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.

 Ravajaxe wrote:
According to a spanish source of Faeit212 who has skimmed though the codex, the unit listing of units is similar to the 5th edition IG codex.
http://natfka.blogspot.fr/2014/04/astra-militarum-unit-list-leak.html

Here are the notable exceptions I can see :

HQ
+ Tank commander
* Nothing else special, primaris psyker still in.

Troops
- lack of special weapon squad
- Sergeant Bastonne lost in action
- Commander Al'Rahem lost in action
- Commander Chenkov lost in action
* Sergeant Harker still here

Elite
- Marbo lost in action
* Tempestus scions replace stormtrooper (we already knew that)
+ bullgryns

Dedicated Transports
+ Taurox (and taurox prime)

Fast attack
* unchanged

Heavy support
+ Wyvern comes in
- Griffon is out
- Medusa is out
- Colossus is out

I am calling BS. There was no rumor of any of the tanks or SCs going away until about a week ago when people were worried they might. This source sounds like they skimmed the forums and picked some controversial things to say were taken out. Especially because we know there were FA changes (sentinels got a points drop) AND that we have rumors contradicting the Primaris Psyker being an individual choice.

Basically, what I am saying is, apply lots of salt. Faeit WILL reprint anything. We have one week to wait for the book to come out, we can wait until then so see what it contains.

 Happygrunt wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
According to a spanish source of Faeit212 who has skimmed though the codex, the unit listing of units is similar to the 5th edition IG codex.
http://natfka.blogspot.fr/2014/04/astra-militarum-unit-list-leak.html

Here are the notable exceptions I can see :

HQ
+ Tank commander
* Nothing else special, primaris psyker still in.

Troops
- lack of special weapon squad
- Sergeant Bastonne lost in action
- Commander Al'Rahem lost in action
- Commander Chenkov lost in action
* Sergeant Harker still here

Elite
- Marbo lost in action
* Tempestus scions replace stormtrooper (we already knew that)
+ bullgryns

Dedicated Transports
+ Taurox (and taurox prime)

Fast attack
* unchanged

Heavy support
+ Wyvern comes in
- Griffon is out
- Medusa is out
- Colossus is out

I am calling BS. There was no rumor of any of the tanks or SCs going away until about a week ago when people were worried they might. This source sounds like they skimmed the forums and picked some controversial things to say were taken out. Especially because we know there were FA changes (sentinels got a points drop) AND that we have rumors contradicting the Primaris Psyker being an individual choice.

Basically, what I am saying is, apply lots of salt. Faeit WILL reprint anything. We have one week to wait for the book to come out, we can wait until then so see what it contains.

To be fair to the rumour, it's not actually trying to detail changes (things like the FA points changes or Primaris Psyker being an individual choice), it's only detailing what has been added and what has been removed.

Anpu42 wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:

- Sergeant Bastonne lost in action Is in the HQ Section on the GW Site
- Commander Al'Rahem lost in action Is in the HQ Section on the GW Site
- Commander Chenkov lost in action Is in the HQ Section on the GW Site
* Sergeant Harker still here
- Marbo lost in action Is in the Elite Section on the GW Site

At least they are still all up in the GW-US site.

Bastonne did not receive a model (although the kasrkin sergeant made a very good count-as)
Chenkov is long gone (about the same time when most Valhallan gone OOP last year). You may have confused with various vostryan mins.

Bull0 wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
According to a spanish source of Faeit212 who has skimmed though the codex, the unit listing of units is similar to the 5th edition IG codex.
http://natfka.blogspot.fr/2014/04/astra-militarum-unit-list-leak.html
(...)

If that's all true, this Codex sucks.

We already knew basically all of that, except for the artillery stuff and Al'Rahem and Chenkov. Sounds like the "spanish source" cobbled together a load of known stuff and then chucked in something controversial to get attention. Hope so, anyway.

It's still a possibility. But for the artillery tanks, it is highly probable that GW has made an agreement with FW to let them develop, produce models, and sell rules of tanks that have became theirs now.

Red__Thirst wrote:If the Griffons truly are gone, I'm going to be highly perturbed.



