Well, if you were wondering what the changes were going to be for the flyers in Death From The Skies, you have to look no further than the changes to the FAQs. They are live now.


This is a welcome thing. Things to note...... Deep Strike removed from all flyers it seems, and Scout removed from Vendetta/ Valkyries. I have not gone through them all, so here is the link. (it also looks like the Grey Knight Stormraven stays put in its Fast Attack slot, but is misplaced on the GW store. (we shall see).

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=1000018&pIndex=1&aId=3000006&multiPageMode=true&start=2


Q: Land Speeder Storms, Stormraven Gunships and
Stormtalon Gunships are all listed as Space Marine vehicles
in the Reference section. Does this mean that every Space
Marine Chapter now has access to these vehicles as well (i.e.
Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Grey Knights etc.)? (p411)

A: No – you may only select units and vehicles that are
available in the army list section of your codex. The two
exceptions are the Stormtalon and Stormraven Gunships,
which are only available to armies chosen from Codex:
Space Marines and Codex: Black Templars. The rules for these
Flyers can be found in the Death From the Skies
compendium.



White Dwarf June 2012 (WD390)
Updated rules for the Ork Dakkajet, Burna-bommer and Blitzabommer can be found in the Death From the Skies compendium

122 Comments:

  1. Seems Heldrakes just keep getting better and better. :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also being a welcome thing I think is a matter of opinion. In mine it is as I play Chaos (mwah haha!). Long range shooty flyers might not suffer so much either but the rest might feel the burn a bit more. Necrons for example can no longing deepstrike to deploy units where they want.

      Delete
    2. How exactly did they get better?

      Delete
    3. I'm not sure, but I think he means that because other flyers got nerfed and no longer have deep strike, Heldrakes lost one of their few detriments, ie not having deep strike where other flyers did.

      Delete
  2. Just put the final nail in the coffin of GK Interceptor squad, why don't you? Not sure what the reasoning was to remove the ability for units with personal teleporters to accurately deploy out of a Stormraven, but it was literally the only reason I would consider taking them (for late game accurate deployment).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it's because they arnt "flying" but phasing from one spot to the other, so if they got out of the SR they would still plummet to thier doom

      Delete
    2. Well I would hope that they weren't just jumping out the back and hoping for the teleport to kick in in time.

      Delete
    3. Well I guess that really sucks for blood angels then!

      Delete
    4. CK, it's the imperium im pretty sure that's exactly what they are think/hope lol

      Delete
  3. Where is the entry that lists all flyers as losing deep strike?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Grey Knight FAQ specifically says to remove it from the entry, I don't know about other armies at the moment though

      Delete
    2. Yep, same for the Dark Eldar flyers. Funny, they had a long and heated discussion on 3++ earlier this week over whether a flyer would crash if it arrived via deep strike.

      Delete
    3. The Blood Angels FAQ also removed the Deep Strike rule from the Stormraven.

      Delete
    4. Flyers without hover mode crash when deep striking anyway.

      Delete
    5. No they don't. When deepstriking, a vehicle counts as moving at cruising speed

      Delete
    6. Anyway, the point is moot now, because apparently no flyers can deep strike anymore.

      Delete
  4. If they still have the Special Manoeuvre for a Space Wolf I'm calling BS on them saying Space Wolves can't take flyers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At least give the wolves flak missiles WTH GW?

      Delete
    2. What special move are you referring too?

      Delete
    3. The Crusade of Fire campaign had Veteran Ace rule which essentially gave you a random mini-warlord style trait to one pilot in your army. Each codex except Sisters of Battle got one, including Space Wolves and Black Templars. BT now have flyers, but no word on if SW will get one...

      Delete
    4. Strangely the Dark Eldar didn't get one... Very strange, and having a flier even goes against SW lore.

      Delete
    5. As if fluff doesnt change when Profit is to be made

      Delete
    6. Space Wolves don't like teleporting, but they are happy with fliers and land speeders. It is just that they see the LS pilots as reckless and only blood claws are crazy enough to use jump packs...

      Delete
  5. I am more pleased that Vend/Valk lost Scout. No more outflanking ye bastards!

    ReplyDelete
  6. From what I can see: Craftworld Eldar Flyers did not receive the nerfhammer. Yay!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What Craftworld Eldar Flyers??

