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.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
I don't mind my HQ being called a platoon command squad in some regard, but I do want a none cadian/special character option to have a character issue 2 orders.... Or have a lore friendly DKoK Marshall on the field rather than just a Lieutenant.

Just convert up a DKoK version of the new characters to count as them. Given there's no alternative that they could be confused for, it shouldn't be a problem.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
I don't mind my HQ being called a platoon command squad in some regard, but I do want a none cadian/special character option to have a character issue 2 orders.... Or have a lore friendly DKoK Marshall on the field rather than just a Lieutenant.

Just convert up a DKoK version of the new characters to count as them. Given there's no alternative that they could be confused for, it shouldn't be a problem.

I know I can do that, and fully intend to do that, it's more to do with keyword interactions, especially for stratagems and/or relics.

Just allow a standard regimental command squad with a generic senior officer.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

I know I can do that, and fully intend to do that, it's more to do with keyword interactions, especially for stratagems and/or relics.

Just allow a standard regimental command squad with a generic senior officer.

There's a Company Command Squad in HQ and a Platoon in Elite...I don't know if we've solidly seen how many Orders each issue?

The latest leaks from Mordian Glory have no command squads in elites and the following as HQ choices -

Cadian command squad
Cadian castellan
Gaunts Ghosts
Iron hand Straken
Lord Solar
Scion Command Squad
Platoon Command Squad
Primaris Psyker
Tank Commander
Creed

Unless there have been some amendments to that since, that is the leak.

Now granted, there is some debate on whether senior officers grant 2 orders, or 1 with the re-roll 1 order, but the platoon command squad does not have a senior officer, meaning they are all special characters or Cadian.

Early days still anyway, so not fully dejected about it, but it would be a bit meh if it did happen.

Since the book has probably been sent to the printers, I'm going to look at the good things, or at least interesting things.

I like the fact that Kasrkin are back. I think also that in the new Guard codex the orders are going to be very important. Some of the orders seem much improved.

So what do we know about the Kasrkin. We know they are elites, have carapace armour, have BS 3 and can take 4 special weapons, and a damage 3 sniper weapon. They also have access to 3 of the doctrines. Two from the army, and then a 3rd which would need to be individual.

One of the first armies that I'm going to build is going to be around a core of 30 Kasrkin.
A useful doctrine for them will be Heirloom weapons for 28 inch range and 14 inch rapid fire range.

The squads will be equipped with 2x plasma 2x volleyguns & 1 sniper rifle.

The default order that I will give them will be the take aim order, this will give them +1to hit and +1ap. This makes them hit on a +2 with +3 ap on their standard guns, plasma guns will have ap4.

The sniper rifle will have Ap3 as well. Since there will be 3 sniper rifles, each hitting on +2 with ap3 and 3 damage they can become fairly annoying to characters in other armies. Especially T3 armies.

In addition I would take a Castellan with them so they have two orders which isn't as important as orders can "splash", and this Castellan would also give them re-rolls on any shots they miss. +2 with a reroll of 1's is very close to autohits.

This could be a very solid core to the army at 355 points. It can also be made very thematic, as one can use the 3rd doctrine to make the units visually distinct. i.e. Trophy Hunters and Guerilla Fighters.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
The latest leaks from Mordian Glory have no command squads in elites and the following as HQ choices -

Unless there have been some amendments to that since, that is the leak.

Now granted, there is some debate on whether senior officers grant 2 orders, or 1 with the re-roll 1 order, but the platoon command squad does not have a senior officer, meaning they are all special characters or Cadian.

Early days still anyway, so not fully dejected about it, but it would be a bit meh if it did happen.

I'm not sitting through that whole livestream of nonsense. This is the bit that I followed:

If that's not the case? Meh. Not like they've removed the Marshal from the IA Compendium.

Is the Command Squad still a separate option or have they combined them and the officer into a single unit?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

Honestly I couldn't give a damn about the whole special weapon debate, bit fed up with the whole "the sky is falling and the book is dead based on a few rumours" mentality I've seen on here and other sites. Wait until the book is out, give it a go.

Yes because that attitude worked SUPER well with the CSM codex LOL

You're right that attitude didn't work well for the CSM codex the people who got over it still have to put up with the incessant reminders and rambling of how angry they're supposed to be etc. despite by all accounts the fact its a good book in terms of balance.

@Valkyrie power to you, if it isn't something that causes you upset, then just give it a go and enjoy what you enjoy. Obviously some people are upset that their collections don't work how they want, or their dedicated fluff units need to be broken up which is just as valid, I just wish it was channelled better.

