WarriorFish Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I think think the new codex will be writing any regiments out - certainly not rules wise. Even without any doctrine/trait system our current codex is more than able to represent many different regimental approaches so there's no reason to believe this will change for the worse. I don't think we need any more dedicated AA as we already have plenty in the Hydra and Vendetta (though the Hydra needs a kit). That's not to say I wouldn't like one though, but if I had to choose it'd be models we're missing. So I don't think there's anything to worry about :) You're definitely right that you need to post up your Vostroyans though :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilofix Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I'd be happy if they made Elites more useful. Gave Hydra Interceptor. And gave us more Stormtrooper, Hydra and Artillery kits. I think the Artillery is a given. You can't get brand new Basilisk boxes directly from GW anymore (sprues yes, box no). So I think they've redone it. I'm saving up some $$; not so much to buy new stuff but rather to buy old stuff if they suddenly stop production on them. Hopefully not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NebuchandnezzarCD Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 My biggest worry is not that they will get written out of the rules but that the older metal ranges will be discontinued, I feel like a new codex drop is all that they need as an excuse. As for the flier I wasn't thinking AA but more along the lines of AI that can strafe and bomb enemy positions, just wishful thinking though because I don't see it happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Your Vostroyans are still Guardsmen, still equipped with the same weapons and still GW models so if the worst happens you've still got the legal models you can use. If GW made it it's legal and always will be - technically I could use the cardboard Ork Dreadnought I got in my 2nd Edition box set if I really wanted :lol: If you're really that worried about it get some more Vostroyans so you're well stocked - it also sends the message to GW that they're still wanted :) Forge World already have some suitable Imperial Navy units that could make the transition, it wouldn't be the first time either. I'm looking forward to finding out what new kits we get :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share Posted February 11, 2014 No one will let me use those card Dreadnoughts as it becomes difficult to determine their side armour... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilofix Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 FW Avenger would actually be cool. And, I now need to look for an oop cardboard Dread on ebay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argun Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I've got a bad feeling that our special characters are gonna be receiving the SM treatment: special characters are applicable to one regiment only. No more mix-n-match like the SMs used to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilofix Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 So is there an actual date for this new Codex? March is not that far away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I hope not, that would be silly. There are roughly a thousand chapters but countless times more that of Guard regiments so to limit a handful of special characters in the codex to certain named regiments would be counter productive. I don't recall any other armies being under such restrictions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argun Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I hope not, that would be silly. There are roughly a thousand chapters but countless times more that of Guard regiments so to limit a handful of special characters in the codex to certain named regiments would be counter productive. I don't recall any other armies being under such restrictions? With the new SM codex, they restricted all the special characters to their respective chapters. The only way you can use say, Lysander and Tigurus in the same list is to have one or the other allied. In the previous one, you could 'counts as' one of them, but they'd be in the same army with no unit tax to get them in the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NebuchandnezzarCD Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 On the bright side if they make the SC regiment specific then they'd need to give rules for each regiment so that it actually works without argueing over what counts as what. Personally I can really see them giving regiment specific traits like the did with C:SM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Sorry, I was talking about other armies and I didn't make that clear. I'm not aware of any codex other than Space Marines that does this, supplements aside? Does the Chaos codex do this? It's a lot less clear with Guard though, there's no successor structure so there's nothing to tie a regiment to another in anything other than appearance (which is as much a modelling thing as anything else). If they do implement this it will likely be a generic regimental structure list you pick from as Neb said. I'd like it if they took it a step back, so rather than directly say "Cadian regiment" or "Catachan regiment" they picked rules and effects for different regimental structures. So you could have light infantry or artillery regiment for example? