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.

 Zweischneid wrote:
Just saying if you want to stick with 40K, you shouldn't try playing it against the grain of it's core-design principles.

"Stop wasting time trying to improve the rules" isn't a core design principle, it's laziness and incompetence.

"We'd rather cut a unit and lose $10 than allow someone else to make $1 off our IP" isn't a core design principle, it's greed and stupidity.

 alarmingrick wrote:
And what happens when that "simple question" is answered with a no, instead of the warm, welcoming yes you envision?

I live in my world, Z.

Have you ever even asked? Genuinely? Friendly? Humbly? Politely?

I have a hard time envisioning the kind of gamer who would say no to that kind of genuinely polite and humble question... especially as we "all" know the mess that is 40K.

Peregrine wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
You don't have to engage me. But you know full well that you are only entrapped by your own refusal to engage the opponent across the table, if you think a unit is "illegal", just because it isn't in the latest codex. Really, the only thing holding you back is the fear of asking a simple question.

You can keep repeating your whole "talk about it" nonsense all you like, but the indisputable fact is that many people play 40k as a pickup game in a store, where the expectation is that you follow the normal rules of the game and many people are reluctant to include house rules. And many of us do not like the fact that now we have to negotiate to be allowed to use our army, instead of just showing up and playing a game.

Slightly OT, but I wonder if this is a Regional thing. From what I've seen around the web, pick-up games in store seems to be a lot more common in the USA, whereas over here non-store/private clubs seem more common. This may just be coincidence, but obvioulsly that kind of negotiation would be easier/more likely in a club rather than pick-up setting.

 Paradigm wrote:
Just a quick question: Are the Artillery rules/costs in IA1 identical to the ones in the old IG codex? Because if so, there's nothing stopping anyone just using the old codex rules and saying 'these are now FW, but the stats are the same, ok?'

The rules are the same, because when they were printed there was no reason to believe that they were anything other than a copy of the codex rules that was included to go along with all of the fluff pages about those tanks.

Cheers. I imagined they would be, but sometimes FW have added/tweaked things, like Autocannons on Chimeras.

alarmingrick wrote:And what happens when that "simple question" is answered with a no, instead of the warm, welcoming yes you envision?

I live in my world, Z.

Then you find someone else to play with. Assuming there are multiple people in the store, I imagine you could find one person reasonable enough to play with FW rules.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 alarmingrick wrote:
And what happens when that "simple question" is answered with a no, instead of the warm, welcoming yes you envision?

I live in my world, Z.

Have you ever even asked? Genuinely? Friendly? Humbly? Politely?

I have a hard time envisioning the kind of gamer who would say no to that kind of genuinely polite and humble question... especially as we "all" know the mess that is 40K.

I really feel we're at odds, yet on the same side. Can you think of any other games that work the way you are talking about? I don't have a problem asking a question of people I play against. I have a problem with that I have to ask in the first place.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 alarmingrick wrote:
And what happens when that "simple question" is answered with a no, instead of the warm, welcoming yes you envision?

I live in my world, Z.

Have you ever even asked? Genuinely? Friendly? Humbly? Politely?

I have a hard time envisioning the kind of gamer who would say no to that kind of genuinely polite and humble question... especially as we "all" know the mess that is 40K.

In several years of using a pre-heresy World Eater force ('counts as' Blood Angels) I only had one person refuse to play me, although a couple of times had people blame their defeat on lack of knowing what my units were, and of course a few 'you should use the chaos codex' comment. (Even a 'why aren't they painted like the ones on the box'?! )

You're right, I think the vast majority of people are trusting and welcoming, even in pick-up games where you don't know the opponent. But, a 'no' only has to happen once and it can really deflate you.

 alarmingrick wrote:


I really feel we're at odds, yet on the same side. Can you think of any other games that work the way you are talking about? I don't have a problem asking a question of people I play against. I have a problem with that I have to ask in the first place.

No. I don't know any other game that works that way. Which is why it is such a rare and special thing in 40K that is worth preserving.

For those who don't like to game that way, there are literally thousands of games.

For those who do like to game that way, there really is only 40K.

