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.

There is already a precedent for the Assault Intercessors, despite having a Close Support marking being Troops. Incursors have the Close Support marking as well. So my guess is they will be Troops.

For the reasons I gave above. I believe that we're going to see a gradual rolling back of traditional marines in advertising, removal from the shop floor to direct only (they're always under pressure to find shelf space), phasing out of earlier chapter specific upgrade kits in favour of new ones designed to synch up with the Primaris Kits, condensing of the traditional Marine lists to generic entries at the back of Primaris focused codices, and so on.

You'll still be able to buy the basic SM kits and play with your older SM armies. But every year you'll come a little closer to being that guy who walks in with a Lost and the Damned army.

I posted this close to a year ago. Nice to see we're still on track.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Fair enough - I still wouldn't read too much into precise wording from the cartoon. It will be quite a bit of work to add a Tank keyword retroactively to all the Codexes. If they write the core rule to include Vehicle their work is done? Job's a good'un. Guess we'll have to wait and see...

If they use [VEHICLE], wouldn't things like Dreadnoughts and Sentinels get to benefit, which is quite a way from "Tanks" getting the benefit?

 Jimbotron wrote:
For me, a big takeway was Mike Brandt joining Warhammer Community to head events. Are we going to see a return to GW sponsored tournaments vs just supporting?

Yeah, after his attitude towards the CA19 scenarios, it should be seen as a worrying move.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
I have to say, that robe is bugging me. Why is it under his chest armor, but over his pants? All the way in or all the way out, bro.

I assume it's the robe he wears everyday, so it's not sized to fit over his armour, so the chestplate it buckled in place over it.

Wouldn't that be likely to interfere with some of the interface between the armour and the Black Carapace, though?

 TedNugent wrote:
Admittedly, those new storm shield Primaris are going to look pretty dope in a Dark Angels army. Definitely digging the storm shields and more knightly regalia.

I know we'd be talking conversions here, and conversions are GW's kryptonite at times, but swapping the swords out for Deathwing Knight flails would be cool.

BrianDavion wrote:
speaking of space wolf assault intercessors, I think we've got our first old school Marine unit made offically redundant, Space Wolf Blood claws, not really seeing any reason to take them over this new unit. they're worse in every way

They do get some special weapon options, though, which is something these Assault Intercessors probably won't have. A small niche, but a niche nonetheless.

Special Weapons on Blood Claws? Yeah no. They're a BS4+ unit.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Special Weapons on Blood Claws? Yeah no. They're a BS4+ unit.

And Primaris have separate squads to deal with that. Those special weapons aren't seeing use in the place Blood Claws want to be in the first place.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Special Weapons on Blood Claws? Yeah no. They're a BS4+ unit.

And Primaris have separate squads to deal with that. Those special weapons aren't seeing use in the place Blood Claws want to be in the first place.

Exactly. Specialization is something you try to do anyway. Saying that Blood Claws can buy a shooty weapon is the same as pointing out Ork Boyz can get some Rokkits: you're technically correct but you're not doing it so who cares?

Actually, it is going to be kinda interesting to see what weapon options these are getting. And if we are getting new bikes, is there going to be Primaris Attack Bike?


And if those have a option for Eviscerator, well I am probably going to do Flesh Tearers.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Special Weapons on Blood Claws? Yeah no. They're a BS4+ unit.

And Primaris have separate squads to deal with that. Those special weapons aren't seeing use in the place Blood Claws want to be in the first place.

Exactly. Specialization is something you try to do anyway. Saying that Blood Claws can buy a shooty weapon is the same as pointing out Ork Boyz can get some Rokkits: you're technically correct but you're not doing it so who cares?

Can we move away from broad sweeping statements until the new rules are released for the next edition, you are most likely going to be correct but you may not be, point adjustments will surely happen, blood claws may be very relevant on points alone, or not, but lets wait and find out.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Special Weapons on Blood Claws? Yeah no. They're a BS4+ unit.

And Primaris have separate squads to deal with that. Those special weapons aren't seeing use in the place Blood Claws want to be in the first place.

Exactly. Specialization is something you try to do anyway. Saying that Blood Claws can buy a shooty weapon is the same as pointing out Ork Boyz can get some Rokkits: you're technically correct but you're not doing it so who cares?

