trougedoor122 Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 i've heard rumors that GW is going to be re merging the DH and WH codex in 6th edition. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043004 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissia Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 And I've seen GW debunk that rumour numerous times (search the =][= forum for Jervis Johnson, you'll find several threads about what he's said on the subject), rightfully so beacuse a combined codex woudl suck. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043005 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcaren Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 I don't think you can trust any rumors since there are so many. Some say there will be independent WH and DH books with Inquisition by itself. I seem to doubt all the rumors and see GW doing something really stupid to them. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043147 Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrasymacus Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 As with all things G dub related, as bad as things are, G dub can always make them worse. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043158 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissia Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 I don't think you can trust any rumors since there are so many. Some say there will be independent WH and DH books with Inquisition by itself. I seem to doubt all the rumors and see GW doing something really stupid to them. I can trust the numerous reports by veteran BnC posters of responses from Jervis Johnson more than I can the completely and utterly unsupported claims by random people at any rate. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043179 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 I can see how it oculd[sic] be done myself...   Supplemental Codex: Inquisition  ....  Special Rules: "By the Authority of the Immortal Emperor of Mankind" -- If the army takes an HQ from an Imperial Loyalist army (Space Marines, Imperial Guard, Sisters of Battle, Grey Knights, and variation lists of the same), they may add units from that codex to the army list. In order to use these units, one must have a copy of that army's codex. These units do not count for mandatory unit slots (1 HQ, 2 Troops). In our current regime of self contained tomes, such a document would be unlikely. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043229 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissia Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 That is beside the point. That right there is probably the best solution to the problem regardless of its likelihood. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043246 Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakehunter52 Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 I don't think you can trust any rumors since there are so many. Some say there will be independent WH and DH books with Inquisition by itself. I seem to doubt all the rumors and see GW doing something really stupid to them. I can trust the numerous reports by veteran BnC posters of responses from Jervis Johnson more than I can the completely and utterly unsupported claims by random people at any rate. Â I totally agree. It has been confirmed multiple times at multiple events, including a reply that I have received myself. Most likely people get to speculating with the local red shirts and take their ideas for truth. Grey Knights and Sisters are staying in different rooms guys. No purple here. Â Back on topic, I noticed that GKs and Sisters were left out in name. But why then the pictures? I think that it is obvious. The codex couldn't support it in it's current form. Especially if they are planning a major overhaul, as in new codex. With new focuses, rules and units. GW is actually being responsible. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043268 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 That is beside the point. That right there is probably the best solution to the problem regardless of its likelihood.Good solutions are congruent with current business models, the one proposed is not. The inquisition needs a home, and with the chambers militant is the best candidate. Overlays create an awkward system of interdependencies that only functioned in the era of common equipment, an era that has since passed. Similar to software, it is advantageous from a revision perspective if the components are modular. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043292 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissia Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Good solutions are congruent with current business models Good business models are congruent with good solutions. Â Â This overlay is non-specific. It requirest hat you take an HQ unit, which means even if the names of the HQ units change, all you have to do is take one of the newer HQ units. It does not list units, it does not list wargear, only that an HQ has to be taken from an Imperial Loyalist army, and it is very obvious what is intended and what the rule actually says. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043293 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 This overlay is non-specific. ...That's only close to the mark here, but nice try. Â To expound, under the assumption that the books are play tested, considerable more effort must to expended chasing interdependencies to verify proper balance than if the manual was self contained. This leads to either undesirable risks taken with environmental balance, or, equally undesirably long, and expensive, development cycles, and both of these are just bad business. Being non-specific only makes it worse and will have a hangover effect on any future revisions to the referenced books, as ideally they'll be tested and developed for backward compatibility. Â All these headaches dissipate when the elements are made to stand alone. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043296 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissia Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Without making the inevitable joke about your assumption about playtesting, you're really exaggerating the problem far, far too much. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043299 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Without making the inevitable joke about your assumption about playtesting, you're really exaggerating the problem far, far too much.... and I think you're grossly underestimating the issues. Seems, as usual, we're at an impasse. Trusting to what I suspect is my superior insight and experience, I shall wait patiently to be vindicated in posterity. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043302 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissia Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 So you will wait for posterity on your posterity? Hehe :devil: Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043303 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 It's not often that I get such an interest in my behind. :devil: Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043304 Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrasymacus Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 You guys are dorks. Â Playtesting is a myth. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043429 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissia Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 the inevitable joke about your assumption about playtesting Beat ya to the punch, thrasymacus. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043505 Share on other sites More sharing options...
