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.

I got all excited then realised that its marine stuff

Hopefully more to these leaks. I'm assuming they're from white Dwarf?

 jspyd3rx wrote:
Hopefully more to these leaks. I'm assuming they're from white Dwarf?

There's some coming from new reboxed models; others might be from the codex (it might have an October release, but at the same time that might just be a major delay as GW pushes other thingsin first so stock might already be out in the wild for it).

Danit wrote:
Any one else notice a multi melta is heavy 2 and 1d6+2 damage at half range now

For that vehicle. So imperium has now 3 differently working multi melta.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Overread wrote:

 jspyd3rx wrote:
Hopefully more to these leaks. I'm assuming they're from white Dwarf?

There's some coming from new reboxed models; others might be from the codex (it might have an October release, but at the same time that might just be a major delay as GW pushes other thingsin first so stock might already be out in the wild for it).

Or seeing these are easy to build models...they are from ebt boxes

 Sasori wrote:
It's very likely an oversight, the marine datasheets don't have any special rules as well.

Not sure, but my FLGS GW rep told him that they're trying to remove special rules from non-character models in order to make the game more streamlined and simple.

 Togusa wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
It's very likely an oversight, the marine datasheets don't have any special rules as well.

Not sure, but my FLGS GW rep told him that they're trying to remove special rules from non-character models in order to make the game more streamlined and simple.

Sounds like nonsense. The only thing in Indomitus that doesn't have at least two special rules are the Bladeguard, and their one is a pointer to Angels of Death, which is actually a list of four special rules.
The Invader should at least have that, or its somehow a Primaris Bike unit that doesn't have 'And They Shall Know No Fear', Bolter Discipline, Shock Assault or Combat Doctrines. And everything but Bolter Discipline is relevant to that model (though admittedly ATSKNF is only rarely relevant for a max unit)

More likely etb has simplified rules. Get you by until codex

Yeah, looks like these are the summary rules from the assembly guide, in super-compact form (hence the language agnostic symbols) so no army-wide rules at all. Like the Necron dudes not having Reanimation Protocols/Living Metal.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Yeah, looks like these are the summary rules from the assembly guide, in super-compact form (hence the language agnostic symbols) so no army-wide rules at all. Like the Necron dudes not having Reanimation Protocols/Living Metal.

Thats true for the Praetorians and Spyder. Not for the ETB stuff (lokhust, Doomstalker, Invader, Firestorm).
The Condensed Datasheets in assembly guides just have symbols and stat values. The other four have too much text to be them (and S/T/W/etc), but not enough to be complete, final codex entries. Its actually very strange... they have the edges of the unit picture and description in a sidebar, like the Edge of Silence booklet for Indomitus, but are obviously missing rules that should be present in between wargear options and Keywords. The 'Abilities' block just isn't there.

 Oguhmek wrote:
Regarding the old destroyers - Darren Latham, miniatures designer at GW, just posted a WIP video of regular destroyers for his personal Necron army on Instagram. So I don’t expect them to be replaced anytime soon. As for the heavy one or the destroyer lord however, my instincts tells me that those will be replaced by the new models we’ve seen, but this is just pure speculation at the moment.

Damn. Really puts a dampener on the Destroyer Cult theme if normal Destroyers don't get new models and the Heavy is just an ETB.

 Marshal Loss wrote:

 Oguhmek wrote:
Regarding the old destroyers - Darren Latham, miniatures designer at GW, just posted a WIP video of regular destroyers for his personal Necron army on Instagram. So I don’t expect them to be replaced anytime soon. As for the heavy one or the destroyer lord however, my instincts tells me that those will be replaced by the new models we’ve seen, but this is just pure speculation at the moment.

Damn. Really puts a dampener on the Destroyer Cult theme if normal Destroyers don't get new models and the Heavy is just an ETB.

Really? Getting new options and not losing anything seems like a benefit for the Destroyer Cult theme, not a loss.

Voss wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:

 Oguhmek wrote:
Regarding the old destroyers - Darren Latham, miniatures designer at GW, just posted a WIP video of regular destroyers for his personal Necron army on Instagram. So I don’t expect them to be replaced anytime soon. As for the heavy one or the destroyer lord however, my instincts tells me that those will be replaced by the new models we’ve seen, but this is just pure speculation at the moment.

Damn. Really puts a dampener on the Destroyer Cult theme if normal Destroyers don't get new models and the Heavy is just an ETB.

Really? Getting new options and not losing anything seems like a benefit for the Destroyer Cult theme, not a loss.

It's not great for those who don't want to be running 20 year old models.

 Marshal Loss wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:

 Oguhmek wrote:
Regarding the old destroyers - Darren Latham, miniatures designer at GW, just posted a WIP video of regular destroyers for his personal Necron army on Instagram. So I don’t expect them to be replaced anytime soon. As for the heavy one or the destroyer lord however, my instincts tells me that those will be replaced by the new models we’ve seen, but this is just pure speculation at the moment.

Damn. Really puts a dampener on the Destroyer Cult theme if normal Destroyers don't get new models and the Heavy is just an ETB.

