Leaderboard

I found this instead online:

This is actually a particularly notable comment IMHO because yes, it actually is just about competitive. Because sadly, competitive is just about all that's left. It's very rare now that you go to your flgs, or even hang out with a friend, and everyone's willing to just drop some stuff on a table and start rolling dice. And Crusade is gone, so nobody's interested in setting up a narrative game, let alone a campaign. What GW suggests becomes law, and the only thing left is competition. It's not all bad though A couple of my opponents aren't enjoying the edition much, so we may find an outlet in the more creative ways of gaming. And yeah the TW comment is actually true lol

I wish I had your skills, so I could finally realise what would the greatest Ultramarines model ever: Marneus Calgar and Robute Guilliman on an Invader ATV. It'sa me, Marnio and my pal Guilluigi!

That's the thing though. You're saying that perhaps your heavy infantry guys shouldn't have the same M stat as a Genestealer or Drukhari Wyche. Maybe only as fast as a Kabalite Warrior. Those are things that are supposed to be lightly armoured and faster than the 'baseline' in exchange for lacking durability. It doesn't even occur to you that maybe those nice Xenos chappies should be faster than Marines. Marines used to be good all-rounders and in that sense they were elite. Things like Eldar or Nids had significantly better raw stats in their specialist area back in 2nd edition. Armies were smaller back then. Marines and Eldar could shoot up stuff at range. Stuff like Hormagaunts would tie stuff up, but that was only until my elite CC units arrived and started taking things apart. That was the trade off. Now Marine players want to be gloriously better in everything and that's why a few folks feel like they are playing NPC factions. I realise that this forum, as civilised as it is, is entirely the wrong place to make this case. It's not a new phenomenon. Going all the way back to 3rd edition I've run into Marine players who get salt about even one or two casualties from things they don't consider worthy of killing them. To address how much this increase in Toughness will affect things, I simply don't know. But GW hand out Lethal Hits and DW rules an awful lot, and I have to wonder if those sorts of rules aren't a part of why Marines aren't feeling like the Special Boys they think they should be.

I think one thing that we need to remember as customers and hobbyists is that this is GW's business model and has been for some time (arguably forever, but at the very least as far back as when they went to weekly releases). They produce loads of new stuff all the time, they want us to buy it and they won't (and can't) keep it around forever (both for practical reasons and because they want us to buy the new stuff; both set of reasons are business reasons at the end of the day, of course). That being said, they also want to keep us happy (to the degree that it keeps us buying stuff/as long as it doesn't interfere with us buying stuff) and so, they're usually going to provide us with rules for outdated/OOP stuff or, as in this case, at least a way to use it (whether you or I like that way or not is beside the point). The people in the design studio love games and miniatures and obviously want to produce good games and miniatures and it's almost guaranteed that they also love the setting (they may of course have different ideas about it, just like we do here). The corporate entity that is GW wants money and only "cares" about the game, setting and you to the degree that it keeps you spending , so they're always going to push for what they think will make the most money. Mostly they will be focused on the present business year, but with at least some thought towards sustainability, so they "care" about not ruining the game/setting in the sense that they don't want to scare you off, unless they'e pretty sure it will attract an equal or greater amount of paying customers (whether this state of affairs is good or bad depends on your view of capitalism and hence, is probably beyond the scope of the thread). As a customer and hobbyist I think you need to understand this in order to be happy and fulfilled in your hobby life (and being happy might mean doing something else wih your time and money, of course). So it means asking yourself some (potentially tough) questions and drawing the necessary conclusions. Personally, I'm not a fan of the new lore at all, but rather than rage against the dying of the light I've chosen to ignore it (to my mind, that's pretty much the only thing I can do in order to preserve the version of the setting that I personally love). I don't like the hovertanks or new dreads, so I don't buy them (I have no illusions that this will cause GW to drop them, but neither will my raging about them). I don't like most of the Primaris stuff, but I do like the improved proportions and some of the design cues, so I mix and match with bits and accept a few trade-offs (such as the ankle bulbs) for what I consider an overall improved aesthetic. Gamewise, I think it's swings and roundabouts and always has been (gripes about the state of the game go back to at least 2nd edition and on the flipside some things have actually improved; if you don't presonally think so, well, 2nd edition is right there), so I decide on an edition-to-edition basis what to do. So far I enjoy 11th, but I'm completely ready to go back to a houseruled 4th edition if 11th (or 12th, or 13th...) becomes untenable for me. Is this ideal? No, but the ideal game (not to mention the ideal game state) does not exist and certainly not within a 3-year cycle, codex drip format, so picking the "least bad" option is always going to be the way, realistically speaking. Today, some of the mainstays of what I consider to be 40K goes away (or at least they move to Legends, signalling that they're probably going away within 3 years). Ok, I kinda expected that to happen at some point, because no product is kept around forever*, especially not in the business model GW operates by. So what do I do? Well, my tactical marines already are Intercessors (they just look a lot better), so I might just use them as that; lorewise they'll stay tacticals of course and gamewise I just don't really care - I'll use them because of what they represent, not because of the specific details of the rules (althought I might gripe about these from time to time, I am a Warhammer player after all...). If I felt differently, I'd probably go back to an earlier edition and start looking for likeminded people, as the alternative is to be sad and angry forever (which, admittedly, is very 40K but I personally find it exhausting and unproductive) and at the end of the day, I'm beholden to myself, not to GW or the latest iteration of the game. "But what if I can only play in tournaments or with people that will only accept 100% official tournament rules and models and I love the old miniatures and hate primaris and new rules and lore, but can't or won't ever play anything but the newest version of the game?!?" I hear you cry. Well, sucks to be you, I guess - but honestly, it likely did anyway, because that really doesn't sound like a fun way to spend your time, energy and money. I know this sounds a bit flippant, but the point is "do what makes you happy and don't tether your hobby enjoyment to following GW's every whim, if you hate most of what they do" and I only say it because I want you to be happy. It takes a little effort, but you can totally do your own thing and I all but guarantee that there are other people out there who like the same things about 40K that you do**, so start looking for them. *Sometimes I find it helps to consider what other products or product lines you have invested in that has been around for a similar amount of time. It might not feel great but it gives a sense of perspective that I think is sometimes lost in these discussions. **If there genuinely aren't, you might want to reevaluate if you actually want to interact with others about 40K at all. Just noodling around with your own minis and lore is perfectly acceptable too, after all.

