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.

Furyou Miko wrote:Nah, the Sisters WDdex is pretty strong. It's just very, very small.

I suppose a more accurate description might be "pretty strong, as long as you play with one or two very specific builds". The popular, competetive lists I've seen all seem to be built around Celestine or the "Uriahbomb", neither of whom are even true Battle Sister characters.

It kinda fits in with what MrMoustaffa mentioned earlier about the internal balance and unit pricing issues. Makes me wonder what part of the Minidex was more due to Ward and what due to Cruddace.

Coyote81 wrote:Oh, Cruddance does like IG. So maybe there will be some terrible Gue'vesa units in the list too.

That would be cool, indeed. I hope he's actually aware of them already having had rules at some point - with other people writing stuff than their original designer, I often feel as if they may not be aware of some detail. GW published a lot of stuff over the years, it'd be pretty easy to miss something, even for GW people themselves.

That's an interesting link in the OP, considering what I heard at my local GW store.

The store manager told me, a Tau player, that the Tau codex is 'done'. And has been for a few months.

His source of information from another GW manager (in a different state), that he met at the national/regional store managers meeting. Apparently, the person writing the new Tau codex, lives in the area, and stopped in and mentioned it.

I doubt the above, last I checked the design studio was in Nottingham, UK.

But he's a store manager told by another store manager... Seems pretty legit from here.

A Tau codex pretty much needs human auxiliaries (And they don't even need new models; Cadians work just fine). Without them, it's just not fluffy.

 Zweischneid wrote:
Just not true. Dark Eldar has probably the worst fluff of any 40K Codex in the last 10 years or so with it's horrid loony-toons-black-hole in a box writing.

Really? I genuinely enjoyed the Dark Eldar codex. I thought it was some of the best fluff of a 40k codex, especially considering the pitiful fluff the Dark Eldar had before. Stuff like regenerating from body parts really helped to flesh out their faction. As for the black hole in a box, they're meant to be the fair folk; weird "magic" like that put to a spiteful and petty use only makes sense.

 Zweischneid wrote:
Not to mention that it took the boredom of Long Fang spam to a whole new level with the even more ridiculous Venom Spam. I sometimes wonder why he even bothered including other stuff.

IIRC, Venomspam wasn't that bad before 6th Edition nerfed the rest of the codex into the ground.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I doubt the above, last I checked the design studio was in Nottingham, UK.

Does that mean that all of the employees live in the UK?

We live in the digital age.

1068SCP wrote:A Tau codex pretty much needs human auxiliaries (And they don't even need new models; Cadians work just fine). Without them, it's just not fluffy.

Well ...
A Tau Codex without Tau would be "not fluffy", but auxiliaries are just an add-on to the main force and as such Gue'vesa would indeed be optional. Even Kroot and Vespids are not a "must have" per se.
It's the same as with Space Marines and Scouts, Imperial Guard and Ogryns, or Sisters of Battle and Frateris Militia.

Having Gue'vesa in the Codex would still fit better to the Tau background, though, in that it incorporates options that are connected to their Empire's background.

As for the Dark Eldar, I guess I'm somewhere in the middle in that I like some of the new writing, but find certain bits rather OTT.

FenixZero wrote:Does that mean that all of the employees live in the UK?
We live in the digital age.

From my experience, writing and creative development still tends to have people move together, just because video meetings tend to be not as awesome as the real stuff, and it's better when you can just get together with a project partner to discuss new ideas in person rather than via some text chat or e-mail. There are actual "brainstorming" offices with comfy couches just for that sort of stuff: chilling and talking. For GW, I would also assume that the designers actually play a couple games to try out their rules internally before (if) it's even released to a bunch of beta players.

Of course, if the designers do not actually playtest the army they designed themselves it would explain a couple weird things, so who knows.

FenixZero wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I doubt the above, last I checked the design studio was in Nottingham, UK.

Does that mean that all of the employees live in the UK?

We live in the digital age.

