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.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Daba wrote:
Ceramite plating is fundamentally made much worse in it's effect on the game on AV14 units, something you keep conveniently forgetting.

Which is completely different than your original claim that FW is playing by different rules and breaking GW's fundamental design rules. We could argue endlessly about whether having a very small number of melta-immune AV 14 units is a good thing but you can not argue that melta immunity is somehow against GW's unwritten design rules.

PS: in DFTS the Storm Talon gained ceramite plating even though the 5th edition version didn't have it.

I am saying that game interactions like AV14 melta and Lance immunity are the problems, which is a specific case more than the general Melta immunity. I don't like Melta immunity, but on the vehicles it exists on, it doesn't cause the 'screw you' interaction that it does on AV14.

 Daba wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Daba wrote:
Ceramite plating is fundamentally made much worse in it's effect on the game on AV14 units, something you keep conveniently forgetting.

Which is completely different than your original claim that FW is playing by different rules and breaking GW's fundamental design rules. We could argue endlessly about whether having a very small number of melta-immune AV 14 units is a good thing but you can not argue that melta immunity is somehow against GW's unwritten design rules.

PS: in DFTS the Storm Talon gained ceramite plating even though the 5th edition version didn't have it.

I am saying that game interactions like AV14 melta and Lance immunity are the problems, which is a specific case more than the general Melta immunity. I don't like Melta immunity, but on the vehicles it exists on, it doesn't cause the 'screw you' interaction that it does on AV14.

And another army had access to this same melta immunity on an AV14 model as well, under regular GW rules, at the time that this FW model was released. So they were keeping in line with how GW was designing the game.

 Daba wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Daba wrote:
Ceramite plating is fundamentally made much worse in it's effect on the game on AV14 units, something you keep conveniently forgetting.

Which is completely different than your original claim that FW is playing by different rules and breaking GW's fundamental design rules. We could argue endlessly about whether having a very small number of melta-immune AV 14 units is a good thing but you can not argue that melta immunity is somehow against GW's unwritten design rules.

PS: in DFTS the Storm Talon gained ceramite plating even though the 5th edition version didn't have it.

I am saying that game interactions like AV14 melta and Lance immunity are the problems, which is a specific case more than the general Melta immunity. I don't like Melta immunity, but on the vehicles it exists on, it doesn't cause the 'screw you' interaction that it does on AV14.

Plus you are paying half has much again as a standard land raider to get it.

Breng77 wrote:

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I run an Elysian Drop Troops Army list. Its 40K Approved.

My Elysian Drop Troops Army list rules are the 6th Edition Basic Rule Book, the current Imperial Guard Codex and the Taros Companion rules for Elysian Drop Troops in the IA Vol 3 Second edition printed in this year. There is no confusion over it, no mystery to which book. The newest rules for something always overrides the older, just like I quit using my old IG Codex when the newest came out.

The main difference between My Elysian list and the newest Tau stuff is you do not need batteries and an electronic device to read it, both are approved for 40K.

And here is where the confusion comes in, you Elysian list comes com imperial armor 3, but wait my opponent shows up wi an Elysian list from imperial armor 8. I need to know that this is in 2 books and that 3 second Ed is newer than 8? And is this different from the list found in IA 4 which is seemingly a different veteran Elysian list? This is not confusing at all! ......

Nope because I used the newest book.

Remember the " Taros Companion rules for Elysian Drop Troops in the IA Vol 3 Second edition printed in this year.

There is no confusion over it, no mystery to which book. The newest rules for something always overrides the older" from above.

Let me give you two other examples in your vein of thinking.

First Example - A current 40K army where you can not even buy a Codex anymore....

A guy shows up with a Sisters of Battle army at an imaginary tournament with the Witch Hunters Codex. The TO then tell him after his opponent complains " I'm sorry, you need to go find two out of print White Dwarf magazines because Game Workshops said his codex was replaced by them and they no longer sell them, so sorry you missed the message..." They wish him luck on trying to buy the magazines off somebody on Ebay...

2nd Example - Got to love electronics...

