swordtart wrote:I can see the logic that Jervis is using. You diehards who play regularly, have several armies and probably most codices know what the lastest rule is. That knowledge is not necessarily universal.
well
GW certainly could do something about that (
WD/flyers in stores & at events/
FAQs online - heck, they could even re-release the Wargear book with individually punched pages so it can be kept up to date), but even if they dont, those of us that
do have the information to hand should be encouraged to use it, IMO.
swordtart wrote:It would be extremely irritating to play with someone who insisted that the special rule that I had built my tactics on was interpreted diffrently in a new codex that I didn't have.
just to be clear, this isnt what im planning to do. i would like to create a reference sheet that shows which items get updated for which armies, and where possible, include these changes (on the back). when playing an opponent who could be affected by one of these changes, i would ask them whether they wanted to continue using the old rules, or try the new ones. if one of my own armies was affected, i would ask my opponent which version of the rules they wanted me to use.
swordtart wrote:We hope that when the codex was written it was balanced with all the codices then in existance. If that philosophy was followed then the balance will continue as each new codex is introduced. If not then the whole system is screwed anyway.
also to be clear, the point of this exercise isnt to increase
balance between armies, but to make things more
consistent and reduce the number of "WTF?" moments.
i dont want to play a game where a
DH Assault Cannon cannot Rend, and where a
GK LR has different POTMs to one belonging to a
DH Inq. in the same army.
swordtart wrote:I am not sure that it is even necessary to update to the an armies new codex when it comes out if you want to play with the old one. What you cannot do is pick and choose from each one. If the new
IG codex comes out making
IG 4pts rather than 6 (please Jervis!!!) but binning doctrines, you can ither field an army of 6pt
IG with doctrines or 4pt
IG without.
again, just to clarify: this list wouldnt be used in conjunction with any codex that has been updated (for example, im not suggesting anyone use the current
SM codex with the changes in the one that is coming out in a couple of weeks). this is for armies that havent had their books updated, but share items with those that have.
swordtart wrote:As everyone keeps saying points cost is difficult to judge don't start trying to read across.
which is exactly why it probably wont matter too much if an army starts using the new rules for an item whilst paying the old cost.
especially considering there will be both positive and negative changes on the list (and it would be "all or nothing" - a
DH player cant say he wants the Rending Assault Cannon without having the limited range Psychic Hood too, for example).
swordtart wrote:The word shotgun is therefore not indicative of a particular capability. The same is true for the
GW use oof the word which is laible to be less rigorous rather than more so.
but "Shotgun" is a
game term. just like "Bolter" or "Landraider".
if something is going to be different, it needs to be something else ingame. like the "Astartes Grenade Launcher" - thats clearly a different ingame item to the "Grenade Launcher" used by
IG/
DH/
WH, and i wouldnt try to update anything using its rules.
if there is a reason for something being different then that is fair enough. but why shouldnt an Inquisitor Lord or an
IG Colonel be able to get their hands on a Shotgun of comparable hitting power to those used by
SM Scouts?
remember:
- the
SM codex is being updated next month but the
IG codex isnt (if they were both updated at the same time and still given different stats then that would be a different matter)
- until the
SM codex gets updated, they both use the same statline (so if there is no difference between an
IG shotgun and a
SM shotgun now, what is changing?)
- the Imperium uses
STCs to make a lot of items, so standardisation isnt out of the ordinary (and is certainly better in logistics terms)
- the stats are broad with plenty of variation in the fluff being given the same number on the statline (for example, a weightlifter and a weakling would both be S3 in modern
40K), and the rules are merely representative of what is going on (each to-hit dice doesnt always track an individual bullet, not all Rapid Fire weapons actually have the same
RoF fluffwise etc) - so even if there are differences between the shotguns fluffwise, this neednt mean they have different stats ingame
the main point though is the second one: if an
IG shotgun is the same as a
SM shotgun ingame, then they are the same. they shouldnt suddenly become different without good reason: if how shotguns are represented ingame is changed, then that change should apply to both. if them having the same statline was good enough before, then it should be good enough when that statline is updated. IMO, of course.
swordtart wrote:I know I have done the shotgun to death but the same arguments can be applied to most other kit in the codices.
Just my 2p
cheers for the reply, but to be honest, this isnt really what this thread is about: this thread assumes that the "use the newest rule" philosophy is accepted and adopted by both players, and is simply trying to compile a complete list - not discuss the merits of the philosophy itself.
with that in mind, i would greatly appreciate any help fleshing this list out.
cheers
~ Tim