|
I have a somewhat odd question. Which army does the thread think is easiest to transport? I imagine it's more or less directly related to model count (barring huge vehicles), so Adeptus Custodes?
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2023 07:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 15:21 |
|
|
After a decade-long break, I'm trying to get back into 40k. I was never that deep into it in the first place, though. I have a few questions. First, which rules do I need to start playing? In the old days, you bought the big central rule book, a codex, and then you built your army from a point budget. There seems to be more options now. I found some index cards for the various armies with unit stats and rules, but no point costs. What's going on here? Second, I bought some models (custodes, while my wife got harlequins) and a whole bunch of painting supplies. Obviously, since I'm only five models in, my results are still awful, but I remember the basics from my last attempt, and I've watched videos and read guides and so on. Is there a place I can get feedback and suggestions for how to improve? There is a painting thread in this forum, but it seems to mostly be really experienced painters sharing their work, and I'm wondering if there's a better place to discuss basics. My immediate goal is to have a (small) fully painted army (to a tolerable standard) and play a full game. My previous efforts never quite managed to reach that level. I have an acquaintance who has been in the hobby for years and has a huge Imperial Guard tank army, so it's just up to me to get an army assembled so he can crush it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2023 22:38
|
|
|
rantmo posted:So the core rules are free and available here and the points are in the Munitorium Field Manual document. All the actual army rules and stats can be found in the various indexes which are all here: https://www.warhammer-community.com/warhammer-40000-downloads/ Thanks! I found a newer version of the Munitorium Field Manual. How often do they change? Are codices just dead? Al-Saqr posted:lol I posted a giant OP about this... I did read the OP and I particularly enjoyed the faction overview, which is what convinced me to get Custodes. I did find the "NOW ONTO THE RULES!" section difficult to understand and very concise. E.g. it doesn't mention the Munitorium Field Manual at all. But I suppose I will go admit to my plastic abuse in the painting thread, and leave rules confusion for later.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2023 18:24
|
|
|
I've read the rulebook now and it all seems pretty simple (except having to memorise all the minor variations in weapons). Even played a tiny test battle with my Custodes against my wife's Harlequins. Enjoyable! Some things that struck me as odd: Why is AP granted a position on the main weapon statblock, rather than being a weapon ability like Melta x, Rapid Fire x, etc? Many weapons have AP0 anyway, which would be equivalent to not having this ability. Am I missing some subtlety about the implications of a statistic being on the main stat block? Speaking of AP, I found it awkward to think of AP-1 as reducing my dice roll by 1. Instead I think of it as increasing my save by 1. Numerically this is the same, but is there some subtlety I'm missing?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2023 09:58
|
|
|
The Deleter posted:If thinking about AP that way helps then go for it, but you should be aware that there is a difference between dice modifiers and stat modifiers. Dice modifiers cap out at +1 or -1, with the biggest exception being the Armor save, where AP can go beyond -1. Stat modifiers aren't capped afaik, but the main thing is that you can stack a dice mod and a stat mod. For example, a Hammerhead tank can't get two sources of +1 to hit (which is the dice roll). But since the army ability "For The Greater Good" modifies the Ballistic Skill stat, you can take its railgun from needing a 4+ to hit to a 2+ to hit. (Technically a 3+ BS with a +1 to hit). Thanks, this is very useful, and exactly the kind of subtlety I was worried about overlooking. I played a bit of Warhammer Fantasy 5th edition way back, and I appreciate that modern 40k is stat-wise simpler.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2023 13:22
|
|
|
loving hell, I have assembled a single Sister of Silence from the Adeptus Custodes boxed set, and I feel exhausted. This reinforces why I decided to go for a low model count army. Am I the only one who finds assembly much more tiresome than painting? Especially with the extremely small parts that GW has become so fond of using.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2023 20:56
|
|
|