      Delete
    2. This one:

      http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Eldar/ELDAR-NIGHTWING.html

      Delete
    3. Or this one:

      http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Eldar/ELDAR-PHOENIX.html

      There are a few out there. Have you been in a coma?

      Delete
    4. Well neither did any other forge world flyer..
      And to answer your question, yes. Yes i have.

      Delete
    5. I really hope this is not the reasoning behind why Eldar still don't get crap regarding flyers, because where I play Forge World stuff is not allowed outside of Apocalypse.

      Delete
    6. GW has given the 40k stamp of approval to all non-apocalypse units made by forgeworld.

      Delete
    7. Tod, do you have a reference for that info?
      I don't doubt you, but I haven't seen that info before?

      Delete
    8. The reference is in the new IA books and FW productions. They differentiate between two types of units in their books. Ones that are fit for regular games of 40k, and ones that are Apoc only. However there's still a large portion of people that immediately assume FW stuff is broken, and refuse to play against it anyway.

      Delete
    9. that stamp means nothing except that they are compatible with 40k, its not an allowance by GW to use forgeworld stuff in any tournaments which are prohibited in most, including my FLGS.

      Delete
    10. Of course FW models didn't get the nerd hammer, they aren't covered by a GW FAQ, they're covered by a FW one. I can stamp 40k approved on things too, does this mean I can use them in 40k? Yes, GW owns FW, but they are a separate entity. Think of FW as an expansion like cities of death or planetscape, sure you can us them in a 40k game and they work really well for campaigns, but you wouldn't use them in your average 40k game.

      Delete
    11. I see no problem with using FW stuff in an average 40k game. As long as my opponent brings the rules for the units he uses, and they're not Apoc units, you really shouldn't have an issue with it.

      Tournament organizers are notorious for cherry-picking rules either way.

      Delete
    12. Agree with Crow, as long as you know about it before hand and can review the rules I don't see a problem with someone using FW

      Delete
    13. We've been going over this in detail and found a blog post containing a direct quote from a forgeworld rules designer that basically cleared it up.

      To paraphrase, 40k stamped FW units are compatible with 40k - but you should let your opponent know prior to the game, just as you would if it were a planetstrike or cityfight game.... In essence, you can think of forgeworld literally as an expansion of 40k.

      Delete
    14. I asked this question at my local gw store regards to using forge world stuff, I was told it was perfectly ok as long as it wasn't apoc. Personally I think it's fine. And adds variety to games.

      Delete
    15. @Charles; Yes, you can stamp on things too, however, you don't get to use the GW logo when you do so. When I look at my IA books then I see exactly the same GW logo that I see on my codices and rulebooks.
      So if the game company releases a book that says 'Hey, you can also use these models' what else do you want?

      Delete
  7. My Black templar get the landspeeder storm?.... does GW know we don't have scout to put in the damn thing? i like getting the two flyers though, about time my Templars get somthing new.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I actually think it fits because scouts are expected to run with the big boys, so they should be able to follow along in their own speeder. I hope they make the rules a little more specific and not just a cut & paste job.

      Delete
    2. I hope so too, would be nice to be able to drop off 5 neophites on an objective via landspeeder. until then it's time to paint up my new stormraven yay

      Delete
    3. Nathan, I'm afraid you didn't correctly comprehend the FAQ phrase from the C:SM FAQ that you are referring too.

      "Q: Land Speeder Storms, Stormraven Gunships and Stormtalon Gunships are all listed as Space Marine vehicles in the Reference section. Does this mean that every Space Marine Chapter now has access to these vehicles as well?"

      "A: NO (emphasis mine) - you may usually only select units and vehicles that are available in the army list section of your codex. THE TWO EXCEPTIONS are the Stormtalon and Stormraven Gunships..."

      So, unfortunately, the Land Speeder Storm is most certainly NOT available to Black Templar amries.

      Delete
    4. No, the Black Templars don't get a Landspeeder Storm. In the FAQ entry listed above it said the TWO (2) exceptions were the Stormtalon and Stormraven which are now available to C:SM and BT. Everything else, including the Landspeeder Storm, are only available to those codexes that already have them in their list entries.

      Delete
    5. Well boo then, was looking forward to painting one up.

      Delete
  8. Huh? What's the reason to take Vendettas if you can't outflank them anymore? If only there was some way to get them to do that anyway, like a special character who would be a tactical geni---

    CREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you take Khan as your warlord, does he do this too? I.e. can 'chapter tactics' apply for your entire army, or just your primary detachment?