Glad I got my plastic Baney when I did, 95bucks beats that Knight price of 140bucks! They acknowledge that A-mil are commonly referred to as IG in their codex section.....why not keep the Imperial Guard? Oh wait, that can't be locked down as IP-copyright as it is a real life term used by nations!

 Mr.Omega wrote:

AV12 with 6 mid-strength shots for 55 points was about 10 points undercosted anyway, compare it to vehicles from other Codexes, you do not find many things close to it for 55 or less at all, and when you do I bet that they don't get carry capacity as well.

If we're talking undercosted transports, the Chimera definitely isn't it.

Night Scythes are undercosted by about half. At 150 they'd still be a steal.

Wave Serpents cost twice as many points but have 1) better weapons, 2) are fast skimmers, 3) better BS, 4) better armor, 5) Serpent Sheild, the list goes on and on.


The Chimera was OK at 55 points in 6th edition. At 65 points it's an absolute ripoff especially since the typical cargo (Vets) are probably going to 2 Specials per squad.

I really don't see the Chimera change as that bad, to be honest. Sure, it's another 10 points you can't spend elsewhere, but it's not exactly overcosted.

 Zweischneid wrote:
No. I don't know any other game that works that way. Which is why it is such a rare and special thing in 40K that is worth preserving.

Oh good, this same old nonsense again. I think you are the only person who thinks that "the rules are so utterly broken that you have to negotiate and fix them before you can play the game" is an attribute worth preserving. This is like getting served moldy food in a restaurant and showing up to protest when it's shut down for health violations because "it's a rare thing worth preserving".

 Paradigm wrote:
I really don't see the Chimera change as that bad, to be honest. Sure, it's another 10 points you can't spend elsewhere, but it's not exactly overcosted.

It is when you compare it to a unit that, for 35 points more, is a BS4 flier with a much better weapon that never kills its passengers when it's destroyed.

Just saying...the last thing the Chimera needed was a points increase.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
I really don't see the Chimera change as that bad, to be honest. Sure, it's another 10 points you can't spend elsewhere, but it's not exactly overcosted.

It is when you compare it to a unit that, for 35 points more, is a BS4 flier with a much better weapon that never kills its passengers when it's destroyed.

Just saying...the last thing the Chimera needed was a points increase.

Agreed, but as you yourself just pointed out, that's a case of the Scythe being too cheap, not the Chimera being to expensive. Rather than comparing it to undercosted options like Scythes and Serpents, look at what you actually get with the Chimera.

65 points for AV12 front, 2 good weapons, 5 fire points. I'd say that's fine when compared to transports like Rhinos, Razorbacks, Devilfish, Ghost Arks and just general cost.

The Chimera was well-justified at 55 points. It's cargo is a much lower points squad than what you'd find in a Space Marines, Eldar, Necron, or Ork army. It's primarily to protect a special weapons toting squad and to get scoring units onto objectives, especially since you can't assault ogryns or a command squad out of one.

So while it was good for the points, it wasn't performing the transport function like other army's transports, which are usually to get high points units into the fight quickly.

That said, I will reserve judgement until we see the cost of vehicle upgrades on it. A 10 point bump could be offset if pintle-mounted weapons are 5 points i/o 10, or if extra armor/dozer/HKM are cheaper too.

 Paradigm wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
I really don't see the Chimera change as that bad, to be honest. Sure, it's another 10 points you can't spend elsewhere, but it's not exactly overcosted.

It is when you compare it to a unit that, for 35 points more, is a BS4 flier with a much better weapon that never kills its passengers when it's destroyed.

Just saying...the last thing the Chimera needed was a points increase.

Agreed, but as you yourself just pointed out, that's a case of the Scythe being too cheap, not the Chimera being to expensive. Rather than comparing it to undercosted options like Scythes and Serpents, look at what you actually get with the Chimera.

65 points for AV12 front, 2 good weapons, 5 fire points. I'd say that's fine when compared to transports like Rhinos, Razorbacks, Devilfish, Ghost Arks and just general cost.

It would have been easier (for me anyway) to buy that argument had they not released the reason for the 65 point price tag(Taurox) at the same time.
It's clearly done for the sake of selling more of the new toy.

 alarmingrick wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
I really don't see the Chimera change as that bad, to be honest. Sure, it's another 10 points you can't spend elsewhere, but it's not exactly overcosted.