Can we move away from broad sweeping statements until the new rules are released for the next edition, you are most likely going to be correct but you may not be, point adjustments will surely happen, blood claws may be very relevant on points alone, or not, but lets wait and find out.

Shooting options at low saturation for a low BS unit has always been bad, so it's not a sweeping statement?

So you know how flamers will work next edition then? Yep, cool. Genuinely sick of the level of toxic ego on this site.

Once the Destroyer's weird head is swapped out, the model looks so much better. (Although Deathmark heads always improve any necron sculpt.) Does he look too much like a rip off Illuminor though?

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
So you know how flamers will work next edition then? Yep, cool. Genuinely sick of the level of toxic ego on this site.

People weren't buying flamers for those squads either because the potential to lower the odds of a successful charge was a bad idea.

GaroRobe wrote:
Once the Destroyer's weird head is swapped out, the model looks so much better. (Although Deathmark heads always improve any necron sculpt.) Does he look too much like a rip off Illuminor though?

Hmm... I wonder if the illuminor is a dual kit with this, now that you mention it. Very similar pose.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
So you know how flamers will work next edition then? Yep, cool. Genuinely sick of the level of toxic ego on this site.

People weren't buying flamers for those squads either because the potential to lower the odds of a successful charge was a bad idea.

Right, you aren't getting this... In 8th edition they were not. You don't know how anything functions in 9th edition, so stop making sweeping statements about how they will function until you know better.

Charging may be super easy due to a change in charge distance, flamers may be amazing, blood claws could be super cost effective....

That model is part of the boxed set that is forthcoming, Iluminor Szeras is slated to be out before that.

 Dysartes wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Fair enough - I still wouldn't read too much into precise wording from the cartoon. It will be quite a bit of work to add a Tank keyword retroactively to all the Codexes. If they write the core rule to include Vehicle their work is done? Job's a good'un. Guess we'll have to wait and see...

If they use [VEHICLE], wouldn't things like Dreadnoughts and Sentinels get to benefit, which is quite a way from "Tanks" getting the benefit? .

this is the big Problem with this preview
there are 3 possibilities, they use "vehicle" in the core rules, and it won't be only tanks but alle vehicles, or they use the keyword "tank" and add it to the units with the 9th Errata/CA

and the 3rd one is also the most likley, the keyword "tank" is added only to units as they get their new Codex and/or as new units are released (we have seen something similar before with AA guns as they were in the core rules but only added to units with the new codex)

 Dysartes wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
I have to say, that robe is bugging me. Why is it under his chest armor, but over his pants? All the way in or all the way out, bro.

I assume it's the robe he wears everyday, so it's not sized to fit over his armour, so the chestplate it buckled in place over it.

Wouldn't that be likely to interfere with some of the interface between the armour and the Black Carapace, though?

Over the soft armour (which I assume is more like a bodysuit) and under the chestplate which doesn't need direct connectors seems about right.

 Kanluwen wrote:
That model is part of the boxed set that is forthcoming, Iluminor Szeras is slated to be out before that.

I have a sneaking suspicion, 9th edition may launch with Pariah, considering the main factions of Pariah are lining up with the start box and/or the trailer yesterday.

Illuminor could be a dual kit still, and the model above could just be the ETB version.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
So you know how flamers will work next edition then? Yep, cool. Genuinely sick of the level of toxic ego on this site.

People weren't buying flamers for those squads either because the potential to lower the odds of a successful charge was a bad idea.

Right, you aren't getting this... In 8th edition they were not. You don't know how anything functions in 9th edition, so stop making sweeping statements about how they will function until you know better.

Charging may be super easy due to a change in charge distance, flamers may be amazing, blood claws could be super cost effective....

Well seeing as it was not a good idea to do so in 4th or 5th or 6th or 7th or 8th, something tells me those low saturation Special Weapon add ons, including Flamers, will still be a bad idea for low BS melee units. That's how the game has always worked. Getting all high and mighty defensive about it is a strange hill to choose to die on.

I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.

Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
That model is part of the boxed set that is forthcoming, Iluminor Szeras is slated to be out before that.

I have a sneaking suspicion, 9th edition may launch with Pariah, considering the main factions of Pariah are lining up with the start box and/or the trailer yesterday.

Illuminor could be a dual kit still, and the model above could just be the ETB version.