On day two of the imagery tournament guy complains his opponent is using stuff not in the opponents current Codex and can not show him the rules he is using because he is using something on an IPAD and the opponent forgot to pack his charger. NO one else in the tournament had paid for the supplement in question. What does the TO do since the guy's opponent does not now have a copy of the rules in question as required by the rules of the tournament....

Much sticker questions then looking up on a web site which is the most current codex for an army...

Yes, we know the SOB "codex" is an outlier... it's well established. It also absolutely Sucks that it's not available. So, if that's the example you choose to often compare FW rules availability to, it's really a poor one if you want it to be allowed. You'd be taking the SOB problem, and multiplying it 10x

The second example is a much better one (electronic supplements) as it's actually something that will continue to grow and, as muwhe said, the tourney community needs to learn how to handle it and embrace it.

Personally, I say bring on the digital revolution . But I view that as a much different issue than the SOB white dwarf codex, which as I said, is an absolutely crap situation to find rules and is not something anything that you want to be allowed should be compared to... as it's a horrible outlier and a general huge pain for everybody that they released the rules that way. Is that what you're saying FW rules are

 OverwatchCNC wrote:
Do people in this thread in the tournament section buy units to lose?

However while players should be presented with a list before the match adding in FW to the lists will lengthen the amount of pre game unit explanation necessary. In an edition of the game that already has too much time consuming pre game steps this causes a problem with timed tournament rounds. FW shouldn't be used simply for the complexity it adds and the time it adds to games in a timed environment. No matter what Peregrine says the inclusion of FW does add a significant amount of time to a match, even if it is one unit and adds only 5 minutes of explanation time spread throuout a match those 5 minutes could be the difference between a win and a loss. If the FW rules were as available and clear as to what is most recent as GW codices then I would say the time constraints would be less of an issue.

Irregardless isn't a word.

I completely disagree with the statement "FW shouldn't be used simply for the complexity it adds and the time it adds to games in a timed environment.", I feel it SHOULD be allowed because of the complexity it adds to the game. Adding more options to armies is a good thing, it is only bad for those that require easier scenarios to determine a winning list. This allows for more variation to compete with those easy to design winning army lists. Again, the power lists will still be present, but the number of lists that don't dominate but can compete rises significantly.

I do concur that it would require more pre-game time, though I think 5 minutes of time is an slightly high of an estimate. If you need 5 minutes to understand a single units rules, 40k isn't for you. Granted, less experienced gamers will require such time...but they also would with Codexes rules they are unfamiliar with. If 15-30 minutes is a breaker for you when spending time at a tournament, then I can completely understand your stance. For me, an extra half an hour at an event doesn't really affect me...still an all day event.

Webster:
ir·re·gard·less adverb \ˌir-i-ˈgärd-ləs\
Definition of IRREGARDLESS
Syn : regardless
Usage Discussion of IRREGARDLESS
Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance.

 Farseer Faenyin wrote:
Again, the power lists will still be present, but the number of lists that don't dominate but can compete rises significantly.

According to Peregrine, that's not true. Unless by "can compete" you mean "are only taken for fluff reasons".
And even then, it really only applies to Imperial armies (mostly IG). feth those Xenos man - who needs em.

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I run an Elysian Drop Troops Army list. Its 40K Approved.

My Elysian Drop Troops Army list rules are the 6th Edition Basic Rule Book, the current Imperial Guard Codex and the Taros Companion rules for Elysian Drop Troops in the IA Vol 3 Second edition printed in this year. There is no confusion over it, no mystery to which book. The newest rules for something always overrides the older, just like I quit using my old IG Codex when the newest came out.

The main difference between My Elysian list and the newest Tau stuff is you do not need batteries and an electronic device to read it, both are approved for 40K.

And here is where the confusion comes in, you Elysian list comes com imperial armor 3, but wait my opponent shows up wi an Elysian list from imperial armor 8. I need to know that this is in 2 books and that 3 second Ed is newer than 8? And is this different from the list found in IA 4 which is seemingly a different veteran Elysian list? This is not confusing at all! ......

Nope because I used the newest book.

Remember the " Taros Companion rules for Elysian Drop Troops in the IA Vol 3 Second edition printed in this year.

