REMINDER WE HAVE A Q&A EPISODE COMING UP! When you finish any RU-vid pleasantries you deem us worthy of please go submit your questions on our community post: ru-vid.comUgkx_S_nhAfOLqD0elh03H48IFfLfwr6jO4c Also, if you would be so kind, check that you're subbed if you like us. We're like 400ish subs away from the 100K mark and I need some positivity in my week. (Also also, I'm trying to clean up any basement dwellers in the comments trying to derail the topic of the video with their shit-takes on the game's lore. Sorry if you see any, it's a bad week to be moderating 40K comments sections, let me tell you.)
Every chaos god specific codex should have a detachment for bringing demons, one for bringing chaos knights and one centered around their Demon primarch. There’s 3, GW. On the house.
Hey would you guys be willing consider being playtesters for a tabletop wargame? You guys have great ideas and seem to have a good idea on how a game should be
Thank you! Because I love the addition to the lore of female custodes. Been playing them since they came out and always had female kitbashes and now with the new lore my female army is canon
@@thepoorhammerpodcast It it makes you feel any better, i have never heard those words in that exact sequence before, genuinely suprised by the levels of (justified) pettiness you have shown in this episode and im not even 20 minutes in. Edit: I just got a idea for a new episode, find the largest plastic kit of each faction and calculate its points/dollars per gram of plastic.
This made do that calculus on my own novel. I’m charging people 0.0125c/word. Thanks for the morning depression, Brad…😢 I have to sell 480,000 words to afford 300ish from GW
@bcw1313 ha! Our translation team, including editorial work asks less per word from a *companies*, than GW from customers. Guess I chose a wrong line of work!
I feel like it is a way to force a useful illustration on people who want to make excuses for GW. Although Brad I only expect your rants (which i mostly love) to become worse because I dont expect GW to do 10 percent of your very good suggestions (those that are very good, im not saying everything suggestion you have is very good).
Or having a writing team of more than 3-5 people that all individually work on a dex Poor multi billion dollar company cant afford to hire more people from a fanbase that writes better rules in mere days 😢
So I went to a Q&A last year at GWs KC open event. It was late at night and i cant remember who the person answering was but he was higher up on the US side and was brutally honest when answering questions. One of the questions was something along the lines of "why not go to an all digital rule set?" The legitimate answer was that "GW has found on average they sell two codexs per player of that army. So why would they stop?"
The unfortunate side effect is I kinda dread the Sisters release in summer. I'm not too worried for CSM as my other army since they already confirmed 8 detachments (surely at least one will be fun right?). Sisters on the other hand I can easily imagine them sucking the flavour out of and giving too few detachments.
Yeah, balance is better overall, but people still complain just as much. Edit: Maybe my comment is too much of a turnoff as well. I am not trying to say poorhammer is wrong, they are right, GW should do better. What I am saying is that some fans are toxic, and complain to complain. The balance of the game is better than ever IMO, and instead of worrying that mid tier armies are not OP when they get a new codex, I would rather GW work on buffing the bottom armies, and debuff the top ones. There will always be a meta, and that meta will distort win rates more and more as the game becomes more balanced.
@@redspec01God I hate these Stu Black talking points. This isnt an esport it's a skrimish roleplaying game. I rather things be creative and fun than chess
"I don't know if there's any other examples of leaders impacting unit interactions with detachments" cough cough bully boyz......cough cough warboss giving an entire squad of Boyz the warboss keyword and thus the extra turn of waaaagh in bully Boyz.
Does it work also for example for Azrael leading Hellblasters with lieutenant? Do they all get Deathwing keyword because of Azrael and can I slap enhancement from inner circle on lieutenant because of it?
@RaggiDrex Probably not in that case as I believe you choose Enhancements during the choosing your army step, whereas you don't attach leaders until the Declare Battle Formations step.
