Medjugorje Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Can you blaim them? BT sells models. That might be true for resellers but it certainly doesn't seem the case for Geedub these days; I can't remember the last time I saw a BT character/upgrade sprue in-stores, and Forgeworld has been gradually removing their BT products for a while now on account of them not selling particularly well. That's assuming people actually buy them from Geedub, though. Do you have a source for that claim? I would actually bet you that the contrary is the case. BT seem to be one of the most popular (if not THE most popular) second founding chapters, judging from the general community activity (recent twiter survey for example). I guess the recent phasing out of various chapter unique models, accessories etc. (not just BT) has mainly two reasons: 1. focusing on one chapter (posterboys) is more economical 2. freeing production capacity for new products i think it is like Henricus told that. In 5th Edition, i saw many guys playing Black Templars,... nowadays not. There are far more DA, BA, SW, Ultramarine-Players in stores. But I also think that the rules leads to that. The specialedition Codex 6th Edition where was at first selled out ---> CF/BT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medjugorje Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 A chapter upgrade that fits to the current tactical squad without need for extra modelling would be nice... I would quite like to know whose bright idea it was to reverse the pins and holes on the tactical squad torsos No one is to blame, they're just that old. aha,... what about all other things that GW does the last 2 years. I think they tried to eliminate our special position - but now they recognize that this was a failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redmapa Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 I dont think GW tried to eliminate our 'special position' or that we are getting it back. I think that during 5th edition and after the Chapter House debacle GW realized that they just could not support that many armies at that time and some compromises needed to be made so we were cut from having a codex and a real update in order to make more space for other armies, in 5th edition more than half the armies didnt have an up to date codex then in 6th ed everyone had an up to date codex. Now it seems like GW has expanded or made sure that the case of 5th edition never happens again, either way they've added new armies without over extending themselves (Mechanicum/Skitarii/Imperial Knights and Cults have relatively small model lines), we're not getting our codex back anytime soon though I am expecting our conversion kit to be updated anytime now, specially because it would be a great way to sell more Primaris stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acebaur Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 I'm digging the Chaplain. The rest is still meh. I have a feeling that if primaris get true melee beyond reivers, they might have a templar option since we're the only melee oriented codex chapter left. we are not the only one. I would say Raven Guard got more focus on cc then on shooting. I don't feel that way, Shrike buffs JP guys, but that's always been the case and their CT means that units that are far away from enemies force a -1 to hit. That would mean that long range weapon units would be ideal for RG because they can stay far away and be difficult to damage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balordazul Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Ok when will BT get their focus article? Poster boys are done and Raven Guard ... also Raven Guard flyers are going to be very good. Wait I do have a question on that if you are at a minus two to hit and you are Orks shooting at a RG flyer do you auto fail in this edition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redmapa Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Ok when will BT get their focus article? Poster boys are done and Raven Guard ... also Raven Guard flyers are going to be very good. Wait I do have a question on that if you are at a minus two to hit and you are Orks shooting at a RG flyer do you auto fail in this edition? Chapter Traits only apply to Infantry, Bikers and Dreadnoughts. Nothing else, so flyers are not getting any bonus outside of stratagems or warlord traits. I hope tomorrow is our day, by the end of the week we should know all tactics/unique stratagem/warlord traits which will only leave relics, generic stratagems and warlord traits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acebaur Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Ok when will BT get their focus article? Poster boys are done and Raven Guard ... also Raven Guard flyers are going to be very good. Wait I do have a question on that if you are at a minus two to hit and you are Orks shooting at a RG flyer do you auto fail in this edition? Chapter Traits only apply to Infantry, Bikers and Dreadnoughts. Nothing else, so flyers are not getting any bonus outside of stratagems or warlord traits. I hope tomorrow is our day, by the end of the week we should know all tactics/unique stratagem/warlord traits which will only leave relics, generic stratagems and warlord traits. Where does it say that? I don't recall seeing that anywhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redmapa Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 like all Chapter Tactics, this will apply to your Infantry, Bikers and Dreadnoughts. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/14/ultramarines-and-the-redemptor-dreadnought-first-lookgw-homepage-post-2/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Arthur Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Did any of you look on the comments on 40ks facebook page? GW facebook account replied to a question about Templar chapter tactics saying they're very good. While they say about most of their new stuff I'm hoping this bodes well for our future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firepower Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Did any of you look on the comments on 40ks facebook page? GW facebook account replied to a question about Templar chapter tactics saying they're very good. While they say about most of their new stuff I'm hoping this bodes well for our future. As though they would say 'No, they're rather 'meh' really?' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian_F_H Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Did any of you look on the comments on 40ks facebook page? GW facebook account replied to a question about Templar chapter tactics saying they're very good. While they say about most of their new stuff I'm hoping this bodes well for our future. As though they would say 'No, they're rather 'meh' really?' Exactly. I guess we have to wait and see... