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.

I love the new Space Wolf and Grey Knights Codex and cant wait for Blood Angels.
I still don't see where people are saying the Space Wolf Codex is boring and uninspired. To me it is a very dynamic exiting book. My only real complaint is that there are so many different build I cant decide what it want to play.

As for the grey Knights, it took my 2,250 point Army and made it a playable 2,000 point army with my only real choice is Land Raider Redeemer or Stormraven.

New orks are great. I have to call BS on all the internet gripe saying half the squad dies to mob rule or they loose 3 or 4. Mob rule has saved me a bunch a time from running and I didn't even loose a boy to it. Most i have ever lost is 2 .Also 30 shoota boyz going to ground in a ruin, makes your opponent rage lol.

As far as loosing invul in cc. I don't even notice. Now that I can plop fnp into a 30 strong mob. Also the new KFF being an invul is great especially combined with fnp.

I still run kanz back up by large shoota boy mobs and they work just as they did before.

I win a lot more than I lose. Shoota boyz going up to 7 points is fair, I even felt 6 was to cheap for them last codex.

So far, I find the 7th codices are very nicely tuned to each other. 'Ere we go has been an all-star rule for our ork player. So has new mob rule, for that matter. Our DE guy and I find the army wide pfp chart to be amazing.
And I really don't see that many people complain about them online. Most people I see talking about them online are the people saying "why's everyone hating on this new book, I think it's pretty solid."

I honestly love the new GK codex but it did re-enforce my play style since I was a huge deep striker and shunter with most of my tactics based around that. I have won a fair amount of games and I have been enjoying playing the new codex. I miss Mordrak and I am miss psybolts but it isn't something that greatly affected my enjoyment of the codex. I feel though, they fixed a lot of the fluff that people had problems with in the previous codex like Draigo and the Bloodtide incident.

At the same time, I understand people's gripes about the new GK and there has been a huge debate over it. Loss of content with needing three codices, one major hardback book with two e-books if you used all three of those elements. GW certainly did not make this economical and I understand why people are upset but I haven't let it get me down about this, I just can sympathize with those that are upset. I honestly like the individual attention that my army got.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
I am greatly disappointed in the Ork codex. I don't hate it, just disappointed. As accolade said, it's largely the removal of content and playstyles, but it's also the continued pendulum and bumbling way of balance, over nerfing some units into uselessness, not fixing the units that needed to be fixed, and turning perfectly good rules into a random load of crap.

Would you mind giving actual examples instead of generalisms?

And please don't list the loss of invulnerable saves as a playstyle that has been lost.

Content and playstyles removed:
The lost of Wazdakka and Old Zogwart (while not the most popular, still provided interesting mechanics, and I'll miss turning HQs into squigs)

You can still build a model just like Wazzdakka using the relic bike. The only great thing about Zogwort was the curse of the squig - his inability to use shooting powers, the worthless staff and his terrible profile are not going to be missed. Besides, the actual number of Zogworts showing up in games was very, very low.

Biker boy mobz (although still playable via unbound, the lost of objective secured makes it uncompetitive)

Biker boyz have dropped in points, increased in unit size, gained access to pain boyz and have generally become one of the best units in the codex. Objective secured rarely ever matters for orks, (if you are within 3", why aren't you in combat?). Doubling up on CAD allows you to field the very same army as before, with the difference of having some trukkboyz or gretchin in the mix. Since you are saving 7 points per biker, an army of 30 bikers would already cost 5 less points than before, even though you have an extra pain boy and four new units of gretchin.
Pretty hard to call an army that basically got four units and a HQ for free a removed playstyle.

Kan wall (Kans got horribly nerfed, which they didn't need since they're already got hosed with only 2 HP, and while dreads got buffed they're still not useful on their own)

Kan wall was already all but gone in 6th, due to the relevant rules disappearing from the BRB. The codex really didn't do anything but put the final nail in its coffin.

Battlewagon konvoy (the 20 point jump and still having to pay for the mandatory weapons. But the nerf to the deff rolla is just unforgivable)

What mandatory weapons? I rarely take any, if ever. The battlewagon bash still works great, the loss of the deff rolla (which is sad) is pretty much balanced out by being able to bring good anti-tank like tank bustaz or mek gunz along. The 20 point jump is pretty much attributed to battlewagons getting a lot more durable since the last codex was made. No lost playstyles to be found here.

