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.
Earth127 wrote: Arachnofiend, you are using a general stratagems ,webway strike and veterans, as highly specific and therefore wrong example .Every codex has a version and all infantry ,including rubrics, in TS codex can use it.
...What you're saying only supports my argument? Galas says "Rubrics got buffed by the codex because they can deep strike now", I respond with "Webway Strike doesn't improve Rubrics any more than it improves Tzaangors, and Tzaangors got other toys in the codex that make them more appealing than they were in the Index".
I know it's easier for you if you just assume that everyone who's unhappy with the codex is a petulant whiner, but you can look at my earlier posts and see that I was pretty positive and excited about this book until the full information was revealed. Now that we know everything, I have to admit that TSS was right and I was wrong.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/28 17:09:39
nintura wrote: Why in the hell would you ever take 5 man rubric squads....
Well, five man squads fill up slots more effectively than 10 man squads, have more sorcerers than 10 man squads, and have fewer morale issues than 10 man squads.
10 man squads by contrast have more dakka per point, both due to avoiding doubling up in sorcerers with pistol+force weapon, and from the soul reaper.
It's a trade off, but currently I'd still lean towards 5 man squads being better. If smite does get nerfed and soul reaper doesn't get errata'd, only then would I consider 10 man.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/28 17:10:38
nintura wrote: Why in the hell would you ever take 5 man rubric squads....
Well, five man squads fill up slots more effectively than 10 man squads, have more sorcerers than 10 man squads, and have fewer morale issues than 10 man squads.
10 man squads by contrast have more dakka per point, both due to avoiding doubling up in sorcerers with pistol+force weapon, and from the soul reaper.
It's a trade off, but currently I'd still lean towards 5 man squads being better. If smite does get nerfed and soul reaper doesn't get errata'd, only then would I consider 10 man.
I think everyone would agree that 5-man units are better if you can take a soulreaper. As it stands you can't though, so we have to assume that five man units are bad. Fortunately it'll be only 2-3 weeks before the faq comes out to clarify that question.
Earth127 wrote: Arachnofiend, you are using a general stratagems ,webway strike and veterans, as highly specific and therefore wrong example .Every codex has a version and all infantry ,including rubrics, in TS codex can use it.
...What you're saying only supports my argument? Galas says "Rubrics got buffed by the codex because they can deep strike now", I respond with "Webway Strike doesn't improve Rubrics any more than it improves Tzaangors, and Tzaangors got other toys in the codex that make them more appealing than they were in the Index".
I know it's easier for you if you just assume that everyone who's unhappy with the codex is a petulant whiner, but you can look at my earlier posts and see that I was pretty positive and excited about this book until the full information was revealed. Now that we know everything, I have to admit that TSS was right and I was wrong.
You are right that basically every buff in the codex that can be seen as a buff to Rubrics can be counter argumented with "But it buffs Tzaangors more": I think thats the exact reasoning as "What unit should I use in my space marine army?" "Just use Imperial Guard". I disagree with that reasoning, because I don't believe the game is as black and white as many people online seems to paint. I still think theres room for strong lists usin other things that just Tzaangors, and yeah, maybe Stratagems and Psychic Buffs are more powerfull used in Tzaangors or Magnus. But are really they? Will they be more powerfull in every situation, agaisn't every opponent, even in all metas? But thats just my opinion, of course, is not like I'm a Thousand Sond expert.
I can agree with you that this Codex is not like the Blood Angels where everybody was excited about all the new rules. But I'll tell you something. With Dark Angels, nearly nobody was excited, the internet consensus was "Bah, they are just worse vanilla space marines" "Why Blood Angels received those nice assault bufs and we receive FETHING MORALE INMUNITY TO OUR TERMINATORS?" And I'll admit in some form I was part of that group. But after the dust as settle, what we have? Blood Angels are soheorned in a full assault codex that uses 2-4 units (Libby Dreads, Death Company, Sanguinary Guard, etc...) and its a nice Codex, please don't believe I'm saying they are like Tau or Orks. But in the end, the Dark Angels Codex has much more tactical diversity because the changes and buffs are much more subtle, so is more difficult to be excited about, but after you have the codex, think lists, try games, etc... you find yourself with a TON of tactical flexibility in how you want to play your army. I believe the same will happen with TS. Of course I can be totally wrong.
And personally I believe the Reaper Cannon will be FAQ'ed to take one in units of 5. (Or GW could FAQ the CSM one to be taken in units of 10, is a coin toss)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/28 17:17:16
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
No you talked as if they exclusively buff Tzaangors, wich is a b ig difference.
