Codex: Space Marines | Multi-Part Intercessor & Vanguard Vet Teaser | Legends Culling

[ChapterMasterGodfrey]

The prospect of a year long stop gap in a three year edition just massively demotivates me to play tbh

[Blindhamster]

1 hour ago, ChapterMasterGodfrey said:

The prospect of a year long stop gap in a three year edition just massively demotivates me to play tbh

tbf, this is how everyone that isn’t marines feels every edition 

[Orion]

1 hour ago, ChapterMasterGodfrey said:

The prospect of a year long stop gap in a three year edition just massively demotivates me to play tbh

 

Can I interest you in a $700 codex?

It even lets you know this edition of the codex is limited

 

[Rhavien]

29 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

tbf, this is how everyone that isn’t marines feels every edition 

Part of the problem for me is that GW doesn't tell us the plan. If we get a standalone Dex they ripped me off again, selling me a SM Codex and my real codex one year after. All other factions can play with their old books till they get their new one.

Like you, I really liked the last codex and the BA representation a lot. If I could play with it till I can buy my proper 11th Dex that would be fine to me, but as it is a supplement (We were already ripped off needing to buy two books) I can't do that. They already invested the effort to create those PDFs and they could have done it with their final form in mind. If this is the final form, just tell it to me and I try to adapt and hope to find a fitting detachment when the supplement finally comes out.

 

I also find it ultra annoying that they are shifting the weapon loadout around AGAIN just two years after releasing the current DC kit (Kit plus upgrade frame...). There is just no need to it! If they want to give out more pistols, I'm fine with that and don't care if my squad lacks a plasma and flame pistol, but don't tell me that my squad is now illegal because I build three fists.

Edited yesterday at 01:17 PM by Rhavien

[Rhavien]

Doubles...

Edited yesterday at 01:17 PM by Rhavien

[Mogger351]

13 minutes ago, Rhavien said:

Part of the problem for me is that GW doesn't tell us the plan. If we get a standalone Dex they ripped me off again, selling me a SM Codex and my real codex one year after. All other factions can play with their old books till they get their new one.

Like you, I really liked the last codex and the BA representation a lot. If I could play with it till I can buy my proper 11th Dex that would be fine to me, but as it is a supplement (We were already ripped off needing to buy two books) I can't do that. They already invested the effort to create those PDFs and they could have done it with their final form in mind. If this is the final form, just tell it to me and I try to adapt and hope to find a fitting detachment when the supplement finally comes out.

 

I also find it ultra annoying that they are shifting the weapon loadout around AGAIN just two years after releasing the current DC kit (Kit plus upgrade frame...). There is just no need to it! If they want to give out more pistols, I'm fine with that and don't care if my squad lacks a plasma and flame pistol, but don't tell me that my squad is now illegal because I build three fists.

Unless you're going to events, is there any reason you can't just use your 10th codex + supplement for now? With opponents permission of course

Edited yesterday at 01:25 PM by Mogger351

[HeadlessCross]

5 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

I agree with some of the displeasure from our Brothers in red and other divergent chapters.

I think the problem relates to giving all Chapters the "Combat Doctrines" rule. Blood Angels should have a thematic "Red Thirst" rule, Space Wolves should have a "Sagas" rule, Dark Angels should have "Grim Resolve" etc etc

 

What these abilities do could have been completely reworked for 11th edition, and made to be equally compelling.

The issue is that this assumes members of those "divergent" Chapters are smooth brained and are never flexible in operation. 

[Orange Knight]

9 minutes ago, HeadlessCross said:

The issue is that this assumes members of those "divergent" Chapters are smooth brained and are never flexible in operation. 

 

Why would you be making this assumption?

These chapters would still have access to detachments that promote certain units and playstyles. 

[Karhedron]

1 hour ago, Rhavien said:

I also find it ultra annoying that they are shifting the weapon loadout around AGAIN just two years after releasing the current DC kit (Kit plus upgrade frame...). There is just no need to it! If they want to give out more pistols, I'm fine with that and don't care if my squad lacks a plasma and flame pistol, but don't tell me that my squad is now illegal because I build three fists.

 

At least there is less difference between a Chainsword and a Power sword these days. Either +1A or an extra point of AP so I don't feel like I am missing out by not having the extra power swords.

