>>98945761
>Thoughts on the new missions and detachments?
It makes me a bit more confident that they're not going to keep HH on a 3-year cycle, but at the same time, that feels like a decision made way higher up the chain than the rules guys. Either way it's nice to see.

It was always safe, secondlets just lacked the vision to see its potential.

>>98945761
>fury of the ancients back
>pride of the legion brings back dedicated transports
>calvary can score
>drop pod assault is back
>end of turn and game scoring
Holy shit it's as if they were listening directly to the retards on this board, I'm surprised they didn't go full retard and bring back deep strike charges on the new mishap table while they're at it

>>98945823
HH is obviously on the 3 year track and if you think otherwise you're just writing a 1.5 year cheque for disappointment.

>>98945761
>TQ
Marine-slopl

>>98945858
What if I think there is a chance that they'll also put ToW into an edition pipeline which means that they'll shift every game into a 4 year track to make space?

>MFW I can finally take my fellblade as an HQ without taking a special character like some kind of faggot
>can fit all my vehicles with 150 points to spare for some techmarines and upgrades
Okay yeah this is based

File: Screenshot_20261111_16473(...).jpg (362 KB, 1079x1009)

362 KB JPG

>TQ
I don't like this aproach to list building, you can't build an actual army, just a bunch of tanks and tech support. You can't take any Mechanized Infantry or bikes

>>98945895
I doubt it. Kill team and necromunda are on similar churns and they haven't shifted the cadence.

>>98945761
>Does this save 3rd?
I don't know what problem you would have with third that this would be able to solve.

File: fury of the skew list.png (184 KB, 838x727)

184 KB PNG

So we finally get a Venerable Dreadnought prime advantage kinda, it just took halfway into the edition.

>>98945901
Don't know if it's me staying up late but they do seem to double down harder on their skew compared to 2.0 somehow. But it doesn't say you can't take allies on either of them.

>>98945915
Kill Team and Necromunda are specialist games, HH and TOW are mainline. You can release a new edition of a specialist game in October between other stuff, but GW usuall reserve the whole summer for a mainline.

>>98945901
I like that you can take a super-heavy as your HC

File: Screenshot_20261111_17280(...).jpg (299 KB, 985x1247)

299 KB JPG

>Can't take Rhinos

>>98946001
>Having your vets ride around in metal death traps

>TEN
>FUCKING
>DREADNOUGHT
>SLOTS

unironically how do you deal with this

>>98946020
Plasma, melta, and laser rapiers

>>98946020
5 melta guns kills a dread bro, this isn't second anymore.

File: Screenshot_20261111_17373(...).jpg (386 KB, 986x1293)

386 KB JPG

Ally in that all automita detachment and i don't need flesh bags anymore

>>98946031
>does not have the malefic type
I will not stand for this mhara gal discrimination, my boy dindu nuffing

>>98945969
The distinction between specialist games and main games the studio that designs them. Horus Heresy, TOW, Necromunda and Blood Bowl are all specialist games studio, 40k, AoS, Kill Team, Warcry (lmao) are main studio games. Both appear to run on a 3 year cycle, necromunda (the most specialist game to ever specialist) just dropped a largely pointless new edition 3 years after its last new edition.

This shit is on rails.

>Iron Warriors praetor chilling in his pimp wagon commanding his predators and Sicarans to action
Kino

>Armistice Day
>release a whole bunch of new ways to kill toy soldiers
hmn

File: Screenshot_20261111_17571(...).jpg (170 KB, 1079x579)

170 KB JPG

>>98945901
>Tfw your high commnd slot takes up nearly a 1/3 of your list
What was the LOW points cap again?

They all say 'the only additional detachments...'. Aren't allies still an additional detachment? That means no allies for any of em.

>>98946085
Think so, Have to wait for the FAQ and see l, people are going to try and claim that the high comand fellblade doesn't count to LOW limits

>>98946077
25%, so 750 at 3k. Slap that multimelta pintle on there you've earned it.

>>98946104
Huh. I didn’t think of that. I know someone’s gonna try it

This just makes it even more tucked up that Glaives can't be upgraded to decurion magna

File: Screenshot_20261111-132517.png (77 KB, 1080x256)

77 KB PNG

Objectively funny secondary

File: deep strike.png (112 KB, 649x756)

112 KB PNG

We are so back. My 9 drop pods have a lease on life again.

Very clever that you "deep strike" in deployment with all your normal pods.

File: elfinpsyop-elfin.gif (419 KB, 220x220)

419 KB GIF

Just ordered a fellblade, hate myself, but i like tanks

>>98945761
>Thoughts on the new missions and detachments? Does this save 3rd?
They could have published this on day one, it's not tied to a physical release.
This was a choice to not allow stuff until now.

>>98946041
Your boy diddu everyzzin

>>98945895
There's no way they're going to slow down 40k

File: star-trek-memes-1-2024111(...).jpg (25 KB, 500x370)

25 KB JPG

>Fury of the Ancients
>The Eternal Vendetta

>>98946275
11th was kind of a failure, all of the stores in my area that sell warhammer have 10 plus copies of aramgedon

>>98946185
>drop pods all deploy in deployment
>likely will scatter
>chunk of your army standing in the open before the game even starts
>orbital player always goes second
They HATE drop pods

>>98946283
Sounds like GW need to invest even more resources into 40k to keep players engaged. Maybe they could switch to a 2 year cycle and an even more heretical tech priest can invent extremis marines.

>>98946284
Just seize the initiative, bro

File: how-johnny-uses-his-stand(...).jpg (117 KB, 640x635)

117 KB JPG

I'm forcing all deep strikes to always use orbital drop rules in exchange for always getting to multi deep strike and being able to take a -2 on the table in exchange for being allowed to charge out of deep strike as well, this is how it should've always been

>>98946357
That table is awful, 1/3 chance to bounce back before even setting up a model? No thank you. Just use anvillus pods and storm eagles.

>>98946020
they are only ws4, just rape them with veterans.

>>98946370
This nigga doesn't use voxes!
Point at him and laugh!

>vehicles can now score

so uh, back to the sublime cohort giving vehicles line 1-3 I mentioned last night?

>>98945761
>TQ
I think it's the biggest u-turn they've made, but it won't be enough. People who like 3rd already play 3rd, and people with taste have more issues with it than just the mission structure.

>>98946533
>needed a legends pdf the size of the actual army list
>need new missions/detchments that overshadow the actual rulebook
This is pathetic

>>98946185
>>98946284
Say, the units did not Deepstrike, but they were in reserves.
Can they assault once they disembark?

>>98946441
Very https://youtube.com/shorts/CVdRFLvmBjE?si=7EPl-dusy0t0bgGb
Though results of 3d6 scatter? "Try again next turn" in a 4 turn game when you only begin rolling in turn 2 and can't assault on arrival? Damn.
Those are 2 results we could've done without and we'd get a neat 1d6 roll chart.

File: 20250131_225508.jpg (1.25 MB, 3199x1805)

1.25 MB JPG

>The Eternal Vendetta making dreadnoughts 2.0 monsters again (vs space marines, at least).

File: k3rq8bd7sgpy.gif (414 KB, 500x281)

414 KB GIF

>>98946450
Pimp my sublime, scoring Auroxen

>>98946628
>4 turn game
>He doesn't know

>>98946570
RaW, orbital assault is not a deep strike
You can move and charge
However, your pods drop during deployment and your units disembark during the movement phase as per the rulebook (if you choose to do it before turn 1)
Afaik orbital assault also doesn't remove the restriction for turn 1
TL;dr at first glance, you're allowed a first wave during deployment and subsequent waves starting turn 2 (unless you have a master of descent)
Your deployment wave CAN charge turn 1 but must stay in the pods until YOUR turn
Any wave after that cannot

>>98946667
Right, Deepstrike isn't the problem here because they don't do that.
But what they actually do is come out from reserves, and I don't remember if units coming from reserves can charge unless restricted by some other rule.

File: images (1) (23).jpg (42 KB, 588x384)

42 KB JPG

>>98946533
>>98946566
I want to hear what 3E apologists have to say.
>>98931991
>Thats fine actually. The issue is everything else about ROW (like orbital assault and tank armies).
Go on, defend the big company from the decisions the big company has chosen to undo.

