New DA Campaign in 2015

[Interrogator Stobz]

I think I can actually hold my breath that long, it may be a very salty wait but dammit I'll try.

 

:D

BS

[Frater Cornelius]

according to Steve the Warboss on feait the campaign CSM vs DA with both codices redone will be in May-June

I find this highly worrying. It has only been three years. How often would they expect us to change codices? Hell, I just started Ravenwing and you are telling me that come May all those specialist Troops will be gone 7ed style and I will need to cram in Greenwing into a pure RW army? I do not like that.

 

On the on the other hand, maybe GW wants to bring the 6ed codices up to 7ed standards so that everyone has data cards and supplements, Campaigns and what-not. That would certainly be welcome to the overall gaming balance, but my cynicism is prohibiting such positive thoughts.

 

Verdict? I am highly discouraged now, even though I wasn't that excited in ages when I picked up some Ravenwing goodness...

[Isiah]

'Woe is me' ... a bit premature for that I think :).

 

Ravenwing and Deathwing are bound to be standalone/mixed army options of some kind. More likely formations.

 

Besides - the new books might not happen :wink:

 

Cheers

I

[Frater Cornelius]

Fair enough. The 'owner' of my local GW store has been playing DA since 2nd edition (C:Angels of Death) and he said that DW and RW were troops in one way or another since the beginning of time when no other specialist troops even existed.

 

On an educated guess, we probably might lose them as troops but gain alternative FoC where FA or Elite are mandatory choices, Champions of Fenris or Baal Strike Force style.

[SvenONE]

I've found that 7th edition's Objective Rules really took away from what the Troop designation used to mean.  I know we like to champion our bikes and terminators as troops, but to me this is nothing more than us holding on to a bygone era of 40K.  In 6th edition missions troops were important because you needed to have them when the game ENDED.  Which means you needed enough troops to survive 5-7 turns of intense fighting, so loading up on mobile or durable troop models was a pretty big deal.  Positioning was important as a good amount of the time turns 4 and 5 were usually meant for you to put yourself on a trajectory to either shoot an enemy troop off an objective so they couldn't consider it claimed, or you moved a troop onto one of your nearby objectives to claim it and hope that the game didn't continue beyond 5.

 

But this has all changed, those missions, while still largely function the same just require ANY unit that isn't being contested can claim it.  For Maelstrom missions, troops are quite simply pointless for securing objectives as points are scored at the end of YOUR turn.  So you can shoot a unit off an objective or cause them to retreat via melee all you want, but it's more than likely that they already scored the point they needed.

 

Since the 7th came out I've played strictly Maelstrom games, once the Dark Eldar codex came out I've been playing them almost exclusively since I've grown tired DA.  With either army, I'd say less than 10% of my points have been scored by invoking any objective secured rule.  Games can be either really close where it doesn't matter, or so lopsided based on the way objectives are drawn that troops are nothing more than obligatory slots to make a roster.

 

With the advent of unbound, the endless amount of formations that seem to be out there, and GWs adjustment of securing objectives (heck VEHICLES can claim) I believe they've done this as a sales move to open up more units to players.  They want you to play with more diverse lists rather than 3-4 squads of tactical marines all the time, as it stands most elites/FA/Heavy are more expensive anyway, now that you can bring more of them you can spend more money (which GW obviously likes).

 

So to bring it all together losing DW/RW as troops would truly and hardly be an issue.  Mark my words (I'm not a GW insider, just basing it off of their track record the last year) we are going to get special detachments for DW and RW.  The DW one may come right in the eventual new codex or this campaign book.  I can't see a supplement anymore because quite honestly DW has too few units to create formations from.  The only things in our book that are Deathwing are: Command Squad, Terminators, Knights, Landraiders, Dreadnoughts, that's it. Belial, CM, Libby and Int chaplain.  Most of those are just slightly different versions of a terminator though.  You can't make enough interesting formations from that if you ask me.

 

RW would probably stand a better chance since you have: Command Squad, RWAS, RWSS, RWBK, Darktalon, Jetfighter, Darkshroud, LSV (as awful as it is), and Sammael (and everyone else who can ride a bike).

 

The conclave is a good sign that GW is finally thinking about interesting rules for DA.  So here's to hoping.

