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.
2013/08/15 14:12:07
Subject: Re:Codex: Space Marines.first post updated
Grav Amp: Re-roll failed to-wounds and armor penetration for Grav weapons.
Must say, I'm glad none have more than 24" range, don't want anymore cries of from the xenos players.
I have to say, i really dislike those stats. There is simply no reason to use anything but grav guns. MEQ get owned by them, Xenos for the most part get owned by bolters, the rest get own by grav. They are too good against what our bolters cant handle.
Its really way too situational to be considered broken. It only fires effectively from centurions and with a 30" threat range things like WK's can easily stay back and shoot from 36 with stock weapons that ID them, riptides can out range them even easier, both are MUCH faster as well. Grav weapons just stop such things from being spammed and rolling over us while we watch helplessly.
They are not situational at all, they handle what your bolters can not handle, when was the last time you brought a heavy bolter over a misile launcher just in case you run into okrs?, me never, my regular bolters do the job just fine and my ML addresses things my bolters can not, i dont bring specialist weapons to do what i already do just a little bit better. Why only from centurions?. 18" range on moving infantry firing 2 shots a turn, outside rapid fire range, is where most marine armies live. The only thing i dont know is how they work against Vehicles, but regardless, i would seem that i will be playing my wolves as Ultras with the tactical trait. The only question is if they will still have Combat tactics which would make them golden and depending on the rules against vehicles its either spam double grav or grav missile on tactical for massive twin linked action. The only thing i can imagine making them not such an obvious choice would be a higher/prohibitive point cost, which since GW will want to sell them i doubt its the case.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/08/15 14:14:37
ClockworkZion wrote: On another forum someone noted that the DA Camo Cloaks just add +1 to cover. With the RG Stealth that gives their Scouts a +2 to their cover....
Or a 2+ in Ruins without going to ground.
You mean like what you could do with Telion already?
You mean at the discount of not having to buy telion or the flexibility to do it twice?
EDIT Twice because he is UM so no go with RG from rumors so far.
I meant during the current book, 5th edition.
It's not exactly a new and exciting thing for scouts to be terminators in cover.
warboss wrote: Is there a permanent stickied thread for Chaos players to complain every time someone/anyone gets models or rules besides them? If not, there should be.
If the price point of $30 is accurate, these better have a lot of options on the sprue. I like the models overall (would ditch the cherub on the librarian) but consider them on par with the new $20 farseer. I hope whoever got these prices was looking at canadian/australian/other prices, not USD.
If the monopose Tau fireblade with no extra bits at all at $20 is any indication (and it's less power in game and we know how GW likes to price things in $$ proportional to how good they are on the tabletop), it'll be $30.
Monopose models with useless equipment seem to be GW's thing for 6th. Who wants a combi melta these days(combi plas are better and rarer)
who takes a power axe? And it isnt like CSM are hurting for champion figures. 20 years of great HQ models make awesoem champions and they currently cost less. http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/armySubUnitCats.jsp?catId=cat440207a&rootCatGameStyle=
Automatically Appended Next Post:
StarTrotter wrote: And I'm conflicted as to why I should even bother with the CSM codex when I can represent my World Eaters and Iron Warriors legion with the loyalist marine codex so much better (and if anyone calls it heresy I jsut look at them and ask them to rethink that phrase mwahaha!)
trade a heldrake for a codex that can actually represent the legion you want, with rules that dont conflict with themselves.
CSM are all going to start following the Codex Astartes!
StarTrotter wrote: And I'm conflicted as to why I should even bother with the CSM codex when I can represent my World Eaters and Iron Warriors legion with the loyalist marine codex so much better (and if anyone calls it heresy I jsut look at them and ask them to rethink that phrase mwahaha!)
But just think of all the great things codex chaos gives us!
heldrakes!
dinobots!
...heldrakes!
But yeah real talk as a long time ex IW player it's a real bummer to see that loyalist SM will remain miles ahead in the shooting department for another half decade.
