Warhammer 40,000 General /40kg/

So - 40k space wolves have gotten so fucking boring to paint, playing them is all about assaulting and WOLF WOLF WOLF WOLF. the release of Inferno has me thinking of switching to them in heresy along with my guilliemarines... BUT - new plaguemarines are coming out, noone in my area legit plays CSM for understandale reasons... but the models seem really interesting

With traitor legions, how do the DG/CSM fair? are they COMPLETE shit = you cant win even if you went full tryhard with fucking daemons and stuff? i want to have fun but atleast have a shot at winning casual games at my club...

they are insanely powerful if you cheese it up.

Maybe the one that's recommended in the fucking op

Thanks m8, im going to pla .nids regardless. I've always loved them and they look great to paint and model. Unfortunately it seems i may have to get used to the idea of winning very rarely but at least i have the best looking models

try readium

The labels look out of place, I doubt it, but I can't be sure.

They're a mix of all the elf factions, instead of having their faction specific rules they get to have an extra turn whenever a unit dies near them which is pretty game breaking at times.

They're completely beginner unfriendly due to needed the codexes of all the elf factions that you're using as well as the Ynnari suppliment.

Is there a PDF of the core Shadow War rulebook?

FAKE

No they haven't been out yet.

Fake and gay.

Are this threads death?
Couple days ago we have 4-5 generals per day, with about 400 posts. Now we have 1 per day with little more than 380 posts.

I think it's because people are either playing shadow wars, or because after the series of events that was gathering storm 1-3, 8th edition and shadow wars, people need a slight break to recuperate

Would Iron Warriors ever get unique models?

New Death Guard when???

Most likely because the GROGNARDS are recovering from being BTFO!

Well I was fightinh them by making new normal Generals but it semms that doesn't help.

>>Charging units will strik first come 8th.

Warsmith is unique model

Well, people are kind of getting bummed out by 40K pretty much going the way of Age of Shitemar.
In the meantime, Shadowars is at least a Necromunda rerun, and can be played with your current toy selection so why not?

Probably an update to warsmiths, siege terminators, not sure about if they'll get a special marine like the chaos update format has been so far, and maybe some sort of construction worker cultist group.

So they changing old good fanbase for new retarded kids. Fucking dammit. They never shoud cross 999.M41 and touch 13 Black Crusade, especially in such retarded style.

Shadow wars scans when

>mfw when pathfinders are the unit used in shadowars instead of breachers
Why pathfinders? (Marker drones are a better source of markerlights)
Breachers seem like a great fit for shadow wars.
Is the xv25 op?
Is having a -2 modifier to your opponent's shooting any good?

MIGHT, it's not certain yet but the peeks have not been promising.

I thought Roundtree was smart enough not to allow the nuking of a setting and game system which needs a few years before it has people buying it again, but I might yet be proven wrong.

in the shadow wars general, check the catalogue, all of the rules are there but some of them are in low quality scans

I'm thinking, maybe a plastic warsmith, plastic obliterators and Perturabo. As cool as that sounds it'll never happen

:(

It's entirely possible that they'd give some love to the other legions after updating the cult marines for Chaos, user.
More daemon engines or daemonic fortifications would be cool too.

>New Death Guard when???

I'm guessing next month. But I have nothing to prove this. I'm just excited for the release. So many interesting models to paint.

Are you the same guy who's posted it five times already?

Is it possible to get Praetorian Guard models anymore? I was thinking of getting some

>and can be played with your current toy selection so why not

Well, unless you play Inquisition or Sisters of Battle.

Okay so marines don't get real tanks because they're special ops. They get transports. Mostly shitty rhinos, which are hey a reliable vehicle that doesn't break down much, but is ultimately just a
bare bones transport without much armour and no fire support utility. Rhinos do the job without wasting resources, but are not special. Fucking law enforcement use Rhinos.

But they do need to operate alone at times, so they bring along rhinos with support weapons bolted on. Razorbacks if they want to still move a few dudes, pseudo-tanks if they don't.

Their main fancy ass specialist vehicle is also a transport, but one armoured like a bunker with a blow-open ramp to let them shock-assault out the front. Shame it's tabletop rules are shit, but it fits the philosophy that the most dangerous thing you can load up a space marine vehicle with is not guns, but space marines.

The real tanks? Guard have them. Totally different battlefield role. The guard aren't gaudily painted spec-ops wankers, they're an actual self-sufficient functioning army.

Which raises the question: Why the reversal of this policy with the Fellblade?

Fellblade are fancier, better tanks than Baneblades.