There is no confusion over it, no mystery to which book. The newest rules for something always overrides the older" from above.

Let me give you two other examples in your vein of thinking.

First Example - A current 40K army where you can not even buy a Codex anymore....

A guy shows up with a Sisters of Battle army at an imaginary tournament with the Witch Hunters Codex. The TO then tell him after his opponent complains " I'm sorry, you need to go find two out of print White Dwarf magazines because Game Workshops said his codex was replaced by them and they no longer sell them, so sorry you missed the message..." They wish him luck on trying to buy the magazines off somebody on Ebay...

2nd Example - Got to love electronics...

On day two of the imagery tournament guy complains his opponent is using stuff not in the opponents current Codex and can not show him the rules he is using because he is using something on an IPAD and the opponent forgot to pack his charger. NO one else in the tournament had paid for the supplement in question. What does the TO do since the guy's opponent does not now have a copy of the rules in question as required by the rules of the tournament....

Much sticker questions then looking up on a web site which is the most current codex for an army...

Ummm...so as the to I own both the sister we dex mag, and an electronic copy, and have every available book on my own iPad....oh and I bring my charger.....

But you still missed the point....the point is not that I don't know that the newest book contains the current rules. It is that I don't even know what book the list is in. Having the sisters list replaced by a sisters book, is different than having the Elysian list in ia8 replaced by one in ia3. If I'm a tournament player and my opponent shows up with ia8 with the list how do I know it was reprinted?

The same way you know that something's been FAQ'd: you check it online.

Achilles doesnt like munchy Scarabs and haywire grenades.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
The same way you know that something's been FAQ'd: you check it online.

So then you agree that using FW in a tournament setting would require not only immediate internet access at the table, but also time to search the internet before even starting the game? Granted, this can be done (albeit painstakingly) on many smartphones, but not everybody has a smartphone and not every venue has sufficient cell coverage.

That's backwards justification. They didn't think of Ceramite plate until after the Drop pod was created. It is a gamist rule with excuse fluff to justify it.

Um...Ceramite Plating/ Armor has been around since 2nd edition. It was a vehicle wargear card you could take on any imperial vehicle in 2nd edition. Salamanders had it as purchasable wargear for their vehicles in the Armageddon Codex in 3rd edition. It has a history of being in the game long before drop pods.

PS: Dental plan...Lisa needs braces...

Torrent of Ire wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
The same way you know that something's been FAQ'd: you check it online.

So then you agree that using FW in a tournament setting would require not only immediate internet access at the table, but also time to search the internet before even starting the game? Granted, this can be done (albeit painstakingly) on many smartphones, but not everybody has a smartphone and not every venue has sufficient cell coverage.

As you would need to with FAQ's and Erratas.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Achilles doesnt like munchy Scarabs and haywire grenades.

Yup... and only holds what 5 or 6 models?

It ain't THAT great. In fact, it's just an expensive gun platform on a mobile bunker chassis.

Torrent of Ire wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
The same way you know that something's been FAQ'd: you check it online.

So then you agree that using FW in a tournament setting would require not only immediate internet access at the table, but also time to search the internet before even starting the game? Granted, this can be done (albeit painstakingly) on many smartphones, but not everybody has a smartphone and not every venue has sufficient cell coverage.

No I do not. I would expect the word trust would be in there but even if it was not I am sure since the TO's get a copy of the list they might check the list before the Tournament.

But to save time and effort I will bring a screenshot of what the current book is for Elysians dated the day before the event if you do the same for your Codex and any electronic supplements you want to use off the appropriate web pages...

Sound fair? What goes for one side goes for both?

I do not follow other Army Codi and generally trust my opponent to show up with the right one for him. Is there some reason I should change that view?

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
First Example - A current 40K army where you can not even buy a Codex anymore....

A guy shows up with a Sisters of Battle army at an imaginary tournament with the Witch Hunters Codex. The TO then tell him after his opponent complains " I'm sorry, you need to go find two out of print White Dwarf magazines because Game Workshops said his codex was replaced by them and they no longer sell them, so sorry you missed the message..." They wish him luck on trying to buy the magazines off somebody on Ebay...