It is when you compare it to a unit that, for 35 points more, is a BS4 flier with a much better weapon that never kills its passengers when it's destroyed.

Just saying...the last thing the Chimera needed was a points increase.

Agreed, but as you yourself just pointed out, that's a case of the Scythe being too cheap, not the Chimera being to expensive. Rather than comparing it to undercosted options like Scythes and Serpents, look at what you actually get with the Chimera.

65 points for AV12 front, 2 good weapons, 5 fire points. I'd say that's fine when compared to transports like Rhinos, Razorbacks, Devilfish, Ghost Arks and just general cost.

It would have been easier (for me anyway) to buy that argument had they not released the reason for the 65 point price tag(Taurox) at the same time.
It's clearly done for the sake of selling more of the new toy.

I totally agree the 65 point chimera is ok with me but everyone knows the only reason it was increased was because of the "short bus."

 Mr.Omega wrote:
I think the Chimera nerf is being viewed with the sort of tunnel vision people had with Belial's points nerf. Belial was massively undercosted in the previous DA Codex and people cried doom and designer idiocy at his massive points increase, despite the fact that for all his advantages it was entirely justified- the only thing that doesn't make him worthwhile is the fact the playstyle he's associated with is isn't good, frankly.

So what did recosting him accomplish if his playstyle isn't viable other than making it less so?

I mean really, the Razorback is 55 for TL HB, has less armour, less firepower and less carry capacity. Compared to the Rhino, 20 points buys you 6 midstrength long range shots an armour that lets you survive more than a turn on the front.

The Razorback has side hatches, self repair, BS4 and is in an army of super-soldier infantry and not wet noodle infantry.

The Chimera was a bit too cheap, arguably.

At the beginning of 5E, when most other armies were still running 4E or 5E books, perhaps. After 6E, Hull Points, new transport rules, and the new Necron, Eldar, and Tau books? One will notice those Chimera parking lots largely disappeared.

People should stop whinging about smokes and searchlights, both of those are far from mandatory, 95% of the time you'll want to be shooting or exploiting flat out instead, or you'll be behind something like a Leman Russ for a consistent cover save/LOS blockage that renders them effectively moot. Searchlights are 1 pt. Big deal.

Searchlights are used more than ever now that Nightfight is in *EVERY* mission type and not just 1/3rd of games, and Smoke Launchers are always valuable wargear, the Leman Russ tanks don't advance ahead of the chimeras for them to hide behind.

Paying 30-40 points extra army wide will also possibly get balanced out by everything else getting cheaper.

Except...it's not all getting cheaper...? And, as I pointed out earlier, for many players we're not talking about 30-40pts but 3-6x that.

The points cost of most things hasn't leaked so calling doom at this point is idiotic.

And yet you're certain taht everything else will be getting cheaper when we've seen no such evidence aside from Sentinels.

 alarmingrick wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
I really don't see the Chimera change as that bad, to be honest. Sure, it's another 10 points you can't spend elsewhere, but it's not exactly overcosted.

It is when you compare it to a unit that, for 35 points more, is a BS4 flier with a much better weapon that never kills its passengers when it's destroyed.

Just saying...the last thing the Chimera needed was a points increase.

Agreed, but as you yourself just pointed out, that's a case of the Scythe being too cheap, not the Chimera being to expensive. Rather than comparing it to undercosted options like Scythes and Serpents, look at what you actually get with the Chimera.

65 points for AV12 front, 2 good weapons, 5 fire points. I'd say that's fine when compared to transports like Rhinos, Razorbacks, Devilfish, Ghost Arks and just general cost.

It would have been easier (for me anyway) to buy that argument had they not released the reason for the 65 point price tag(Taurox) at the same time.
It's clearly done for the sake of selling more of the new toy.

I do see why you think that, and believe me, I'm just as cynical and convinced that it was done just to boost Taurox sales. I was just trying to say that the slight points increase is a relatively minor thing to worry about when, at current tally, we've lost 4 special characters and 4 complete units There are certainly a lot of things to complain about, but I don't think the Chimera pricing, regardless of motive, is a priority.

