Valrak 2026 release rumours video

[Karhedron]

9 minutes ago, jaxom said:

I love Intercessors and keep trying to make them work as best I can. Angelic Inheritors and Bastion are my favorite detachments.

 

Bastion is better in this regard IMHO as it actually buffs Intercessors. AIs only buff them if you add a character which increases their cost. Mind you, a 10-man squad with Lethal Hits from a Lt can do a surprising amount of damage. A squad with a 4++ from a Librarian is also a bit harder to shift. The problem is that both of those Characters provide more benefit buffing stronger squads.

[jaxom]

Yeah, that’s a perennial problem with putting characters in Intercessors. It’s part of why I’ve been using Bastion more lately; that and the +1 to wound OoM does work with all the bolter shots.

[TrevorLoLz]

On 4/19/2026 at 12:59 AM, HeadlessCross said:

They're completely different stat lines with the units doing completely different things. No, it was never going to be a replacement, it was just about being patient for GW to release a Terminator kit where the proportions weren't comical. 

 

I don't understand the downvoting to this. 

 

It was fairly clear that Gravis was going to replace Terminators in the long term, and for whatever reason that design strategy changed.

[Orange Knight]

1 minute ago, TrevorLoLz said:

 

I don't understand the downvoting to this. 

 

It was fairly clear that Gravis was going to replace Terminators in the long term, and for whatever reason that design strategy changed.

 

Did they ever say this?

 

To me it looked like a replacement for Centurions. 

[Lexington]

2 hours ago, TrevorLoLz said:

It was fairly clear that Gravis was going to replace Terminators in the long term, and for whatever reason that design strategy changed.

 

Yeah, if you look around at late 7th/early 8th Edition, you can see the sketches of an initial intent to mirror what AoS did in 40K. Eldar and Dark Eldar were clearly meant to be merged, fr'ex (the origin of the Ynarri model trio, I'd wager), and the 7th Ed Harlequin Codex was already setting up Slaanesh's doom as part of the bargain. Primaris were likely intended to be a wholesale replacement of Space Marines, with Gravis as the Terminator equivalent and Phobos replacing Scouts. Things changed, tho, probably mostly due to the strongly negative reception AoS got on launch.

 

Who knows what other wild shenanigans we missed out on?

[Scribe]

2 hours ago, Lexington said:

 

Yeah, if you look around at late 7th/early 8th Edition, you can see the sketches of an initial intent to mirror what AoS did in 40K. Eldar and Dark Eldar were clearly meant to be merged, fr'ex (the origin of the Ynarri model trio, I'd wager), and the 7th Ed Harlequin Codex was already setting up Slaanesh's doom as part of the bargain. Primaris were likely intended to be a wholesale replacement of Space Marines, with Gravis as the Terminator equivalent and Phobos replacing Scouts. Things changed, tho, probably mostly due to the strongly negative reception AoS got on launch.

 

Who knows what other wild shenanigans we missed out on?

 

Thank the Gods 40K dodged that bullet. 

[Marshal Reinhard]

On 5/18/2026 at 2:01 AM, Orange Knight said:

 

Did they ever say this?

 

To me it looked like a replacement for Centurions. 

I mean just look at them

[Robbienw]

Jes Goodwin was hinting to people that Gravis/Aggressors were a replacement for Terminators at Warhammer Fest in 2017.

[Orange Knight]

2 hours ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

I mean just look at them

 

They have similarities to Tartaros Terminators, but the duel fists and extra weapons also evoke Centurions.

[Blindhamster]

i dont recall him saying that to me, but at that warhammer fest aggressors weren't even announced. it was only the inceptors and captain (aggressors were previewed in July, warhammer fest was in May). I do recall when I spoke with him (for an hour or so) he said that there were designs for melee focused marines coming and they weren't necessarily what people might expect. I assume Aggressors is what he was talking about there.

Even in the Dark Imperium book, gravis isn't described as a replacement for terminator armour. It's described as being almost as durable with more advanced sensors and stuff (it's also described as more mobile, which is patently not true now but they did used to have a better movement than terminators I guess)

[Orange Knight]

@Blindhamster

 

I agree, and I hope that GW really thinks about the profiles and abilities that units should have going forward. The new codex is an opportunity to fix some units that have deviated from their lore.

 

I think Fly has to be returned to the Repulsor tanks, and Aggressors need some additional movement abilities to make them quicker again.

[01RTB01]

Just now, Orange Knight said:

@Blindhamster

 

I agree, and I hope that GW really thinks about the profiles and abilities that units should have going forward. The new codex is an opportunity to fix some units that have deviated from their lore.

 

I think Fly has to be returned to the Repulsor tanks, and Aggressors need some additional movement abilities to make them quicker again.

 

Narratively the repulsor is "floaty" it doesn't fly over stuff. It's certainly not in that mould and shouldn't be flying like land speeders or winged things. 

[irlLordy]

If difficult terrain movement penalties were still a thing, I could see the grav tanks getting rules to avoid them. I don't think they should be treated as actual flyers though, they're more like hovercraft.

[Robbienw]

1 hour ago, Blindhamster said:

i dont recall him saying that to me, but at that warhammer fest aggressors weren't even announced. it was only the inceptors and captain (aggressors were previewed in July, warhammer fest was in May). I do recall when I spoke with him (for an hour or so) he said that there were designs for melee focused marines coming and they weren't necessarily what people might expect. I assume Aggressors is what he was talking about there.

