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.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I wonder if chaos and xenos will eventually get similar "unaligned" comedies.

Chaos can get Codex: The Lost and the Damned and put the cultists and traitor guard type units there, chaos beastmen, along with some of the more esoteric stuff. The lost and the damned army list from 3rd Ed was great, was such a fun army to play, mixing guard and space marines with daemons and the like.

Xenos Mercs could give us stuff like Zoats, the random aliens from the Drukhari books, etc. And the various random xenos stuff that's popped up over the years.

Come to think of it, you think Legion of the Damned might eventually make it's way back to the table via Imperial Agents?

Funny thing is, chaos and imperium often do direct opposites in how the factions are put together. Right now they put a load of weird stuff like beastmen, mutant cults and traitor guard in the recent chaos marine codex, while imperium do many separate factions. Lojalist marines had many separate codex for years, while chaos marines had all the big legions in the one book (well, actually there was no special rules to represent legions). But just as lojalist marines started to get supplement instead of codex for the crazier marines, chaos started to get their marines as stand-alone factions with uniqe rules and models.

So, if imperium get their freaks in a separate codex, or as allies, Chaos will probably get theirs tied to the marine codex for now.

 LunarSol wrote:
Codex is in the wild and its bad. Like, absolutely, hilariously bad. Most of this stuff has been nerfed beyond what its already not being taken for and the detachments are all pretty underwhelming.

DW Vets might have come out the best, if just because the hammer squads are pretty untouched and can ride in Rhinos. Ordo Xenos is just a terrible version of Blackspear though and really should not see play. Points will decide a lot of this, with stuff like the GK Terminators being far more expensive than their in faction counterparts for less. I have zero idea if anything here will see play.

Say it ain't so, the allies based almost-narrative faction that's a nightmare to balance isn't competitive.

Dudeface wrote:

Say it ain't so, the allies based almost-narrative faction that's a nightmare to balance isn't competitive.

I mean, there's degrees of quality here. They truly outdid themselves on this one.

 LunarSol wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Say it ain't so, the allies based almost-narrative faction that's a nightmare to balance isn't competitive.

I mean, there's degrees of quality here. They truly outdid themselves on this one.

Will it be fun to play an Agents army?
That's the big question. It's okay if they're not super powerful, if they're FUN.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Say it ain't so, the allies based almost-narrative faction that's a nightmare to balance isn't competitive.

I mean, there's degrees of quality here. They truly outdid themselves on this one.

Will it be fun to play an Agents army?
That's the big question. It's okay if they're not super powerful, if they're FUN.

Nobody has commented on that and is likely too subjective. For a lot of people "good" and "fun" are both synonymous and fluid terms.

Nevertheless, as a stand alone army they have a weird ass range full of gaps meaning they can't field a force capable of handling a chunk of the game, they're based around (initially) being spice for other armies rather than fielded alone. This all still stands true and I can't see why anyone would be expecting to rip up competitive games within those confines.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Say it ain't so, the allies based almost-narrative faction that's a nightmare to balance isn't competitive.

I mean, there's degrees of quality here. They truly outdid themselves on this one.

Will it be fun to play an Agents army?
That's the big question. It's okay if they're not super powerful, if they're FUN.

See also: Soulforged Warpack and Dread Mob. Detachments built around blowing yourself up for power are fun, but probably not competitive.

I think it will be fine if you build an opfor that plays into it thematically. That’s all I’m looking for, I don’t need competitive.

Edited since reading the leaked codex.

I have never had issues with GW codexes to this degree before. This is not only a steaming pile of hot garbage, but they outright LIED to us.

"You will absolutely be able to continue playing as a PURE DW army!" This is plainly a lie, not only can you not realistically play a full 2000 army with nothing but vet squads and the jet, you also CAN NOT synergize them into another "just paint them black" marine army, since these elite DW Adeptus Astartes, don't have the Adeptus Astartes keyword....