Predators are not fancier, better tanks than Russes.

This is pretty inconsistent right? It's not just me?

That's from before when the legions were the conquering army, and marines could get good tanks.

Because Special Forces need access to a more varied equipment to deal with all kinds of missions. They might not have fifty shades of tanks but if the mission calls for tank support, they've got it.

Also, there's a limited amount of Fellblades so who'd need the best tank the most, meatshields or SpecOps? The ones with fifty shades of tanks or the ones with close to none?

Basically, Fellblades should really fall under admech territory. Fancier, non-mass producible relic superheavy weapons.

Except the legions were still mostly using rhino derivatives, and were still just the speartip of invasion.

>Why the reversal of this policy with the Fellblade?
because in (I want to say third edition), GW was struggling to think of ways for 30k marines to be different from 40k ones and came up with the idea that maybe they used some guard tanks.

>Fellblades should really fall under admech territory.

The Admech probably think so as well. It's the sort of vehicle that, every time it's deployed to battle, a small group of Tech-Priests get sent to shadow it in the hopes it'll be destroyed and they can steal the wreck for study.

Chaos Eldar when?

Kinda don't have time to post here. Had a big game 8k per side ig sw vs tyranids, will post photos latter.

Repostan because no one commented

1500/1500

>>Victrix Strike Force

>Battle Demi-Company

Cataphractii Terminator Captain (1) - 125pts - MeltaBomb

Tactical Squad (5) - 80pts - Melta
Rhino (1) - 35pts

Tactical Squad (5) - 80pts - Melta
Rhino (1) - 35pts

Tactical Squad (5) - 80pts - Melta
Rhino (1) - 35pts

Centurion Devastator Squad (3) - 240pts - 3 GravCannon
Drop pod (1) - 35pts

Land Speeder Squadron (1) - 55pts - MultiMelta

>10th Company Task Force

Scout Squad (5) - 70pts - MissileLauncher

Scout Squad (5) - 70pts - MissileLauncher

Scout Squad (5) - 70pts - MissileLauncher

>>Skyhammer Annihilation Force

Devastator Squad (5) - 110pts - 4 MultiMelta
Drop pod (1) - 35pts

Devastator Squad (5) - 110pts - 4 MultiMelta
Drop pod (1) - 35pts

Assault Squad (5) - 100pts - Jump packs, MeltaBombs, 2 Flamers

Assault Squad (5) - 100pts - Jump packs, MeltaBombs, 2 Flamers

Captain drops with the Devastators as meatshield, scouts camp objectives, marines try to blow up tanks, cents kill enemy biggies. I want to expand the list to 1850, anyone got good ideas for antiair I could use?

>marines don't get real tanks

Except the predator was a DAoT age MBT.

>Predators are not fancier, better tanks than Russes.

Except they are. Or are you just looking at the game numbers, because on that logic a WW1 automatic rifle is a better gun than a modern .223 carbine.

I'd welcome for 40k getting AoSed. The game as it is feels like a chore, meanwhile AoS has better balance and plays faster and more engagingly with GHB.

>Except the predator was a DAoT age MBT.
Retard, that were Baneblades and Sicarans.

>The game as it is feels like a chore

The game feels like a chore because GW have bloated the game with and endless slew of mini-codexes and rules supplements. The core rules, for the most part, are still pretty functional, if unbalanced towards shooting. An across the board revamp to trim away some of the game's fat would be a good idea; an AoS-style butchering would not be.

Russ is heavy tank to break the enemy line.
Predator is fast tank for special operations, it can be dropped in middle of the warzone.
Fallblade was designed for legiones astartes to for breaking the line, with Mastdodns and other super heavy equipment and they are very rare in 40k.

mfw my friend said wraithcannons will barely hurt Guilliman.

i forgot d weapon rules.

on a 6 d6+6 wounds no saves

fucking top kek lad.

They're really good, for around 3-7 points extra on every marine you get
+1 toughness
Fearless
FnP
Relentless
And the, basically, CAD + tax decurion allows you to reroll FnP of 1 and give stealth from beyond 12"

40k mainly needs its army composition mechanic replaced with something simple. Between different FOC and formations (not to mention special relics from campaignbooks) spread over countless expansions, supplements, and digital downloads it is impossible for anybody to keep track of what is possible and what not. And makes it absolutely impossible to balance the game even remotely decent.

Locally we only play using the standard FOC, and big powerfull units like superheavies have to be agreed upon before somebody can field them. The game is still enjoyable that way (if you also ban Eldar)

r8 pls

Would I be better off with Coteaz?