And I don't consider cyborks a playstyle, but I would say it was kinda important to have around. I liked my nobs having a save against krak missiles

Why take cybork if you can have mega-armour?
Seriously though, cybork didn't save you from krak missiles either. Nobz take casualties easier now, but also dropped in points. In total, I'd say they are just as bad as before.

Most people across the internet are echoing the very same things you just listed. I actually bet a warhammer buddy of mine that you'd list biker armies, deff rollas, kanz, lootaz and cybork, because that's what everyone does. Which is very sad. Take a step back, rethink what your army was supposed to do, adjust according to the new codex and you'll find the very armies and play-styles just thought lost have become more powerful and well-rounded than ever before.

As a space wolves player and playing a bunch of games with the new SW codex. The book seems boring/bland, in the last there was a great lack of internal balance and that has been mitigated, but in doing that a lot of flavor has been lost. I understand that certain things needed to be nerfed, such as the denial bubble and the wolf standard, but loss of a lot of unique wargear and especially the mark of the wulfen entirely, instead of changing it. This just makes this codex seem like a supplement to the SM codex opposed to a stand alone codex, there are only 3 unique weapons, the frost weapons, wolf claws (which are just lightning claws with 1 extra strength) and hellfrost guns. We no longer have any unique rules like HQs cannot have identical wargear, or 2 hqs per each hq1 slot in force org

Like the other GK posters here, I'm happy with the new codex. Was playing a Ghostwing list from 5th through 6th, and had already started to shift to a Shuntwing+Mordrak Bomb before 7th. The only real effect 7th has had on me is that I'm now running Draigo instead of Mordrak, and I take less models so I can fit it a Knight Titan. That's it. Didn't even need to buy a single new model, as I already played TDA heavy. Thankfully, my GKT and PAGK were already magnetized (weapons for the TDA, backpacks and special weapons for the PA).

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Like the other GK posters here, I'm happy with the new codex. Was playing a Ghostwing list from 5th through 6th, and had already started to shift to a Shuntwing+Mordrak Bomb before 7th. The only real effect 7th has had on me is that I'm now running Draigo instead of Mordrak, and I take less models so I can fit it a Knight Titan. That's it. Didn't even need to buy a single new model, as I already played TDA heavy. Thankfully, my GKT and PAGK were already magnetized (weapons for the TDA, backpacks and special weapons for the PA).

SJ

Great minds think alike but I also bring Imperial Fists as well.

The Ork Codex made me shelve my army. My own army became illegal outside of Funbound and went up in points. The loss of units, removal of interesting playstyles and mechanics and the blandification of everything has really turned me off of one of my favorite armies.

Which interesting playstyles have been removed?

Biker horde is even more viable than previously, etc

I play orks and am happy with what we have. There are lots of viable builds with just the codex and dataslates just add to it. Lots of great units and tactics. Yep, there are a few odd things like the price tag of kanz, naughts and burnas, but the codex really doesn't have obscenely bad choices other than Ghazzy. Oh, you think kanz and walker wall is bad? Try dread mob formation. 'ere we go and buffed HOW are a thing.

Same with SW and GK.

Note, however, that GK have very few units thus drammatically lowering their tactical flexibility and feel just an alpha-strike one-trick pony. Effective one, though.

So far, i'm really happy with what's going on in 7-th ed.

 Chumbalaya wrote:
The Ork Codex made me shelve my army. My own army became illegal outside of Funbound and went up in points. The loss of units, removal of interesting playstyles and mechanics and the blandification of everything has really turned me off of one of my favorite armies.

I hear this a great deal about the new codices. "Blandification." I just don't see it. There are things I don't like in the new dex, but it's far from bland. Lots of cool choices and tons of fluffy weapons and units.

I said it before I am trying to work through my Ork Dex Hate and I amonce again growing to love Orks again been with the stupid gits since 3rd ED. But I must admit I still HATE that in a trend of making trooper models cheaper SM now 14pts DE Warriors now down a point ext, that GW idea of makeing Sluggaboys more attractive was makeing Shootaboys more Expencive.
PS Deffrolla

It is nice that people who played bad or odd armies under old books suddenly have good units. we had a friend who started GK with terminators , NDKs and we didn't knew what to do with him before the new dex. On the other hand my boyfriends list is no longer legal and he spend a lot of money on it.As no one here expected that GW would kill a whole army.