I don't need "competitive", but ZERO weapons bigger than a Infernus Bolter is plainly not even playable against any other army that brings even a smattering of armor.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Say it ain't so, the allies based almost-narrative faction that's a nightmare to balance isn't competitive.

I mean, there's degrees of quality here. They truly outdid themselves on this one.

Will it be fun to play an Agents army?
That's the big question. It's okay if they're not super powerful, if they're FUN.

Nothing in this screams fun to me. A lot of the units got bits hacked off them from what they have now and none of the detachments have anything that gets my attention. I do really like they Agents can do the Assassin switcheroo that was so cool before, but as an army its just a bunch of expensive guardmen without tanks. Nothing super cool or interesting, though I think the tools are here to make something cool using another army as the baseline. Being able to say, add KTs and GKs to Sisters is a solid plan. Some of that depends on the final costs of things though. Some of this stuff is overcosted by considerable amounts in the book (which doesn't mean anything of course, it just doesn't help)

Muggzy wrote:
If they give us nothing but Vets for battle line, AND broaden what equipment vets can take, more like the 9th(?) ed where they can basically take ANYTHING from the weapons list (I know that's not likely but somehow giving vets access to a couple heavy weapons would work) then I can see it being fun.

Following the GW pattern, look what’s in the box and that’s what you’ll have access to. Frag cannon, infernus bolter, combi, hammer, power weapons, bolters. Don’t think there’s much else.

 bullyboy wrote:

Muggzy wrote:
If they give us nothing but Vets for battle line, AND broaden what equipment vets can take, more like the 9th(?) ed where they can basically take ANYTHING from the weapons list (I know that's not likely but somehow giving vets access to a couple heavy weapons would work) then I can see it being fun.

Following the GW pattern, look what’s in the box and that’s what you’ll have access to. Frag cannon, infernus bolter, combi, hammer, power weapons, bolters. Don’t think there’s much else.

Storm shields and shotguns, too.

I'm already planning to add a Watch Master and 10 Veterans to my collection: 4 with power weapons and shield, 4 with hammers, one Blackshield with twin power weapons, and the sergeant gets a xenophase blade.

As a narrative player I'm looking forward to using inquisition. Power and being competitive means nothing to me. I'm positive I'll have fun when th them. Using Arbites alongside SOB should be interesting, as usual not everyone would be happy. They could give away free rules and models and you'd still get complaints.

Full contents list for the Boarding Actions are now up on the official site (NZ edition) - interestingly looks like there might be a combined Gene3stealer Cult/Tyranid boarding patrol detachment, as both the cults and Tyranids are listed with detachments alongside the 'Great Devourer' and it's infestation swarm.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

Muggzy wrote:
If they give us nothing but Vets for battle line, AND broaden what equipment vets can take, more like the 9th(?) ed where they can basically take ANYTHING from the weapons list (I know that's not likely but somehow giving vets access to a couple heavy weapons would work) then I can see it being fun.

Following the GW pattern, look what’s in the box and that’s what you’ll have access to. Frag cannon, infernus bolter, combi, hammer, power weapons, bolters. Don’t think there’s much else.

Storm shields and shotguns, too.

I'm already planning to add a Watch Master and 10 Veterans to my collection: 4 with power weapons and shield, 4 with hammers, one Blackshield with twin power weapons, and the sergeant gets a xenophase blade.

I think the DW sheet is about perfect overall. I just wish SIA was built in rather than a strat in an extremely limited detachment. As is, the unit is really only worthwhile as a melee loadout for the most part.

I have so many firstborn deathwatch vets, I should be able to make anything work. Vanvets with heavy thunderhammers will just ignore the jump packs.
Looking forward to seeing how it all plays out (both Hereticus and Xenos/deathwatch)

 LunarSol wrote:
Codex is in the wild and its bad. Like, absolutely, hilariously bad. Most of this stuff has been nerfed beyond what its already not being taken for and the detachments are all pretty underwhelming.