It may launch around the same time or later, but I don't know of any 40k character model that's a dual kit.

Excluding the Daemons, but that's more of an AoS thing.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.

Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.

I watched a video this morning where they described how deployment/missions works in AoS, in that no set table size is stated, just distance between deployment zone. So if the table was 2x2, 4x6 etc etc, the deployment zone size changes with the board size, but the distance between deployment zones does not.

so on a 3x2 board, a 24" gap between deployment will be stated where you get a very small deployment area, but the same mission on a larger board would give you a larger deployment zone. How it was sold to me then is, it allows for difference in table size, and even shape, you could play on a circular table then in theory as long as the set distance is able to be accounted for.

I use to live in a flat where there was absolutely no way we could have played a 6x4 game, ever, there wasn't the room unless we went to the trouble of buying a folding table, and that still was an issue for storage, set board sizes needs to disappear from the game rules, its only relevant/required for tournament play.

BrianDavion wrote:
speaking of space wolf assault intercessors, I think we've got our first old school Marine unit made offically redundant, Space Wolf Blood claws, not really seeing any reason to take them over this new unit. they're worse in every way

That's an odd thing to say since Blood Claws are in an army with Grey Hunters. Unless you have jump packs, Grey Hunters are better, right? But Blood Claws still have a place.

We don't know if these guys will get a jump option, so, for now, they're just Grey Hunters that have 2 wounds.

And, of course, we also don't know the stats of their weapons (Are they +1S? -1AP? Both? Neither?) or how much the models cost, points wise. If they were to cost, say, 8 pts, then they'd be better by far. If they're 30 points, they'd be unplayably bad. If they're, say, 20 pts? Well, then you have a choice to make.

Don't sandbag yourself out of the gate brother. Wait until we know more before going all dour up in here.

Sit back, take a deep breath, and just hang on. We don't know beans yet so don't get worked up; it doesn't do you any good.

Peace, yo.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.

Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
That model is part of the boxed set that is forthcoming, Iluminor Szeras is slated to be out before that.

I have a sneaking suspicion, 9th edition may launch with Pariah, considering the main factions of Pariah are lining up with the start box and/or the trailer yesterday.

Illuminor could be a dual kit still, and the model above could just be the ETB version.

It may launch around the same time or later, but I don't know of any 40k character model that's a dual kit.

Excluding the Daemons, but that's more of an AoS thing.

There's loads, DA captain from psychic awakening is one just off the top of my head. Isn't the current necron C'tan monolith thing one as well?

 GaroRobe wrote:
Once the Destroyer's weird head is swapped out, the model looks so much better. (Although Deathmark heads always improve any necron sculpt.) Does he look too much like a rip off Illuminor though?

I was thinking about all-deathmark-head necron force yesterday. Yeah, they look much better without the derpy skulls. Are there any decent third party necron head options?

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.

Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.

I watched a video this morning where they described how deployment/missions works in AoS, in that no set table size is stated, just distance between deployment zone. So if the table was 2x2, 4x6 etc etc, the deployment zone size changes with the board size, but the distance between deployment zones does not.

so on a 3x2 board, a 24" gap between deployment will be stated where you get a very small deployment area, but the same mission on a larger board would give you a larger deployment zone. How it was sold to me then is, it allows for difference in table size, and even shape, you could play on a circular table then in theory as long as the set distance is able to be accounted for.

I use to live in a flat where there was absolutely no way we could have played a 6x4 game, ever, there wasn't the room unless we went to the trouble of buying a folding table, and that still was an issue for storage, set board sizes needs to disappear from the game rules, its only relevant/required for tournament play.

That would be a sensible approach as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.

Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
That model is part of the boxed set that is forthcoming, Iluminor Szeras is slated to be out before that.

I have a sneaking suspicion, 9th edition may launch with Pariah, considering the main factions of Pariah are lining up with the start box and/or the trailer yesterday.

Illuminor could be a dual kit still, and the model above could just be the ETB version.

It may launch around the same time or later, but I don't know of any 40k character model that's a dual kit.

Excluding the Daemons, but that's more of an AoS thing.

There's loads, DA captain from psychic awakening is one just off the top of my head. Isn't the current necron C'tan monolith thing one as well?

The C'Tan isn't a named character.

And I'm pretty sure while you -can- use that Captain as a generic model, he's a named character.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.