Yep, and the design studio are still all based in Notts. Should know, given my friend is a junior games designer there...

So no, your "source" is wrong.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

FenixZero wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I doubt the above, last I checked the design studio was in Nottingham, UK.

Does that mean that all of the employees live in the UK?

We live in the digital age.

Yep, and the design studio are still all based in Notts. Should know, given my friend is a junior games designer there...

So no, your "source" is wrong.

Just relaying what I heard, no sweat off my back.

I personally want more models, but I would be happy with what we have costed correctly/better and some of the core designs updated. Like transports, and point limits on certain characters.

Just thought of a phrase for Cruddaces terrible codexs...
Crudex:
Currently includes Nids and SoB, soon to be added Tau.
Now I don't like to use them as an example but Privateer Press have a better collaboration when it comes to army books as though the books (I believe) are written by different writers they are all particularly balanced. Simply put get the Forgeworld team to write the Codexes....

 JbR of the Endless Spire wrote:
Just thought of a phrase for Cruddaces terrible codexs...
Crudex:
Currently includes Nids and SoB, soon to be added Tau.
Now I don't like to use them as an example but Privateer Press have a better collaboration when it comes to army books as though the books (I believe) are written by different writers they are all particularly balanced. Simply put get the Forgeworld team to write the Codexes....

Also Imperial Guard, which is terrible in the opposite manner (OP)

Yes, something is way off when we trn to forgeworld for balance, when it was once the source of "wacky, unstable rules"

FFS who hired these guys? how can people who have years of "experience" in doing these things can do such glaring mistakes that every noob can spot before even taking out calculators or testing them in the game itself?

A few oddlot combinations that turn out more powerful then intended I would have understood, but have more things that are out of balance, either strong or weak, then tings that are in balance is plain odd, is someone even TESTING these stuff in a serious matter? or reading it even?

Just take Tau for an example, it was written by some andy guy, but it sends the message of "is anyone looking into it" across, a quick list of things that make no sense:
1-An army who is shooy-centric (make that "shooty-only"), BS3 standard.
2-Gun drones cheaper as wargear then as a unit.
3-Phirana depends on distance to survive, yet needs to get VERY close to attack. (counter-productive much?)
4-Pathfinders? a static fast attack unit. brillent. (and requires to take a transport to boot, except using it renders them useless for the turn they disembark...)
5-The seeker missile, equal to the SM krak upgrade in power and cost require a markerlight to fire.
6-Broadside plasma "upgrade" actually reduces kill rate on almost everything. (only if the enemy is like a Sv2+ with no invul and within 12'' it pays off.)
7-Vespid, an assualt unit with guardsmen worth of WS and S. (good I5 and HoW dont help if you cant kill anything.)
8-Etheral, carries a risk of sending your own unit running away. (I get it that the tau are shocked, but isn't running away a bit overkill? you brought the guy to a warzone!)
9-the massive hammerhead railgun is less potent the tiny broadside ones at solid shots. (give it melta or something x_x)
10-Sniper drones, got a SFG but can't infiltrate, or scout move, or SOMETHING? the thing is far harder to see then scouts!

And that's just right off my head.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Yes, something is way off when we trn to forgeworld for balance, when it was once the source of "wacky, unstable rules"

FFS who hired these guys? how can people who have years of "experience" in doing these things can do such glaring mistakes that every noob can spot before even taking out calculators or testing them in the game itself?

A few oddlot combinations that turn out more powerful then intended I would have understood, but have more things that are out of balance, either strong or weak, then tings that are in balance is plain odd, is someone even TESTING these stuff in a serious matter? or reading it even?