So far my thoughts are: Pros: - List Building: While not perfect, it's a step up from 10th and I do like the new DP system brining back a bit of the feel of mixed force armies without all the soup nonsense that dominated previous editions which tried to do that. - Variable Missions: While again not perfect (I still prefer asymmetric and narrative missions in general) they are again an improvement over the previous versions. I've been talking about players having different mission requirements being a good thing for a long time and it's nice to see some of that. - Cleave feels much more thematic than Sustained Hits for melee. - Lethal Hits changes: Light weaponry to be non-monsters and vehicles (as seen in Ork codex and assuming it's going to roll out to others over time.) - Terrain as objectives: While a little more fiddley sometimes, it actually feels like your fighting over something / trying to secure a valuable position. I much prefer it to "go stand on that circle out in the open" - The addition of Upgrades to the enhancement system. Cons: - Balancing everything around competitive: We don't wany a little extra narrative flair in our competitive matches, we want actual narrative gameplay. - Terrain Layouts: Everything is still designed mostly around L-shaped ruins. Yeah we "can" make missions without them, but it's still pretty much all you'll see at hobby stores. As mentioned above, where are the rivers and trench networks of old? - They still haven't figured out the sweet spot for Fights First, it's either busted or useless. I'm not saying initiative needs to come back, that certainly had it's own issues, but some more nuanced middle ground would be appreciated. - It felt like 11th edition missed a few rounds of quality checks before it went out the door: (GSC army rules not working at all RAW at launch ect...) They're patching it decently enough after the fact, but it feels very much like a AAA video game mentality. Sell everyone on a buggy mess and fix it over the next six months. These are things that anyone giving a reasonable look at the edition should have seen a mile away. - Some armies being VERY limited in detachment combos: Tau can play all of 8 possible combinations for their total of 7 detachments because of all the restrictions. I know we're probably going to get our codex pretty early on, but still... yikes. Some things I don't think are 11th's fault and/or general responses to other people's thoughts: - LOS / Vehicle Facing: I don't see this as an issue. If we're looking at the game from a realism standpoint, these vehicles aren't moving while doing nothing, stopping and then shooting. Everything is happening at once in theory. While a vehicles rolls between one building and another, it should be shooting during that movement, but it's not something that can work in a game system like this, so they say so long as a tiny bit of the vehicle is showing, that represents it having moved into a position in which it could have attacked. It's not perfect, but it's never broken my immersion. - Social Interaction: This is sadly just the times we live in and not the fault of any game system. Maybe an alternating activation system would keep people more engaged, but even in IGOUGO, you should be spending your opponent's time strategizing and planning for your next turn. Someone not really invested in the game isn't going to be invested no matter the ruleset. - Templates: They may have been thematic but I do not miss the days of my opponent's moving every single one of their freaking models in their 20 man blobs exactly 2" apart to make me hit one less target with my single blast weapon. Blech, no thanks. I'm actually working on a custom generating narrative system to overlay onto 40k games. I'm actually in the final stages and hope to be able to release something to everyone in a month or two. TLDR it's kinda like the Twist system, but turned up to 11 and the knob broken off. It's not meant to be balanced, but to provide thematic and narrative building blocks for all kinds of missions and is built to essentially be nearly infinitely repayable with different outcomes.

