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.
2020/08/11 18:57:04
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Couldn't that be fixed by giving it a rule like the one that allows Old One Eye to get protection from a carnifex? "This model cannot be targeted if it's within 3 of a friendly model with the VEHICLE keyword". Something like that?
I mean a rule update could fix it, sure. I'd make it non-character. But as is, he's 125 points of lascannon fodder because people were having Daemon princes hug each other.
2020/08/11 19:13:24
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
2020/08/11 19:48:16
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
It was a 3 year edition. So less than half by your reckoning.
I didnt say it was terrible. Just that the pendulum swings, and people have very short memories.
Considering in a lot of places stores were closed end february, some people didn't even get to play their updated 8th ed books, or enjoy their dominance. Specialy if they just started marines.
I get that people don't like their armies getting beaten, I didn't like it happen to me either. But does anyone think about new players that start marines, because they are a good army? Why should they get the hate. Plus for all we know a codex or two after marines we may get some other OP army
People didn't ask for nerfs to their books in 8th, I doubt they will ask for them in 9th.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
2020/08/11 20:23:34
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
2020/08/11 21:25:42
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Perhaps the people complaining about tell me where the datasheet for the Warboss on a bike is?
Cause it isn't in codex Orks. nor is it in saga of the beast. In fact it's not even in Legends.
In short...
there is no warboss on bike Datasheet
GW isn't going to provide points costs for a datasheet no longer supported. Now given that forge world makes the model. Ork players should make sure they ask GW.. repeatedly, if the 9th edition forge world rules will provide rules for the forge world produced. This is hardly the first time a forge world only model has been removed from a codex.
Ask Imperial Guard players about that
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
2020/08/11 21:32:19
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
BrianDavion wrote: Perhaps the people complaining about tell me where the datasheet for the Warboss on a bike is?
Cause it isn't in codex Orks. nor is it in saga of the beast. In fact it's not even in Legends.
In short...
there is no warboss on bike Datasheet
GW isn't going to provide points costs for a datasheet no longer supported. Now given that forge world makes the model. Ork players should make sure they ask GW.. repeatedly, if the 9th edition forge world rules will provide rules for the forge world produced. This is hardly the first time a forge world only model has been removed from a codex.
Ask Imperial Guard players about that
And obviously because there's no datasheet they shouldn't support it, and because they're not supporting it they shouldn't make a datasheet... the point is, more Primaris releases, and actually *removing* things from Xenos factions to give them less options.
2020/08/11 21:58:55
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
I thought that gw had been slowly killing the customization and all the cool peripheral stuff for a while now because of chapter house. If it doesn't have its own data sheet, model, and goofy name with copyright then no rules all to stop 3rd party alternatives.
2020/08/11 22:01:42
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
I expect rules and points for it to be available in the upcoming revamped ForgeWorld indices.
I suspect that the omission from the FAQ is more an oversight than an actual squatting - you can never be sure though.
However, I am a bit concerned that there has been near total radio-silence on the new FW books. Considering they announced them over six months ago and referenced them being available on launch of 9e...
2020/08/11 23:00:29
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Stux wrote: I think people have also forgotten that Marines spent half of 8e as a mid tier at best army. With some chapters even lower.
Well, that's the excuse the SM players use to explain their losses..... "My armies only mid-tier".
Say uh, what percentage of the edition was your faction the single best army in the game? It was way less than 1.4 years for all of mine.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2020/08/11 23:19:14
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Blessed be those npc factions that still exist as a faction and not as a convenient Lore punching bag to underline the supposedly superior punching bag...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/11 23:19:28
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2020/08/11 23:59:28
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
BrianDavion wrote: Perhaps the people complaining about tell me where the datasheet for the Warboss on a bike is?
Cause it isn't in codex Orks. nor is it in saga of the beast. In fact it's not even in Legends.
In short...
there is no warboss on bike Datasheet
GW isn't going to provide points costs for a datasheet no longer supported. Now given that forge world makes the model. Ork players should make sure they ask GW.. repeatedly, if the 9th edition forge world rules will provide rules for the forge world produced. This is hardly the first time a forge world only model has been removed from a codex.
Ask Imperial Guard players about that
It's in the Index. Which is still a legal source of datasheets, unless I missed something.
You were wrong about there being no model. You're wrong about there being no datasheet.