[Frater Cornelius]

I hope we get an actual Forge Organization Chart for DW and RW and not just some silly Formations. Something like Mandatory 1 HQ and 2 FA and 4-6 optional FA. Because if it is just a Formation with set unit and some useless rule, I am going to go Nottingham and urinate in front of GW HQ.

 

The fear is not losing RW and DW Troops, but not being able to make pure wing anymore.

[SvenONE]

Well ill be honest those silly formations have their place. Try and find someone who has the Haemonculus Covens supplement and thumb through it. It's a pretty good sign of what GW is doing.

 

In it you have a special detachment different from the main codex. It comes with its own rules and warlord traits, as well as new relics. Then further in it has about 6 individual formations each pretty unique and each with their own set of special rules that you wouldnt get otherwise. Then you have this superformation that combines all the individual ones together.

 

If GW follows this format for us I think you can save yourself the trip (and the fluids).

[SvenONE]

The fear is not losing RW and DW Troops, but not being able to make pure wing anymore.

Even to that I would say GW has given you the means to do so with an unbound list. Unbound initially carried the stigma that it was going to be a 10x Dreadknight or Bloodthirster list, but there are still more conventional ways of using it, and in the end what would you really be losing? If anything you could use a Bike Librarian as an HQ instead of Sammael.

[Frater Cornelius]

 

The fear is not losing RW and DW Troops, but not being able to make pure wing anymore.

Even to that I would say GW has given you the means to do so with an unbound list. Unbound initially carried the stigma that it was going to be a 10x Dreadknight or Bloodthirster list, but there are still more conventional ways of using it, and in the end what would you really be losing? If anything you could use a Bike Librarian as an HQ instead of Sammael.

 

 

Unfortunately, Unbound isn't and probably never will be tournament legal. Besides, some Detachment bonuses are not bad.

[twopounder]

 

 

The fear is not losing RW and DW Troops, but not being able to make pure wing anymore.

Even to that I would say GW has given you the means to do so with an unbound list. Unbound initially carried the stigma that it was going to be a 10x Dreadknight or Bloodthirster list, but there are still more conventional ways of using it, and in the end what would you really be losing? If anything you could use a Bike Librarian as an HQ instead of Sammael.

 

 

Unfortunately, Unbound isn't and probably never will be tournament legal. Besides, some Detachment bonuses are not bad.

 

 

I would say fortunately. I think the loss of organized rules is reducing the quality of the game. That and the sudden surge of random skills and abilities. 

[ZONKEY]

A new codex so soon, is that to bring it in line with the layout of the new post space wolf codexes, I assume it will be similar to the grey knight codex and offer minor tweaks with nothing to new

[Master Avoghai]

 

The fear is not losing RW and DW Troops, but not being able to make pure wing anymore.

Even to that I would say GW has given you the means to do so with an unbound list. Unbound initially carried the stigma that it was going to be a 10x Dreadknight or Bloodthirster list, but there are still more conventional ways of using it, and in the end what would you really be losing? If anything you could use a Bike Librarian as an HQ instead of Sammael.

The thing is GW has not understood that 40k is a GAME meaning restrictions to make the fact of playing unjoyable for both.

 

It's like going to play football and say "ok, we will make two teams, one of 11, the other of 13, and the latter will be allowed to have two goal keepers that will play in a tiniest goal. But no fear gentlemen, the team that plays with 11 players and use the standard football rules will start with one extra goal.

 

Restrictions is what made us appreciate the game but they are tough to make. Too light, and the game becomes a mess.Too tough, and the game becomes too complicated.

 

It seems that games developers chose the lazy method : let's allow everything and that way we can have a fresh beer rather of working.

 

But we NEED restrictions. "But you can play unbound" cannot become a solution.

[ValourousHeart]

 

 

3- GW doesn't care so much about DA to make such an effort for our army

 

Sorry, but I have to firmly disagree on this point. Novels, datasheets/formations, models, starter set. GW cares about DA. They just have a bad habit of making the rules not so Eldar-y as one would like.

Yes GW make things for DA cause they know they sell but they dont put the necessary attention or i wouldnt explain why we had 3 disappointing codices in a row during the last 15 years...

The only things good for DA comes from the fluff (the books and novels) and the models (that are usually better than the average SM quality)...

Basically the DA are not an army to play but a collector series of models supported by a nice series of novels...