12:27 Like seriously, if Space Marines get a detachment per chapter, why can't we get one per sept? Easy fix: T'au - Kauyon, literally unchanged. Viorla - Montka. Boom. N'dras - Focus on stealth, make us harder to hit, boom. Borkan - Better weapons, either in range, damage, or ap. Boom. Tash'var - Army Wide FNP. Boom. Farsight - Battlesuit Detachment. Done. And go ahead and throw the Kroot detachment in for those people. That's 7 right off the bat.
@@b-beale1931 the trick to making tau survive in melee is to either make one of the sub-species have melee focus (like a berserker unit) or have a primaris style breakthrough in gundam suits that make them tougher/able to punch good lol. Both unfortunately require gw to care about tau
I'm so happy you actually spoke about the T'au codex. I feel like due to it's potential power, people just refuse to hear me out when I criticize it. Four detachments is way too little, especially when one is dedicated to a small range of the faction only, and the other you get nothing until turn 3.
The first detachment that came to my mind at 44:20 was actually the new Bully Boys. The ability to attach a Warlord to a unit and have them be affected by the second waaaagh also really helps to diversify lists. If I really like a certain unit and I can put a warlord in there, I can use it.
There's a thing that's at the back of my mind while watching this episode: If you ever want to do a follow up to this, do a complete 180 and do a "How to write a codex(That isn't OP)" Because while I wholehartedly agree with the philosophy of "All armies should be fun, and to be fun you have to have some measure of power" this is how you end up with mid 9th ed. codicies where the popular joke was that to write a codex, you have to snort a long, fat line of cocaine, since all of the codicies were ON CRACK. In other words, make a guide how to make a codex not be destroying the balance of the game.
The Orks Dread Mob rule and Big Meks now having the MEK keyword is another (and better) example of the "Leader Expansion". 4 different Meks with a variety of what they can lead giving Infantry ways to interact with the Detachment rule
Only makes sense for an evolving rulebook. Physical books should be for things that do not change, like their could be am argument for the basic rules of 10th edition being print, but anything that needs patching or balance changes should be in a pdf on the website.
@@bobthegamingtaco6073the problem is that the Balance Dataslate makes the point of Codexes moot. Rules can get changed so drastically that unless you cut out and tape the new wording old-school White Dwarf style into the book, a physical release makes no sense. Rules and datasheets on their own should be free, with anything else being paid for so the artists and writers get paid by people who want those extras in their $60 books
You should definitely do a video about your thoughts on the charge mechanics. One of the best ones I saw, from GW themselves is how charge works on Horus Heresy. I was really surprised. You do a 2D6, but you get +1 or +2 modifiers based on your movement stat, so a jumppack unit gets +2 charge natively. Also there is something called surge move, that is when you fail a charge, you move half the distance, so you don't en up static at least and you cover some ground.
Watch them make you pay a subscription for digital rules. And sell you that as a benefit. And for the cost to exceed the codex over 1 calendar year. Like digitally distributed video games and the claim "games will be cheaper because we dont have to press media and print boxed" GW will hoover up every penny they did before and look for extra. Price isnt linked to production cost even though there should be a relationship.
As someone who doesn't play 40k but does enjoy Tabletop games, I think it's so stupid that 10th started with "oh we're going to be more accessible by having rules online" only to remove free rules when a codex comes out because someone at GW wants a second Yacht. Codexes should be art, lore, painting tips, etc. Rules should be online and updated and expanded for free. Hell, there's parts of the codex that is outdated as soon as it's delivered (points), so it's already a mess. It is fascinating to see how badly GW has fumbled what should have been a home run. Beyond just the failures of the Codex Business model, GW's approach to "balancing" stuff is just to make things more Horde-y (because that means people need more models, so GW gets more model sales). We've also seen how stuff like online free rules allow for them to buff or change things that need changes on a fundamental level beyond just adjusting stats. They added an entirely new Detachment for a Faction this way (the drukhari), which tells me that they could fix weak codexes that have bad or underperforming detachments (or add new ones), but they don't for whatever reason. GW really is trying to have their cake and eat it too by appearing like they're modernizing the game while still keeping the same old business model and that just doesn't work.
