New Codex thoughts

[Subtleknife]

13 hours ago, The Emperors Champion22 said:

you say that they removed each chapters flavour but how? they specifically included detachments that clearly represent each chapter in all but name. imperial fists can take anvil siege force and play like they should in the lore, but you can also take ironstorm and play a vehicle heavy list without changing your army or needing to make your army a successor chapter. you couldve always done that back when there were chapter specific stuff but its the same effect with just different keywords.

 

In 8th and 9th you got an entire supplement along with multiple strategems and special rules for each first founding. I think it is fair to say they have removed each chapters flavour and squashed them together. Oh and as an ultramarine player i have also lost unit options to this update too. The special chapters are going to get roughly the same number of detachments but for their exclusive use. So not only are certain first founding loosing their uniqueness imo, they are no longer being treated equally which is worse imo.

 

11 hours ago, Minsc said:

 

Anvil Siege Force 
Imperial Fists.

Gladius Task Force 
Ultramarines. 

Firestorm Assault Force 
Salamanders.

Stormlance Task Force 
White Scars.

Vanguard Spearhead 
Raven Guard.

Ironstorm Spearhead
Iron Hands. 

Does it feel better if you look at it like this?

Personally I don't feel that any uniqueness has been lost, and that on the flip-side, I can now "legally" play my Salamanders in more ways than before - if I want to.

Previous chapter traits shoe-horned you to play a certain way/with certain units to optimize your list according to your trait: Bring these units/weapons or suffer the drawback of not having a trait that supports them. Nothing inherently wrong with it, but it wasn't always fun since it technically punished the player for bringing the "wrong" units in a list.

Now, if I want to play a certain list with my Salamanders, I can chose a detachment that supports the list better; i.e. if I want to try a Dreadlist, I might give the Ironstorm Spearhead a go - if I want to - or I can simply keep using the Firestorm Assault Force if I myself feel that it's unfluffy to use anything else for my boys in green.
In the end it's my (the players) choice one way or the other - and I don't see how thats a bad thing.


 

No, changing the names does not make it look better imo. We have gone from  having a supplement each with special rules for that chapter to being squashed together losing all uniqueness and chapter specific stratagems. It is a regression imo and not the direction I wished GW had gone in.

 

Edited October 15, 2023 by Subtleknife

[Blindhamster]

So in 8th you had a chapter tactic, some strats and a character for monst, exceptions were the 4 Divergent and ultramarines which has more units/characters 

 

in 9th, most of those things didn’t get touched, except for the divergent chapters which got refreshed rules, and in the case of templars got refreshed models too.

 

in 10th

- you get detachments instead of traits, they’re functionally the same thing if you choose to use them, as there wasn’t detachment bonuses before

- you get specific strats and items themed to match the detachment, you get less but everyone does, so that’s fine (and arguably what a lot of people had complained about in 8th/9th)

- you still get the same characters/units except where they were firstborn only and haven’t had a refresh, in which case their survival seems to be based on if they were plastic for the most part.

 

Now you have more options in that you can use a white scar character with any of the codex detachments as an example. But you can still make the mounted themed, hit and run force too if you want. The flavour remains but as others say, it doesn’t dictate how your army needs to be built/played as much.

 

what we don’t know, is how they’ll handle the DA, BA, SW and BT, but seems they’ll get their own books still, so just a case of waiting to see if they’re going to make it so that it’s standalone again (in which case, they’ll lose access to the main codex detachments/strats/characters etc) or if it’ll be a set of supplements (in which case, I wonder if they’ll open up the detachments to everyone maybe - as in can use them with codex characters etc.)

Edited October 15, 2023 by Blindhamster

[Subtleknife]

30 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

So in 8th you had a chapter tactic, some strats and a character for monst, exceptions were the 4 Divergent and ultramarines which has more units/characters 

 

in 9th, most of those things didn’t get touched, except for the divergent chapters which got refreshed rules, and in the case of templars got refreshed models too.