Balance isn’t the same as fun.
Balance is important-but being able to customize your guys is too.

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

Honestly I couldn't give a damn about the whole special weapon debate, bit fed up with the whole "the sky is falling and the book is dead based on a few rumours" mentality I've seen on here and other sites. Wait until the book is out, give it a go.

Yes because that attitude worked SUPER well with the CSM codex LOL

You're right that attitude didn't work well for the CSM codex the people who got over it still have to put up with the incessant reminders and rambling of how angry they're supposed to be etc. despite by all accounts the fact its a good book in terms of balance.

@Valkyrie power to you, if it isn't something that causes you upset, then just give it a go and enjoy what you enjoy. Obviously some people are upset that their collections don't work how they want, or their dedicated fluff units need to be broken up which is just as valid, I just wish it was channelled better.

Cheers man, it does irk me that they're going this way but like you said, I enjoy what I enjoy

 Kanluwen wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
The latest leaks from Mordian Glory have no command squads in elites and the following as HQ choices -

Unless there have been some amendments to that since, that is the leak.

Now granted, there is some debate on whether senior officers grant 2 orders, or 1 with the re-roll 1 order, but the platoon command squad does not have a senior officer, meaning they are all special characters or Cadian.

Early days still anyway, so not fully dejected about it, but it would be a bit meh if it did happen.

I'm not sitting through that whole livestream of nonsense. This is the bit that I followed:

Spoiler:

If that's not the case? Meh. Not like they've removed the Marshal from the IA Compendium.

I didn't sit through it, he posted a google sheet on the video:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/1/d/1PlnctYYLtDqTp5tDNhElj5en8eecnczPXVt9S8wfqck/edit?usp=sharing

Kasrkins at BS 3+ or no?

 Valkyrie wrote:
Is the Command Squad still a separate option or have they combined them and the officer into a single unit?

Combined, per GW themselves.

JNAProductions wrote:Balance isn’t the same as fun.
Balance is important-but being able to customize your guys is too.

Gonna be real here:
Customizing is great and all...but that's not what we really see. It's basically just a list of things that come down to "Are you actually gonna play the game, or just make army lists online?".



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Kasrkins at BS 3+ or no?

Supposedly.

They're 4+ in Kill Team because of the way that Elite mechanism works.

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

Honestly I couldn't give a damn about the whole special weapon debate, bit fed up with the whole "the sky is falling and the book is dead based on a few rumours" mentality I've seen on here and other sites. Wait until the book is out, give it a go.

Yes because that attitude worked SUPER well with the CSM codex LOL

You're right that attitude didn't work well for the CSM codex the people who got over it still have to put up with the incessant reminders and rambling of how angry they're supposed to be etc. despite by all accounts the fact its a good book in terms of balance.

"By all accounts"
I'd love to see your source on that.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:

I didn't sit through it, he posted a google sheet on the video:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/1/d/1PlnctYYLtDqTp5tDNhElj5en8eecnczPXVt9S8wfqck/edit?usp=sharing

So, am I getting this right: the Kasrkin Squad is 10 guys and 2x2+1 free special weapons for 105 points? That's cool.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

Honestly I couldn't give a damn about the whole special weapon debate, bit fed up with the whole "the sky is falling and the book is dead based on a few rumours" mentality I've seen on here and other sites. Wait until the book is out, give it a go.

Yes because that attitude worked SUPER well with the CSM codex LOL

You're right that attitude didn't work well for the CSM codex the people who got over it still have to put up with the incessant reminders and rambling of how angry they're supposed to be etc. despite by all accounts the fact its a good book in terms of balance.

"By all accounts"
I'd love to see your source on that.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/10/20/warhammer-40000-metawatch-unpacking-the-latest-balance-dataslate/ - 50% WR and podium pretty regularly https://40kstats.goonhammer.com/#ft4. Got anything to disprove it?

Not to mention CSM just won the LGT a little while back. With LVO in Corona-blues back in February, the year’s biggest tournament.

CSM are arguably the top dog to beat atm.

I've been mulling over the codex leaks today, and I think I can finally put my finger on what feels off-putting about the book.

It increasingly feels like an army of special characters/units, and less like a sandbox I can create my own lore and units within.

Want a veteran squad? I'm afraid you have to use Cadian Shock Troops, Cadian Kasrkin, Catachan Devils, or Death Korps of Krieg. Oh, you want to kitbash a squad of Harakoni Warhawk Grenadiers or a veteran unit from the light companies of Horizele 4? Too bad, they are Cadians or Catachans now.