[Alternis]

2 hours ago, Orion said:

 

Can I interest you in a $700 codex?

It even lets you know this edition of the codex is limited

 

I may have decided to acquire one purely on a whim, and I fully acknowledge it’s overpriced right out the back door. 

[DemonGSides]

1 hour ago, Rhavien said:

Part of the problem for me is that GW doesn't tell us the plan. If we get a standalone Dex they ripped me off again, selling me a SM Codex and my real codex one year after. All other factions can play with their old books till they get their new one.

Like you, I really liked the last codex and the BA representation a lot. If I could play with it till I can buy my proper 11th Dex that would be fine to me, but as it is a supplement (We were already ripped off needing to buy two books) I can't do that. They already invested the effort to create those PDFs and they could have done it with their final form in mind. If this is the final form, just tell it to me and I try to adapt and hope to find a fitting detachment when the supplement finally comes out.

 

I also find it ultra annoying that they are shifting the weapon loadout around AGAIN just two years after releasing the current DC kit (Kit plus upgrade frame...). There is just no need to it! If they want to give out more pistols, I'm fine with that and don't care if my squad lacks a plasma and flame pistol, but don't tell me that my squad is now illegal because I build three fists.

 

The weapon loadout stuff is truly annoying.  Bad rules come and go, but things that make you change up what your models are wielding need to be A) logical (aka something that makes sense, such as they forgot an option that was in the box and now it's a new opportunity for you) or B) becomes something easily proxy-able.  The DC changes are heinous because they have access to SO MANY different types of Melee weapons that all have their own profile that now you can't just say "Oh that Pfist is actually Y" because there's just too many options.  I get it when people get a little cross when certain weapons are boiled down to basics, but it does a lot for freedom of modeling, and adaptability for changing rules and older models.  This DC change is just a big "WHY!?" (I know why, cuz there's a handflamer in the JPAI kit.  But still!).

I'm just sort of glad I never finished my second squad.  Now I just move one of my PFists from Squad 1 into Squad 2 and make the appropriate changes otherwise.  But if you put the effort in for two squads... well who really wants THREE full squads of DC?  A bit overkill.

Edited yesterday at 02:58 PM by DemonGSides

[jaxom]

49 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

Why would you be making this assumption?

These chapters would still have access to detachments that promote certain units and playstyles. 

I’m confused, I thought the point was needing Red Thirst and not having Combat Doctrines? Did I misunderstand?

[Lathe Biosas]

My only gripe is when a squad goes from different weapons that you've had to pick out and model go to a generic "all-in-one-gun." 

 

The new Sternguard all have "Artificer Firearm." Does that mean I can just put my old Boltguns from 30k on them and call it a day, or do I need to sprinkle random Combi-weapons throughout the squad?

[Mogger351]

48 minutes ago, jaxom said:

I’m confused, I thought the point was needing Red Thirst and not having Combat Doctrines? Did I misunderstand?

No you did not, I think your unprofessional language is throwing people off.

 

You are correct the red thirst is by common opinion the main defining thing that needs a rule for blood angels. 

 

Historically this ends up being a rule that incentivises melee play, which you correctly discern shoehorns them into "melee marines" primarily and means the marines are less able to react tactically and dynamically as a less divergent chapter.

 

This inevitably sparks the circular debate of how they aren't that divergent and have a normal chapter structure and/or shouldn't have their range output limited as a result of the melee focus.

 

Which then sees them being stripped of flavour and slapped back into the main codex and here we are.

 

I sympathise with people whose army loses identity, less so with those who want it to do everything and get it day 1. So mileage varies from person to person clearly.

46 minutes ago, Lathe Biosas said:

My only gripe is when a squad goes from different weapons that you've had to pick out and model go to a generic "all-in-one-gun." 

 

The new Sternguard all have "Artificer Firearm." Does that mean I can just put my old Boltguns from 30k on them and call it a day, or do I need to sprinkle random Combi-weapons throughout the squad?

Whatever you like, the profiles represent special ammo, combi attachments and other esoteric guns/gadgets. If you modelled a unit with volkite or grav weapons I think that'd be fine too.

Edited yesterday at 04:09 PM by Mogger351

[Rhavien]

14 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

No you did not, I think your unprofessional language is throwing people off.

 

You are correct the red thirst is by common opinion the main defining thing that needs a rule for blood angels. 