2020/08/12 00:07:15
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
The indexes are dead. The Warboss on Bike got caught in a weird space where they didn't Legends it (there is a current Forge World model) but there isn't a Forge World Index datasheet. Cross your fingers and hope it is in the new Forge World Index, whenever that gets released.
2020/08/12 00:13:17
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
* looks at the many different historical autarch model options*
The no model no rule mantra is bs.
Relics give god damn powerful rules and you dont need to model jack.. why why not allow people to convert characters to take cool mounts and weapons ?
WHy not give a farseer a fusion pistol? Why not take exarch weapons on an autarch to make cool conversions.. Like why couldn't he have a scorpion claw ? Hes only got 4 attacks ffs..
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote: Where did they state the indexes are dead? They definitely weren't in 8th. Did they state that as part of launching 9th somewhere?
There was an FAQ in 8th that introduced "legends" and retirered index flow chart.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/12 00:17:07
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
But that's simply not right. Legends did not retire the index. Legends just moved a bunch of Index things to Legends; it did nothing to Index sheets that were neither replaced by the Codex nor moved to the Index.
The Warboss on Warbike was very much still a legal unit after Legends. People took them to LVO. They still had a points value in CA 2019. I am not aware of any TOs ruling they were not a legal unit.
2020/08/12 00:25:43
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
The warboss on bike was in a weird place for a long time anyway. First it was purely Da Rippa model which people converted/used as an unnamed warboss. Then for a while Forgeworld sold it as an unnamed warboss on bike while keeping Da Rippa rules around but no model specifically for him. Is it still listed as an unnamed warboss on bike even though now the datasheet has been regulated to legends and he no longer has a listed points?
A few other units around the place have had somewhat similar occurrences, primaris techmarine comes to mind. For a decent length of time there was only the character version, and only recently an unnamed version has been brought out. GW is just really weird with it's releases sometimes.
2020/08/12 00:32:24
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Galef wrote: Biker HQs have always been my favorite, regardless of faction, and I hate to see them go
But alas this isn't the first time it's happened. I remember taking a DE Archon on jetbike in the old days, but when the 5th ed Codex dropped, no more jetbike. What was even more annoying is that the 7th ed Codex had a 2 page layout about an Archon who rose from a skilled Reaver and whose need for speed was unquenchable. Yet as soon as he became an Archon, he must have put his bike in the garage for good.
-
The Codex also mentions the Archon of the Dark Moon has wings, yet we can't have those either. Fluff from their own books apparently means nothing when it comes to rules.
Do you expect every thing mentioned somewhere in a codex, book or article to get rules? There is only so much design space, and as I've said before you guys need to chill out. We're a month into a new edition with no codexes, the collapse of multiple governmental systems, a pandemic, and trade fights with the one country that supplies most of the world with things. We have literally seen new models in the pipe line for all of the armies mentioned here and once things even out (hopefully soon) you'll get releases. Besides, it's not as if we can even play the damned game at the moment anyways. Chill, out.
have you seem how many different primaris LIEUTENANTS GW have made, just by themselves? There are at least 12 separate, new, plastic models for a single unit entry in the marine codex. Although some have actual names, I don't think those names translate to unique character profiles (they all use the same generic lieutenant entry(s)),
For comparison, non named character models in the 3 eldar armies combined equals 11: 3 DE, 7 CWE, 1 Harlie based on GW's webstore (and the fact that the warlock skyrunner and the farseer are the same box).
that's one HQ unit from the space marine book, which has a ridiculous number of HQ entries, having more examples to purchase than the HQ offerings of 3 entire armies.
So I don't really think it's a problem of design space at all....
Typically once people start crying about the primaris lts, I stop listening. Most of those were LE models for store releases or models for the specific chapters (blood angels, Ultras, etc). You can't even buy over half of them anymore. As I stated before, we've seen new NON primaris characters teased for the fall, including orks, dark eldar, death guard and so on. It's reasonable to assume that once Necrons and the New marine stuff are out, you'll see a shift to one of those other factions with more rules, books, models and kits. Crying about it doesn't do any good. Email the company if you're so upset and tell them you want more support for non-marine armies.
2020/08/12 01:01:15
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
yukishiro1 wrote: I don't think the Indexes were ever on GW's site, didn't you have to buy them separately?