>>98946667
OH
Also, because your units don't exit until movement, you can't claim a vox bonus during deployment because your vox model isn't on the table

>>98946689
Turn 0 orbital drops get +1 to the roll so you functionally get a vox for everyone

>>98946689
I am fine with that, and I praise that decision: the first wave braves the landing to pave the way for the second one. It's thematic.

>>98946680
It's deep strike only for the charge restrictions

>>98946689
>your vox model isn't on the table
Just deploy the MoD with strato vox first and everyone else within 9", its only deathstorms that have to deploy before the rest.

>>98946712
The +1 roll is mostly there so you can never roll the "you can't Deepstrike anything else" result. Global vox though.

Can multiple voxes combine? +4 from deepstriking next to a stratovox and 2 normal voxes

>>98945858
this, GW sucks like that

>>98946724
Sorry, ESL. Are you saying Deepstrike is the only entry move that may not charge upon entry?

>>98946635
Nice blood bowl team bro.

>>98946727
Your MoD can't come in during deployment, it's pods only

>>98946735
Yes

where do I find stl files of official miniatures for the purpose of piracy

>>98946752
Give me your credit card number, exp date and code
I'll get them for you

>>98946765
hahahaha, hahahaha.

>>98946745
Outflank doesn't let you charge either

>>98946667
>but must stay in the pods until YOUR turn
No, they disembark the first move sub phase eligible, not yours specifically, which will always be your opponents. This detachment is ass. It's not even haha fun, it's pay points risk losing during deployment.

>>98946818
Either way, it's not all reserve
Is there even a way to get outflank in a drop pod assault?

>>98946851
They're not eligible to disembark in the opponent's move sub-phase because it's the opponent's turn
Same reason you don't fall back during your opponent's movement
There's not a single rule that works like this in the game

File: Screenshot_20261111-16051(...).png (396 KB, 1220x1244)

396 KB PNG

>>98946862
>must Disembark in the Move Sub-Phase immediately following the Reserves Sub-Phase in which it was Deployed
>Must
Specific>General, they get out immediately.

>>98946872
You cannot disembark during your opponent's turn
As per the transport rules, you must select a unit before allowing it to do a disembark move in the move sub-phase
Only the active player may select units during the move sub-phase
Furthermore, there has not been a single FAQ or errata acknowledging that it is even possible or how unit selection would work if two players were both able to select units to move during the same movement phase
The only disembark explicitly allowed during your opponent's turn is emergency disembarkation and it's listed step by step how to do it

This rule just states that you can't hold them in during your turn to wait for your next turn
I swear to god this is what happens when people think wahapedia can replace the rulebook

>>98946947
Impact Doors skip all that. You don't even select the drop pod, it just happens. This was clearly not well thought out when they designed this. RAW your units never disembark as there was no reinforcement step in which they were deployed to follow triggering this rule. But assuming drop pods must function you still skip selecting a transport as the door rules force you to disembark asap from the pod hitting the table. You can't simply elect to not do a "must".

Can Legions Imperialis bases be used with Epic 40k? I have a bunch of LI based space marines, but I'd love to play with Orks and Xenos as well.

>>98946947
>As per the transport rules, you must select a unit before allowing it to do a disembark move in the move sub-phase
NTA But nothing in the drop pod rules says anything about selecting a unit, it says it MUST disembark, you don't get a say in the matter, its automatic.

>>98946947
You must [Disembark], the must overrides any "you may" or other restrictions under the [Disembark] rule; it must happen. The immediate [Disembark] is mandatory upon triggering [Impact Reactive Doors].

Even if your unit was stuck inside the pod until your turn, its still free real state for your pop for VP, stun the unit, and then probably just kill the unit inside.

>>98946977
All the other rules that force or break a sequence in a phase explicitly state it
It's all in the rulebook, such rules state "at the beginning/end of X phase" and if it can happen during your opponent's turn, it states "during your opponent's X phase" or "during your or your opponent's X phase"
Then it explains the sequence
And again, the rulebook specifically calls out that rules like that are the only rules that allow actions in the opponent's turn
The impact reactive doors open the doors upon deployment
Then you have to wait until your movement
The rulebook has a nice section at the beginning about how to interpret specific wording
Go read it

File: okily-dokily-do-ned-flanders.gif (51 KB, 640x480)

51 KB GIF

>>98946450
>spam status effects out the ass from multi-lasers, flamers, basilisks etc, all mounted on tanks
>use those tanks to get line X

it could work

>>98947011
>All the other rules that force or break a sequence in a phase explicitly state it
Not required, but its nice that many do
>Then you have to wait until your movement
You can't, you are explicitly required to IMMEDIATELY perform the disembark action. It's not immediately if you wait, is it?

I really hope the rumors of upgrade kits are true.

>>98947011
That is assumption based on precedence and what many new players get stuck on. The rules state "must" and "immediately". You're forgetting this breaks normal disembark already when you play a normal game and it arrives in your reinforcements.

>>98947023
If only there was a section in the rulebook that explained how to interpret rules and what wording is used to mean what interpretation...
(Wahapedia is not the rulebook btw)

>>98946872
Technically they aren't deployed during the reserves subphase, they're deployed during YOUR deployment phase

ablities or rules that break or contradict the core rules are always considered to override the core rules, its /tg/ 101, hate mtg so much.

>>98947032
what rumors

>>98947036
If only the unit rules had rules text
(The specific rules that tell you how a unit behaves contrary to generic rules are not optional btw)

>>98947047
Fatrak, about big upgrade packs coming for HH.

I don't think its fair you can have units pined or routed before the game even starts just because you are playing against a gay meme list

>>98946853
No, you saying only DS being limited got me thinking of outflanking assault units on LR Explorators, but no, never mind those.
It's so very good that orbital assault gets formalized in this rite. It might be a game changer...

>>98947054
Oh the fat pissboi, did he say what kinds?

>>98947071
Don't think so, just big. I think it's legion upgrades, ofc.

The fell blade looks pretty simple

>>98947073
Alright we'll see then or not.

>>98947080
It could be really fucking gay, like one huge upgrade kit including
>helmets for various marks
>pauldrons
>legion specific weapons
>vehicle upgrades (rhino doors)
>some extra bling
Something that if you buy multiple of you're always left with shit you didn't want

File: disgusted-clint-eastwood.gif (782 KB, 240x228)

782 KB GIF

>of funking course this Saturday is another tcg launch so all the tables are reserved at the lgs

>>98947033
According to the movement phase, you select units one after the other and elect to move or not move them
Every unit gets selected during the phase, whether you decide to move or not
"Must" replaces "may" in the disembarkation, yes, but you "may" disembark AFTER selecting the unit
Because not selecting a unit isn't an option, "must" disembark forces a disembark no matter what in your turn
But again, because "may" comes after selection, if a unit isn't selected then it must not do anything

Either way the disembark rule only applies to deployment in the reserve phase
The doors open upon deployment no matter the phase

>>98947049
I've never seen someone so smug about refusing to open a book

>>98947105
You dont select the pod, you cant actually. So it never falls under any of the rules you mention. You cannot ignore "must immediately" from a specific rule, even if it is not the normal procedure. >>98947043 and >>98947009 got it right from the long and short of it.

>if a unit isn't selected then it must not do anything
By that logic the are removed as causalities per the last line of the doors rule.

>>98947067
Agree. It should have been half your pods rounded up your first turn. It would have made the interactions so much more clean.