 

in 10th

- you get detachments instead of traits, they’re functionally the same thing if you choose to use them, as there wasn’t detachment bonuses before

- you get specific strats and items themed to match the detachment, you get less but everyone does, so that’s fine (and arguably what a lot of people had complained about in 8th/9th)

- you still get the same characters/units except where they were firstborn only and haven’t had a refresh, in which case their survival seems to be based on if they were plastic for the most part.

 

Now you have more options in that you can use a white scar character with any of the codex detachments as an example. But you can still make the mounted themed, hit and run force too if you want. The flavour remains but as others say, it doesn’t dictate how your army needs to be built/played as much.

 

what we don’t know, is how they’ll handle the DA, BA, SW and BT, but seems they’ll get their own books still, so just a case of waiting to see if they’re going to make it so that it’s standalone again (in which case, they’ll lose access to the main codex detachments/strats/characters etc) or if it’ll be a set of supplements (in which case, I wonder if they’ll open up the detachments to everyone maybe - as in can use them with codex characters etc.)

 

 

I don't really agree. In 8th and 9th you had your own specific chapter trait. On top of that you had the vanilla strats as well as ones that were specific to your chapter, same for relics etc too.

 

In 10th you lose your chapter trait, you lose your custom strats and relics too. It is a straight downgrade imo. That thing that made each chapter unique has been stripped back and taken away along with a lot of other parts too.

Edited October 15, 2023 by Subtleknife

[CCE1981]

Can we move on from the flavor.  There is a whole other discussion thread for just that.  I am interested in people’s thoughts on how the codex works.  New and interesting things they noticed that can happen. 
 

Thank you

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

8 hours ago, Lemondish said:

 

Each book has a code inside that can be redeemed on your mywarhammer account to unlock the details in the app.

 

I'm not sure there's a way to get that access before getting your hands on the actual book.

Ok I was just looking around for where I’d have to go to do it once I got the book . Thanks

[Blindhamster]

my copy hasn't arrived yet, hoping it does tomorrow. Interested to see what new lore (if any) there is

[Subtleknife]

7 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

my copy hasn't arrived yet, hoping it does tomorrow. Interested to see what new lore (if any) there is

Deffo agree there. I'm in the same boat. Waiting for it to arrive and eager to see if there are any new lore tidbits.

[Blindhamster]

I think we can expect some minor things, but not a lot.

 

im also interested in the idea that we may see updated models for vulkan, sicarius us and Lysander.

 

as tyranic war vets apparently didn’t make it in, will you go with using them as sternguard? 
 

and on the broader stuff above, I’m pleased that the company heroes seem fun at least as they’re one of the units I ordered 

[Orange Knight]

I'm very excited at the prospect of a new Lysander. I guess we can assume that characters that didn't make the codex are gone for good.

 

I was having a look at the rules for each one, and for some reason Vulkan is lacking the "Tacticus" keyword. Both Sicarius and Pedro Kantor have it now despite still being old models in MKVII armour.

[CCE1981]

6 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

 

as tyranic war vets apparently didn’t make it in, will you go with using them as sternguard? 

I would very much allow anyone to do that.  Similiarly and ‘bolter unit’ outfitted in a unique way as Sternguard.

[WrathOfTheLion]

My copy should be here sometime this upcoming week. I also picked up a few of the new kits including the Company Heroes box, which as far as a unit goes I'm the most excited about.

[Chainsword Cookie]

I consider the Detachments a marked improvement, in fact anything that declutters the game is very much welcome. With this current ruleset you are no longer locked into a color scheme to play as you wish (speaking in terms of "official tournament games") and you can very much play anything with any Space Marines chapter. I find this current iteration very liberating and it allows me to play a Dreadnought heavy list legally, then maybe try a Thunderwolf list next time with the Stormlance or mayhap infiltrate 10 Wolf Guard Terminator in turn one with the Vanguard detachment. 

 

The 10th Edition lends itself well to experimenting with army builds and the new Space Marines codex has a wealth of detachments which allow players with existing collections to play many and varied lists.  