Period...

What are talking about the last 15 years.

Lots of people loved our 3.5 codex.

And I went a year with our 4th edition codex playing 3-4 games a week without losing a single game.

I actually started feeling bad for my opponents and would help them tailor a list just to beat me... and then still curb stomp them.

 

Perhaps your disapointment for the last 15 years stems more from you not being as good of a player as you think you are.

 

Don't worry about it, I'm in the same boat you are... I just played my first game last weekend since early 5th.... and I lost.

I can make lots of excuses, but the reality is that he was better than I was.

It didn't help that I didn't know the rules that well, forgot to use half of my armies special rules (sisters of battle), and didn't roll very well after turn one.

 

Those mistakes didn't help, but he outmoved me, had a better plan, and kept me in a reactive stance.

That is why he won... and that is why he is a better player... for now ;)

But it is going to take work on my part... lots of work.

 

I do understand that you and I may want items from other codex, but does the DA codex really need wave serpents and heldrakes?

Don't get me started on what I want to see for my Sisters of Battle.

But both codex can win they way they are... You and I just have to not make mistakes and out play our opponents.

[ValourousHeart]

Restrictions is what made us appreciate the game but they are tough to make. Too light, and the game becomes a mess.Too tough, and the game becomes too complicated.

It seems that games developers chose the lazy method : let's allow everything and that way we can have a fresh beer rather of working.

But we NEED restrictions. "But you can play unbound" cannot become a solution.

I didn't quite understand your football analogy, could you please explain that again.

 

I am not sure about you, but when I got started with this hobby I didn't have a full army and it would be years before I would have a competive one.

So my first game of 40k my army consisted of SM, Orks & Grechin, Sisters of Battle, High Elves and Dwarfs.

During that first year I used the box my attack bike came in as a Rhino for my sisters and the paper ork dread from the 2nd edition box set as my SM dread.

 

Everyone I talk to has a lot of the same memories... so perhaps your experience isn't that far off.

 

So what is wrong with bringing what you got?

 

As such I think that restrictions limit the fun... all in the name of competitive play.

Personally I would love to take my RW to a combat patrol tournament.

But it is this narrow and restrictive mind set that looks me in the face and says you're right that is very fluffy and would be awesome, but even though we are playing a divergent form of 40k, we can't be that divergent.

 

I guess that the DA must be really dumb because the only way the RW could possibly go on a combat patrol and hunt the fallen is if Sammie or Azreal is leading the unit.

That has to either be incompetence or micro-management... maybe both.

No wonder we have been searching so long and not found that many.... there is only so much those 2 guys can do.

[Loar]

Regardless of people's opinion on possible FOC changes, or formations or whatever they end up doing do our various wings, theres one thing people are overlooking:

 

For the first time in basically EVER, Dark Angels have a chance of being updated mid/late into an edition instead of being the testing dummy for codex balance/creation for a new edition.  Because of the quick turn around time in updating codex's for 7th, if we are to be updated it would be the first time DA are not handicapped with being the first out the door for the new edition or having to wait 3-5 years to be updated.  This means potentially not being stuck with paying legacy costs on units or being stuck with :cussty rules for as long as we normally do.

 

Will there be changes both good and bad?  Im sure there will be, but we also have the opportunity to be brough back in line with the balance of other 7th ed codex's and give us the current meta's tools and point costs.  Its definatly something that has really never happened for DA before, so will be interesting how we are viewed going forward or how good the army is once the dust has settled.

[Master Avoghai]

Regardless of people's opinion on possible FOC changes, or formations or whatever they end up doing do our various wings, theres one thing people are overlooking:

 

For the first time in basically EVER, Dark Angels have a chance of being updated mid/late into an edition instead of being the testing dummy for codex balance/creation for a new edition.  Because of the quick turn around time in updating codex's for 7th, if we are to be updated it would be the first time DA are not handicapped with being the first out the door for the new edition or having to wait 3-5 years to be updated.  This means potentially not being stuck with paying legacy costs on units or being stuck with :cussty rules for as long as we normally do.

 

Will there be changes both good and bad?  Im sure there will be, but we also have the opportunity to be brough back in line with the balance of other 7th ed codex's and give us the current meta's tools and point costs.  Its definatly something that has really never happened for DA before, so will be interesting how we are viewed going forward or how good the army is once the dust has settled.