I mean honestly, how hard would loyalist players (actually probably everyone) laugh if the CSM book came out with a rumored option that said troop CSM reroll misses for the cost of *fething nothing*? Oh right but CSM got hatred vs SM in close combat so that's just as good right
You know, you have to pay 10% more for hatred marines, it only works on marines, only in close combat, and only on the first round.
but it gives you +1 LD, which is great, because your guys dont ATSKNF!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/08/15 14:30:39
Dark Mechanicus and Renegade Iron Hand Dakka Blog
My Dark Mechanicus P&M Blog. Mostly Modeling as I paint very slowly. Lots of kitbashed conversions of marines and a few guard to make up a renegade Iron Hand chapter and Dark Mechanicus Allies. Bionics++
That figure is still Awesome no matter what it has itself armed with. But I too dislike the idea of fixed gear HQ's considering most space marine captains and chapter masters are armed with swords that are mostly useless now.
Brother Sergeant Bob wrote: Holy hell i think i found a viable use for Flakk missles finally. Imperial and Crimson fists devistators with 4 ML hav a decent shot taking out flyers even if the missles are strength 7. Tank Hunters makes paying 40 points for the missles make sense.
Atleast it does to me, the new AA tanks are only strength 7 anyways.
Exactly. People are claiming that tank hunters are uselsess, but its extremely rare for someone to field a totally vehicle-free army. With tank hunters for flakk missils and a quad gun you are negatimg what makes things like the heldrake and vendetta so tough: their av12. I can't count the number of times I've shot flakk and quad gun rounds at a helturkey only to roll 3&4's. Witj those rerolls your devs are gonna be nasty.
On another topic, I really hope scout shotguns get a change/buff. I have a squad of Ultramarine shotty scouts who are beggimg to be useful.
The 2 other space marine players at my FLGS are going to be upset that they won't be able to use Telion in their IF, and Salamanders armies. Guess their Telion models will be used as just generic sergeants.
Dark Angels- 7500 pts Tau- 5000pts Chaos Daemons- 3000/2000 pts Dark Eldar(allies)- 1500 pts Zoom, Zoom, Iyaan.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I just watched a battleship falling in love with a man.... yep. That's enough anime for the day.
xxvaderxx wrote: Which make no sence is lowering the and compacting the barrel and receiver of the gun to the left hand grip and it functioning the same way. Either it does not or they are retards for not using more compact guns that have the same performance,
It makes perfect sense. They have the STCs to make combi-weapons, and they have the STCs to make bolters, but they don't have the STC to make just the bolter portion of the combi-weapon and a more compact weapon as a result.
Alternately: The Imperium is indeed full of technological retards.
maybe they dont have the same performance
maybe combi bolters, bolter part has a slightly lower RoF, or is much more expensive, or is slightly less accurate, or less reliable.
StarTrotter wrote: And I'm conflicted as to why I should even bother with the CSM codex when I can represent my World Eaters and Iron Warriors legion with the loyalist marine codex so much better (and if anyone calls it heresy I jsut look at them and ask them to rethink that phrase mwahaha!)
Nothing wrong with swapping a codex. C:CSM is made for those who want to field daemon engines and warp-tainted thingmajigs. As a 'traditional' Traitor Marine player, I've long appreciated C:SM/BA
I think that is half of the hate coming from CSM players. Half of them dont want to field a bunch of warp tainted craptastic assault units and daemon engines. They want legions of marines. BasicallyC:evilSM, not C:possessed and dinobots.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/08/15 14:40:02
Dark Mechanicus and Renegade Iron Hand Dakka Blog
My Dark Mechanicus P&M Blog. Mostly Modeling as I paint very slowly. Lots of kitbashed conversions of marines and a few guard to make up a renegade Iron Hand chapter and Dark Mechanicus Allies. Bionics++
2013/08/15 14:51:20
Subject: Re:Codex: Space Marines.first post updated
So one of the rumors is a confirmation that you can ally C:SM with one CT to another C:SM with a different CT. I *think* I like that, but I'm not sure. It would allow me to use rules for two chapters out of the book, which is nice, and if I want to play with more than two I can always just do what I had to do before and put them all into a single instance of C:SM. The only time it would get really awkward would be if I want to field my BT along with a mixed codex force.