With how much of a cluster everything has been the past few days. This was honestly the most positive thing I've seen! I've honestly questioned staying in the hobby the past three days just because of reactions it's been rough and this honestly has been a serious but good episode :)
6:35 Woah, I wasn't expecting a Flesh and Blood reference, I love that game. Recent developments really do raise questions on what GW's rules teams look like. There's no excuse for a company this big to make mistakes this bad.
Star Wars Legion has a great exanple of army benefits not being equal and game design. The rules are simple enough where its obvious. The Empire can reroll a shooting roll. Rebels can reroll dodge. Sounds fair right? Wrong. You find that the rebels have to use an action to dodge rather than move and shoot like the imperials. You also find that rebels are a lot squishier. So the empire versus rebels usually cancel out the bonuses. But the rebels don't have anything that counter the empire's heavy armor and they can still take a Dodge as an option on their side too. The rebels dont have anything to easily throw the other direction. Game design is interesting. But it shows that building a theme to an army can backfire
With the comment about leaders making units viable within a detachment like the winged Tyrant, the Dread Mob detachment did a good job imo in the ork codex where Mek leaders give bonuses to things like boys, nobs and lootas where they otherwise would have no bonus within Dread Mob
flesh and blood mentioned! My locals doesn't have MTG but it does have FAB. As a lover of that "Western" artstyle/aesthetic, I'm happy to see it mentioned, because I'm getting into the game soon.
ALso when printing a detachment rule - Making the effectiveness of my rule depend entirely on the enemy army, and their ability to deny it.... Isnt fun The space wolves Champions of Russ detachment is about the fluffiest thing you can imagine.... But MAN does it SUCK when you play someone that says "Oh your playing a list that requires your character to last hit stuff, let me just not let you do that" is not fun
Rewatching this a few months later. "If you're making an enhancement for a single datasheet, you're doing something wrong." Going back and checking drukhari one piece boat haha. Also funny back when they gave drukhari extra ap on a pain token they never updated the succubus enhancement. A succubus empowered with that gets ap 5.
Army Rule also failed for Tau. Doesn't affect all the units. Sadly funny when you realize how much kroot were pushed this edition and yet they are neither affected by their army rule, nor most detachments. I pray for the day when it's actually the Tau Empire and not just 'Tau and some other stuff'. Could get more into all the failures with the codex, but that'd take up too much space and tbh while the Tau codex has many problems, it's still one of the less bad ones.
One of the things that annoys me in certain codexs is having to pay extra points to use my rules, like the new ork dread mob. You have to have a mek in a squad in order for them to be affected by the rules, that’s a minimum of 45 extra points per squad that you want to have rules lol
I would add for bad detachment rules is playability. Although the Endless Swarm movement rule is kind of cool, it seems like a wild thing to add to a swarm army time wise. I would say it would work a lot better on Crusher Stampede because moving 1 (possibly 3) models is going to be way faster.
Everyone is operating on the assumption that GW is a game company. It isnt. Check its business statement. It is and always has been a model company that sells rules and lore to sell models.
Would you guys ever doing a game design term glossary episode? I remember you guys used words like "nambo" to describe rules that have negative synergy with each other and I'm curious if there are other obscure terms.
I would love it if charges within 4 or 5 inches, or even 6 if you wanna be cool, were guaranteed. And you could roll a d6 to add distance for ambitious charges. It sucks soooo much to fail a 5 inch charge after I spent a CP to reroll it and got FOUR ONES
Thoughts on Sisters? They hit all but the number, but the range is so small the only other thing to do would be leaning in to vehicles which the army already does regardless of detachment. Some of the enhancements also fall in that "worthless 5pt enhancement".
I ditched D&D a few years ago because it felt like it was written by children, now this? I assume game designers are just lying on their CVs and don't actually know how to make rules/games/stuff.