Except that if the vanilla marine codex for 7th is released 6 months after us, I can bet we'll see lots of things that have been play tested using our 7th Ed codex and abandoned because not working.

 

In order not being a testbed, we should have a codex released 6-12months AFTER vanilla... Not BEFORE

[Isiah]

Indeed. I've always said: Codex SM first - divergent Chapters second :yes:

 

Cheers

I

[Frater Cornelius]

 

Regardless of people's opinion on possible FOC changes, or formations or whatever they end up doing do our various wings, theres one thing people are overlooking:

 

For the first time in basically EVER, Dark Angels have a chance of being updated mid/late into an edition instead of being the testing dummy for codex balance/creation for a new edition.  Because of the quick turn around time in updating codex's for 7th, if we are to be updated it would be the first time DA are not handicapped with being the first out the door for the new edition or having to wait 3-5 years to be updated.  This means potentially not being stuck with paying legacy costs on units or being stuck with :cussty rules for as long as we normally do.

 

Will there be changes both good and bad?  Im sure there will be, but we also have the opportunity to be brough back in line with the balance of other 7th ed codex's and give us the current meta's tools and point costs.  Its definatly something that has really never happened for DA before, so will be interesting how we are viewed going forward or how good the army is once the dust has settled.

Except that if the vanilla marine codex for 7th is released 6 months after us, I can bet we'll see lots of things that have been play tested using our 7th Ed codex and abandoned because not working.

 

In order not being a testbed, we should have a codex released 6-12months AFTER vanilla... Not BEFORE

 

 

SW was the second 7ed codex and in my opinion by far the strongest in my eyes, especially with Champions of Fenris. If anything, BA and GK feel much more like half-baked testbeds. I will even go as far as to say that functionally GK is a worse codex than DA and in terms of missed opportunities BA and their Campaign books are far worse than DA.

 

There is a bitterness in this sub-forum. Not quite as profound as in the GK section (which is really getting out of hand), but I feel that many DA players secretly wish themselves an Eldar 2.0 with their codex. Haven't felt anything like that in the SW section before, despite having lost quite a few things in the transition to 7ed.

 

Why not enjoys what you have, instead of what could've been. Being someone who enjoy the model-range and codex (but not so much the fluff, I admit), all that bitterness is making me a slight feeling of uneasiness, like I have missed something everyone else got.

[Chaplain Lucifer]

There is bitterness because since 2nd ed. we never had a fair treatment, exception to the v3.5 codex that DA players helped to build. It's not that we wish for a Eldar Codex but we deserve that some of the stuff we have over the years don't suck so much.

[twopounder]

Fair enough. The 'owner' of my local GW store has been playing DA since 2nd edition (C:Angels of Death) and he said that DW and RW were troops in one way or another since the beginning of time when no other specialist troops even existed.

 

On an educated guess, we probably might lose them as troops but gain alternative FoC where FA or Elite are mandatory choices, Champions of Fenris or Baal Strike Force style.

 

I'd have to grab my angels of death codex, but I'm pretty sure he's wrong. I believe the first instance of the *wings being used as troops was the Dark Angel entry in the 3rd edition rule book. I only recall deathwing re-rolling the first failed psychology test and ravenwing I *think* got a jink save. Great, now I have to go look.

 

EDIT: Thats right, I completely forgot. Yeah, that manager is talking out his rear. There were no troops in 40k back in 2nd ed. It was similar to fantay's HQ - Core - Special system. In 40k, you had HQ - Squads -Support. Of which, you could draw 25% as HQ, 50% as squads and 25% as support.

 

For example, if it was a 1000 point game, you could have a max of 250 points in HQ units, 500 points in squads, and 250 points in support.

 

Deathwing and Ravenwing (like all marine bikes and terminators) were squads. Everyone could take terminators and bikes to fill up their squad requirements.

 

In fact, he has it completely backwards. In order to take a master of the ravenwing or master of the deathwing, you had to take ravenwing bikes or deathwing terminators (respectively) first! So instead of unlocking *wing units with HQ's, you unlocked HQ's with *wing units.

