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.

Iracundus wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
The two Autarchs are potentially to be released together as a boxed set later.

They called it "Craftworld Command" in one of the articles.

Now that's absolute peak hilarity.

Such a release would only make sense if there were cross-kit customizability. If that had been the original case, and they changed the rules to remove that, then it is incompetence as it destroys the reason for the set. Way to go to crater your sales of that set.

Maybe they're banking on people buying the set not knowing about the rules, OR are going to sell a DLC allowing you to mix and match your autarch?

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

Iracundus wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
The two Autarchs are potentially to be released together as a boxed set later.

They called it "Craftworld Command" in one of the articles.

Now that's absolute peak hilarity.

Such a release would only make sense if there were cross-kit customizability. If that had been the original case, and they changed the rules to remove that, then it is incompetence as it destroys the reason for the set. Way to go to crater your sales of that set.

Maybe they're banking on people buying the set not knowing about the rules, OR are going to sell a DLC allowing you to mix and match your autarch?

Or they could just errata the datasheet, get sales of both kits without needing to go to the effort of repacking the 2 Autarchs together. They get the money earlier for less effort!

I do wonder if GW will feel a pinch with the new pricing? I dropped my order of Maugan Ra with the local store after realizing its now $45 for the model. If I feel the model is worth it on the table, I'll either buy discount later or more than likely just convert one of my Harlequin Death Jesters

 bullyboy wrote:
I do wonder if GW will feel a pinch with the new pricing? I dropped my order of Maugan Ra with the local store after realizing its now $45 for the model. If I feel the model is worth it on the table, I'll either buy discount later or more than likely just convert one of my Harlequin Death Jesters

Nah, the sales lost from people stopping aren't enough compared to the money they gain from raising the prices every year. Otherwise they would, you know, stop constantly jacking up the prices to the point of stupidity.

Iracundus wrote:

Or they could just errata the datasheet, get sales of both kits without needing to go to the effort of repacking the 2 Autarchs together. They get the money earlier for less effort!

OR they don't errata the datasheet, because they don't think it should be a big deal since Autarchs are now 1 per Detachment?

It sucks that you can't replicate the art 1:1, for sure. But frankly...it's not like you're the only ones with covers being "lies" or whatever. No model for whatever's on the AdMech cover. Hell, we got a new HQ(the Technoarcheologist) that doesn't even have a model available.

£32.50 for that warlock sprue is an absolute joke.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Iracundus wrote:

Or they could just errata the datasheet, get sales of both kits without needing to go to the effort of repacking the 2 Autarchs together. They get the money earlier for less effort!

OR they don't errata the datasheet, because they don't think it should be a big deal since Autarchs are now 1 per Detachment?

It sucks that you can't replicate the art 1:1, for sure. But frankly...it's not like you're the only ones with covers being "lies" or whatever. No model for whatever's on the AdMech cover. Hell, we got a new HQ(the Technoarcheologist) that doesn't even have a model available.

But they also did advertise you being able to model the cover art Autarch thanks due to the models being compatible, as as selling point.

Are there leaks for points? Looking forward to updating my list in the week before I can get a hardcopy of the book.

Well, Maugan Ra is AUD$77. That's a very high price for an on-foot special character.

I guess I was right to think that GW isn't raising prices on existing kits, but sure was going to keep pumping the price on new ones.

there's very little chance of a complaint to the advertising standards authority being upheld

you can swap bits between the kits as they've said, it's just if you do so the model you build isn't game legal at things appear to stand and they didn't promise that

(not that i don't think it would make far more sense to amend the rules to allow the cross kitting)

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
I do wonder if GW will feel a pinch with the new pricing? I dropped my order of Maugan Ra with the local store after realizing its now $45 for the model. If I feel the model is worth it on the table, I'll either buy discount later or more than likely just convert one of my Harlequin Death Jesters

Nah, the sales lost from people stopping aren't enough compared to the money they gain from raising the prices every year. Otherwise they would, you know, stop constantly jacking up the prices to the point of stupidity.

yeah, I don't think 'feeling the pinch" is ever going to happen, but I do wonder how sales will go for the Warlocks and Maugan ra.. It might be a Blood of the Phoenix all over again.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Well, Maugan Ra is AUD$77. That's a very high price for an on-foot special character.

