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.

Yeah the terrain piece just gives you 1 for free without needing the stratagem.

Ah, the best part of new Battlebox products has arirved: The market being flooded with kits that no one wants. Got a couple extra sets of MANZ for much cheaper than normal.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
On topic, I'm pretty excited by a lot of the ork custom jobs and stratagems.

I would be too if they didn't require the purchase of a terrain piece.

They don’t.

You need the Mekshop to use them.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Ah, the best part of new Battlebox products has arirved: The market being flooded with kits that no one wants. Got a couple extra sets of MANZ for much cheaper than normal.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
On topic, I'm pretty excited by a lot of the ork custom jobs and stratagems.

I would be too if they didn't require the purchase of a terrain piece.

They don’t.

You need the Mekshop to use them.

No, you don’t. Mek shop gives you one for free. It isn’t required for you to spend 1 CP before battle to apply kustom jobs. Since it’s pre-battle, you can do it multiple times as well.

Man, sounds like to me the Space Wolf update is pretty solid. No new psychic powers though? During the Psychic Awakening?

Voss wrote:
If it works, and the 'community' continues to exist, is it really a fallacy?

That would be a discussion to continue elsewhere so this thread can get back on topic, though.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Ah, the best part of new Battlebox products has arirved: The market being flooded with kits that no one wants. Got a couple extra sets of MANZ for much cheaper than normal.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
On topic, I'm pretty excited by a lot of the ork custom jobs and stratagems.

I would be too if they didn't require the purchase of a terrain piece.

They don’t.

You need the Mekshop to use them.

You can get one by either buying a mekshop or by spending one CP per kustom job.

Considering how the mek shop is 80 points and a detachment for one job, and battalion with weird boyz and gretchin is 215 for five jobs, I doubt we'll be seeing a lot of mek shops.

 Jidmah wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Ah, the best part of new Battlebox products has arirved: The market being flooded with kits that no one wants. Got a couple extra sets of MANZ for much cheaper than normal.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
On topic, I'm pretty excited by a lot of the ork custom jobs and stratagems.

I would be too if they didn't require the purchase of a terrain piece.

They don’t.

You need the Mekshop to use them.

You can get one by either buying a mekshop or by spending one CP per kustom job.

Considering how the mek shop is 80 points and a detachment for one job, and battalion with weird boyz and gretchin is 215 for five jobs, I doubt we'll be seeing a lot of mek shops.

unless you're playing in some weird meta that allows everyone one terrain piece in addition to the 3 normal detachments or something yeah

Still doubtful whether 80 for an otherwise completely useless model is worth 1CP.

Tyel wrote:

I think Ghaz is going to suck at 285 points. But if he does, I have some hope he will be knocked down to a more reasonable level (230? Less?) in CA2020. Well, maybe not, as that will probably be getting written about now, but still - the year after that. In the fullness of time it will improve.

GW did fix the Swarmlord with a cut from 300 > 250pts, so even for Xenos a change isn't out of the question. Plus Ghaz is out early enough in the year for feedback to make it into the next CA.

 xttz wrote:

Tyel wrote:

I think Ghaz is going to suck at 285 points. But if he does, I have some hope he will be knocked down to a more reasonable level (230? Less?) in CA2020. Well, maybe not, as that will probably be getting written about now, but still - the year after that. In the fullness of time it will improve.

GW did fix the Swarmlord with a cut from 300 > 250pts, so even for Xenos a change isn't out of the question. Plus Ghaz is out early enough in the year for feedback to make it into the next CA.

Of course, given the global situation, quite how much of the sort of feedback they listen to will have made it to them by the time they start working on CA2020 is anyone's guess...

 Dysartes wrote:

 xttz wrote:

Tyel wrote:

I think Ghaz is going to suck at 285 points. But if he does, I have some hope he will be knocked down to a more reasonable level (230? Less?) in CA2020. Well, maybe not, as that will probably be getting written about now, but still - the year after that. In the fullness of time it will improve.

GW did fix the Swarmlord with a cut from 300 > 250pts, so even for Xenos a change isn't out of the question. Plus Ghaz is out early enough in the year for feedback to make it into the next CA.

Of course, given the global situation, quite how much of the sort of feedback they listen to will have made it to them by the time they start working on CA2020 is anyone's guess...

yeah, I'm not sure if GW so much listens to feedback as watches tourny results.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Ah, the best part of new Battlebox products has arirved: The market being flooded with kits that no one wants. Got a couple extra sets of MANZ for much cheaper than normal.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
On topic, I'm pretty excited by a lot of the ork custom jobs and stratagems.