Dark Angels player here. The bit about leaders making more units count is relevant in the inner circle task force as that only affect deathwing infantry, which is very small, but Azrael, Asmodai, Ezekiel, and Lazarus grant deathwing to their led units. Still not great tho
T'au was nearly a great codex but they just skimped out on the detachments. there's so much potential for a stealth detachment since it would incorporate both battlesuits and kroot into one. the new kroot are really great but they can feel too far detached from all current T'au stuff. A vehicle detachment would've worked too honestly. i feel as if we got shafted because of getting so many new models/refreshes
Oddly enough I wasn’t super upset when I found out the number of tau detachments, mostly because they cover almost all play styles that the tau have, and they are all at almost equal strength and viability, but it would have been nice to have seen maybe 2, like a stealth suit/ ghostkeel themed one, or a vehicle heavy one for example
I don't own a codex. I'm playing Ynnari. There will be a new codex in 10th edition. I dunno when and in which format, but there will be one and don't have any plans on buying a booklet from two years ago when there will be a new one in (maybe) three months. Plus, it's really hard to find the old codex for the original price.
I am terrified that GW is going to short-change Guard with detachment rules. Because like... Guard have some shoe-ins (Death Korps, Catachan), but there's a bunch of flavor regiments in the decades of Guard lore. Moridian Iron Guard, Vostroyan Firstborn, Tallarn Desert Raiders, Elysian Drop Troops... and those are the four I remember off the top of my head, and doesn't include a generic Planetary Defense Force. It should be easy to hit a 6 detachment minimum, but I've got this nagging fear they won't do it. They'll do Death Korps and Catachan, maybe a Mechanized Infantry (shit, I forgot Armageddon Steel Legion), and call it a day.
Not totally codex related, but if GW would just release art books every year, I would 100% buy them, I don’t play, but I do love the lore and the vibe and the aesthetics Then the people who just want rules don’t have to be stuck with the art and lore sections in the codex
honeatly they should make codexes to balance against eachother and then do digital rules for competetive. itd give you a reason to buy codexes (friendly or casual games) and then have a competetive ruleset that gets updated. itd solve so many issues and probably make things more balanced. people would still buy codexes because most people dont play competetive
Imagine being GW and releasing a Tau codex with only 4 detachments when you could have added a detachment for the 3rd Tau war strategy which corresponds to Ka'is/lone hunter (like a lone operative one) and a combined Tau-kroot detachment (like kroot could spott) Moreover it's not complicated to get REAL game designers to avoid all of these, even more that I'm sure that there is thousands of passionate and experienced game designers that would love to work on the game NB: even with paid rules (cheaper) people would buy it and it would be much simpler and more flexible (and even cheaper for them to produce)
The only thing i want from warhammer in general is for the rules to be accessible. I don't want to play as is, and I'll gladly enjoy any other tabletop game instead
I will love the lore of this game for years and have thought about starting to collect The minis and play the game. But whenever shit like this happens it just always reminds me how untrustworthy of a company GW is for the amount of investment required to play. It is quite an intimidating Thought that they could just wipe away anything at any moment
Good points, but unfortunately all discussions for how GW "should do things" is an utterly moot talking point. As long as GW is making money, they have 0 incentive to listen to customers complaining as they continue to buy. I hate to say this because it upsets people for whatever reason, but outside of voting with your wallets/boycott things will not change for the better. The practice for GW staggering army/codex releases has been a profit making point and its not going to change anytime soon as long as their bottom line is in the black. Remember a companies' sole obligation is not to its customers, its to its shareholders.
As a Tau player, my rules are good and I like what I have, but I still feel like I'm missing stuff without some extra detachments. Like no tank and no infantry detachments kinda sucks and I feel a bit cheated even if I got good rules.