      Delete
  9. I might be a tad evil saying this but I'm starting to like this book now considering the nerfs hehehe. Don't worry though, I'm sure I will get my just desserts in the upcoming Daemon book...

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sorry, this is probably a kind of stupid question, but what happens to BA? The wording of the rules sorta throws me off, you can read it as BA just lost their fliers since only C:SM and C:BT is allowed to use the Storm Raven and the Storm Talon.

    I have a friend who is taking it kind of...hard, since that is the way he reads it. What is your take?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That isn't the way I interpreted the Q/A on page 4: Quoted from the FAQ,
      'No--you may usually only select units and vehicles that are available in the army list section of your codex.'

      The army section of Codex: Blood Angels remains unchanged- the Stormraven was not removed, and is still available as a Heavy Support option. Your friend need not worry- he can make it rain Blood Angel Stormravens if he feels so inclined!

      Delete
    2. It's worded differently (and better) in the COdex: Space Marines FAQ than the BRB FAQ

      Delete
    3. It's pretty clear that they intended to give the storm raven to Codex marines and Black templar, but what they actually wrote is that Codex marines and Black templar are the only ones that get it now. More of the famous quality editing from GW.

      Delete
  11. no - BA still have the Storm Raven. See the BA FAQ.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, mate. I actually got so tired of the ranting that I went there myself.
      Was coming back to share the same information! :)

      Sorry for posting without reading that first, I'll make sure to punish myself with a glass of sour milk!

      Delete
    2. Pretty savage how blood angels cant access storm talon or the land speeder variants though. But the rest of the space marines can have storm raven.

      Delete
    3. Aye, that's peeved me no end; add that to the loss of Skies of Blood plus the other nerfs since 6th and they've almost completely clipped the wings of what should be the elite Airborne Chapter of the Space Marines. :(

      Delete
  12. Are there any difference between the Storm Ravens? I don't see why you could not just get the BA codex instead if not. Surely it would be better spending the money on a full other codex rather than one entry for 1 unit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How about allowing Codex: Space Marines armies to drop off an Ironclad Dreadnought into assault?

      Sound worth it to me!

      Delete
    2. I'm not on about allowing anything but if the storm raven has exactly the same rule set in both DFTS as the BA codex. Wouldn't owning a full BA codex be more preferential than owning a book for the same price that you can only use for just one model?

      Delete
    3. Agree with Nurgle on this one, they should have let BA and GK keep their flavor instead of turning it generic.

      Delete
    4. They aren't the exact same. Both the GK SR and the BA SR have different missiles, so C:SM and BT will probably get new missiles as well

      Delete
    5. Read the description under the Raven on the website - looks like BT/SM are getting "stormstrike" missiles - rules in DftS

      Delete
    6. Sorry, should have been more specific, I meant that the ability has become generic, as someone put it, went from "Skies of Blood" to "Skies of Whatevs"

      Delete
    7. As well as Gk Stormraven has access to psybolt ammo making the hurricane bolters heavy bolters and assault cannons +1 strength. Add that to the fortitude psychic power which lets it ignore shaken and stunned results = much more reliable.

      I think GW made a huge mistake cherrypicking units to share with its cash cow codex. It takes away from the trust i had left. When you start doing this, where does it end? It doesn't. I think I should start taking other codex entries with my army, and the reasons i shouldn't just became one fewer.

      Delete
  13. Great I downloaded a polish one on the uk site (random)

    ReplyDelete
  14. White Dwarf June 2012 (WD390)
    Updated rules for the Ork Dakkajet, Burna-bommer and Blitzabommer can be found in the Death From the Skies compendium.

    Yay! our FAQ was written by GW's Marketing department...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right? Talk about a dog chasing It's tail- oh wait, that will be me referring to GW FAQs, lol!

      Delete
    2. Anyone notice they also removed any and all other references to the Ork planes from that FAQ? Found a video that sums it up for us:

      http://youtu.be/QZg8E72xXFA

      Delete
    3. I'm nearly at my wits end with GWs nonsense.

      Delete
    4. Hopefully the fixed fighta ace.

      Delete
    5. Here is the hint for GW marketing

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyZ7oSnHnio

      Delete
  15. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  16. What exactly is the purpose of removing Deep Strike and Scout from the IG flyers? Or from any of the flyers for that matter? I am missing something?!?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds like someone's a little bitter. How do so many other players of the game survive and beat lists that contin these "OP" flyers?

