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.

Tyel wrote:
The idea GW isn't going to change stuff in codexes is so contrary to the last 25 years its hard to take it serious.

I'll be amazed if "army rule+detachment rule" makes it much beyond say August 2024.

To be clear - changing stuff in codexes =/= changing datasheets. The army rules could all change. If GW strays from the 2 pager then the whole exercise of 10th is moot so I don't see that happening.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Oh cool, well if my army is "just representative for different archetypes" then I guess GSC are just "representative for different archetypes" of Conscripts, and the whole army should be able to be taken by Guard, right?

If GSC players want the named Guard units, they should play Guard. It's as simple as that.

If you want to make a GSC army as a local militia supporting a Guard regiment, or make them represent frateris militia or something, why not?

Which has what to do with GSC getting access to Kasrkin, DKoK, Cadian, Catachan, and Attilan Rough Riders?

They got stationed on a corrupted planet. Wow, that was easy.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Spoiler:

 Trickstick wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Oh cool, well if my army is "just representative for different archetypes" then I guess GSC are just "representative for different archetypes" of Conscripts, and the whole army should be able to be taken by Guard, right?

If GSC players want the named Guard units, they should play Guard. It's as simple as that.

If you want to make a GSC army as a local militia supporting a Guard regiment, or make them represent frateris militia or something, why not?

Which has what to do with GSC getting access to Kasrkin, DKoK, Cadian, Catachan, and Attilan Rough Riders?

This isn't your RP session. This is just silly. This would be like if Dire Avengers could go in Drukhari and people just shrugged it off, saying "Dire Avengers are just representative of different archetypes".

No. They're a specific unit, with a specific history, and a specific frame of reference to be made.

Blame the AM-Codex for making them that special and related to a specific regiment or world - I hope that changes in the new edition. Just call them Storm Troopers, Shock Troopers, Trench Troopers, Jungle fighters and Rough Riders. To be fair: I wouldn't like Kasrkin in a GSC army. But the rest - of course.

 Dryaktylus wrote:

Blame the AM-Codex for making them that special and related to a specific regiment or world - I hope that changes in the new edition. Just call them Storm Troopers, Shock Troopers, Trench Troopers, Jungle fighters and Rough Riders. To be fair: I wouldn't like Kasrkin in a GSC army. But the rest - of course.

I'm gonna go ahead and blame the design studio for not following their own precedent.
This is from the GSC FAQ:


I am 100% for the unique variants of Guard. We have the "Infantry Squad" to be the generic.

 GaroRobe wrote:
One of the free store models for June is a termagant. I guess that’s a good sign the new edition will be out soon

Preorder 10th, in stores 24. Unless you think there's even bigger release than 10th in 24th :>

 Dryaktylus wrote:
Blame the AM-Codex for making them that special and related to a specific regiment or world - I hope that changes in the new edition. Just call them Storm Troopers, Shock Troopers, Trench Troopers, Jungle fighters and Rough Riders. To be fair: I wouldn't like Kasrkin in a GSC army. But the rest - of course.

Booo, I want little halfling and big ol' ogryn hybrids. Abhumans are as human as anyone else!

Tyel wrote:
The idea GW isn't going to change stuff in codexes is so contrary to the last 25 years its hard to take it serious.

Touche.

However, "changing" is miles away from "improving". Especially where xenos are concerned.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Dryaktylus wrote:

Blame the AM-Codex for making them that special and related to a specific regiment or world - I hope that changes in the new edition. Just call them Storm Troopers, Shock Troopers, Trench Troopers, Jungle fighters and Rough Riders. To be fair: I wouldn't like Kasrkin in a GSC army. But the rest - of course.

I'm gonna go ahead and blame the design studio for not following their own precedent.
This is from the GSC FAQ:

Spoiler:

Add the following to this section:
‘You cannot include any of the following units in a Brood
Brothers Detachment:
• Named characters (i.e. those that can only be included once
in your army)
• Cadian Castellan
• Cadian Command Squad
• Regimental Attachés and Bodyguards
• Cadian Shock Troops
• Death Korps of Krieg
• Catachan Jungle Fighters
• Kasrkin
• Regimental Preacher
• Attilan Rough Riders
• Field Ordnance Battery

I am 100% for the unique variants of Guard. We have the "Infantry Squad" to be the generic.

In the event that the named regiment units are then disallowed, can you explain why field ordnance, preachers, attaches, bodyguards and planes are all mysteriously unable to be used?

I'll take the time to point out that the gsc range is fairly damned small and that a lot of the guard units actually fill those missing gaps. I'd even have accepted specific units included in the gsc book/index isolated from the guard one, so that they can have synergy and some rules parity with the rest of the army.