Yes but of them are better for Tzaangors then rubrics but nearly everything is in the current meta save genuinely 100% exclusive stuff.
People say the new codices are bland an all the same and they have a point but it something I am very willing to accept if it leads to general better balance and not the crapshoot that was CSM (of any variety) in 7th.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/28 17:20:13
Arachnofiend wrote: I think everyone would agree that 5-man units are better if you can take a soulreaper. As it stands you can't though, so we have to assume that five man units are bad. Fortunately it'll be only 2-3 weeks before the faq comes out to clarify that question.
Even without soul reaper five man squads are currently better, the psychic power and shooting/melee from an extra sorcerer is a more cost effective boost to melee and ranged damage than the soul reaper, which also doesn't help in melee which rubrics will likely get involved in given their RF weapons and role holding objectives.
If the smite nerf becomes official that might change, but it also depends how many rubrics you plan to field overall. If it's just 10, I'd still put them in two sets of five. If it's 20-30, sets of 10 is better. If you plan to use lots of stratagems on them, arguably a single unit of 20 might be best.
I don't think it's quite as black and white as people make it it to be.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/28 17:24:28
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote: Your doing a lot of running around and telling people to shut up and deal with it. What gives?
There's a fry (from futurama) meme on the net of "shut up and give them your money!". That's just how some people are. For all the talk of haters, white knights are just as bad in that respect.
Myself? If they had called this: codex: tzeentch daemonkin, i wouldn't have had a problem. There was even precedent for it. But this is not what i'd call codex: thousand sons.
That's because it's not, it is just tzeench deamonkin under a different name, I said quite a few pages back I was expecting the same bland formula that 8th has followed to continue with the new "thousand sons" codex, and I was right, we got some new strats, some new spells and warlord traits but like nearly every 8th codex it lacks character, but this isn't just a chaos problem, all the new books have this problem nearly.
Can you put specific examples of what do you think reflects the lack of character from 8th's Codexes vs 7th's Codexes? I'm not being sarcastic, I have found this critizism some times and I really want to know why people feel that way. For me, 7th codexes were much more complicated and full of useless rules that really didn't add anything to the game, from a fluff, strategic or "characterfull" role. Stratagems alone make the game much more engaging, tactic and choise-based that any kind of formation of most of 7th special rules, IMO.
Yeah sure and no problems with asking mate it's a fair question, caveat first this is just my opinion and I'm no way am I trying to convince anyone else that I'm right or they are wrong.
On with the explanation.
I've been playing 40k/fantasy/wargames for 30 years this year, I have seen a lot of design philosophies come from games workshop over the years, some good, some bad, the current 8th design philosophy (to me) lacks a lot of background consideration and somewhat poorly thought out "quirks" for each army so far, I am also seeing a varying degree of redundant rules across the board that either should not exist or need more depth.
We lost and gained a lot of stuff when 8th dropped and part of that was "character" at the moment all characters feel samey, a space marine captain is ws2+ and chaos lord is ws2+, Lucius the eternal is ws2+, eldar autarch is ws2+ etc. With the loss of initiative we also lost another factor to separate characters, on top of that we gained very little, a movement characteristic and bubble effects that also seem same.
Then we look at wargear, the continued limitations that keep coming are further compounding different characters, making them again feel samey, and when the index gets phased out, those options will be lost permanently, just look at primaris as a good example of limited options affecting choice.
Then we look at stratagems, these are both good and bad, good for the range of ways they can affect your army, but bad in how they have become a lynch pin to mine for as much points as you can, this has led to an odd watering down of armies, as they fish from multiple books to get the most effective units for command points possible, the old chart while limiting encouraged you to stay within your codex rather than draw from several, so ups and downs here.
So all of these combined and some others (I've talked enough) I feel that 40k has been watered down too far, it's bland, boring for me at the moment, I am not a fan of the current design philosophy.
Earth127 wrote: Arachnofiend, you are using a general stratagems ,webway strike and veterans, as highly specific and therefore wrong example .Every codex has a version and all infantry ,including rubrics, in TS codex can use it.
...What you're saying only supports my argument? Galas says "Rubrics got buffed by the codex because they can deep strike now", I respond with "Webway Strike doesn't improve Rubrics any more than it improves Tzaangors, and Tzaangors got other toys in the codex that make them more appealing than they were in the Index".
I know it's easier for you if you just assume that everyone who's unhappy with the codex is a petulant whiner, but you can look at my earlier posts and see that I was pretty positive and excited about this book until the full information was revealed. Now that we know everything, I have to admit that TSS was right and I was wrong.