So in your hypothetical example, someone out of the blue bought a SoB army without knowing their rules or where to find them?

2nd Example - Got to love electronics...

On day two of the imagery tournament guy complains his opponent is using stuff not in the opponents current Codex and can not show him the rules he is using because he is using something on an IPAD and the opponent forgot to pack his charger. NO one else in the tournament had paid for the supplement in question. What does the TO do since the guy's opponent does not now have a copy of the rules in question as required by the rules of the tournament....

Much sticker questions then looking up on a web site which is the most current codex for an army...

If you are at a tournament one of the requirements in the rules pack is that you must have the latest copy of your army’s codexes. If you cannot produce one you forfeit, and I know as a tournament player you already knew that. Not only that, they list what codexes are the ones that can be used.

In the Elysian Drop Troop army example, there is a good chance that the person who is playing that army has no idea where their latest rules are, and as an opponent I would have no clue to were all of them are found. Unlike GW armies where I know where to find the latest rules.

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I do not follow other Army Codi and generally trust my opponent to show up with the right one for him. Is there some reason I should change that view?

Let's not pretend that codex updates that come along once every ~five years are as hard to keep track of as the many IA books with their arcane version structure. As someone else already pointed out, you've got new editions of IA Volume Two coming out that override rules in IA Volume Eight. Combined with the fact that there are twelve non-sequential yet current IA volumes, it is immensely confusing (and doubly so for people who aren't already familiar with them).

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I do not follow other Army Codi and generally trust my opponent to show up with the right one for him. Is there some reason I should change that view?

If you were a tournament player you would know the answer to that question.

 Blackmoor wrote:

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I do not follow other Army Codi and generally trust my opponent to show up with the right one for him. Is there some reason I should change that view?

If you were a tournament player you would know the answer to that question.

I did and do still play tournaments, just not the big ones. I chose not to assume in a game that the other guy is going to cheat....

That's a little like the adage that only a man cheating on his wife worries about his wife cheating......


That's a hell of an attitude to have about your opponents...

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:

 Blackmoor wrote:

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I do not follow other Army Codi and generally trust my opponent to show up with the right one for him. Is there some reason I should change that view?

If you were a tournament player you would know the answer to that question.

I did and do still play tournaments, just not the big ones. I chose not to assume in a game that the other guy is going to cheat....

That's a little like the adage that only a man cheating on his wife worries about his wife cheating......


That's a hell of an attitude to have about your opponents...

You are thinking that you need to know your opponents’ rules because he is cheating is wrong (although rules knowledge will protect you from this), but there are a lot of players out there who have a poor understanding of the game and their own rules.

If you wish to compete at a tournament you have to not only know your opponents’ rules to know what his units can and can’t do to know how to beat him, but the rules are often complex and there are a lot of grey areas (see the YMDC sub-forum). There are also local metas that play a rule a certain way with house rules and your opponent might not even be aware that they are playing it wrong, or they just simply read a rule incorrectly.

That is why FW brings a lot of complexity into a tournament that is already straining with rules issues.

To be honest I am there to play and have a good time, not to get wrapped up in what his army rules mean.

Thanks for mentioning You Make The Call on the possibility I did not know about it., I do read it pretty regularly, almost as much fun as the News and Rumors.

But still I am not going to get a copy of every codex out there just to get a better edge on beating somebody.

I learn about armies by playing them and reading the forums and I am going to trust the other guy to know his army...He has a Codex there if he needs it.

In the end it's a game, and any serious worries can be resolved by a dice roll if necessary.

It gets back to the question "Are folks getting so wrapped up in winning that they forgot the fun is supposed to be in playing, not the beating .

I know my army and I am going to trust the other guy to know his.

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
But still I am not going to get a copy of every codex out there... (snip)

I learn about armies by playing them and reading the forums and I am going to trust the other guy to know his army...He has a Codex there if he needs it.

While I also play this way, I'll note that most high level tourney players will indeed have every codex.

Also:

In the end it's a game, and any serious worries can be resolved by a dice roll if necessary.