My IG was a nice dynamic army I liked. It was dynamic when armies didn't needed it to win. Now that being dynamic is the corner stone of 7th ed, my army lost the mobility options it had and is bad without ally in 7th. So neither me, nor my boyfriend are happy with the changes.

I think the GK dex is great. I'm a long time GK player and I can finally field a solid army of Grey Knights without Cotaez and henchmen. I think once the Eldar and Tau codices get brought back down to reality, the new codex hate will diminish. (Reminds me of the Vampire Counts and Dark Elves issue of Warhammer past).

The issue with removing content and special characters is just a paradigm shift. People are still judging new dexes with a 7th ed. mentality. Take special character.....unit becomes troops is dead, and content and play style had been broadened with allys, formations, and dataslates.

For me personally, the 40K Universe has never been so open and vast. I've been playing for 25 years and this is a great time to be involved in the hobby. Everyone loves to criticize, but praise is rare.

Thanks to the new GK codex, I'm now a Tyranid player. I started playing this game with GKs at the very end of 5th and loved them, admittedly in no small part because they were a tiny, elite army. But to me the new codex stripped out a lot of the flavor and almost all of the actual differences between the units. Each unit having a different unique psychic power that fit their role was a great way to help differentiate between units that by necessity did not have a low of variation to begin with.

With the loss of those, there's really no difference between any of the PAGK that would actually require them to be different units, and not simply upgrades. The change to psycannons forces the PAGKs, who are supposedly designed to be a close range shooting/close combat mixed unit to choose one or the other, while paying the points for both. Psybolt used to help them out against larger model count armies by making the fewer shots they put out matter more.

Now, I'm not saying they're a weak army, they're still good, they're just not fun anymore to me.

@Jidmah:

Wazdakka & Old Zogwart

A warboss with Gazbag's blitzbike is not "just like" wazdakka and his bike of the aporkalypse. For one thing, you can't fire while while turbo boosting, and the gun is not quite as good (str 8 ap 4 assault 4 vs str 6 ap 3 assault 3 twinlinked. I think I would prefer the better tankbuster) Although the warboss+gazbag's is much cheaper than Wazdakka was

Old Zogwart, on the other hand, I don't think the idea of "well, we wasn't used a lot. The tau ethereal special character was considered the worst special character in the entire game, and what happened? GW updated his rules in the 6th eidiotn codex, and he's fairly decent. Games workshop dropped the ball with this, and even if the new rules wouldn't have been great, people still would have used him.

I still would have used him

Biker mobz

Yes, it's great that biker boyz got that buff, they needed it. However, the good thing about wazdakka making bikers troops was that it freed up the fast atttack slots for other things, like buggies. I could take 6 units of bikes thanks to double CAD, but that means my only other "fast" unit would have to be trukk boyz (although that does include burnas and tank bustas) or the battlewagon (which I'll get to in a second).

Kan Wall

Yes, 6th edition already killed Kan Wall. But like with Zogwart, GW could have fixed them, they should have fixed and they didn't. I think there is some truth that GW reacts to meta that's two editions old.

Battlewagons

Mandatory weapons as in "anything to prevent the wagon from being immobilized from a weapon destroyed result. You may not take them, but you're not the sole data point on the chart I don't see how it got tougher, compared to it during fifth edition (particularly the whole 'open top no longer reduces the strength of an explosion' thing), and I think the real reason they got bumped up was to level out with the reduced cost of a nob squad.

Cybork

Why can't I have a choice between which one I would prefer to use (not to mention that I could have both on a warboss). And I can say that the cybork has saved me from ID more that a few times, it was just as valuable as every other inv save in the game

I guess to be honest, it's more that I'm more disappointed in what I think the codex COULD have been than what it actually is, and if I just got to brass tacks the ork codex is not a bad codex, just a meh one.

Sold 3/4ths of my GK army, PAGK are confused now. They want to be a Jack-of-all-trades but they really are more of a niche than before/

Either you dole out 5 more ppm for Purifiers which are PAGK except better in everyway with ML2 Cleansing Flame 2 attacks more special weapon slots and take a minimum of Strike Squads

Or you go all in on the improved termies which are relentless so they can fire AND assault, 2 attacks, 2+ and 5++.

It has moved me to start making a Deathwatch army, still working out the kinks on how to do this legally though.

