yet seeing as their tournament level units were nerfed, and we will just have to wait and see.

Well put. Much better than I did.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
im so excited to ge some Ork clan rules again finally! I've been trying to find a pdf copy of their old rules. Skarboyz and Boar Boyz and junka trukks.

Also makes me kinda kick myself for painting every unit of Boyz in different Clan colors...

Yep it is a great time to be in the hobby :-) That all of the codices that are out so far have been well revived and are roughly on the same power level makes me double as excited for the new Ork one! I don't think things like Boarboyz or Skarboyz will be making a return but I think that 'Ardboyz have a good shot at coming back.

I do wonder how many people are going to get caught out by that, most of the Ork armies that I have seen have multiple clans colours in them considering that has been part of the story for a long time.
There will be a lot of repainting going on I expect!

And before anyone jumps on me, I know that you can just proxy your models as the different clan rules. However, most people will be aiming for a fully painted up army that properly reflects the rules that they are using I imagine.

 Kroem wrote:
And before anyone jumps on me, I know that you can just proxy your models as the different clan rules. However, most people will be aiming for a fully painted up army that properly reflects the rules that they are using I imagine.

It is a nostalgia thing where I would hate to see anyone undo the old style multi-clan army but yes, it is terribly nice when people try to make their army reflect the rules.
Trying to stay in the spirit of WYSIWYG I figure is courtesy.
I would suggest picking like a shoulder plate or something that is common colour to the clan type in charge.

That's a nice idea, faster than repainting all the boyz!

What is also important to remember is that Chapter/Clan/Dynasty etc. tactics are not mandatory, you can quite happily play your army without them; especially if you are trying to tone down your list when going against a weaker opponent.

I do wish that GW had made disadvantages associated with them to make it more of a choice to take them or not rather than 'dey betta, me take'.

The huge problem is that (as an ork player) I might not have a fun game for a few months now...

I agree with those expressing that, given how flat (i.e. 'bad') the past two (several?) IG codexes have been, they seem by comparison to be OP, and perhaps even an example of Codex Creep. I don't think the IG codex, from what we've seen, is an example of creep, I think it's just the first strong codex (where 'strong' is relative to the other codexes seen in 8th edition) they've had in a long time. Years ago (4th ed.), I remember the first time I played Imperial Guard--I had never seen them before and had no idea what they did. I lost. Then, after not having seen IG for years, I played against them in 6th ed., and lost again. I hadn't spent any time reading up on IG in order to understand what their capacities were, and I paid the price for my ignorance. Once I took them seriously, I didn't lose again. There's certainly some of that going on in accounting for IG performance in 8th ed., no?

I also agree that the Grey Knights codex is, objectively, not as powerful. I would point to the difficulties in balancing an army where almost every unit has access to Smite, comes stock equipped with Force Weapon equivalents, can Deep Strike, and provide an exceedingly difficult matchup for a specific codex (Daemons). Smite Spam is unpleasant (see: Maelific Lords), so it seems possible that Grey Knights were held back out of concerns for that.

Irdiumstern wrote:
It seems to me that they may have different, distinct teams working on the codexes. IG reads like a labor of love, while CSM is only a workmanlike improvement and AdMech not even that.

I played with the Conscript nerf yesterday in an otherwise index list, and I think I'll be playing more regular infantry squads from now on. With both scions and conscripts, neither nerf kills the unit, but it does force a reevaluation. Scions are unique enough in their role that you'll still want them like before, but conscripts can now wiff on their Move! Move! Move! which can really throw a spanner in one's plans.

CSM at least buffed some of the worst stuff. I feel like my Daemon Prince has options given the horrific pricing the daemonic weapons originally had.

Grey Knights really shouldn't have been their own force. They by definition is a specialized hard counter to Daemons, who is essentially a subfaction of the bigger Chaos Faction 50% of the time. There was no way they can retain that and be a viable force on their own.

Each codex is still going to vary massively depending on

* How much time is spent on it by the design team
* If it has new models
* If it has a champion in house or just something to be knocked out in the lunch hour if no one has anything better to do than copy/paste some stuff.
* If it is part of the endless river of Marines

7th Ed codexes were all over the place - Necrons/ Eldar/Tau compared to Orks/Guard/Agents - it didn't matter when they came out - just much of the stuff above.

but of course we are stuck with the Codex system sadly.

The huge problem is that (as an ork player) I might not have a fun game for a few months now...

Not that's fine cos us Imperial players got our Codex boosts......apparently that's all good - waiting is something you should enjoy.

I think, at least, if they proceed as they've done for the IG, then things do bode well for future codecies.

They've made an effort to address units that were overpowered by directly targeting the aspects that made them overpowered, increasing the cost for Stormtrooper Plasmaguns by a fairly significant amount and decreasing the effectiveness of Conscripts under Orders.

They've also made an effort to improved units that are bad, like Leman Russ Tanks, by affecting the aspects that made them bad.

However, we'll see how well they succeed.


I think that Plasmagun Scions will still be too cheap. The squad has increased in cost by 24 points, and the cost per model increased from 16 to 22 points, which brings them closer to being in-line with comparable special-weapons units, like Sternguard [31] or Sisters Dominions [27]. However, the latter two units effectively require the purchase of a transport to achieve the Deep-Strike effect that Stormtroopers have. After purchasing your Drop Pod or Immolator, Sternguard total up to 41 per plasmagun [assuming the drop-pod is at capacity, 51 if it's just the 5 of them], and Sisters Dominions total up to ~40 [offset somewhat by the fact the tank has a gun to use].