Won't be able to use these as Basilisks (Snub nosed bassies.. yea. No), or Wyverns. I could still use the Imperial Armor book to field them, granted, but it's still frustrating as I would rather not have to buy an Imperial Armor book just to field a pair of Griffon mortars.

I can only hope and pray they come out with a supplement for artillery that brings the Colossus, Griffon, and Medusa back in as options. Otherwise I'm going to be very disappointed. Also, before anyone says it: Yes, I realize buying a supplement is identical to having to buy the Imperial Armor book.

*sighs* Gonna go try and figure out how I can use the models pictured above in the near future, and quietly hope that they are in-fact still in the new codex.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

I have about zero chance ever to be your opponent, but in case, I would let you play them IG V6 Basilisks without problem. I would not mind seeing this type of proxy in tournaments.
Their gun is already quite big, and griffon's medium range and strength does not really give justice to these massive beasts !
Be proud of these oldies, they are nice and well painted.

So my MT codex hasn't arrived on time but are scions still taken in platoons or is it 1 squad per troops choice and a platoon in the AM codex?

Is the Militarum Tempestus available to buy at FLGS or GW stores? Will it ever be? It is not on black library either?

Can you take an imperial guard primary force and then take a Scion command squad and two scion squads (as troops) as allies?

 Mantle wrote:
So my MT codex hasn't arrived on time but are scions still taken in platoons or is it 1 squad per troops choice and a platoon in the AM codex?

the mt codex is good to have if you want to have an all scion army or as an allied force. The am codex will have the entry for scions if you want scions as PART of your guard army and not as an ally or seperate army.

 krazynadechukr wrote:

 Mantle wrote:
So my MT codex hasn't arrived on time but are scions still taken in platoons or is it 1 squad per troops choice and a platoon in the AM codex?

the mt codex is good to have if you want to have an all scion army or as an allied force. The am codex will have the entry for scions if you want scions as PART of your guard army and not as an ally or seperate army.

But if I take MT as my primary detachment do the scions come in platoons?

And will they stay as platoons in the AM codex like the white dwarf article?

 Mantle wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:

 Mantle wrote:
So my MT codex hasn't arrived on time but are scions still taken in platoons or is it 1 squad per troops choice and a platoon in the AM codex?

the mt codex is good to have if you want to have an all scion army or as an allied force. The am codex will have the entry for scions if you want scions as PART of your guard army and not as an ally or seperate army.

But if I take MT as my primary detachment do the scions come in platoons?

And will they stay as platoons in the AM codex like the white dwarf article?

yes.

Platoons for both? So in a MT force I can take 6 command squads and 18 squads of scions with enough points

 Mantle wrote:
Platoons for both? So in a MT force I can take 6 command squads and 18 squads of scions with enough points

In am you have 3 elites, you can take 1-3 ten man squads & 0-1 command squads per elites choice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mantle wrote:
Platoons for both? So in a MT force I can take 6 command squads and 18 squads of scions with enough points

you'd want to ally that configuration with guard, hence needing both new codexes.

Where did this "Vendetta will be 170 points and only hole 6 people" come form.

I'm in the same conundrum, I have 50 dkok grenadiers (look & equiped like scions), 1 valk & 5 salamanders (I can use as either taurox or chimera) in my guard army (that alone could be a 1200 pt scion army), (and I have 1 hq & 2 troops, 4 tanks, 1 basilisk, & 9 heavy weapins teams.) So do I get both codexes, or just AM? Will my "scions" be better as allues ir part of my guard? I want to see that MT codex once I get my AM codex to help me decide.

 Fishboy wrote:
Where did this "Vendetta will be 170 points and only hole 6 people" come form.

not sure - today I heard 200+ pts and no transport capacity at all in my local GW store but that's just hearsay and rumour.................

I guess the big draw of the MT book is that those Scions will be scoring troops.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Fishboy wrote:
Where did this "Vendetta will be 170 points and only hole 6 people" come form.

not sure - today I heard 200+ pts and no transport capacity at all in my local GW store but that's just hearsay and rumour.................