You are right that basically every buff in the codex that can be seen as a buff to Rubrics can be counter argumented with "But it buffs Tzaangors more": I think thats the exact reasoning as "What unit should I use in my space marine army?" "Just use Imperial Guard". I disagree with that reasoning, because I don't believe the game is as black and white as many people online seems to paint. I still think theres room for strong lists usin other things that just Tzaangors, and yeah, maybe Stratagems and Psychic Buffs are more powerfull used in Tzaangors or Magnus. But are really they? Will they be more powerfull in every situation, agaisn't every opponent, even in all metas? But thats just my opinion, of course, is not like I'm a Thousand Sond expert.
I can agree with you that this Codex is not like the Blood Angels where everybody was excited about all the new rules. But I'll tell you something. With Dark Angels, nearly nobody was excited, the internet consensus was "Bah, they are just worse vanilla space marines" "Why Blood Angels received those nice assault bufs and we receive FETHING MORALE INMUNITY TO OUR TERMINATORS?" And I'll admit in some form I was part of that group. But after the dust as settle, what we have? Blood Angels are soheorned in a full assault codex that uses 2-4 units (Libby Dreads, Death Company, Sanguinary Guard, etc...) and its a nice Codex, please don't believe I'm saying they are like Tau or Orks. But in the end, the Dark Angels Codex has much more tactical diversity because the changes and buffs are much more subtle, so is more difficult to be excited about, but after you have the codex, think lists, try games, etc... you find yourself with a TON of tactical flexibility in how you want to play your army. I believe the same will happen with TS. Of course I can be totally wrong.
And personally I believe the Reaper Cannon will be FAQ'ed to take one in units of 5. (Or GW could FAQ the CSM one to be taken in units of 10, is a coin toss)
Deathwing Terminators got a shoot twice stratagem, Dark Angels plasma gets pushed with Weapons of the Dark Age, and ravenwing got more stuff than I can remember (it's not my army, after all). The Dark Angels stuff isn't as flashy as what the Blood Angels got, but at least it exists. And some of it is even effective! The closest thing we got to Rubric synergy in our codex is a stratagem to make Aspiring Sorcerers explode... well, not explode, so much as faintly whimper out of existence which might make a nearby unit feel a little prick.
Arachnofiend wrote: I think everyone would agree that 5-man units are better if you can take a soulreaper. As it stands you can't though, so we have to assume that five man units are bad. Fortunately it'll be only 2-3 weeks before the faq comes out to clarify that question.
Even without soul reaper five man squads are currently better, the psychic power and shooting/melee from an extra sorcerer is a more cost effective boost to melee and ranged damage than the soul reaper, which also doesn't help in melee which rubrics will likely get involved in given their RF weapons and role holding objectives.
If the smite nerf becomes official that might change, but it also depends how many rubrics you plan to field overall. If it's just 10, I'd still put them in two sets of five. If it's 20-30, sets of 10 is better. If you plan to use lots of stratagems on them, arguably a single unit of 20 might be best.
I don't think it's quite as black and white as people make it it to be.
I did a breakdown of the Discipline of Change earlier, assuming Magnus (and while I might be wrong I think you still need to assume Magnus in a competitive Thousand Sons list) the only psychic power that makes sense to put on a Rubric squad is Tzeentch's Firestorm. Remember, the CA spell that we all laughed at because of how bad it was? Yeah.
I was reaaaally banking on Rubrics providing their own Prescience, that would have been an argument for the unit, but they don't even get that.
Tell me what the Shaman does? +1 to hit? Oh that goods! Tzaangors only
That's just a fantasy.
Mutalith, has 6 different abilities 2 mortal wound generators, and 4 CC buffs of one form or another. Because what I want is to have my Rubrics in CC woth thier 1 attack and AP- attack. No don't want to use that AP-2 bolter you paind 2 points for.
Thats just a fantasy.
All of our HQs have 1 aura, re-roll to hits of 1, which helps Rubrics get to a 77% hit ratio, pretty good. And Tzaangors get to a 97% hit ratio. Ohh...
The only thing that is a fantasy is thinking this Codex is for Thousand Sons.
Yep, because they had barely anything prior so them getting buffs feels like a lot.
There's nothing stopping you from giving SoT reroll charges or S5 power swords. Crazy, I know.
And rubrics still get to hit at 97% with a simple spell - a spell that is made redundant for Tzaangors unless you're facing minuses to hit. And it's not like there is a lack of sorcerers to cast it since Shamans are not filling HQ.
I don't know about you, but I find that shooting something before it attacks me is also useful.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
nintura wrote: Why in the hell would you ever take 5 man rubric squads....
