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.

Man, getting so much so early has me feeling really impatient sooner than usuall. I hope some more pics leak soon.

Just to insert my own view here. If I want to try different chapters and tactics, I will do so with the models I have. No matter the color... I call that fun, not powergaming.

As for the new AA, they are of limited use unless they can be taken as squadrons. What kind of AA does not have intercepting capability? But if it did, it could fire at ground targets at BS. Duh?

I was just joking guys...I am not sure whether I should be amazed or sad by some people seriously responding that I should be aware of the fact that in reality, Matt Ward does not (!) sneak in and strikes passages out...really guys?

Now, I have read up on all forums and summaries and this looks like SM will just be another bad 40k codex. I have been rambling about TAC now being underpriced (and they are - ATSKNF alone is broken enough and justifies their 16 pts), but see, that's something I could live with since, as others correctly pointed out, they'll have 1-2 TAC more on the battlefield.

...but really, giving the ENTIRE CODEX PE (Everything) is the most slowed thing I have read in recent codex history. And yeah, spare me that "But, but, PE works in melee too!", melee is terrible anyway in 6th.

The idea of having individual tactics you can choose from is awesome, especially given the multitude of chapters and the others seem to be fine, but PE (Everything) just trumps everything so hard that noone even thinks of the other ones.

I am still hoping for this turning out to be a false rumor and it only applying to certain troops, not to vehicles etc. but if this should turn out to be another GW troll attempt, this would mean that SM got an extreme advantage and you'd better be spamming LOS blocking terrain now. Lots of it. The rest of the codex seems to be fine...the new units have their use and don't seem broken, lots of pts costs going down, new AA tank etc.

It's amazing how the team that writes WHFB army books seems to know what they are doing and keep releasing good books that really improve the game whereas the 6th 40k codices are terribly balanced and obviously cater to the powercompensating crowd. I just can't wait for the IG codex, inb4 Vendettas costing 90 pts.

 Lobukia wrote:
Man, getting so much so early has me feeling really impatient sooner than usuall. I hope some more pics leak soon.

+1.These 2 weeks before the pre-orders go up makes me want to stick my head in the sand until the codex drops.

What's PE(everything) mean?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ah... He means preferred enemy.

^^ It is linked to the rumoured Ultra Tactical trait which has most all weapons twin linked or re-rolling ones. We have to wait to see the exact wording yet though...

don't forget Dark Eldar - almost every weapon is poisoned
Dark Angels - gained stubborn for free
Necrons - warrior gauss weapon glance vehicle

The trend lately has been to make troops a better option, not just the two mandatory ones.

Not when that one rule trumps out every other Chapter Tactics, that's just bad.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Dark Angels - gained stubborn for free
Necrons - warrior gauss weapon glance vehicle

Since when is Stubborn good for Marines in 5th/6th?
Necrons: Nothing new here ...

daisho wrote:
Not when that one rule trumps out every other Chapter Tactics, that's just bad.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Dark Angels - gained stubborn for free
Necrons - warrior gauss weapon glance vehicle

Since when is Stubborn good for Marines in 5th/6th?
Necrons: Nothing new here ...

and csm's troops got what?.... oh thats right take cultist cos basic csm marines are rubbish

 ausYenLoWang wrote:

and csm's troops got what?.... oh thats right take cultist cos basic csm marines are rubbish

I was talking about real Spess Marines, not some heretics from the warp

 Sigvatr wrote:
ATSKNF alone is broken enough and justifies their 16 pts

That's why everyone playing SM stack up on Tacs, right?

 His Master's Voice wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
ATSKNF alone is broken enough and justifies their 16 pts

That's why everyone playing SM stack up on Tacs, right?

Short and accurate. An excellent post

Fielding a yellow army with ultramarines rules isn't powergaming. At all. The only thing that would be egregious would be attempting to mix chapter tactics with other chapter's special characters (which you can't do). So long as every model on the board is legal, what does it matter what color it is? Why would you want to encourage players to prime their armies black rather than bring a fully painted force to the table?

Using Kantor to make Sternguard score when you're trying to use the UM Tactical Doctrine would be powergaming. But fielding a totally legal army from the codex that's incidentally painted up in a different color is not. Anybody that would whine about something like that isn't a player I'd be remotely interested in playing against anyways (considering that there's nothing wrong with that).

 ShooShoo wrote:
After all, -2 ppm simply means that you save 10 pts in a 10-man squad.

Wouldn't that be 20 points in a 10 man squad? Or am I missing something with the original cost remaining the same and only the extra marines costing less?

Hey guys. What chapter tactics rules would best fit a Blood Ravens army do you think?