carmachu Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 The designers may have got a bit carried away with the Inquisition elements, but only because that was the general trend in the player community too - they were basically just giving the customer what they wanted at the time. Â Uhm no actually. The customers did NOT want the inquistional elements at all. The player base had been playing sisters since 2nd and they diluted the force by adding =I= to it. Â The designers did, not teh consumers. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043782 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 The customers did NOT want the inquistional elements at all. The player base had been playing sisters since 2nd and they diluted the force by adding =I= to it.I am a customer, and I did want the cool looking new toys. Further, I picked up Witch-Hunting upon release of this codex in third edition. A customer base is not a unilateral, monolithic, thing. Do not delude yourself that it is. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043790 Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 really ? and how many armies do you see world wide use lets say PE or arco flaglants? or armies made only of inq stuff . not many , right ? the lord inq sucks [compering to sob and GK hqs] , the storm troopers make no sense at all[specially as sob cost 1 point more] , the odd ball units like flaglants , PE or death culits are border line unplayable , elite inq were good for two things . tarrot and open up an option for an assasin . So where is that cool Inq stuff people got with the inq dexs? Â A customer base is not a unilateral, monolithic, thing. Do not delude yourself that it is. cool bro , but if 9 people out of 10 play WH for sob and sob only it does mean something . Same with DH where people mostlly use IGs stuff[because its new and with better rules] and GK . Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043800 Share on other sites More sharing options...
carmachu Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 The customers did NOT want the inquistional elements at all. The player base had been playing sisters since 2nd and they diluted the force by adding =I= to it.I am a customer, and I did want the cool looking new toys. Further, I picked up Witch-Hunting upon release of this codex in third edition. A customer base is not a unilateral, monolithic, thing. Do not delude yourself that it is. Your the only one. Maybe two. And how often do you use them? Probably not enough.  And how many want it now? No one. No one uses the crappy units that came with them.  Hell I was part of a playtest group and we we're wondering what the hell they were doing. There were a couple interesting sister items/options that didnt make it, but we got alot of crappy =I= stuff....  Sorry but your wrong. The majority opf the base wanted sisters. They played sisters. They didnt play =I=, they played that little book called....Sisters of Battle.  Your anotcedal "I wanted them" isnt the player base either. Look around at vairous places and discussion- they arent about =I=, their about battle sisters. For a reason. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043803 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Oh, I'm sure I'm not the only one, one of a slim minority at this point, but I'm sure I don't stand alone. Â 'Course, now we can bust out the semantics, of the 'Sisters of Battle' players of the era, of course the wanted more battle sisters. Yourself included. Of the greater 40K playing population, which I was of in this era, I enjoyed having twiddly little toys to add to my various Imperial formations and really couldn't have given a whit about the combat nuns. The auxiliary units are sadly inefficient, but I don't play all my games as competitive matches, and I think this colours my perspectives. Â New players do happen, and I view it as an unfortunate side effect of lopsided development that there aren't more radicals, if their units were stronger, you'd see more of them. The is always the issue with allies that something becomes brokenly strong and thus appears in all armies, as a result, they get priced 'conservatively'. They couldn't make Inquisitors efficient lest the Marine players abandon their codice and migrate en mass to the Inquisitorial banner. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043819 Share on other sites More sharing options...
boreas Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 I got the Witch Hunters Codex as my first WH40k army. I loved the =I=, arco and PE models.... The reason you don't see them is not that they aren't liked by players. It's because they are so utterly bad you cannot really play them. Arcos and PE play themselves (which is very bad when you are trying to play a tactical game). IST and =I= are overpriced, etc... A good revamp (either in 3 codexes: =I=, SoB and GK or 1 combined codex) would see a revival of those units. WH40k is all about "grimdark" and no other army represents that as much as the =I= units. As for the combined/separate thing, no matter how JJ is quoted to me I still beleive that GW will do Codex: Imperium in the future. All ordos are referred to as "The Imperium" in the 5th ed. rulebook, Apocalypse and Planetfall. Everyone has their preference (Melissia's prefer separated, I prefer combined, etc) only the future will tell and there is not much use arguing about the different merits of the options  As for the whole Planetfall thing...well... Most armies have 1-2 stratagems (only one for most armies and some are really useless). The =I= (named the Imperium) has one and it's possible the best one (capable of destroying a whole unit of termies or even a Hive Tyrant and Tyrant Guard retinue in one roll!). For a small 25$ (cheap in the big world of GW!), I get 6 new missions, a whole new way to play with different FOCs, stratagems... It's really worth it. 25$ Is barely enough to buy my family a meal at McDonalds. An evening at the movies with my wife is 40$ (not including the babysitter). Sure, inventive players could have come up with those as houserules. But try making stratagems that your whole gaming group will accept. Hell, we had trouble accepting some homemade datasheets for Apocalypse (there's always someone who thinks it's too cheap, too strong, etc).  My gaming group bought a copy for the "gameroom" and we're all very eager to play! And I'll have avery hard time not to use the "Imperium" stratagem every time...  Phil, who's usually doing the most griping at GW... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043897 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daedalus Templarius Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 we have a good discussion going for DH/GK updates at http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/246190.page too if you guys are interested in presenting your views there Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2043951 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissia Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 there is not much use arguing about the different merits of the options Especially when you can't even get me to agree that the combined codex has any merits to begin with :D Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/172802-gk-left-out-again/page/2/#findComment-2044190 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.