>>98947141
A) a pod must be selected in the movement phase even if the only action allowed is "no move"

B) you don't select the pod to disembark. You select the unit inside the pod to disembark

C) there's a lot of words you ignored between "must" and "immediately"

D) the rulebook itself states that when you have to do something "in the next X phase", it's YOUR next phase

E) the drop pod doesn't arrive in the reserve sub-phase, which is the requirement for the rule to apply, as opposed to the opening of the doors which only requires the drop pod to be deployed

You might think it's stupid, you can argue it's probably not what was intended, you probably want to houserule it, I know I will
But as written in the the new detachment, the impact reactive doors special rule, and how the rulebook tells you to read special rules, they stay in until your turn
That disembarkation requires specific triggers. Those triggers don't happen. They don't disembark

>>98947092
whats worse is a tcg event thats planned that never really goes ahead/isnt as popular as they were expecting so theres space where you could have played

>>98946977
>You don't even select the drop pod, it just happens
Yeah in your movement phase. So during the deployment, they shall remain inside? Huh didn't think that'd be a case

>>98947629
During the movement phase, every unit that is able to move must be selected and you must choose whether you move it or not
A unit that cannot move cannot be selected
A unit that can move must be selected before you can end the phase
The unit that performs the disembark action is the unit embarked on the pod, not the pod itself. It's still technically "on the table"

>>98947705
Oh yeah, they'll totally disembark on the movement phase like it or not.

>>98947739
If it's your own turn, as only the active player may select units in the movement phase
If you could disembark in the opponent's movement phase, the opponent would decide where you move, doesn't really make sense
Unless the opponent moves near the pod and you react to disembark

>>98946283
It's less it didn't sell, I probably sold pretty well, but Jew W got greedy and basically forced stored to buy double the allocation they needed to lad Jew WS books (which didn't work, they are having a fucking discount voucher in desperation this November and December to cover the lack of earnings)

>>98946027
This

>>98945849
> It was always safe
> But let's give the community what they asked for anyway, for free, something they have historically never done before

File: 250px-Alpha_Legion_Terminator.jpg (47 KB, 250x372)

47 KB JPG

>PoTL has 5 elite slots
>+1 from logistical benefit
>army vanguard apex detachment for 3 more elite slots
>+1 from logistical benefit

is 10 exodus's a serious army?

>>98947905
I think the restrictions listed with the detachment rule both of those options out.

>>98947073
Eh, they better have a better showing this time around than those resin attempts previously. The SoH and BA ones were mediocre at best, and pitiful considering the asking price.

>>98947935
oh right
8 exoduses then?

>>98945849
Said potential being turned into a 2e hybrid

Also
>It was always safe
Safe is 80% of heresy players leaving between the release of 3.0 and now

>>98947997
The restrictions prevent you from taking logistical benefit or any detachments except the few they've list there. Unless I'm misreading something it looks like you'd be capped at 5.

>>98947841
Phew then I'm glad, because it would be a massacre, as the Orbital Assault player always goes second and his units are probably scattered all over.
So your units wil spend the opponent's first turn inside their pods, then disembark in your turn.

>>98948018
you are right, I mixed up auxilary detachments as additional detachents

>>98947997
Praetor + Delegatus + 3 Logisticals would net you 9 Exodii.

>>98948021
If your opponent can kill a rhino then the unit is good as dead anyway. If youre lucky you just have an auto stunned unit. Its a lot of effort and points for a worse scout. Its basically drunk infiltrating rhinos that cant move after.

>>98948162
Yeah and if my grandma had wheels she'd be a bike

>>98948162
Are you stupid?

>>98948205
Not how that phrase is used

>>98948214
I dont know, is the ability to kill a 4HP AV12 unit that scattered into the open uncommon?

>>98948218
You didn't have to write all that, you could've just said yes

>>98948162
>It's basically the best vehicle in the game except it's immune to getting blown up in your deployment zone turn 1
How does that make it bad?

>>98945761
>Vehicles can now score
Does this mean the Tarantula spam list is now viable?

>Crusade Detachment - 510 pts
>Praetor (High Command) w/ Paragon Blade, Combat Shield and Cyber-Familiar - 145 pts
>Delegatus (Command) w/ Power Dagger and Combat Shield - 110 pts
>2x Centurion (Command) w/ Power Dagger and Combat Shield - 90 pts
>Tarantula Battery (Recon, via Logistical Benefit) w/ Hyperios Missile Launchers - 75 pts

>2x Officer Cadre - 255 pts
>2x Centurion (Command) w/ Power Dagger and Combat Shield - 90 pts
>Tarantula Battery (Recon, via Logistical Benefit) w/ Hyperios Missile Launchers - 75 pts

>9x Headhunter Leviathal - 135 pts
>3x Tarantula Battery (Recon, one via Logistical Benefit) w/ Twin Heavy Bolters - 45 pts

>3x Headhunter Leviathal - 255 pts
>3x Tarantula Battery (Recon, one via Logistical Benefit) w/ Twin Lascannons - 85 pts

All the officers just hide out in the deployment zone or cap any objectives that the opponent can't get to because to do so he risks being engaged by the 78 Tarantulas you just shat across the board during deployment

Add the fact the Tarantulas can now cap to the above and the opponent not only can't move his units without being deleted, he has to clear out 78 sentry guns to even ensure you can't win on objectives

>>98947090
I don't care anymore I'm mostly in for the lolz at this point. I have same five poses fatigue.

>>98948162
>If your opponent can kill a rhino
If my opponent wastes 5 Lascannons on killing a Rhino I might have to suppress a giggle

>>98945879
Where do you think you are?

>>98946001
>Can't take more than 5 Vets but can take 13 fucking Terminators

>>98946121
Only applies to Lords of War, which that Fellblade suddenly ISN'T because it identifies as a High Command now.

So you can take a High Command Fellblade and then either a second one in your actual LoW slot or even a pair of cheaper LoWs.

>>98946085
The thing is it's written the same way as other Primary Detachment-related restrictions, meaning RAW it only applies to linked auxiliary detachments.

>>98946135
Just take there Glaive in your normal LoW slot alongside the Fellblade in your HC then

File: Primarisbits.png (487 KB, 799x661)

487 KB PNG

>>98946635
I see that Redemptor sneaking in at the back

>>98947905
>>98947997
>>98948058
Read the fucking PDF, it's free

Max 5 Elites slots and that's it

Thank you GW that after seeing me and my friends sad about our armies not being legal or being auto lose, you gave us rites of war, so I we can play our armies. Half edition gone, but half edition still to go. Looks like voicing our unhappiness everywhere and not buying anything works. I ordered another 2 javelin and a preteus land speeder, os you better fix their rules in the winter FAQ GW.

>>98948350
avarge polish store game expiriance. although it is more like 32-40 tarantulas, most of us use buses and trams to get to the store, so transporting 78 would be a bit much.

>>98948544
>Read
Can't

File: 2928e573ff0796f8ac138552b(...).jpg (93 KB, 600x900)

93 KB JPG

Viable to paint some raven guard in raptors green as them donning some camo?

>>98946635
it's incredible how ugly the nu-dreadnoughts are
Was the castraferrum lighting in a bottle??

>>98949065
next year the new starter box will have refreshed castraferrum, and they will be peak (albeit huge compared to the OG)

While I try to avoid my next mental breakdown I decided to try and paint 1.5k or 2k of HH 2.0 marines in the next month. Should I do ultras, hands, sallies, BA or scars?

>>98949042
You paid for your minis, do as thou wilt.

>Wrath of Terra Deluxe edition is still up
Did they make shitton of them or is it not selling

>>98947899
This one does not see it.
>>98948016
This one hides behind numbers made up in his head.

>>98949042
you'd be better off doing AL for that

>>98945849
Is this potential coming soon or is it getting realized within 4.0 in a couple of years?

>>98949247
GW put out a survey to game stores
Those that hosted heresy before 3.0 saw an average of 80% decline in number of players
50% decline in playtime
Of those surveyed,
5% had a new heresy community after 3.0
40% of those with a heresy community at the start of 3.0 no longer had one after a year

Anyone here can also tell you that the playerbase fell sharply in numbers pretty much everywhere

File: images (34).jpg (47 KB, 660x465)

47 KB JPG

>>98949251
Alpha legion don't really appeal there just isn't anything list or narrative-wise I would wanna do besides painting some legionaries and going hard on tanks and dreads with the lot painted in British cold war camo. But camo on marines is often hit or miss I think.

>>98945849
Meet potential edition!
Always could or might eventually be but never is good!

0 warlord traits
0 khans on bike
7 hours reading the challenge rules

Give me liberty! Give me fire! Give me lawyerspeak writing or I retire!