 

SECOND EDIT:

 

Deathwing were immune to psychology and passed all tests. Ravenwing were expert riders (reroll skid tests and ignore shooting modifiers against fast vehicles) and had jink (-1 modifier when shooting at them if they move 10" - 20" and a -3 if they move over 20")

 

It gets hard to remember these things when 6 editions are floating around you head :P

[Varizel]

Regardless of people's opinion on possible FOC changes, or formations or whatever they end up doing do our various wings, theres one thing people are overlooking:

For the first time in basically EVER, Dark Angels have a chance of being updated mid/late into an edition instead of being the testing dummy for codex balance/creation for a new edition. Because of the quick turn around time in updating codex's for 7th, if we are to be updated it would be the first time DA are not handicapped with being the first out the door for the new edition or having to wait 3-5 years to be updated. This means potentially not being stuck with paying legacy costs on units or being stuck with :cussty rules for as long as we normally do.

Will there be changes both good and bad? Im sure there will be, but we also have the opportunity to be brough back in line with the balance of other 7th ed codex's and give us the current meta's tools and point costs. Its definatly something that has really never happened for DA before, so will be interesting how we are viewed going forward or how good the army is once the dust has settled.

Except that if the vanilla marine codex for 7th is released 6 months after us, I can bet we'll see lots of things that have been play tested using our 7th Ed codex and abandoned because not working.

In order not being a testbed, we should have a codex released 6-12months AFTER vanilla... Not BEFORE

SW was the second 7ed codex and in my opinion by far the strongest in my eyes, especially with Champions of Fenris. If anything, BA and GK feel much more like half-baked testbeds. I will even go as far as to say that functionally GK is a worse codex than DA and in terms of missed opportunities BA and their Campaign books are far worse than DA.

There is a bitterness in this sub-forum. Not quite as profound as in the GK section (which is really getting out of hand), but I feel that many DA players secretly wish themselves an Eldar 2.0 with their codex. Haven't felt anything like that in the SW section before, despite having lost quite a few things in the transition to 7ed.

Actually i thought BA is pretty strong with Drop pod elements. The focus shifts though from jump troops to Tactical marines imho. The new BA codex itself i thought was pretty well done, i admit, however that the formation they got... is pale in comparison the one nids got. Wolf codex is just an adjustment of an already powerful 5th ed codex Space Wolves that kinda loses its luster when 6th and 7th ed hit, so not much adjusting needed i suppose to retain some of the oomph?

Why not enjoys what you have, instead of what could've been. Being someone who enjoy the model-range and codex (but not so much the fluff, I admit), all that bitterness is making me a slight feeling of uneasiness, like I have missed something everyone else got.

I totally understand your feeling about fluff... after all wolf's fluff sucks... big time, that's why you want to wear robes now right ? Cuz our fluff is top notch hahaha. I mean, you'd rather have secret handshakes right, compared to howling to the moon .

j/k

My 2 cents

[SvenONE]

@MasterAvoghai I think your football analogy is a little bit of a stretch.  In 40K terms, the size of the playing field and the objectives (tinier goal) aren't changing when someone ops to play an unbound list.  It would be more like the opposing team playing with 11 forwards and the home team playing with a standard lineup.

 

But I've long held the conspiracy theory that our codex wasn't written with 6th in mind.  I think it was written sometime in the 5th, shelved and then updated once 6th was being released.  My only evidence of this is our seemingly infatuation with power swords, (CM/DWSarge unable to take thunder hammer, Blade of Caliban, Monster Slayer, etc.) and how they worked in 5th (ignoring armor saves) were much stronger, in my opinion, in 5th.

 

As for "competitive" codex entries for us in the future.  I know I personally could care less about tournament play. It's a smug thing to say, but if you want a tournament style game -- this isn't it, and I think GW's carpet bombing of sooooo many new concepts of rules (unbound/formations/dataslates/the new faction system).  Even Maelstrom missions are terrible if you want tournament systems, nothing is worse for a game than objectives that are constantly changing with randomness.  I play Corvus Belli's Infinity for that -- that's a game system that is properly setup to be played in a tournament atmosphere.  I think GWs approach is their way of saying "hey, stop trying to make a square peg fit in a round hole by playing it 'competitively'".  Just because a game is played between 2 people doesn't mean you SHOULD make a tournament system out of it.

