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.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Some more leaks:

Skitarii: 8ppm for both vanguard and rangers, rangers have a 3" pregame move now, are core (obviously) squads of 5-20, 8ppm for both vanguard and rangers, and under 10 models you can only take 1 of each special weapon (like wyches) (not completely sure about the weapon loadout) Rad Carbines are still same profile, but 6s to hit autowound instead of 2d on 6s to wound. Arc Pistol is S5 ap2 d1 (d2 and 4+ wound vs vehicle )

GW's rules inanity continues it seems...

I hate it when they do that but it seems to be a trend. I see why they're doing it, and I think it's a good idea for new units, but like Wyches, we had multiple codex iterations that allowed multiple special weapons from each kind and we built our units accordingly. Are we supposed to break our painted models apart?

40KFAQ@gwplc.com is the address, let the rules team know what you think of this (in a polite and civil manner, please).

I have some vanguard/rangers I use for Kill Team (with a tank and an enginseer from a starter box).

I decided to take the plunge and get the new codex and some of those kastelan robots I'd always liked the look of but never had a reason to get.
Are these in the codex still? They're now listed as no longer available rather than out of stock. Any point in me getting a codex if the model I wanted is now discontinued? I have no way to know if it still has rules in the new codex.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Are these in the codex still? They're now listed as no longer available rather than out of stock. Any point in me getting a codex if the model I wanted is now discontinued? I have no way to know if it still has rules in the new codex.

They're in the Italian leaks, and I would guess they're off the site for a re-box.

Looks like some reviews of the book are up on YouTube already. GMG has one at least.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Looks like some reviews of the book are up on YouTube already. GMG has one at least.

Goonhammer have a (non-YT) review up.

beast_gts wrote:

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Looks like some reviews of the book are up on YouTube already. GMG has one at least.

Goonhammer have a (non-YT) review up.

Nooooooo! One of each weapon in a unit of 10... *siiiiigh* man that is really annoying. It was obviously gonna happen, but at least I could hope it wouldn’t. I really don’t like the way they’re doing this, I need to somehow unmake models and redo them.

 Tiberius501 wrote:

beast_gts wrote:

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Looks like some reviews of the book are up on YouTube already. GMG has one at least.

Goonhammer have a (non-YT) review up.

Nooooooo! One of each weapon in a unit of 10... *siiiiigh* man that is really annoying. It was obviously gonna happen, but at least I could hope it wouldn’t. I really don’t like the way they’re doing this, I need to somehow unmake models and redo them.

The waist gunners from the Dunerider can take the standard Skitarii arms, in case you're looking to fill some bodies.

Has anyone spotted can the regular tech-priest enginseer have the holy order traits?

 Spreelock wrote:
Has anyone spotted can the regular tech-priest enginseer have the holy order traits?

It seems like it? I think any tech-priest can take them, and they’re listed under the types of tech-priest.

Other opinions: the book seems pretty awesome. I’m not a huge competitive player, but there seems to be a good chunk of improvements to stuff that needed it, a couple of strats that make some units pretty awesome (radium carbines auto wounding on 4+ to hit! And taser weapons getting extra hits on 5+! Delicious!). And overall it feels really fluffy now.

While both canticles and Doctrinas are once per game (though there seems to be a few ways to get around this, generally for 1 unit a turn), they seem pretty awesome, Canticles all looking a lot more solid than before and keep up with Shroudsalm (one of my new faves being the electric one that no longer does token mortals... whenever that happened for anyone, and now -1 from hit rolls in melee for the turn it’s active. Tasty af).

A few odd ball rules that are way too complex for pretty much no reason, like the new way of transporting a unit of up to 12 between 2 of the transport flyers... awesome in terms of visuals, the rule is just a page long and just does not seem worth the effort and points if that’s what you wanted them for.

And there’s also a LOT of keyword and rules maintenance and tracking.

But overall seems like a really fun book and I’m really keen, especially for crusade.

But man... the one thing that bums me out is the damn weapon option restrictions. *flips table*

GW's embarrassing inability to proofread strikes again, the transports can transport literally any infantry in the game. It's as if the guy who wrote the Ad Mech codex saw the 10 point Reavers in the DE book and was like "hold my beer..."

How a company worth billions still can't find a way to hire a halfway decent proofreader is just mind-boggling.

I'm pretty concerned about the strength of chickens.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I'm pretty concerned about the strength of chickens.

Yea, a unit that was already devastating and fairly durable, became tougher then 2 dollar steak and had it's guns improved lol.