Dudeface wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Dryaktylus wrote:

Blame the AM-Codex for making them that special and related to a specific regiment or world - I hope that changes in the new edition. Just call them Storm Troopers, Shock Troopers, Trench Troopers, Jungle fighters and Rough Riders. To be fair: I wouldn't like Kasrkin in a GSC army. But the rest - of course.

I'm gonna go ahead and blame the design studio for not following their own precedent.
This is from the GSC FAQ:

Spoiler:

Add the following to this section:
‘You cannot include any of the following units in a Brood
Brothers Detachment:
• Named characters (i.e. those that can only be included once
in your army)
• Cadian Castellan
• Cadian Command Squad
• Regimental Attachés and Bodyguards
• Cadian Shock Troops
• Death Korps of Krieg
• Catachan Jungle Fighters
• Kasrkin
• Regimental Preacher
• Attilan Rough Riders
• Field Ordnance Battery

I am 100% for the unique variants of Guard. We have the "Infantry Squad" to be the generic.

In the event that the named regiment units are then disallowed, can you explain why field ordnance, preachers, attaches, bodyguards and planes are all mysteriously unable to be used?

I don't know why. Maybe make a trip to Nottingham and ask them. This is the FAQ that you can go look at, right now, that was published with the "Cadia Stands" boxed set back on January 5th, 2023.

And for the record? I don't agree with the Field Ordnance having been disallowed, nor the Preachers. Attaches and Bodyguards make a kinda/sorta sense, since the GSC would have replaced them with their own goons.

Flyers being disallowed is one of those "easy to catch everything" bits. It prevents any of the FW Flyers from being used. I'm 100% down for GSC getting the Arvus Lighter upgunned or something of that nature.

I'll take the time to point out that the gsc range is fairly damned small and that a lot of the guard units actually fill those missing gaps. I'd even have accepted specific units included in the gsc book/index isolated from the guard one, so that they can have synergy and some rules parity with the rest of the army.

Yes, and I'd have been fine with that as well--provided it doesn't cross too far into the Guard territory.

Additionally? This is why I have argued for quite some time now that we should have been given a "Planetary Militia" unit for the Guard, GSC, and CSM to 'share'.

 vipoid wrote:

Touche.

However, "changing" is miles away from "improving". Especially where xenos are concerned.

True.
I may be like a 2010 Brettonia player, but I think a big DE wave can't be that far away. But it could be an 11th edition box set sort of thing.

If this season was say Tyranids, Squat 2nd Wave and maybe some Tau late on (a bit like Eldar last year).

For Daed - yes, I dont expect the 2 page rules to last. Its going to seem very dull by the people who play every week after say 6 months. Basically what happened with Ravening Hordes. (Or ask Ork players how they felt after a year of Indexhammer).

 vipoid wrote:

Touche.

However, "changing" is miles away from "improving". Especially where xenos are concerned.

Define improving, most of the power creep in 9th was in the xenos books after all (and regardless of how busted it was, I do consider the 9th ed Tyranid codex the best Tyranid codex).

 Kanluwen wrote:

Voss wrote:
Because coming from a named planet provides immunity to genestealers?

Look at that non-pickable list. Commissars(lore actually has had them being a common vector for GSC and Chaos corruption of regiments!), Preachers(same as Commissars--they're a common vector for GSC and Chaos corruption of regiments), Ogryn and Ratlings, and Tempestus.

Unless there's an element missing("can't take any keyworded units"), it's just a big ol' "feels bad" for a Guard player when someone else can roll up with something equivalent to your army, plus the cherrypicked Best Units(tm) from your army filling any gaps their army has to begin with.

I don't think it will be quite that bad. For starters, Voice of Command is an Army Rule. That means Brood Brothers units won't have access to it since they are not in a Astra Militarum detachment. They also won't have Cult Ambush nor benefit from the detachment rule (They Came From Below in this case), making the same Brood Brothers unit worst than and equivalent Imperial Guard unit.

As for the list of units not available, they are all either closely aligned to the Imperium (Commissars, Militarum Tempestus, Preachers, Enginseers & their Servitors), are Epic Heroes, Abhumans, or are part of the Imperial Navy. These all makes sense since either they are not from the world in question, are unique, or are already a niche covered by the GSC themselves.

Tyel wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

Touche.

However, "changing" is miles away from "improving". Especially where xenos are concerned.

True.
I may be like a 2010 Brettonia player, but I think a big DE wave can't be that far away. But it could be an 11th edition box set sort of thing.

If this season was say Tyranids, Squat 2nd Wave and maybe some Tau late on (a bit like Eldar last year).