It doesn't help that modern models have absurdly tiny separate bits. I wonder if they let a computer cut apart the model to optimise sprue usage. This really feels like something a machine would design.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:my issue is figuring the balance between sub assemblies for easier painting and assembling completely to not deal with a bunch of arms and heads stuck on paper clips Yeah, my Custodes I assembled completely before painting. I'll do that again, except for the shields - those I'll leave off. It may not look as nice as if I painted each part separately, but I don't think I'd enjoy the fiddlyness of painting tiny subassembles. My Sisters of Silence I will probably also assemble completely, but they are much simpler models anyway. Perhaps I'll paint the bolter guns separately. Maybe I'll try using a few big subassemblies when I start painting the jetbikes and such, but I'm trying not to make things too complicated for myself, so I don't risk burning out. I can live with the paint job being suboptimal (it'll be anyway as long as I'm holding the brush).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2023 21:21
|
|
|
Any kind of IG field gun looks so drat cool on the battlefield, but I agree with the other posters that this looks more 1st World War than Napoleonic (but I guess the Tsar was around for most of WW1 anyway). The wheels really do make it look a lot older than the normal field ordnance battery.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2023 08:49
|
|
|
How big a problem is mould lines today? I've recently assembled plastic custodes and sisters of silence, and while I had to file down sprue attachment points, I did not notice much in the way of mould lines.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2023 10:13
|
|
|
Correct Latin is insufficiently Latin, so I always say codii and carnipodes.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2023 08:38
|
|
|
Cooked Auto posted:Speaking of rules, GW just dropped a Exemplary Battles Scenario for 40k to let you recreate the Battle for Macragge. It's lovely how they explicitly condone switching out the armies involved. Looking forward to the heroic last stand of orks holding back the Custode hordes.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2023 14:17
|
|
|
Are there any 40k-related podcasts worth listening to?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2023 16:14
|
|
|
I have bought the past three issues of WD, and besides the pleasant nostalgia of doing so, I also find it quite nice reading. The narratives in the battle reports are so engagingly written that I become tempted to buy whatever game and army they are about.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2023 22:14
|
|
|
Captain Magic posted:Speaking of sisters schemes, here’s one I threw together last night that I ended up liking a lot. AK Streaking Grime is my best friend. I really like the grimy look. To me it's not really grimdark, as classic 40k grimdark is still clean and majestic (like that sweet space marine above). This Sister looks like she's realised that war is about having a bad time while walking around in the dirt.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2023 08:43
|
|
|
I have finished what I think is the first fully based squad I have ever done. There are tons of imperfections, but I don't really care. I spent enough time on these to be well outside the ability to judge them objectively. Also, when together and viewed at a distance, they actually do look pretty good. The tufts of grass is something I got from a local model train shop, and it was an absolute PITA to glue, but I think that's because the tubes of superglue I have aren't very good. When creating the bases, I didn't really have a good idea of what I wanted, except something vaguely forest/wilderness-like, so I just put on some Stirland Mud and then random contrast paints and drybrushes until I got something that looked OK-ish.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2023 19:51
|
|
|
coelomate posted:those sisters look great! last time I played their range was almost all metal, it rules how multipart plastic kits took over everything. I do feel some nostalgia for metal minis. I think assembling an old Canis Wolfborn I have somewhere would be a good cure for that.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2023 22:52
|
|
|
God drat, the Sisters of Battle models look great. Must have been decades of pent up creativity.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
The Exorcist is probably the best model in the game. A pipe organ tank, and also the organ pipes are missile tubes. This transcends even art.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2023 21:22