I find with my Grey Knights that most of my pure GK lists are just about the same. Some combo of Librarian, terms, interceptors and dread knights. I occasionally take purifiers/Storm raven/Draigo. Psycannons on terms, incinerators on everything else.

Allies give me variation my list desperately needs and stops every game from being the same. My strike squads are now purifiers since I don't see me ever using PAGKs as anything but purifiers.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
@Jidmah:

Wazdakka & Old Zogwart

A warboss with Gazbag's blitzbike is not "just like" wazdakka and his bike of the aporkalypse. For one thing, you can't fire while while turbo boosting, and the gun is not quite as good (str 8 ap 4 assault 4 vs str 6 ap 3 assault 3 twinlinked. I think I would prefer the better tankbuster) Although the warboss+gazbag's is much cheaper than Wazdakka was

To be more correct, you'd have to buy a big mek+gazbags, but that's mostly irrelevant. Keep in mind Snikrot and Zagstrukk can no longer assault from reserves and Thrakka doesn't give you 6" runs. Special characters change, and Wazzdakka has changed to no longer shooting S8 AP4 while turbo-boosting and you requiring to name him Wazzdakka yourself. Oh, and you can get him the whole load of big mek toyz now.

Old Zogwart, on the other hand, I don't think the idea of "well, we wasn't used a lot. The tau ethereal special character was considered the worst special character in the entire game, and what happened? GW updated his rules in the 6th eidiotn codex, and he's fairly decent. Games workshop dropped the ball with this, and even if the new rules wouldn't have been great, people still would have used him.

I still would have used him

"Well, he wasn't used a lot" wasn't my point, just that he was completely useless. Curse of the squig did sometimes do something when your opponent had targets for it, and you managed to get close enough to that target, and you didn't die before that. Try the new weirdboy, Da Krunch is tons of more fun than curse of the squig. Tau gained something. Not gaining something is not the same as losing something.

Yes, it's great that biker boyz got that buff, they needed it. However, the good thing about wazdakka making bikers troops was that it freed up the fast atttack slots for other things, like buggies. I could take 6 units of bikes thanks to double CAD, but that means my only other "fast" unit ould have to be trukk boyz (although that does include burnas and tank bustas) or the battlewagon (which I'll get to in a second).

So... take a third CAD? For every 21 bikers you field, you got a free CAD from the codex and FNP for one of your units (2x gretchin + 1 painboy biker). Big blobs of bikers with FNP work really well, so by the time you'd have filled 6 slots, you should be saving hundreds of points compared to your previous army.

Yes, 6th edition already killed Kan Wall. But like with Zogwart, GW could have fixed them, they should have fixed and they didn't. I think there is some truth that GW reacts to meta that's two editions old.

In short, nothing was actually lost.

Mandatory weapons as in "anything to prevent the wagon from being immobilized from a weapon destroyed result. You may not take them, but you're not the sole data point on the chart

Mandatory implies that everyone has to take it. I'm not taking them, and I'm doing fine, with only losing a single wagon to weapon destroyed in six games. Weapons to prevent immobilization have stopped being a thing when glances stopped rolling on the damage table. The chance of actually suffering a weapon destroyed result is so low, it's not worth spending any points on.

I don't see how it got tougher, compared to it during fifth edition (particularly the whole 'open top no longer reduces the strength of an explosion' thing), and I think the real reason they got bumped up was to level out with the reduced cost of a nob squad.

Let me enlighten you then
Since AV vs strength didn't change at all, let's skip to AP right away, the important ones being AP1, AP2 and AP3+

5th edition, glances
AP1: 50% to destroy or immobilize
AP2: 33.33% to destroy or immobilize
AP3+: 33.33% to destroy or immobilize

5th edition, pens
AP1: 86.66% chance to destroy or immobilize
AP2: 66.66% chance to destroy or immobilize
AP3+: 66.66% chance to destroy or immobilize

7th edition, glances
All: 0% chance to destroy or immobilize*

*ignoring rate of fire, of course, I'll get to that later.

7th edition, pens
AP1: 66.66% chance to destroy or immobilize
AP2: 50% chance to destroy or immobilize
AP3+: 33.33% chance to destroy or immobilize

So, when you look at each shot separately, not only has the chance of pens stopping your wagons dropped, some pretty high chances have been completely eliminated from glances.