Sorcerers (for that thought experiment anyway)
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/01/28 17:38:07
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote: Your doing a lot of running around and telling people to shut up and deal with it. What gives?
There's a fry (from futurama) meme on the net of "shut up and give them your money!". That's just how some people are. For all the talk of haters, white knights are just as bad in that respect.
Myself? If they had called this: codex: tzeentch daemonkin, i wouldn't have had a problem. There was even precedent for it. But this is not what i'd call codex: thousand sons.
That's because it's not, it is just tzeench deamonkin under a different name, I said quite a few pages back I was expecting the same bland formula that 8th has followed to continue with the new "thousand sons" codex, and I was right, we got some new strats, some new spells and warlord traits but like nearly every 8th codex it lacks character, but this isn't just a chaos problem, all the new books have this problem nearly.
Can you put specific examples of what do you think reflects the lack of character from 8th's Codexes vs 7th's Codexes? I'm not being sarcastic, I have found this critizism some times and I really want to know why people feel that way. For me, 7th codexes were much more complicated and full of useless rules that really didn't add anything to the game, from a fluff, strategic or "characterfull" role. Stratagems alone make the game much more engaging, tactic and choise-based that any kind of formation of most of 7th special rules, IMO.
Yeah sure and no problems with asking mate it's a fair question, caveat first this is just my opinion and I'm no way am I trying to convince anyone else that I'm right or they are wrong.
On with the explanation.
I've been playing 40k/fantasy/wargames for 30 years this year, I have seen a lot of design philosophies come from games workshop over the years, some good, some bad, the current 8th design philosophy (to me) lacks a lot of background consideration and somewhat poorly thought out "quirks" for each army so far, I am also seeing a varying degree of redundant rules across the board that either should not exist or need more depth.
We lost and gained a lot of stuff when 8th dropped and part of that was "character" at the moment all characters feel samey, a space marine captain is ws2+ and chaos lord is ws2+, Lucius the eternal is ws2+, eldar autarch is ws2+ etc. With the loss of initiative we also lost another factor to separate characters, on top of that we gained very little, a movement characteristic and bubble effects that also seem same.
Then we look at wargear, the continued limitations that keep coming are further compounding different characters, making them again feel samey, and when the index gets phased out, those options will be lost permanently, just look at primaris as a good example of limited options affecting choice.
Then we look at stratagems, these are both good and bad, good for the range of ways they can affect your army, but bad in how they have become a lynch pin to mine for as much points as you can, this has led to an odd watering down of armies, as they fish from multiple books to get the most effective units for command points possible, the old chart while limiting encouraged you to stay within your codex rather than draw from several, so ups and downs here.
So all of these combined and some others (I've talked enough) I feel that 40k has been watered down too far, it's bland, boring for me at the moment, I am not a fan of the current design philosophy.
I actually agree with your first two points. The first one, about all characters and elite units being the same with bs2+ and ws2+ is a problem of the D6 system, but I believe it was already there in 7th and prior editions. It doesn't matter if your character has WS6 or WS8 when it fights agaisn't nearly everything with a 2+ or 3+.
About the lack of Initiative, its true, its one less stat to diferentiate units, but I believe the overhaul of the meele phase was a net gain at the end of the day. Now, combat phases are interesting, when you use X stratagem, what units you activate first, etc... in prior editions, with Initiative and combats being done one at a time, basically the FULL combat phase had 0 player interaction. Literally, it was totally automatic mode. And for this, I think losing Initiative to gain Movement was a very good move.
With the lack of weapons options, I agree, that sucks, but I don't think is really anything to do with 8th edition. I don't think, whey they where doing the edition, they tought "Oh yeah we are gonna remove all those options!". Thats obviously a marketing thing that has been pushed into the rules.
And about people souping up to have many CP's, etc... its not really different than 7th edition with people allying for the most broken combos. The ship of allies has sailed, we are gonna live with it for many years.
So, at the end of the day, I agree with most of your points, but even then I believe we are in a net gain. But this comes down to personal tastes, if you don't like the game, theres nothing wrong about that. Personally, I enjoy it much more than 7th, 6th, etc...
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/01/28 17:42:31
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Earth127 wrote: Arachnofiend, you are using a general stratagems ,webway strike and veterans, as highly specific and therefore wrong example .Every codex has a version and all infantry ,including rubrics, in TS codex can use it.
...What you're saying only supports my argument? Galas says "Rubrics got buffed by the codex because they can deep strike now", I respond with "Webway Strike doesn't improve Rubrics any more than it improves Tzaangors, and Tzaangors got other toys in the codex that make them more appealing than they were in the Index".