I think we all like to think that alliances in 40k occur more often than they really do...BT and IG aside, because there's so many of them that they're bound to be fighting something at the same time as someone else.
trade a heldrake for a codex that can actually represent the legion you want, with rules that dont conflict with themselves.
CSM are all going to start following the Codex Astartes!
So its a codex with mediocre units but a few rules that make the mediocre bread and butter models better (rerolling) vs a codex with worse bread and butter units but that has very OP things everybody takes like nurgle oblits, helldrakes, etc?
Lansirill wrote: So one of the rumors is a confirmation that you can ally C:SM with one CT to another C:SM with a different CT. I *think* I like that, but I'm not sure. It would allow me to use rules for two chapters out of the book, which is nice, and if I want to play with more than two I can always just do what I had to do before and put them all into a single instance of C:SM. The only time it would get really awkward would be if I want to field my BT along with a mixed codex force.
While I agree that I "think" I like it, I can also see it being ripe for abuse. Maybe GW did that on purpose, but I could see allying to get some tank hunter flakk missles while playing the chapter I want. Sit that on an quad-gun and it is time for fun.
Allying internally is pretty crazy. I'm a little sad that I won't be able to take Tigrius in a non-UM army but I can see how this would be broken as hell honestly so I'm ok with it.
I do like it if it's true that I can ally internally. The only reason if the costs are the same I would ally in DA's or something is for cheap units I get in the SM book anyway but might not have enough spots for. I am a little scared what I can do with the additonal slots though. Guess Tau and SM are the only ones who are so internally divergent they can ally with themselves.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/08/15 15:01:13
Best Painted (2015 Adepticon 40k Champs)
They Shall Know Fear - Adepticon 40k TT Champion (2012 & 2013) & 40k TT Best Sport (2014), 40k TT Best Tactician (2015 & 2016)
StarTrotter wrote: And I'm conflicted as to why I should even bother with the CSM codex when I can represent my World Eaters and Iron Warriors legion with the loyalist marine codex so much better (and if anyone calls it heresy I jsut look at them and ask them to rethink that phrase mwahaha!)
Nothing wrong with swapping a codex. C:CSM is made for those who want to field daemon engines and warp-tainted thingmajigs. As a 'traditional' Traitor Marine player, I've long appreciated C:SM/BA
I think that is half of the hate coming from CSM players. Half of them dont want to field a bunch of warp tainted craptastic assault units and daemon engines. They want legions of marines. BasicallyC:evilSM, not C:possessed and dinobots.
How about possessed that actually don't suck? If they had given them Daemons of X I could've ran slaanesh daemons and used the extra run speed to boost them! Bring back the 3.5 possessed and allow me to buy the traits I want for my mutations. Not random crap, if I want jump pack possessed that use giant wings of warp. LET ME.
I mean the problem is they havn't fixed anything within the codex much. Noise marines got good, Plague marines are still on top, CSM are still inferior to C:SM (that 1 point now will be giving ASTKNF and free bonus abilities!).
The only good daemons are obliterators, there's nothing to help the assault portion of the army, no cheap assault vehicles, no interesting rules to get them closer, nothing to help!.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/08/15 15:07:48
Ironwill13791 wrote: The 2 other space marine players at my FLGS are going to be upset that they won't be able to use Telion in their IF, and Salamanders armies. Guess their Telion models will be used as just generic sergeants.
If that is what they did to this codex I am dissapointed as well.
That leaves a small list of heroes for anyone else to use compared to other books. Counts as was just fine as a rule. I never gave a darn about the fluff for the character, just what the guy could do on the field. I would make them a count as for my army and move on.
Making me play a particular chapter and rules to use certain characters is not cool. Its also just bad game design if they are trying to avoid mixing rules that may make an army really good.
Ironwill13791 wrote: The 2 other space marine players at my FLGS are going to be upset that they won't be able to use Telion in their IF, and Salamanders armies. Guess their Telion models will be used as just generic sergeants.
If that is what they did to this codex I am dissapointed as well.
That leaves a small list of heroes for anyone else to use compared to other books. Counts as was just fine as a rule. I never gave a darn about the fluff for the character, just what the guy could do on the field. I would make them a count as for my army and move on.