This book honestly should just be called Codex Skitarii IMHO because that's where all the love was poured, good lord.

yukishiro1 wrote:
GW's embarrassing inability to proofread strikes again, the transports can transport literally any infantry in the game. It's as if the guy who wrote the Ad Mech codex saw the 10 point Reavers in the DE book and was like "hold my beer..."

How a company worth billions still can't find a way to hire a halfway decent proofreader is just mind-boggling.

Presumably it was to allow Forgeworld and Secutarii infantry to board, though the latter still have Admech keyword, don't they? Or perhaps who can ride in which Imperial transports is loosening up?

 Tastyfish wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
GW's embarrassing inability to proofread strikes again, the transports can transport literally any infantry in the game. It's as if the guy who wrote the Ad Mech codex saw the 10 point Reavers in the DE book and was like "hold my beer..."

How a company worth billions still can't find a way to hire a halfway decent proofreader is just mind-boggling.

Presumably it was to allow Forgeworld and Secutarii infantry to board, though the latter still have Admech keyword, don't they? Or perhaps who can ride in which Imperial transports is loosening up?

Secutarii come with the <titan legion> keyword rather than <forge world>, so that sounds plausible. I'm also struggling to think of a situation where this would be horribly game-breaking, especially as pretty much any other imperial factions have their own transports already and it means giving up armywide bonuses like canticles.

Still, it's pretty funny if Primaris / Firstborn can jump aboard Admech transports but not ones from their own chapter.

It was definitely just them failing at allowing SECUTARII, there is zero chance it is intended. And hopefully no TOs are naive enough to allow it. But it's embarrassing that GW can't seem to do basic proofreading; this is the second codex in a row to have a very basic, very high profile error that any decent proofreader would have spotted immediately.

That they don't even bother to day-1 errata stuff like this and the Reavers is really disappointing too. It's just so lazy.

yukishiro1 wrote:
It's just so lazy.

Something something 8th edition Assault weapons...

yukishiro1 wrote:
That they don't even bother to day-1 errata stuff like this and the Reavers is really disappointing too. It's just so lazy.

To be fair to them you're jumping the gun on any complaint that this particular issue hasn't been covered by a day 1 errata because the codex is still 7 days from release. By all means complain in 8 days if/ when it doesn't come.

I'm rather disappointed by the change to special weapon loadouts for the skitarii, I can see why they did it but these types of changes are a real headache for anybody with an existing force. I guess I'm building some arc rifle models this week...

Well, I mean no, not really. It's up for purchase now and insiders have got their copies and can use them, so any day-1 errata should be up too. In this case the error is so obvious presumably nobody is really going to order the book planning on abusing it, but assuming they're aware of it - and it's hard to believe even GW could be ignorant and incompetent enough not to have realized it in the 3-6 months since they sent it to the printers - it should be corrected via an errata immediately.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Those are unconfirmed. They cropped up as text only.

And now it's confirmed.

This is GW's worst trend in a while.

Wow.. it seems like they buffed Ironstriders even more !!! @@ Like they were already good. The thing is, they fight extremely well too. So, they shoot well, they fight ok, and they are reasonably tough because you improve their saves and stuff.

Its like it will be hard to shoot down a whole unit in one turn (and they are so fast they can hide behind obscuring and then advance out to get a good shot), along with them being able to get better saves.

I mean, you can tag them, but you need a really tanky unit to withstand a big unit hitting you in close combat. And admech has stuff to make you fight last, and such now.

Big unit of Ironstriders is looking super hard to bring down (whether in shooting or in close combat), and also hard to bring down in close combat too. They are tough to even tarpit too.

In short, if ironstriders aren't already out of stock, they would totally be now. I mean, I think you could totally skip tanks for just ironstriders if you wanted to. They are that good.

Definitely seems to be little reason to take any of the tanks when the Ironstriders do everything the tanks do, except better, cheaper, and with <CORE>.

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Wow.. it seems like they buffed Ironstriders even more !!! @@ Like they were already good. The thing is, they fight extremely well too. So, they shoot well, they fight ok, and they are reasonably tough because you improve their saves and stuff.

Its like it will be hard to shoot down a whole unit in one turn (and they are so fast they can hide behind obscuring and then advance out to get a good shot), along with them being able to get better saves.

I mean, you can tag them, but you need a really tanky unit to withstand a big unit hitting you in close combat. And admech has stuff to make you fight last, and such now.

Big unit of Ironstriders is looking super hard to bring down (whether in shooting or in close combat), and also hard to bring down in close combat too. They are tough to even tarpit too.