I know it's easier for you if you just assume that everyone who's unhappy with the codex is a petulant whiner, but you can look at my earlier posts and see that I was pretty positive and excited about this book until the full information was revealed. Now that we know everything, I have to admit that TSS was right and I was wrong.
You are right that basically every buff in the codex that can be seen as a buff to Rubrics can be counter argumented with "But it buffs Tzaangors more": I think thats the exact reasoning as "What unit should I use in my space marine army?" "Just use Imperial Guard". I disagree with that reasoning, because I don't believe the game is as black and white as many people online seems to paint. I still think theres room for strong lists usin other things that just Tzaangors, and yeah, maybe Stratagems and Psychic Buffs are more powerfull used in Tzaangors or Magnus. But are really they? Will they be more powerfull in every situation, agaisn't every opponent, even in all metas? But thats just my opinion, of course, is not like I'm a Thousand Sond expert.
I can agree with you that this Codex is not like the Blood Angels where everybody was excited about all the new rules. But I'll tell you something. With Dark Angels, nearly nobody was excited, the internet consensus was "Bah, they are just worse vanilla space marines" "Why Blood Angels received those nice assault bufs and we receive FETHING MORALE INMUNITY TO OUR TERMINATORS?" And I'll admit in some form I was part of that group. But after the dust as settle, what we have? Blood Angels are soheorned in a full assault codex that uses 2-4 units (Libby Dreads, Death Company, Sanguinary Guard, etc...) and its a nice Codex, please don't believe I'm saying they are like Tau or Orks. But in the end, the Dark Angels Codex has much more tactical diversity because the changes and buffs are much more subtle, so is more difficult to be excited about, but after you have the codex, think lists, try games, etc... you find yourself with a TON of tactical flexibility in how you want to play your army. I believe the same will happen with TS. Of course I can be totally wrong.
And personally I believe the Reaper Cannon will be FAQ'ed to take one in units of 5. (Or GW could FAQ the CSM one to be taken in units of 10, is a coin toss)
How many auras do DG have that can affect them 1 or 2? Or is it 7 lets see.
Re-roll 1s to hit, re-roll 1 to wound, re-roll hits in the fight phase, 1 free attack on death, +1 leadership, reroll something else im sure.
DG players were complaining about how bad thier buffs were, until they realized they needed to take them in max squads and abuse the free shooting they got.
We are not saying what we got was bad, were saying its good for Tzaangors very good.
Rubrics have 2 auras reroll 1s to hit and reroll 1s for psy test. And the only way to get reroll 1s for psy tests is to take a 450 point model that will die on the first turn.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/28 18:04:55
MinscS2 wrote: My biggest gripe with the codex is how it invalidates a large chunk of my 7th Ed. Thousand Sons army:
10 Terminators, 10 Possessed, 3 Obliterators, 3 Mutilators, a Chaos Lord on Disc and a Chaos Lord in Terminator Armour.
I guess I could make a separate CSM/Index detatchment for them but...meh.
eeer, none of these were TS units in 7th though...
Not sure what you mean with "TS" units. Fluffwise? Not so much. But ruleswise they where quite potent and had good synergy with MoTz and Tzeentch in general in late 7th.
If nothing else I could at the very least use them (not every list has to be fluffy you know) but now I can't.
nintura wrote: And that's our point.... why can't they have made more units before making the codex....
It is very easy to make new units, but making new moulds for injection moulded sprues is both challenging and expensive. It can easily be £50000 pound and up for a three plate mold in precipitation-hardened steel, and those figures can only be recouperated with sizeable production volumes. GW is doing well, but they are not Lego.
The bigger problem is that they don't have the machine team to produce more units and you lose most of a day's production every time you change mould.
Yes you can. Take them in an Elite detachment and you can even make them Renegades or Iron Warriors. That's how Chaos works in 8th. Last Edition we had formations, now it's detachments.
Arachnofiend wrote: I think everyone would agree that 5-man units are better if you can take a soulreaper. As it stands you can't though, so we have to assume that five man units are bad. Fortunately it'll be only 2-3 weeks before the faq comes out to clarify that question.
Even without soul reaper five man squads are currently better, the psychic power and shooting/melee from an extra sorcerer is a more cost effective boost to melee and ranged damage than the soul reaper, which also doesn't help in melee which rubrics will likely get involved in given their RF weapons and role holding objectives.
If the smite nerf becomes official that might change, but it also depends how many rubrics you plan to field overall. If it's just 10, I'd still put them in two sets of five. If it's 20-30, sets of 10 is better. If you plan to use lots of stratagems on them, arguably a single unit of 20 might be best.
I don't think it's quite as black and white as people make it it to be.