Even in the Dark Imperium book, gravis isn't described as a replacement for terminator armour. It's described as being almost as durable with more advanced sensors and stuff (it's also described as more mobile, which is patently not true now but they did used to have a better movement than terminators I guess)

 

He may not have said it to you, but he said it to myself and others there at the same time.  Essentially he said there were ground units coming in Gravis armour like the Captain, that would be filling the heavier armour role.  This was immediately after being asked if there would be Primaris Terminators.  He also said they had 10 years worth of Primaris designs (not designed model kits, but defined concept units to be made into kits) and that they would not be revisiting older designs.

 

Its quite clear they had a rethink on marine designs later on and decided they needed to keep some classics.

[Orange Knight]

1 hour ago, 01RTB01 said:

 

Narratively the repulsor is "floaty" it doesn't fly over stuff. It's certainly not in that mould and shouldn't be flying like land speeders or winged things. 

 

It flies enough. In the lore it goes over water, drops from orbit, can angle the gravity field to go higher or lower.

 

It's certainly not limited in the same way as a tracked vehicle.

 

And it would still be very slow - reduced to an 8" movement if it moved over terrain/models, which seems fair enough. No one wants to see it perched on top of small ruins - but that's something else entirely. The current rules don't match the official lore.

Edited 2 hours ago by Orange Knight

[Blindhamster]

58 minutes ago, Robbienw said:

 

He may not have said it to you, but he said it to myself and others there at the same time.  Essentially he said there were ground units coming in Gravis armour like the Captain, that would be filling the heavier armour role.  This was immediately after being asked if there would be Primaris Terminators.  He also said they had 10 years worth of Primaris designs (not designed model kits, but defined concept units to be made into kits) and that they would not be revisiting older designs.

 

Its quite clear they had a rethink on marine designs later on and decided they needed to keep some classics.

Some of it was almost certainly marketing speak for the "shiney new stuff". There was no way they were ever replacing terminators. 

But we can (as is mostly the case for us) agree to disagree. All I'm saying is the official lore in the accompanying novel described the gravis armour as not a replacement, and the conversations I had never suggested terminators were going anywhere. We can both read into those separate conversations we had however we like though 

[Evil Eye]

1 hour ago, 01RTB01 said:

 

Narratively the repulsor is "floaty" it doesn't fly over stuff. It's certainly not in that mould and shouldn't be flying like land speeders or winged things. 

Right. My understanding is the Primaris grav-tanks aren't true skimmers like Tau or Eldar vehicles or even the Land Speeder; due to the sheer weight of the vehicle and the (relatively) crude nature of most Imperial skimmer tech, the things basically brute-force the thing into the air by having it sit on a "cushion" of grav-repulsion, a bit like a real-life hovercraft but with force field sci-fi nonsense rather than air. Whereas a Falcon might make grass ripple in its wake, a Repulsor will flatten anything caught underneath it (as that one unfortunate traitor discovered). As a result it's definitely got advantages over conventional tracked vehicles, notably speed, but it's still interacting with the ground rather than ignoring it altogether and whilst it would be less prone to difficult terrain than a regular tank it wouldn't be immune to it altogther; it would still trigger mines, and especially soft ground or deep water would be a problem. And unlike a hovercraft, a Repulsor (being much smaller and more heavily armoured and thus much denser) probably wouldn't be able to glide over water in all likelihood, as it would be unable to spread its considerable weight over a sufficient area to not just sink like a stone. Hovercraft tend to be very large but not that heavy for the size of vehicle, and smaller ones are incredibly light. A hovercraft the size and weight of a tank wouldn't be able to lift itself.

 

If I were adapting the Primaris grav-tanks to my beloved 4th edition I'd have them all as "Tank, Fast" and give them the following rule:

Cawl-Pattern Grav-Plates: Unlike the more sophisticated skimmers used by the Eldar or Tau Empire, Space Marine grav-tanks rely on brute force application of repulsion to stay aloft and still produce a significant amount of ground pressure. As a result they do not count as skimmers, but may always re-roll difficult terrain tests. Note that it is also entirely appropriate to model them with tracks instead of grav-plates; the re-roll can be explained as sophisticated suspension or self-repair systems instead.

[Robbienw]

Lore is very mutable in 40k though as we know, and things don't always get through from studio to author.

 

I remain convinced they expected Gravis to be as popular as Terminator amour and had no plans to revisit Terminator amour in the mainline 40k marine line, and then things changed.

[Mana]

30 minutes ago, Robbienw said:

Lore is very mutable in 40k though as we know, and things don't always get through from studio to author.

GW changes the lore at the drop of a hat when it suits them, totally agree.

[Orange Knight]

24 minutes ago, Mana said:

GW changes the lore at the drop of a hat when it suits them, totally agree.

 

They tend to add and bolt things on to the lore as opposed to outright changing it.

 

One notable example of change is the timeline retcon in the Dark Imperium novels, and the community made a big fuss about it.

 

 

@Evil Eye I'd settle for Repulsors having Deep Strike, or being able to move over models and cause mortal wounds without having to do a "crushing charge"



 

Edited 45 minutes ago by Orange Knight