caricature I hear ya. And give me the same grace asked of me. I like tacticus. I like redemptors. I like a lot of the the scale marines. But Cawl is not representative of an imperium in decline. He reeks of name carving into primarch hearts levels of fanfiction. So think about what they claim Cawl has created. Superior marines, a super primarch entire new lines of vehicles, multiple variants of each. Oh but in secret... and even though he belongs firmly mechanicum he gave it away. Okay. Does that sound like 40k, or a marvel super hero? Thats my gripe. A dozerblade and tracks on a valiant looks great. Listening to Cawl slop not great. So, you're right, but lets get classic ludacrousness back like plaid, or luda in the back of your chevrolet, and not actual ludacrous

Yeah, the Vindicator was inspired by the WW2 german Sturmtiger, which was used exactly for that. The current kit took many details from the real thing, like the ring of holes around the barrel, or the little crane to lift the heavy rocket mortar shells (Which were basically gigantic bolt rounds!)

Having played two games of 11th edition, with the first one being ok and the second one being horrible, I was (again) thinking about what I don't like about modern 40k, specifically 11th edition as the latest iteration, and what all those happily playing modern 40k like about it, and to be honest, I couldn't think of anything. That's why I'd like to hear from the fraters here at the B&C, what do you like / dislike about modern 40k? I don't want people to "defend" why they enjoy playing, I just want to find some perspectives that are different from mine (which has become very negative). For me, the biggest issues are the following ones: - IGOUGO. It's just boring, stratagems are a bad bandaid for it, and it leads to other problems (alpha strikes, extreme sensitivity when it comes to terrain setup, ...). - The terrain layouts. They are just so boring and the opposite of immersive. They don't make any sense, there are ruined buildings but no roads, and it's all mirrored. - The missions. The primaries all boil down to mostly the same, and the secondaries feel like your commander is baby-in-chief. "Go, destroy an enemy tank. Which one? I don't care. Can you move two units as far apart as possible? But don't let them shoot! Take the building in the center! Forget that building in the center, spread your forces all over the battlefield! What?? The enemy commander said that I'd never dare take that one building he is sitting in, and made some chicken noises. YOU WILL TAKE THAT BUILDING, NOW!!1!" - Some really unthematic rules, especially line of sight, and missing vehicle facing. I hate it how a tank can shoot when only the side of its rear is peeking out, and RAW even a gun barrel is a valid target. - Too many rules, but this is probably a "me problem". From faction rules to unit rules, to detachment rules and stratagems, I can't keep them in my head for my army, much less those of my opponents army. That leads to gotchas for me, which feels bad. - Edition churn. I'm starting to mix up rules with the way they were in previous editions...