Just take Tau for an example, it was written by some andy guy, but it sends the message of "is anyone looking into it" across, a quick list of things that make no sense:
1-An army who is shooy-centric (make that "shooty-only"), BS3 standard.
2-Gun drones cheaper as wargear then as a unit.
3-Phirana depends on distance to survive, yet needs to get VERY close to attack. (counter-productive much?)
4-Pathfinders? a static fast attack unit. brillent. (and requires to take a transport to boot, except using it renders them useless for the turn they disembark...)
5-The seeker missile, equal to the SM krak upgrade in power and cost require a markerlight to fire.
6-Broadside plasma "upgrade" actually reduces kill rate on almost everything. (only if the enemy is like a Sv2+ with no invul and within 12'' it pays off.)
7-Vespid, an assualt unit with guardsmen worth of WS and S. (good I5 and HoW dont help if you cant kill anything.)
8-Etheral, carries a risk of sending your own unit running away. (I get it that the tau are shocked, but isn't running away a bit overkill? you brought the guy to a warzone!)
9-the massive hammerhead railgun is less potent the tiny broadside ones at solid shots. (give it melta or something x_x)
10-Sniper drones, got a SFG but can't infiltrate, or scout move, or SOMETHING? the thing is far harder to see then scouts!

And that's just right off my head.

Which is funny because in it's hay day Tau was the top codex. Its just gotten outdated is all.

The fact it was good in it's day does not change the fact all the things I just said makes no sense and should have been pointed out from a single reading of the codex.

I didn't claim the Tau codex dont have some nice things in it, some very good even to this day. but its just makes no freaking sense!

Okay, I've got to stand up for the guard codex here. I think cruddance did a really good job on it. He didn't screw up the fluff, and he added a LOT of new stuff, most of which was pretty good. I take particular offense to comments like...

loota boy wrote:Yeah, even if cruddace writes it like gaurd rather than nids, it'll still be bad. A handful of golden units sitting on a pile of gak isn't a good codex.

... which I find grossly inaccurate. The guard codex isn't perfect, but because, after nearly 5 years, there are some power gamers who only play what has been determined to be the cheesiest stuff in the codex does NOT make the whole codex bad. Every codex undergoes this kind of powergamer slide over time, you have to look at the REST of the codex to see its merits.

And the rest of the guard codex is generally pretty good. I mean, in the old guard codex there were THREE heavy support vehicles. In the current one there are FOURTEEN. Most of them are pretty well done too. Interesting, fluffy, have their niche role that they do well, and are appropriately priced. The perhaps three of them that are done poorly doesn't change the fact that the other eleven are great.

Plus, look at the codex holistically here. You can play guard as a foot horde, as a mech list, or as air cav (amongst other styles). You can show up with a lot of tanks or a lot of artillery. You can play an army where practically everything outflanks. There is a lot you can still do with the guard codex. I've yet to see many other codices age so well as the current guard codex.

Yes, if cruddance does it like tyranid, I'll be a little sorry, but if he does it like guard, a heartfelt congratulations is in order.

I must agree with Ailaros. If Tau get the Guard treatment, it'll be a solid, powerful codex.

Personally I will just be happy to have a new codex.

And unless its a radical re-write of everything in the Tau codex, from stats to pt cost, with horrible fluff, it will likely be a improvement.

I am so tired of my favorite army with so little meat to it, FW did more to expand on the Tau then the GW codex (fluffwise)

So I will refrain from any chicken-little sky is falling talk and just wait patiently , and be glad the Tau will finally get a update.

Well, the "Tau is getting a new codex in 6 months" thing is going on for almost 3 years now, so I would not place preorders yet...

 BoomWolf wrote:
Well, the "Tau is getting a new codex in 6 months" thing is going on for almost 3 years now, so I would not place preorders yet...

lol while that might be true. Tau will have a new codex by Q3 next year, more than likely sooner but ... we know how things go.

Based on nothing omre then random rumors, who are running wild for almost 3 years now, and is always "prosponed by a few months"

I'll belive it when I see it.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Based on nothing omre then random rumors, who are running wild for almost 3 years now, and is always "prosponed by a few months"

I'll belive it when I see it.

I agree. I've been getting my hopes up for almost two years that I'd be seeing something legitimate now. So far all I've seen is an update from Forgeworld that made Tetras an auto-take.