Why no new special primary attachements for Auxillia

>>98949343
You’re not Marines thus not worth considering. Buy your rules to help GW make money.

>>98948384
How hard is it to repose them? The butt is annoying since it's so detailed, but there should be ways to repose the knees

>>98946010
They're the most resilient they've ever been, even lascannons have to chip DMG them.
The 3 melee legions may be better off using something else, and the cargo might lose a bit of setup distance, but they are still a means to fit 10 elite infantry that doesn't require a Land Raider, and 10 Power Fists would need a whole ass Spartan.
And then you bring a second and third Rhino, and the enemy needs 15 Lascannons.

>>98949343
You already have the equivalent with the new way tercios work

>>98946688
You mean an orbital assault which does not function like orbital assault (unavoidable and uninteractive alpha strike)?

>>98947905
Cant army vanguard or logistical benefit with POTL.

>>98948350
Units with movement 0 are explicitly stated to not be able to score objectives. So tarantulas are explicitly out even if vehicles can normally score.

>>98949269
Of course anon, your uncle who works at GW shared with you this survey. Please make up numbers that make sense if youre going to make up numbers, an 80% decline in players would be accompanied by an unprecedented drop in sales for the game.

>>98947899
>> But let's give the community what they asked for anyway, for free, something they have historically never done before
Legacies
Exemplary missions/units in 2nd.
Ruinstorm Demons/Militia/Custodes (before they became a proper book)
The slew of new missions and detachments 40k keeps getting all the time.

>>98949496
You can literally just google it dude

Also legacies was only thrown together after backlash. You can tell by the way it's written
The custodes and militia legacy lists was just so they wouldn't get sued by writing off armies people had bought substantial amount of models for

>>98949506
>you can literally just google it
Okay. Im going to go look up "GW horus heresy store survey shows 80% drop in players", and if I dont have that survey come up with those numbers im going to fuck your mother and give her a less disappointing son.

>Also legacies was only thrown together after backlash.
Just like in 2e right? They totally werent going to have any legacy rules this time around until someone complained online and then lo and behold all those things that were legacies last edition returned as legacies in this edition.

>The custodes and militia legacy lists was just so they wouldn't get sued
Lmfao.
In other unrelated news: GW recently discontinued rules for normal marines in 40k, making entire armies of their most popular faction of all time unusable. I await the class action any day now.

>>98945761
The orbital drop one, the second line says that units without deepstrike must be in a transport and then in reserves. You can still give them rhinos? It's just they have to start in reserves? It doesnt specify drop pods or transports with the orbital rule. You could give them dreadclaws too I guess but those models are so expensive.

>>98949522
>He can't even formulate a search engine query
It's been said for a while that 3.0 tards were drooling morons who are glad the game finally got dumbed down to their level
I haven't seen such a prime example until now

>>98949772
Last paragraph of page 7
Any unit arriving from reserves must do so via deep strike

>>98949786
But then how do flyers work?
>Units with the Flyer Sub-Type must be placed into Aerial Reserves.
Flyers don't have deepstrike anymore. Not even the dreadclaws.

>>98949802
Oh I figured it out, reserves=/=aerial reserves. Flyers are fine.

>>98949813
Correct!
The detachment rules also specifically call out flyers

>>98949772
cant do rhinos, but you can do termites. Although why you would I dont know, you dont get the pre-game deployment/disembark as drop pods and you dont get the multiple DS a turn caveat either with them, so youre basically just hampering the game-plan.

>>98949780
Whats that? If I formulate better I will be able to find the chain of random internet articles which lead to the claim, which terminates in "some guys on an internet forum said it was true in their area"? How interesting.

>>98949905
If you formulate better you'll find the survey
3.0 fan IQ strikes again

>>98949880
Eh, it's 30 points more
You get a melta and it can still move around afterwards
Emergency embarkation is now the only way to deny vanguard if you were on the objective at the start of the turn
Shove a tac squad in there you're pretty good

>>98949880
It's to limit the drop pods. I figure 3 pods are easy enough to hide barring a spectacular scatter. Any more and I'm just feeding my opponent units turn one. Then have a mix arriving from reserves.

>>98949506
>Also legacies was only thrown together after backlash
Winters is a fucking retard and misspoke, the fact you people still take his word as gospel over a year later tells me everything I need to know about you

>>98949948
NTA, and I don't watch winters, but it is very obvious it was an emergency update. We don't need to glaze GW.

>>98949506
They announced legacies at the same time as 3rd edition retard

>>98949958
I'm not glazing GW I'm calling out winters for being a mouth breather, this games got enough issues to complain about without pretending he's anything but

>>98949948
>>98949963
Winters isn't the one who "came out" with it
It's obvious from reading the document
There was a legacies pdf and it was small
The books leaked and they rushed to pad it out because of backlash
The previews for the pdf on Wacom do not match the final version and it was pushed back by weeks

>>98949994
Who the fuck is winters

I watched them announce legacies on the reveal livestream for hh3.0

>>98949272
You're right, they should make a tank that looks like the chieftain.

>>98949997
Some small YouTuber 3.0 fans blame for the edition failing

>>98948544
Crusade (vanilla) detachment: 1 Logistical
2 Elite detachments: 6 Exodus, 2 Logisticals
9 Exodii
I'm using the vanilla FOC to spam Exodus, I think that's the most you can get.
Unless you add a Champion for the 10th Exodus

File: Screenshot_20261112_10225(...).jpg (66 KB, 903x130)

66 KB JPG

>>98949880
>you dont get the multiple DS a turn caveat either with them
You do, it applies to any unit with deep strike, even after the initial drop. You can also use it for units with innate deep strike like jump packs

File: thank-you-lisa-for-teachi(...).png (257 KB, 1080x810)

257 KB PNG

>>98948672
>Looks like voicing our unhappiness everywhere and not buying anything works
And it only took half the edition! Quick, what's still missing?

File: Screenshot_20261112-132334.png (490 KB, 1039x1061)

490 KB PNG

>>98947905

File: 20261111_150437.jpg (316 KB, 920x1097)

316 KB JPG

The data terminal, weapon cards, and instructions for a Titanicus warlord comes in a cute black envelope now

>>98950093
1 high command for army vanguard, 3 elites, +1 logistics
1 delegatus +1 logistics, army vanguard, 3 elites +1 logistics
1 troop, +1 logistics
Champion, veteran cadre 1 elite
Champion, veteran cadre 1 elite

12 exodii

>>98950119
I already said I was retarded shut up

>>98949994
>It's obvious from reading the document
Yea, the difference between legacies in 2.0 and 3.0 is just night and day! Why, you can just tell which units were added last second due to the massive imbalances!

>>98949042
>Mk7
Is that allowed? No firstborn in 40k anymore either.

>>98949994
>and it was pushed back by weeks
Yea man, the week or so it was late was totally enough time to write a whole new document. Thats how these things work you see.

>>98950211
NTA but what ones were? I assume the "missing" book ones like vet breachers?

>>98950215
I think thats just an example of the color scheme he wants, not the literal exact models.

>>98950211
You can't? Lmao
I'll help you, don't worry
Just off the top of my head
All consul options
Veteran breaches
Veteran heavy support
Tartaros siege
All legion wargear option

>>98949343
SM got traits and rites of war, and Consuls now unlock stuff
SA started out with tercios, and then got SA Patterns as their RoW equivalent, and sort of legion traits as their trait equivalent. Idk what they could get.

Mechanicum will probably want their Cybernetica and Reductor FOCs. Me, I'd like Jump Magi and Reductor Troops other than just Thallax. They're okay but I don't want Thallax 24/7.

>>98950223
Im sorry if it wasnt obvious but I was being sarcastic. The idea that GW did such a thing on such a small turnaround is kinda laughable. If they really did invent dozens of new units for the edition on the spot/port dozens of new profiles they never intended to see the light of day previously in that sort of time frame it would be blatantly obvious based on the rules being absolutely unworkable and busted one way or the other. Which theyre not, the legacies units are - as with most of 3e - relatively well balanced with some minor deviations (enigmatii and locutarus are bad, sanctifiers are good).