Making me play a particular chapter and rules to use certain characters is not cool. Its also just bad game design if they are trying to avoid mixing rules that may make an army really good.
Ironwill13791 wrote: The 2 other space marine players at my FLGS are going to be upset that they won't be able to use Telion in their IF, and Salamanders armies. Guess their Telion models will be used as just generic sergeants.
If that is what they did to this codex I am dissapointed as well.
That leaves a small list of heroes for anyone else to use compared to other books. Counts as was just fine as a rule. I never gave a darn about the fluff for the character, just what the guy could do on the field. I would make them a count as for my army and move on.
Making me play a particular chapter and rules to use certain characters is not cool. Its also just bad game design if they are trying to avoid mixing rules that may make an army really good.
SM have so many characters its not even funny.
If you play Ultra Marines. If you restrict access to certain rules the list dwindles to one or two at most.
2013/08/15 15:20:29
Subject: Re:Codex: Space Marines.first post updated
Grav Amp: Re-roll failed to-wounds and armor penetration for Grav weapons.
Must say, I'm glad none have more than 24" range, don't want anymore cries of from the xenos players.
I have to say, i really dislike those stats. There is simply no reason to use anything but grav guns. MEQ get owned by them, Xenos for the most part get owned by bolters, the rest get own by grav. They are too good against what our bolters cant handle.
Its really way too situational to be considered broken. It only fires effectively from centurions and with a 30" threat range things like WK's can easily stay back and shoot from 36 with stock weapons that ID them, riptides can out range them even easier, both are MUCH faster as well. Grav weapons just stop such things from being spammed and rolling over us while we watch helplessly.
They are not situational at all, they handle what your bolters can not handle, when was the last time you brought a heavy bolter over a misile launcher just in case you run into okrs?, me never, my regular bolters do the job just fine and my ML addresses things my bolters can not, i dont bring specialist weapons to do what i already do just a little bit better. Why only from centurions?. 18" range on moving infantry firing 2 shots a turn, outside rapid fire range, is where most marine armies live. The only thing i dont know is how they work against Vehicles, but regardless, i would seem that i will be playing my wolves as Ultras with the tactical trait. The only question is if they will still have Combat tactics which would make them golden and depending on the rules against vehicles its either spam double grav or grav missile on tactical for massive twin linked action. The only thing i can imagine making them not such an obvious choice would be a higher/prohibitive point cost, which since GW will want to sell them i doubt its the case.
You do know what are rules for salvo? Because seems you don't. Here,I will qote it for you from rulebook.
Amodel armed with a Salvo weapon can move and fire at a target up to half its maximum range away.
So when you move with your 18'' gun you actually have 9'' range on it, which is 15'' total if you count 6'' move. Compare it to plasma gun, who has 30'' range(6'' moving + 24'' range) or even melta gun who then has 18'' range.
The new QnA has made White Scars fears go away for the most part. Looks like the poster a few pages back that speculated the 5 man Bike Troops thing was a minimum was right. And with Khan at only 125pts and the Captain at 90pts, taking both might be worth it for reasons other than making those Bikes Troops. Happy days
Am I missing the grav weapon's interaction with AVs on vehicles? Help guys, I'm just not seeing it, but I assume its in the rumor feed somewhere.
DO:70S++G++M+B++I+Pw40k93/f#++D++++A++++/eWD-R++++T(D)DM+ Note: Records since 2010, lists kept current (W-D-L) Blue DP Crusade 126-11-6 Biel-Tan Aspect Waves 2-0-2 Looted Green Horde smash your face in 32-7-8 Broadside/Shield Drone/Kroot blitz goodness 23-3-4 Grey Hunters galore 17-5-5 Khan Bikes Win 63-1-1 Tanith with Pardus Armor 11-0-0 Crimson Tide 59-4-0 Green/Raven/Deathwing 18-0-0 Jumping GK force with Inq. 4-0-0 BTemplars w LRs 7-1-2 IH Legion with Automata 8-0-0 RG Legion w Adepticon medal 6-0-0 Primaris and Little Buddies 7-0-0
QM Templates here, HH army builder app for both v1 and v2 One Page 40k Ruleset for Game Beginners
Godless-Mimicry wrote: The new QnA has made White Scars fears go away for the most part. Looks like the poster a few pages back that speculated the 5 man Bike Troops thing was a minimum was right. And with Khan at only 125pts and the Captain at 90pts, taking both might be worth it for reasons other than making those Bikes Troops. Happy days
Khan is 150 on the bike, and the Captain would be more than 90 with the bike and wargear...