The latter part I agree with; the codex drip, arms race and stop-start mode of balancing the game is silly. But that's not an entirely new issue or something that is really solvable, as long as that's the business model. I also agree that it would be a lot better if they turned the heat down on a lot of things and made the game less lethal, rather than buff everything until we're back where we started (it remains to be seen if they'll do this, but it's certainly a concern). The first part may have been true in game terms, but thematically, marines were certainly always meant to be more than "marginally above average" and furthermore, in the game's earlier days, that above average stat line actually meant a whole lot more in game terms too. If we take a slightly longer view of the issue, Marines have had a completely static statline (and so has most of their weaponry) for most of the game's life and consequently have been hit very hard by the arms race inflation way before the last couple of editions rolled around (and as a consequence they gradually had their points dropped as their stats and armour became increasingly useless, because everyone else apparently needed "delete marine"-guns). We don't have to go that far back to get to a time where the mainline marine unit tacticals just weren't taken as anything except a minimum size "troops tax" unit, and even then, "good" players usually took two scout squads instead. AFAICT the new mainline marines have been in a similar position until they got special rules to make them pump out a crazy amount of shots and I don't see a lot of people considering them a good unit even now. So yeah, marine stats absolutely needed bumping up, whether the statline was expanded or not. Now that the statline has expanded, there's no reason for marines to be stuck with a pre-expansion statline for the next 25 years. That they should obviously go up in points to reflect that is another matter - and so is our expectation that the balancing will eventually be poorly handled.

My take on the new statline is that it's very much required, but that it also isn't as impactful as it would initially seem. Marines were toughness 4 in an age when the highest strength of a weapon was 10. The most powerful gun was 2.5x the strength of the average Marine toughness. In the current game, where Str16 weapons exist, the Marine was starting to feel less tough than a Guardsman used to. Also, we already have access to 3 wound, toughness 6 Marines, with Str 5, damage 2 bolters at a low cost. Did they break the meta? No - in fact they were hardly ever taken. The most exciting aspect of the reveals is that GW are leaning into real wargear differences. Phobos moving faster is a brilliant change. I expect we'll see weapon profiles across the board take advantage of this; Guns with higher strength, or more shots, etc. I'm expecting we'll see some tougher tanks and vehicles as well. The new Intercessors rules are actually worse than they currently are. In 10th edition they have more shots at maximum range and sticky objectives, but that doesn't concern me because it's clear things will be re-balanced across the board. Oath of Moment is also gone, and it remains to be seen if Chapter Tactics return, or if bonus rules will be decided by the detachments.

You guys just made me realise my issue with 11th. I can't speak for others, especially since YOU put it better than I could: TELL ME IF you feel the same please: 11th ed is LIKE a Mobile Game/Live Service Video Game version of 40k. If you ever played a mobile game/live service video game (including PC, etc.), it's like a constant stream of little tasks. Here's your daily x number of tasks for rewards, there's a multiplayer event happening RIGHT NOW do you want to fast travel there Y/N? There's no rhyme or reason to these chores, it's just do them to check a box. Then other players exist only as part of those tasks (destroy A tank). There is as much narrative/lore/story as there is for a theme park ride. Now I honestly see a real mistake by GW. It's the same Wizards of the Coast had with 4th ed Dungeons & Dragons. "Modern" is exactly it, WotC tried to "modernise" D&D by incorporating Massively Multiplayer Online Game elements OF THAT time. Certain classes were "Strikers" in the same way a MMO would say "DPS" (Damage Per Second). EVERYthing was standardised as an "Encounter", a roleplay conversation has the same mechanics as combat. D&D 4th ed was the past. 40k 11th ed is NOT that, but it's today's modern take of the same issues, now with mobile/live service games. (As I typed that out, Dawn of War 3 did something like that but way worse, becoming a MOBA. 11th ed's not that bad.) +++++ A note, we actually had Maelstrom of War in 6th ed. 11th ed's objective cards I noticed were better. So it's not a totally new issue. Sorry I didn't compile a list, but I agree with yours. I hadn't thought much about it until now, but I reckon it's the overall framework.

You can't even get that as a paid download on their website with Warhammer Plus. All their archive content has all the rules removed with all the usual grace of your most heavy handed Imperial Censor, Imperial Armour included. It's bad. I had Warhammer Plus for a year because I really wanted that Karl Kopinski Kasrkin and the only thing I wanted out of that service was incomplete and not available to download.

Wow. That's a much better way to spend an inheritance. I was just going to buy a buttload of 40k scale Titans and Knights so I can play Adeptus Titanicus with bigger mechs.

Sounds like this is just about competitive. That said Total War should solve a lot of these issues and be cheaper to get started.