While a dice roll works great for simple things like LOS questions, for rules questions in a tourney, it's not the best solution (imo). You have to call over a judge and that can take time. Or, just give your opponent the benefit of the doubt, which I try to do... but obviously it'd be better to know the rules for both armies to speed up play and rules questions, if possible. Again, I also just try to know my own rules cold, but it's something to consider.

It gets back to the question "Are folks getting so wrapped up in winning that they forgot the fun is supposed to be in playing, not the beating .

I know my army and I am going to trust the other guy to know his.

While the second sentence here is fair to say (and again, is generally how I play) I think the first is unfairly characterizing a group of people. Knowing rules stone-cold for all aspects of the game is part of the hobby for many people, and that's part of the reason why FW inclusion horrifies them so much. It makes it a bit of a "wild wild west" rules-wise, and the amount of huge hardbound books you'd need to lug around to be ready to make a call on it would be insane!

Whereas as someone already mentioned, many folks have all the FAQs for all armies printed out and with them for an event... and soon, they'll just have them on their Ipads, along with all digitally released codii, for quick reference. FW can really throw a wrench in that, and relying on an opponent to know their own rules and not make any errors just isn't what many tournament players are going to want to do, when they're used to being able to double-check rules for any standard codex very quickly.

 RiTides wrote:

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
But still I am not going to get a copy of every codex out there... (snip)

I learn about armies by playing them and reading the forums and I am going to trust the other guy to know his army...He has a Codex there if he needs it.

While I also play this way, I'll note that most high level tourney players will indeed have every codex.

Also:

In the end it's a game, and any serious worries can be resolved by a dice roll if necessary.

While a dice roll works great for simple things like LOS questions, for rules questions in a tourney, it's not the best solution (imo). You have to call over a judge and that can take time. Or, just give your opponent the benefit of the doubt, which I try to do... but obviously it'd be better to know the rules for both armies to speed up play and rules questions, if possible. Again, I also just try to know my own rules cold, but it's something to consider.

It gets back to the question "Are folks getting so wrapped up in winning that they forgot the fun is supposed to be in playing, not the beating .

I know my army and I am going to trust the other guy to know his.

While the second sentence here is fair to say (and again, is generally how I play) I think the first is unfairly characterizing a group of people. Knowing rules stone-cold for all aspects of the game is part of the hobby for many people, and that's part of the reason why FW inclusion horrifies them so much. It makes it a bit of a "wild wild west" rules-wise, and the amount of huge hardbound books you'd need to lug around to be ready to make a call on it would be insane!

Whereas as someone already mentioned, many folks have all the FAQs for all armies printed out and with them for an event... and soon, they'll just have them on their Ipads, along with all digitally released codii, for quick reference. FW can really throw a wrench in that, and relying on an opponent to know their own rules and not make any errors just isn't what many tournament players are going to want to do, when they're used to being able to double-check rules for any standard codex very quickly.

I agree with most of what you say. I have the BRB, the IG Codex, my two magazines for Sisters (how far they have fallen) and my Elysians down solid.

The last part of what you said is something I have been wondering about. A while back I sent Forge World an email and never got a response, pretty unusual for them...whatever else they are far more responsive than the other half of the company.

The question was if there were going to be electronic rule sets for sell to match what was happening on the other half of the company.

If 40K Approved equipment and army rules were to be sold electronically how would that affect the tourney scene?

The Apple stuff is updated automatically from what I can tell. I am guessing the epub stuff has updated epubs available for those that buy them.

I suspect if Forge World did it it would be more along the lines of buy the book. For a few bucks more gain access to the download.

I also suspect they would make a lot of money that way since it would eliminate the update issue..

Ok so a few things here.

1.) Assuming that players even good ones have all their rules down for their army is a big mistake. It is frequently not true, and whether they are trying to cheat or not, many good players (including the winner of the GT I host) get rules wrong all the time about their armies. Often because other players don't call them on it. Now I'm not saying you must know your opponents army front to back, but don't assume they do either.