I would be too if they didn't require the purchase of a terrain piece.

They don’t.

You need the Mekshop to use them.

No, you don't.

It's been confirmed in a Warhammer Community Article.

BrianDavion wrote:


unless you're playing in some weird meta that allows everyone one terrain piece in addition to the 3 normal detachments or something yeah

Well, RAW, there are still no detachment limits for matched play.

The "3 normal detachments" is an optional recommendation for large, organized events that comes with the very explicit recommendation to modify, change and adapt that recommendation as needed (e.g. increase or decrease the limit, apply it to certain detachments only, etc.., etc..).

Now I realize that, especially stateside, many people play with a 3 detachment cap as "standard", because events like LVO, etc.. use it, very few events follow the second half of the very same recommendation and change it/play with it (some "highlander" evens for the most part) and simply refrain from rules that are cut out by this convention (e.g. the Drukhari 6-9 Patrol-Detachment army), but it's not actually a rule of the game and not necessarily what the rules writers have in mind when they write their rules.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:


unless you're playing in some weird meta that allows everyone one terrain piece in addition to the 3 normal detachments or something yeah

Well, RAW, there are still no detachment limits for matched play.

The "3 normal detachments" is an optional recommendation for large, organized events that comes with the very explicit recommendation to modify, change and adapt that recommendation as needed (e.g. increase or decrease the limit, apply it to certain detachments only, etc.., etc..).

Now I realize that, especially stateside, many people play with a 3 detachment cap as "standard", because events like LVO, etc.. use it, very few events follow the second half of the very same recommendation and change it/play with it (some "highlander" evens for the most part) and simply refrain from rules that are cut out by this convention (e.g. the Drukhari 6-9 Patrol-Detachment army), but it's not actually a rule of the game and not necessarily what the rules writers have in mind when they write their rules.

ohh yeah I know, reason I specificly mentioned detachment limits at all is because I figured most people would rather take a extra battalion, get the three CPs from that, rather then take the terrain piece. I noted that is indeed likely the case unless your local tourny etc used some odd ball rules there.

 puma713 wrote:
Man, sounds like to me the Space Wolf update is pretty solid. No new psychic powers though? During the Psychic Awakening?

Space Wolves don’t have psychers. They have Rune Priests. Totally different. I thought this was cleared up back 10k years ago as some council...

(It does seem an oversight though.)

BrianDavion wrote:

ohh yeah I know, reason I specificly mentioned detachment limits at all is because I figured most people would rather take a extra battalion, get the three CPs from that, rather then take the terrain piece. I noted that is indeed likely the case unless your local tourny etc used some odd ball rules there.

Sure. Though the Kustom Job strat says you can get an "additional" kustom job using the strat. It might be interpreted that you need to have at least one kustom job already to be able to play the strat, which would require you to have the terrain-thing.

I am sure people will discuss that wording to some extent, but TOs might well rule it that way and/or it might be tightened up by the FAQ for the book.

 Nevelon wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Man, sounds like to me the Space Wolf update is pretty solid. No new psychic powers though? During the Psychic Awakening?

Space Wolves don’t have psychers. They have Rune Priests. Totally different. I thought this was cleared up back 10k years ago as some council...

(It does seem an oversight though.)

granted their codex psykic abilities are IIRC pretty awesome.

BrianDavion wrote:

yeah, I'm not sure if GW so much listens to feedback as watches tourny results.

Not sure tourney results will be readily available this year...

 Nevelon wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Man, sounds like to me the Space Wolf update is pretty solid. No new psychic powers though? During the Psychic Awakening?

Space Wolves don’t have psychers. They have Rune Priests. Totally different. I thought this was cleared up back 10k years ago as some council...

(It does seem an oversight though.)

And I hope Rune Priests never stop communing with daemons pretending to be Fenrisian nature spirits. So wholesome, but probably doesn't offer all that much psychic potential given it is just one planet as awesome as that planet is.

Well, Blood Angels didn't get any new psychic powers, nor did Dark Angels (or Ynnari). I also don't think the Chaos Marines got additional psychic powers (?)

Likewise, Ynnari, Craftworld Eldar and Drukhari (who - like Templars and Tau - obviously also didn't get psychic powers) got no new Warlord Traits or Relics and, except for Craftworlds, no new Stratagems. Inversely, no non-Marines got mono-faction bonuses, etc...

Tyranids, Tau and now Orks got variants of "upgrade a unit", but nobody else.