 

Historically this ends up being a rule that incentivises melee play, which you correctly discern shoehorns them into "melee marines" primarily and means the marines are less able to react tactically and dynamically as a less divergent chapter.

 

This inevitably sparks the circular debate of how they aren't that divergent and have a normal chapter structure and/or shouldn't have their range output limited as a result of the melee focus.

 

Which then sees them being stripped of flavour and slapped back into the main codex and here we are.

 

I sympathise with people whose army loses identity, less so with those who want it to do everything and get it day 1. So mileage varies from person to person clearly.

It's quite funny how you accuse another Frater of an "unprofessional language" and then go on to lecture us like some kind of studied Warhammer professor what is the truth about the hobby. 

[Spagunk]

Deja Vu from every edition argument that BA "Aren't a melee chapter". The cycle continues .

[Mogger351]

6 minutes ago, Rhavien said:

It's quite funny how you accuse another Frater of an "unprofessional language" and then go on to lecture us like some kind of studied Warhammer professor what is the truth about the hobby. 

It was sarcasm good sir/lady.

 

Edit: I'd note that wasn't a rebuttal either.

Edited yesterday at 04:40 PM by Mogger351

[DemonGSides]

30 minutes ago, Spagunk said:

Deja Vu from every edition argument that BA "Aren't a melee chapter". The cycle continues .

 

We've had people claim that they don't do overly ornate armor as well, from people I consider big BA fans.  People always have their own expectations and want to build a force that keeps those in mind, unless they're going for literal 'lore specific' projects.

 

1 hour ago, Lathe Biosas said:

My only gripe is when a squad goes from different weapons that you've had to pick out and model go to a generic "all-in-one-gun." 

 

The new Sternguard all have "Artificer Firearm." Does that mean I can just put my old Boltguns from 30k on them and call it a day, or do I need to sprinkle random Combi-weapons throughout the squad?

 

Personally, this is actually pretty ideal for a lot of situations.  Not every.  But not having to worry about if the Power Axe is Better than the Power Maul that might be better than the Power Sword is a mental exercise that brings little benefit to the game when the idea is "power weapons are good at opening up personal armor like a tuna can."  That's the more important thing to get right.

 

I'm still not sure if Combi-Weapons are being done quite 'right', but they are definitely a better game piece in that you're not individually rolling 4 different weird guns that may or may not even be all that useful for the at hand purpose.

 

Same thing with like Encarmine weapons.  There didn't REALLY need to be a difference between Spears and Swords, and them becoming one is an improvement, as you're no longer punished for wanting to make Cool Models, whatever way you think is coolest.  I consider that to be a good thing, especially in a game at the scale that 40k is currently played at.  Save individualized hyper specific war gear for skirmish or KT level stuff.  If the game went back to each side having 2-3 squads and maybe a single vehicle, I would probably be a lot more inclined to wanting that granularity, but that would be a big change to the game from what we've been playing for the past 15 years.

Edited yesterday at 05:09 PM by DemonGSides

[Evil Eye]

I strongly feel the weapon issue would be much simpler if we went back to Codices having a universal armoury that (mostly) everyone picked from; so a bolt pistol was a bolt pistol regardless of whether it was a Scout Sergeant or a Chapter Master using it.

 

I do think melee weapons can get away with more abstraction than guns; for example, I strongly prefer the generic power weapons of 5th and prior over power swords/axes/mauls having their own profiles in 6th and 7th. There are limits though and I will never not be mad that Tyranid Warriors got all their talons, claws, whips and swords condensed into "melee bio-weapons".

 

Guns definitely deserve their own profiles. There are occasions where you can get away with generic/abstracted profiles (Codex: Eye of Terror gave mutant hordes the option to be armed with "firearms" to represent the array of crude blunderbusses, muskets and stub guns they'd be armed with, and that worked fine) but things like combi-weapons being squished into one profile is ridiculous.

 

As a slight tangent, I did have an idea for how I'd personally handle combi-weapons. I'd do them like the 3rd/4th/5th incarnations, but instead of having one shot per game, I'd give them the following "reload" rule:
Combi-weapons are usually only designed to hold a small amount of ammunition at a time, and most be reloaded after every shot. To represent this, after firing, the attached weapon cannot fire again in the subsequent turn. The main weapon can still fire as normal. In the following turn it is reloaded and can fire again.