The main speculation among the tinfoil hat crowd are siege terminators, because the community article gives a somewhat different impression of them and one of the big omissions in the book (later erattad) was that the tartaros terminators couldnt take fists and hammers. So therefore clearly that loadout was going to be reintroduced as siege terminators, and once it was reintroduced via the eratta which simply added the "can swap a power weapon for a weapon from the terminator weapons list" line for tartaros, the unit was changed into the gun terminators they are now. Some even thought this was originally done because tartaros were going to get a new box without those weapons in it (which didnt happen).

Vet breachers are, for all intents and purposes, a new unit. Veterans (and command squads) no longer get combat shields, but their gimmicks in terms of breacher weapons mean theyre not just "foot veterans with heavy shields"), especially since foot veterans didnt return proper until the ZM journal anyways. Them and veteran support squad are basically just new units invented for the edition going with the theme of split veterans (like tactical vets, assault vets, and despoiler vets).

>>98950220
You can't do math, I'll help you
Rulebook leak in mid-June
It was already printed so the rules team isn't working on it
3 weeks to July
Release of 3rd July 26th, 3 more weeks
Legacies pushed back August 5th, 2 more weeks
That's 8 weeks to work on it since the leaks

>>98950257
>The legacies units are well balanced
Dude, no one is this stupid, come on
They're not even in the same design philosophy as the Liber units

>>98950234
Yea man, they totally werent going to have "moritat without jump pack" until astartesfan27 complained on reddit. You can tell because the foot moritats rules are so half baked.

>vet breachers/HSS
Are two entirely new units. Vet HS/TSS as a unit literally did not exist prior to this edition. Neither did vet breachers (which are not just veterans with breacher shields, in loadout or functionality).

>all legion wargear options
lmao

>>98950261
Of course, the second the final line was written on the rulebook (which was obviously right before printing the next day, thats how these things work, it is known) everyone involved was sat onto the legacies document mines which were all that they worked on for eight weeks straight. This document was of course tiny and contained very few units, until they heard anons complain online at which point in the week or so it was delated from the initial timetable they added all the missing things back in. It was also the only rules release around this time, which is how you know it was all anyone was working on.

>>98950277
List the broken ones so I can laugh at you.

>>98950278
>>98950290
>>98950294
Holy shit GW apologists are willing to swallow so much cum

>>98950278
>>98950294
>>98950290
I've never seen so much sweeping
I really hope you're getting paid

>>98950252
>. Me, I'd like Jump Magi and Reductor Troops other than just Thallax
You can get those the second thallax get nerfed.

File: HWbfVkxbwAAuFsF.jpg (208 KB, 1660x731)

208 KB JPG

honestly I'm kinda lost with heresy
I have a bunch of stuff, a lot of it painted but I just don't want to do anything with it

like I don't know what identity I want my army to really have

initially I had a 2.0 armoured spearhead but the new armoured spearhead just doesnt work with what I have as you can't take stuff like tacticals in rhinos with it

>>98950328
>>98950324
>Can't list anything

>>98950344
What list did you run/do you want to run, and why doesent it work?

>>98950324
>>98950328
Im still waiting for those clearly imbalanced legacies units which show how last minute the rules are.

>>98950362
well back in 1st and 2nd, armoured spearhead allowed you a tank commander as a HQ
that is not possible in 3rd except for the new armoured spearhead detachment, but that doesnt allow you to take any infantry, which my list also had

so i'm kinda stuck with a bunch of tanks which I don't really use and an army identity I can't figure out, I see multiple ideas of "thats cool" but can't commit

>>98950294
X unit can now take Y wargear is because they forgot it in the liners
Terminator, jump, and bike consuls can suddenly take gear the foot option can't
Everything from the word bearers is unusable
Pathfinder is garbage
Primus medicae is unusable
Armistos does nothing
Veteran breacher squad is because people complained that they removed the volkites from the breachers
Attack bikes are bad
Every single vehicle is unplayable

I'm just at a third, should I keep going?

>>98950362
>>98950359
Sweep it up

>>98950362
>>98950359
>He gets impatient when no one gives him attention for 20 minutes
Are you 9 years old?

>>98950393
>X unit can now take Y wargear is because they forgot it in the liners
Because the libers were written with "no model, no rules"
>Terminator, jump, and bike consuls can suddenly take gear the foot option can't
See above.
>Everything from the word bearers is unusable
Diabolists are solid if youre running malefic units (which you are as WB most likely) as one of the few ways to attach a character to those units. Procurators are about as niche as ever.
>Pathfinder is garbage
Wrong, great duellist.
>Primus medicae is unusable
Only way to get medic! saves onto bike units/that fits in with terminator and jump units
>Armistos does nothing
Never did. But youre right, the unit is just there so people with one can use him in the same capacity he always had (a consul with a heavy weapon).
>Veteran breacher squad is because people complained that they removed the volkites from the breachers
Wrong, veteran breachers are a melee unit.
>Every single vehicle is unplayable
Also just entirely wrong. The SA vehicles are great, as is the assault ram. Legion basilisk and medusa are solid because theyre just basilisk and medusa tanks, and those are good.

>attack bikes are bad
Yea, probably. Not beyond the realm of other "bad units" but I dont see much reason to take them over jetbikes of some flavor. Although the heavy bolter variant is reasonably competetive with the alternative due to coming with a combi-bolter and firestorm/firing protocols/implacable.

>>98950376
So dont run them as HQ? run them as normal tanks and take a centurion like a normal person.

>and an army identity I can't figure out
The same one you had previously? A bunch of tanks with armored infantry for support/to hold ground/screen for them. Youre just going to have dudes with funny hats in with the infantry (or going to have to use a command rhino/spartan).

>>98950439
Ah, I see
You've never played the game
My apologies
I'll wait until you have before I reply to you again
Do you want some resources on how to find a group in your area? I'd be happy to help

>>98950439
>Asks for a list of bad units
>Is provided said list
>"W-well it's okay that they're bad!"

Moving the goalposts to sweep under them

>>98950476
>>"W-well it's okay that they're bad!"
NTA
Not what he said
Everyone involved in this shit flinging contest is both retarded and illiterate

>>98950476
>asks for a list showing that units are bad in a way which shows that the unit rules were written last minute
>gets give one (1) actual example of a bad unit, and that unit is just "slightly less useful than another"
wow, sure showed me.

If you actually read the legacies rules you could have at least noticed enigmatus cabal and locutarus storm squads as other subpar units. In line with units from the libers of course - 3e doesent have perfect balance so there are some bad units here or there - but at least it would have been less embarassing than just "well the attack bikes aren't very good, therefore document written last minute"

>>98950439
>Diabolists are kind of okay
I said the word bearers in general
Procurators are garbage
Warpfire is garbage
Tainted weapons are garbage

Learn to read

>>98950486
You can say NTA all you want, we all know it's you because you always double post

File: e6c731ea0deeedcbaa2454565(...).jpg (50 KB, 736x721)

50 KB JPG

>>98950439
>The assault ram is great

not who you're replying to but don't embarrass yourself, please

File: inb4 phoneposting.png (93 KB, 1080x531)

93 KB PNG

>>98950497
There's more than 2 people in this thread
I hate both of you
You're both retarded

>>98950511
Wow! I'm really impressed!
I'm also a baby that doesn't know how ms paint works
Or that page code can be edited

>>98950535
Doing these mental gymnastics to convince yourself there isn't more than 1 person that doesn't like you in this thread betrays your mental age
I'm NTA whether you want to believe it or not

>>98950577
>MS paint is mental gymnastics
You also forgot to post as the other guy as you used to every 2 minutes
Oops

>>98950584
>Could it possibly be that someone else in this thread thinks I'm retarded?
>No of course not, it's obviously one guy samefagging and editing evidence!
>One of the "two" anons responding to me stopped responding, could it possibly HAVE actually been 2?
>No, of course not, he obviously forgot to samefag despite him religiously falsifying screenshots!
Yeah, it is
Get help

>>98950655
Stop embarassing yourself

>>98945761
Back on track
>TQ
I don't HATE third, but these missions and detachments are a definite improvement even if they feel like they're coming late
If these are the "beta test" for next edition then I like the direction

>>98950671
Next edition is a curse word
I seriously hope they learned their lesson with how this one launched
I don't want my army to cease being playable in a year and a half only for it to be playable again in as much time

>>98950682
I've come to accept that we're on some kind of churn I just hope the churn is longer than 3 years
New editions can be good (in theory), and I don't have the time nor energy to doom about them anymore so I choose to hope instead

You can't take chainswords with tactical squad. 3.0 is garbage and the no model no rule thing isthe worst shit stupid gw retards did to this game.