 

I don't think that there is less flavor in this book. What we are looking now is simply GW telling us to play how we want with the models we have and with whichever paint scheme we fancy. What I also like is that the units have different uses and tactics when used in different detachments and this keeps the game interesting. 

 

I can't wait to see what the diverging chapters will get and I hope that those detachments will be cross viable with the rest of the Space Marines armies. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

21 hours ago, Subtleknife said:

It's exactly what I feared. The uniqueness of each first founding has been completely lost. The rules overall seem bland and I don't like basically being forced to use powerlevels nor the loss of options. 

 

10th seem to be one step forward two steps back for me which is only re-enforced by this codex.

 

I agree, I think they have completely fluffed the 1st company rules. I agree re the gladius detachment too.

 

I also seem to remember GW saying that there would be something to make up for the OOM change but personally I don't see it. 

 

Overall, a bit dissapointed if I'm honest. However, I think my dissapointment is alleviated by the kick ass terminator sculpts - although that makes the 1st company detachment sting even more 

The uniqueness is in their lore.

since when have any first founding chapters aside from 3 had any rules available to them that were even remotely accurate to lore?

[Lemondish]

6 hours ago, Subtleknife said:

I don't really agree. In 8th and 9th you had your own specific chapter trait. On top of that you had the vanilla strats as well as ones that were specific to your chapter, same for relics etc too.

 

The way I see it, quantity isn't a quality here. Nothing of value was lost. Sure, you had a ton of stratagems, but what value were they really if they were never used. Those vanilla marine Stratagems included an awful lot of effects that applied to a single unit... and, well, they aren't gone - they're just baseline datasheet abilities now. Nothing of value was lost.

 

The flavour came from the chapter tactics alone there, because the quality of all these other layers was super low on average. This was why you often saw blue Iron Hands - because the amount of flavour didn't actually bring quality half the time.

 

Now, I still get that flavour, but the bloat is reigned in so that every piece, from Stratagem to Enhancement is specifically within that Chapter's fighting theme. That's significantly more flavour than I had in all of 8th and 9th edition. Now I get quality effects all down the line without any of the chaff.

 

What I have lost is lore.

[Subtleknife]

@Lemondish and @Inquisitor_Lensoven I think we just agree to disagree. I would usually write a response back why I disagree, but I will refrain from doing so due to the OPs wish to move on from flavour. I do appreciate both of your responses though.

[Robbienw]

Nothing particularly earth shattering or new in the background info.  Many of the withdrawn classic units (assault squad, Land speeders, bikes etc) are still referred to in the fluff.

 

The procedures to give normal marines primaris organs are referred to and are said to be extremely dangerous with many space marine risking their lives to do it.  Which contradicts a bit what people have told me has been said recently in Guy Haley books about it being really easy now.

 

In the fluff section on Marine fleets there is a small addition beyond what is normally in there about serf pilots in space marine fleets and the craft they fly.  There have two void interceptor types (Broadhead and Skythian) piloted exclusively by chapter serfs.  The serf pilots are often fitted with high end augmetics. 

Edited October 15, 2023 by Robbienw

[Tacitus]

To get back on topic a bit -

 

Fury of the First: Jump Captain + Vanguard Vets + Sticky Cap strat. 

 

Ironstorm Spearhead: Techmarine Parking Lot - Target Augury Web + Dakka Gladiators and Repulsors (Each Repulsor will dropping nearly 20 "bolter" shots with Lethal Hits plus their other weapons - also with lethal weapons - Potential as well for Firestrike Turrets - either as a cross fire firebase, or to replace the Repulsors - but I think you lose a lot doing that. 

 

Vnagaurd Spearhead:  Infiltrating Terminators/Gravis

 

Strike and Fading Phobos/Reivers with the Stick Booby Trapped Cap Strat probably partners well with the infiltrated anvil above drawing a lot of forces from edge objectives. 

[DemonGSides]

4 hours ago, Robbienw said:

In the fluff section on Marine fleets there is a small addition beyond what is normally in there about serf pilots in space marine fleets and the craft they fly.  There have two void interceptor types (Broadhead and Skythian) piloted exclusively by chapter serfs.  The serf pilots are often fitted with high end augmetics. 