 Sigvatr wrote:

It's amazing how the team that writes WHFB army books seems to know what they are doing and keep releasing good books that really improve the game whereas the 6th 40k codices are terribly balanced and obviously cater to the powercompensating crowd. I just can't wait for the IG codex, inb4 Vendettas costing 90 pts.

You mean the same team that does 40k? (Phil "Eldar" kelly, Matt "Space Marine" Ward, Robin "I can't stop screwing things over" Cruddnce, Jeremy "Okay" Vetock")

Dark Angels/Tau/Ogre Kingdoms/Orcs and Goblins - James Vetock

Eldar/CSM/Chaos Daemons/Vampire Counts: Kelly

Space Marines/ Tomb Kings/Empire: Robin Cruddance

Iyandan Supplement/Daemons of Chaos/High Elves: Mat Ward.

Probably missing a few in there actually.

Seriously, the same people wrote both Warhammer fantasy, and 40k. How do you not know this, is this a joke?

orkybenji wrote:
Hey guys. What chapter tactics rules would best fit a Blood Ravens army do you think?

Their primarch is "unknown" so whatever fits your doctrine of war best. Lots of marines with rapid- fire and heavy weapons? Ultramarine tactical company. Assault marines and bikes? Assault company or raven guard. Without having the book in hand I can only speculate but overall just choose what fits your army's models theme best.

Bolters are pretty much one of the worst (if not the worst) basic weapon in the game.. yet they're basically handheld tank cannons. They really need something special about them, and honestly so do tactical squads since they're also one of the worst troops in the game..although that can be said for most generic 1A space marines.

Granted the UM tactics seems by far the best, but it really is needed to perhaps make the standard marine not a complete joke.

orkybenji wrote:
Hey guys. What chapter tactics rules would best fit a Blood Ravens army do you think?

Thousand Sons

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

It's amazing how the team that writes WHFB army books seems to know what they are doing and keep releasing good books that really improve the game whereas the 6th 40k codices are terribly balanced and obviously cater to the powercompensating crowd. I just can't wait for the IG codex, inb4 Vendettas costing 90 pts.

You mean the same team that does 40k? (Phil "Eldar" kelly, Matt "Space Marine" Ward, Robin "I can't stop screwing things over" Cruddnce, Jeremy "Okay" Vetock")

Dark Angels/Tau/Ogre Kingdoms/Orcs and Goblins - James Vetock

Eldar/CSM/Chaos Daemons/Vampire Counts: Kelly

Space Marines/ Tomb Kings/Empire: Robin Cruddance

Iyandan Supplement/Daemons of Chaos/High Elves: Mat Ward.

Probably missing a few in there actually.

Seriously, the same people wrote both Warhammer fantasy, and 40k. How do you not know this, is this a joke?

Cruddace also wrote the Tyranids last book.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

It's amazing how the team that writes WHFB army books seems to know what they are doing and keep releasing good books that really improve the game whereas the 6th 40k codices are terribly balanced and obviously cater to the powercompensating crowd. I just can't wait for the IG codex, inb4 Vendettas costing 90 pts.

You mean the same team that does 40k? (Phil "Eldar" kelly, Matt "Space Marine" Ward, Robin "I can't stop screwing things over" Cruddnce, Jeremy "Okay" Vetock")

Dark Angels/Tau/Ogre Kingdoms/Orcs and Goblins - James Vetock

Eldar/CSM/Chaos Daemons/Vampire Counts: Kelly

Space Marines/ Tomb Kings/Empire: Robin Cruddance

Iyandan Supplement/Daemons of Chaos/High Elves: Mat Ward.

Probably missing a few in there actually.

Seriously, the same people wrote both Warhammer fantasy, and 40k. How do you not know this, is this a joke?

Cruddace also wrote the Tyranids last book.

Oh I know, I was listing current edition codex's for both Warhammer 8th and 40k 6th, otherwise I would've thrown in all 7th/5th edition codex's

The size comparison that was done pretty much 'proved' they had to be on 50mm bases because otherwise they would be bigger than a dread and make a terminator look like a squat.

 Fezman wrote:
We've been told that that Sternguard are going to cost fewer points per model and that the special ammo is unchanged. I feel like if there were going to be any other major point changes like combibolters doubling in price we would have heard by now.

With that in mind, I'm feeling optimistic that they'll stay as 5 points.

how much do CSM Chosen pay, isnt it like 7 points or am I thinking something else?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StarTrotter wrote:
Wait you mean like mixing in Kharn into a slaanesh army where it won't work as well but Kharn can still possibly beat face if you shove him in a rhino with some meatshields (cutlists or terminators) or the daemon codex where WHOA Lord of Change in a Nurgle army or even Eldar where you can grab multiple factions and shove them together (or tau and ally in more riptides and battlesuits even though farsight enclaves wouldn't have the best relationship with tau).