For Daed - yes, I dont expect the 2 page rules to last. Its going to seem very dull by the people who play every week after say 6 months. Basically what happened with Ravening Hordes. (Or ask Ork players how they felt after a year of Indexhammer).

I agree with Daed on this one. It actually sounds like they started with a design requirements and limitations to apply to everyone, instead of it being all over the place like 9th. I could see them adding more detachments in the future, but that still works with the one in and out system.

I think they way they are going to keep it fresh are the fact that Datasheets will have much more defined roles and unique abilities, coupled with the amount of detachments to try out new playstyles and lists.

If they add any army-wide layered rules the entire thing collapses, I just don't see it happening right now. .

Cadians and Kriegers aren't immune to Genestealer corruption. LOL!

I’ve no doubt that the the first year or so of codexes will be fairly evenly balanced with each other and based on the same design principles / power levels.

Then we hit the one year mark.

GW has a decent track record of keeping things “in line” design wise after they release a new edition. 7th edition, probably the worst edition of 40k ever, had codex releases which were pretty even in terms of balance.

Until about 1 year in when the design changes.

Think of the 7th edition Necron codex and its Decurion, something which all codexes after got and all codexes before were never given a version of. 40k is basically at its best right after a hard reset with indexes / book army lists that were all designed about the same time.

Honestly? I’d say the real test will be the eldar codex. There hasnt been a single edition where the eldar codex didn’t break the current game and dumpster everything that came before it. If they can leap that hurdle? They can probably do anything.

I'm just wondering when we'll get our first paradigm shift. The first break from the 2 pages per army standard.

I can easily see it being Grey Knights and/or Thousand Sons, when they introduce a page of psychic powers available to everyone, almost like a generic faction-wide "Enhancement" section. 6 powers, which can be given to characters, but no duplicates.

If we're lucky they'll be something you pay points for.

They'll stick to the two page thing, for sure.

But over the course of the edition, they'll produce 10-15 or more different per army between codices, campaign books, White Dwarf, etc. And the cool thing about that is that detachments that don't have unit restrictions allow you to choose from any of those detachment WITHOUT altering your army list.

I have lamented the loss of subfaction identities from the 2nd class factions, but I've got to admit that giving a player the option of altering everything about how an army feels and plays by making a single choice... It's actually kinda cool.

I think it might maintain people's interest in their armies rather than lead to boredom. Get bored? Change detachment. Same models, but completely new set of enhancements (WL traits and Relics) strats, and a detachment rule. It'll feel like a whole new army without the purchase of a single model.

There will be some detachments that do have model restrictions... But their might be the potential for detachments to include cross-faction composition. I think of the Torchbearer or Army of Faith rules from 9th, and it occurs to me that a two page detachment spread would be a perfectly serviceable way to represent them.

Tomorrow's preview is the one I've been most excited about. I actually got a copy of Ashes of Faith and I already own most of the Inquisitors. I've got models from all three Chambers Militant on deck. The Imperial Agents Faction Focus will answer a lot of questions.

I just hope that the detachment side of things has real differences between them, as in they really alter what counts as Battleline and even restrict units in some cases. Otherwise they're just the same army with slightly altered special rules, a few strats, and a massively reduced pool of optional WL traits and relics.

My Ashes of Faith box is sitting at a news agency awaiting collection. I might be able to pick it up tomorrow.

Yeah, that's true too- I have to remember how much people disliked some of the CSM Subfaction sets of rules, and they're pretty much two page detachment spreads.

A lot hinges on detachment design. It could go either way.

 alextroy wrote:
As for the list of units not available, they are all either closely aligned to the Imperium (Commissars, Militarum Tempestus, Preachers, Enginseers & their Servitors), are Epic Heroes, Abhumans, or are part of the Imperial Navy. These all makes sense since either they are not from the world in question, are unique, or are already a niche covered by the GSC themselves.

I think it's even simpler than that. The list of banned units neatly overlaps with the list of units the 9th edition codex allows you to take in a storm trooper detachment, a separate pseudo-army with its own WLTs, datasheets at the back of the book in a separate section, etc. I suspect that once GW gets beyond the index era for guard and we start seeing multiple detachments those units will be split off further and handled separately, maybe allowing guard lists to take auxilia units with the 250/500/750 point limit like brood brothers. If that happens the brood brothers restriction makes perfect sense: you can take "normal" guard units other than unique characters, you can't take units from the support sub-faction that even guard players can't take without restrictions.

I certainly think it makes more sense than any kind of argument that named regiment units are somehow immune to corruption, or that a squad using a named regiment unit's rules can't be the MyPlanet Climate Nouns using the most appropriate rules for their concept and *must* be a unit of Cadians lore-wise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PenitentJake wrote:
I think it might maintain people's interest in their armies rather than lead to boredom. Get bored? Change detachment. Same models, but completely new set of enhancements (WL traits and Relics) strats, and a detachment rule. It'll feel like a whole new army without the purchase of a single model.