I honestly don't think that the kouyon one is that bad. it's probably the best of the 'on turn 3' ideas. Cause it is a pretty substantial rule but it also means you can easily lose in the first 2 turns. I'm not saying it's perfect but it definetly is probably the best of the late game abilities for detachments I've seen. Maybe we'll be proven wrong later when more codex's come out but for now it seems the best. THough the changes for codex might have hurt it a bit with what? two strats can only be used aftert turn 3? But I think the rule was changed so now the spotter unit gets sustained hit 1 if it also shoots at the spotted enemy now?
I love the artbook + rules combo. I view the codex as the book that allows you to characterize your faction. Here is the faction, here is how to play them. Just makes sense, dont separate it. Agree that the flashcards are dumb.
Definitely not the first person to say this, but it’s pretty telling that a lot of responses to codex releases isn’t “oh cool my codex is out soon” but rather “oh god, please let my codex not suck”
yes please, hell they could still keep the codex's the way they are but sell them as an art book and the game thing would be a advertisement for the in game faction giving an example of the original interpretation they had for that edition with a link that takes people to the free online rules. you could play with the codex art books if you wanted but they would be very unbalanced because gw's original interpretations are never balanced. It could be fun though as a one off thing to do with a friend like "hey, you wanna play a game using the crappy art codex's?"
They should only offer printed codexes as a crowning point, a bookend to an edition. This way, they could literallywrite the edition's lore into the book and make it shaped by the results of things like Oghram. They're blinded by their own thirst for money.
It's unfortunate but GW is at the top so they can basically do whatever they want. Both with their incredibly expensive model range and they're very outdated ways that they release rules. Although I'm sure if the other compan ies managed to claw their way to the number one position, they would also be just as bad
Rant start : Yes please, Start with indexes online, add and real-world balance additional detachments for each army online, release new Minis add Datacards for them online, and then at the end release all Faction + Detachment Rules in one book (Print on demand). Close out the edition with one big narrative campaign. with one book with all the rules for all factions in this campaign, next Book, maybe campaign battlefields, suggested order of play. And a trilogy of novels, or trilogy of short stories in Black Library with all the story. Instead of this piecemeal approach as with Psychic Awakening and Arks of Omen. Have all Players have their Codex right from the start. Not this: Here is the final codex for this edition, next month we will start a new edition and everything in it will be obsolete. Rant end ..
@@ichbineinberliner1776 On the contrary, there's literally nothing stopping you from playing a previous edition. A capstone codex for a faction would include all the rules and final balance changes of the edition and would thus be a single purchase necessary. No more balance passes, just play the edition as it was at it's end. Technically codexes are only obsolete NOW because they're written 6 months out of date and don't have ANY accurate numbers in them. Hell, I wouldn't even include narrative campaign stuff like oghram in the codex save with the results of that narratively recorded in the history section, just basic crusade. Those narrative campaigns would be released during the edition as a way to maintain currency influx, rather than the staggered releases of obsolete-on-purchase codexes we have now.
I really like this idea. That way you could have the lore be impacted in some ways by the results of that edition's tournaments, similar in some respects to what Old Version of the Legend of the Five Rings card game did.
@@Vohtwomax I pray you guys at least keep your teleporting shenanigans. From the outside looking in, that seems like the most fun part of playing Grey Knights.
@@theshamurai32 I would love GK to be great at 2 things: teleport shunting(it's kinda their entire schtick) and killing Daemons. I don't mind if they're terrible at everything else. I would love to see some kind of Rock-Paper-Scissors epement introduced where X faction is great at dealing with Y, but Y will be good at fighting Z, and Z can defeat X. Grey Knights>Daemons/Chaos, Chaos>humans/Astartes, Astartes>xenos, and so on and so forth.
I said this to a friend earlier, but ideally, editions should last 5-8 years, not the three year cycle that they currently have going. Additionally, codexes should all be out within the first year; all codexes should be written at once, with communication between everyone who is writing them. Year two should be focused on acually balancibg everything, and the rest of the editions lifespan should be about providing interesting scenarios and updating whats already there, expanding army ranges, and providing a fun game.
