/tg/ - Traditional Games

>My name's Jervis Johnson...
Somehow, I knew it would be him before I even clicked on the link.

>...and to more accurately represent the deep and really interesting background for the game.
So that'll be why entirely loyal Space Marines can now start shitting out Bloodthirsters when they're losing, right?

>and we've been doing Formations for Warhammer 40,000 too, but we see them as an important part of the new version of the game, so we'll be doing more of them.
Oh boy, I sure can't wait for GW to charge me extra to buy all the DLC Formations they release, since they're apparently going to be such an important part of the game.

The one bright side I see in that video is the line that says people have to agree how they're going to select their armies before the game starts; so it looks like you shouldn't have to worry about people springing some absurd Unbound army on you.

>>29365712
>Sadly, they don't. They are now just AP6.

Okay. Well. That's problematic. So, pretty much all of our dedicated CC units have lost their re-rolls to hit in close combat, as well as losing an attack from their base profiles. Warriors and Genestealers didn't get the help they needed, the loss of Biomancy nerfs down MC's even further, our Artifacts are rubbish...

This is heartbreaking. Here's to five more years as a Dark/Craftworld Eldar player, I guess.

The 'hurr I dun see pictur' joke is old, tired, and forced.

>>20988063
>They really think that this codex is MUCH worse than Gavdex.

Oh, for god's sake.

You know, this just reinforces why I think /tg/, despite it's flaws, is one of the best places to talk about 40k on the internet. The reaction to the book here was almost overwhelmingly positive, with lots of threads happily discussing what sort of crazy things could be done with the new book.

Everywhere else just seems to be bitching and complaining about not getting Cult Terminators.