Really? Getting new options and not losing anything seems like a benefit for the Destroyer Cult theme, not a loss.

It's not great for those who don't want to be running 20 year old models.

2002 release, not quite there yet.

 Marshal Loss wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:

 Oguhmek wrote:
Regarding the old destroyers - Darren Latham, miniatures designer at GW, just posted a WIP video of regular destroyers for his personal Necron army on Instagram. So I don’t expect them to be replaced anytime soon. As for the heavy one or the destroyer lord however, my instincts tells me that those will be replaced by the new models we’ve seen, but this is just pure speculation at the moment.

Damn. Really puts a dampener on the Destroyer Cult theme if normal Destroyers don't get new models and the Heavy is just an ETB.

Really? Getting new options and not losing anything seems like a benefit for the Destroyer Cult theme, not a loss.

It's not great for those who don't want to be running 20 year old models.

But its better than a staple of existing collections getting stamped out of existence for basically no reason.
An update would have been nice, sure. But given GW's non-answers on Destroyers, this seems the best possible result.

Necrons are getting a lot, even buffs to existing units. Updates can still happen in the future.

Dudeface wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:

 Oguhmek wrote:
Regarding the old destroyers - Darren Latham, miniatures designer at GW, just posted a WIP video of regular destroyers for his personal Necron army on Instagram. So I don’t expect them to be replaced anytime soon. As for the heavy one or the destroyer lord however, my instincts tells me that those will be replaced by the new models we’ve seen, but this is just pure speculation at the moment.

Damn. Really puts a dampener on the Destroyer Cult theme if normal Destroyers don't get new models and the Heavy is just an ETB.

Really? Getting new options and not losing anything seems like a benefit for the Destroyer Cult theme, not a loss.

It's not great for those who don't want to be running 20 year old models.

2002 release, not quite there yet.

c. 20 year release*

In any case, I'll still hold out hope. For all we know DL may simply have had those lying around and didn't want to waste them; leaving any units with green rods still on sale is a bit of a bizarre decision from GW if this is the way they've decided to do it.

Voss wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Yeah, looks like these are the summary rules from the assembly guide, in super-compact form (hence the language agnostic symbols) so no army-wide rules at all. Like the Necron dudes not having Reanimation Protocols/Living Metal.

Thats true for the Praetorians and Spyder. Not for the ETB stuff (lokhust, Doomstalker, Invader, Firestorm).
The Condensed Datasheets in assembly guides just have symbols and stat values. The other four have too much text to be them (and S/T/W/etc), but not enough to be complete, final codex entries. Its actually very strange... they have the edges of the unit picture and description in a sidebar, like the Edge of Silence booklet for Indomitus, but are obviously missing rules that should be present in between wargear options and Keywords. The 'Abilities' block just isn't there.

Those units were rumored to be in Indomitus, so maybe the leaked photos are from prior to their removal. Either way I'm betting those are not from a finalized codex, way too much dead space and the layout is off.

 Red Corsair wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Yeah, looks like these are the summary rules from the assembly guide, in super-compact form (hence the language agnostic symbols) so no army-wide rules at all. Like the Necron dudes not having Reanimation Protocols/Living Metal.

Thats true for the Praetorians and Spyder. Not for the ETB stuff (lokhust, Doomstalker, Invader, Firestorm).
The Condensed Datasheets in assembly guides just have symbols and stat values. The other four have too much text to be them (and S/T/W/etc), but not enough to be complete, final codex entries. Its actually very strange... they have the edges of the unit picture and description in a sidebar, like the Edge of Silence booklet for Indomitus, but are obviously missing rules that should be present in between wargear options and Keywords. The 'Abilities' block just isn't there.

Those units were rumored to be in Indomitus, so maybe the leaked photos are from prior to their removal. Either way I'm betting those are not from a finalized codex, way too much dead space and the layout is off.

Or it could be a later boxed set that includes both (for whatever reason) and these are the quick rules from that set’s guide/fluff book. But yeah, pretty definitely not a codex unless they’re going really strange in a bad way.

So you're telling me those old Destroyers are almost legally allowed to drink, which means I feel older than usual.

 Red Corsair wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Yeah, looks like these are the summary rules from the assembly guide, in super-compact form (hence the language agnostic symbols) so no army-wide rules at all. Like the Necron dudes not having Reanimation Protocols/Living Metal.

Thats true for the Praetorians and Spyder. Not for the ETB stuff (lokhust, Doomstalker, Invader, Firestorm).
The Condensed Datasheets in assembly guides just have symbols and stat values. The other four have too much text to be them (and S/T/W/etc), but not enough to be complete, final codex entries. Its actually very strange... they have the edges of the unit picture and description in a sidebar, like the Edge of Silence booklet for Indomitus, but are obviously missing rules that should be present in between wargear options and Keywords. The 'Abilities' block just isn't there.

Those units were rumored to be in Indomitus, so maybe the leaked photos are from prior to their removal. Either way I'm betting those are not from a finalized codex, way too much dead space and the layout is off.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. A leak of an early draft version
The layout, the weird points in CA2020 as part of the 'Indomitus Set,' it makes sense if these pages are just... leftovers.