 

This is a great addition even if it's mostly useless.  It never sat well with me that EVERY vehicle was piloted by an astartes; that'd eat up the 1k available in each chapter.  I get the tanks cuz you might have to dismount, but most of the fliers, imo, should be serf flown.

[Tacitus]

16 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

 

This is a great addition even if it's mostly useless.  It never sat well with me that EVERY vehicle was piloted by an astartes; that'd eat up the 1k available in each chapter.  I get the tanks cuz you might have to dismount, but most of the fliers, imo, should be serf flown.

Dawn of War implied the flyers - Thunderhawks and in theory Storm Ravens are piloted by Techmarines which are not part of the 1,000.  Past Codicies have claimed the vehicle pilots are from the reserve companies.

[Dracos]

It says six detachments but three seem dead on arrival. I can’t count the number of times when, even where it’s thematic, a detachment like “First Company” was being laughed at and one of the three actually useful detachments like Firestorm or Vanguard were preferred for their Terminator heavy army. 

[Tacitus]

2 hours ago, Dracos said:

It says six detachments but three seem dead on arrival. I can’t count the number of times when, even where it’s thematic, a detachment like “First Company” was being laughed at and one of the three actually useful detachments like Firestorm or Vanguard were preferred for their Terminator heavy army. 

I'm actually looking at the Fury of the First formation more for the -Guard squads.  Warping a Terminator Squad around to Sticky Cap, or to Fade and Charge with the Captain's Reroll charges - the Battle Shocked to Death Enhancement also has some appeal. 

[Lemondish]

8 hours ago, Subtleknife said:

@Lemondish and @Inquisitor_Lensoven I think we just agree to disagree. I would usually write a response back why I disagree, but I will refrain from doing so due to the OPs wish to move on from flavour. I do appreciate both of your responses though.

 

And I appreciate your position. Cheers, bud.

 

47 minutes ago, Tacitus said:

I'm actually looking at the Fury of the First formation more for the -Guard squads.  Warping a Terminator Squad around to Sticky Cap, or to Fade and Charge with the Captain's Reroll charges - the Battle Shocked to Death Enhancement also has some appeal. 

 

I think it looks pretty fun, too. Most don't rate it highly for competitive play, which is totally fine by me is it ends up being fun anyway.

 

If I cared about always picking the most competitive options I certainly wouldn't have stuck with space marines this entire time lol

[Robbienw]

9 hours ago, Tacitus said:

Dawn of War implied the flyers - Thunderhawks and in theory Storm Ravens are piloted by Techmarines which are not part of the 1,000.  Past Codicies have claimed the vehicle pilots are from the reserve companies.

This is more to do with the fleet crews and void craft for void war and logistics, not the flyers piloted by marines over the battlefield.  The marines don't have the numbers to crew their spacecraft where you need a lot of bodies, this is just an expansion of that,

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

On 10/15/2023 at 9:22 AM, Subtleknife said:

 

 

I don't really agree. In 8th and 9th you had your own specific chapter trait. On top of that you had the vanilla strats as well as ones that were specific to your chapter, same for relics etc too.

 

In 10th you lose your chapter trait, you lose your custom strats and relics too. It is a straight downgrade imo. That thing that made each chapter unique has been stripped back and taken away along with a lot of other parts too.

Bruh.

the traits, relics, and strats come from the detachments.

 

you’re literally upset about a complete non-issue.

[Dracos]

1 minute ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Bruh.

the traits, relics, and strats come from the detachments.

 

you’re literally upset about a complete non-issue.

You’re not wrong in the isolated context of 10e. I could be mistaken but it’s the assumption of the Marine+1 concern which prior to 8th had always seemed to be the case. 8th was one brief shining moment when the other players of the other Founders felt vaguely of equal value

 

Or I could be misinterpreting his concern?

 

My hope is Divergents are unique not +1 or it really is a step back before 8th. We just need to see a Dark Angel codex to see