>hasn't read the fluff
>calls people retards
>le ebbin baneblade light tank may-may
>Sicaran, created during the Great Crusade out of various other tank designs, such as the Rhino and Land Raider, by Ferrus and Girlyman, was used during the DAoT

How can one post be so wrong?

>40k mainly needs its army composition mechanic replaced with something simple.

We had that for years. It was called a Force Organization Chart.

>The core rules, for the most part, are still pretty functional
Armor Penetration and Vehicles simply don't work under the current system. Reworking every Codex would be needed, but honestly, returning to 2nd Ed with smaller armies and more strongly pronounced differences between stuff would be nice. Make Terminators great again.

>40k mainly needs its army composition mechanic replaced with something simple. Between different FOC and formations (not to mention special relics from campaignbooks) spread over countless expansions, supplements, and digital downloads it is impossible for anybody to keep track of what is possible and what not. And makes it absolutely impossible to balance the game even remotely decent.
Army composition however is literally the most interesting it has ever been. Formation are an incredibly good idea that is actually well implemented about 60% of the time.

Sadly formations seem to make people stumbling over eachother to buy more models, just to be able to play the latest cheese formations. I'm afraid that it will be the FOC that will disappear next edition, and that the formations cancer is going into overdrive.

>Armor Penetration and Vehicles simply don't work under the current system.

Right, but that's one faulty component out of a broadly functional ruleset. It's still not a reason to AoS the game, though I wouldn't object to winding things back to 2nd edition. Basically I just don't want the base mechanics to get any simpler; if they make them more complex, that's fine by me.

>smaller armies

Yeah, that'll happen. GW can totally sell more models that way.

>Army composition however is literally the most interesting it has ever been.

If by "most interesting" you mean "most fucked up." The whole system is a mess.

>Formation are an incredibly good idea

Yeah, if you want to be a WAACfag, don't have any ideas of your own or just want to throw money at GW.

>Army composition however is literally the most interesting it has ever been

The problem is that 40k is just about army composition now, and not about how well you play the game.

I'm not entirely against formations, but they should just allow you to field armies that wouldn't be possible using the standard FOC, and not also give tons of free special rules for no reaon. Being able to min/max what units you field is powerfull enough already without adding additional power through special rules on top of it.
You can tell that GW has gone too far with formation bonusses when there are some armies that don't even function properly unless you use formations (Genestealer cults are a decent example of this)

Again, another point on why I want 40k getting (if only a bit, not entirely) AoSified: you still need to fit in formations in force-org charts and you must pay points for them (just as apocalypse did)

This is the basis for a 1250 point list I am trying to make, what should I fill it out with? The lib can be librarius armor, biker, or termy armor. I could change out one of the HQs for a captain.

I have the following to pick from to fill with:

Devastators (Any weapon)
Contemptor Dreadnought
Vindicator
Cataphractii (Also have a captain)
Moar Tacticals
Scouts
Librarius Conclave
Assmarines

>Yeah, if you want to be a WAACfag, don't have any ideas of your own or just want to throw money at GW.

Well, for the first time since 2nd I actually have a reason to use my tactical marines and not just fill my comp choices with scouts and take actually good units, and stuff like traitor legion detachments are also pretty cool. Of course stuff like an optimized stealth cadre is bull, but for casuals games formations are a really nice thing. Hell, they tested the waters with apocalypse and it got overwhelmingly positive feedback, so I really don't see your problem.

>Being able to min/max what units you field is powerfull enough already without adding additional power through special rules on top of it.
Or they could balance the fucking models and tourneyfags can then restrict everybody to the FOC if they really hate fun that much.

>Formation are an incredibly good idea that is actually well implemented about 60% of the time.

There are two types of formation.

Type 1. Requires too many tax units. Buffs provided to said tax units aren't good enough to make them viable. Virtually never taken outside of fluffy lists.

Type 2. Uses units you'd want to take anyway because they're good. So provides free buffs to already good units. Almost always taken by players looking to win.

Rarely, if ever, will you find a middle ground. The only way Formations can ever work is if all units are balanced. This will never happen.

>Right, but that's one faulty component out of a broadly functional ruleset.

Leadership is borderline pointless currently, with most armies in the game either ignoring it or having stats high enough to make it pass almost all the time.

Assault has been penalized for several editions in a row, making it close to non-viable outside of specialist lists that usually involve deathstars.

Monstrous Creatures enjoy major advantages over Vehicles.