>>98950696
>Can't give tacticals chainswords
Not like that would do anything anymore lmao

I’m not sure if it’s a hot take but I liked that vehicles couldn’t hold objectives in 3.0.

>>98950691
New editions can be good when needed
They're not often needed
Especially not at the rate GW churns them
And reminder that GW doesn't make new editions to make game better, they do them to push the game market in a preferred direction

>>98949453
>unavoidable and uninteractive
All you would be able to do is like 2-3 intercepts at most. Though it would be nice if that was available.
As for "unavoidable", pods can roll a 2 (1+1) and fail to arrive that turn. And that comes at the cost of essentially all tanks.

A good time for the Thunderhawk skycrane.

>>98950765
I think the sweet spots like 5 years, sometimes 4 if shit gets a little too silly toward the end, power creep is real and the reset button has to get pressed eventually

File: 20261112_162801.jpg (331 KB, 1495x1265)

331 KB JPG

Alright NOW it's acceptable

>>98950825
>no hunter killer
ngmi

File: 20261112_222549.jpg (2.48 MB, 4032x3024)

2.48 MB JPG

blood for the blood angel
(chainaxes are sick and should be swappable with chainswords)

>>98949506
Complaints about legacies are hilarious
You paid for the books knowing what was inside and you complain about what's inside
You already knew what you were getting
They gave you something for free and you still complain
Who cares what the pdf says? You didn't pay for it
Games workshop doesn't owe you anything besides what you gave them your money for

>>98950150
Bro that's 11. And yeah, 11 Exodus lmaoooo

>>98950278
>foot moritats rules are so half baked.
What's wrong with Mortitats Mortalis?

>>98950333
What's OP about Thallax? Not defending GW or anything, I just don't know. Their JSJ was removed...right?? Tau Crisis flashbacks

>>98950928
>Bro that's 11
NTA but
>1 high command for army vanguard, 3 elites, +1 logistics = 4
>1 delegatus +1 logistics, army vanguard, 3 elites +1 logistics = 5
>1 troop, +1 logistics = 1
>Champion, veteran cadre 1 elite = 1
>Champion, veteran cadre 1 elite = 1
>Total = 4+5+1+1+1=12

File: i-just-think-theyre-neat-(...).jpg (21 KB, 500x332)

21 KB JPG

maybe I should just focus on building and painting HQ units and retinues

I got a legion champion and some lernaens to paint

>>98951301
Make techmarines and forge lords

>>98950495
>Procurators are garbage
Procurators are what theyve always been, a weak combat unit with the potential to score extra victory points if you can manage to keep them alive. High risk, high reward.

>warpfire is garbage
>shred plasma
>bad

>tained weapons are garbage
Yea man, a power sword that reduces the strength of an entire unit on a wound is SOOOO bad. Totally.

Phage is an insanely powerful rule, there are few weapons and factions with ANY access to it, tainted weapons are situational but very potent in the right situations. You trade the offense of a fist or hammer for a significant defensive buff to your whole unit provided you can get it through. These things cripple any sort of power armor unit when in the hands of a centurion (or even a sgt a lot of the time).

>>98950509
Anon, flying transports are incredibly powerful as a delivery mechanism, you basically cant stop them getting through. The assault ram is an incredibly durable flying transport, to the point where even some of the best tools for trying to take out a flyer (like the deredeo or xiphon) are not likely to kill it.

Its an incredible transport.

>>98950778
>All you would be able to do is like 2-3 intercepts at most
Anon, you automatically go 2nd (unless you seize) in drop pod assault. You drop in, disembark, the enemy gets a turn of shooting at you, THEN you get to go. As opposed to the 2e version, where you drop in (after wasting an enemy turn perhaps), they cant do anything about it, and then you get to shoot them.

>>98950985
Nothing, I was being sarcastic.

>>98950696
Mechanically identical to a chain bayonet, so just take those and count them as chainswords. Not that anyone takes chain bayonets.

>>98950994
Currently? Nothing. Theyre - like basically all admech units - hyper efficient for what they are, being buffable 2w jump marines with access to very powerful weapons and a functional immunity to 3/4 status effects, but theyre balanced by the high opportunity cost and being in an army that cant fully support them. Theyre a powerful tool that has to be singularly powerful because it stands alone.

If you add jump priests that can join them without slowing them down for comptroller and easier buffs? If you add more units that can keep up with them and cover their weaknesses? Then suddenly they stop being fine, and become overtuned garbage.

Admech (and custodes, and SA really) are balanced around the fact that they have a small roster and therefore basically all their units are 1:1 better than their equivalent marine unit. Marines are balanced the fact that they have a tool for every situation, but that their tools are generally not as efficient as anyone elses at any given job (with the one exception being anti-tank, where marines are by far the best army at killing Av14 with their laser vindicators, rapiers, and kratos).

>>98951143
>>1 delegatus +1 logistics, army vanguard, 3 elites +1 logistics = 5
>>1 troop, +1 logistics = 1
Cant do that. You can only do one logistics per detachment. So its the troops OR delegatus doing logistics.

>>98951311
I have a praevian

>>98951338
>Yea man, a power sword that reduces the strength of an entire unit on a wound is SOOOO bad. Totally.
>Phage is an insanely powerful rule, there are few weapons and factions with ANY access to it, tainted weapons are situational but very potent in the right situations. You trade the offense of a fist or hammer for a significant defensive buff to your whole unit provided you can get it through. These things cripple any sort of power armor unit when in the hands of a centurion (or even a sgt a lot of the time).
The issue with tainted weapons is the combo of the same issue as most Legacies weapons (overcosted for their statline, with most costing around Thunder Hammer points for a shittier weapon) alongside the fact power swords as they stand are the worst power weapon choice in 3.0.

That said, tainted weapons are better than most legacies weapons because yeah, they have that unique ability as a buff weapon. You don't want to take them on the whole squad, you want to take two per unit of melee Vets because they'll be hitting at initiative (before most weapons that are actually good at killing MEQs and above) and debuffing the opponent's ability to kill you when you trade against each other with said weapons. The reason you want two specifically is because you need an average of 4 attacks to get a wound off, so having a pair of 3 attack Vets with them gives you a good chance to get at least one Phage hit in.

Eg: On average a pair of 10 man power axe/maul Vets in a mirror match will deal 10-12.5 wounds to each other. If the WB unit has two guys swap their axe/maul for the tainted weapon, you'll drop your own average down to 9.5-11.5 wounds due to having a weaker weapon for damage purposes, but the enemy gets kicked down to an average of only 7.5-10 wounds (the mauls effectively become axes with less breaching and the axes become power swords with more breaching) so you can snatch the win, especially with your +1 to resolution from the legion trait.

>>98951338
>>98951446
Tl;dr: Legacies weapons (and the legion weapons in general) are usually worse than the stock options in 3.0 because James' new thing with them is just tacking 5-10 points onto a power weapon and this tends to make them overcosted for their statline. Tainted Weapons seem to follow this trend at a glance because they're also built on the power sword statline, but this is ignoring how they're actually really good if you only sprinkle them in to debuff the enemy.

That said, it'd be nice if they went back to the old 'any power weapon gets the upgrade' instead of them just being swords, because then you could just make the two guys use "tainted axes/mauls" instead

>Procurators are what theyve always been, a weak combat unit with the potential to score extra victory points if you can manage to keep them alive. High risk, high reward.
My only issue with Procurators personally is they shouldn't have Bitter Duty, they should have a variant that works almost exactly the same but lets a Diabolist/Esoterist/Librarian/Burning Lore Praetor join them so they can actually fit their lore of "Chaos Apothecarion that is helping their master with his ritual components"

And because it'd let you model them as a bunch of bladeslave-esque Possessed for the bodyguards while the Procuratories/Apothecaries are the attached IC's apprentices

>>98951406
Not sure how I missed that, good call.