Looks like they’ve added the Dreadnought to the list too. Bye-bye Boxnaughts. :(

I don't think anyone has any issues with minor tweaks in rules, especially coinciding with a large release and adding new models (that may require new rules/tweaks) to work correctly! It's taking things that people where nominally happy with, that may have just needed some tightening and just chucking it all out. Like in 1.0 did people have issues with extensive(ish) legion traits, black shields, army of dark compliance, militia, Auxilia Tercios etc? Not that I'm aware of, I think Paragon/Divining Blades, Medusa and especially POTM Vindicator Spam and a few other things needed some tightening.. then we got 2.0 dropped on us that pretty much threw everything away that we knew. Then 3 years later when people are ok with 2.0, just needs some tweaks to reactions, lascannons and dreadnoughts.... and... Boom 3.0 hits and throws everything out again. Adds a heap of verbose wording for stuff we didn't need, made some really (really, really, really) questionable choices in regards to list building and a whole host of other things that weren't asked for. I think the pattern to me is the biggest concern! Look 2.0...fool me once... 3.0..fool me twice...

Got to say, @WBRBloom, that Fabulous Bill is a real triumph. It was definitely worth the time it took. Glad to see everyone else's coming along nicely too. Talking of which, I had to take the day off sick today due to a really spectacularly unpleasant cold. Enrolment week's not a good time to be ill if you work in a college, but at the same time you don't do a lot of good spreading your germs around either. Plus I couldn't sleep, so my brain's been mush most of today. Don't need my brain to paint though, so I've made good progress on the next ten traitor guards: Managed to power through to the point where they just need brown highlighting and their eyes, rank markings, runes of devotion, and bases finishing off. Oh, and the unfortunate corpse adorning the platoon icon: I did think about attaching some kind of symbol of Khorne under the torso, but you know I think the general air of ill-intent is going to do the job all on its own. I do also like the contrast between the heavy armour on the lieutenant's front and the lack of it on the back. It's exactly the way a fanatic needs it. All facing the enemy, because you have no intention of running away: And just so there's a sense of completeness, here are the five regular footsloggers: I might just hit the target after all

=][= A mod has said to stop the back and forth with Primaris and Firstborn, which includes personal attacks. I've removed a post that does just that, no more ignoring Mod directive will be tolerated guys =][=

Wasn’t happy with my original Master Lazarus so I stripped him. Think he came out much better this time.

Likes: - Army building. The new detachment system is a welcome change. A given faction is no longer strictly limited to a certain playstyle if it wants to be good for anything but narrative games. Mix & Match is good too. - Primary Missions. Not all sunshine and rainbows, but the variety and the fact not every battle is a mirror matchup is nice. - CLEAVE. Blast for melee. What's not to love? And I don't even run anything that has it Dislikes: - Terrain. The more GW defines terrain rules, and especially layouts, the less fun this game becomes. True line of sight is effectively a thing of the past, we've got flat outlines that apparently block LOS even with a bloody brick sitting on them. And nobody can agree on how titanic & aircraft interact with the big pieces. - Objectives. Linked to terrain. Placement is harder, it's more difficult to set up, every base outline has to be measured at 3 different points because everything's sitting on a lopsided triangle instead of a nice easy circle. Seriously, we could've just set up ruins over/around the circles and the "narrative" link would still be there. My first couple 11th ed games setup took an obscene amount of time because of this new thing. - Melee. I like games where an engagement can take a while. Not everything goes to plan, and everyone gets a chance to fight back. At range or melee, or just in tactical repositioning. This doesn't happen except in the smallest games, & melee armies are a big part. Nowadays they're all super fast, like 2-turns-to-cross-the-table fast, and melee units have insane profiles that pretty much instakill anything they touch. That speed means they always get first strike. T1 a player can move up & hide all his dudes behind the terrain outlines in the middle of the field. If his opponent already moved up, then let the charges begin! If not, wait in complete cover til BR2, then steamroller him and enjoy the benefits of having full access to all the no man's land objectives. Only against another fast melee army will this be difficult. The way of melee has become too easy, and ranged combat is insanely difficult. I feel for tau, no matter how good their shooting is. Almost every army I see this edition plays the fast-melee style, and they do altogether too well. I think what I'm trying to say here is melee has become too powerful, so everyone's forced to play melee... and that's just taking away flavor. - Player Mindset: A tougher one to talk about. I don't think people are showing the imagination that made this hobby so fun when I started. No longer can we build stories from our battles - it's official layouts, force dispositions, card-drawn missions and the Holy WH40K App all the way. Oh and Crusade is no longer supported by G-dubs so nobody around wants that. Yeah, mostly complaints, unfortunately. Here's hoping for some good Narrative material sometime soon! Remember scratch-built terrain anyone? Lol