Voss wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Yeah, looks like these are the summary rules from the assembly guide, in super-compact form (hence the language agnostic symbols) so no army-wide rules at all. Like the Necron dudes not having Reanimation Protocols/Living Metal.

Thats true for the Praetorians and Spyder. Not for the ETB stuff (lokhust, Doomstalker, Invader, Firestorm).
The Condensed Datasheets in assembly guides just have symbols and stat values. The other four have too much text to be them (and S/T/W/etc), but not enough to be complete, final codex entries. Its actually very strange... they have the edges of the unit picture and description in a sidebar, like the Edge of Silence booklet for Indomitus, but are obviously missing rules that should be present in between wargear options and Keywords. The 'Abilities' block just isn't there.

Those units were rumored to be in Indomitus, so maybe the leaked photos are from prior to their removal. Either way I'm betting those are not from a finalized codex, way too much dead space and the layout is off.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. A leak of an early draft version
The layout, the weird points in CA2020 as part of the 'Indomitus Set,' it makes sense if these pages are just... leftovers.

I sure hope so. The Enmitic weapon makes zero sense.... It just fulfills no purpose.

The lack of strong AP is also pretty bizarre too.

 Sasori wrote:

Voss wrote:

The layout, the weird points in CA2020 as part of the 'Indomitus Set,' it makes sense if these pages are just... leftovers.

I sure hope so. The Enmitic weapon makes zero sense.... It just fulfills no purpose.

Well... don't hope too hard. 'Draft' doesn't mean the weapons have different stats in the final version.
Though if they are, consider that the Skorpekh lord's enmitic weapon is actually worse, so if they are different, there is a chance it could be in the wrong direction.

So we've resigned ourselves to the reality that the basic Destroyer kit isn't getting replaced?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So we've resigned ourselves to the reality that the basic Destroyer kit isn't getting replaced?

No, we really don't know what direction that's going. These look to be the Heavy Destroyer replacement.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

Voss wrote:

The layout, the weird points in CA2020 as part of the 'Indomitus Set,' it makes sense if these pages are just... leftovers.

I sure hope so. The Enmitic weapon makes zero sense.... It just fulfills no purpose.

Well... don't hope too hard. 'Draft' doesn't mean the weapons have different stats in the final version.
Though if they are, consider that the Skorpekh lord's enmitic weapon is actually worse, so if they are different, there is a chance it could be in the wrong direction.

Yeah, but at least I can understand that since the Skorpekh lord is primarily a CC unit with a small shooting bonus.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So we've resigned ourselves to the reality that the basic Destroyer kit isn't getting replaced?

Resigned isn't quite the right word. Just no real indications that it is.
Between GW staffer using them in a new army project and still being listed in the webstore (the monolith, by contrast, is gone completely, and we know that's getting replaced), signs point to it carrying on.

Voss wrote:
Between GW staffer using them in a new army project...

That said, GW have printed Codices that omit pictures of new models that haven't been revealed, even if they're coming out a few weeks after the Codex comes out, so it's possible that the GW staffer wasn't allowed to use/wasn't given access to the new models because GW are still petrified of previewing stuff.

 Marshal Loss wrote:

Voss wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:

 Oguhmek wrote:
Regarding the old destroyers - Darren Latham, miniatures designer at GW, just posted a WIP video of regular destroyers for his personal Necron army on Instagram. So I don’t expect them to be replaced anytime soon. As for the heavy one or the destroyer lord however, my instincts tells me that those will be replaced by the new models we’ve seen, but this is just pure speculation at the moment.

Damn. Really puts a dampener on the Destroyer Cult theme if normal Destroyers don't get new models and the Heavy is just an ETB.

Really? Getting new options and not losing anything seems like a benefit for the Destroyer Cult theme, not a loss.

It's not great for those who don't want to be running 20 year old models.

At least you don't get price hike. Like ig players clamoring for new troops. New models nice but from 22.5 pounds for 10 you would go 32.5 or higher...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marshal Loss wrote:

In any case, I'll still hold out hope. For all we know DL may simply have had those lying around and didn't want to waste them; leaving any units with green rods still on sale is a bit of a bizarre decision from GW if this is the way they've decided to do it.

Not really. Unlike what many seem to believe instant replacement of what they are replacing isn't all at once generally. This is already like twice as big release for npc faction. Expecting even more is optimistic

Uh, yeah, really. This isn't about "instant replacement", it's about how many units are left still using the old plastic rods. As it currently stands based off what remains on the webstore the only units would be an old Lord, the Destroyer Lord, and Destroyers (heavy & normal). Given the Heavies are clearly being replaced I don't think it is at all unreasonable to avoid declaring Destroyers' hopes of a revamps dead just yet and a GW staff member building old Destroyers on his instagram is far from proof that they're remaining. Replacing them must have been on their radar; we'll see what happens.

I can't see GW leaving any unit with the old green rods now.
They would look super out of place with everything else in the army.

My brother got a box of destroyers recently, the green rods have been replaced with grey plastic ones.