Though I can't remember if the Rewards of Treachery slot HAS to be a non-AL unit, if it doesn't you could use it as an ersatz second Logistics slot and take another Exodus via it

>>98951382
>Mechanically identical to a chain bayonet, so just take those and count them as chainswords. Not that anyone takes chain bayonets.
And this is why bayonets/chain bayonets should be "bayonet or combat knife" and "chainsword or chainbayonet" while not requiring a specific gun to be taken.

>>98951364
>The assault ram is an incredibly durable flying transport, to the point where even some of the best tools for trying to take out a flyer (like the deredeo or xiphon) are not likely to kill it.
The ram also entirely invalidates Storm Eagles because it's just them but better. GW needs to go back to the old lore when it was 20 guys (or I guess 22 to let you have an IC attached) and let Storm Eagles carry a full tactical squad.

>>98951402
For an example, since "well theyre more efficient than their marine counterparts" might sound hyperbolic or like butthurt marine opinions:
A thallax with a multi melta is 35pts, this is the exact same cost as a heavy support marine with a multi melta, they are in the same slot.
They have the same balistic skill (4), but here are the differences:

The thallax has one point of toughness higher.
The thallax has one more wound.
The thallax is 3" of movement faster and is anti-grav.
The thallax can deep strike natively (it doesent need a transport to do it like the heavy support squad)
The thallax has one more attack in melee
The thallax has an invulnerable save (not a very good one, but still)
The thallax has a functional immunity to cool based status effects (which is most of them
The thallax can have its characteristics buffed (more or less as you please) by cyberthurgy, the heavy support squad cannot.
The thallax is not a support unit, it scores full points for objectives.
The thallax has aegis of pain, giving it a situational fear(1) - very potent in combination with its speed and any status applying weaponry (admech have a lot, and the thallax can carry some of its own too, but obviously not the multi melta variant)
The thallax can also all take melta bombs, which is something few squads can do.

>The benefits of the HSS:
Higher willpower and intelligence (relevant in ZM admittedly)
Not bulky (less relevant)
One higher initiative. (still worse in combat than thallax)


Do you see what I mean? You will be hard pressed to find a unit in the marine list that can do the job of an admech unit as good as that admech unit. But this is fine, because marines have a tool for any situation and can therefore make well rounded lists with few weaknesses, but admech, between their limited roster and restrictive faction rules, cant easily do that and often have to over-specialize and double down on strengths while leaving gaps in what they can do.

>>98951446
>overcosted for their statline, with most costing around Thunder Hammer points for a shittier weapon
Possibly true, although this is true for all the "power weapon +" weapons (scythes, caedere, chainglaives, frost blades, terranic swords (not the greatswords, the normal ones)...). But tainted weapons, on account of having phage, are probably the "best" of them all, simply because they do something entirely different which a hammer cant do. You trade damage for a crippling debuff, and because theyre sgt list weapons you can sprinkle them throughout your units with minimal opportunity cost.

>legacies weapons are generally worse
Are there that many legacies weapons?
The only other ones I can think of (in terms of melee) are the NL escaton power claw. Which is, on paper, a strictly better thunder hammer (while their other special weapon of that tier, the headsmans axe, is technically a sidegrade on account of being S6).
In terms of guns its what, the WB and TS special plasma? Which is a sidegrade on normal plasma, the TS one in particular is great (if you abuse corvidae) due to being base D2.

I dont think its accurate to say that the legacies weapons are "worse than the liber weapons", they feel throughly in line with most of the legion options, its just that most legion options are somewhat niche or situational.

>>98951465
>The ram also entirely invalidates Storm Eagles because it's just them but better.
The storm eagle is cheaper (by a good bit) and has better/more varied guns. But its a good bit less durable. I feel like its a fair trade off and think both have good reasons to be taken over the other.

If you JUST want a way to get your hunter-killer missile of a squad to its destination, the caestus has almost no equal. It will basically always get through and get your guys where you need them. But once it does that it may as well stop existing, its one magna-melta cannon and cyclone missile launcher are super niche in terms of their damage, especially since it wants to move.
The storm eagle is cheaper and can deliver the same cargo but less reliably (more fragile due to lower AV and HP). But it also can be kitted out in more ways and can offer more utility as it flies in/once it disembarks its payload. Its a more flexible all-round unit also looks much cooler

>>98951457
>And this is why bayonets/chain bayonets should be "bayonet or combat knife" and "chainsword or chainbayonet"
I dont want to be a dick, but just model your dudes anon. Do you really need that shit spelled out for you?

>>98951406
>>98951454
Wait you can actually get 13. 11 from the Primary and then a Shattered Legions detachment with:
>Alpha Legion Delegatus w/ Exemplars of the Legions = +1
>Officer Cadre Alpha Legion Optae w/ Exemplars of the Legions = +1

>>98951495
Yeah, what I was trying to say is all the legion weapons are overcosted and tainted weapons are funny in that they look like their statline is even shittier than average until you realise they're for debuffing and really good at it.

>Are there that many legacies weapons?
I was mostly lumping the other legion weapons into the same pot in my head, but yeah the power claw is an outlier while the only other ones are the guns, which are either good but expensive (1ksons) or overcosted garbage (WB), think there's IH ones as well but can't remember them off the top of my head

Oh and shrapnel bolters, they're good. So overall the guns are probably good.

As for melee, aside from the claw there's the chainblade for NL as well, which is shit due to being a chainglaive in a bad disguise. It's not bad because the chainglaive is bad, it's bad because it's no different from the chainglaive and available to the exact same units so why fucking bother.

Then the other one I can remember off the top of my head is the Graviton Maul for IW and I rate that one down because it suffers the issue even otherwise good ones like the assault cannons/1ksons plasma/etc got. In that it's added to a specific wargear list rather than 'any model with [base weapon] can take [legion weapon]' and thus locked out of a bunch of units even if they make sense for it fluffwise (eg: IW can't take Vet Breachers with Graviton Mauls, but they can take Vet Assaults with them).

>>98951506
>But it also can be kitted out in more ways and can offer more utility as it flies in/once it disembarks its payload
Is that really worth it with the missions and snap shots though?

>also looks much cooler
Agreed

>>98951510
I'm modeling my dudes with bayonets + chainswords (counts as chain bayonet), thank you very much. I'm just annoyed at GW for half-assing this shit.

>>98951522
>Is that really worth it with the missions and snap shots though?
You actually dont snapshot on the drop mission, you simply only fire defensive weapons (like the front bolters on the storm eagle).

And it can fire its guided missiles (if you dont replace them) on the safe strike mission, or just take the less safe one and position to be invisible to intercept (which means you only need to worry about return fire, but afaik thats always a danger for flyers since that doesent snapshot against them anyways). So potentially? Worth it. Plus the potential damage is just higher, a kitted out storm eagle has four stationary lascannons + either a cyclone missile launcher (stationary) or multi melta (stationary), which feels much better than the caestus.

>>98951540
Fair. I was going to say "but just bring separate AT that's not needing to rely on Aerial Reserves" only to check and realise the ram costs more than the Storm Eagle so that's moot.

I still think GW should make it carry 20 guys again

>>98951382
Because shred is terrible. People don't choose chain swords on purpose, maybe axes and heavy axes/swords because it's a limit to the unit. But holy fuck do bayonets suck ass. Should have been +1a or rending.

>>98951522
>Yeah, what I was trying to say is all the legion weapons are overcosted
I dont disagree on that. I think theyre sadly just kinda undertuned. A simple "bandaid" for this imo would be something like dropping the cost of power weapons to 5ppm, which would make all the "power weapon upgrade" weapons 10ppm and therefore technically cheaper than a hammer. But this probably breaks something or another. Still, its definetly something I hope they managed to adress somehow in the future.

