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.

 Redbeard wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

It'd be great if your side wouldn't ignore half of that paragraph every single time. Thanks.

No one ignored anything. The part that you seem to think we're ignoring doesn't actually say anything about the models being invalid. It says that it's polite to make sure your opponent is happy. That line applies equally to non-FW stuff, as far as I'm concerned.

"Want to play a game of 40k?"
Doesn't have different implications than
"Want to play a game of 40k with Forge World models?"
to you?

Yes, I guess when it comes down to it, I dislike allowing Forgeworld because of unit envy. Nids get Stonecrusher Carnifexes (yay?), Malanthropes (yay?) and ... what else really? Am I missing a really useful unit?

Those big spore mines are pretty cool.

Meiotic Spores are extremely "meh" as far as I'm concerned. They don't really solve any problems the codex has.

Between allies and native units every other codex gets access to at least a dozen new useful units.

Sounds like you're more upset about allies than FW.

I bolded the part you missed.

Ultimately I don't care one way or the other, I'll just end up griping.

Well, that explains a lot. If you don't care, why are you taking part in the debate?

I cared when I started, I've come to not care. Mostly because I play for fun, I'll rarely if ever go to any tournaments outside my local one (mostly because I can't afford to), and fighting over what pieces of plastic/resin/metal to allow on the table isn't fun.

Hulksmash wrote:

As a side not I'm cool with forgeworld. All the extra AA means that flyers would go away

Why? It's not like they auto-kill flyers, they're just capable against them, and typically are rather easily engaged and destroyed themselves.

Unless all you're playing is something like Cron air with 8 flyers and are anticipating facing nothing but a wall of AA guns, it's probably not going to make a huge difference. People *might* take some AA units, probably not tons of them, and while they'll be better against flyers than most units, it's not like they'll be so much more effective against flyers than their non-skyfire equivalents are against normal vehicles.

You're grossly overstating the effect these AA guns will have.

and my 5th edition armies would be back to performing excellently. Down with flyers and 6th edition

I have yet to see a reason why 5th edition armies would be so "back" just because flyers would be gone (which is a rather silly assumption). With the hilarious fragility of 5E vehicles and changes to transported units, not to mention wound allocation, they'll never work again the same way.


There's absolutely no reason either of these things (disappearance of flyers and return to 5E lists) would come to pass.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Why? It's not like they auto-kill flyers, they're just capable against them, and typically are rather easily engaged and destroyed themselves.

Unless all you're playing is something like Cron air with 8 flyers and are anticipating facing nothing but a wall of AA guns, it's probably not going to make a huge difference. People *might* take some AA units, probably not tons of them, and while they'll be better against flyers than most units, it's not like they'll be so much more effective against flyers than their non-skyfire equivalents are against normal vehicles.

You're grossly overstating the effect these AA guns will have.

Go read the Interceptor rules and then get back to me. It turns out that getting guaranteed shots on enemy units before they ever get a chance to attack is quite strong!

 mwnciboo wrote:

If we don't draw a line, people will be saying "I want Apocalypse rules in Standard Tourneys, so I can have Warhounds and Titanhammer Squads, or a Massive Leman Russ Squadron - Emperors Fist etc etc or a Thunderhawk Gunship or this FoC . People have got to be more reasonable, no one forces you to pay top dollar for FW resin stuff, it's nice, but it's pretty stupid to bitch about not getting to use it. Kind of like buying a Ferrari and then moaning about the Fuel and Insurance Costs.

Slippery slope much? The stuff we're arguing about is not the Titans and similar units, it's the ones that explicitly say they're meant for "normal" 40k.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Jesus Redbeard. The words "This Official Codex for Sisters of Battle" on the first page of the article tells you this is their official codex. You're reaching bro.

 Hulksmash wrote:

Specifically stated as Official updates to the codexes. Not units that can be used in 40k like Forgeworld. Actual, physical updates to the codex. There is a difference.

But how do we know to look there in the first place? After all, everything we need to know is in the Codex.

 Kingsley wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Why? It's not like they auto-kill flyers, they're just capable against them, and typically are rather easily engaged and destroyed themselves.

Unless all you're playing is something like Cron air with 8 flyers and are anticipating facing nothing but a wall of AA guns, it's probably not going to make a huge difference. People *might* take some AA units, probably not tons of them, and while they'll be better against flyers than most units, it's not like they'll be so much more effective against flyers than their non-skyfire equivalents are against normal vehicles.