Personally I didn't want anything broken (because broken mechanics will likely appear in this codex no matter what). Yet I don't get why UM are better at shooting every single gun in the game better than any other marine and that being only a half a point (along with And they shall know no fear) over a standard CSM. Then you get armies that are like Salamanders where they have lost the twin-linked melta and master crafted hammers replaced with master crafted on one hq weapon and flamers being twin-linked (still) and getting to re-roll pen and glances on vehicles with flame throwers? Like what the heck does that even do? The flamers I know of are like S4 or 5 which means they can rarely do anything to a vehicle so why even mention it? And then you go into ones that aren't as convenient (I'd argue that the IF and RG are still not as good as the UM ones even if they do have their advantages).

CSM can do it becasue they only have 7 special characters and 4 of them are cover your eyes awful. GW also seems to think that all CSM are the same with no legion traits and that anyone will work with anyone "it's cinematic to have them mix, they are chaos"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
Am I only one who thinks that it is incredibly stupid that Ultra tacticals are better shots than their veterans? How does that make any sense?

In any case, if these rumours are true, I don't think GW really thought this through. Ultra tactical trait is just hands down better than anything else. Increased accuracy of all shooting in a shooty edition, immunity to plasma overheat (in edition where plasma is good) and tacticals manning Icarus lascannons is just absurdly good.

I am hoping that the rumor is wrong, and somehow Ultra tactical trait isnt as good as we are all hearing, because it is just too good.

No offense to all the people claiming books are being intentionally powered up and that the game is unbalanced but I honestly can't see it.

Are non-6th edition armies hurting a bit more than 6th editions? Some but by not all by any means. Do all 6th edition books stack up competitive wise vs. each other? Certainly.

The inclusion of allies has actually oddly balanced the game. The current issue is the pace. Because of the pace most players aren't able to adapt like normal to the new books being released and without time to adjust are just throwing their hands up in the air and screaming broken or unbalanced.

Anyways, back to C:SM. I can say that Tacs are going to finally be worth taking. DA tacs are solid but not quite good enough outside of a 5-man combi/special weapon in a drop pod. The chapter tactics are going to make them worthwhile in at least Ultramarines, White Scars, and Ravenguard. I see Salamanders as the ultimate ally contingent with 3-4 cheap flamer heavy drop podding units for around 600pts.

But the point is people will actually take Tacticals which even with the ability to not be overrun just haven't stood up as a viable troop unit in 5th and 6th edition to this point.

And as for the army wide shooting PE which Ultras are getting it's being blown way out of proportion. The only unit that'll benefit heavily is the Centurions. There aren't many other places this is going to shift the bar. Unless people mount up again it won't matter on tanks since people should be taking whirlwinds, centurions, and thunderfires for heavy support with maybe an anti-flyer tank thrown in. Fast attack units aren't taken to commonly by SM players but even there it's either already twin-linked (bikes) or not putting out to many shots for it's point value. Yes, sternguard get a boost but it's going to depend on the special ammo cost as to their usefulness. Shooty termies would benefit but who takes those in an army with so many solid elite choices.

Basically wait for the codex for costs on weapons and wargear but also for specific wordings. But I can see numerous instances where I'd prefer the WS, RG, IH, or Salamanders. The only one I can't see using based on rumours is the IF. Guess we'll wait and see but seriously, the game isn't broken and marines aren't going to break it. Just maybe give them tools to stand alone instead of as an ally or with major allies.

***Edit***

And yes, without a sergeant the point difference between DA Tacs and SM Tacs is currently 5 points assuming Melta, Combi-Weapon, and Missile/MM. Which is why DA Tacs aren't that great and are only primarily used from what I've seen in a 5-man drop pod w/combi and special for 120-130 points depending on the special. Something that now SM will be able to do but with benefits which will make me want to bring more than 2 5-mans and bring full 10-mans on top of it.

 tetrisphreak wrote:

orkybenji wrote:
Hey guys. What chapter tactics rules would best fit a Blood Ravens army do you think?

Their primarch is "unknown" so whatever fits your doctrine of war best. Lots of marines with rapid- fire and heavy weapons? Ultramarine tactical company. Assault marines and bikes? Assault company or raven guard. Without having the book in hand I can only speculate but overall just choose what fits your army's models theme best.

According to their WD article from years ago, they use their libbys to work out the tactics for an upcoming mission and then engage in lightning assaults and strikes to destroy the enemy before the battle has a chance to begin.