You expected anything else from Kelly & Cruddace clown duo? They did the exact same thing in 7th as currently in 10th, nerfed DW five times in a row culminating in utterly garbage, worst 'Agents' codex ever - though it looks like it will now be second place next to new Agents book

DW Vets might have come out the best, if just because the hammer squads are pretty untouched and can ride in Rhinos

Yeeeah, because melee squads is precisely why people play DW. SIA? Smart tactics? Special Ops feel? Primaris units? What's that?

Also I'd bet good money said clown wunderteam above will further nerf DW in the next 2-3 errata/FAQ files. They apparently have quota to meet and are just getting started

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Personally I was hoping that the Arbites would get a plastic Throne of Judgement HQ model and Karamzov would then be an extra-fancy option with his triple-melta cannon (regular Judges just get a hurricane shotgun or something.

That would kinda go against the fluff - the Karamazov's ToJ was supposed to be a huge deal, seat converted from new dreadnought chassis, a favour granted to a very few people in the Imprerium. Yes, the same dreadnought chassis that according to grimdumb fluff Imperium forgot how to produce, ditto with new terminator suits, yet despite massive losses of both each year space marine chapters never seem to run out of either. Go figure. So maybe part of the 'nonexistent' production could be redirected to Arbites, sure

And then there is the fact 40K team for some reason rabidly hates making 2 in 1 models, unlike AoS counterparts. The flying Sister pulpit, IH Gravis techmarine, new SoB canoness, that ork boss from books, each could be easily 'genericized' by addition of handful of parts, much like AoS kits do, greatly increasing sales - but somehow, the concept is too difficult for 40K team. Or the other way around, why not add ultramarine parts to the sprue of new assault/gravis captains to allow making 1st and 8th company named characters - AoS would certainly do so, sadly 40K team is more interested in limiting and removing stuff wherewer they can, and DW is by far biggest victim of this...

Dudeface wrote:
Nevertheless, as a stand alone army they have a weird ass range full of gaps meaning they can't field a force capable of handling a chunk of the game, they're based around (initially) being spice for other armies rather than fielded alone. This all still stands true and I can't see why anyone would be expecting to rip up competitive games within those confines.

Wrong. This maybe is 'true' from 7th ed onwards, the garbage writing of K&C. In 5th edition, Inquisition was fun, flexible, rich in options and builds, with tons of esoteric wargear and callbacks to early 40K and RT fluff. And that was just side show to GK, yet was vastly better written than trash that was 7th/10th edition Agents books, and the army could easily stand alone if you wanted it too! Alas, that was when GW had competent head rules writer. Then there is 3rd edition Inquisition, that was pale shadow of what would come in 5th, yet was still doable on its own and was far more fun/flexible than served now - it takes some special talent to do worse in one book than 3rd edition did in each of three pamphlets (two really, because Xenos book was never released) working with small fraction of the minis current range has.

People 'expected' (or rather, I'd say 'hoped') GW writers to do better, because they once did better. Alas, that was when competence/talent, rather than office politics and longevity in company, was valued...

Elysian drop-troops on August 16th!!!

 Scottywan82 wrote:
Elysian drop-troops on August 16th!!!

So I was right! Awesome news!

The arm computer they deliberatley show is Tempestus gear.

So... finally Elysian Drop Troop Tauros in plastic... pretty, pretty please?

Watching it again, I really want to see what that massive pair of cannons are for.

the rumor was scions, not elysians, but i can't really tell the difference from these screencaps. is it more obvious to anyone else?

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
the rumor was scions, not elysians, but i can't really tell the difference from these screencaps. is it more obvious to anyone else?

Looks similar with the pic here

Scions for kill team is more or less confirmed, and the War com article is called transmission from Chalnath (where the kill team campaign is).

Also, you clearly see the wrist computer that all scions have.

