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.

Still no leaks on the points for the new units? We got two Warlord Traits in the Chaos article today. I am surprised there haven't been full leaks of those yet either.

 MajorTom11 wrote:
Y'know, that Abaddon sculpt is so good it almost de-legitimizes making any kind of positive argument for Guilliman being any kind of good. Side by side, Guilliman looks almost like he's from a different company.

About the only excuse i can up with is that Gman was a product of 7th edition era GW which tended to suck at everything from rules to fluff to occasionally even models.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Still no leaks on the points for the new units? We got two Warlord Traits in the Chaos article today. I am surprised there haven't been full leaks of those yet either.

Also, to be fair to the Sculptor, you cannot really beat the 30k Guilliman model. It is perfect for the character.

 aka_mythos wrote:
I don't think we should hate on cultists, almost every 40k novel I've read there are cultists or cultist equivalents fighting alongside the CSM. If the goal is to make CSM the choice over Cultists, it should probably take the form of Stratagems that only effect Heretic Astartes.

This is literally the same issue that existed with Conscripts. They made the absolute worst choice by simply bumping up points and nerfing Commissars into uselessness.

The answer is, and always will be, making it so that they do not benefit from army strats, rules, etc unless a specific character or trait calls them out as benefiting.

 warboss wrote:
About the only excuse i can up with is that Gman was a product of 7th edition era GW which tended to suck at everything from rules to fluff to occasionally even models.

GW was bad at miniatures during 7th?

That... doesn't make sense.

 Kanluwen wrote:
This is literally the same issue that existed with Conscripts. They made the absolute worst choice by simply bumping up points and nerfing Commissars into uselessness.

No Kan! We must swing the pendulum as hard as possible. Units should only exist in two possible states: Always take or never take! No middle ground! It's the GW way!

Did anybody figure out what the wing on big 'bad's base is yet?

It's bigger than Roboutes backpack wings. Perhaps a new unit that's still to come? Sisters? Blood Angels?

Tinfoil hat on, we may not see a new codex for Marines or Chaos. Instead their rules could just be in their mini codexes/ in the new campaign book. And they could be somewhat placeholder for preparation of a 9th edition where they will then get new codexes. Could be that they're waiting to overhaul a few rules in the system before fixing marines as a whole.

Tinfoil hat off, they probably just have no idea how to fix the basic marine in 8th editions and all it's dmg and high strength and alpha strike. They want to keep it at a basic, simple midline statline and that's not really good in 8th. I hope they at least reduce the points.

 Gael Knight wrote:
Did anybody figure out what the wing on big 'bad's base is yet?

It's bigger than Roboutes backpack wings. Perhaps a new unit that's still to come? Sisters? Blood Angels?

I think I could make out a little gold eagley foot poking out under the marine from another angle, so I think it's a big broken aquila of some kind.

 Red_Five wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Still no leaks on the points for the new units? We got two Warlord Traits in the Chaos article today. I am surprised there haven't been full leaks of those yet either.

Also, to be fair to the Sculptor, you cannot really beat the 30k Guilliman model. It is perfect for the character.

All the 30k Primarchs are fantastic. Outside Perty on too big a terrain piece of course.

I also just hate Fulgrim but I hate the Emperor's Children in general so that's maybe a bias getting in the way.

If Vigilus Ablaze is the only way to get the new rules for Vanguard Space Marines and Daemonkin Chaos Space Marines outside the boxed set, I would be fine with that. Hopefully they put a little more care into the rules so things like the Lieutenant only having a plain CCW instead of a Combat Knife are taken care of. Also, hopefully the full datasheets are in there, not just the ones that cover the models in the boxed set (so it would have the alternate weapon options and full squad sizes). But I suspect we will be getting add-on books for the Vanguard Space Marines and Daemonkin (possibly a Chaos Undivided add-on) at a later date that has the full datasheets. It will probably kick off a whole slew of codex add-ons to extend the life of the edition the way we got add-ons in 7e.

We will already be able to pre order shadowspear in a few days, but what about vigilus and Abaddon ? We already have knowledge on Abby but is it okay to believe that some time will happen between shadowspear and vigilus 2 release ?

 warboss wrote:

 MajorTom11 wrote:
Y'know, that Abaddon sculpt is so good it almost de-legitimizes making any kind of positive argument for Guilliman being any kind of good. Side by side, Guilliman looks almost like he's from a different company.

About the only excuse i can up with is that Gman was a product of 7th edition era GW which tended to suck at everything from rules to fluff to occasionally even models.

I think Guilliman is a greay model... If your intention was to give peiole a base to convert the Emperor from...

Carlovonsexron wrote:

 warboss wrote:

 MajorTom11 wrote:
Y'know, that Abaddon sculpt is so good it almost de-legitimizes making any kind of positive argument for Guilliman being any kind of good. Side by side, Guilliman looks almost like he's from a different company.

About the only excuse i can up with is that Gman was a product of 7th edition era GW which tended to suck at everything from rules to fluff to occasionally even models.

I think Guilliman is a greay model... If your intention was to give peiole a base to convert the Emperor from...

I disagree subjectively with that (i.e not saying I'm right and you're wrong, just my opinion). For me, the proportions and design of the Guilliman 40k model are just brutally off. Waist wasp thin, unusually extended limbs, esp in comparison to 40k design in general, miniscule head. Armor detail and filigree not bad but soft and again oddly put together. For me the more they do since their design renaissance the more out of place that model sits in a near singular fashion. I mean, all the models crept a bit more towards art scale, a bit, and then there is that 40k bulk that the artwork conveyed for PA that wasn't there in the heroic scale era that has been coming in to the new era. There are still small heads, there are still bad proportions, tiny thighs. The thing about Guilliman is he is one of the worst examples of being 'off' in several of the areas for me.