God I hope not. All the layers of special rules are the least interesting thing about army building. The focus should be on building cool new models and army concepts, not layering on some different off-table modifiers to their dice math. "I bought some new tanks and now I'm playing an armored regiment instead of an infantry gunline" is a much better way to have a new army than "I re-roll 1s to hit instead of 1s to wound". Plus, minimizing the impact of detachments helps mitigate the problem of the tournament optimization mindset, where any given set of units has exactly one obvious best set of detachment bonuses and that's the one you see 99% of the time.

So the Leviathan rules are out, and this time quality PDF (Core Rules only!) got leaked. Question for mods - is it ok to post the source for the download?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I just hope that the detachment side of things has real differences between them, as in they really alter what counts as Battleline and even restrict units in some cases. Otherwise they're just the same army with slightly altered special rules, a few strats, and a massively reduced pool of optional WL traits and relics.

My Ashes of Faith box is sitting at a news agency awaiting collection. I might be able to pick it up tomorrow.

I hope the extra detachments in the Codex work that way too. If there aren't enough restrictions to each of them, it'll just be a case of building an army using the best units then picking the best detachment for them, whereas it should be the case that you pick the detachment to represent your army style first, then build into that. GW don't have a great track record with this kind of thing.

I wonder if something similar to the way the LotR game has "legendary legions" could work, essentially its your normal army list for a faction, with a few requirements and restrictions, then a bonus or two, and the ability to fiddle with point values (usually free equipment for a character or two, or a free upgrade), balanced by a change in what is available (e.g. say here an armoured formation not being permitted much/anything thats not mechanised say)

allows different forces, in a way thats very easily documented in a page or two, an easy way to integrate new, minor but interesting characters etc

So... do we know yet if units will have variable sizes?

The Dark Eldar preview made it sound as if Kabalites start at 10 models. Do you think they'd do that with other armies, like Marines? Or even set increments (an Ork Boyz unit has 1 Nob and 9 Boyz, it may add an additional 10 Boyz for X points)?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So... do we know yet if units will have variable sizes?

The Dark Eldar preview made it sound as if Kabalites start at 10 models. Do you think they'd do that with other armies, like Marines? Or even set increments (an Ork Boyz unit has 1 Nob and 9 Boyz, it may add an additional 10 Boyz for X points)?

I hope they are fixed increments, or there are going to be a lot of 9/14/19 size squads to avoid blast brackets. The heavy weapons in Guard squads will be interesting in that regard too, unless they have some extra "counts as 2 models for blast" rule, which I think is possible.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So... do we know yet if units will have variable sizes?

The Dark Eldar preview made it sound as if Kabalites start at 10 models. Do you think they'd do that with other armies, like Marines? Or even set increments (an Ork Boyz unit has 1 Nob and 9 Boyz, it may add an additional 10 Boyz for X points)?

The backside of the Chaos Legionaries datasheet was shown and states a unit composition of 1 aspiring champion and 4-9 legionaries. I don't think we've seen any other info on squad composition.

Well Cadians were described as 10 or 20 in their focus, but Guard are usually more strict on this sort of thing.

 Shadow Walker wrote:
So the Leviathan rules are out, and this time quality PDF got leaked. Question for mods - is it ok to post the source for the download?

All I can find is deleted posts... :(

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 Shadow Walker wrote:
So the Leviathan rules are out, and this time quality PDF got leaked. Question for mods - is it ok to post the source for the download?

All I can find is deleted posts... :(

As the mods are silent = I have no idea if they agree or not, I will not post openly the source but you can PM me
IMPORTANT - those are Core Rules only, 61 pages = no Crusade, Combat Patrol etc.

 Trickstick wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So... do we know yet if units will have variable sizes?

The Dark Eldar preview made it sound as if Kabalites start at 10 models. Do you think they'd do that with other armies, like Marines? Or even set increments (an Ork Boyz unit has 1 Nob and 9 Boyz, it may add an additional 10 Boyz for X points)?

I hope they are fixed increments, or there are going to be a lot of 9/14/19 size squads to avoid blast brackets. The heavy weapons in Guard squads will be interesting in that regard too, unless they have some extra "counts as 2 models for blast" rule, which I think is possible.

Oh man, I hope not every unit is like that! That makes list building so boring as you can't fit in a few extra dudes here and there, or shave off a few to reach the points limit. That's one of the only things I dislike about AoS- kinda boring list building and lack of unit upgrades and options.