Battlescribe still has the entry, you can look it up there easily.
I'd imagine they would have still been on the site right? You'd think it would be around where codexes and the like are but can't seem to find them. And don't remember seeing them in a GW brick and mortar store for some time. I can see them removing the points if the datasheet is no longer available in a book that's in print. It's yet another way the Warboss on bike is a weird little anomaly in regards to his datasheet. I think we should call him the Schrodinger's warboss. He simultaneously does and does not have rules depending on if you look.
And battlescribe isn't an overly reliable source as well, it's a bit like using a wiki. They're as likely to be right as wrong.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/12 02:31:05
2020/08/12 02:56:30
Subject: The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
yukishiro1 wrote: I don't think the Indexes were ever on GW's site, didn't you have to buy them separately?
Battlescribe still has the entry, you can look it up there easily.
I'd imagine they would have still been on the site right? You'd think it would be around where codexes and the like are but can't seem to find them. And don't remember seeing them in a GW brick and mortar store for some time. I can see them removing the points if the datasheet is no longer available in a book that's in print. It's yet another way the Warboss on bike is a weird little anomaly in regards to his datasheet. I think we should call him the Schrodinger's warboss. He simultaneously does and does not have rules depending on if you look.
And battlescribe isn't an overly reliable source as well, it's a bit like using a wiki. They're as likely to be right as wrong.
Ah yes, I too enjoy looking through peer reviewed data and finding out that half of all samples are incorrect.
Let us look to gamesworkshop to show us the true light on correct data! My S65 Harlequins shall laugh as they take down Aplarius and his men!
2020/08/12 03:20:05
Subject: Re:The loss of the Ork Biker Warboss sets a dangerous precedent
Galef wrote: Biker HQs have always been my favorite, regardless of faction, and I hate to see them go
But alas this isn't the first time it's happened. I remember taking a DE Archon on jetbike in the old days, but when the 5th ed Codex dropped, no more jetbike. What was even more annoying is that the 7th ed Codex had a 2 page layout about an Archon who rose from a skilled Reaver and whose need for speed was unquenchable. Yet as soon as he became an Archon, he must have put his bike in the garage for good.
-
The Codex also mentions the Archon of the Dark Moon has wings, yet we can't have those either. Fluff from their own books apparently means nothing when it comes to rules.
Do you expect every thing mentioned somewhere in a codex, book or article to get rules? There is only so much design space, and as I've said before you guys need to chill out. We're a month into a new edition with no codexes, the collapse of multiple governmental systems, a pandemic, and trade fights with the one country that supplies most of the world with things. We have literally seen new models in the pipe line for all of the armies mentioned here and once things even out (hopefully soon) you'll get releases. Besides, it's not as if we can even play the damned game at the moment anyways. Chill, out.
have you seem how many different primaris LIEUTENANTS GW have made, just by themselves? There are at least 12 separate, new, plastic models for a single unit entry in the marine codex. Although some have actual names, I don't think those names translate to unique character profiles (they all use the same generic lieutenant entry(s)),
For comparison, non named character models in the 3 eldar armies combined equals 11: 3 DE, 7 CWE, 1 Harlie based on GW's webstore (and the fact that the warlock skyrunner and the farseer are the same box).
that's one HQ unit from the space marine book, which has a ridiculous number of HQ entries, having more examples to purchase than the HQ offerings of 3 entire armies.
So I don't really think it's a problem of design space at all....
Typically once people start crying about the primaris lts, I stop listening. Most of those were LE models for store releases or models for the specific chapters (blood angels, Ultras, etc). You can't even buy over half of them anymore. As I stated before, we've seen new NON primaris characters teased for the fall, including orks, dark eldar, death guard and so on. It's reasonable to assume that once Necrons and the New marine stuff are out, you'll see a shift to one of those other factions with more rules, books, models and kits. Crying about it doesn't do any good. Email the company if you're so upset and tell them you want more support for non-marine armies.
Apparently when they where just designing the look of primaris they had the entire modeling team each design one. the original intent was to onl;y use one model as the finished product as the primaris Lt. but they liked everything so much they used the other Primaris Lts other people designed for special events minis. so we got a ton of Primaris Lts because GW was using rough drafts.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
Eldar- 4436 pts