Now, lets assume three devastator squads in the side-ark (AV12) of a wagon within 12", each being equipped with four multi-meltas, lascannons or autocannons. As above, I count "immobilize" as deadly as well.
MM: Hit 2.66, .22 glances, 2.22 pens, average into 2.04 deadly results in 5th, 1.48 deadly results in 7th or two volleys to take off all HP
LC: Hit 2.66, .44 glances, 1.33 pens, average into 1.04 deadly result in 5th, .66 deadly results in 7th or three volleys to take off all HP
AC: Hit 5.22, .87 glances, .87 pens, average into .87 deadly results in 5th, .29 deadly results in 7th or three volleys to take off all HP

In summary, depending on who is shooting you, your wagon can weather between 33% and 200% more shoots before becoming a piece of terrain. On top of that, most weapons which are not dedicated anti-tank weapons will most likely not explode your wagon, so by the end of the day, all those dreaded S4 hits kill a lot less orks than the way more common S3 hits in 5th.

I guess to be honest, it's more that I'm more disappointed in what I think the codex COULD have been than what it actually is, and if I just got to brass tacks the ork codex is not a bad codex, just a meh one.

Well, we didn't get a lot less than eldar (we already had planes), and people are fine with that codex for some reason . Almost the entire ork codex was buffed, only a few models have received actual nerfs (kanz, shoota boyz, burnas, dakka jet).

Took first place in a local tournament with my SW list, while not even going OTT with TWC, so I'm quite pleased with the codex. I did use the supplement detachment however, since I'm not really impressed with SW troops at the moment. They're just slightly glorified Tac marines, so nothing really worth taking sadly. I don't consider the lack of OS a hindrance, quite the contrary. Instead of subpar troops I can take more hitting power and wipe out most OS units from objectives.

I don't feel we lost too much flavor, couple of knick-knacks and MotW which is probably the biggest thing especially when talking about troop viability.

I think there are a lot of people who peruse the books and theoryhammer, and I think that a lot of those same people are the "Why would you take X unit when Y unit is .000000011% better statistically at killing Z?" people. The combination of the two is vastly inaccurate in practice.

I've been playing the new Wolves and as far as internal balance goes it is one of the best books we've ever had. I struggle every time I make a list because so many of the options are viable at comparable levels for comparable points. In another thread we are discussing the codex and all the people there have presented different ideas with few of "that one build" type suggestions (like going full-blown Nurgle everything in a Daemons list for the jink, etc).

The Wolves and Orks also both benefit from really having no jump-out super-trick combos, which means that generally people are going to build lists in the more traditional pre-netlisting way: trying different units and seeing what they like and what works in their local scene.

As a long-time Space Wolf fan I am enjoying a resurgence. The changes have made it so that the army has new life, and it's gone from "Rune Priest, Melta Grey Hunters, Long Fangs, TWC" to a great spread. Even the bad options have some utility and I feel confident that I could change my list slightly every game without losing too much effectiveness.

It's great news because win or lose, boring armies are born of bad internal balance. I see guys playing Wave Serpent spam and I always say the same thing to my friend who does this "God it must be so boring you basically just re-roll the same stuff seven times every turn." I honestly feel bad for people like that, as a club leader I often watch them struggle to make their lists interesting by adding a unit only for them to conclude it was a bad idea and go back to full blown spam. I don't mind that but I can only imagine it is boring as hell to play (it also makes you rusty on all the rules the spammy units don't use, in some cases...definitely not for me).

The only thing wrong with this game these days is that people don't just shut up and play it, frankly. You adapt to the changes or you just become one of the grognards, running around slagging everything out of context of the current game's balance.

 Fenris Frost wrote:
I think there are a lot of people who peruse the books and theoryhammer, and I think that a lot of those same people are the "Why would you take X unit when Y unit is .000000011% better statistically at killing Z?" people. The combination of the two is vastly inaccurate in practice.

I've been playing the new Wolves and as far as internal balance goes it is one of the best books we've ever had. I struggle every time I make a list because so many of the options are viable at comparable levels for comparable points. In another thread we are discussing the codex and all the people there have presented different ideas with few of "that one build" type suggestions (like going full-blown Nurgle everything in a Daemons list for the jink, etc).