      Sounds like its less "OP" flyer and more user error on your part.

      As it stands, the only flyer I'd consider "OP" is the Helldrake and only because of the recent 360degree FAQ to its head/flamer.

      Everything else has been out long enough that people have found plenty of ways to deal with the "OP" flyers.

      Delete
    2. People beat lists that contain the OP units, because this is a game where combat is determined through dice rolls. For 130 pts, getting a 12/12/10 flyer with scout, transport compatibility, 3 twin-linked las cannons, can be taken in squadrons, etc. is pretty ridiculous. It was already annoying enough in 5th edition, but as it got flyer rules, it got ridiculous.

      Delete
    3. If by dealing with OP flyers you mean going out and buying the same OP flyer and taking it as an ally then good for them. Any time GW wants to drop a steaming pile on the imperium ill applaud them.

      Delete
    4. The vendetta is underpriced. It was designed as a skimmer and then turned into a flyer when 6th came out. The biggest problem is that it's an AV12 flyer and with the exception of the Icarus lascannon, every other weapon (that's not a flyer) with skyfire is S7. Even then, with the rarity of skyfire it takes a lot of dedicated shooting to bring a vendetta down. Additionally, with its 3 twin linked lascannons, it's going to shoot down any flyer it has LOS too.

      Delete
    5. Don't forget that underpowered BS 4 on those flyers too crow.

      Delete
    6. I find the nerfing of said "OP" flyers to somewhat go against GW's plan as this may (most likely) lower sales of said flyers. Not to mention piss off all the folks who've been using said flyers for the last several years.

      Why not FAQ in more anti flyer gear. Give FLAK missiles to more armies, give Skyfire and or Interceptor to more units especially those that one would expect to have such rules in the first place. I bet GW would have seen a spike in sales for such models if they had gone this route. I would venture to guess that flyer sales would have stayed about the same.

      But if you all would rather see a nerf to things (years later) rather than a buff to things that should have had it in the first place...IE I doubt there would be much complaining about said "OP" flyers if more things had been FAQed to gain Skyfire, interceptor or more Flak missiles spread about from the get-go then I feel sorry for those players that are getting bent over the barrel by all of this. Years this has been allowed but now it all gets hella-nerfed and this is what you folks prefer?


      Delete
    7. If by several years you mean the release of 6th edition.

      Delete
    8. To be clear, I own one Valkyrie and have never used it in a game though I've played against them and their variants countless times.

      I own one Stormraven which I have used but only rarely.

      I own two Ork Fightas that I have used regularly.

      90% or more of these FAQs and DftS does not effect me.

      I'm only upset at the manner in which GW has been conducting business over the last several years. IE all their sales and marketing shenanigans.

      CoF - lets not tell anyone what it's about because if we do, very very very very few people would buy it.

      Helldrake - way too expensive $ wise. Let's buff it up with a FAQ and watch all those single helldrake lists turn into triple helldrake lists.

      DA Codex - seriously do I have to explain the issues with this? A FAQ the same week it's released? A Named Character left completely out? And you expect everyone to believe you were not aware of how bad things were prior to release?

      Overall price increases? way too much for certain things and why so much for model A when model B is clearly the same size or bigger etc? and I realize there are issues with new sculpts/molds processes etc that can account for some of this but clearly not all.

      Old codexs (BT, Eldar etc) that cost 15.00 4 or 5 years ago is now 30? I doubt the cost to print them has gone up so much that you have to double the price now.

      Spot the space marine dog? Really GW? you're afraid you're going to lose money/sales of your books because there's such a hyge percentage of people out there that are so clueless that they will buy a book about a space marine dog rather than one of your books? Really?

      There's more but until the sensible people outweigh the fanboys, nothing will change.

      Delete
    9. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    10. and

      "If by several years you mean the release of 6th edition."

      That's the extent of your response? So you would rather see things nerfed? vs see things buffed that clearly should have been buffed from the get-go?

      And yes, I see the issue with skimmers now flyers etc.

      Delete
    11. Still my question is basically unanswered, we have people crying "OP" and "under priced" but really what does removing Scout and DS do to remedy either of those complaints? Nothing, now they won't be scouting, but they are still flyers that can't be targeted by anything but skyfire weapons and Flakk Missiles... Good think they thought to FAQ Flakk into everyone's armies... oh wait...