>it's bad because it's no different from the chainglaive and available to the exact same units so why fucking bother.
Because you can model it with a chainsword therefore dont need to buy an expensive upgrade sprue :^). Its why my assault squad can pull double duty as night raptors if I want them to, and why my despoilers can do the same for terror squad. But yes, I think its a tad silly that theyre literally the same weapon, why even bother at that point? Just have them all be "nostraman chainblades" the same way you have "tainted weapon"

>graviton maul
Feels subpar as a weapon, but the shock(pinned) fives it SOME niche use I think.

>>98951506
>more fragile
Basically meaningless if your opponent doesn't take tarantulas. It will never get shot otherwise.

>>98951559
Shred is good, its just not good into 1w models.

>Should have been +1a or rending.
Which would make them better than chainswords, which would be worse.

The issue is that the basic chainsword is, basically, just a generic close combat weapon rather than "a weapon in its own right". Having bayonets be a weapon in their own right would lead to tacticals being good at shooting and basically equal to despoilers in melee, which would be terrible. You could buff chainswords, but then you also need to buff charnabals and heavy chain-weapons and chainaxes (which to be fair you could do, dont think those weapons are exactly amazing atm).

>>98951522
>Then the other one I can remember off the top of my head is the Graviton Maul for IW and I rate that one down because it suffers the issue even otherwise good ones like the assault cannons/1ksons plasma/etc got. In that it's added to a specific wargear list rather than 'any model with [base weapon] can take [legion weapon]' and thus locked out of a bunch of units even if they make sense for it fluffwise (eg: IW can't take Vet Breachers with Graviton Mauls, but they can take Vet Assaults with them).
Also I forgot to mention here the other obvious example of BA/IF terminators who can't take assault cannons despite an actual kit for that existing specifically for 30k

>>98951559
Shred just needs to go back to being a re-roll to wounds if they're going to keep it. Or maybe 'breaching lite' where it makes the attacks AP3 instead of AP2.

>>98951563
>I dont disagree on that. I think theyre sadly just kinda undertuned. A simple "bandaid" for this imo would be something like dropping the cost of power weapons to 5ppm, which would make all the "power weapon upgrade" weapons 10ppm and therefore technically cheaper than a hammer. But this probably breaks something or another. Still, its definetly something I hope they managed to adress somehow in the future.
Imo they should make them free swaps and try to balance that via the statline of the weapon itself instead of via pricing.

>Feels subpar as a weapon, but the shock(pinned) fives it SOME niche use I think.
Which is why it annoys me all the more that they can't take a squad of 10 Vet Breachers with them and go around smacking tanks in the balls

>>98951569
>Deredeo
>Xiphon
>Sicarans
>IF reaction
>HSS
>Rapiers
>Return fire

But yes, fragilty on flyers has limited meaning.

>>98951581
>Imo they should make them free swaps
That could be cool. Any DG model with a power weapon can swap to a power scythe etc. But I suppose that could lead to the issue of "so why would you ever take a generic power weapon as any legion with special power weapons"

File: IF_Vet_Assault_Termi.jpg (34 KB, 250x336)

34 KB JPG

fuck it i'm gonna take powerfists on my lernaens instead of thunder hammers I don't even care

i'll spend the saved points on banestrike or whatever

>>98951585
>That could be cool. Any DG model with a power weapon can swap to a power scythe etc. But I suppose that could lead to the issue of "so why would you ever take a generic power weapon as any legion with special power weapons"
Same reason you might take axe over maul, statlines.

No point tooling out a bunch of DG with scythes if you want them killing termies.

>>98951588
I take power fists on my atramentar. It looks better, is cheaper, and on the charge theyre I2 anyways. Plus it means theyre better into dreads and vehicles.

>>98951594
>No point tooling out a bunch of DG with scythes if you want them killing termies.
But the scythe IS the best power weapon for terminators (at least out of the "generic" ones - axe/spear/sword/maul). Its just an axe with reaping blow.

>>98951338
Regular power weapons strike at the same time as your tainted weapons, so no effect
Heavy melee weapons boost the strength beyond the point where +1S makes a difference
>>98951364
Durability on flyers doesn't matter enough to justify cost or the low transport capacity
They fuck off right after dropping and anti air weapons aren't as prevalent
You're also forced to roll to come in turn 1 so there's a high chance you'll be forced to come in from your table edge with your 18" movement
The melta is not valuable because after your drop mission you have a 50% chance it won't come in for an attack run

>>98951585
>"so why would you ever take a generic power weapon as any legion with special power weapons"
Is that such a bad thing? Most legion weapons are limited to sergeants and characters anyway, the balancing factor can come from scarcity and legion choice rather than points. Like how thunder hammers and paragon blades used to be praetor exclusive, oh weren't those the days..

>>98951611
>Regular power weapons strike at the same time as your tainted weapons, so no effect
Unless its mauls or axes. Or you put it on a centurion which is I5 to everyone elses I4.

>Heavy melee weapons boost the strength beyond the point where +1S makes a difference
Unless you have T5+, such as by being a terminator or a GVB (although GVB have their owh phage (S), but its relevant on them) or using shieldwall.

>>98951609
God wait it's an axe? Could have sworn it was a sword. I guess then it is the anti-termie option then, especially since Bulky effects Reaping Blow right?

Just reverse my point then, works better because it means you're doing either scythe or maul and those feel the most DG weapons to me at least.

>>98951611
>Regular power weapons strike at the same time as your tainted weapons, so no effect
See my post about melee Vets, no one takes fucking swords because they're garbage while axes and mauls are what you actually take and they're both IM-1.

I'm ignoring lances because their use is rather niche/for sniping out Sergeants and you don't really spam them in said role.

Plus even if they all struck in the same step, Phage lasts the whole game so you both get it the next round(s) of combat and/or when your ranged units shoot the enemy unit if it won.

>>98951585
>List
Only the Xiphon there has meaning of you don't have a lot of terrain, because it interdicts, and return fire depending. If you have a fire raptor you can just choose drop mission regardless of the fact it's not a transport.

The rest won't fire a shot because terrain obscures them when deployed on board edge. Then you move in the movement phase. The only thing that can hit them then are tarantulas and return fire.

>>98951611
>Durability on flyers doesn't matter enough to justify cost or the low transport capacity
They have the same transport capacity, 16.

>You're also forced to roll to come in turn 1 so there's a high chance you'll be forced to come in from your table edge with your 18" movement
Anywhere outside your opponents deployent zone T1. Anywhere (including your opponents deployment zone) T2 onwards. And 18" + disembark (+ setup, its an assault vehicle) from any edge is still plenty.

>anti air weapons arent as prevalent
They become more prevalent as people in an area start using flyers. And theyre generally quite good at their job.

>The melta is not valuable because after your drop mission you have a 50% chance it won't come in for an attack run
Yea, I dont rate the melta super high. But it will likely come on at some point, you keep rolling if it fails.

The caestus is a specialist vehicle. It is VERY good at its job (making sure a unit gets where it needs to go), and sacrifices a lot to be good at this job. Think of it like a flying land raider.

>>98951628
>No one takes sword
Until your maul vets run into a sword squad who kill enough of your guys to negate the bonus

>>98951617
>Is that such a bad thing?
Kinda, yea? Every single power weapon in an entire legion being a chainblade or a power scythe would be boring and lame.

>only sgts
If I understood what was being proposed correctly (because I have had similar musings before), the idea was that essentially some legions add a new option to the power weapon list. So when you have a Power Weapon as death guard, you dont just pick from Lance, Sword, Axe, Maul. You also can pick the power scythe. That any model with a Power Weapon (so every terminator, sgt, despoiler with power weapon, etc) could then do that. And in that situation I dont see why they wouldnt make that choice (because in most cases the legion power weapon is just better than ANY generic power weapon basically always).

>>98951638
>The rest won't fire a shot because terrain obscures them when deployed on board edge.
Depending on where. Sure, you CAN deploy outside of LoS of that deredeo, but guess what, thats potentially a large area where you cant appear, which limits where you can put your squad (which, as a transport for most likely a melee deathstar, is very important).

There is undeniable value to a transport that doesent have to care about any of this and is simply durable enough to make a drop right in the middle of the enemy army. Is it something you always want? No. Is it something you might choose is important to you and worth paying an extra 70pts on for your potentially super expensive deathstar? Absolutely.