May be a bit much, I would say 5 years with that plan is better, because you have a whole like, 3-6 years when the game doesn't have new codices, and can maybe get stale because of it. I think 2-3 years after everything released is much more interesting, gives people enough time to spend with all the rules and not get tired of it, I know I would
@@timunderbakke8756 "Cult of Magic", "Oops all Tzangor", and "I swear Daemon Engines have been a key part of TS all along ; Magnus adores his Maulerfiend"
Omg after the custodes got 2 detachment with sisters of silence I can already see it coming one is going to be tzaangors pluss Thousand sons and the other tzaangors by themselves
Nah, we had codex birdmen back in 8th. Tau have assimilated that title from us this edition. TS have a Tzaangor one, a Spawn / Mutalith one, a Demon engine one, something with demons and pacts that focusses on the infernal master because he's a unique thing for TS and.... oops, that's your 4, we ran out of ideas. So sorry. Its not like you wanted to play thousand sons in a thousand sons army anyway, right? If we're very VERY lucky, Tzaangor and Spawn / Muta will be a single detachment focusing around mutation and we'll get a cult of magic (preferably that isn't built around 1 strat making the rule completely OP for one unit, but is otherwise useless).
Just watched an Auspex vid on how good you can make an elite Meganobz army. Someone nailed it in the comments: "I remember back when Custodes were more elite than Orks."
My local GW store owner told me about how in the beginning of 9th basically the same thing happened. The custodes player base shit itself and died once they saw the codex, then it turned out it was extremely OP and had to be nerfed several times. So i’m holding out and hoping its better than we think.
@tbomb69 I admire your optimism. I'm not really competitive grade and mostly play casual play with old friends, so I'm not too worried about losing a lot (plus my first and foremost is Guard, so I'm used to getting my ass kicked lol). I'm more annoyed on the principle of GW dicking over my compatriots on the competitive side.
You keep teasing these larger problems, give me an episode on how you would do 11e! (Not in a "let's see you do better" way, I would actually be interested in a design deep dive like this for it)
Rules should be free, if a company is selling me bespoke minis for the game, in my opinion. Come on! It is basically industry standard at this point... I play a variety of wargames and either the rules and unit stats are free and there is a miniature line for the game or the rules are not free (but 1 book is enough!), but the game is miniature agnostic, so I can (officially) use whichever minis I want. The vast majority of companies either want me to buy either their minis or a book, not both! Here is some stuff I enjoy with dedicated miniature lines: * Carnevale: free online rulebook, free character card PDF, free gang builder (not the best, but its functional, I would like to see some interface improvements) * Conquest: The last argument of Kings: free online rulebook and faction PDFs, great free army builder app * Malifaux: free online rulebook, a physical stat cards added to the minis when you buy them, the best army builder app in the hobby! (seriously this app is AMAZING and can even help you run the game by quickly generating setups and you can connect two apps to do all bookkeeping that side objectives might require in the apps and be synced for the game at hand)
Armies with smaller ranges ie Custodes need more detachments not less. It’s great when armies like Orks and space marines can have entirely different armies for entirely different detachments. But for smaller armies they have to play with the same units each game so the only way to get any real variety in ways to play is to get more varied detachments.
I just want to reinforce that a codex DOES NOT have to be busted to be good! If it expands on your faction and gives you equally fun, cool, and diverse ways to play them then its great!
We all knew it, but now it is painfully obvious that Games Workshop thinks it's better to prioritize how much money they can rake in per product than making the product worth buying All of this is crazy, considering how much money GW already makes They aren't nearing bankruptcy why do they do this shit
Im so glad the ork codex is good. The idea of going an entire edition with nothing but bad codex breaks my brain. Honestly I preferred the power creep of 9th to a non-stop wave of disappointment.
i dont know if i hard agree but i get your point nothing sucks more then waiting for your codex and getting publically crapped on however it does suck to get a codex be cool for a week then eat 600 points worth of nerfs and have all of your cool shit taken away its like would you rather be blind to the cool shit or get it only to have ot taken away
I think for T'au they shouldn't have made For the Greater Good the army rule. Especially because it doesn't work with auxiliaries or ethereals. Give a bunch of units the ability to be spotters, and then make a detachment that makes spotting even better. I think Kauyon/Montka would have been a better army rule, like each round you get to choose to either be more deadly or more mobile, something like that. And then detachments could just be Spotters/Kroot/Battlesuits/Tanks&Vehicles/Stealth. I'd say there should be an Ethereals detachment but there's only one Ethereal unit left.