Oh, look, the ultimate Internet contrarian and the user least capable of walking away from a fight have encountered each other in a thread about a somewhat controversial update of a very popular army.

 azreal13 wrote:
Oh, look, the ultimate Internet contrarian and the user least capable of walking away from a fight have encountered each other in a thread about a somewhat controversial update of a very popular army.

Awesome! Thanks for helping the situation out so much!

Holier than thou sniping is just as much of a annoyance as the "ultimate Internet contrarian and the user least capable of walking away from a fight "!

What's the problem?

 krazynadechukr wrote:
What's the problem?

That's a Medusa, not a Griffon. Just sayin'.....

TuddFudders wrote:

Heafstaag wrote:
Haven't seen this yet, but a poster over on warseer posted the the bullgryn's 'brute shield' gives a 5+ invul save!

Truly the savior of the codex right here. Everything else was justified.

This right here is why I'm getting tired of this thread. We've had maybe 10 pages of actual rumor and 40 pages of discussion of said rumors, then 100 pages of bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, "oh, you're telling me not to 'whinge' then you're a GW fanboy."

And now anytime someone intrudes on that conversation to talk about actual rumors, they get a snarky comment. This thread needs to die.

How about you guys take that gak somewhere else?

And i must say im quite happy with how the codex turned out.
I like Imperial Guard, i like playing Imperial Guard.
Couldn't care less about Point Costs and such things.

 krazynadechukr wrote:
What's the problem?

Because there is no reason why you should have to convert a medusa (that's a FW medusa in your pic). There is no logical reason on why these things were cut from the IG codex. If they were cutting units with no GW models, then WHY IS THE VENDETTA STILL IN?

So why do you think a snarky comment is bad, but a post of rejoining for a 5+ invulnerable save is good?

 alarmingrick wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Oh, look, the ultimate Internet contrarian and the user least capable of walking away from a fight have encountered each other in a thread about a somewhat controversial update of a very popular army.

Awesome! Thanks for helping the situation out so much!

Holier than thou sniping is just as much of a annoyance as the "ultimate Internet contrarian and the user least capable of walking away from a fight "!

Wasn't talking about you dude, but this response, considering others I've seen from you too, is telling me that you are probably suffering a sense of humour failure and need to decompress a little?

 Happygrunt wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
What's the problem?

Because there is no reason why you should have to convert a medusa (that's a FW medusa in your pic). There is no logical reason on why these things were cut from the IG codex. If they were cutting units with no GW models, then WHY IS THE VENDETTA STILL IN?

That is actually a very good point. It, like the Arty, is a FW conversion kit, so why hasn't it gone too? If Spock could see how GW are operating, he'd have a heart attack.

There seems to be a fair old amount of stuff missing from the new Imperial Guar..... sorry ASTRA MILITARUM section of the GW website. No Creed, no LC, but weirdly still Al'Rahem even though he's meant to be dropped. Kind of hoping it's just a balls up as they're moving stuff on the website around, but now I'm getting a little worried. I wanted the LC.

 azreal13 wrote:

 alarmingrick wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Oh, look, the ultimate Internet contrarian and the user least capable of walking away from a fight have encountered each other in a thread about a somewhat controversial update of a very popular army.

Awesome! Thanks for helping the situation out so much!

Holier than thou sniping is just as much of a annoyance as the "ultimate Internet contrarian and the user least capable of walking away from a fight "!

Wasn't talking about you dude, but this response, considering others I've seen from you too, is telling me that you are probably suffering a sense of humour failure and need to decompress a little?

You're correct. My apologizes.

JeneralJoe117 wrote:
There seems to be a fair old amount of stuff missing from the new Imperial Guar..... sorry ASTRA MILITARUM section of the GW website. No Creed, no LC, but weirdly still Al'Rahem even though he's meant to be dropped. Kind of hoping it's just a balls up as they're moving stuff on the website around, but now I'm getting a little worried. I wanted the LC.

The LC is certainly gone, which is annoying, as I was planning on getting one this week (my only hope now is that the local GW store will still have one on the shelf next week). Stupidly, they've kept the old metal ones, but got rid of the newer, and in my opinion, best one.