 Ailaros wrote:
Okay, I've got to stand up for the guard codex here. I think cruddance did a really good job on it. He didn't screw up the fluff, and he added a LOT of new stuff, most of which was pretty good. I take particular offense to comments like...

loota boy wrote:Yeah, even if cruddace writes it like gaurd rather than nids, it'll still be bad. A handful of golden units sitting on a pile of gak isn't a good codex.

... which I find grossly inaccurate. The guard codex isn't perfect, but because, after nearly 5 years, there are some power gamers who only play what has been determined to be the cheesiest stuff in the codex does NOT make the whole codex bad. Every codex undergoes this kind of powergamer slide over time, you have to look at the REST of the codex to see its merits.

And the rest of the guard codex is generally pretty good. I mean, in the old guard codex there were THREE heavy support vehicles. In the current one there are FOURTEEN. Most of them are pretty well done too. Interesting, fluffy, have their niche role that they do well, and are appropriately priced. The perhaps three of them that are done poorly doesn't change the fact that the other eleven are great.

Plus, look at the codex holistically here. You can play guard as a foot horde, as a mech list, or as air cav (amongst other styles). You can show up with a lot of tanks or a lot of artillery. You can play an army where practically everything outflanks. There is a lot you can still do with the guard codex. I've yet to see many other codices age so well as the current guard codex.

Yes, if cruddance does it like tyranid, I'll be a little sorry, but if he does it like guard, a heartfelt congratulations is in order.

Perhaps pile of sh*t isn't entirely accurate, but the internal balance just isn't great by any stretch of the immagination. It isn't that so many things are bad, it's that in every slot, there's a golden unit that just makes every other option look.. unfortunate. So many times i see in gaurd tactics and gaurd list building threads people asking about how effective X unit is, and the default response is "well, it's alright, but it competes with unit Y for the same slot, and unit Y is just hilariously better." I don't think anyone is going to say that hellhounds, valks, sentinals, and hell, even rough riders are bad, (they're all quite good) but when they sit in the same slot as the vendetta, which is just leaps and bounds better, stupidly so, that they just don't get taken. It's the same with most every slot.

Hq is all the ccs. Primaris are alright with the new psyker rules, but lord commissars only find a place in horde builds, which aren't doing well this edition. The ccs gives you access to cheap special weapons, so it's the default choice.

Troops, veterans are just so much better than most of the options. The basic troops lost most of their oomph after the loss of power blobs. A precious few people use special weapon squads and heavy weapon squads, and don't even bring up penal legions. The elite slot is also really meh aswell. Ratlings, ogryens, storm troopers and the psykers? They're all usable, don't get me wrong. They perform just fine. But why do you take them when you could use the points for more vets, vendettas, and manticores?

Fast attack, everything is overshadowed by the godly vendetta. Hellhounds are fine, but their variants leave a lot to be desired. Bane wolfs are.. ok i guess, but devil dogs? This is a trend with the variants of units. Most of the time, everyone uses the default and one other choice. Then, there's anouther that is also sometimes used but is sort of expensive. The rest is ignored. Sentinals are fun and gimmicky, and valks are good, but next to the vendetta... they just feel underwhelming.

The heavy support by far does the best here, but the feeling is still found, mainly in the LR variants. No one uses anything but the vanilla, the demo, and sometimes the executioner if you can afford one. Bassies and the variants are good too, but it's mostly then basic and the medusa. Griffins and colossusses are fine, but not often used in comparison to other options. And everything pales in comparison to the almighty manticore. It just screams "Take me! I'm the best!" Hydras are fine, especially against fliers and scimmers, but you have to take a trio of them to have reliable firepower, and now you've lost space for the real heavy support option. Deathstrike? What the hell is that?

I'm not saying that any of the other options are bad. They're all fine, for the most part. But when you have a golden unit in every slot, it just detracts from variaty. If someone with a good grasp of 40k tactics opened the gaurd codex with the intent of building a competitive, effective list, taking what looked like the bet options, and had no pre-knowledge of any of the units, each of the top units might as well be highlighted, because he's going to notice them right away.