It's all a bit random on what they decide to add to a given faction in PA and probably mostly done with random writers either having some "cool ideas" for Tau or Orks or whatever, or nobody really giving a crap and thus a faction just getting the minimal-effort treatment (e.g. Drukhari, GSC, Ynnari) before going to print.

The 3 detachment limit seems like a daft idea if it cuts armies off from their actual rules (ie Dark Eldar).
Or has no exception for taking at least one fortification.

 dan2026 wrote:
The 3 detachment limit seems like a daft idea if it cuts armies off from their actual rules (ie Dark Eldar). Or has no exception for taking at least one fortification.

I wouldn't worry too much about it. As was stated previously, there is no "3 detachment limit", or "Rule of 3" as it is sometimes called. Firstly, it's not a rule, it's a guideline for matched play at organised events. Secondly, it's not a "rule of 3", as the guideline scales with points levels.

 dan2026 wrote:
The 3 detachment limit seems like a daft idea if it cuts armies off from their actual rules (ie Dark Eldar).
Or has no exception for taking at least one fortification.

It's not. 40K isn't necessarily meant to be played with all the options all the time. Sometimes it can be fun to add arbitrary limits like 3 detachments or no super-heavies or no more than 1 named character, or whatever to switch it up a bit.

The odd thing is that the competitive scene has adopted that one suggestions of "you could try this" as inviolable gospel (while being curiously fairly antagonistic towards trying other random limitations/changes for a change of pace).

Sunny Side Up wrote:
40K isn't necessarily meant to be played with all the options all the time.

If that were true the Force Org chart would be a single item that you can't just take more of and in combinations that give you more of whatever slot you need.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
nobody really giving a crap and thus a faction just getting the minimal-effort treatment

Sounds like a load of nonsense. Do you not give a crap about your job? Do the rest of the people that work with you not give a crap about their jobs? Is this why you deduce that these people are incredibly lazy and give everything minimal effort, despite that they're in the enviable position of having a job that in most cases doubles up as one of their main passions? Saying this makes no sense and makes you seem foolish.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 dan2026 wrote:
The 3 detachment limit seems like a daft idea if it cuts armies off from their actual rules (ie Dark Eldar).
Or has no exception for taking at least one fortification.

It's not. 40K isn't necessarily meant to be played with all the options all the time. Sometimes it can be fun to add arbitrary limits like 3 detachments or no super-heavies or no more than 1 named character, or whatever to switch it up a bit.

The odd thing is that the competitive scene has adopted that one suggestions of "you could try this" as inviolable gospel (while being curiously fairly antagonistic towards trying other random limitations/changes for a change of pace).

That's because people are shockingly drawn to balance, and even bad efforts like Rule of 3 or Three Detachments or point rebalances in Chapter Approved are going to be the common ground.

 dan2026 wrote:
The 3 detachment limit seems like a daft idea if it cuts armies off from their actual rules (ie Dark Eldar).
Or has no exception for taking at least one fortification.

To be fair, I think the issue is more that the DE codex was written by a man with a pickaxe lodged in his skull.

"I know, I'll take a codex that's already starved of units and content and split it into three mini-factions with no synergy or overlap between them. And then I'll remove two more units and all the wargear. I is smart designer."


No, I'm not still bitter. Why do you ask?

 vipoid wrote:

 dan2026 wrote:
The 3 detachment limit seems like a daft idea if it cuts armies off from their actual rules (ie Dark Eldar).
Or has no exception for taking at least one fortification.

To be fair, I think the issue is more that the DE codex was written by a man with a pickaxe lodged in his skull.

"I know, I'll take a codex that's already starved of units and content and split it into three mini-factions with no synergy or overlap between them. And then I'll remove two more units and all the wargear. I is smart designer."


No, I'm not still bitter. Why do you ask?

Yeah the codex was NOT well written. If the Patrol rule thing wasn't put in, chances are nobody would've cared or asked for the bonus. Hell, I'm pretty sure nobody really considered it overall.

The easiest way to fix it is not limit who benefits in a detachment. Your Wyches should function as intended even if you brought Ravagers. It's pure stupidity that it doesn't work that way.

They could have included an element of what they intended by just having the HQs 'unlock' unit options; so a Battalion with an Archon, a Haemonculus, and a Succubus could have any units from Kabal, Coven or Cult.

 harlokin wrote:
They could have included an element of what they intended by just having the HQs 'unlock' unit options; so a Battalion with an Archon, a Haemonculus, and a Succubus could have any units from Kabal, Coven or Cult.

That's a lot more elegant.