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:It’s a real pity that Sororitas attracts so many weirdos, I feel like I always need to reassure people that I’m here for the insane space Catholicism, not sexy battle ladies. GW did a really good job not overtly sexualising them, so I think you are safe as long as you don't use conversions or third party models obviously intended to cater to the male gaze. The official models look like hardened warriors with dubious priorities regarding war vehicle design, which is as it should be.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2023 14:48
|
|
|
Compared to the last time I was in this hobby (around 2010), Games Workshop has really upgraded its community presence and communication. It's impressive that warhammer-community.com has a new post almost every day. I can't think of many companies that do that. I do wonder how they balance what to put in White Dwarf and what to put online.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2023 11:37
|
|
|
coelomate posted:There is some weird ambiguity in how the rules are written. I can see where somebody could reasonably think a toe in the ruin makes the model "not fully visible" because we're treating the ruins as abstractions with invisible walls and doors and windows and stairs and ladders already. I don't think it's ambiguous. Regarding line of sight, ruins (and other terrain) is to my understanding not an abstraction. Only the stuff that is actually physically there matters. If your ruin is a flat plastic rectangle with the text "RUIN" written on it, then it never hinders line of sight. Any rule that depends on blocking line of sight is thus not applicable. Other rules (e.g. reduced movement) depend on footprint, not line of sight, and so would still apply.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2023 18:19
|
|
|
Yesterday evening I played my first game of 40k against my wife. We only made it two rounds before it was too late, but it was still fun to finally push around our toy soldiers. We played Combat Patrol rules with my Custodes against her Eldar. My army was roughly what GW specifies for Combat Patrol, and was a Shield Captain leading five Custodian Guard, as well as two squads of four Prosecutors each. My wife brought a five man Harlequin Troupe led by a Troupe Master, as well as a Voidweaver and two Skyweavers. We had a decent amount of terrain (some properly painted, some improvised), but I still think it was not enough. I also made very poor use of cover. In the two rounds we managed to play, the Voidweaver easily killed all my Prosecutors, while my Guards killed the Skyweavers. This left me with a single (slow) unit and my wife with three faster units. Had we continued, I think she would have won the game simply by running away and occupying objectives before I could get to her. My Custodian Guard were as expected almost invincible to anything she could throw at them, but her forces were just too drat fast to catch. Quite unbalanced, but still fun, and it will probably work better at 1000 points, where I can afford some flying units. Athas fucked around with this message at 10:45 on Oct 17, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2023 10:34
|
|
|
Yes, that's about what I imagined. I still enjoyed the game, and we'll probably play a few more at 500 points to rehearse the rules, if only because we don't yet have 1000 points painted. Eldar fate dice also seem a bit unbalanced at 500 points, as the total number of dice rolls is much lower, although this not really impact the game much, as my wife panicked and futilely spent all her fate dice on saving throws for her Skyweavers when my Guard cut them apart.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2023 11:30
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:Woooowww check it out you guys I found the warhammer army I painted 20 years ago!! The thing that really strikes me is that from a distance, zoomed out, this army looks pretty good (except for the bare bases and the inexplicable orc). I guess that is why even bad painters like myself are able to put together armies that look good on the tabletop. I didn't realise Space Marines had grown that much larger, though. Will they keep growing indefinitely?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2023 20:14
|
|
|
Why do WH40k discussions often use the word "into" instead of "against"? I am not a native English speaker, but it does not seem grammatically correct.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2023 08:46
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:Lol with who and where?! Ive never heard or read this! Here is the Reddit post I read just before asking my question, but it really shows up all the time. Originally I thought it was related to correct uses of "into", such as "charging into engagement range", but then I saw people use it for shooting or entire armies, as a replacement for "against" or "versus".
