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.

 Galas wrote:
My biggest problem with this crap is the fact that it looks like gak on the table and it slows down the game.

Why can't I fit my units with specialized wargear? If some choice is OP then balance them all. But having a squad with a anti tank weapon and a flamer and a sniper rifle and a grenade launcher is horrible.

They killed the Thunderers warscroll in aos with this and they are bringing it to 40k.

I don't know what to expect with Tau. If they do this to Crisis Suits they basically kill the army.

The actual reality will be people using the guns that fit into the army dynamic they want and the rest get ignored. Few people will frakenstein their units.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
GW does it again.

I dont play AdMech but I will be sending them hate mail just like I did when they made my DG army illegal.

While on that subject...what was the wording like for that?

Well this means one thing for me. With staffs being 4 per unit, but one per box, my metal dudes no longer have to worry to not have the opitmal number of weapons per squads.

I do wonder how GW is going to do it with units that have multiple of some weapons, but only one per box. Purgators can take 4 psi lancers, as can paladins, but there is only one weapon of each type per box. Can't even get a full load out.

In general won't matter as much to new players, while hurting people with an army already. Which I think points at the fact that GW does not care as much about people who already bought an army for a faction.

There models works though, old players will buy more legalise their army and new players will keep buying. I started this thread and am very aware of the intention by GW but I have also already bought a box of skitarii so my squads will be legal, even though my mates said I was good to go they were.

Well maybe. But there is also those people who will sit down, look at the 5-6 boxs they have to buy to just make their legal army, legal and working again, and will just quit.

I understand this is less of a problem in places where having 6k of an army is considered nothing out of unusual.

Karol wrote:
Well maybe. But there is also those people who will sit down, look at the 5-6 boxs they have to buy to just make their legal army, legal and working again, and will just quit.

I understand this is less of a problem in places where having 6k of an army is considered nothing out of unusual.

Yeah, maybe. I think some people with existing armies will simply not be as strict with wysiwyg as before. "You see, because GW is stupid, only the Guy with that Red helmet over here actually has a special weapon, the others are just normal dudes and I'll remove them first when you shoot the unit."

That wouldn't fly here at all, WYSIWYG is strongly enforced here. Just like the 10VP for painting, another problematic thing if you have to update an army.
here you have a fully painted army and suddenly you lose 1-2 models from a few squads, and you are in a bad position, specially if you commissioned the army.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

Karol wrote:
Well maybe. But there is also those people who will sit down, look at the 5-6 boxs they have to buy to just make their legal army, legal and working again, and will just quit.

I understand this is less of a problem in places where having 6k of an army is considered nothing out of unusual.

Yeah, maybe. I think some people with existing armies will simply not be as strict with wysiwyg as before. "You see, because GW is stupid, only the Guy with that Red helmet over here actually has a special weapon, the others are just normal dudes and I'll remove them first when you shoot the unit."

That wouldn’t fly with me either, my armies are characters and tell stories. What they look like matters.

Karol wrote:
Well maybe. But there is also those people who will sit down, look at the 5-6 boxs they have to buy to just make their legal army, legal and working again, and will just quit.

I understand this is less of a problem in places where having 6k of an army is considered nothing out of unusual.

Don't think it takes that many boxes.

Basically, you'd need to replace one special in any existing squad. So if you're okay with replacing that special with a standard weapon, one box fixes ten squads. If you insist on using replacements who are equipped with the other (sub-optimal) special weapon, you probably still have all the bits that you didn't use the first time around (because sub-optimal), and if so, you can still fix 10 squads with a single box.

I guess it does depend on the army though.

Also the number of people quitting seems to less than those joining. That’s a model GW will like. While the numbers go up, they keep smiling.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PenitentJake wrote:

Karol wrote:
Well maybe. But there is also those people who will sit down, look at the 5-6 boxs they have to buy to just make their legal army, legal and working again, and will just quit.

I understand this is less of a problem in places where having 6k of an army is considered nothing out of unusual.

Don't think it takes that many boxes.

Basically, you'd need to replace one special in any existing squad. So if you're okay with replacing that special with a standard weapon, one box fixes ten squads. If you insist on using replacements who are equipped with the other (sub-optimal) special weapon, you probably still have all the bits that you didn't use the first time around (because sub-optimal), and if so, you can still fix 10 squads with a single box.

I guess it does depend on the army though.

Yeah I’ve fixed my army with 1 box.

GSC is gonne be so dope. Have 3 special weapons and 2 explosives per 5 models. :-)

Karol wrote:
That wouldn't fly here at all, WYSIWYG is strongly enforced here. Just like the 10VP for painting, another problematic thing if you have to update an army.
here you have a fully painted army and suddenly you lose 1-2 models from a few squads, and you are in a bad position, specially if you commissioned the army.

