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.

Andykp wrote:
Yet again, that is the communities problem, not GWs. The rules are clear. People, making house rules isn’t the companies fault. So GW releasing a new model straight to legends is fine, your mates won’t let you use it, it’s your mates are the problem.

It's also your problem for letting your mates dictate wich units you can use.
Afterall, do they allow YOU veto power over units in their armies? What would their response be if you told them they couldn't play, say, a Defiler?

The pitiful part is when it's a unit they had happily played against countless times before.
Fri night it was all fine & good. Sat (or a few days later - EX: Chaos Lord with Jump Pack) when the new codex landed & the unit suddenly became Legends, with the exact same rules & pts? BAD! CANNOT BE PLAYED!

And then it gets really stupid.
Did you know that there's a unit that's both Legends & Not Legends simultaneously, right now?
Deathwatch Terminators.
In the DW list? 100% good to go, nobody will bat an eye if you field it. Take it to every tourney you can sign up for....
In the Agents of the Imperium list? You'll find this unit under Legends.
And you can make the exact same list - same pts, same models, same unit rules, using either DW or IA. The only difference is the name on the top of the page & the detachment rules.
So what's the difference? Why are the DW termies OK to use as DW, but wouldn't be as agents?

ccs wrote:

And you can make the exact same list - same pts, same models, same unit rules, using either DW or IA. The only difference is the name on the top of the page & the detachment rules.
So what's the difference? Why are the DW termies OK to use as DW, but wouldn't be as agents?

Not true. You can play them with the same detachment rules. Blackspear and Alien Hunters are 99% identical. The real difference is the DW version have access to Oath of Moment while the Imperial Agents.... don't get an Army Rule.... also the DW Terminators forget how to reroll charges when they join Imperial Agents.

Codex are smaller, lose all the narrative rules and go softcover - but will probably cost more because of the slipcase.

Trukk does look nice though.

Battle March sounds interesting, as smaller scale battles has long been WHFB Achilles Heel.

Concept? Great. Execution? Well genuinely have to wait and see.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Battle March sounds interesting, as smaller scale battles has long been WHFB Achilles Heel.

Concept? Great. Execution? Well genuinely have to wait and see.

Well, fortunately, Battle March has been out for a while now and is a pretty popular game mode. Not sure what the new book even adds, if anything, besides separating it from the Arcane Journal it was originally part of.

It seems like I've thoroughly been proven wrong. Thanks everyone.

 Rihgu wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Battle March sounds interesting, as smaller scale battles has long been WHFB Achilles Heel.

Concept? Great. Execution? Well genuinely have to wait and see.

Well, fortunately, Battle March has been out for a while now and is a pretty popular game mode. Not sure what the new book even adds, if anything, besides separating it from the Arcane Journal it was originally part of.

I managed to miss that entirely! Thank you for the correction

That new terrain is looking decent. I wonder if it'll be cheaper to source from the starter sets than just buing the terrain on its own...

I'm sure most of you already know this but apparently all the new ork boy arms from the Armageddon kit our interchangeable with the other boys from the same set, you just have to cut off the pegs, which should lead to some more customizability with your set.

At least according to this person here on Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/orks/comments/1uex98u/psa_the_new_boyz_arms_are_compatible_with_every/

 Mrangryork wrote:
I'm sure most of you already know this but apparently all the new ork boy arms from the Armageddon kit our interchangeable with the other boys from the same set, you just have to cut off the pegs, which should lead to some more customizability with your set.

At least according to this person here on Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/orks/comments/1uex98u/psa_the_new_boyz_arms_are_compatible_with_every/

If only I'd known two days sooner. I found some of the standard assembly options to be a bit too similar looking.
The main improvement that the standalone kit needs is definitely more heads though.

 Asmodai wrote:
Codex are smaller, lose all the narrative rules and go softcover - but will probably cost more because of the slipcase.

Smaller page size, but thicker: I believe they said 176 pages in the stream? So that's a like a 33% pagecount increase. I look forward tos eeing what thesaurus jiggery-pokery they'll have done to re-issue the same bestiary pages again with a little variation.

Warhammer Community wrote:But what about the Boyz, you ask? Well, now… that would be telling.

The fact that they're playing coy about the Boyz kit makes me hopeful that it'll be a more elaborate set and not just an extra sprue.

The Trukk looks good, I think I would have preferred it to be a little less tall and with a smaller front and longer truck bed. I might just say that it's the Big Boss' Trukk to explain why it looks so beefy.
The mek is fantastic, reminds me a lot of the Big Mek with Kustom Force Field (please release it to MTO).
The real star of the show is the Blood Axes head on the Warboss