The Wolves and Orks also both benefit from really having no jump-out super-trick combos, which means that generally people are going to build lists in the more traditional pre-netlisting way: trying different units and seeing what they like and what works in their local scene.

As a long-time Space Wolf fan I am enjoying a resurgence. The changes have made it so that the army has new life, and it's gone from "Rune Priest, Melta Grey Hunters, Long Fangs, TWC" to a great spread. Even the bad options have some utility and I feel confident that I could change my list slightly every game without losing too much effectiveness.

It's great news because win or lose, boring armies are born of bad internal balance. I see guys playing Wave Serpent spam and I always say the same thing to him "God it must be so boring you basically just re-roll the same stuff seven times every turn." I honestly feel bad for people like that, as a club leader I often watch them struggle to make their lists interesting by adding a unit only for them to conclude it was a bad idea and go back to full blown spam. I don't mind that but I can only imagine it is boring as hell to play (it also makes you rusty on all the rules the spammy units don't use, in some cases...definitely not for me).

The only thing wrong with this game these days is that people don't just shut up and play it, frankly. You adapt to the changes or you just become one of the grognards, running around slagging everything out of context of the current game's balance.

This is what I have been trying to say for the longest time.
Exalted, and I don't do that much.

I can agree with that, through 5th to 7th, it was just boring playing Wolves seriously, because every slot had a must-take option or you were shooting yourself in the foot. Even if we're not "UBER-OP!!!!!" I'm very happy with the new Dex just because it's full of viable options. I can finally dust off some of those old units that I never thought I'd get to use (like Iron Priests ).

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:
I can agree with that, through 5th to 7th, it was just boring playing Wolves seriously, because every slot had a must-take option or you were shooting yourself in the foot. Even if we're not "UBER-OP!!!!!" I'm very happy with the new Dex just because it's full of viable options. I can finally dust off some of those old units that I never thought I'd get to use (like Iron Priests ).

Yes I am the same way. love my Blood Claws and now they are not eating up so much of my army.
Wolf Scouts are the only one I am having issues with, but I need to really get out there and play them before I put them on the back burner.

My favorite thing about the Wolves book is that when you win, you often win on fundamentals.

People get very into their combos and tricks and super-unit builds, but to me that just kind of muddies the water. They aren't really playing their opponent; the game they enjoy is played in front of a computer screen with a forum on one side of the window and Army Builder and a downloaded PDF in the other.

Space Wolves these days is the kind of army that wins on the table, not in the list. I like this very much, and hope that by the end of the 7E updates everybody is like this.

 docdoom77 wrote:

 Chumbalaya wrote:
The Ork Codex made me shelve my army. My own army became illegal outside of Funbound and went up in points. The loss of units, removal of interesting playstyles and mechanics and the blandification of everything has really turned me off of one of my favorite armies.

I hear this a great deal about the new codices. "Blandification." I just don't see it. There are things I don't like in the new dex, but it's far from bland. Lots of cool choices and tons of fluffy weapons and units.

Let me explain how it works.

- So, Timmy, here is your brand new 7-th ed ork codex!
- Let's see...deff dreads got better...flashgits got fieldable...boyz got faster...meganobz got decent...there's now point in buggies...tankbustas got awesome...bikers got awesome...big gunz got outstandingly awesome...nob bikers lost invul...OMG...boyz have a 1/36 chance to fail morale...NO WAY! The internet was right! It's a bland codex!

I honestly don't thin there is much issue with a single book itself, I think the issues and negative discussion around 40k and it's rules. Which leads to disappointment in the codexes due to frustraition allready.
For me my GK army is efectively gutted. It won't work without major changes that are not all within of my control.
So even if there is positivity to be had in changes within the book I am left with a general negative to the book as a whole.

That play testing at this point just means spend more money to have fun again !
One off the issues I am finding that leads to frustraition is that I don't think GW design realy puts much effort in.
I was looking for new things to expand but I lost far more than I gain, and to find what I will gain is Price comitment that is far to steep..
I myself think GW needs to sit back and reevaluate what each eliements within codexes should be achieving and what the missions should be trying to encourage within the players. This I think is far more importent than the codexes themselves.

Things like how a HQ leads and army, what a fast attack unit should achieve on the battle field and what do troops do that nothing other will do a player has access to. And encourage players to take elements from all places for there use and needs one the battlefield rather than just there points to power.