So for example, a Marine with a combi-flamer fires the flamer portion on Turn 2. In Turn 3 he can only fire the bolter portion, but in Turn 4 the flamer has been reloaded with a new canister and so can be fired again, and so on. This would make combi-weapons useful and less of a high-risk option (if you miss with your combi-melta shot you haven't totally wasted your points) whilst still giving them some drawbacks (and a reason to use the main gun).

[Mogger351]

50 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

I strongly feel the weapon issue would be much simpler if we went back to Codices having a universal armoury that (mostly) everyone picked from; so a bolt pistol was a bolt pistol regardless of whether it was a Scout Sergeant or a Chapter Master using it.

 

I do think melee weapons can get away with more abstraction than guns; for example, I strongly prefer the generic power weapons of 5th and prior over power swords/axes/mauls having their own profiles in 6th and 7th. There are limits though and I will never not be mad that Tyranid Warriors got all their talons, claws, whips and swords condensed into "melee bio-weapons".

 

Guns definitely deserve their own profiles. There are occasions where you can get away with generic/abstracted profiles (Codex: Eye of Terror gave mutant hordes the option to be armed with "firearms" to represent the array of crude blunderbusses, muskets and stub guns they'd be armed with, and that worked fine) but things like combi-weapons being squished into one profile is ridiculous.

 

As a slight tangent, I did have an idea for how I'd personally handle combi-weapons. I'd do them like the 3rd/4th/5th incarnations, but instead of having one shot per game, I'd give them the following "reload" rule:
Combi-weapons are usually only designed to hold a small amount of ammunition at a time, and most be reloaded after every shot. To represent this, after firing, the attached weapon cannot fire again in the subsequent turn. The main weapon can still fire as normal. In the following turn it is reloaded and can fire again.

So for example, a Marine with a combi-flamer fires the flamer portion on Turn 2. In Turn 3 he can only fire the bolter portion, but in Turn 4 the flamer has been reloaded with a new canister and so can be fired again, and so on. This would make combi-weapons useful and less of a high-risk option (if you miss with your combi-melta shot you haven't totally wasted your points) whilst still giving them some drawbacks (and a reason to use the main gun).

Honestly if combi weapons were only ever on characters or sergeants then fine, it just irks me when people want a full unit of defacto special weapons.

 

The current implementation for them as "shooting specialist gun" seems good enough to me to represent the needs of the unit without birthing silly things like termicide squads. 

[HeadlessCross]

53 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

I strongly feel the weapon issue would be much simpler if we went back to Codices having a universal armoury that (mostly) everyone picked from; so a bolt pistol was a bolt pistol regardless of whether it was a Scout Sergeant or a Chapter Master using it.

Which is what made many options straight up suck. Captains getting beefed up Bolters without needing a relic was one of the better design decisions made. 

[DemonGSides]

48 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

I strongly feel the weapon issue would be much simpler if we went back to Codices having a universal armoury that (mostly) everyone picked from; so a bolt pistol was a bolt pistol regardless of whether it was a Scout Sergeant or a Chapter Master using it.

 

They mostly do; the most cursory glance at three ubiquitous weapons indicates that they all have the exact same statline except that the WS/BS might change to be better for character units, and number of attacks may vary; otherwise, they are all the exact same.  No one has a Heavy Bolt Pistol that's different than anyone else's.  I don't think this would do anything except slow the game down, as well as make army construction more annoying, as you're forced to bounce around a book.  Datacards have been a blessing for not having to lug around a library for every game, even tho their nature as a fixed item is tough in a world of consistent updates.

 

 

[FarFromSam]

The days of wysiwyg are... done.  And it is nice.   Devs Counts as desolation squad etc. Means build the coolest looking load out and be clear with your opponent on what's what. 

 

 I run my lancer as a valiant all the time, no one knows the difference since new vehicles have hundreds of unrecognizable/uninteresting weapons.  Put what looks cool on your models and have a good time.

[Karhedron]

6 hours ago, Lathe Biosas said:

The new Sternguard all have "Artificer Firearm." Does that mean I can just put my old Boltguns from 30k on them and call it a day, or do I need to sprinkle random Combi-weapons throughout the squad?

 

I would say model them however you want. Since Sternguard only have one loadout, there is no risk of confusion. I am continuing to run these guys.