You're not alone. I was considering getting back into the game for 11th but more and more I think I'm good. But for me personally... >Every single weapon being its own unique profile on the unit that uses it. The universal armoury system made much, much more sense. >The gutting of statlines (WS and BS, Strength, Initiative etc). Needlessly dumbs down the whole game. >The mutilation of vehicle rules in general. No more facings or firing arcs, no more actually behaving like a vehicle with the strengths and weaknesses those would give, just a giant infantry model. >Removing the FOC. Some degree of restriction on unit choices is necessary IMO, and the free-for-all we have at the moment, blech. >Removing templates. They really weren't complicated and were a nice thematic way of resolving area-of-effect weapons. >Removing wargear costs and massively cutting down on options. Just, why. >Making every model a seasonal item with an expiration date before being rendered unplayable. Fundamentally at odds with what a tabletop game should be. >The constant patches and reworks to the game. At this point it's quite clear GW have no idea what the hell they're doing with the rules (or worse are doing them badly on purpose) and expecting the next patch to suddenly make the game work (and not just invalidate the book you've already spent money on) is foolishness. >Everything being able to wound everything. A Land Raider should not be able to be damaged by a lasgun. End of. And that's just from the rules perspective...

Two problems, both minor. 1. Social Interaction has diminished. In my last game, my opponent stared at his phone for 95% of the game, even while he was moving pieces and rolling dice. 2. The Warlord. There is no real use to have one model picked out as your Leader. The rules don't add anything. No extra CP generation when they are living, no extra benefits to keeping him alive. Also, my opponent had an allied Imperial Agent as his Warlord who just sat in a building doing nothing for the entire game, until I sniped him on turn 4.

Lasguns stay at a 5+. Shuriken catapults, flamers, galvanic rifles, shootas, gauss flayers, autoch bolters are all going from 4+ to 5+ as core infantry weapons. Pulse rifles go from a 3+ to a 4+. Overcharged plasma, meltas, ion weapons and a whole slew of anti-marine options go from a 3+ to a 2+. Please stop trivialising the impact it has on the rest of the game as being a side grade at 2pmm with your suggested 10%.

With the loss of Oath and Hail of Fire the change to the Intercessor bolt profiles feels like a wash or a slight downgrade. Divergent marines weren't enjoying the +1 to wound, so it's a buff for them, but I think any kneejerk reactions about increased marine damage output are unwarranted. Some units, like terminators with storm bolters, we've talked about needing a buff for a long time. They just aren't good. For them, the S5 AP-1 change is welcome and needed. But, again, this all has to be weighed with the loss of Oath in mind. Competitive marine lists are often built around double Oath and the reliability of its rerolls and +1 to wound. That is going away, and the power it offered needs to be compensated for somewhere. Moving up one toughness can be a 16% durability boost, roughly, but it's not always gonna be that. Some stuff wounded on 3's, and will still wound on 3's. In that regard, I think a lot of the wailing and gnashing of teeth I see on forums (not necessarily this one) is also overwrought. A lasgun was wounding on 5+ yesterday, and is wounding on 5+ when this codex comes out. Yes, Terminators will move to a 6+. Were you really bringing lasguns to kill terminators, anyway? And is that 16% decrease in lethality vs one unit type worth getting that worked up over? Especially if the unit sees a 10% point increase? Marines won't become unkillable, they'll go from "you wiped the unit of 5" to "this one guy survived." That can be really important for scoring objectives, but I don't think that's the oppressive power creep that half of the communities on the internet seem to be losing their mind about. GW could still screw this up, but I'm a fan of the idea of the change. I think it should've been done when they re-scaled the upper end of the toughness curve as part of an index edition. But I think it's something that needs to be done to create more room at the bottom end of the scale for more variation between infantry, and it's better done sooner than later. I look forward to the idea of things like T4 Skittles and Sisters, or possibly even T4 aspect warriors. I'm still going to field my Predators, legends or not.

FTFY:

In the meantime, you can just spray paint your Centurions and firstborn Marines silver and run them as Grey Knights. (Centurions and Dreadknights are both so ugly most players can't look directly at them during a game, so you should be fine.)