It looks like only Cadians, the Catachan II, and Tanith First and Only get the top Guard field commanders now (2 orders/turn, I'm guessing Straken and Gaunt/Colm will get this). Sure, it seems you can counts-as and mix and match freely, but things like strategems are likely to be tied to keywords.

I preferred it when everything but the named characters were generic. It would have been very easy to have, for example, a grenadiers unit entry rather than specifically a Kasrkin entry.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

Honestly I couldn't give a damn about the whole special weapon debate, bit fed up with the whole "the sky is falling and the book is dead based on a few rumours" mentality I've seen on here and other sites. Wait until the book is out, give it a go.

Yes because that attitude worked SUPER well with the CSM codex LOL

You're right that attitude didn't work well for the CSM codex the people who got over it still have to put up with the incessant reminders and rambling of how angry they're supposed to be etc. despite by all accounts the fact its a good book in terms of balance.

"By all accounts"
I'd love to see your source on that.

Non-wargaming image removed

 Valkyrie wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

Honestly I couldn't give a damn about the whole special weapon debate, bit fed up with the whole "the sky is falling and the book is dead based on a few rumours" mentality I've seen on here and other sites. Wait until the book is out, give it a go.

Yes because that attitude worked SUPER well with the CSM codex LOL

You're right that attitude didn't work well for the CSM codex the people who got over it still have to put up with the incessant reminders and rambling of how angry they're supposed to be etc. despite by all accounts the fact its a good book in terms of balance.

"By all accounts"
I'd love to see your source on that.

His source was literally the WarCom article that got disproved on its point about the lower Marine winrate LOL

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

Honestly I couldn't give a damn about the whole special weapon debate, bit fed up with the whole "the sky is falling and the book is dead based on a few rumours" mentality I've seen on here and other sites. Wait until the book is out, give it a go.

Yes because that attitude worked SUPER well with the CSM codex LOL

You're right that attitude didn't work well for the CSM codex the people who got over it still have to put up with the incessant reminders and rambling of how angry they're supposed to be etc. despite by all accounts the fact its a good book in terms of balance.

"By all accounts"
I'd love to see your source on that.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/10/20/warhammer-40000-metawatch-unpacking-the-latest-balance-dataslate/ - 50% WR and podium pretty regularly https://40kstats.goonhammer.com/#ft4. Got anything to disprove it?

To be fair, Custodes have a win rate of 53% and podium fairly often too, but we as a group are pretty sour with our codex. A "good codex" isn't just winning. When a good chunk of the units are trash and "winning" involves one or two good units in a sea of poop, it's not really fun.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

Honestly I couldn't give a damn about the whole special weapon debate, bit fed up with the whole "the sky is falling and the book is dead based on a few rumours" mentality I've seen on here and other sites. Wait until the book is out, give it a go.

Yes because that attitude worked SUPER well with the CSM codex LOL

You're right that attitude didn't work well for the CSM codex the people who got over it still have to put up with the incessant reminders and rambling of how angry they're supposed to be etc. despite by all accounts the fact its a good book in terms of balance.

"By all accounts"
I'd love to see your source on that.

His source was literally the WarCom article that got disproved on its point about the lower Marine winrate LOL

To clarify you're discrediting the objective numeric data because of their subjective opinions? Never mind you haven't touched on their podium placings.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cuda1179 wrote:

To be fair, Custodes have a win rate of 53% and podium fairly often too, but we as a group are pretty sour with our codex. A "good codex" isn't just winning. When a good chunk of the units are trash and "winning" involves one or two good units in a sea of poop, it's not really fun.

Oh for sure, but much like the sprue/options debate, it's either "not able to win enough", "not got good internal balance" or "doesn't have fun flavour fluff options". Every book will fail on one of those, hence the various flavours of complaint.

Dudeface wrote:


Oh for sure, but much like the sprue/options debate, it's either "not able to win enough", "not got good internal balance" or "doesn't have fun flavour fluff options". Every book will fail on one of those, hence the various flavours of complaint.

Listen, all EviscerationPlague wants is for every codex to be:

Perfectly internally balanced with every unit, wargear option, and rule equally viable to use despite a functionally infinite combination of army list combinations.