I guess I was right to think that GW isn't raising prices on existing kits, but sure was going to keep pumping the price on new ones.

He's packed with options though.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Well, Maugan Ra is AUD$77. That's a very high price for an on-foot special character.

But he's not on foot, he's doing a split mid-air on two pieces of tactical masonry!

Can you believe that's not the first time GW did that pose with an Eldar character?

Of course it isn't the first time GW has done that pose. There are only so many poses you can use for a model on the obligatory Aeldari mason piece

 Kanluwen wrote:

Iracundus wrote:

Or they could just errata the datasheet, get sales of both kits without needing to go to the effort of repacking the 2 Autarchs together. They get the money earlier for less effort!

OR they don't errata the datasheet, because they don't think it should be a big deal since Autarchs are now 1 per Detachment?

It sucks that you can't replicate the art 1:1, for sure. But frankly...it's not like you're the only ones with covers being "lies" or whatever. No model for whatever's on the AdMech cover. Hell, we got a new HQ(the Technoarcheologist) that doesn't even have a model available.

So why is it a big deal to you that Infantry Sergeants carry Lasguns again?

You know.

I’ve been Looting twice this weekend, securing goodies for the good and not for the greedy.

Shameless plug out the way? The Warlocks continue to baffle me price wise.

Event Exclusive models are £21 each. Not great, but the exclusivity, for some, kind of justifies that tag somewhat.

But £37.50 for two models? Yeesh.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
You know.

I’ve been Looting twice this weekend, securing goodies for the good and not for the greedy.

Shameless plug out the way? The Warlocks continue to baffle me price wise.

Event Exclusive models are £21 each. Not great, but the exclusivity, for some, kind of justifies that tag somewhat.

But £37.50 for two models? Yeesh.

It's brutal. I was excited for plastic Warlocks, but that kit is so bland, the price just feels like being kicked while I'm down. When I saw it was $55, I assumed the site was defaulted back to AUS by mistake.

£37.50 for two Warlocks.

Meanwhile, it's only £25 for four Collegiate Arcane Mystic Battle Wizards, who actually have a bunch of options too...

No Eldar releases this week, probably because GW knows that real world people will need to get paid again before buying their overcosted new models.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
£37.50 for two Warlocks.

Meanwhile, it's only £25 for four Collegiate Arcane Mystic Battle Wizards, who actually have a bunch of options too...

Two AoS named characters with options, aka Galen and Doralia, from just one year ago are £31.50. The prices are rising like crazy.

So, it amuses me as I'm reading the codex overview and review, that I like the Ynnari the most.

Yes, it guts the special rules from all the factions and is almost certainly less powerful. But it also ditches a LOT of the BS accounting & rules bloat, and that just feels better.

Not being able to take corsairs when you can take dark or clown elfs and the tax on incubi and scourges just feels petty, however.



---
Not sure about the reviews, though. Getting a 'thematic but expensive and not amazingly competitive' vibe from the assessments.

Voss wrote:
So, it amuses me as I'm reading the codex overview and review, that I like the Ynnari the most.

Yes, it guts the special rules from all the factions and is almost certainly less powerful. But it also ditches a LOT of the BS accounting & rules bloat, and that just feels better.

Not being able to take corsairs when you can take dark or clown elfs and the tax on incubi and scourges just feels petty, however.

I could live with some of Ynnari's limitations but taken together they just feel excessive.

The loss of stuff like Pivotal Roles feels not just unnecessary but spiteful.

Where are people getting £37.50 for the Warlocks? They are £32.50. Still far from ideal obviously but not sure where the extra fiver is coming from.