On the Montka/Kauyon i totally agree and make it you can choose one and change but if you change you're stuck and the more you stay in a way the more bonus you get.
Army rules should have a tad more leeway then you are describing in my opinion. Think of current GSC, the cult ambush doesn't work on a lot of units, but that's fine, you don't want to bring back rockgrinders balance wise. Then again, admech is horrid, nobody sane would dispute that.
This is a solid point, I think the rule needs to be reworded then to make GSC fit within it. I don't have the rewording I want ready to go, but you're correct it needs it.
@@thepoorhammerpodcast Off the top of my head, I think the flashier it is, the more % you can afford to not be affected. But a good rule of thumb could be that it should at least affect things that every list will use. Or affect all your Battleline at minimum, even if it's very flashy.
I'm thinking that an TTRPG is a better comparison than Magic: The Gathering. Lots of TTRPG's have went to digital primary and the physical book is a luxury item you can get if you want it. It would also make a lot of sense for Warhammer to go that way. Also you can add new detachments via a new digital releases!
Apologies but I want to increase the chance that this comment even gets read. Copied from the 40k Trivia show comments section which youtube just threw at me again. "I love this episode, I want more of this. Like it felt like 5 minutes. You can have tripled this and id have still probably wanted more, Eric Jenny and Berilio make a fantastically funny cast for this. Brad you did great hosting apart from the magnus question your wife beat you on" Having said that I posted that and noticed your comment about how much work it was for Berilio. Only if he agrees to it. Double shift for your hard working editor in chief. I didnt notice any issues with editing but it might have been because it was so funny.
Step one, not be GW. Step two, ??? Step three, stay within the fantasy of the army. Step four, don’t profit because you aren’t GW and are infringing on copyright.
Try Dat Button is nearly perfect for an AdMech detachment. It’s fluffy and perfectly encapsulates the esoteric weapons they use. Galvanic rifles? Maybe they *really* shoot well, maybe the explode because you fail four Hazardous rolls
It seems to me as though the bad codexes started off fun, then had bits chopped off to 'balance' them. Then the balance team sent them to print without checking that they were still fun.
A few where probably supposed to get a bigger model release with them that they had to scrap and the codex where just printed without any change *cough cough* ad mech cybernerica *cough cough*
@@saltytattie833 it was already leaked last year because we are supposedly getting space wolves at the same time, end of the edition just like votaan and world eaters so could be up to 2 years realistically
The timing on the announcement of the EC Index is really funny because of the fustercluck with Custodes, like they're throwing a bone to distract people.
To go off the “don’t have enhancements on 1 character” how about making sure it works with the character. New custodes enhancement gives a shooting buff to blade champ or shield captain but blade champ doesn’t have any ranged weapons. Sure, it affects the unit but come on… Also for strats, can we add a rule that if the detachment wants to care about characters, and your characters make a battle tactic free, that there’s at least a battle tactic available…
Ok, that first one is funny and painful, I didn't notice that on my quick read of the leaks. The second I won't hold against the codex writer, it's almost certain it was written before the Battle Tactics change occurred in a dataslate. The codex will need FAQs done to modernize it to the dataslate (which gets back to the "stop making paper rules" point.)
@@thepoorhammerpodcast I can see that but my only issue with that is they have yet to change the type of a strat since making that balance dataslate and how they wrote this codex and the lack of synergies doesn’t instill confidence that they will make that change. I mean why run a codex detachment where the strats only affect a single model after removing so much already.
