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.

Dark angels are the least Codex compliant chapter and have been since 3rd edition...

Wow... just, wow.

I am at a loss right now. I need to take some time to unpack and process this stupidity.

tneva82 wrote:
It saves cp from those 3+ compulsory fa/elite/hs det's.

Gw can't decide do they want more or less cp

I guess I wonder who was actually taking anything other than a battalion unless it was DE or DA? It was so incredibly rare to see anything of the sort after the CP changes. This just removes the need to tap into that filler.

It simplifies it. Isn't that what people wanted?

Disciples of Belakor was taking SHA, Patrol, and Vanguard, for as much as DoB matters for anything.

Lammia wrote:
Dark angels are the least Codex compliant chapter and have been since 3rd edition...

I mean, there's the Ravenwing but other than that… ??

 Rihgu wrote:
Disciples of Belakor was taking SHA, Patrol, and Vanguard, for as much as DoB matters for anything.

Yea I'd consider that an edge case caused by a weird release that they tried to force a way to make it work. This sounds like it could make it easier with the allies thing, but we'll have to see the text to judge.

Dark Angels

Chapter badge of the Dark Angels

The Dark Angels make use of very different terminology when referring to the Chapter's officers as compared to that commonly used by other Space Marine Chapters.

This is because the Dark Angels have continued to draw upon the ancient military traditions of The Order of lost Caliban in organising the Chapter. In general, this terminology is also replicated in most, but not all, of the Unforgiven Successor Chapters of the Ist Legion.

https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Codex_Astartes#Non-Codex-Compliant_Chapters

 Eldarsif wrote:

Dark Angels

Chapter badge of the Dark Angels

The Dark Angels make use of very different terminology when referring to the Chapter's officers as compared to that commonly used by other Space Marine Chapters.

This is because the Dark Angels have continued to draw upon the ancient military traditions of The Order of lost Caliban in organising the Chapter. In general, this terminology is also replicated in most, but not all, of the Unforgiven Successor Chapters of the Ist Legion.

https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Codex_Astartes#Non-Codex-Compliant_Chapters

Ok, if you consider "they call some of the guys something a bit different, but their roles are largely analogous" wildly divergent from standard Codex organisation, then sure.

This is an intreasting one. My initial feelings on this are pretty mixed. I like that it opens a ton of flexibility in building, but it takes away any sort of penalty for just bringing the best units.

That being said, this is only a small slice, we don't have near anywhere all the information. There could be more benefits/downisdes in other sections. We are also getting the balance slate and points adjustments at the same time.


Will need to get the full picture of not only this book, but the rest of the drop and some time to digest it. Nephilim was generally thought about pretty poorly upon release, but ended up being probably the best matched play experience of 9th, so I'm cautiously optimistic about this.

Lammia wrote:
Dark angels are the least Codex compliant chapter and have been since 3rd edition...

Their dilfernce is 1st is all dw and bike company is 2nd instead of 6. They are actually quite compliciant if you care about fluff and not powergaming every free bonus rule.

It might just be a taste of where 10th is going to go - but to me its shouting "big rules reset incoming so have fun with your toys however you like and don't cry to us about balance cos we ain't coming back."

I'd be... cautious, on running to the shops to get your weird-skew list that may well not make it six months.

Lammia wrote:
Dark angels are the least Codex compliant chapter and have been since 3rd edition...

Er, Space Wolves would like a word.

Could you please keep the random ramblings about Chapters compliance to Codex Astartes out of this thread?

 Eldarsif wrote:
I think GW just realized the old FOC and detachment system was just not fitting with the way the game is now.

Personally excited to test this out, especially with elite Characters getting their own slot.

And if you play Death Guard you get up to 5 "free" elite characters !

Tyel wrote:
It might just be a taste of where 10th is going to go - but to me its shouting "big rules reset incoming so have fun with your toys however you like and don't cry to us about balance cos we ain't coming back."

I'd be... cautious, on running to the shops to get your weird-skew list that may well not make it six months.

I get that this has some historical precedent, however, seasons and tournament packs really don't follow that logic. It seems fairly likely that GW is going to continue to roll into the next season in June. Whether or not things get up-ended by a new edition becomes less likely the more that GW finds stability in this sort of rotation.