I strongly doubt that one. Sure would tick off a lot of people who modeled their Vendettas with open side doors or back doors to not have ANY transport capacity. Of course, the rumored capacity of 6 is just as silly, as there's still the same interior room on every Vendetta model out there as there is on the Valkyrie.

Well, for those missing (maybe missing) Medusa and Co - there is still Imperial Armour, so technically nothing is lost.

For me, most news from codex sounds good. Cheaper STs? Cheaper Sentinel? New rules, new orders, tank HQ, tank orders... truly, when people compare it to Tyranid codex sound to me like bollocks
Yeah, not me, not you saw the codex, but from official(!) materials we have seen it looks really good and with many good new things.

edit: I understand that some thing will suck, you cant make everyone happy, but...I wouldnt prematurely call it lost game, not in the time we are leading

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
No Griffons = Not interested. If I can't field Betty, I have no interest in fielding my other 4500 points, either. To hell with this game.

now that's how you rage quit!

 UlrikDecado wrote:
Well, for those missing (maybe missing) Medusa and Co - there is still Imperial Armour, so technically nothing is lost.

For me, most news from codex sounds good. Cheaper STs? Cheaper Sentinel? New rules, new orders, tank HQ, tank orders... truly, when people compare it to Tyranid codex sound to me like bollocks
Yeah, not me, not you saw the codex, but from official(!) materials we have seen it looks really good and with many good new things.

edit: I understand that some thing will suck, you cant make everyone happy, but...I wouldnt prematurely call it lost game, not in the time we are leading

Im feeling positive, and im feeling positive on that you can still field all of those lovely artillery units from imperial Armour with pretty much no change, so even the old codex is still viable rules are viable since they are the same points/rules.

As for the removal of the old characters, if it is true i do not see the point of it. Bastonne going away is pretty obvious since he sucked, but Al rahem and Chenkov were fluffy characters that altered the armies play style in a fun not broken way. I would be pleased if they actually ADDED a special new character, but i doubt that will happen. Removal of some of them does seem a bit ridiculous.

So far units have not been dropped from a new codex if there is a forgeworld model for it. Remember how there were rumours that shrieks would go from Tyranids? Here's hoping the medusa and griffin stay.

So I preordered my MT codex through the store and guess what.... the store got 1 taurox 2 boxes of scions and thats it...

WTF GW? Preorder means you know exactly how many you need and where....

Are those metal IG regiments direct only? Might have to break my "no Gw" rule for those as I have always liked them.

And for those rage quitting the game, PM me and I'll take those off your hands.

 generalchaos34 wrote:

Im feeling positive, and im feeling positive on that you can still field all of those lovely artillery units from imperial Armour with pretty much no change, so even the old codex is still viable rules are viable since they are the same points/rules.

As for the removal of the old characters, if it is true i do not see the point of it. Bastonne going away is pretty obvious since he sucked, but Al rahem and Chenkov were fluffy characters that altered the armies play style in a fun not broken way. I would be pleased if they actually ADDED a special new character, but i doubt that will happen. Removal of some of them does seem a bit ridiculous.

Kudos for being positive!

Bastonne I would like to see upgraded, not killed, but...not big loss. He just was...fluffy If al-Raheem and Chenkov are out, it sucks. Both were good in crunch (Chenkov very niche), both were fluffy. Marbo...was best. But still, I have hopes for Catachans, Cadians supplementum or, fingers crossed, something like True Heroes of Imperium with many IG characters... Marbo, Chenkov, Last Chancers, Gaunt Ghosts...

Just thought I would add, it looks like the Astra Militarum [IG] Taurox can be built with an open topped cargo area! Awesome!?

Guess I'll just have to run my Griffons and Medusas using IA Vol 1 rather than the codex.

Bastonne: I'm kind of surprised they didn't thow him in with the MT. His rules in the last codex would actually have been good if he was a stormtrooper rather than vet upgrade, and his equipment (hotshot, carapace) lended itself to them as well. I never understood why they put him with vets where he's useless.

Al'Rahem: Added a very interesting rule, but lost his unique order (forwards for the Emperor replaces Like the Wind almost word-for-word) so I can see why.

