Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
In spite of everything they've said, this looks like traditional list building was something they just threw on as an afterthought. I don't think they have ever had a worse implementation for how to put an army list together.

My excitement for 8th has taken a massive hit.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

S.J. posted:

honestly this is all pretty hilarious

I've been waiting for them to drop a bollock with this release, I wasn't expecting it to be something so fundamental and rudimentary as point cost layouts.


Strobe posted:

At this point I'm hoping that GW at least realizes that this is a loving stupid way to handle points costs, and in three weeks/months comes out with an update that basically goes back to 7th edition's methods of pricing points costs. They're otherwise totally separate, so it's entirely possible that it happens.

I don't expect it, but it's still not impossible. :v:

Depending on whether or not they are already being printed, I would be surprised if the first actual Codex books don't have a more sane layout. There is no way this nonsense doesn't piss off a a lot of people.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

Beer4TheBeerGod posted:

This should be the thread title. I have no problem with obtuse points references if it means GW can quickly update them.

Don't get me wrong, I can see why they would want to be able to adjust points more easily, and I applaud the intent, but there had to be a better implementation than this. Personally I detest the third party programmes and have pretty much always done it by hand.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
Don't look to the index books to make specific chapter by chapter changes like that. Those Centurions will most likely come in the BA codex.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

Liquid Communism posted:

Opinions are awesome, I just get frustrated at the wailing and gnashing of teeth regarding having to do a bit more 3rd grade arithmetic when list building.

I mean, it is known that basic addition is the bane of all neckbeards...

I don't think it's at all unreasonable for people to be pissed off with the list building element of the book taking a jump back to an inelegant and unwieldy format that was fixed at least half a decade ago. There's certainly no need to be a tit about it.

Lovely Joe Stalin fucked around with this message at 17:21 on May 30, 2017

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
Chuche, out of interest, have you ever made a cupola out of bits of roadkill?

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

Attestant posted:

If I understand it correctly, if you want to run Tyranids + GSC together, that means running them under the Tyranids-keyword, thus being a Tyranids detachment. So that would mean no IG on top of that.

Looking at it I think it would work if you had a detachment of purely GSC, allowing a detachment of IG. Then You take your Nid detachment under the keyword Tyranids, which the cult also has. I think that is how it works.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

Zaphod42 posted:

Having to play with a list from the last edition that barely works in the current edition is one of the stupidest things GW does. I was hoping that releasing rules for all the factions at the start of 8th would try to curb some of that stupidity.

There's no reason not to just put 5 minutes into making Thousand Sons as good as Death Guard or Blood Angels or Grey Knights or Space Wolves or Dark Angels... except that Nurgle is the new hotness and Space Marines get all the love.

Its just typical "GW doesn't give a poo poo about chaos" but man, it sucks and don't try to piss on my face and tell me its raining.


:cry:

I too cannot think of any reason that GW didn't do full codex level work for every single army in the game, while maintaining balance, in time for the release of the new edition and then put all of those rules into five £15 books.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
I think the skids would look better painted black. But then they would also look better as a proper armoured skirt.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
I think it's likely a flexibility thing. For now they all do exactly the same thing. Once codex books start coming out you will probably see more variation creeping in. By doing it this way they aren't locked into Deepstrike Exception #19. It's simply "Tyranids have Floppy Hook Dongs which do X."

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

Macdeo Lurjtux posted:

Quick painting question, when I'm layering do I want to go darker to lighter or does the direction matter more? I want to try a marine pattern reminiscent of the dawn sky and was thinking of doing reddish orange at the feet and transitioning to a more yellow as I climb the the model.

It's pretty much a matter of taste. That said, starting light over a white undercoat and then adding shading is entirely viable, and depending on the colours in question, preferable.
In the example you give of orange moving to yellow, I would start with a yellow basecoat (over grey or white primer) and then layer the orange on afterwards because it is a lot easier to paint yellow over a white undercoat than it is to build it up over a darker colour.

There's a miniatures painting thread elsewhere in TG that is perfect for this sort of question.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

OhDearGodNo posted:

So just to be clear, we are all in agreement and fully know that Bigly Marines will slowly get more and more stuff, and over the course of a few years eventually be the new regular Space Marine- and that we just don't talk about it aloud?

I''m fine with that.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
The way I see it, a cool model I want to one day paint doesn't stop my other cool models being cool.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

The Sex Cannon posted:

Anyone know when pre-orders start on the GW Website? Trynna get dis poo poo up here.

It was 10am here in the UK.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
Sniper scouts with the masks made from greenstuff.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

Ayn Marx posted:

Why do you desperately want people to be disappointed by this game

He's got a bad case of Death Thread psychosis.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

Sykic posted:

Anyone ever just write off an entire army as unpaintable? You look at the models and think to yourself "No way in hell can I paint that, I'll stick to space marines" and never even try? That's been me and Tyranids since about 6 years ago, there's not a chance in hell I can paint a nid, I tried once when I was fairly new and got this abomination. Then I got thinking, gently caress it, I'm back in the hobby now, let's try something different, something crazy, something that'll give chutche2 a cupola nightmares.



Is it a great paint job? No. Is it infinitely better than I ever imagined? Absolutely. And to think I originally planned to sell off the Tyranid half of Deathstorm.

Moral of the story: Just paint.

That looks great. Would you mind sharing your recipe?

  • Locked thread