Video also mentioned the codex supplements would be being retired, but whether or not this just means they're being index'ed until new ones drop or it's foreshadowing a return to Codex: Space Wolves etc I guess is up for debate. At least until 12th when they'll probably go back to Supplements again, then back to full Codexes, so on.

Yeah, it feels a lot like wargame turned into a AAA Live Service Game, with all the 0 day patches, seasons and daily quests replacing the narrative of an unfolding battle. I'm not sure how to say this, but a lot just feels like ticking unthematic boxes, already starting at the stage of list building ("Ok, I need a cheap unit I can hide near the edge of the table, I need a unit to score Engage on all fronts, etc."). Thinking about it, especially as I have a lot more experience with board games compared to live service games, modern 40k also feels a lot like a modern Eurogame. Not a "classic" one like Tigris & Euphrates or Imperial, but one of those from the past 10 years where it's more about system mastery rather than playing the other players, with tons of rules but little interaction, where your goal is to most efficiently squeeze out points from the system, with the other players mostly being there to set the score you have to beat.

I don't think this is happening at all. Orks are also tougher and stronger, straight out of the gate. I expect Guardsmen, Eldar, Tau will stay at toughness 3, but I also expect that Guard will get even more powerful Tanks, Eldar will be even quicker, and Tau might have expanded capabilities we haven't yet considered (I generally don't like Tau and feel their army needs a big re-think in how it functions). I imagine Sisters will eventually be toughness 4. I don't know if regular bolters will become Str5 because that impacts a lot of things outside of Marines. I suppose you can seperate Astartes Bolters from Human Bolters. Votann will probably become more durable as well.

This talk about Horus Heresy dice gave me some original, though maybe not entirely practical, ideas for Traitor force dice sets. In case of the legions associated with specific deities, instead of replacing the number six with a legion symbol, replace it with the sacred number of the deity. So for example Thousand Sons could have red dice with gold pips and the number six replaced with number nine, while Death Guard dice would be off-white with sickly green pips and number six replaced with number seven. Adeptus Titanicus uses a D10 for some rolls. This would actually allow for making a special Traitor die, with the numbers 6-9 substituted with symbols for Slaanesh, Nurgle, Khorne and Tzeentch, with the Chaos Undivided symbol standing for number 10. Back to the normal 20 dice blocks, I came up with a thematically impractical Alpha Legion special set: - Metallic blue dice with marble effect and white pips - Contains 9 dice with number one replaced by the legion symbol (multi-headed hydra) - Contains 9 dice with number six replaced by the legion symbol - Contains 1 "Primarch die" with both number one and number six replaced by identical legion symbols - Contains 1 special scatter die, with the ordinary arrows substituted with the symbol of Chaos Undivided Have you ever been tasked with defending a position against Alpha Legion, wondering from which direction they will be attacking? Just roll the Alpha Legion special scatter die to find out!

Hey all! Been a long time since I posted anything on the B&C. Recently got back into the hobby and a buddy of mine wanted to dabble in Kill Team, so I figured I'd join him in the fun. I decided to go with Red Corsairs because taxes suck and space pirates are cool Decided to start a progress log here to keep myself motivated to finish them in a timely manner. So far, just a few WIP shots of the first three on the desk. Apologies for the image quality. Just using my phone camera. Butcher - This dude was so much fun to put together. Had a blast kitbashing it. Former Space Wolf, probably will paint him up with a big ol Mark of Khorne on his greave. Plasma Gunner - This guy sucked. Do not recommend sculpting scales. 0/10 experience, the fact that they're not perfectly symmetrical is driving me nuts but they're as good as they're gonna get. Icon Bearer - Gotta have a Fallen in there somewhere. This was my first attempt at sculpting robes. Think they turned out okay. Still gotta sculpt a backpack banner for him. Still have to put together the Heavy Gunner, the Balefire Acolyte, and the Aspiring Champion. Very much open to suggestions as to what chapters/legions they should all come from! Cheers, -Kal

Do you really think that GW cares about what a minority of disgruntled vets like us complain about online? Sorry but the idea that our grumbling has somehow translated into improved lore is just absurd.

=][= Blanket bashing of either the first-born or Primaris range, or criticising those who like a particular one is not conducive to constructive and civil discussion =][=

The 30K marine range.

I see. I have great taste in aesthetics, I even have an art degree. So I can tell you, that the primaris are obviously and objectively better looking than the malformed low detail chimps that preceded them. Marine range has literally never looked better than it does today. I am glad we got this settled!