There is no reason ever not to put someone on a bike. (Oh alright, Nob bikers the exception that proves the rule because Orks)

Psychic phase is either all in or nothing. Psychic powers are a mixture of totally useless or gamebreaking.

>Yeah, that'll happen. GW can totally sell more models that way.

Funnily enough that's exactly what they did with AoS. Army sizes in 8th ed Fantasy were vastly larger.

Ignore that teleport homer on the chaplain, I forgot to remove it.

>le "why u h8 fun" may-may

>Army sizes in 8th ed Fantasy were vastly larger.

They were? All I remember from 8th was a few big things and 2-3 blocks of infantry. I got to field a small fraction of the units I got and instead just had to spam a select few to not get steamrolled. Previously I could have had the table full of different units doing different things.

>The only way Formations can ever work is if all units are balanced. This will never happen.
Then we can stop playing 40k right now and all start playing Rock Paper scissors from now on because that's the only perfectly balanced game. (Fluffy) Formations allow casual players to actually field that dreadnought or whirlwind they bought because it looks cool, and that's more important for the hobby than some sweaty tourneyfag that gets his stuff off ebay anyway.

>Leadership is borderline pointless currently, with most armies in the game either ignoring it or having stats high enough to make it pass almost all the time.
The thing they're doing with pseudo battle shock in 8th looks really good. I still hoped for a differentiation into discipline and morale to differentiate the factions more.

>Assault has been penalized for several editions in a row, making it close to non-viable outside of specialist lists that usually involve deathstars.
assault really would be the easiest thing to fix by making the WS vs WS chart extend beyond 3+/5+, allowing consolidate and assault from deep strike/transport at cost of your extra attack, and giving +2 I on the charge.

>Monstrous Creatures enjoy major advantages over Vehicles.
Monstrous creatures aren't good, it's just that vehicles suck. They should axe the damage chart completely, translate vehicles to Wounds/Toughness/armor Save, have them roll their saves on multiple dice and implement deteriorating profiles for Creatures/Vehicles.

>There is no reason ever not to put someone on a bike. (Oh alright, Nob bikers the exception that proves the rule because Orks)
Jink should be Edge-ari Aeldari exclusive again.

>Psychic phase is either all in or nothing. Psychic powers are a mixture of totally useless or gamebreaking.
Agredd. Just give every psyker a single Psyker stat on a d6 to successfully cast, give powers point costs and a modifier on the casting roll.

Remember that Apocalypse formation that consisted of nothing but space marine captains? people used that. Providing tools for casual players is important because those are actually in the majority compared to the WAAC crowd. Having that bundled up in formations allows tournaments to easily and broadly ban all the casual stuff by just banning formations and having everybody run FOC. So maybe you should grow some thicker skin and read the rest of the post, you nigger.

>mfw everyone I've talked to who plays 40k is somewhere between hyped to cautiously optimistic.
>most are positive and think the changes will be good and speed up the game
>not a single person I've talked to is butthurt about the new changes

I honestly believe the only people who are crying about the changes don't actually play the fucking game, because I haven't met one yet.

>They were?

Yeah. GW pushed huge infantry blobs HARD in 8th. The Horde and Steadfast rules made big regiments of 30+ models really good, in addition to GW cutting the price of rank-and-file infantry and pushing the average sized game up from 2500 to 3000 points. Even middle of the road armies like the Empire or Dwarves needed hundreds of figures, which were most often sold in £20 boxes of ten. That, more than anything else, is what killed Fantasy. GW just made the game impossible to get into.

>(Fluffy) Formations allow casual players to actually field that dreadnought or whirlwind
Sadly that isn't really what happend in reality. Because there are also formations for units that were inherently stronger to begin with.

It is actually the fact that there are formations that makes the sweaty WAACfag that buys stuff from ebay seem so prominent in the playerbase. People that care about collecting and painting there army have no possible way of keeping up with the powercreep, and want to field the army that they have collected and painted rather than some formation where GW wrote what they must buy for them.

>The thing they're doing with pseudo battle shock in 8th looks really good

Ehm ... no. Battleshock means that the only thing people will be playing is MSU. Battleshock means that large units, that can lose more models, are more likely to fail the morale test by a large amount, and lose even more models. People are already complaining that all they do is remove tons of models by the handfull, Battleshock would make that even worse.

Asking this again. Just watched a battle report on MWG with them and they look absolutely amazing

What casual player has a formation worth of SM captains?