Chenkov: If he's actually gone, SITNW better be an upgrade on Conscripts.

Of course, they could just sell us 4 different Supplements/Dataslates: Catachan, Cadian, Valhallan and Tallarn.

 UlrikDecado wrote:
Well, for those missing (maybe missing) Medusa and Co - there is still Imperial Armour, so technically nothing is lost.

For me, most news from codex sounds good. Cheaper STs? Cheaper Sentinel? New rules, new orders, tank HQ, tank orders... truly, when people compare it to Tyranid codex sound to me like bollocks
Yeah, not me, not you saw the codex, but from official(!) materials we have seen it looks really good and with many good new things.

edit: I understand that some thing will suck, you cant make everyone happy, but...I wouldnt prematurely call it lost game, not in the time we are leading

It might sound good when just balancing the codex with some units, that's fine.

What is the biggest problem to me is the fact it seems they are taking away what was the most fun thing about Imperial Guard, the diversity.

With the same codex i could create two completely different armies. In a tallarn force i would have sentinels, Al'harem and fast vehicles with a lot of high impact weapons. In a valhallan force i would have chenkov, lots of conscripts and various Artillery pieces.

Al'harem and Chenkov are rumored to be gone, and with them two characters that could truly change up an entire playstyle. The different artillery pieces are gone and just replaced with the basilisk. Now if i want a cheap mortar i would have to go with the wyvern instead of the Griffon. The griffon was good, and it felt good. The wyvern really does seem almost useless, even for a player like me who plays and paints mostly to have a fluffy and distinct army.

From the pictures, we have only seen people fielding Cadians. Cadians are fine, but the point of the guard is that they encapsulate so many different styles of warfare based in our own history. There doesn't seem to be a single thing that i have seen in the codex so far that makes any army capable of being more distinct from the next. We do not have any confirmation of new characters, just the removal of old ones.

These are just fears at the moment but in my opinion they're legitimate fears. I wanted an update to 6th edition that really made regiments stand out. I was hoping the guard would at least get the chapter tactics treatment from the Space Marine codex, but as of now it seems like they have only gone and made the guard more stagnant.

 UlrikDecado wrote:

 generalchaos34 wrote:

Im feeling positive, and im feeling positive on that you can still field all of those lovely artillery units from imperial Armour with pretty much no change, so even the old codex is still viable rules are viable since they are the same points/rules.

As for the removal of the old characters, if it is true i do not see the point of it. Bastonne going away is pretty obvious since he sucked, but Al rahem and Chenkov were fluffy characters that altered the armies play style in a fun not broken way. I would be pleased if they actually ADDED a special new character, but i doubt that will happen. Removal of some of them does seem a bit ridiculous.

Kudos for being positive!

Bastonne I would like to see upgraded, not killed, but...not big loss. He just was...fluffy If al-Raheem and Chenkov are out, it sucks. Both were good in crunch (Chenkov very niche), both were fluffy. Marbo...was best. But still, I have hopes for Catachans, Cadians supplementum or, fingers crossed, something like True Heroes of Imperium with many IG characters... Marbo, Chenkov, Last Chancers, Gaunt Ghosts...

Lots of characters with models removed?

Start singing

 fullheadofhair wrote:
Are those metal IG regiments direct only? Might have to break my "no Gw" rule for those as I have always liked them.

They are cheaper on Ebay and as they are metals there really is no difference between new and second hand (most of the time anyway).

Orthon wrote:
Is the Militarum Tempestus available to buy at FLGS or GW stores? Will it ever be? It is not on black library either?

It is available to buy at FLGS or GW stores...but you have to get it special ordered.

Can you take an imperial guard primary force and then take a Scion command squad and two scion squads (as troops) as allies?

Yes, you can.

The wording of the Clarion Vox-Net for MT is different than that of the one in White Dwarf(MT is "any friendly units" while White Dwarf is "any friendly unit from the same Militarum Tempestus Platoon") but otherwise I'm not seeing any huge changes but I only just got my Tempestus book and I have yet to finish really giving it a good in-depth reading.