You're grossly overstating the effect these AA guns will have.

Go read the Interceptor rules and then get back to me. It turns out that getting guaranteed shots on enemy units before they ever get a chance to attack is quite strong!

Remember how the gun can't shoot on its next turn if it takes an Interceptor shot?

Its also done at the end of the enemy movement phase. So the final position of the target is important. Which means you can plan out the movement to avoid the guns.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Why? It's not like they auto-kill flyers, they're just capable against them, and typically are rather easily engaged and destroyed themselves.

Unless all you're playing is something like Cron air with 8 flyers and are anticipating facing nothing but a wall of AA guns, it's probably not going to make a huge difference. People *might* take some AA units, probably not tons of them, and while they'll be better against flyers than most units, it's not like they'll be so much more effective against flyers than their non-skyfire equivalents are against normal vehicles.

You're grossly overstating the effect these AA guns will have.

Go read the Interceptor rules and then get back to me. It turns out that getting guaranteed shots on enemy units before they ever get a chance to attack is quite strong!

Remember how the gun can't shoot on its next turn if it takes an Interceptor shot?

Its also done at the end of the enemy movement phase. So the final position of the target is important. Which means you can plan out the movement to avoid the guns.

I thought the wording was when a model arrives by deep strike or a flyer enters from reserves. Don't have my brb at work to double check myself so apologies if I have it wrong,

Yes, it's when a unit arrives from reserves within range and line of sight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
But how do we know to look there in the first place? After all, everything we need to know is in the Codex.

And according to the rules in the White Dwarf, the pages from it are considered to be in the Codex.

 Kingsley wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Why? It's not like they auto-kill flyers, they're just capable against them, and typically are rather easily engaged and destroyed themselves.

Unless all you're playing is something like Cron air with 8 flyers and are anticipating facing nothing but a wall of AA guns, it's probably not going to make a huge difference. People *might* take some AA units, probably not tons of them, and while they'll be better against flyers than most units, it's not like they'll be so much more effective against flyers than their non-skyfire equivalents are against normal vehicles.

You're grossly overstating the effect these AA guns will have.

Go read the Interceptor rules and then get back to me. It turns out that getting guaranteed shots on enemy units before they ever get a chance to attack is quite strong!

You mean, like going first?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 OverwatchCNC wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Why? It's not like they auto-kill flyers, they're just capable against them, and typically are rather easily engaged and destroyed themselves.

Unless all you're playing is something like Cron air with 8 flyers and are anticipating facing nothing but a wall of AA guns, it's probably not going to make a huge difference. People *might* take some AA units, probably not tons of them, and while they'll be better against flyers than most units, it's not like they'll be so much more effective against flyers than their non-skyfire equivalents are against normal vehicles.

You're grossly overstating the effect these AA guns will have.

Go read the Interceptor rules and then get back to me. It turns out that getting guaranteed shots on enemy units before they ever get a chance to attack is quite strong!

Remember how the gun can't shoot on its next turn if it takes an Interceptor shot?

Its also done at the end of the enemy movement phase. So the final position of the target is important. Which means you can plan out the movement to avoid the guns.

I thought the wording was when a model arrives by deep strike or a flyer enters from reserves. Don't have my brb at work to double check myself so apologies if I have it wrong,

It's at the end of the movement phase, after all movement that turn. So you can move on your Night Scythe and jump out the unit in front of that Sabre Def line and thn your opponent has to decide what to shoot at.
In a 6 Night Scythe in a Flying Circus list you have 4 coming on with troops and most likely only have 2-3 interceptor units so you do the math.

 Dugg wrote:
You mean, like going first?

Yes, like going first. Every time you have something come in from reserves. Which includes every time you have a flyer come on the board after it flies off the board.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Dugg wrote:
You mean, like going first?

Yes, like going first. Every time you have something come in from reserves. Which includes every time you have a flyer come on the board after it flies off the board.

and in a say 1750point list do you really think that 1 AA unit, maybe 2 or 3 tops would last for more then 2 turns? Everyone seems to think these AA units are indestructible and will be on the board for the whole game.