Anyway - nothing wrong with a little caution for the next 4 to 6 months.

I think we will probably see weird things that have to get hammered out. Many Thousand Sons would love ditching Rubrics for a whole other block of Scarabs. Normally the obsec might discourage dumping troops, but with Scarabs as obsec the downside is pretty small ( other than casting a bunch more spells with Rubrics ).

I am also interested to see how super heavies interact within that detachment. Stompas might be viable.

But as you say...it could all be gone in an instant.

Normally the obsec might discourage dumping troops, (...)

Well, I don't think it is the case. Apart from very powerful troops like tyranid Warriors, people tend to take the bare minimum of troops to fill the mandatory slots of Batallions and Patrols.
This new force organization chart will render troops obsolete, if only as a mandatory choice, or completely. Why bother taking weak infantry with objective secured ability, if you can max on heavy hitters that will wipe out the troops out of objectives ? Troops will become only list fillers that competitors will spend their spare points on. The fluff will go down the toilet with Arks of Omen.

 Arbitrator wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
"How do we make the FOC even more pointless?"
"Just make it huge, free, and give you tons of slots, and you can pick what your compulsories are."
"That works. Or doesn't. Whatever."
"Three hour lunch?"
"Three hour lunch!"

Sells out on day 1.

I know (or just choose to believe) it was different people that said this, but we had a lot of "I'm not buying this" at the start of Nephilim then a lot of "It's sold out and I need it" recently.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 parakuribo wrote:

All units must be from the same faction[and that faction cannot be Imperium, Chaos, Aeldari, or Tyranid].

This Detachment is incredibly flexible and will work for all factions, though there will be a couple of specific additional rules to it to allow for unusual armies like Drukhari and DarkAngels forces, that would previously have usually been made of multiple smaller detachments.

With this in mind, and looking at some of the other rules in the preview, I have one serious question:
????????

You make a Space Marine Ark of Omen Detachment. That also happens to be an Imperium Detachment because all Space Marines also have the Imperium keyword. You then take the allied detachment.

EightFoldPath wrote:

You make a Space Marine Ark of Omen Detachment. That also happens to be an Imperium Detachment because all Space Marines also have the Imperium keyword. You then take the allied detachment.

The salient point is that the Imperium keyword can't be the only thing all your units share, so it prevents all-imperial soup lists.

For me at least, I'm excited for this detachment solely because I can field my Inquisition without being at an immediate disadvantage by paying 3cp for a vanguard detachment. Otherwise I'm meh.

I'm a bit confused. The three elite slots for characters is nice on the surface, but haven't pretty much all elite characters been given a slot-exemption if certain (lore-based) conditions are met? So now I can take three Datasmiths without Kestelans, or three Commissars without Command Squads, and suffer no real ill effects? I don't know all the factions that well, but I can only think of a handful of situations this helps with (Tau marksmen, some of the Ork characters, maybe some Spez Marns?). Seems that every elite character should have just been written with a lore/balance based exemption to begin with so it's not a free-for-all.

 ProfSrlojohn wrote:
For me at least, I'm excited for this detachment solely because I can field my Inquisition without being at an immediate disadvantage by paying 3cp for a vanguard detachment. Otherwise I'm meh.

I will say that's a nice change, as we've been doing that anyway in our group as long as you keep it to roughly 25% of your points.

KillerAngel wrote:
I'm a bit confused. The three elite slots for characters is nice on the surface, but haven't pretty much all elite characters been given a slot-exemption if certain (lore-based) conditions are met? So now I can take three Datasmiths without Kestelans, or three Commissars without Command Squads, and suffer no real ill effects? I don't know all the factions that well, but I can only think of a handful of situations this helps with (Tau marksmen, some of the Ork characters, maybe some Spez Marns?). Seems that every elite character should have just been written with a lore/balance based exemption to begin with so it's not a free-for-all.

DeathGuard's Elite Characters don't get that "slot exemption".

This will help DeathGuard lists, as it would be easier to maximize Deathshrouds and Blightlords.