I'd use Raven Guard in this case.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 Bulldogging wrote:
The Stalker is only listed as having 4 shots and can split fire. Not 8, unless I missed an update.

each of the weapons has four shots

4 sounds about right
8 and the thing is incredibly good. Here have a forgefiend for 100 points less.

I am amazed that people think Tactical marines are overpowered.

What game have you played that a tactical marine squad overwhelmed your forces and killed more points than they costed? I can't remember a time for my army. In fact they usually stand around taking pot shots at people or unload out of a rhino and try to rapid fire something to death and usually fail.

To all the people who keep thinking that Imperial Fists, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Ultra Marines, White Scars, etc.... are all different armies. Whoa. They aren't. You have little toy soldiers with armor on the field. They are ALL space marines. They have a little fluff to go along with them but in the end you have about 4 rulebooks to represent your forces. As long as your army is WYSIWIG then I don't care what rules you use to represent your aggressive assault arm of your Ultramarine army. Just use the rules correctly, make sure your points are properly spent, and that you aren't mixing any of the rules incorrectly.

With the ally rules the game has pretty much allowed you to do almost anything so get over it people. You can ally tau and space marines. That is pretty damn unfluffy so get OVER IT.

spamthulhu wrote:
I am amazed that people think Tactical marines are overpowered.

What game have you played that a tactical marine squad overwhelmed your forces and killed more points than they costed? I can't remember a time for my army. In fact they usually stand around taking pot shots at people or unload out of a rhino and try to rapid fire something to death and usually fail.

To all the people who keep thinking that Imperial Fists, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Ultra Marines, White Scars, etc.... are all different armies. Whoa. They aren't. You have little toy soldiers with armor on the field. They are ALL space marines. They have a little fluff to go along with them but in the end you have about 4 rulebooks to represent your forces. As long as your army is WYSIWIG then I don't care what rules you use to represent your aggressive assault arm of your Ultramarine army. Just use the rules correctly, make sure your points are properly spent, and that you aren't mixing any of the rules incorrectly.

With the ally rules the game has pretty much allowed you to do almost anything so get over it people. You can ally tau and space marines. That is pretty damn unfluffy so get OVER IT.

I don't understand the view on tactical squads either. They've been bad for basically every edition of 40k since 3rd (and I don't remember them being great in 2nd either). All tactical squads do is shoot 2 decent weapons, make a bunch of ineffectual CC attacks then die vs anything that has multiple attacks. If you play even in semi-competitive tournaments you should see how poor tactical squads are (and by extension any unit that is similar to a tactical squad.. like assault squads)

They desperately need buffing so hopefully this is for the better.

 ShooShoo wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

It's amazing how the team that writes WHFB army books seems to know what they are doing and keep releasing good books that really improve the game whereas the 6th 40k codices are terribly balanced and obviously cater to the powercompensating crowd. I just can't wait for the IG codex, inb4 Vendettas costing 90 pts.

You mean the same team that does 40k? (Phil "Eldar" kelly, Matt "Space Marine" Ward, Robin "I can't stop screwing things over" Cruddnce, Jeremy "Okay" Vetock")

Dark Angels/Tau/Ogre Kingdoms/Orcs and Goblins - James Vetock

Eldar/CSM/Chaos Daemons/Vampire Counts: Kelly

Space Marines/ Tomb Kings/Empire: Robin Cruddance

Iyandan Supplement/Daemons of Chaos/High Elves: Mat Ward.

Probably missing a few in there actually.

Seriously, the same people wrote both Warhammer fantasy, and 40k. How do you not know this, is this a joke?

I said "team", not specific authors - I just can't believe the very same teams (as in: group of certain people working together at one army book) manage to, on the one hand, produce good army books in WHFB and on the other hand, manage to screw up 40k's balance so bad. The only explanation I could come up with right now is that GW wants to milk the 40k cow by simply releasing broken codices on purpose. 40k and WHFB army books / codices are worlds apart from each others both in terms of external and internal balance. And to be fair, assuming randomness seems slightly unbelievable now.

Why do you have a different account..?

Or it's simply because they want to release their codex's faster, and generally sod off testing.

I'd love to have the Warriors of Chaos ported over for CSM..

Or it's simply because they want to release their codex's faster, and generally sod off testing.

I'd love to have the Warriors of Chaos ported over for CSM..

So you want a totally overcosted and fairly bad army thats only saving grace is the massively untested Demon prince of nurgle that can't be killed? and the manticore that is extremely good for a monster. I guess that's a successful book.. 2 models! I've seen warriors of chaos armies with around 14 total models because the only things worth taking are the demon prince + manticore.