I did a breakdown of the Discipline of Change earlier, assuming Magnus (and while I might be wrong I think you still need to assume Magnus in a competitive Thousand Sons list) the only psychic power that makes sense to put on a Rubric squad is Tzeentch's Firestorm. Remember, the CA spell that we all laughed at because of how bad it was? Yeah.
I was reaaaally banking on Rubrics providing their own Prescience, that would have been an argument for the unit, but they don't even get that.
How do you figure a -4 smite does as much damage per cast as Firestorm.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/29 00:59:04
MinscS2 wrote: My biggest gripe with the codex is how it invalidates a large chunk of my 7th Ed. Thousand Sons army:
10 Terminators, 10 Possessed, 3 Obliterators, 3 Mutilators, a Chaos Lord on Disc and a Chaos Lord in Terminator Armour.
I guess I could make a separate CSM/Index detatchment for them but...meh.
eeer, none of these were TS units in 7th though...
Not sure what you mean with "TS" units. Fluffwise? Not so much. But ruleswise they where quite potent and had good synergy with MoTz and Tzeentch in general in late 7th.
If nothing else I could at the very least use them (not every list has to be fluffy you know) but now I can't.
I thiiink he means that none of these units are thousand sons legion
Obliterator cult are not part of any legion but a seperate cult that attaches itself to a warband/legion
Possessed are not Thousand sons but will work alongside them or even be created by them, but are not actual Tsons (in a literal sense)
Standard termies are another outside force brought in by the Tsons through a deal of some kind as all of the Tsons termies would either be rubrics or psykers, no middle ground there.
Chaos lord would also be a Rubric if not a psyker,
So fluff wise none of them are actual Tsons, they could have joined the legion after the rubric though?
Arachnofiend wrote: I think everyone would agree that 5-man units are better if you can take a soulreaper. As it stands you can't though, so we have to assume that five man units are bad. Fortunately it'll be only 2-3 weeks before the faq comes out to clarify that question.
Even without soul reaper five man squads are currently better, the psychic power and shooting/melee from an extra sorcerer is a more cost effective boost to melee and ranged damage than the soul reaper, which also doesn't help in melee which rubrics will likely get involved in given their RF weapons and role holding objectives.
If the smite nerf becomes official that might change, but it also depends how many rubrics you plan to field overall. If it's just 10, I'd still put them in two sets of five. If it's 20-30, sets of 10 is better. If you plan to use lots of stratagems on them, arguably a single unit of 20 might be best.
I don't think it's quite as black and white as people make it it to be.
I did a breakdown of the Discipline of Change earlier, assuming Magnus (and while I might be wrong I think you still need to assume Magnus in a competitive Thousand Sons list) the only psychic power that makes sense to put on a Rubric squad is Tzeentch's Firestorm. Remember, the CA spell that we all laughed at because of how bad it was? Yeah.
I was reaaaally banking on Rubrics providing their own Prescience, that would have been an argument for the unit, but they don't even get that.
How do you figure a -4 smite does as much damage per cast as Firestorm.
I didn't think to compare Firestorm to Smite because the thought was that Rubrics have to take something, and none of the other spells are useful to take on Rubrics. How is a WC 9 smite still better than Firestorm at WC 7? I would think that with smite doing a fixed 1 damage Firestorm would do more damage once they have an equal chance of manifesting.
Re-roll 1s to hit, re-roll 1 to wound, re-roll hits in the fight phase, 1 free attack on death, +1 leadership, reroll something else im sure.
DG players were complaining about how bad thier buffs were, until they realized they needed to take them in max squads and abuse the free shooting they got.
We are not saying what we got was bad, were saying its good for Tzaangors very good.
Rubrics have 2 auras reroll 1s to hit and reroll 1s for psy test. And the only way to get reroll 1s for psy tests is to take a 450 point model that will die on the first turn.
You are wrong about the auras, reroll 1 to wound isn't an aura it's inherent on some weapons, those weapons alone can be upgraded to reroll all failed wounds with a WT. The others just flat out don't exist? You got the number roughly correct but none of the details beyond that. Also, no one complained out auras were bad? We have one really bad aura in the plague surgeon (as reroll ones on a 5+ is barely an increase), everything else was solid.
We take one unit of plague marines, put them in some sort of transport, and use the blight grenade stratagem. That's literally the only particular use they have. Everything else is best done by our daemon engines, terminators, or zombies.
Could you not compare things to other armies if you have literally no idea what you are talking about?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arachnofiend wrote: I did a breakdown of the Discipline of Change earlier, assuming Magnus (and while I might be wrong I think you still need to assume Magnus in a competitive Thousand Sons list) the only psychic power that makes sense to put on a Rubric squad is Tzeentch's Firestorm. Remember, the CA spell that we all laughed at because of how bad it was? Yeah.