If I had to guess, they'll use a War in the Webway Journal to print a 'final' Daemons list which combines the ones they'll have previously presented in other Journals (EG Tzeentch in this one, a Signus Journal which has a Daemons of Khorne list, etc) - maybe/hopefully with some extra goodies for Sisters of Silence - and 'Ruinstorm' will remain as a PDF DIY army in the same vein as Militia. I think for Nurgle they'll probably have to come up with some OC content (maybe focusing on Typhon's misadventures).

Thanks for providing picture of that card - it is quite clear and informative. Perhaps one of the benefits of the limited space provided by the format - there is not much space for excessively flowery prose or vague waffling about all sorts of possible exceptions.

So, two more games (against Crusher Stampede Tyranids and Bastion Marines), both at 1500. I padded out the list like this: Xenocult + Broodswarm + Heroes Patriarch, 10 genestealers (star children) 10 genestealers (star children) Reductus (contraband munitions) 2×5 Acolytes, mining tools 2×5 Acolytes, hand flamers Primus (reroll damage), 20 Neophytes 2×20 Neophytes (one with disguises) 2× Ridgerunner (mortar, auger) (So an extra Ridgerunner, a second unit of enhanced Stealers, a third unit of Neophytes with a buffed Primus, and shooting buffs for the Reductus. Pretty much the 1000 list with extra toys.) Rather than full reports, here are the highlights: - the Neophyte bricks are really survivable. In my second game, I ended with all three at full strength; in the first, all three were damaged but still in play after several turns going toe-to-toe with big monsters. I'm finding that the footprint of the unit is sufficient to let me have the icon-bearer in terrain almost all the time, so I'm regenerating at least six bodies every battle round, and more if I can tag an objective too (which is what I want them doing anyway, given the huge amount of OC they carry). Keeping the icon-bearer in terrain means I'm not worried about casualties reducing my regen capabilities - he's always the last model standing, so I always want him in terrain. - the Neophytes can kill things with firepower. With one unit having +1 to hit, and another usually benefitting from the rerolls stratagem, I've got two fairly reliable fireteams. No one gun is great, but the volume of fire gets them over the line. Plus, it's okay to be a bit visible - enemy units seem to have a hard time taking out all 20, and bringing back 6-9 means I've always got the heavy weapons and grenade launchers available in my shooting phase. The Ridgerunner with survey auger really helps out here, both with the extra AP and by removing benefit of cover. - the Stealers hit hard. The extra save doesn't really matter, but T5 does, and S5 is a real bonus into Marines. And because you can bring a unit back, they work as a screen (or bait) - they don't survive getting hit by dedicated combat units (especially ones with d2 or better), but in dying they can set up a charge from the other unit, or shooting from the Neopyhtes. My opponent loses a good unit, and I get to put the Stealer back on the table wherever I need them. - the Reductus' shooting is less valuable then her ability to perform actions. She's great for ticking over the Assets primaries without costing me a major unit to do so. Anyone else getting much use out of the new detachments, or neophytes in general?

August vow complete, I enjoyed getting this guy painted up. Still working on my CtA vow so will probably not have another vow this month.

Well I'm rather diappointed in myself for my lack of content here but I'll keep pushing. I, Brother Argent, vow for the Month of August to complete: 10x Termagaunts 1x Ripper Swarm 5x Barbgaunts 1x Heresy Space Wolf Guy 1x Necron Cryptek I'll get pictures up soon but yes, I'm trying to finish my first CtA vows. About a month and a half after I intended.

Thanks for your feedback, it's much appreciated. 11-14-22 08-15-24 07-06-25

Would you mind painting a bunch Dark Angels character models? Start with Sammael on his jetbike.

also seems like they could have been more aggressive with the Counts As. Predators as gladiators, Centurions as Aggressors, etc.

I am in favor of the differentiation between Tacticus and Phobos. Bringing the standard Astartes one step closer to being a walking tank (albeit still many steps FROM that goal) is hard to hate.

It would be cool to see the Imperiums version of a Battleship or a T'au submarine or anything Orks. An Ork aircraft carrier would be cool. Even if GW can't/won't explore it in the tabletop (which is understandable) it would be nice to see it explored in videogames or Black Library.

I've never been very keen on Deredeos but that looks very nice. Great work!