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.

Wow there goes the beating heart of the guard. Ripped out Temple of Doom style.

I can't help but think there is a vocal minority of stupid people and their efforts have seen anyhting remotely complex or interesting increasingly stripped from the game. Because 'its hard to understand'.

So much for "this squad is dedicated anti-infantry and this squad is dedicated anti-armor."

Is it really that game breaking to allow two flamers or two meltas in the same squad?

 KidCthulhu wrote:
So much for "this squad is dedicated anti-infantry and this squad is dedicated anti-armor."

Is it really that game breaking to allow two flamers or two meltas in the same squad?

No, GW is just stubbornly obsessed with justifying their poor decision not including enough bits on each sprue.

I know I'm on thoughtcrime island with this one, but I really don't mind these changes. If it makes it easier to get into an army, and thus the hobby as a whole, that's what's best for the game and the community.

It sucks, and I feel bad for people that have stuff they either can no longer use or requires work to use. I certainly feel the burn with literally dozens of heavy weapon squads and a crap ton of special weapons split amongst veterans, 3rd edition stormtroopers, and metal kasrkin. But I'm excited that the army is becoming more modern and hopefully easier for new players.

 Polonius wrote:
I know I'm on thoughtcrime island with this one, but I really don't mind these changes. If it makes it easier to get into an army, and thus the hobby as a whole, that's what's best for the game and the community.

It sucks, and I feel bad for people that have stuff they either can no longer use or requires work to use. I certainly feel the burn with literally dozens of heavy weapon squads and a crap ton of special weapons split amongst veterans, 3rd edition stormtroopers, and metal kasrkin. But I'm excited that the army is becoming more modern and hopefully easier for new players.

More people for the sake of more people doesn't make for a better hobby. We live in an age of 3rd party bitz and Ebay. Getting what you need or want is NOT some gargantuan task.

EviscerationPlague wrote:
More people for the sake of more people doesn't make for a better hobby. We live in an age of 3rd party bitz and Ebay. Getting what you need or want is NOT some gargantuan task.

I suppose you can either acknowledge that limiting options is somehow good for GW sales (which is, of course, indirectly good for the hobby) or you can assume that GW is doing this purely out of malice and/or incompetence. It's up to you.

 Polonius wrote:
I know I'm on thoughtcrime island with this one, but I really don't mind these changes. If it makes it easier to get into an army, and thus the hobby as a whole, that's what's best for the game and the community.

I never had any trouble getting into an army when I could take 2 of the same gun vs only 1.

And can we please not kid ourselves into thinking that this was done to make things 'easier' or for the 'good of the game/community'.

 Polonius wrote:
I know I'm on thoughtcrime island with this one, but I really don't mind these changes. If it makes it easier to get into an army, and thus the hobby as a whole, that's what's best for the game and the community.

It sucks, and I feel bad for people that have stuff they either can no longer use or requires work to use. I certainly feel the burn with literally dozens of heavy weapon squads and a crap ton of special weapons split amongst veterans, 3rd edition stormtroopers, and metal kasrkin. But I'm excited that the army is becoming more modern and hopefully easier for new players.

Agreed.

There's also an element of hysteria here thanks to the nature of these rumours. We've already seen the older rumour of "infantry squads can't have heavy weapons" generate several pages of 'sky is falling!!!' posts before it finally turned out to be inaccurate.

This latest batch of rumours says that you cannot select the same special weapon more than once, but also say that Catachans might be able to take 3 flamers. We've also seen that the Kasrkin kit comes with two each for most special weapon options. If it's a thoughtcrime to want to see an actual unit datasheet before declaring the army DOA then count me in too.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
I know I'm on thoughtcrime island with this one, but I really don't mind these changes. If it makes it easier to get into an army, and thus the hobby as a whole, that's what's best for the game and the community.

I never had any trouble getting into an army when I could take 2 of the same gun vs only 1.

And can we please not kid ourselves into thinking that this was done to make things 'easier' or for the 'good of the game/community'.

Sure, me neither. And if GW catered to hobbyists like us, the hobby would be smaller. I'm hard pressed to see how this can be some manipulative master plan, right? If anything, putting one plasma gun in every box, but making three per squad by far the best option leads to more sales. So, again, we're back to either there is some value to this, or GW is incompetent.

 Polonius wrote:
Sure, me neither. And if GW catered to hobbyists like us, the hobby would be smaller. I'm hard pressed to see how this can be some manipulative master plan, right? If anything, putting one plasma gun in every box, but making three per squad by far the best option leads to more sales. So, again, we're back to either there is some value to this, or GW is incompetent.