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NebuchandnezzarCD Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Sorry, I was talking about other armies and I didn't make that clear. I'm not aware of any codex other than Space Marines that does this, supplements aside? Does the Chaos codex do this? It's a lot less clear with Guard though, there's no successor structure so there's nothing to tie a regiment to another in anything other than appearance (which is as much a modelling thing as anything else). If they do implement this it will likely be a generic regimental structure list you pick from as Neb said. I'd like it if they took it a step back, so rather than directly say "Cadian regiment" or "Catachan regiment" they picked rules and effects for different regimental structures. So you could have light infantry or artillery regiment for example? I think the regimental structures idea could work really well, they could even go as far to allow it to affect the FOC with a tank regiment being able to take battle tanks as troops and such, or maybe adding the benefits and restrictions like the optional rites of war in the legion list do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 The old doctrine system was cool, but somewhat flawed so I'd like a better system to be implemented if we get one. The Marine one is serviceable but not perfect. A tank one would be fantastic, if those stinking xenos can have their fancy army structures why can't we have our famed tank regiments? JUST IMAGINE ALL THE TANKS EVERYONE WOULD BUY. Just thought I'd highlight that bit, in case anyone from GW was reading... It probably won't happen as it'd be quite different to the usual army but we can dream. Maybe as a supplement? Though they tend to be army themed and the rumour mill has followed on from this touting Steel Legion and Catachan supplements was it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicodemus Doloroso Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Tank regiment is possible, considering that there is already an armoured company list produced by Forgeworld. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hendrik Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 which is exactly why i don't think they'll do it! personally double force org chart is already a very viable option to get more tanks.(if you don't like squadroning them...) making tanks troops seems a bit overpowered, unless you also include the drawbacks from the armoured battalion list. (that's right, i'm advocating against making an even more powerfull version of the armoured battalion!) i'm really curious to what they'll do with the guard though. GW did a great job with making the necrons and tau great shooting armies and i'm curious to see how (over)powered they'll make the imperial guard! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cypherthefallenangel Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I've got a bad feeling that our special characters are gonna be receiving the SM treatment: special characters are applicable to one regiment only. No more mix-n-match like the SMs used to. I'd rather that than get the nid treatment and lose half of them for no good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Someone needs to show those blue monkey oiks who's boss, they've been sitting on their perch for too long so GW had better give us some good stuff :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt_Reaper Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Something that has bugged me for a while is the notion that Chapter Tactics in C:SM means you can only play that CT with that Chapter. You can still runs your Ultramarines as another Chapter, you just lose out on all those Ultra-Special Characters. Likewise if our SCs are restricted to regimental doctrines* it doesn't mean you can't run Ol' Iron Hand as a Vostroyan, it means Iron Hand and Creed won't be chilling together. *patent pending Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Don't forget that if you only have to use a certain Chapter Tactics if your army is clearly that chapter (so no Ultramarines playing as White Scar tactics) and last I checked Imperial Guard armies tend to be DIY regiments more often than not which would give you free reign to change as you please :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted February 13, 2014 Author Share Posted February 13, 2014 I guess that this gorgeous army is now very, very illegal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorFish Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I think it's still legal, though the AT-AT walkers would probably require some house ruling... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted February 13, 2014 Author Share Posted February 13, 2014 Oh it does, basically the owner talks about their usage before a match with each opponent. By legal though, I was referring to the rumour that it is Disney's (Star Wars' parent company) legal team that has caused the Imperial Guard name change... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argun Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Oh it does, basically the owner talks about their usage before a match with each opponent. By legal though, I was referring to the rumour that it is Disney's (Star Wars' parent company) legal team that has caused the Imperial Guard name change... Wait, Disney made GW change our name? Seriously? When did this come about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted February 13, 2014 Author Share Posted February 13, 2014 Have your salt cellar at the ready, but the rumour is that the Games Workshop's Imperial Guard have to change their name due to the clashes with the Imperial Guard (The Emperor's bodyguard in the red robes) and Imperial Stormtroopers in Star Wars. Considering how GW, apparently, throw their weight around when it omes to IP matters, it's hardly surprising that a bigger fish has put them in their place. Here's a cartoon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.