:0 not entirely all on subject but I think it helps ilistrate some of my feelings for disappointment with my current codexes.
$80 for the books and the cost to advance realy makes me desire far more from the rules.

Things like how a HQ leads and army, what a fast attack unit should achieve on the battle field and what do troops do that nothing other will do a player has access to. And encourage players to take elements from all places for there use and needs one the battlefield rather than just there points to power.

This is exactly what is happening now.

The reason your GK don't work is because they are now designed exactly like an army of overly elite soldiers. You're outnumbered and outgunned every time you hit the table and are best when paired with a conventional ally, 100% to the fluff AND a full throw-back to the original Daemon Hunters dex's style back in 4E.

I don't really think these complaints hold water, this edition has more content and more options for army construction than ever before. And everyone who built a one-trick pony army like the ones I mentioned earlier SHOULD expect this to happen at some point...it's in GW's interest to keep each army varied and interesting and it has never behooved them to sell you a few boxes of Purifiers while the rest of the product line collects dust.

If you play anything like that -- a death star, a list with 750 points in one uber unit, or an army that depends entirely on its' HQ trick to succeed -- you should 100% expect the changes. When that happens, it is a mistake -- GW is correcting them now as they roll through the books.

I get being disappointed that you "need" to buy more, but you really don't -- you just want to, because you don't change your list with the times. I also don't think you really should be able to buy 5 boxes and be set for life either (I know, I'm in the minority on that).

I know you say "it won't work" and that it is not in your control but it absolutely is, and you are just basically saying "In order to have the army I want it would cost money and I don't want to bother paying any more money."

EDIT: I don't mean to beleaguer your disappointment. It just used to be a lot worse. Imagine if the other elements from the GK codex were literally gone forever. Codex Inquisition and Codex Grey Knights fill a good gap and the way the product is now, at least we have options!

 Fenris Frost wrote:

Things like how a HQ leads and army, what a fast attack unit should achieve on the battle field and what do troops do that nothing other will do a player has access to. And encourage players to take elements from all places for there use and needs one the battlefield rather than just there points to power.

This is exactly what is happening now.

The reason your GK don't work is because they are now designed exactly like an army of overly elite soldiers. You're outnumbered and outgunned every time you hit the table and are best when paired with a conventional ally, 100% to the fluff AND a full throw-back to the original Daemon Hunters dex's style back in 4E.

I don't really think these complaints hold water, this edition has more content and more options for army construction than ever before. And everyone who built a one-trick pony army like the ones I mentioned earlier SHOULD expect this to happen at some point...it's in GW's interest to keep each army varied and interesting and it has never behooved them to sell you a few boxes of Purifiers while the rest of the product line collects dust.

If you play anything like that -- a death star, a list with 750 points in one uber unit, or an army that depends entirely on its' HQ trick to succeed -- you should 100% expect the changes. When that happens, it is a mistake -- GW is correcting them now as they roll through the books.

I get being disappointed that you "need" to buy more, but you really don't -- you just want to, because you don't change your list with the times. I also don't think you really should be able to buy 5 boxes and be set for life either (I know, I'm in the minority on that).

I know you say "it won't work" and that it is not in your control but it absolutely is, and you are just basically saying "In order to have the army I want it would cost money and I don't want to bother paying any more money."

EDIT: I don't mean to beleaguer your disappointment. It just used to be a lot worse. Imagine if the other elements from the GK codex were literally gone forever. Codex Inquisition and Codex Grey Knights fill a good gap and the way the product is now, at least we have options!

I really do not think they are at all, they put new stuff in. But ad very little to the game. I have never play with a death star before, and I don't think buying a single army that I play forever. But the changes they made didn't add anything I can use, or anything I wanted. All they did was take away.
I even like the style that GK have, which the last codex worked for me to achieve it.
When I say need to buy more, it's because GW have offer nothing to make me Want to buy more. When you say more options I don't think GW ad much at all, they have simply removed an option and with it the entire list I used. (Which was all currently painted and as I work on other projects) fell apart, I am removing things to ad in what I am now needing. This must be done before I can explore the options presented.
But I will say this, I don't think the codex is bad, but I don't think it's good ether. I think at it's price and GW position it should be much more.

A symptom of a game in a bad place. In the end I get every option GW try's to ad better in other places. Why pay more for a codex that ads nothing to my experience when I have been waiting for It to be released with anticipation.