Now if they basically give everything a massive points hike, and decrease the table size the game could end up faster at the same points level we play at now just because we'll be taking something like 25% less stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
That model is part of the boxed set that is forthcoming, Iluminor Szeras is slated to be out before that.

I have a sneaking suspicion, 9th edition may launch with Pariah, considering the main factions of Pariah are lining up with the start box and/or the trailer yesterday.

Illuminor could be a dual kit still, and the model above could just be the ETB version.

It may launch around the same time or later, but I don't know of any 40k character model that's a dual kit.

Excluding the Daemons, but that's more of an AoS thing.

Well if people want less commitment to play time, Necromunda/Kill Team and smaller point games exist.

 kodos wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Fair enough - I still wouldn't read too much into precise wording from the cartoon. It will be quite a bit of work to add a Tank keyword retroactively to all the Codexes. If they write the core rule to include Vehicle their work is done? Job's a good'un. Guess we'll have to wait and see...

If they use [VEHICLE], wouldn't things like Dreadnoughts and Sentinels get to benefit, which is quite a way from "Tanks" getting the benefit? .

this is the big Problem with this preview
there are 3 possibilities, they use "vehicle" in the core rules, and it won't be only tanks but alle vehicles, or they use the keyword "tank" and add it to the units with the 9th Errata/CA

and the 3rd one is also the most likley, the keyword "tank" is added only to units as they get their new Codex and/or as new units are released (we have seen something similar before with AA guns as they were in the core rules but only added to units with the new codex)

That would be years wait for some. Imo 3 is least likely

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
That model is part of the boxed set that is forthcoming, Iluminor Szeras is slated to be out before that.

I have a sneaking suspicion, 9th edition may launch with Pariah, considering the main factions of Pariah are lining up with the start box and/or the trailer yesterday.

There's not supposed to be anything Marine related with Pariah--that book is Necrons, Sisters of Battle, and Inquisition.

Truthfully? The new edition launch is supposed to be July for its release. Even assuming that Pariah ends up getting the same amount of Psychic Awakening fiction as the others?
For a quick breakdown:
There were 6 PAs that received 4 pieces of fiction(Phoenix Rising, Faith and Fury, The Greater Good, Saga of the Beast, Engine War, and War of the Spider).
There was 1 PA that received 3 pieces of fiction(Blood of Baal) and 1 that received 5 pieces of fiction(Ritual of the Damned).

Pariah just received its first piece of fiction, meaning we have maybe 2-4 more weeks until they would have started preorders for it...unless it was meant to be getting just one piece of fiction and the trailer.

Illuminor could be a dual kit still, and the model above could just be the ETB version.

Ehhh...they would have shown off the alternate build by now or even have mentioned it as 'a new option coming with the book!'.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I was listening to a podcast last night and they brought up how GW has been trying to streamline the game for years so it's less of a time commitment to play (usually through optional rules no one uses), and they mentioned that the game could see a shift in table size used to 3x5 which matches the dimensions of a kitchen table bought commerically, like from Ikea.

.

Hope not. Time to do that was 8th. Now without doing codexes new and invalidating old ones with all the ranges, speeds and abilities deployment and movement would be even less relevant.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

GaroRobe wrote:
Once the Destroyer's weird head is swapped out, the model looks so much better. (Although Deathmark heads always improve any necron sculpt.) Does he look too much like a rip off Illuminor though?

Hmm... I wonder if the illuminor is a dual kit with this, now that you mention it. Very similar pose.

No. Theres a lot of differences, completely different legs (3 vs 4 for a start), Szeras looks a fair bit bigger, different terrain they're stood on...

 Crimson wrote:

 GaroRobe wrote:
Once the Destroyer's weird head is swapped out, the model looks so much better. (Although Deathmark heads always improve any necron sculpt.) Does he look too much like a rip off Illuminor though?

I was thinking about all-deathmark-head necron force yesterday. Yeah, they look much better without the derpy skulls. Are there any decent third party necron head options?

You can sometimes find them on ebay. I also planned an all deathmark head force to go along with Illuminor. Sadly, the all bronze color scheme is now the status quo for Necron (makes sense, since now they're not as Terminator like) so that look won't be as original, but the mono eye look would be great. It's funny, but even the old destroyers look incredible with that head (there are some pics of them on the current destroyer page)