While this is true, there is always the metagaming level players that can figure out how to take advantage of "lead disatvantage" effect the "golden units" create, and by that tailer their own lists to be especially efficient against thoes golden units, while not surely effective agaisnt the runner-ups.

Its some sort of sticky balance in imbalance, sometimes taking the second or third best is better, as it is less likely to get countered.

The real thing you have to worry about is when Cruddace gets to do a book he doesn't want to do. He wanted to do Guard, and it shows. While there's some shoddy internal balance, there's so much stuff that it's hard to not have a choice. He really wanted to get his teeth into Guard and expand them. A lot of misses, sure, but with the amount of options he just threw in there, there was bound to be a lot of hits as well.

Then with Tyranids, it's very obvious he didn't want to do them. Half assed rules, very little expansion to existing units, dropping lots of older options (and even making some option combinations outright illegal), units and wonky pricing across th whole book showing very little playtesting.

Hell, he didn't even find it important, as the author of the book, to talk about the only huge release they've gotten, the Tervigon wave. He palmed it off to other studio members.

So Tau players, hope that he has a bit of passion for the army. If he does, you might be lucky enough to get a Taurial Guard codex. Otherwise, you'll end up with a Tauranid codex.

The real thing you have to worry about is when Cruddace gets to do a book he doesn't want to do. He wanted to do Guard, and it shows. While there's some shoddy internal balance, there's so much stuff that it's hard to not have a choice. He really wanted to get his teeth into Guard and expand them. A lot of misses, sure, but with the amount of options he just threw in there, there was bound to be a lot of hits as well.

The problem is most of the stuff he added in was forgeworld stuff at the time.

The variants to the LR came from FW (Cept Demolisher)

The variants to artillery came from FW (Originally just the basilisk)

Along with the Hellhound variants.

It's like he mostly just pulled out what he thought was cool from FW.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

The real thing you have to worry about is when Cruddace gets to do a book he doesn't want to do. He wanted to do Guard, and it shows. While there's some shoddy internal balance, there's so much stuff that it's hard to not have a choice. He really wanted to get his teeth into Guard and expand them. A lot of misses, sure, but with the amount of options he just threw in there, there was bound to be a lot of hits as well.

The problem is most of the stuff he added in was forgeworld stuff at the time. It's like he mostly just pulled out what he thought was cool from FW.

If he starts with that, I'd be incredibly happy as a Tau player.

Tetras, XV-8 variants, XV-9s, new Hammerhead turrets, flyers, drone turrets... I'd have a flipping field day.

Granted, I think there's several of those that are far too expensive for what they bring to the table, but with an appropriate adjustment they'd flesh out the existing codex quite nicely. If the rumors of Crisis Suits being scoring units as an option, I'd be unbelievably pleased.

Yeah, the FA slot in the guard codex is terribly balanced, but that really can't be said about the rest of the codex. I see people taking lord commissars and psykers all the time, and infantry platoons are PLENTY viable. If you've never seen any fielded, it's because of the players you're facing, not the codex.

And that's really the problem. Just because you have a few uncreative players who can't figure out how to do anything but copy netlists does not mean that there is A ONE guard list and that the rest is junk. It just means that power gamers are uncreative, not that there's a problem with the codex.

I mean, we see the same silliness with grey knights. GK has lots of great options, but that doesn't stop people from saying that if an option isn't THE option, it's therefore a BAD option. Worse is not the same as bad, people.

Take issue with point 1) Above - a shooty army as BS3 basic? *COUGH* guard. BS3 is perfectly fine given the volume of fire. Arguments that start with such an asinine comment struggle...

The problem is they were alright at the time of their creation, what with fish of fury for extra defense.

They cannot be to low however, they still have a decent save, as well as a good weapon (Now that rapid fire is back to half range again)

But the current cost is to much, especially the cost for a team leader in most cases.

When was rapid fire half range? In 3rd - 5th it was 12"