      Delete
    12. I agree with you. I don't like to see things nerfed but the vendetta IMO is the strongest model in 40k even after the nerf. Partially because the entry is in a codex that is on Lance Armstrong roids with 6th. Something had to be done about the vendetta and obviously gw agrees.

      Delete
    13. Takes away outflank, removes the ability to fly on from behind turn 2 and pinch you between their lascannons and parking lot.

      Delete
  17. It's op because it was designed to be a skimmer, rules for a vehicle that could be assaulted and shot at normal ballistic skill, shot by blasts etc, if you think it should keep all existing rules plus become immune to 90% of the attacks that could once hit it you're out of your mind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess I am out of my mind.

      I don't find Valks or Vendettas to be "OP" in any of my games, either when I field them, or when I face them. No, the fact is that instead of FAQing older armies to have access to Flakk missiles as mentioned in the 6th ed rules, they just decided to "nerf" flyers by removing their special rules. Taking away DS and Scout does not make them any less "OP" nor does it make them less immune to 90% of the attacks.

      Really, it almost seems like GW is giving their fanbase and customers the big F U lately.

      Delete
    2. Hurr, delicious tears of RAEG, durr.

      Seriously, all this "Vendetta is OP, bawwwww!" is so 2012 and coming from SPESS MAHREEN players who were so accustomed to autowinning against IG that any competitive unit for them is broken cheese to them.

      Delete
    3. What a great argument style you have there, it almost seems tempered with flairs of /tg/.

      Delete
  18. I think I am the only person in the world who is bored of fighting against fliers...I started 40k way back in 2nd edition and the fact that I rarely fight a game with an opponnt that doesnt use fliers is sad...moan over lo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would like to see the occasional tournament ban flyers all together. Not all the time... but just every now and then.

      My gaming group will often vote on no flyers for our next meet-up.

      Delete
    2. Really who wants a SF future game where there are only Infantry, Tanks and the occasional Skimmer (Helicopter). Sounds more like WWI than the "Grim, Dark, Future".

      Delete
    3. Grumpy, the size of the battles fought in 40k (even Apoc games) means you wouldn't use or see fliers. They are used for indiscriminate bombing runs over enemy held territory where none of your own guys are. They move so fast that they'd enter and exit the table in less than the time that it takes to say "at the start of the movement phase".

      Non-hovering flyers have no place in the game (IMO), particularly at this point where there is very little way to deal with them for most armies. It makes the AGL + Quad Gun/Icarus almost essential for most armies. These latest documents at least should have Errata'd all sorts of flyer takedown options for every army but it didn't. Flyers will remain OP until everyone gets a reasonable way to destroy them without just "tit for tat'ing" their own plane.

      Delete
  19. "They are used for indiscriminate bombing runs over enemy held territory where none of your own guys are."
    Umm... this sounds correct only if you are describing early WW1 battlefield, because non-hovering flyers have been used ever since for striking at "point" targets such as individual tanks, bunkers, and strongpoints on the battlefield at low altitude. In fact, several non-hovering flyers have been designed specifically for that purpose only (Il-2, Hs129, A-10, Su-25, etc.)

    Also, applying a "scale" to speeds or distances in 40Kverse results in automatic fail with no rerolls allowed, if you take a moment to think about it, because a "fast" vehicle is barely able to outrun fully laden (unaugmented) infantry. The game may have begun its life (way way back during the transition from Laserburn to RT) as "12 inches to 50 metres, one minute to a turn", but has been so much "balanced" and altered to allow for CC armies and to prevent vehicles from dominating the battlefield outright that applying any scale to time or distance is impossible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I stand corrected about the targeting thing (I was thinking more along the lines of UAVs etc for accurate shots).

      However you can't ignore the ridiculousness of having a plane travelling at more than 220kmh (the A-10's stall speed) being static on a table that represents, generously, a 2km square of land. I do understand the bizarre nature of scale in the game, but that is just dumb.

      Delete
  20. so guess this means stormraven stormtalon spam will be the new OP army after cron-ari -.-

    way to make sales GW

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They aren't that spammable though. For each Stormtalon, a Necron player can take 2 Night Scythes with points left over. Although you need units to take them, I guess it might balance out...