I don't think they really needed to change Baneblades/Shadowswords/etc. that much, since they were already really good. While they didn't output as much damage as one would expect given the scale of their arsenal, and especially comparing them to Knights, their assault-proofing was worth a lot. I think that combining a D6 increase in fire output, to make no mention of the change to the Shadowsword's shot count, with a 40-point reduction in cost will make them possibly dangerously overpowered, especially the Shadowsword.

Leman Russes probably weren't buffed enough, unless the Manticore was severely nerfed. Even firing twice, the Leman Russ doesn't quite match the Manticore in effectiveness. The Manticore is S10 and NLoS. The Leman Russ at 152 still won't exceed a 133 point Manticore in any capacity, considering the Manticore can mitigate it's marginally reduced vulnerability by hiding completely out of line-of-effect. The change really does benefit the Punisher, though, which might begin to make its way into lists as a viable unit, especially considering that it now can compete with the Wyvern and with Mortars.

I'm not sure about HWT's. I think Mortars were the offending element, not the unit as a whole, as I can't say I was particularly keen on any other loadout. I'm also not entirely certain that a 6-point increase per squad is going to affect the unit.

Conscripts are a big point of contention. I don't think they're going to be going away from "soup" lists, as they've been termed. Their function has been preserved, but I think that removing Orders entirely would have been necessary to reduce their egregious effectiveness at non-secondary functionalities.



With regards to Regimental Doctrines...
Of the ones we've seen, Catachan might just outright be the best. Infantry is lacklustre, but the tank one is so good.
Cadia is probably second best. Re-rolling ones pairs with the unique tank command to mimic Catachan on Leman Russes, but you can't issue orders to Manticores, and extra shots is better than re-roll 1's.
Valhalla's is redundant and mostly pointless for infantry. For tanks, it at least makes them almost as resilient as advertised, so it might be good if you're running ABG, but it doesn't help Manticores.
Vostroya's is at best situationally useful, and will only have an effect about once per game every 5 games. Worthless for tanks.
Armageddon's is superior to Vostroya's on Infantry, but still will prove useful rarely, and it's effect on tanks might as well not exist.
The Mordians' isn't worthwhile in any way, there's nothing really more to be said. It will, at least, trigger more than Vostroya's.
Tallarn's is decent, all things considered. It helps out the secondary battery of Leman Russes, so I'd place it on par with Valhalla. Al-harem's strategem is probably better than Chenkov's, but Chenkov.

I'd say, ranking them:
Catachan
Cadian
Tallarnian
Valhallan
Armageddon
Mordian
Vostroyan

Their specific strategems and unique orders may, of course make them preferable depending on your list, but considering that Catachan offers you Harker and reliably better shot counts from all your artillery.

I agree with MechaEmperor7000 in the fact that even if the Conscripts nerfs aren't enough, the fact that GW has nerfed them shows how they are aware of them. The same goes for Scions, and for the buffs of LemanRusses, Baneblades, etc...
As much as you like to say that this Codex is pure powercreep and crap (And you can have a point in the Stratagems and Warlords Traits/Reliquis part, I'm not gonna discuss that), the part that affects units I think even if needs more fine tuning, shows how GW has actually do something with all the complaints people had. If what they have done is enough, time will tell, but the fact that at least they have done something is quite inspiring.

And Grey Knights have the same problem that Sisters of Silence. They are a highly specialized army, so theres only two ways then can work:
-They are a competitive army by themselves, but then have bonuses against deamons, what makes them OP against deamons.
-They are competitive against deaemons but by comparison they are weaker than all the rest of the armies, what makes them pretty bad.

They are in the second state now.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

SilverAlien wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I don't think IG would be an indicator of power creep as from what I've seen so far the designers at least tried to tone back powerful units

Gonna stop you right there: they buffed a few units already considered to be good, and absolutely failed to meaningfully nerf

I'm now gonna have to stop you right there.

See we haven't even seen the full rules yet beyond some second-hand posting on the internet and snippets from WarCom, so whether or not these nerfs are "meaningful" have yet to be seen. Until then, it is entirely your opinion whether or not these are effective. But at least they are nerfs, meaning GW isn't there, fingers stuck in ear, going "la la la" like they did 5 years ago. As for the buffs, people complained that Leman Russes, who were well known for their slow advance while firing due to their own rules from last edition, suddenly becoming BS5+ when they moved an inch, and Baneblades, who never suffered any sort of BS or shooting penalities before, suddenly all shoot like a drunk ork in the same situation. GW addressed both, directly. It shows a willingness to actually improve the game.

And again, this is why Chapter Approved is a far better measuring stick; they can stick whatever they want into codexes, but Chapter Approved will be their fine tuning of the game. If they screw THAT up, then we have a power creep scenario.

I mostly agree but I'm not sure all Baneblade variants also needed to get a number of shots buff to their main cannons. A Shadowshord was already plenty scary with a D6 Volcano Cannon, a 3D3 Volcano Cannon sounded like cheese to me when I first heard it. Or Mordians with a 4+ overwatch when they use a stratagem. Of course, I'll have to see it on the table before drawing any final conclusions but that's how I feel about it right now.

I think the reason for the extra shots buff on the superheavy cannons was because now, essentially, Leman Russes are 2d6 shots. So they wanted to differentiate more and say "the baneblade cannon is REALLY POWERFUL" and also having 2d6 shots seemed less than really powerful to them.

That said, I agree with you, they're stupid good.