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.

What factions didn't get PA rules aside of Necrons?

 Tyran wrote:
What factions didn't get PA rules aside of Necrons?

Sisters of Battle.

Yeah. The most recent codex, the one codex released after Space Marines. I guess they are way behind the curve.

tneva82 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Oh give over.

We know some stuff from PA will carry over to the forthcoming Codex range, yes?

So we just need to await our new Codex and plethora of new models.

Yes but not all.

Thus the factions that didn't get PA rules will be behind the power curve ones factions with PA will get new codex at which point they have new codex AND rules from PA.

That's making a lot of assumptions about GW consistency with power curves (which historically is wildly inconsistent), and they stated already that updated codexes will simply copy a chunk of the stuff published in PA books. The 'extras' gained from having both is going to be very small, potentially incompatible and likely to be a detriment just as often as it turns out to be a benefit.

And that assumes that most factions actually got a notable power curve bump from PA. But I'm sure lots of folks will want to argue about that.

From 9 Ways to Prepare for Warhammer 40,000’s New Edition on Warhammer Community:

This is not so much preparation as advice. Whether you’re planning to expand upon or create a whole new army, KEEP YOUR BOOKS SAFE! There will, of course, be updated editions of codexes for each faction in the future that further develop their rules, including awesome, narrative-driven content for your Crusade campaigns in the new edition and more.

However, until then, your current codexes will remain your go-to companions for each faction. It’s not just codexes, either – campaign books such as those from War Zone: Vigilus, the Psychic Awakening series and even the various index articles featured in White Dwarf will still be usable in the new edition.

So it's clear to me that once your new codex drops, the old codex and the other sources (campaign books and White Dwarf articles) are rendered obsolete for that army.

 alextroy wrote:
Yeah. The most recent codex, the one codex released after Space Marines. I guess they are way behind the curve.

Hence the cheeky wink.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Spoiler:

Ice_can wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
That's the last pa book, so now can they please, TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT THE NEW FORGE WORLD BOOKS?

Please?

I am waiting for the main 40k team to kinda go oh yeah FW we need the new Rules for your stuff for 9th edition.

FW "WTF guys you said you were doing all the 40k rules and even cried to managment to make it happen. GTFO.

GW Ehh better do something quick heres the same unplayable 8th edition index rules with some keywords added and a 40% points increase.

Players "WTF this is unplayable trash?"
Gw "Wait for CA it fixes it."

CA FW points increases.

Stu Black said early on that FW books would be some of the earliest releases. And with how long the turn around on books is, they likely started this back when they took the books over from FW last year.

The issue is when is one of earliest releases?
They have already admitted that no faction even necrons who have how many new models wont have a codex at launch and latest roumers for them getting it is late August, Marines of one form or another are bound to get a new codex as one of the launch factions, unless they really are going out their and going Primaris DW vrs Crons for the normal starter set(doubt it). Stu has already said DW are getting a codex early hence the WD touch up.
Thats 3 codex's, plus a CA for 5 months of the year left.
At this point I noy hopefully we will see FW updated this year which is getting really old.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Spoiler:

Ice_can wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
That's the last pa book, so now can they please, TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT THE NEW FORGE WORLD BOOKS?

Please?

I am waiting for the main 40k team to kinda go oh yeah FW we need the new Rules for your stuff for 9th edition.

FW "WTF guys you said you were doing all the 40k rules and even cried to managment to make it happen. GTFO.

GW Ehh better do something quick heres the same unplayable 8th edition index rules with some keywords added and a 40% points increase.

Players "WTF this is unplayable trash?"
Gw "Wait for CA it fixes it."

CA FW points increases.

Stu Black said early on that FW books would be some of the earliest releases. And with how long the turn around on books is, they likely started this back when they took the books over from FW last year.

He was making a joke while pointing out the treatment fw has received from the gw rules team in 8th: repeated points increases in ca with no drops, except for the astreus. Because "primaris". Personally, for chaos sake, and R&H in particular, I hope the rules team were forced to read IA 13 repeatedly, and then hit in the head with the book to make sure it sinks in.

On the subject of what will carry over from pa to the new codexes: I hope they keep all the Night Lords stratagems from Faith and Fury. I think whoever wrote those may be an actual Nostroman.

On a somewhat unrelated topic, does anyone else find it downright bizarre that they didn't tell us how much each detachment costs in CP, as well as whether there is any additional penalty for souping?

It seems like strange business decision, because without that info, it makes figuring out the vague contours of what your army is going to look like impossible. Which means a lot of people like me who are sitting on the sidelines and not spending any money until we know. Whereas if we had had that information, they might have tempted us to go out and buy some models during the transition period, even without knowing precise point values.