The 'value' in it is that it makes bits sellers redundant, because GW realised that people were just buying bits from elsewhere instead of buying a whole additional kit to get those weapons. It's not specifically about increasing their own sales but of limiting the market for 3rd party bits suppliers.

And, again, that would be fine if they did it by including sensible options in the kit to begin with...

 insaniak wrote:
The 'value' in it is that it makes bits sellers redundant, because GW realised that people were just buying bits from elsewhere instead of buying a whole additional kit to get those weapons. It's not specifically about increasing their own sales but of limiting the market for 3rd party bits suppliers.

And, again, that would be fine if they did it by including sensible options in the kit to begin with...

That's certainly possible. GW does overreact to stuff like that.

I guess I'm just used to stuff changing all the time, so I feel more sanguine about this stuff. Again, I think it blows, I just, perhaps naively, there might be an upside.

 Kanluwen wrote:
We had Scions added,

We've had stormtroopers in every codex since 3rd. And I would guess they were there before as well.

 Polonius wrote:
If it makes it easier to get into an army, and thus the hobby as a whole, that's what's best for the game and the community.

I don't really see how this makes anything easier. There were already few, if any, units where you couldn't build a legal configuration with a single box. This was only ever a problem for the e-sport players who couldn't cope with the existence of an option that might have 0.01% more chance of winning, for normal players if you didn't want to build multi-kit conversions you just built whatever the box could build and it was fine.

 Polonius wrote:
So, again, we're back to either there is some value to this, or GW is incompetent.

Let's call it "Malicious Incompetence" then.

They identified something - "People are buying bits from 3rd parties rather than us!" - but their inherent and well-documented incompetence saw them choose the malicious path of limiting options to the sprue rather than enhancing the sprue so that no one would need to buy bits from 3rd parties in the first place.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
I know I'm on thoughtcrime island with this one, but I really don't mind these changes. If it makes it easier to get into an army, and thus the hobby as a whole, that's what's best for the game and the community.

I never had any trouble getting into an army when I could take 2 of the same gun vs only 1.

First, assuming rumors are even true in the first place instead of yet another misunderstanding or FUD strawman someone dropped to bash GW - that's not 2 guns, though. It will be like 20-50 spammed across the army because people who want to min-max squads will do it with all of them, not just one, and will cheese spread whatever is the most OP. See all the crying and gnashing you can't cherry-clone copy-paste Chaos Termies with all axes/combi-plasmas when new ones were released.

Second, normal players or people who collect to paint, though? Will be fine taking all comer squad with melta/plasma as your AT unit, and whatever other two specials as anti-infantry. Said unit will also look like fluff ones and won't become gamebreakingly OP like multiple spams turned out to be in the past which is probably another bonus to GW.

Then there is the fact that after GW took a look at knockoff bits scene, with most of them looking utter gak and costing small fortune (seriously, most of these dudes make even FW look positively cheap with like for like comparisons) and realized there is little point to let their customers spend tons of money making their models look worse (and also with most of these, copy-fest with each special weapon gun/arm pose being completely identical, but funnily enough that doesn't bother mOnOpOsE crowd any, go figure). Why bother helping people who parasite on your core business with little to no upsides for GW?

All in all, I can see why GW is done with old, problematic (from their point of view) rules writing style - all it did in past four editions was causing endless headaches and gave little to no added value. I also don't buy the usual excuse 'no bits no rule' because the contents of the box have little impact on rules (why not make IG squads be able to take four specials, each different, if the box dictated the rules? or space marines, why the tactical squad can only take one special when there are six of them in the box? funnily enough, the 'no bits no rule' proponents have zero explanation for either).

Then you have primaris and deathwatch who do have bits in boxes, just that inept clowns writing their rules failed to include the options - gee, where is the magic box dictated thinking in their case? Why DW vanguard veterans can't take relic blade despite it being in the frakking assembly instructions for them? Why only Intercessor sarge has the keys to chapter armoury out of the entire company despite bits for the loadout being available in every other Mk X box? And why they can/can't take [insert 50 examples I can easily do but it's off topic] despite them being/not being in boxes? Gee, that executive that compares rules with boxes is seriously slacking on that whole range, eh?

Mordian Glory got hold of some more leaks. Time to see how many screw ups GW managed.

M.

 Irbis wrote:


Second, normal players or people who collect to paint, though? Will be fine taking all comer squad with melta/plasma as your AT unit, and whatever other two specials as anti-infantry.