Lobukia wrote: Am I missing the grav weapon's interaction with AVs on vehicles? Help guys, I'm just not seeing it, but I assume its in the rumor feed somewhere.
I believe it was mentioned earlier that Grav Weapons cause a vehicle to lose a hull point and be immobilized on a roll of a 6.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/08/15 15:26:13
warboss wrote: Is there a permanent stickied thread for Chaos players to complain every time someone/anyone gets models or rules besides them? If not, there should be.
SickSix wrote: I am pretty sure the combi weapons are modular. So you won't even be able to make one of each available. You will be able to make like, 2 and then have bits left over
I can't see GW doing modular combi-weapons, as that would both make them more complex, but not save much room over full combi-weapons. Looking at the pics, the place where you could possibly have a join between bolter base and combi-weapon part would leave an extremely narrow point between the stock/grip and the body/foregrip that would be very prone to breaking. I would imagine only 1 of each weapon in the kit before modular ones.
Apparently the Sternguard have 2 of each, and the Tactical Squad as 1 that is modular.
Really hope this is true, if only to finally stop all the eBay scalpers who charge $10+ for one combi-weapon
Hope its true, i would really like to cast a mold of it. A few cents of resin could make all the combi weapons i could ever wish for. Not to mention that if they are indeed modular, i could make good cast of the top (specialist) weapon component to use over a regular bolter, which is what i like, i dont like the bolter barrel getting downed to the grip of the gun, i rather have a modular specialist weapon attached to a regular bolter.
I hate the GW combi weapons with the specialist weapon above the bolter. It makes no sense. Not to mention why is the combi-plas/grav/whatever so damn big and only one shot?
I plan on making proper combi weapons and making molds. I have the little casting starter set sitting on the shelf.
Same reason a portable grenade launcher attached to a gun in real life is 1 shot. The firing mechanism is there, but not the magazine, only the chamber and the ammunition on it. Same logic to combiweapons. Which make no sence is lowering the and compacting the barrel and receiver of the gun to the left hand grip and it functioning the same way. Either it does not or they are retards for not using more compact guns that have the same performance,
M203s and or their foreign equivalent are not 'one shot' weapons. They are single fire weapons. They fire a single round at a time, but can be reloaded over and over. A grenadier with easy access to a bandolier of shells can pump out some firepower.
GW's combi-guns apparently one [I] use [/] and then you are carrying around dead wieght.
JSF wrote:... this is really quite an audacious move by GW, throwing out any pretext that this is a game and that its customers exist to do anything other than buy their overpriced products for the sake of it. The naked arrogance, greed and contempt for their audience is shocking.
Lobukia wrote: Am I missing the grav weapon's interaction with AVs on vehicles? Help guys, I'm just not seeing it, but I assume its in the rumor feed somewhere.
I know its been said already....but wow are those Centurions ugly. They're possibly the worst model ive seen GW release. When i heard about them i thought awesome its a marine in a power loader! Alas....i get this weird blocky suit that doesnt even look like it can actually function. shame on you GW for these guys and the khorne lord of skulls. /endrant
from the xenos players.
Biel-Tan Aspect Waves 2-0-2 
Looted Green Horde smash your face in 32-7-8 
Broadside/Shield Drone/Kroot blitz goodness 23-3-4 
Grey Hunters galore 17-5-5 
Khan Bikes Win 63-1-1 
Tanith with Pardus Armor 11-0-0 
Crimson Tide 59-4-0 
Jumping GK force with Inq. 4-0-0 
BTemplars w LRs 7-1-2 
RG Legion w Adepticon medal 6-0-0 