For example, I was all set to buy a coven detachment to add to my eldar list until 9th came out and we started hearing about soup penalties. That purchase has now been put on hold indefinitely, because I'm not about to drop a couple hundred on something that I may not be able to use at all in 9th if the soup penalty is too large. But I'm also not going to buy anything else, because I'm still hoping it will be doable. Whereas if you let me know one way or the other, I might have been tempted into buying some stuff and painting it up to have ready for 9th.

yukishiro1 wrote:
On a somewhat unrelated topic, does anyone else find it downright bizarre that they didn't tell us how much each detachment costs in CP, as well as whether there is any additional penalty for souping?

They've given us virtually no specific details on anything, so this shouldn't surprise anyone.

Right, but it seems like it would be in their own financial interest to give out this info, because it's so basic. Who is going to buy models right now when they don't even know if they're going to be able to use them in a 9th list in any realistic way? I guess monofaction players with limited collections might expand them in the meantime, but that's about it.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Right, but it seems like it would be in their own financial interest to give out this info, because it's so basic. Who is going to buy models right now when they don't even know if they're going to be able to use them in a 9th list in any realistic way? I guess monofaction players with limited collections might expand them in the meantime, but that's about it.

Because they can save it as a teaser, but then not give us all the info anyways.

And thereby keep people not spending money. I thought the whole point of marketing was to get people to open their wallets, not to keep them closed. Are there really people reacting to the 9th drip reveal by going out and spending money because they're so excited? I have definitely been guilty in the past of overestimating peoples' rationality, so maybe I'm wrong here and not giving people clear info really is the way to get them to open their wallets...a depressing thought.

Yukishiro has a good point. I'm certainly not buying anything new until I know if I can actually use it, and have stuff I'm holding off assembling because I don't know what wargear options to use. If I knew that they are fixing the points for the hellforged super heavys I'd like to get a falchion. But if it's staying over 1000 points? Nope, no sale.

Apparently the world is full of people less wise then dakkanauts, since selling models doesn't appear to be a problem for GW right now. Remember, this is the company that see sales going so well they plan on repaying furlough funds to the government despite having no obligation to do so.

edit: Reference to angry people removed since the comment was removed.

 alextroy wrote:
Apparently the world is full of people less wise then dakkanauts, since selling models doesn't appear to be a problem for GW right now. Remember, this is the company that see sales going so well they plan on repaying furlough funds to the government despite having no obligation to do so.

Oh, definitely. They obviously know a lot more about marketing than I do. All I can give is my personal view, which is that I would have made several hundred $ worth of purchases but held off on doing so because of the announcement of 9th, but that I would go ahead and make those purchases if they gave me enough info about how detachments work to know whether I will be able to realistically use those models or not. I may well be an outlier.

yukishiro1 wrote:
And thereby keep people not spending money. I thought the whole point of marketing was to get people to open their wallets, not to keep them closed. Are there really people reacting to the 9th drip reveal by going out and spending money because they're so excited? I have definitely been guilty in the past of overestimating peoples' rationality, so maybe I'm wrong here and not giving people clear info really is the way to get them to open their wallets...a depressing thought.

The whole point of marketing is to generate interest in the product (even if that interest is initially negative because it still means more people actively paying attention to the product). I wouldn't even be shocked if GW is playing it in such a way that they're setting expectations low by revealing only the most controversial rules to generate the most buzz, and then when the full thing drops most people end up feeling better about it because it's better than they thought it'd be.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
And thereby keep people not spending money. I thought the whole point of marketing was to get people to open their wallets, not to keep them closed. Are there really people reacting to the 9th drip reveal by going out and spending money because they're so excited? I have definitely been guilty in the past of overestimating peoples' rationality, so maybe I'm wrong here and not giving people clear info really is the way to get them to open their wallets...a depressing thought.

The whole point of marketing is to generate interest in the product (even if that interest is initially negative because it still means more people actively paying attention to the product). I wouldn't even be shocked if GW is playing it in such a way that they're setting expectations low by revealing only the most controversial rules to generate the most buzz, and then when the full thing drops most people end up feeling better about it because it's better than they thought it'd be.

The Sonic Approach then?

 alextroy wrote:
Apparently the world is full of people less wise then dakkanauts, since selling models doesn't appear to be a problem for GW right now. Remember, this is the company that see sales going so well they plan on repaying furlough funds to the government despite having no obligation to do so.

Actually they aren't allowed to give themselves bonuses and dividends to shareholders if they don't.

Personally, I’m still buying models without knowing all the changes. I don’t think just knowing what the CP costs of the various detachments would influence many people’s buying habits. If you’re waiting on that knowledge, aren’t you likely waiting on points cost changing before you buy as well?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
And thereby keep people not spending money. I thought the whole point of marketing was to get people to open their wallets, not to keep them closed. Are there really people reacting to the 9th drip reveal by going out and spending money because they're so excited? I have definitely been guilty in the past of overestimating peoples' rationality, so maybe I'm wrong here and not giving people clear info really is the way to get them to open their wallets...a depressing thought.