2.)With FW it is not even an issue of trying to cheat. What happens when I have my Elysians from IA 8, and I am only following FW to see when IA8 gets updated so I get a new release. It is entirely possible for me not to know that IA3 is the new list for my army. This is not true for codices. My army gets updated when I get a new codex with the same name. Other books may add rules but not typically replace existing units (though it occasionally does happen, and it is bad when it does...even then though it is released as a supplement to X army, not in X campaign book.)

3.) I agree that FAQ updates are also not always know either, but if I want to check I just check the FAQ for my codex, I don't check an faq for a separate book entirely to see if I get updated.

Like FW or not, their decision to reprint units and army lists in different campaign books, is a bad one. It is confusing for players etc.

 RiTides wrote:
While the second sentence here is fair to say (and again, is generally how I play) I think the first is unfairly characterizing a group of people. Knowing rules stone-cold for all aspects of the game is part of the hobby for many people, and that's part of the reason why FW inclusion horrifies them so much. It makes it a bit of a "wild wild west" rules-wise, and the amount of huge hardbound books you'd need to lug around to be ready to make a call on it would be insane!

So if these players make a hobby of knowing all the rules then why can't they just know the FW rules? Why is it so important to avoid making them do any extra work? If you're going to complain about difficulty in learning the rules the people that are potentially harmed by it are the "casual" players who don't spend a ton of time learning rules.

And they don't have to bring all of the huge hardcover books because the other player is required to bring their own rules. The "rule expert" just needs to know which book the rules are located in so when they demand to see it their opponent can't show the wrong book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blackmoor wrote:
So in your hypothetical example, someone out of the blue bought a SoB army without knowing their rules or where to find them?

Sure, but how is that any different from your example of someone buying an Elysian army without knowing their rules or where to find them?

Unlike GW armies where I know where to find the latest rules.

So why isn't this your fault? Why should TOs ban FW instead of you investing the effort in learning where the latest rules are? Why do we just assume that your lack of knowledge is some kind of sacred state that can not be disturbed?

 Peregrine wrote:

Unlike GW armies where I know where to find the latest rules.

So why isn't this your fault? Why should TOs ban FW instead of you investing the effort in learning where the latest rules are? Why do we just assume that your lack of knowledge is some kind of sacred state that can not be disturbed?

It is very, very easy to know where the current rules are for every GW army. Even with the red herring of SoB most people know where to at least find the rules.

I would have no idea where to find any item of FW. They are scatted over many books and hard to know what the latest rules are (see the Elysian army example).

It is very, very easy to know where the current rules are for every GW army. Even with the red herring of SoB most people know where to at least find the rules.

I just clicked over to the GW site and I can't find where their rules are mentioned. It certainly isn't in the list of all items for that faction like it is for the other ones. Nor is it in 'books' like the others. Where would a new player get this knowledge?

 Blackmoor wrote:
I would have no idea where to find any item of FW. They are scatted over many books and hard to know what the latest rules are (see the Elysian army example).

That's because you apparently haven't bothered to look. But I don't see why accommodating your lack of interest in remaining current on FW rules should be more important than allowing people to use the legal (according to GW) armies they have bought.

 motyak wrote:

It is very, very easy to know where the current rules are for every GW army. Even with the red herring of SoB most people know where to at least find the rules.

I just clicked over to the GW site and I can't find where their rules are mentioned. It certainly isn't in the list of all items for that faction like it is for the other ones. Nor is it in 'books' like the others. Where would a new player get this knowledge?

Then apparently you didn't click on a specific army. If you click on "army essentials" et viola. There's the army book.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

 motyak wrote:

It is very, very easy to know where the current rules are for every GW army. Even with the red herring of SoB most people know where to at least find the rules.

I just clicked over to the GW site and I can't find where their rules are mentioned. It certainly isn't in the list of all items for that faction like it is for the other ones. Nor is it in 'books' like the others. Where would a new player get this knowledge?

Then apparently you didn't click on a specific army. If you click on "army essentials" et viola. There's the army book.

Well the GW AUS site must be broken then, because under the specific SOB tab in "armies" it isn't there, nor is it in essentials or the books tab under 40k. I can't even see an "army essentials" option.