Again, YYMV, but Abbadon, I think many would agree, despite being 'not accurate' in some ways as a whole comes off as a much more 'together' and 'sits right' sculpt. It looks like the artwork, it looks a lot like most hoped it would. Guilliman, I don't think anyone thought he would look like that, in almost any detail. You get where I'm coming from?

easiest fix for cultists would be to make then minium squad size of 20, that means they're individually cheap sure but you're unable to put them in transports (we have NEVER in the fluff seen them ride rhinos etc)

Guilliman looks like a special edition Manga variant of the character.

Seriously, just use Roboute's helmet and you're gold.

I think it's the colours with Guilliman.

Paint him gold and he looks great imo.

Check out this guy's blog.
http://www.agisn.de/html/space_marines.html

Sotahullu wrote:
One possible thing is making cultist excluded from CSM rules in general.

Apostole could still cheer them on but maybe make any Legion traits and marks only affect proper CSM troops.

Just like how grots dont benefit from ork klan kultures. Maybe they could do the same for IG conscripts as well, and restore commissars to usefulness at the same time.

The problem isn't that cultists are too good (although I'd happily see them lose traits in return for going back to 4pts.) The problem is just that the regular Marine statline is bad. The primaris statline is better, but still over costed.

The proper balance is that SM should have slightly better special weapons and primaris, whereas chaos should have buffs from marks like they had in 3.5 codex. But in both cases, the MeQ statline and bolters need to be improved.

The Abaddon model makes me want to start collecting BL.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
That's what makes Chosen seem like a good option for Troops in the Chaos Undivided armies. They are the CSM that are the equivalent to the Tactical Marines in terms of experience. The bog-standard CSM Squad? That's your Scout alternatives. Sort of like how Space Wolves have two PA squads, the Blood Claws (who are the equivalent to the CSM Squad) and the Grey Hunters (who are the equivalent to Chosen).

Remember how 5th edition allowed you to swap elite units into troop slots in armies in which it made sense? Led by people who would realistically have such elite entourage?

Ah, way back when GW actually had a writer capable of making an entire series of balanced, interesting books with multiple builds, good times

 Red_Five wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Still no leaks on the points for the new units? We got two Warlord Traits in the Chaos article today. I am surprised there haven't been full leaks of those yet either.

Also, to be fair to the Sculptor, you cannot really beat the 30k Guilliman model. It is perfect for the character.

Yes, if you ignore slight changes between 30K and 40K, with Robby's armour being perhaps the best conceptual mirror of the change GW had ever made

The thing about elites as troops thing is that you already can basically do if as far as GW can tell. You can take a vanguard detachment. But players want to maximize CPs and want a good troop choice that does it.

You could probably buy the new CSM and just make them chosen and run a vanguard with them while running a battalion of cultists.

So while I thought about just making the standard CSM a chosen...I realize at this point I basically already can.

@Irbis:
One thing is for sure is that in the 41 millennium, Guilliman decided not to skip every leg day.

That's the problem with the FoC having no meaning in 8th (other than how many CPs it generates).

There's no impetus to make units that don't work better if you can just take an FoC that emphasises the units that do.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That's the problem with the FoC having no meaning in 8th (other than how many CPs it generates).

There's no impetus to make units that don't work better if you can just take an FoC that emphasises the units that do.

I don't know how we could fix it, or where we could fix it. The current system is nice but CP generation is just killing everything.

 Asherian Command wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That's the problem with the FoC having no meaning in 8th (other than how many CPs it generates).

There's no impetus to make units that don't work better if you can just take an FoC that emphasises the units that do.

I don't know how we could fix it, or where we could fix it. The current system is nice but CP generation is just killing everything.

Removing CP from Detachments would be a start.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That's the problem with the FoC having no meaning in 8th (other than how many CPs it generates).

There's no impetus to make units that don't work better if you can just take an FoC that emphasises the units that do.

I don't know how we could fix it, or where we could fix it. The current system is nice but CP generation is just killing everything.

Removing CP from Detachments would be a start.

You could peg it to points and every army would have the same amount but that probably wouldn't balance things either. I think GW made some assumptions that armies like AM would get less mileage out of their CP but would get more. Then never really asked "what if they take the cheap AM and use those CPs for elite armies?".

The only question they asked was "How do we get players to buy units from every single army?".

You can't fix CPs by giving everyone the same amount, because not everyone's stratagems are equal. (It would be a big improvement over the current situation though!)

The only way to have CPs be properly balanced by army is for the amount to vary by army, or unit choice within an army. So in other words, army specific detachments, or CPs based on taking certain combinations of units. (For example, every tac squad you take gives +1 CP. But for guard to get +1 CP, they need to take 3 infantry squads.)

I wouldn't be opposed to them moving to something more along the lines of the AoS chart and allies system and ditching the idea of Elites, Fast Attack and Heavy Support and the Detachment system (with them going back to certain conditions moving units to Troops/Battle Line).

Was part of the problem in the past with units becoming Troops that it gave some armies Troops that were leaps and bounds better than others? (I'm thinking bikes with their 4++ in 7th.) Some armies will always have Troops that are better than some other armies, but I can see situations where that's not a very big deal and others where it makes for a bad game.

I like having different unit types (HQ/Elite/Troops/FA/HS/Flyer/Fortification/Super-Heavy) because with an actual FOC that means something, rather than the current system where you can essentially ignore it and take whatever you want with some minor taxes, it forces you to make choices about what you take.