I've play tested the Cron Flyers vs Sabre Def Line units and 2 Sabre squads only last unit Turn 2 on average sometime one will last unit turn 3. They average 2 Night Scythe kills when one lasts unit end of Turn 2 and 1 makes it unit end of Turn 3.

If you use Sabre Defense Platforms correctly, they are toughness 7 with many wounds and have 2+ cover saves against everything.

If your army can deal with that easily, I'd like to see your list...

 Hulksmash wrote:
Jesus Redbeard. The words "This Official Codex for Sisters of Battle" on the first page of the article tells you this is their official codex. You're reaching bro.

Honestly, i had no idea it said that. Because, while i have a decent sized sisters army (my first army, btw), i was notable to get those white dwarves, as they'd sold out. But that's okay, because at least all the codexes are readily available, while FW rules are hard to find, right...

I guess that does raise another question too. WD is a separate entity from the GW design studio, much like how FW is a separate entity. So, why is it okay for WD to say 'this is official' and no one questions the legality of their statement, but when FW does the same, there's a huge debate about whether they're a gw company. The BRB doesn't say anything about white dwarf, so if the argument is that only publications included by the BRB count, then white dwarf calling a couple of their articles a codex isn't really valid...


Yeah, that's dumb. But so is the whole line of thought that says fw is illegal because only the fw books say they are leg.

*Side note - When running Orks I have taking control of my opponents Aegis Def Guns 8 out of 9 times I've gone up against it by Turn 2 and used it to shoot down their flyers as they come on. haha!!! This game is so fun, crazy and AWESOME!

rigeld2 wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
But how do we know to look there in the first place? After all, everything we need to know is in the Codex.

And according to the rules in the White Dwarf, the pages from it are considered to be in the Codex.

That's not the point though. How do we know to check the WD in the first place?

 Redbeard wrote:
So, why is it okay for WD to say 'this is official' and no one questions the legality of their statement, but when FW does the same, there's a huge debate about whether they're a gw company. The BRB doesn't say anything about white dwarf, so if the argument is that only publications included by the BRB count, then white dwarf calling a couple of their articles a codex isn't really valid...

Historical precedent. WD used to print rules all the time and has restarted doing so, and FW has always said that their rules are not for normal 40k. Now FW is trying to "invade" (I used quotes to not offend) non-FW 40k it's obviously going to be met with resistance. Also, the fact that the WD rules (not the Sisters dex, but the Stormtalon etc) are being incorporated into the GW digital releases lends to the "authenticity" of WD.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
But how do we know to look there in the first place? After all, everything we need to know is in the Codex.

And according to the rules in the White Dwarf, the pages from it are considered to be in the Codex.

That's not the point though. How do we know to check the WD in the first place?

... Because you read it?
You read the White Dwarf. You find rules you want to use. You check if it's viable. Oh look - it's a Codex update, so it's viable.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 mwnciboo wrote:

If we don't draw a line, people will be saying "I want Apocalypse rules in Standard Tourneys, so I can have Warhounds and Titanhammer Squads, or a Massive Leman Russ Squadron - Emperors Fist etc etc or a Thunderhawk Gunship or this FoC . People have got to be more reasonable, no one forces you to pay top dollar for FW resin stuff, it's nice, but it's pretty stupid to bitch about not getting to use it. Kind of like buying a Ferrari and then moaning about the Fuel and Insurance Costs.

Slippery slope much? The stuff we're arguing about is not the Titans and similar units, it's the ones that explicitly say they're meant for "normal" 40k.

Can you give me a list of Units meant for Normal 40k? Do you mean Contemptors? Razorbacks with Multi-melta's? Predators with Conversion Beamer turrets? Landraider Terminus Ultra's, Achilles Pattern Land Raiders? As far as I'm concerned, if it isn't in a Codex /FAQ/ ERRATA it's not "normal" 40k. I have quite a few of the IA books, the Badab Campaign ones which have some amazing Special Characters in there with amazing Statlines (sons of Medusa no less ) I would never use them in a normal Campaign, nor would I expect me to be able to use these units in a Tourney Game unless it explicitly state that FW units within the following limits were allowed. Even then I don't normally both because it is too expensive in points. Everyone keeps spazzing out on this and it's a none issue.

 Kingsley wrote:
If you use Sabre Defense Platforms correctly, they are toughness 7 with many wounds and have 2+ cover saves against everything.