 

No, I could care less about competitive in a tournament sense, I want to see a smart and cleverly written book with point costs that suggest the developers were conscious when they writing it.  Part of my dissatisfaction with this book is how much it lacks personality (in its rules of course, its fluff is unmatched!).  The Landspeeder Vengeance and Nephilim Jetfighter exist!!!

[twopounder]

 

 

But I've long held the conspiracy theory that our codex wasn't written with 6th in mind.  I think it was written sometime in the 5th, shelved and then updated once 6th was being released.  My only evidence of this is our seemingly infatuation with power swords, (CM/DWSarge unable to take thunder hammer, Blade of Caliban, Monster Slayer, etc.) and how they worked in 5th (ignoring armor saves) were much stronger, in my opinion, in 5th.

 

 

 

It would explain the massive amount of typos and copy/paste errors in the codex. They tried to update it at the last minute before it shipped to the printer.

 

For tournaments, I used to enjoy them. Casual games are fun, but almost all casual players seem to have about 500 points of sloppily constructed models. It wasn't always this way. I remember when my local GW required that all models be painted and based in order to play and you could hardly squeeze on to a table because the place was so packed.

 

Now they don't seem to care what your army looks like, as long as it's citadel miniatures, and yet it's getting harder and harder to find casual games.

 

But then tournaments came down to people who don't know or willful ignore rules trying to bully their way to a win. Ultimately, it comes down to GW feeling it has to change so many rules to force you to buy a new rule book. At one point you could spend a few years to get the rules down solid. Now it looks like we're going to have enjoy units in the short time we have them or they are viable before another edition comes out and it's back to learning the rules and rebuilding the army.

 

I don't see these supplements changing that any time soon. If anything, it's just another stack of rules to become confusing, obsolete, and broken over the next year and into 8th edition.

[Frater Cornelius]

Fair enough. The 'owner' of my local GW store has been playing DA since 2nd edition (C:Angels of Death) and he said that DW and RW were troops in one way or another since the beginning of time when no other specialist troops even existed.

On an educated guess, we probably might lose them as troops but gain alternative FoC where FA or Elite are mandatory choices, Champions of Fenris or Baal Strike Force style.

I'd have to grab my angels of death codex, but I'm pretty sure he's wrong. I believe the first instance of the *wings being used as troops was the Dark Angel entry in the 3rd edition rule book. I only recall deathwing re-rolling the first failed psychology test and ravenwing I *think* got a jink save. Great, now I have to go look.

EDIT: Thats right, I completely forgot. Yeah, that manager is talking out his rear. There were no troops in 40k back in 2nd ed. It was similar to fantay's HQ - Core - Special system. In 40k, you had HQ - Squads -Support. Of which, you could draw 25% as HQ, 50% as squads and 25% as support.

For example, if it was a 1000 point game, you could have a max of 250 points in HQ units, 500 points in squads, and 250 points in support.

Deathwing and Ravenwing (like all marine bikes and terminators) were squads. Everyone could take terminators and bikes to fill up their squad requirements.

In fact, he has it completely backwards. In order to take a master of the ravenwing or master of the deathwing, you had to take ravenwing bikes or deathwing terminators (respectively) first! So instead of unlocking *wing units with HQ's, you unlocked HQ's with *wing units.

SECOND EDIT:

Deathwing were immune to psychology and passed all tests. Ravenwing were expert riders (reroll skid tests and ignore shooting modifiers against fast vehicles) and had jink (-1 modifier when shooting at them if they move 10" - 20" and a -3 if they move over 20")

It gets hard to remember these things when 6 editions are floating around you head

I am sure he meant squads. I wouldn't have understood it though, because I did not play in 2ed, so he explained it to me in a way I could understand.

[Master Sheol]

There is bitterness because since 2nd ed. we never had a fair treatment, exception to the v3.5 codex that DA players helped to build. It's not that we wish for a Eldar Codex but we deserve that some of the stuff we have over the years don't suck so much.

Lucifer nailed the point...

Yes i am not a good player but i don't mind about winning tournaments cause i play at home/club/FLGS and i dont mind losing a game if i enjoy it... I play basically with players of my level apart a couple of tournament players and i still lose almost all the matches against GK, AM, SW, eldar, necrons, and so on... just with CSM i can win...