Its a sort of lame cry - but the army build rules for Ynnari give me a headache. So I think the prospect of building such a force is probably dead and buried.

Someone on youtube or something will probably give a sensible run down of how you can take X+Y and keep rules A+B, but if you include C you lose everything. But I'm sort of struggling.

Just build the Ynarri army however you want. If you can’t figure out the rules your opponent sure and hell won’t. Lmao

Tyel wrote:
Its a sort of lame cry - but the army build rules for Ynnari give me a headache. So I think the prospect of building such a force is probably dead and buried.

Someone on youtube or something will probably give a sensible run down of how you can take X+Y and keep rules A+B, but if you include C you lose everything. But I'm sort of struggling.

Army building fairly straight forward. Everything loses <Saedath>, <Kabal> and <Wych Cult> keywords and gains the Ynnari faction keyword which replaces the <Craftworld> keyword, so Ynnari are by default a de facto 'Craftworld.'

Craftworlds: Anything EXCEPT Corsairs (because.. reasons), Avatar of Khaine (obviously) or special characters that aren't the Ynnari Three (So no phoenix lords, Yriel or whoever)
Dark: any wych or kabal units plus incubi and scourges (but you have to pay extra for those two, because... reasons). No haemonculi stuff, or named characters. But also no Lords of Comorragh or Favored Retinue upgrades (so no trueborn)
Clowns: any except Solitaires (for the same reason as the Avatar of Khaine, essentially- wrong god), but no Pivotal Roles.

If you _don't_ include Dark or Clowns, you get Strands of Fate.
However, adding _any_ clowns or dark elfs turns off Strands of Fate. And Power from Pain. And Luck of the Laughing God. You... just don't get faction 'doctrine' at all.
Oddly, Travelling Players is still in play, so if you take clowns as a separate patrol detachment (and no dark elfs), you can keep Strands of Fate. Because... reasons.
Also no one can take Runes of Fate, and get Ynnari Rune powers instead (mostly..? Warlocks might not get the option to take Ynnari rather than Battle)
Really, Ynnari losing the big Army Doctrine rule seems a bit much. Less book keeping, but losing any measure of auto-successes, rerolls or toughness really hurts the army.

Transports are restricted to keywords (only Asuryani models in Asuryani transport, etc), except the two special Ynnari characters. Given all the keyword changes... a little weird. I know nothing loses Asuryani, Darkuryani or Clownuryani, but still... they're crossing all sorts of lines uniting in their new god of death, but touching someone else's ride is just right out. I mean, sure, Fire Dragons in open-topped boats would be oppressive (or... a useful way to use them), but it feels 100% gamey rather than fluffy (and most of this feels like a Ynnari player is making a fluffy decision)

I honestly don't think you helped him much at all, lol. It really is still a nightmare....I'd probably start building a list, and then go "ah bollocks, let's just run regular craftworlds"

Voss wrote:
Army building fairly straight forward. Everything loses <Saedath>, <Kabal> and <Wych Cult> keywords and gains the Ynnari faction keyword which replaces the <Craftworld> keyword, so Ynnari are by default a de facto 'Craftworld.'

Craftworlds: Anything EXCEPT Corsairs (because.. reasons), Avatar of Khaine (obviously) or special characters that aren't the Ynnari Three (So no phoenix lords, Yriel or whoever)
Dark: any wych or kabal units plus incubi and scourges (but you have to pay extra for those two, because... reasons). No haemonculi stuff, or named characters. But also no Lords of Comorragh or Favored Retinue upgrades (so no trueborn)
Clowns: any except Solitaires (for the same reason as the Avatar of Khaine, essentially- wrong god), but no Pivotal Roles.