If your army can deal with that easily, I'd like to see your list...

Bikers, Jump Units or any Template/No Cover shots to start. They fail a LD7 check and fall back the platforms are removed as casualties as well.

 OverwatchCNC wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Why? It's not like they auto-kill flyers, they're just capable against them, and typically are rather easily engaged and destroyed themselves.

Unless all you're playing is something like Cron air with 8 flyers and are anticipating facing nothing but a wall of AA guns, it's probably not going to make a huge difference. People *might* take some AA units, probably not tons of them, and while they'll be better against flyers than most units, it's not like they'll be so much more effective against flyers than their non-skyfire equivalents are against normal vehicles.

You're grossly overstating the effect these AA guns will have.

Go read the Interceptor rules and then get back to me. It turns out that getting guaranteed shots on enemy units before they ever get a chance to attack is quite strong!

Remember how the gun can't shoot on its next turn if it takes an Interceptor shot?

Its also done at the end of the enemy movement phase. So the final position of the target is important. Which means you can plan out the movement to avoid the guns.

I thought the wording was when a model arrives by deep strike or a flyer enters from reserves. Don't have my brb at work to double check myself so apologies if I have it wrong,

Its any model coming in from reserves
After having a tourny last weekend (yea I know ive mentioned it a few times), there was a LOT of AA guns there, from sabres to hyperios, one guy had 12 hyperios defence launchers stuck behind a aegis another had quite a few sabres in with big blobs of IG behind aegis. Demons got battered by the AA guns and so did flyers and so did drop pod armies, I did hear of fatewaever getting killed on his first turn on the board...

Yes it cannot shoot the next turn but it can shoot the next opponents turn so anything else coming in from reserves then will get intercepted.

I only run 3 of the hyperios without a defence line I lost one of them in 6 games, they are pretty tough and cant be locked in combat either

@ MarkyMark - Did you have them in one squad or what?

 Dugg wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
If you use Sabre Defense Platforms correctly, they are toughness 7 with many wounds and have 2+ cover saves against everything.

If your army can deal with that easily, I'd like to see your list...

Bikers, Jump Units or any Template/No Cover shots to start. They fail a LD7 check and fall back the platforms are removed as casualties as well.

Um. Not true. You only remove the guns if there aren't enough gunners to man them.

page 46 BRB wrote:Because they need at least one
crewman per gun in order for the unit
to move, if an Artillery unit does not
have one crewman per gun when it is
forced to Fall Back, any gun models
without crewmen are abandoned and
immediately removed as casualties.

Kingsley wrote:

Go read the Interceptor rules and then get back to me. It turns out that getting guaranteed shots on enemy units before they ever get a chance to attack is quite strong!

I'm not saying it isn't useful, I'm saying it's not auto-killing them however by any means, and most of these platforms are relatively easily destroyed themselves. They're not doing anything an Aegis gun, or that anything coming in from reserve itself (such as...well, flyers!), isn't doing as well. They don't have a particularly huge chance to kill a flyer outright, and between mediocre BS on most and Jink, you're looking at typically inflicting only one HP worth of damage with most AA platforms utilizing Interceptor attacks.


I'm just having a hard time seeing where "zomg my fliers actually might face a credible threat once in a while" translates to "flyers are going to disappear and we're all going to be back to playing 5E and 40k is ruined!"

rigeld2 wrote:

 Dugg wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
If you use Sabre Defense Platforms correctly, they are toughness 7 with many wounds and have 2+ cover saves against everything.

If your army can deal with that easily, I'd like to see your list...

Bikers, Jump Units or any Template/No Cover shots to start. They fail a LD7 check and fall back the platforms are removed as casualties as well.

Um. Not true. You only remove the guns if there aren't enough gunners to man them.

page 46 BRB wrote:Because they need at least one
crewman per gun in order for the unit
to move, if an Artillery unit does not
have one crewman per gun when it is
forced to Fall Back, any gun models
without crewmen are abandoned and
immediately removed as casualties.