One of things is a rule. The other is not...

It’s bad enough that they do this, but it’s worse that they are inconsistent with it.

Marines and Dark Eldar have both had new codexes without this treatment.

Two things, related,
1. Why do we care what GW says? They had some good things going and ruined them. Leading to
2. Who is surprised? Admech was a newer faction on the block, got some nice toys. Now... GW needs an excuse to gouge Admech collectors. My bet is that this change (or something roughly like it, a general strategy) was baked into the initial release, and that the bean counters at GW (G for “gimme” and W for “your wallet”) were waiting to pull the trigger until now, to keep Admech competitive (or whatever) until 40K edition X has us all starting over again, likely with more stormca... err... primar... err... numarines and nuorks and nudars and...yeah.
So, why care at all? Frankly, when GW blew up their legacy universe they jettisoned all of the grounding Moorcockian (ironically, this, for anyone having studied this literature) Middle Earthian generality that served as a sort of clearinghouse for sci fi fantasy tropes and now are left with their own trademarkable IP but at the cost of the fact that the new universe is ignorant nast with none of the depth of reference and scope of appeal. Sure, one can excuse them that they must chase a new market of consumers raised on Harry Potter (more ignorant nast) and card games, but then there is this sort of profit driven tweaking. So again, why care? If a single person acted this way, I would perhaps try to appease that person once, but after it became obvious that this person is a selfish short sighted barely literate likely coke addicted jerk, well, let’s just say that this is where I am at with GW and I am just waiting for the rest of the world to catch up at this point so that we can move on...

Andykp wrote:
There models works though, old players will buy more legalise their army and new players will keep buying. I started this thread and am very aware of the intention by GW but I have also already bought a box of skitarii so my squads will be legal, even though my mates said I was good to go they were.

Truthfully, I'm kicking myself for not having grabbed one of the SC AdMech sets with the party barge. Could have added a 3rd hovertank and gotten 12 Skitarii out of the kit plus kitbashed a Technoarchaeologist!

It is one thing to invalidate a loadout when there is a change of kit, quite another to invalidate a loadout arbitrarily and in a manner that benefits no one. There are no players jumping into the game because of this change.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Naturally, there were people wanting to buy the Icons specifically to abuse that.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I can understand why for Skitarii units. It basically became nothing but Plasma Calivers.

 Kanluwen wrote:
So no, it's them choosing to abuse open language.

Again and again you put the blame on the players, rather than the people who wrote the rules in the first place.

Did you ever consider that if the other Skitarii weapons were worth taking then maybe it wouldn't've been "nothing but Plasma Calivers"?

Yeah, I'm not keen on this idea. I have CSM Terminators that I've been using for many years and have lovingly painted them, but I worry for what their legal weapons loadouts will be moving forward.

I would be a little less apprehensive about this if GW could at least provide old weapon option lists in a Legends document. I don't mean full datasheets, stat blocks or points costs; literally just a list of the weapon options.

This would allow us filthy casuals and grognards to at least use our old toys, and help Crusade players to keep their forces legal. Yes, I know we could always houserule it, but having those rules in a Legends document adds an air of legitimacy and makes things a little easier to explain in games with less-frequent opponents.

 General Kroll wrote:
Marines and Dark Eldar have both had new codexes without this treatment.

DE did ( Wyches did; Scourges did not ). Nobody complained about it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
It is one thing to invalidate a loadout when there is a change of kit, quite another to invalidate a loadout arbitrarily and in a manner that benefits no one. There are no players jumping into the game because of this change.

But there could be players not jumping in or jumping out without it.

Nobody, huh?

 Cheex wrote:
Yeah, I'm not keen on this idea. I have CSM Terminators that I've been using for many years and have lovingly painted them, but I worry for what their legal weapons loadouts will be moving forward.

I would be a little less apprehensive about this if GW could at least provide old weapon option lists in a Legends document. I don't mean full datasheets, stat blocks or points costs; literally just a list of the weapon options.

This would allow us filthy casuals and grognards to at least use our old toys, and help Crusade players to keep their forces legal. Yes, I know we could always houserule it, but having those rules in a Legends document adds an air of legitimacy and makes things a little easier to explain in games with less-frequent opponents.

CSM termies are definitely the unit to watch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Nobody, huh?

Apologies - I shouldn't make such an absolute statement. Not enough people were concerned to create a score of pages in discussion over it. Unless I'm remembering wrong, which is entirely possible.

I didn't know that they weren't even consistent within the same codex. That is crazy!

 Da Boss wrote:
I didn't know that they weren't even consistent within the same codex. That is crazy!

What do you mean?

Perhaps I misunderstood a post above, but is it correct that Scourges are not limited to the options in the box but Wyches are? If that is not the case then you can ignore my post as a misunderstanding.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
CSM termies are definitely the unit to watch.