What i would like is a codex that let me use everything written in it without feeling like i am doing a wrong thing cause that unit/equipment is a totally piece of crap

i love the LSV cause it's cool (better than basic LS and of the DS too) but cmon a LS that costs like 2 LS and shoots and dies like 1 is totally wrong, the sword of caliban is the sword of a champion and it's unwieldy? how can a champuion pretend to stand in a challenge always stirking last against all things? and the list can go on and on...

Now we have just 3 good units in our dex (BK, DWK, sacred standards) and to be honest they are ALL overcosted: DWK basically cause since 3rd edition when all the things were reduced in points several times the terminators were reduced just 2 points in 4th edition and now they are 40 points with the sgt paying his PS like a PF while they should be 35 points maximum; BK should be 35 points for what they have not 42 points (and basic DA bikes paying 6 points a teleport homer is frankly too much considering that if you don't use DW units taht are overcosted too these are WASTED points) and all the DA standards are 10 to 20 points overcosted for what they do (the standard of fortitude costs MORE than a BA SP that gives the same FNP bonus and he is a full clad warrior too)...

If we will get a DA 7th edition codex and GW wont fix these overcosted points we will be in this situation of overcosted units that cannot become troops and you will have to pay the tax of a couple of tactical/scout squads too... So basically it would kill the multiwing for games under 2k points cause (i play basically at 1500 or 1750) you are not able to put on the table enough things to exploit the sinergies pour codex offers (making you paying for that sinergy too much ofc)... Yes you can go unbound too but your opponents wil have the organized armies bonuses and we will still be the ONLY SM codex that gets a malus for its chapter tactic (stubborn but at the cost of not being able to fall back voluntary, IF dont get a malus for having bolter drill, BA dont get a draw back for having furious charge, IH dont get a draw back for having FNP)...

And as Lucifer noted the 3.5 codex wasn't a GW codex but a community thing that we at B&C (and in other forums) asked to GW cause the DA codex was a piece of crap (paying 10 points more a DW terminator just for having fearless? 52 points a model for that single advantage? no way)... GW gave us a good 2nd edition codex (in line with other SM codices with just the SW one stronger than the other ones) and then 15 years of crap...

Fair enough. The 'owner' of my local GW store has been playing DA since 2nd edition (C:Angels of Death) and he said that DW and RW were troops in one way or another since the beginning of time when no other specialist troops even existed.

On an educated guess, we probably might lose them as troops but gain alternative FoC where FA or Elite are mandatory choices, Champions of Fenris or Baal Strike Force style.

I'd have to grab my angels of death codex, but I'm pretty sure he's wrong. I believe the first instance of the *wings being used as troops was the Dark Angel entry in the 3rd edition rule book. I only recall deathwing re-rolling the first failed psychology test and ravenwing I *think* got a jink save. Great, now I have to go look.

EDIT: Thats right, I completely forgot. Yeah, that manager is talking out his rear. There were no troops in 40k back in 2nd ed. It was similar to fantay's HQ - Core - Special system. In 40k, you had HQ - Squads -Support. Of which, you could draw 25% as HQ, 50% as squads and 25% as support.

For example, if it was a 1000 point game, you could have a max of 250 points in HQ units, 500 points in squads, and 250 points in support.

Deathwing and Ravenwing (like all marine bikes and terminators) were squads. Everyone could take terminators and bikes to fill up their squad requirements.

In fact, he has it completely backwards. In order to take a master of the ravenwing or master of the deathwing, you had to take ravenwing bikes or deathwing terminators (respectively) first! So instead of unlocking *wing units with HQ's, you unlocked HQ's with *wing units.

SECOND EDIT:

Deathwing were immune to psychology and passed all tests. Ravenwing were expert riders (reroll skid tests and ignore shooting modifiers against fast vehicles) and had jink (-1 modifier when shooting at them if they move 10" - 20" and a -3 if they move over 20")

It gets hard to remember these things when 6 editions are floating around you head

In C:AoD DA had the AB squadrons (1-3 models) and LS squadrons (1-3 models) in troops... for codex SM and BA and SW too AB and LS were support units and single choice and not in squadrons...

in order to take any support unit in these dexes you had to buy a techmarine first while DA having them in troops didnt required that...

Now we dont have anymore the AB squadrons and SM can unlock troop bikes with a full customizable IC too...

Do you see why i say that after 2nd edition codex we had only crap?