If you _don't_ include Dark or Clowns, you get Strands of Fate.
However, adding _any_ clowns or dark elfs turns off Strands of Fate. And Power from Pain. And Luck of the Laughing God. You... just don't get faction 'doctrine' at all.
Oddly, Travelling Players is still in play, so if you take clowns as a separate patrol detachment (and no dark elfs), you can keep Strands of Fate. Because... reasons.
Also no one can take Runes of Fate, and get Ynnari Rune powers instead (mostly..? Warlocks might not get the option to take Ynnari rather than Battle)
Really, Ynnari losing the big Army Doctrine rule seems a bit much. Less book keeping, but losing any measure of auto-successes, rerolls or toughness really hurts the army.

Transports are restricted to keywords (only Asuryani models in Asuryani transport, etc), except the two special Ynnari characters. Given all the keyword changes... a little weird. I know nothing loses Asuryani, Darkuryani or Clownuryani, but still... they're crossing all sorts of lines uniting in their new god of death, but touching someone else's ride is just right out. I mean, sure, Fire Dragons in open-topped boats would be oppressive (or... a useful way to use them), but it feels 100% gamey rather than fluffy (and most of this feels like a Ynnari player is making a fluffy decision)

Thanks for breaking that down for us. It's going to make studying for the Eldar Codex final I've got next week far easier.


Remember when rules weren't like this? I don't remember the 3.5 Legion rules requiring such an crazy breakdown.

 xttz wrote:

 Insularum wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
How about we just all write to ask them to FAQ it to allow, instead of pretending to be legal experts and kidding ourselves that anyone will attempt to sue?

Not a matter for courts for anyone here - no one is out of pocket or subject to any material loss, just pointing out that advertising standards exist and anyone can raise a claim to ASA at any point if they so much as feel they or anyone else are being mislead by marketing claims. In reality everyone spamming FAQ requests is the best and most reasonable course of action as there are bound to be plenty of honest mistakes in the rest of the codex (for example clowns seem to have a few like the lack of core on anything but bikes and the weird unit sizes required for wargear options to kick in).

The Aeldari Discord is carrying out a coordinated email campaign asking GW to errata that datasheet. At the end of the day a revision is in everyone's best interest including their own, so hopefully common sense will prevail.

Definitely seems like a more constructive course of action than amateur legal 'experts' googling advertising laws at least.

I think they will listen if that effort is polite and well reasoned. They did listen with respect to the Cursed City models and the Soulblight Battletome, I bet they will here too.

I for one hope so. I'm itching to make an Autarch who has walked the path of both the Scorpion and the Spider! Who do we email if we'd like to join in?

 Togusa wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 Insularum wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
How about we just all write to ask them to FAQ it to allow, instead of pretending to be legal experts and kidding ourselves that anyone will attempt to sue?

Not a matter for courts for anyone here - no one is out of pocket or subject to any material loss, just pointing out that advertising standards exist and anyone can raise a claim to ASA at any point if they so much as feel they or anyone else are being mislead by marketing claims. In reality everyone spamming FAQ requests is the best and most reasonable course of action as there are bound to be plenty of honest mistakes in the rest of the codex (for example clowns seem to have a few like the lack of core on anything but bikes and the weird unit sizes required for wargear options to kick in).

The Aeldari Discord is carrying out a coordinated email campaign asking GW to errata that datasheet. At the end of the day a revision is in everyone's best interest including their own, so hopefully common sense will prevail.

Definitely seems like a more constructive course of action than amateur legal 'experts' googling advertising laws at least.

I think they will listen if that effort is polite and well reasoned. They did listen with respect to the Cursed City models and the Soulblight Battletome, I bet they will here too.

I for one hope so. I'm itching to make an Autarch who has walked the path of both the Scorpion and the Spider! Who do we email if we'd like to join in?

40kFAQ@gwplc.com

Maybe the sales aspect does need to be literally brought up in case they are obtuse
You currently can do Scorpion/Spider. It just has to be chainsword and warp jump generator. You can't get the mandiblaster helmet under the current rules. Whereas if you could, you might be buy the old Autarch kit as well.