I have tons of models for all my armies and cannot make use of but a tiny fraction of the formations because I don't have several units per type to spam. I never built my armies around spamming certain types of units nor am I interested in throwing money at GW to make my armies formation adherent for the sake of their latest brain farts. I didn't feel the need to buy 10 boxes of infantry and 5 monsters in 8e WHFB.

Do explain to me why FOC is the devil and spamming few unit types via a formation is king?

>inb4 "fun"

Assuming the 1HQ, 2 Troop, @ 2k doesn't change
I've barely changed my list since 5th Ed codex

>Just as long lived as my army in fluff

Selling 5 boxes of one unit type probably isn't as good for GW as selling 5 different boxes of different units. That, at least, makes use of their entire range, rather than one unit.

8th armies might have had more models than previous editions, but unit variety and number of units was abysmal. I remember even in old tournaments facing armies that stretched from one end of the table to the other, full of different units big and small. In 8th it was 2-3 big blocks and some monsters.

Well I'm too cynical to be optimistic about anything. And think that we know too little to make any definate statements on what the next edition will actually be.
If it is still mainly the 40k it is now, but with the mechanics from AoS that are actually good and more attention to balance, then great.
If it is just a straight AoS port with zero effort put into it ... I'll be reduced to only paining and never playing.

>Do explain to me why FOC is the devil
Never said that, read my post.

>What casual player has a formation worth of SM captains?
The dude that likes to model the most blinged out dude available.

>tourneyfags can then restrict everybody to the FOC if they really hate fun that much

Yeah, I wonder where I got the idea that you're not keen on the idea of FOC...

>The dude that likes to model the most blinged out dude available.

Because only a Marine captain is allowed to have bling, is that it? What exactly stops someone who's really into modelling just making any model they want to be all decked out, rather than making several captains?

Also, why must the entire game be sacrificed to make this one person happy?

>were still just the speartip of invasion.

Nope. Marines were the best all end all. The excertus imperialis was just there to secure the ground the Marines already won.

>How can one post be so wrong?

Because your lore ends where my feelings begin.

>Yeah, I wonder where I got the idea that you're not keen on the idea of FOC...
Honestly competitive 40k will always be cancerous as long the the release system works as it does. Addin or removing formations won't change that.

>Also, why must the entire game be sacrificed to make this one person happy?
How does it sacrifice the game? Having it and not having it be mandatory is absolutely possible, people did it with death from the skies.

>Because only a Marine captain is allowed to have bling, is that it? What exactly stops someone who's really into modelling just making any model they want to be all decked out, rather than making several captains?
Well I for one have 2 from starter sets, 1 promo from Games Day and 3 from single boxes. Fun fact: I don't even play Marines.

Militia is just the PDF. Army proper did take to the offensive on its own as well. SA are said to be second only to the Marines in effectiveness and made up a good quarter of the Army's front line combat units. Towards the end of the Great Crusade the Army was taking the lead in many areas where the Marine's couldn't stretch their forces into.

Because GW wants to make a game that only caters to people who are to bussy buying GW models and mech to actually play the game

I know one person that always buys the latest (rule)books, gets hyped by every single new release, then buys tons of new and old stuff ... just to stockpile it the closet or somewhere else. I didn't understand why GW went with AoS untill I heard that person talk about it.

How does this look for 1250?

Lib with the PC devs to keep them from cooking

>FOC is WAAC

ok

>Well I for one have 2 from starter sets, 1 promo from Games Day and 3 from single boxes. Fun fact: I don't even play Marines.

I have a single carnifex and some genestealers, and I don't play Tyranids. Where's my formation so I can field them? Why don't you let me have fun, GW!

>Battleshock means that large units, that can lose more models, are more likely to fail the morale test by a large amount, and lose even more models.

As opposed as removing all the models from unit because of Sweeping Advance, right?

Pretty much everyone is excited about movement values, armor modifiers and, indeed, battleshock, because unlike niggers like you they actually play the game and can see that it's bloated fucking mess.

I honestly can't understand how anyone can defend seventh edition after the fucking Ynnari.

Who would win, nids or skaven

Don't remind me, 30k is full of people like that. First they get into it because "so kewl, so fluffy, so not 40k" then FW makes all the units with GW models worse than their own models to boost sales and next they'll start making their own OC donut steel units puller right out of their asses that are even stronger. And people lap it up and you're a faggot if you don't like it. And if you don't have official FW models and your units don't look like official FW models, you're a poorfag to be laughed at and are ruining the game.

Who would win? Nids or Beastmen?

Do i need a tyrannocyte for my haruspex to be effective or what?

I just feel he's so slow especially with overwatch