Perfectly externally balanced against the other 20+ game factions that are similarly written

Able to support an extensive back catalogue of metal models through to at least 1998, with all wargear and sub-faction options preserved in current rules in case someone finds an eBay bargain

Reflective of 35 years of published fluff material, even that weird article that appeared in White Dwarf one time which even the original author has forgotten about

Every datasheet can take up to four plasmaguns, which are also included on the sprue of each new kit

Is that really so much to ask for?!?

Edited for rules 1, 2 and 3.

With Platoon command in elite I'd be a little surprised if there wasn't an upgrade strat to get them to two orders a turn.

With other regiments getting two orders via other means, you've keyworded just regular regimental commands and colonels as getting that buff, rather than buffing Cadians more.

Dudeface wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/10/20/warhammer-40000-metawatch-unpacking-the-latest-balance-dataslate/ - 50% WR and podium pretty regularly https://40kstats.goonhammer.com/#ft4. Got anything to disprove it?

So it has a consistent win rate. Big deal. The 4th Ed 'Chaos' Codex was plenty powerful - it was the era of Fzorgle, after all - but that didn't make it a good book. This Guard book, just like the recent Chaos 'Dex, is full of maddening choices that invalidate so many existing units or render things nonviable in wildly inconsistent ways.

Customisation means a lot to a lot of us. Dismissing such concerns because some blasted 'meta-watch' article shows a promising percentage doesn't change that.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Not to mention CSM just won the LGT a little while back. With LVO in Corona-blues back in February, the year’s biggest tournament.

CSM are arguably the top dog to beat atm.

You mean Custodes right?

This book isn't horrible, and will likely be fun. I'd say it's a solid improvement over the last one. To be fair though, there are some valid complaints. I'm not a fan of GW's " you only have boxed options" stance.

nekooni wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 xttz wrote:
Ah yes, relentlessly calling everything "gakky" and being a mindless GW consumer are the only two possible states of being. The duality of man.

They are at this point with everything GW's Knights will mindlessly gobble and defend.

Or maybe some people are willing to overlook flaws and look at the brighter side of things, too.

I started playing Night Lords when the CSM codex came out, and while I'm not happy with the lack of support for Jump Pack characters (and a few other things), I'm still having a blast playing them in our Crusade campaign. The codex could be better, but it could also be worse. Saying it's a decent/good codex isn't "mindlessly gobble and defend" - I just don't expect "perfect", and that obviously was xttz's point as well. Right now you're just calling anyone "mindless" that doesn't angrily demand a perfect codex.

I'm sorry, I realize that you're "new" to the 8th Legion, but playing Night Lords with the 9th edition CSM codex when our HH 2.0 list is right there for the taking is like buying a brand new Ferrari and driving it in bumper to bumper stop-and-go traffic when the Autobahn is right there for the taking. You're choosing what are the Legion's worst rules ever (yes, even worse than the 4th edition trash pile) instead of the best rules they've ever had (yes, even better than 3.5. And that's quite the statement coming from an old Chaos Dog like me). I mean, there's settling for what's "current", and then there's filling up on rice cakes when a fresh gourmet meal is right there in front of you.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/10/20/warhammer-40000-metawatch-unpacking-the-latest-balance-dataslate/ - 50% WR and podium pretty regularly https://40kstats.goonhammer.com/#ft4. Got anything to disprove it?

So it has a consistent win rate. Big deal. The 4th Ed 'Chaos' Codex was plenty powerful - it was the era of Fzorgle, after all - but that didn't make it a good book. This Guard book, just like the recent Chaos 'Dex, is full of maddening choices that invalidate so many existing units or render things nonviable in wildly inconsistent ways.

Customisation means a lot to a lot of us. Dismissing such concerns because some blasted 'meta-watch' article shows a promising percentage doesn't change that.

Nooooo H.B.M.C.. It doesn't matter if you don't find the codex fun or interesting. All that matters is that someone (not you, but someone, somewhere) won random 40k tournament #46521 with it. Like, how could you not have fun with it? No matter how dull, flavorless, or unsatisfying it may seem to you, when [INSERT NAME HERE] won [INSERT RANDOM 40K TOURNAMENT] with it? I mean isn't that what gives you that warm fuzzy feeling of fun? Knowing that someone else won a game with the same codex that you're not happy with?

In regards to the Superheavy Weapons: They mostly seem to have a niche role, except the HellHammer is weak AF compared to previous profile. The Mega Bolter stayed basically the same which leaves it weak in the current meta. Otherwise okay over all, FYI the Shadowsword is at best going to get a wound through. So as effective as a Vanquisher Leman Russ... leaving that here.