I was reaaaally banking on Rubrics providing their own Prescience, that would have been an argument for the unit, but they don't even get that.
It's not like rubrics would be an ideal target from Prescience either? Psychic bullets and defensive buffs are what would be most useful for an objective holder. Defensive buffs to dig in better, psychic dakka as it is a mostly straight damage boost, unlike buffs which depend on the unit's base effectiveness, as offensive buffs would generally work better on say scarab occult, who can maximize it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/29 02:43:23
I find this whole thread rather odd. If I'm not mistaken thousand Sons we're never really their own thing until the very end of 7th. They were one special character and one Squad of guys essentially since 3rd Edition maybe even earlier but I started in 3rd. All of a sudden they get all these fancy new models and new units and now some people are upset that they're not fleshed-out enough. ( because they're dust). I mean the biggest problem with Elite armies right now is they have no chaff. So to mitigate this they're giving the cult armies some chaff to work with.
I don't really see the problem. You have more options than you ever had in the last 15 or so years that are Rubics. This whole "it's not the Army I fell in love with" doesn't make sense to me because you didn't lose anything you've only gained things. Like what exactly would you add that would make this Army more thousand Sons-y?
We are angry because they threw in a couple of so called support units, but then the entire codex practically revolves around them rather than the classics.
Most stratagem better support mutants over dusts, with the one dust spesific stratagem being woefully bad and multiple mutant spesific stratagems.
Classics that needed no models, like the sorcerer cults, got entirely ignored.
Its a codex built to around mutants with supporting dusts, rather than the other way around.
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now.
Des702 wrote: I find this whole thread rather odd. If I'm not mistaken thousand Sons we're never really their own thing until the very end of 7th. They were one special character and one Squad of guys essentially since 3rd Edition maybe even earlier but I started in 3rd. All of a sudden they get all these fancy new models and new units and now some people are upset that they're not fleshed-out enough. ( because they're dust). I mean the biggest problem with Elite armies right now is they have no chaff. So to mitigate this they're giving the cult armies some chaff to work with.
I don't really see the problem. You have more options than you ever had in the last 15 or so years that are Rubics. This whole "it's not the Army I fell in love with" doesn't make sense to me because you didn't lose anything you've only gained things. Like what exactly would you add that would make this Army more thousand Sons-y?
Well, actually, yes... You are mistaken.
As i said repeatedly before, you can indeed make a Thousand Sons army with the 2nd Chaos Space Marine Codex of the 3rd edition of Warhammer 40k, the (in)famous 3.5.
People do not remember it because the TS specific army list was honestly pretty bad compared with the OP gak you can do with that codex (slaanesh siren DP, infamous 4 HS iron wariors, etc.). But, in that codex you had restrictions to take only specific units and special rules and advantages for using a TS army (they could choose to have chosen, characters, possesed, terminators - that were all sorcerers, full squads of sorcerers... -; thousand sons marines and rubric terminators - rubrics-) . So yes, they were their own thing. And yes, we did lost things in the following codex (4th or 5th edition i don't remember), so now that the TS codex is a reality again, the least to ask is to get the same options we had in the 3.5 codex. Apparently that is a insane request to have.
Besides that, in the 2nd edition Chaos codex, the background spoke about LEGIONS and the Thousand Sons were among them, and the rules allowed to make a TS specific force as well, only that in this case i think there were not restrictions. And definetely there were NOT tzaangors in the 2nd edition codex, or anyone that came after until now... As i said before, chaos beastmen in 40k were a thing in Rogue Trader, and RT has a different background than 2nd and following editions. People claiming that Tzaangors were in the fluff before don't remember that...
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/01/29 13:50:46
Yeah, RT was different and the lore evolved a lot after it, but tzaangors came from the period of RT that was laying the foundation for the future of 40k, when the legions and Hersey were getting introduced and fleshed out. Not early RT where space marines were adeptus arbites on steroids.
The 2nd edition codex debatably allowed you to make a thousand son army, as what would later be called rubrics were merely called thousand sons, indicating said unit represented the totality of the legion, as well as other sorcerers and Ahriman.
As for the 3.5 codex, I do agree some psychic coven units wouldn't be amiss. In 7th they replicated this by using formations to allow multiple sorcerers to group up together as a unit but 8th doesn't really have any such option currently. The expanded options for rubrics do cover some of the same ground however, so there is that.