No, CSM period are the thing to watch. Our basic infantry kit lacks enough bolters or chainswords for a full unit, as well as several currently available heavy weapons, and LOTS of options currently available for the Aspiring Champion. The only melee weapon with multiple copies in the terminator kit is power fists, and the combi-weapon bits are incomplete. Havocs only have two of each weapon except the chaincannon of which they only have one, and the kit doesn't even have a bolter for the Aspiring Champion. And Chosen don't even have models. This could get messy.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
It is one thing to invalidate a loadout when there is a change of kit, quite another to invalidate a loadout arbitrarily and in a manner that benefits no one. There are no players jumping into the game because of this change.

This decision won't make people jump into the game, you're right.

But anyone who does jump into the game will not feel pressured by net lists and influencers and Youtubers who tell them they need to buy a second box of Skitarii not for the actual Skitarii in the box, but for a single Arquebus because Skitarii with one Arquebus is USELESS and a WASTE OF POINTS but Skitarii with two Arquebuses are OP auto-take Lulz.

As previously mentioned, GW was surprised that there are people who were willing to actually do that- they never anticipated it, they never planned for it, and while they certainly didn't mind the bigger profit margin, they probably all think we're crazy for doing it.

 Da Boss wrote:
Perhaps I misunderstood a post above, but is it correct that Scourges are not limited to the options in the box but Wyches are? If that is not the case then you can ignore my post as a misunderstanding.

Yes, that is correct.

Personally, I view these things as some sort of balancing mechanic. It could be an attempt to lower the cost to entry for common troops. Or some odd mix.

What I do not think it is, is a capricious sales tactic as these same changes would reduce the future total boxes sold.

We can already see more of this coming. Rubrics can no longer have 20 mans in their new codex. Surely this is not going to sell more Rubrics. They will also likely not lose the ability to take all flamers and with flamers ( probably ) moving to 12" as well as picking up a wound for 3 points it could create a severely formidable unit. The change is, to me, undoubtedly to keep that scenario off the table.

PenitentJake wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
It is one thing to invalidate a loadout when there is a change of kit, quite another to invalidate a loadout arbitrarily and in a manner that benefits no one. There are no players jumping into the game because of this change.

This decision won't make people jump into the game, you're right.

But anyone who does jump into the game will not feel pressured by net lists and influencers and Youtubers who tell them they need to buy a second box of Skitarii not for the actual Skitarii in the box, but for a single Arquebus because Skitarii with one Arquebus is USELESS and a WASTE OF POINTS but Skitarii with two Arquebuses are OP auto-take Lulz.

As previously mentioned, GW was surprised that there are people who were willing to actually do that- they never anticipated it, they never planned for it, and while they certainly didn't mind the bigger profit margin, they probably all think we're crazy for doing it.

Which is a good thing for the health of the game, the less netlisting the better. Doubly so for any newer player just getting into 40k.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
CSM termies are definitely the unit to watch.

No, CSM period are the thing to watch. Our basic infantry kit lacks enough bolters or chainswords for a full unit, as well as several currently available heavy weapons, and LOTS of options currently available for the Aspiring Champion. The only melee weapon with multiple copies in the terminator kit is power fists, and the combi-weapon bits are incomplete. Havocs only have two of each weapon except the chaincannon of which they only have one, and the kit doesn't even have a bolter for the Aspiring Champion. And Chosen don't even have models. This could get messy.

Exactly this. It becomes a bigger problem when you consider that CSM have two kits (multipart and ETB) that have different options - how will they handle this?

 Valkyrie wrote:
This is irking me more when you consider no Marine units actually received these changes.

Try finding DW vanguard veteran with relic blade, DW captain with melta fist, DW biker, termie or primaris with SIA (because they all lack frakking button on gun, but that one random biker with said button can take frakking defining trait of a faction!), DW termie with special fuel, DW veteran with one handed shotgun or stalker, etc, etc, etc, really, DW has more such idiotic limitations than DG, AM, and Sisters combined. 'No' Marine unit you said?

Or, you know, the whole imbecile clown comedy that is Primaris access to frakking power weapons I wonder where people now sprinkling crocodile tears now that their faction was affected were back when DW and primaris books were unveiled foretelling the changes, eh? Because I can bet not a single one of complainers helped the players of either faction protest back then...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Did you ever consider that if the other Skitarii weapons were worth taking then maybe it wouldn't've been "nothing but Plasma Calivers"?

Wrong. The other weapons were fine. The problem was with meta heavily leaning into plasma, especially after idiotic W2 buff no one asked for broke it. Melta gun can cost 2 pts and be amazing on paper, but if you're in foot ork heavy meta, it's worthless and no one will take it, and nothing will make it 'worth taking'.