The whole point of marketing is to generate interest in the product (even if that interest is initially negative because it still means more people actively paying attention to the product). I wouldn't even be shocked if GW is playing it in such a way that they're setting expectations low by revealing only the most controversial rules to generate the most buzz, and then when the full thing drops most people end up feeling better about it because it's better than they thought it'd be.

The Sonic Approach then?

I admit it's me being cynical, but this whole "keep the community second-guessing about everything" approach and not going into greater detail about rules that have definitely sparked a lot of debate (meanwhile they clarified the MINIMUM TABLE SIZE like it was really a big deal) makes me wonder if they're leading with the most controversial stuff first, to ease the transition in so we don't feel so culture shocked about how they "ruined 40k" this time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Arbitrator wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Apparently the world is full of people less wise then dakkanauts, since selling models doesn't appear to be a problem for GW right now. Remember, this is the company that see sales going so well they plan on repaying furlough funds to the government despite having no obligation to do so.

Actually they aren't allowed to give themselves bonuses and dividends to shareholders if they don't.

Last time Roundtree issued bonuses he did so to the entire company, so at least the bonuses will go to people on ever level, not just the suits at the top.

Mariongodspeed wrote:
Personally, I’m still buying models without knowing all the changes. I don’t think just knowing what the CP costs of the various detachments would influence many people’s buying habits. If you’re waiting on that knowledge, aren’t you likely waiting on points cost changing before you buy as well?

Personally, the points matter a lot less. Like I feel pretty safe that the units I want to buy aren't going to change dramatically in points. If they do go up more than I expect, I can always shift something else in the army, or reduce squad size, or whatever. But if it costs me say 5CP to add a coven detachment to my army that is already dual harle/CWE (mono quins doesn't work because it isn't a complete army, never has), that just isn't going to work, because that'd be spending 10CP before the game just on detachments. So if that's how much it's going to cost, I can't take any coven models at all, and the entire purchase would be wasted.

On the other hand, if patrols are say only 1 or 2CP and there's no soup penalty, I can easily make a tri-detachment list work, and I'd go ahead and buy the coven detachment and paint it up now to have it ready.

Battalions cost 3. I imagine Brigades will be 5 and Patrols 1.
The others I'm less sure about. Maybe 3 since they operate like battalions that trade troops out for other slots?

yukishiro1 wrote:

Mariongodspeed wrote:
Personally, I’m still buying models without knowing all the changes. I don’t think just knowing what the CP costs of the various detachments would influence many people’s buying habits. If you’re waiting on that knowledge, aren’t you likely waiting on points cost changing before you buy as well?

Personally, the points matter a lot less. Like I feel pretty safe that the units I want to buy aren't going to change dramatically in points. If they do go up more than I expect, I can always shift something else in the army, or reduce squad size, or whatever. But if it costs me say 5CP to add a coven detachment to my army that is already dual harle/CWE (mono quins doesn't work because it isn't a complete army, never has), that just isn't going to work, because that'd be spending 10CP before the game just on detachments. So if that's how much it's going to cost, I can't take any coven models at all, and the entire purchase would be wasted.

Dark Eldar really need a rework, as they have become 3 mini-factions included in one book.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Battalions cost 3. I imagine Brigades will be 5 and Patrols 1.
The others I'm less sure about. Maybe 3 since they operate like battalions that trade troops out for other slots?

Why on earth would Brigades be 5 and Patrols be 1? Those numbers should be reversed.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Battalions cost 3. I imagine Brigades will be 5 and Patrols 1.
The others I'm less sure about. Maybe 3 since they operate like battalions that trade troops out for other slots?

Why on earth would Brigades be 5 and Patrols be 1? Those numbers should be reversed.

Because if you're running a Patrol you're not bringing as many units in that detachment so it would impact the main force (the one with your warlord) less.

Or so I assume GW's thought process to be on this.

I am in the boat of patrols being the lowest cost too. I understand the argument people are making to the contrary, but it doesn't convince me. It seems to rely on the suspect idea that GW wants to penalize you for taking smaller sub-detachments, and I just don't think that's actually true. They moved away from the model of detachments giving you CP, but it doesn't follow from that that they want an inverse relationship between CP cost and size that penalizes you MORE for taking a small allied detachment than a large one.

I expect patrols will be 1 or 2CP, and the same for the specialized detachments. And I also suspect there is no "soup penalty" besides the detachment cost itself. But I'm not willing gamble a bunch of money on being right on both of those things.

More CP from bigger detachments is how they work.

So a Patrol coating 1 means more CP than a Brigade costing 5.

That would lead to odd results like it being more advantageous to take your warlord in your patrol than your brigade detachment.

I think the whole point of what GW is doing is the idea that small detachments of allies will be viable, but that they want to reward you for having one main force, which your warlord comes from.

We'll see I guess, but I would be super surprised if a patrol costs more than a bat and a brigade less than a bat.

I'm curious to see what the pace will be for codexes this time around.