As a casual gamer who collects and paints way more than plays, you're way off the mark in my experience. Mixed weapons look terrible on a display from a purely aesthetic point of view, regardless of how well they do in game.I HATE seeing the GW squads like the Devestators with one of each weapon, they look like gak.

 insaniak wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
Sure, me neither. And if GW catered to hobbyists like us, the hobby would be smaller. I'm hard pressed to see how this can be some manipulative master plan, right? If anything, putting one plasma gun in every box, but making three per squad by far the best option leads to more sales. So, again, we're back to either there is some value to this, or GW is incompetent.

The 'value' in it is that it makes bits sellers redundant, because GW realised that people were just buying bits from elsewhere instead of buying a whole additional kit to get those weapons. It's not specifically about increasing their own sales but of limiting the market for 3rd party bits suppliers.

And, again, that would be fine if they did it by including sensible options in the kit to begin with...

I would assume GW would have a bit more business savvy than to try to ruin a synergistic product. It would be like beer producers trying to put pretzels out of business. The existence of bits sellers enhances the appeal of GW product, except in the cases GW actually makes the bits (Necromunda, mostly).

 Rihgu wrote:
I would assume GW would have a bit more business savvy than to try to ruin a synergistic product.

You'd think, wouldn't you, but given that they ended up going to court over this and that no model/no rule is a direct response to all of this stuff, the current trend of limiting unit options based on sprues is just the next facet of this bizarre and unnecessary behaviour.

To put it another way: GW has never wanted to be a part of the miniature wargaming hobby. They want to be the hobby. They want to be the only place you go to, and for as many people as possible, the only thing they know about. They view everyone else as competition, even resellers (retail or 3rd party).

 Rihgu wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
Sure, me neither. And if GW catered to hobbyists like us, the hobby would be smaller. I'm hard pressed to see how this can be some manipulative master plan, right? If anything, putting one plasma gun in every box, but making three per squad by far the best option leads to more sales. So, again, we're back to either there is some value to this, or GW is incompetent.

The 'value' in it is that it makes bits sellers redundant, because GW realised that people were just buying bits from elsewhere instead of buying a whole additional kit to get those weapons. It's not specifically about increasing their own sales but of limiting the market for 3rd party bits suppliers.

And, again, that would be fine if they did it by including sensible options in the kit to begin with...

I would assume GW would have a bit more business savvy than to try to ruin a synergistic product. It would be like beer producers trying to put pretzels out of business. The existence of bits sellers enhances the appeal of GW product, except in the cases GW actually makes the bits (Necromunda, mostly).

Pettiness is something to always have in mind when talking about the old GW's upper echelons, and I don't think it's gone with the new boss.

M.

 Platuan4th wrote:
As a casual gamer who collects and paints way more than plays, you're way off the mark in my experience. Mixed weapons look terrible on a display from a purely aesthetic point of view, regardless of how well they do in game.I HATE seeing the GW squads like the Devestators with one of each weapon, they look like gak.

Agreed! I hate how haphazard it looks, especially when ideally a squad should have a role. I'm not a "all specials in my army are plasma because plasma is best!" player. I like my tank killers to all have weapons appropriate for the task. Same with my anti-personnel. But NGL, the aesthetics of the finished painted unit is also very important to me.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:
I would assume GW would have a bit more business savvy than to try to ruin a synergistic product.

You'd think, wouldn't you, but given that they ended up going to court over this and that no model/no rule is a direct response to all of this stuff, the current trend of limiting unit options based on sprues is just the next facet of this bizarre and unnecessary behaviour.

To put it another way: GW has never wanted to be a part of the miniature wargaming hobby. They want to be the hobby. They want to be the only place you go to, and for as many people as possible, the only thing they know about. They view everyone else as competition, even resellers (retail or 3rd party).

I thought that the problem with Chapterhouse was that they were producing full models to represent units in 40k (and in addition also sold bits to enhance GW models). Things like Eldar characters, Tyranid Spore Mines and like, didn't they have a Parasite of Mortrex? And Incubi and stuff?

 Rihgu wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:
I would assume GW would have a bit more business savvy than to try to ruin a synergistic product.

You'd think, wouldn't you, but given that they ended up going to court over this and that no model/no rule is a direct response to all of this stuff, the current trend of limiting unit options based on sprues is just the next facet of this bizarre and unnecessary behaviour.

To put it another way: GW has never wanted to be a part of the miniature wargaming hobby. They want to be the hobby. They want to be the only place you go to, and for as many people as possible, the only thing they know about. They view everyone else as competition, even resellers (retail or 3rd party).

I thought that the problem with Chapterhouse was that they were producing full models to represent units in 40k (and in addition also sold bits to enhance GW models). Things like Eldar characters, Tyranid Spore Mines and like, didn't they have a Parasite of Mortrex? And Incubi and stuff?

Nope, hence the "GW tried to get a copyright on shoulder pads after submitting claims" nonsense.