In short, if ironstriders aren't already out of stock, they would totally be now. I mean, I think you could totally skip tanks for just ironstriders if you wanted to. They are that good.

What's your definition of extremely tanky? Because 6 chickens (max size) can't kill 5 gants.

yukishiro1 wrote:
GW's embarrassing inability to proofread strikes again, the transports can transport literally any infantry in the game. It's as if the guy who wrote the Ad Mech codex saw the 10 point Reavers in the DE book and was like "hold my beer..."

How a company worth billions still can't find a way to hire a halfway decent proofreader is just mind-boggling.

?

The French copy I saw has the <Forge-World> keyword, doesn't the English one have it ?

So what is it exactly for skittari ? 1 of each weapon in squads 10 or less or less than 10 ?

This really screws apart most of my infantry. Well GW really doesn't want me buying their books or playing the army I guess, another one bites the dust as I wait for another edition.

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Nooooooo! One of each weapon in a unit of 10... *siiiiigh* man that is really annoying.

Deathwatch players: first time?

You know, it's funny, DW players were warning everyone it's going to happen way back in 2016 it's going to happen to rest of the armies if idiotic rule writing of Kelly and Cruddace isn't immediately protested by the entire playerbase and were completely ignored. Gee, if only someone told you years in advance

But don't worry, if current DW book is any indication, the ride will get wilder still, and in next book AM will lose access to all special rules on units that don't have antennas (yup, no special ammo for any unit lacking silly button on gun, and what's even sadder, there are imbeciles defending this insane change that made whole units illegal after two whole editions)...

So, the Adeptus Mechanicus homeworld is Mars.

Kataphron Destroyers and Breachers are no longer INFANTRY, they are BIKERS.

Skaven exist.

When will I be seeing all your Biker MIce from Mars conversions?

You do realize, some of us may play Deathwatch already yes ? So all this is doing is hitting me over and over again. Deathwatch, Plague marines/Blightlords, Wyches, Skittari.

This is really stupid. I'm so damn tired of GW thinking we are too damn stupid to buy multiple boxes for the loadouts we want, which I did. What is so utterly mind bending to buying two boxes, to say field 2 plasma in a 5 man squad ? Or 2 in a 10 man squad ?

It was stupid then, it's stupid now, and just keeps following the train of stupid. GW designers should wear the " I'm with Stupid " shirt but the arrows are pointing all around them.


Yeah, Kataphrons are bikers, they have the need for speed, maybe people can put some sweet exhausts on them now, they can also peel out of the deployment zones while you make some wicked revving biker sounds.

Not that I agree with GW's decision on this, but GW has received constant complaints that "all the options to build my unit to my desired configuration are not in the kit" along with "evil GW is trying to make me buy multiple kits to get my desired unit configuration". They seem to be solving the problem by either upgrading the kit to contain all the options (Battle Sisters kit, soon to be upgraded Cadian Infantry kit) or restricting the unit to what the kit can support (Plague marines/Blightlords, Wyches, Skittari). Really sucks if you are on the downgrade side of the equation, but it does solve the problem going forward for GW

Spoletta wrote:

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Wow.. it seems like they buffed Ironstriders even more !!! @@ Like they were already good. The thing is, they fight extremely well too. So, they shoot well, they fight ok, and they are reasonably tough because you improve their saves and stuff.

Its like it will be hard to shoot down a whole unit in one turn (and they are so fast they can hide behind obscuring and then advance out to get a good shot), along with them being able to get better saves.

I mean, you can tag them, but you need a really tanky unit to withstand a big unit hitting you in close combat. And admech has stuff to make you fight last, and such now.

Big unit of Ironstriders is looking super hard to bring down (whether in shooting or in close combat), and also hard to bring down in close combat too. They are tough to even tarpit too.

In short, if ironstriders aren't already out of stock, they would totally be now. I mean, I think you could totally skip tanks for just ironstriders if you wanted to. They are that good.

What's your definition of extremely tanky? Because 6 chickens (max size) can't kill 5 gants.

Seeing how i have had 5 chickens walk over ork boy i find idea that 5 gaunts would be too hard. 5 t3 6+ wounds isn't that hard target.

The fact that those chickens rolled like demons against those orks, doesn't mean that that is the expected result.

Chickens are very bad in melee. That's a fact. (As long as you don't mean the melee chickens, but since they don't shoot and you were talking about tagging them in melee, I guess you are talking about the shooty ones).