I suppose my overall point is that they are making an effort to draw from various sources for the new cult legions, even very old ones. Tson draws from the lost and damned (and to a degree eye of terror) for gors and the 3.5 book for rubric terminators, while the DG drew inspiration from the lost and damned/various forgeworld supplements for poxwalkers and epic/forgeworld for the daemon engines. Even tzaangor shamans could be seen as an interpretation of the thrall wizard that has, in one form or another, popped up in the lost and damned, epic, and the 3.5 list (albeit very different in all of them).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/29 15:16:45
I still remember when T-Sons were a strong contender when Rubrics had 2 wounds a piece (and back then invul saves, FnP, and even instant death were all VERY rare) and the sorceror didn't cost as much as a naked chaos lord. Hell even the 3rd edition T-Sons were a force to be reckoned with, as they were flat out immune to S5 weapons if I remember correctly. And that was just their basic troops.
What's more frustrating is that while T-Sons in older editions were restricted by the mentality that there shouldn't be psyker spam (this is pre-5th edition GK codex), recent codexes basically gave it to other factions when T-Sons were the original Psyker-spam army. Plus I think it salts the wound more when Deathguard got a whole slew of new toys (even considering the tzaangors and terminators, Death Guard still have more in the form of two new tanks and the drone) but T-Sons only got a reboxing of some old AoS junk no one remembered existed.
Gwar! wrote:Huh, I had no idea Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines posted on Dakka. Hi Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can I have an Autograph!
Kanluwen wrote:
Hell, I'm not that bothered by the Stormraven. Why? Because, as it stands right now, it's "limited use".When it's shoehorned in to the Codex: Space Marines, then yeah. I'll be irked.
When I'm editing alot, you know I have a gakload of homework to (not) do.
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: I still remember when T-Sons were a strong contender when Rubrics had 2 wounds a piece (and back then invul saves, FnP, and even instant death were all VERY rare) and the sorceror didn't cost as much as a naked chaos lord. Hell even the 3rd edition T-Sons were a force to be reckoned with, as they were flat out immune to S5 weapons if I remember correctly. And that was just their basic troops.
What's more frustrating is that while T-Sons in older editions were restricted by the mentality that there shouldn't be psyker spam (this is pre-5th edition GK codex), recent codexes basically gave it to other factions when T-Sons were the original Psyker-spam army. Plus I think it salts the wound more when Deathguard got a whole slew of new toys (even considering the tzaangors and terminators, Death Guard still have more in the form of two new tanks and the drone) but T-Sons only got a reboxing of some old AoS junk no one remembered existed.
Let's be real here for a second. Thousand Sons were one of the weakest legions in the 3.5 codex. (I started playing them back then. Mostly because of the model's, less for the competitive rules.)
Regular Thousand Sons where essentially just a (massive) pool of extra wounds for the (usually) very kitted out Aspiring Sorcerer. From a competetive standpoint Thousand Sons they where rather meh; one cost almost as much as two regular CSM's and had S&P (only a drawback for them) and worse shooting/fighting.
The Aspiring sorcerer and the 2W terminators on the other hand. Wow mama.
To be fair, saying T-Sons were weak compared to other legions is like saying the Jalapeno is bland and tasteless in comparison to a Scotch Bonnet. The other legions were ridiculous (I should know, I played Iron Warriors) but the T-Sons were no slouches either.
Gwar! wrote:Huh, I had no idea Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines posted on Dakka. Hi Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can I have an Autograph!
Kanluwen wrote:
Hell, I'm not that bothered by the Stormraven. Why? Because, as it stands right now, it's "limited use".When it's shoehorned in to the Codex: Space Marines, then yeah. I'll be irked.
When I'm editing alot, you know I have a gakload of homework to (not) do.
Damn, this is a new and exciting definition of "old" I've never heard of applied to this AOS stuff, here meaning "Less than a year".
What does this make my Ork Warbuggies, then? Surely at the very least "Archaeological"?
Death guard got an awesome, full model release, and then a nurgle daemon release after that. Thousand Sons did not get that. I don't think that point is being debated here. I am sorry that you did not get as many things as the other guys who got more things.
However, by your own definitions here, Death Guard only got a few "real" death guard models. Namely the terminators, characters, and Death Guard marines themselves. Typhus and Mortarion surely cant be listed as new death guard stuff, because they're named characters and not everyone wants to revolve their army around them. The daemon engines - well, they're daemon engines obviously, not death guard at all, so those three models can't be listed. Really, they got 1 more terminator variant, and 1-3 more special flavors of character (I didn't really keep track).
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
5500 pts 
6500 pts 
7000 pts 
9000 pts 
13.000 pts 
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now. 