This seems so random and a complete 180 from how things were going previously, really seems like they are just saying "feth it, 10th edition is out soon lol"

I don't think fluff ever played a role with competitive list construction.
I don't really mind this flexible super-detachment, I can finally take a superheavy e.g. a Spartan or Baneblade without losing all army special rules.

Okay, so what's the worst/most powerful thing you reckon you can do with this FOC? Assuming the rule of 3 and obsec are still a thing in this tourney pack. Though they very well could be for all I know.

They aren't going to remove the rule of 3. It's been the greatest balancing tool GW ever ran into since allowing more than 3 of any specific slot.

Obsec is also built into codexes. It's not going anywhere either.

 ph34r wrote:
This seems so random and a complete 180 from how things were going previously, really seems like they are just saying "feth it, 10th edition is out soon lol"

Gw flipflopping around is as usual.

First it's modifiers, then rerolls, then modifiers, rr's...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hulksmash wrote:
They aren't going to remove the rule of 3. It's been the greatest balancing tool GW ever ran into since allowing more than 3 of any specific slot.

Obsec is also built into codexes. It's not going anywhere either.

Band aid to hide problem rather. Didn't fix problem.

cody.d. wrote:
Okay, so what's the worst/most powerful thing you reckon you can do with this FOC? Assuming the rule of 3 and obsec are still a thing in this tourney pack. Though they very well could be for all I know.

We will lend to getting rid of weak troops and will take only the best killy / resilient / (both) from our codex, and at no cost.

For Astra Militarum, spam the Leman Russes and sentinels, with the "armoured superiority" regiment trait, to count them as 5 or 3 models respectively, on objectives. Then add some Bullgryns and/or rough riders for melee punch. Take 3 commissars (elite characters new slot) to give the order "count as objective secured" on sentinels, bullgryns or cavalry when needed. No need for infantry squads.

Does this looks as a fluffy Imperial Guard army ? No. But it will work.

 Ravajaxe wrote:

cody.d. wrote:
Okay, so what's the worst/most powerful thing you reckon you can do with this FOC? Assuming the rule of 3 and obsec are still a thing in this tourney pack. Though they very well could be for all I know.

We will lend to getting rid of weak troops and will take only the best killy / resilient / (both) from our codex, and at no cost.

For Astra Militarum, spam the Leman Russes and sentinels, with the "armoured superiority" regiment trait, to count them as 5 or 3 models respectively, on objectives. Then add some Bullgryns and/or rough riders for melee punch. Take 3 commissars (elite characters new slot) to give the order "count as objective secured" on sentinels, bullgryns or cavalry when needed. No need for infantry squads.

Does this looks as a fluffy Imperial Guard army ? No. But it will work.

Again, that was possible before though, maybe at a CP hit, but that composition is nothing new.

Dudeface wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:

cody.d. wrote:
Okay, so what's the worst/most powerful thing you reckon you can do with this FOC? Assuming the rule of 3 and obsec are still a thing in this tourney pack. Though they very well could be for all I know.

We will lend to getting rid of weak troops and will take only the best killy / resilient / (both) from our codex, and at no cost.

For Astra Militarum, spam the Leman Russes and sentinels, with the "armoured superiority" regiment trait, to count them as 5 or 3 models respectively, on objectives. Then add some Bullgryns and/or rough riders for melee punch. Take 3 commissars (elite characters new slot) to give the order "count as objective secured" on sentinels, bullgryns or cavalry when needed. No need for infantry squads.

Does this looks as a fluffy Imperial Guard army ? No. But it will work.

Again, that was possible before though, maybe at a CP hit, but that composition is nothing new.

You needed at least 3 troops though, and a plan to make something out of them. which is not the case anymore.

Dudeface wrote:
Again, that was possible before though, maybe at a CP hit, but that composition is nothing new.

The improvement over taking a spearhead other than the CP savings is the extra other slots. A Spearhead was 1~2 HQ, 0~2 Elite, 0~2 Fast Attack. This new detachment is 1~4 HQ, 0~3 Elite, 0~3 Elite characters, 0~3 Fast Attack.

So 9 x LRBT as base, but now you can take 3 TCs instead of just 2 or take 3 units of Sentinels instead of just 2.