Deathstrike Missile Launcher. 150 points

Choose missile AFTER deployment. 3 options for missile.

God Spear Missile: every unit within 3 inches of target location takes Zero wounds on a roll of 1, 8 mortal wounds on a roll of 2-3. 12 mortal wounds on a roll of 4-5, and 16 mortal wounds on a roll of 6.

Plasma Barrage: roll D6 for all units withing D6+3 inches. 1=no hits. 2-3= D3+1 mortal wounds. 4-5= 2D3 mortals. 6=D3+3 mortals

Vortex: roll for every unit within D3+3 inches 2-3 D3 mortals, 4-5 D3+1 mortals, 6= 2D3 mortals. After damage done, on 4+ effect stays on the battlefield another turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Looks like he made an initial mistake with Ogryn. They are still same wounds. Bodyguard ogryn are 6 wounds.

Ripper gun: Assault 3, St5, Ap-2, Damage 2.

That Deathstrike surely has been nerfed. We cannot have a weapon that deletes SM or Chaos characters in one go.

M.

So it gets to choose its missile after deployment, but the adaptive Tyranids don't get to choose their adaptation before the game anymore. Sure. That makes sense.

I'm sad that it's just three slightly different ways of delivering Mortal Wounds. I mean, what is this, Age of Sigmar?

 Rihgu wrote:
I thought that the problem with Chapterhouse was that they were producing full models to represent units in 40k (and in addition also sold bits to enhance GW models). Things like Eldar characters, Tyranid Spore Mines and like, didn't they have a Parasite of Mortrex? And Incubi and stuff?

Chapterhouse weren't doing anything that a multitude of other 3rd party sites weren't already doing. Their problem however was that they had the balls (or lack of intelligence) to just use GW's names outright. That's what got GW's attention.

 Miguelsan wrote:
That Deathstrike surely has been nerfed. We cannot have a weapon that deletes SM or Chaos characters in one go.

M.

Heck, that's enough to nuke Guilliman off the table.

After measuring out the pie plates and doing average wound maths the Deathstrike seems okay now. It may no longer be the low hanging fruit of 40k joke units. It does look good, barring the potentially lame duck firing mechanic they're giving it. My only complaint is the lack of variety between the warhead types and their battlefield effects. This missile amounts to having a focused, regular and wide dispersal settings as opposed to different warheads.

Well, I've watched the video now. So a total of three converted squads are gone.

So far my thoughts are that one is now allowed to have 6 command squads. 3 Cadian and 3 Platoon.

But there are many, many strange decisions and choices.

Why did they bother to include the Catachan Squads at all, more expensive for nothing special?

Why does taking a vox require giving up a special weapon for the Krieg? They are already more expensive?

I can see in some ways how the new codex will be more powerful, but many colourful modelling options have been lost.

You do get a turn head-notice with the Deathstrike. And it's a 150-points-shoot-once-a-game thing

8. Deathstrike Missile (150pts)

M10 WS6 BS4 S6 T7 W11 A3 LD7 Sv3+

Rules
Align target: During the muster army step, after seeing your opp's army, choose 1 of 3 missiles for the Deathstrike.

Special Action - Align Target. This can be done in the command phase if the Deathstrike has not launched any missiles. Completed at end of turn. Once completed do one of two things in your next shooting phase.

Number One: Place a deathstrike missile marker anywhere on the battlefield.

Number Two: Or if the marker is already placed, move the marker anywhere else on the battlefield.

Action? Fire Missile: The Deathstrike can launch a warhead if there is a deathstrike missile marker on the battlefield.

God Spear Warhead
Roll 1d6 for each unit within 3 of the target market. On a 1 nothing happens, that unit is not affected. On a 2-3, the unit suffers 8 mortal wounds. On a 4-5, the unit suffers 12 mortal wounds. On a 6, that unit suffers 16 mortal wounds. Once this is resolved, remove the marker.

Plasma Barrage Warhead
Roll 1d6 for each unit within d3+6 inches of the marker. On a 1, nothing happens to the unit. On a 2-3, unit suffers d3+1 mortal. On a 4-5, 2d3 mortals. On a 6, d3+3 mortals. Minus 1 to the roll for enemy infantry characters.

Vortex Warhead
Roll 1d6 for each unit within d3+3 of the marker. on a 1, nothing happens. 2-3 d3 mortal wounds. on a 4-5 d3+1 mortals. On a 6, 2d3 mortals. Once resolved, do not remove the deathstrike missile target marker. Instead roll 1d6. On a 1-3, remove the target marker. On a 4+ do not remove the marker, but it can no longer be moved via the align target action. The marker persists (unclear when it goes).