      Delete
    2. You can let the Talons acompany the ravens. Go all anti AV weapons.
      Whats a Str 7 Shoot going to do? You Need more than 1 scyth to bring down a SM Flyer.
      Other lists schould Not be a Problem. Helldrakes can Not BBQ the Flyers. GKs cant compet vs 2 Flyer SPAM lists. They'll dex Hop over to Vanilla.

      Pretty much auto win Button for SM & BTs

      Would bet Money on seeing Storm Spam all over in a few Weeks / Months.
      And GW knows how to print Money via rules!

      Its remarkable that After only half a Year of 6th we are seeing Major changes to buff Nerf Thing Around again only to sell Flyers. Guess GW Needs better sales!

      Delete
    3. Ho ho, I was actually just thinking this very same thing. Two ravens, with two talon escorts, outflanking in a Khan list. Carnage!

      Delete
    4. I don't think I have ever seen this warlord 22 kid post anything positive.

      Delete
  21. One question remains open: has anyone actually seen the book, ie. held it physically in her/his hands? (Seeing that there is no torrent you-know-where, and remembering it took GW three weeks just to process my advance order of Crusade of Fire before it was dispatched...)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Someone on /tg/ in Britland apparently had it and scanned it and/or answered questions from it. One of the major things was they cleared up the whole "My Doom Scythe can fire it's death ray backwards" thing, another major thing seems to be that IG flyers for a points decreased but are now 12/11/11 instead of 12/12/10.

      Basically, if this is true (some anon's are not trustworthy) they did nothing to address the fact IG flyers are incredibly powerful, and in fact may of made it even more so.

      Take all I said as you will, I'm still not going to believe a thing until I see it myself.

      Delete
  22. So, Black Templars get Stormtalons and Stormravens, but no other chapter with their own Codex? I get the impression they are just going to merge BTs into a vanilla Marines Codex.

    ReplyDelete
  23. All the whining about Valks and Vends... seriously QQ. Youdon't see IGdominatingthe tourney scene. Yes Ig flyers are powerful but they ballance out a weak infantry force likethe battle tanks. I don't hear SMplayerswhining about not gettingLemanRuss tanks or Manticores. The guardsmen statline makes up for it. So QQ moar Marine players.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's whining because they ARE overpowered, if only because they are too cheap for what they do. And if the talk of the new book is true, they got even cheaper.

      I don't know about you meta, but in my area the tournament winners are frequently Guard, and Space Wolves with Guard Allies.

      Delete
    2. Everything in the IG codex is over powered, except they all have a glaring weakness. Instead of being well rounded like Marines a good IG player has to learn to minimize those weaknesses while maximizing their strengths through unit synergies and clever manuevering. Unlike Marines with their well protected Landraiders and Terminators the IG codex is less forgiving to mistakes but rewards the tactical player.

      If IG is dominating, adjust your tactics. Valks die quickly to Stormraven Melta fire. Leman Russ Tanks are weak against deepstriking melta infantry. Guardsmen are weak against assault, particularly from Vanguard Vets etc.

      Delete
  24. Faq in french are incomplete...
    Only a single page, the first one. Mistake or are we going to play a different game from now on?
    Perplexed.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Everyone talking about how rules are affected, everyone saying my army will be this, my army will be that... has anyone noticed that now my codexes are OFFICIALY outdated? Has anyone noticed that in exchange of updating my codex for free they make me PAY?? Has anyone noticed that now the "compendium" is mandatory?? has anyone seen that now I will have to play games with people that have different rules and the problem that appears here? specially as I am spanish and we got no translations of the rules?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're not alone in thinking about that...

      But you're definitely right.
      And that's terrible.

      Delete
  26. So...no Deep Strike or Scout? How does an Elysian Air Cav army fit on the board then? I mean...I have 9 flyers to put down, not possible in your standard deployment zones. Does that mean I can't use my army or what v.v

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If I'm not mistaken you may move onto the board in Hover mode, so you have roughly an entire half the table to place models and more.

      Delete
  27. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete

  28. Good news for all, there are available Long Beach, Montebello,Monterey Park, Norwalk, Palmdale, Palos Verdes Estates, Paramount, Pasadena, Pico Rivera, Pomona, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Rosemead, Monrovia,If you want to get any information about these, please visit this site. It is great and informative site.
    Flyers

    ReplyDelete

 
Top
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...