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 A chapter upgrade that fits to the current tactical squad without need for extra modelling would be nice... I would quite like to know whose bright idea it was to reverse the pins and holes on the tactical squad torsos No one is to blame, they're just that old. This. You can't fault Geedub for changing the pin system when they updated the kit in 2013. If anything, it's a greater indication that the BT require an updated upgrade kit. Be it as a large, £20ish box or one of the smaller £8 blisters that they seem to be favouring at the moment. I'd rather they went down the £8 route, to be perfectly honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banjulhu Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 A chapter upgrade that fits to the current tactical squad without need for extra modelling would be nice... I would quite like to know whose bright idea it was to reverse the pins and holes on the tactical squad torsos No one is to blame, they're just that old. This. You can't fault Geedub for changing the pin system when they updated the kit in 2013. If anything, it's a greater indication that the BT require an updated upgrade kit. Be it as a large, £20ish box or one of the smaller £8 blisters that they seem to be favouring at the moment. Yes we bloody well can. There was no pro-consumer reason for the flip, all it did was make kit bashing with existing kits harder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Deeper pin = better connection, even if it's only by a few millimetres. Besides, it isn't that difficult to snip the connection and align it manually anyhow. I'd have been surprised if they retained the old connection when the kit was updated in 2013. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sete Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 We should change the thread title. Also we are the only second founding chapter with CT (CF uses IF) so we really can't complain when GW focus a lot on the 1st founding (4 of them at least), and I reckon the new CT will cater for the Primaris stuff. The Warhammer team said they loved the reivers, Helbrecth anf Grimaldus combo somewhere, so we can safely assume it will be something buffing CC. BT is quite popular, and maybe GW will try to cash on it sooner and later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Christopher Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 The Warhammer team said they loved the reivers, Helbrecth anf Grimaldus combo somewhere, so we can safely assume it will be something buffing CC. Don't get me wrong, I'm rather okay with the new Edition (minus the Primaris, obviously). But one thing that bothers me is the ongoing trend of 'forcing' people to field named characters in their lists. It's great that Grimaldus and Helbrecht got such great rules in the Index, but I don't want to see them in every single army and would like my own Marshal and Chaplain to potentially be on par with them. But this applies to all other armies too, and if this is the new standard I want our heroes to be the most heroic of the lot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sete Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 I wouldn't expect that to change for the foreseeable future, annoyingly. I can understand why Games Workshop made the decision that they did but they really dropped the ball in doing so. If they were going to make that decision at all they should have introduced named characters for the factions that are still don't have any. Genestealer Cults, Iron Hands, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medjugorje Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 We should change the thread title. Also we are the only second founding chapter with CT (CF uses IF) so we really can't complain when GW focus a lot on the 1st founding (4 of them at least), and I reckon the new CT will cater for the Primaris stuff. The Warhammer team said they loved the reivers, Helbrecth anf Grimaldus combo somewhere, so we can safely assume it will be something buffing CC. BT is quite popular, and maybe GW will try to cash on it sooner and later. to be one of the first or secound founding chapters doesnt matter. Why should be. Its just a part from the story. We are the covermarines from the 3rd Edition and we had a own codex - we have more players then raven guard, salamanders or iron hands together. We have a scheme - THAT is what is important. The Warhammer team said they loved the reivers, Helbrecth anf Grimaldus combo somewhere, so we can safely assume it will be something buffing CC. Don't get me wrong, I'm rather okay with the new Edition (minus the Primaris, obviously). But one thing that bothers me is the ongoing trend of 'forcing' people to field named characters in their lists. It's great that Grimaldus and Helbrecht got such great rules in the Index, but I don't want to see them in every single army and would like my own Marshal and Chaplain to potentially be on par with them. But this applies to all other armies too, and if this is the new standard I want our heroes to be the most heroic of the lot! exactly. There is a huge difference to playing against Buff-chars who give reroll to "1" then let reroll all dice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal_Roujakis Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 The Warhammer team said they loved the reivers, Helbrecth anf Grimaldus combo somewhere, so we can safely assume it will be something buffing CC. Don't get me wrong, I'm rather okay with the new Edition (minus the Primaris, obviously). But one thing that bothers me is the ongoing trend of 'forcing' people to field named characters in their lists. It's great that Grimaldus and Helbrecht got such great rules in the Index, but I don't want to see them in every single army and would like my own Marshal and Chaplain to potentially be on par with them. But this applies to all other armies too, and if this is the new standard I want our heroes to be the most heroic of the lot! In regards to the Raven Guard, there was also mentions of characters gaining Wargear or Warlord Traits that would suit the Raven Guard style of combat, you'd just have to tailor that character for the type of warfare that you'd want, but I highly doubt that they would be on par w/ named characters without a hefty points fee, named characters have models after all, and GW is all about selling models... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acebaur Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 To avoid any confusion with the first part of this thread I've split it and am locking this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.