And the short video here https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/08/10/critical-transmission-incoming-from-the-chalnath-expanse/

with everything else going on, she's flying under the radar, but the box for Aveline that they have on the website is oddly non-standard with recent GW packaging. the "1 citadel miniature" at the bottom in particular stands out

 Irbis wrote:

Wrong. This maybe is 'true' from 7th ed onwards, the garbage writing of K&C. In 5th edition, Inquisition was fun, flexible, rich in options and builds, with tons of esoteric wargear and callbacks to early 40K and RT fluff. And that was just side show to GK, yet was vastly better written than trash that was 7th/10th edition Agents books, and the army could easily stand alone if you wanted it too! Alas, that was when GW had competent head rules writer. Then there is 3rd edition Inquisition, that was pale shadow of what would come in 5th, yet was still doable on its own and was far more fun/flexible than served now - it takes some special talent to do worse in one book than 3rd edition did in each of three pamphlets (two really, because Xenos book was never released) working with small fraction of the minis current range has.

People 'expected' (or rather, I'd say 'hoped') GW writers to do better, because they once did better. Alas, that was when competence/talent, rather than office politics and longevity in company, was valued...

I also hoped for a more genuine comment in response. It was very clear when you look at the 10th ed index for imperial agents this was coming, I aren't sure how you look at codex: allies and hoped it would be like the 5th ed grey Knight book at all. I prefer the daemonhunters book to 5th ed grey knights personally, but again - this is not a daemonhunters or grey knights codex. Beyond providing fair rules for the inclusion of inqusitorial assets in grey knights (which this does), it was never going to turn the edition trends on it's head and give a 2 page wargear list for a generic inquisitor which doesn't even have a plastic model.

So no, I'm not wrong, in the context of this codex release the writing was very much on the wall. Your inability to parse it from 5+ editions ago isn't my error.

 Scottywan82 wrote:
Watching it again, I really want to see what that massive pair of cannons are for.

The marketing copy articles beforehand mentioned some sort of superweapon, so perhaps it's that?

 RaptorusRex wrote:

 Scottywan82 wrote:
Watching it again, I really want to see what that massive pair of cannons are for.

The marketing copy articles beforehand mentioned some sort of superweapon, so perhaps it's that?

Yeah, it is what that Ork kommando nob saw.

Dudeface wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

Wrong. This maybe is 'true' from 7th ed onwards, the garbage writing of K&C. In 5th edition, Inquisition was fun, flexible, rich in options and builds, with tons of esoteric wargear and callbacks to early 40K and RT fluff. And that was just side show to GK, yet was vastly better written than trash that was 7th/10th edition Agents books, and the army could easily stand alone if you wanted it too! Alas, that was when GW had competent head rules writer. Then there is 3rd edition Inquisition, that was pale shadow of what would come in 5th, yet was still doable on its own and was far more fun/flexible than served now - it takes some special talent to do worse in one book than 3rd edition did in each of three pamphlets (two really, because Xenos book was never released) working with small fraction of the minis current range has.

People 'expected' (or rather, I'd say 'hoped') GW writers to do better, because they once did better. Alas, that was when competence/talent, rather than office politics and longevity in company, was valued...

I also hoped for a more genuine comment in response. It was very clear when you look at the 10th ed index for imperial agents this was coming, I aren't sure how you look at codex: allies and hoped it would be like the 5th ed grey Knight book at all. I prefer the daemonhunters book to 5th ed grey knights personally, but again - this is not a daemonhunters or grey knights codex. Beyond providing fair rules for the inclusion of inqusitorial assets in grey knights (which this does), it was never going to turn the edition trends on it's head and give a 2 page wargear list for a generic inquisitor which doesn't even have a plastic model.

So no, I'm not wrong, in the context of this codex release the writing was very much on the wall. Your inability to parse it from 5+ editions ago isn't my error.

yeah i'm not sure where all the weird expectations around this book came from. looking at the other codexes release around it, it's pretty much exactly what i expected it to be, give or take some primaris kill teams. i was hoping we might get a multi-part plastic inquisitor, but GW's current way of handling things is well established by this point, so expecting them to completely upend it out of nowhere is just coping (and before anyone says anything: no, GW doesn't usually act erratically. they just don't do what you want, and you label that as stupid or erratic)