IA Aeronautica pg26 Sabre Weapons Battery

..., when called upon to fall back the crew must leave their guns behind and Fall Back, the platforms are then removed as casualties.

 mwnciboo wrote:

Can you give me a list of Units meant for Normal 40k? Do you mean Contemptors? Razorbacks with Multi-melta's? Predators with Conversion Beamer turrets? Landraider Terminus Ultra's, Achilles Pattern Land Raiders? As far as I'm concerned, if it isn't in a Codex /FAQ/ ERRATA it's not "normal" 40k. I have quite a few of the IA books, the Badab Campaign ones which have some amazing Special Characters in there with amazing Statlines (sons of Medusa no less ) I would never use them in a normal Campaign, nor would I expect me to be able to use these units in a Tourney Game unless it explicitly state that FW units within the following limits were allowed. Even then I don't normally both because it is too expensive in points. Everyone keeps spazzing out on this and it's a none issue.

The latest Forge World books clearly label what's intended for "normal" 40k and what isn't.

rigeld2 wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
But how do we know to look there in the first place? After all, everything we need to know is in the Codex.

And according to the rules in the White Dwarf, the pages from it are considered to be in the Codex.

That's not the point though. How do we know to check the WD in the first place?

... Because you read it?
You read the White Dwarf. You find rules you want to use. You check if it's viable. Oh look - it's a Codex update, so it's viable.

But then...

*looks at Land Raider Achilles in IA:Apoc 2nd ed*

"A Land Raider Achilles is a Heavy Support choice in a Codex Space Marines, Codex Black Templars, Codex Space Wolves or Codex Dark Angels army." So it's an entry in a book published by GW saying it's a Heavy Support-choice for an army chosen from one of the Codices. What's the difference?

 Dugg wrote:
@ MarkyMark - Did you have them in one squad or what?

Yes mate 3 in one squad with no command platform, they are 0-4 and take up fast attack slot

Faced two flyers, one ork dakka jet gave it locked velocity on the first turn it came on, I did say to go behind a building where I wouldnt have LOS but he said nah go for my beefy assault squad. Second flyer was necron night scythe, doing the tactic of zipping across the map to get to one of my objectives that went bye in its first turn as well, again i said go to the other side of the board but his plan with the flyer was to get to my objectives quickly

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

But then...

*looks at Land Raider Achilles in IA:Apoc 2nd ed*

"A Land Raider Achilles is a Heavy Support choice in a Codex Space Marines, Codex Black Templars, Codex Space Wolves or Codex Dark Angels army." So it's an entry in a book published by GW saying it's a Heavy Support-choice for an army chosen from one of the Codices. What's the difference?

Does it say it's a codex update?
It doesn't?
Oh...

rigeld2 wrote:
Does it say it's a codex update?
It doesn't?
Oh...

Who cares if it uses those exact words? It very clearly states that it is an additional option for those armies, whether it says "codex update" or "heavy support choice". Both are equally official.

 Peregrine wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Does it say it's a codex update?
It doesn't?
Oh...

Who cares if it uses those exact words? It very clearly states that it is an additional option for those armies, whether it says "codex update" or "heavy support choice". Both are equally official.

The rulebook does when it says to use a codex to build your army. Saying it's a codex update is one thing. Not saying it is, well... not.

 Dugg wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
If you use Sabre Defense Platforms correctly, they are toughness 7 with many wounds and have 2+ cover saves against everything.

If your army can deal with that easily, I'd like to see your list...

Bikers, Jump Units or any Template/No Cover shots to start. They fail a LD7 check and fall back the platforms are removed as casualties as well.

by the way, how are you getting a 2+ cover anyway? I mean sure you can give the Crew a 2+ cover but the Platforms can't get the go to ground bonus as Artillery so if you go to ground with your Crew I will just Focus Fire your Platforms.

It says it's a Heavy Support choice for armies chosen from the Codices listed. The Heavy Support section is part of the Codex. If the unit in question is part of the Heavy Support choices, it's part of the Codex. For example, what's a Codex Black Templars army? It's the units selected from Codex: Black Templars. In this army, a Land Raider Achilles is a Heavy Support choice. As such, the LRA is a part of Codex: Black Templars.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
It says it's a Heavy Support choice for armies chosen from the Codices listed. The Heavy Support section is part of the Codex. If the unit in question is part of the Heavy Support choices, it's part of the Codex. For example, what's a Codex Black Templars army? It's the units selected from Codex: Black Templars. In this army, a Land Raider Achilles is a Heavy Support choice. As such, the LRA is a part of Codex: Black Templars.

So you're arguing that it's a codex update without any language saying that the codex is updated. Cool story bro.