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2023 10:32
|
|
|
Notahippie posted:The one thing I'd say that makes sense to me for why to use it is that it makes it clear who is playing which army. If you say "Astartes vs Aelderi is hard" or something like that, it's more ambiguous which one is you. "Astartes into Aelderi" is clearer. In context you would say "playing Astartes vs Aeldari is hard", which I don't think is ambiguous.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2023 15:13
|
|
|
Is pinning necessary for resin models? I intend to buy a large-ish resin model soon, and I don't know what to expect, except a need for superglue.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2023 12:45
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:If the connections are flat-on-flat, yes. Pinning is recommended for larger resin models. If it's just like a space marine arm/shoulder joint there's no need. A lot of the larger models have socketed connections though and a good super glue will hold that fine. Thanks, this is very useful. The two sets I intend buying are the Sagittarum Guard Upgrade Set (small bits of resin glued to plastic), which I'm not too worried about, and the Telemon Heavy Dreadnought, which will be the largest model I've ever assembled. From what I've reading, and by skimming the assembly instructions, it does not look like it will be too difficult by resin standards.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2023 15:40
|
|
|
Spanish Manlove posted:
Is that an 8 dreadnought Space Wolves army? Does that play well?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2023 19:05
|
|
|
My wife is building a Harlequin army, and I am moderately envious of her creativity. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2023 20:48
|
|
|
jadebullet posted:These are rad as hell. I love the basing. The bases are just Valhallan Blizzard followed by a liberal application of glitter glue and some transparent crystals from Green Stuff World. I spend way more time on my forest-themed grimdark bases for my Custodes (complete with plastic skulls and cork rocks), but they end up looking much worse than her Harlequins. She also managed to convert a The Masque model (normally a Slaanesh daemon) to a Solitaire, while I'm proud when I can figure out how to make my dudes point their weapons forwards.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2023 15:34
|
|
|
You are going to have to pin that spear with a brass rod or something if you want it to stay straight.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2023 15:44
|
|
|
Cooked Auto posted:Frankly GW should just re-release those rules updated for 11th, under a giant label of "This is very silly and should be treated as such". All plastic soldier rules should have such a label. I would really enjoy a curated collection of asymmetric scenarios. Not curated for balance, but for fun and interesting choices.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2023 08:33
|
|
|
That Necron looks cool, but it's too much of a diorama for me. I prefer models that are a bit more static, as I think the tabletop looks a bit silly when everyone looks like a freeze frame. Or maybe I'm just salty that I'll never have the painting skill to make that effect look good.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2023 20:47
|
|
|
Wait, why do people dislike the green rods?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2023 14:47
|
|
|
Samuel L. Hacksaw posted:You've... played the game, right? I'm reading the Rogue Trader rulebook now, and some of these rules read like a parody. E.g. the one where you can split a unit, but only if you write down orders for the part that does not get the officer, and those orders then have to be followed. Or how entering a building essentially starts up a new game on a separate board. Or how the game strongly recommends using a GM to adjudicate the many ambiguous rules. Still makes me want to play it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2023 17:31
|
|
|
Construction site orange is a really good colour for that space dwarfette.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2023 08:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 15:21 |
|
|
I just finished basing my Vertus Praetor, so I have now fully finished constructing and painting my Adeptus Custodes Compat Patrol (plus an additional five wardens). I've been collecting Warhammer on and off since I was a child, but this is the first time I've managed to build a full coherent (if small) army. I've been careful to avoid buying faster than I can paint, so all I have left is an (unassembled) box of Allarus Custodians, as well as a Blade Champion. Now I need to decide where to go next. I'm not interested in competitive play, but I still want a reasonably balanced army. One of my prospective opponents (and the one who convinced me to start up Warhammer again) owns an unsettling number of Baneblades and at least one Knight, so I figure I should add some anti-tank weaponry. I heard through the grapevine that the Caladius tank is the best anti-tank the Custodes have, but tanks don't really fit with the theme I have for my army. Dreadnoughts, however, do. I already plan on getting a Telemon, but what else would be useful in an anti-tank role? Hell, what even makes for a good anti-tank weapon? Looking at the Caladius stats, I would guess that "anti-tank" means a low number of high-S high-D attacks (particularly the latter). The Concemptor-Achillus melee weapon (A5, S12, AP-2, D6+1 wounds) looks like it would do OK in melee, but perhaps I'm missing something. I guess I can always find out the hard way.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2023 12:43
|
|