Future of the 40k Inquisition Rumor - Page 8 - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
Wargaming News and 40k Rumors Discuss and share wargaming news, new releases, warhammer and 40k rumors here.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #71 of 81 (permalink) Old 11-16-13, 06:31 PM
Senior Member
 
Sworn Radical's Avatar
Sworn Radical's Flag is: Germany
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Heavily Spanking Saint Celestine
Posts: 721
Reputation: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zion View Post
As a counter point to all the =I= bashing ...
Actually, Zion, there was no =][= bashing at all.
It's simply a fact that 95% of the rules and information relevant for actual game purposes (see how I exclude the fluff of things) are just copy-pasted from the 2-year-old Grey Knights book.
There's simply no denying that, and no way to make this look better.
People even still have to field Coteaz if they take =][= as an allied detachment and want for those Acolythes to be scoring units. That's just a joke.
So, yes, there was plenty of room for improvements.

Don't get me wrong, I got this little ebook to finally be able again to field my combined Sisters / Inquisition forces without the need for Codex Grey Knights.
Oh, I just paid 20,- for the exact same information I allready own ? Really ?

Charging 20,- for this is a ripoff, nothing more.

Peace.

40k Armies: Dark Eldar / Adepta Sororitas
WHFB Armies: Vampire Counts / Empire / various Elves
Horus Heresy: Alpha Legion / Warp Cult
Sworn Radical is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #72 of 81 (permalink) Old 11-16-13, 06:43 PM
Token Trans Mod
 
Zion's Avatar
Zion's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On the internet.
Posts: 6,385
Reputation: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
Actually, Zion, there was no =][= bashing at all.
My apologies I must have missed the well balanced, constructive critiques somewhere in there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
It's simply a fact that 95% of the rules and information relevant for actual game purposes (see how I exclude the fluff of things) are just copy-pasted from the 2-year-old Grey Knights book.
Which I mentioned and even gave possible reasons why. Tells me you didn't read past that sentence in my post. I'm so glad I took the time to type up some valid counter-points to the all negative postings only to have them not be read.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
There's simply no denying that, and no way to make this look better. People even still have to field Coteaz if they take =][= as an allied detachment and want for those Acolythes to be scoring units. That's just a joke.
Or run the Inquisition as a Primary Detachment and ally in your other army. You do know that Allies of Convience and Battle Brother troops are scoring right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
So, yes, there was plenty of room for improvements.
I won't deny that, but I don't think there was a lot of room for the writers on this one to make those improvements. Maybe when GK gets updated we'll see some auto-updates changing things here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
Don't get me wrong, I got this little ebook to finally be able again to field my combined Sisters / Inquisition forces without the need for Codex Grey Knights.
Oh, I just paid 20,- for the exact same information I allready own ? Really ?
Well and more fluff, Relics, more DT options, and nice art. Oh and the ability to take Red Hunters as Battle Brothers too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
Charging 20,- for this is a ripoff, nothing more.

Peace.
Subjective statement is subjective. Maybe it's just the cost of my textbooks (over $500 USD this semester alone) but the $32USD I paid for this doesn't feel like a rip off. How much is a full hard cover codex again? Eldar was nearly $50 so I think the $18 discount from a full codex price to a lower one for these min-ones isn't that bad. But value is subjective and what I see as being too highly priced is not the same as what you see as a "ripoff" (it's called "choke price" if you want to get into Economics, and it varies from person to person for a lot of reasons).

Calling this book a ripoff I think is going too far because you're assuming the value you set for the product is the same that everyone else is setting. If you're going to make subjective statements like that at least preface it as your opinion, not fact.
Zion is offline  
post #73 of 81 (permalink) Old 11-16-13, 07:15 PM
Senior Member
 
Sworn Radical's Avatar
Sworn Radical's Flag is: Germany
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Heavily Spanking Saint Celestine
Posts: 721
Reputation: 5
Default

Please, spare me your irony, Zion. It's not needed, and I'm clearly able to see each and every one of the points your raising.

Well, sure, you're right, I didn't bother to give any constructive criticism .... because there was no new material that would've been worth digging into.

Sure, someone who never picked up the Grey Knights book in the past will find information aplenty, but not us people who allready own that one.
At the very least, GW could've been hinting at that, stating that Codex =][= will be a compilation of formerly published rules (plus the 3 relics ... yeah).
So, I'm neither 'bashing' nor 'raging' nor whatever ... I'm simply a very dysatisfied customer, quite unhappy with the product I've recently purchased. Let's see if they give a refund ...

As for the detachment rules you've been metioning ... if you'd read my post you'd have seen I was talking about =][= as the allied detachment. I'm quite aware it works the other way 'round.
Fluff, sure, I love fluff, even if I believe that a fair amount of the fluff in Codex =][= has been pusbilshed before as well.
New Artworks ? Most were actually shown before in FFG's Dark Heresy line of books.


40k Armies: Dark Eldar / Adepta Sororitas
WHFB Armies: Vampire Counts / Empire / various Elves
Horus Heresy: Alpha Legion / Warp Cult
Sworn Radical is offline  
 
post #74 of 81 (permalink) Old 11-16-13, 08:20 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 364
Reputation: 8
Default

To be honest, you can go round and round as to whether it's worth the asking price. It's cheaper than a full Codex, but in terms of sheer volume of rules there's not much in there.

On the other hand, what it adds to Imperial forces can be game-changing. I don't see it being too handy for Marines, but for Sisters you get access to an excellent assault unit complete with Land Raider- I used a Xenos with Hammerhand, Rad Grenades and a Force Axe accompanied by Crusaders, DCA and a Priest today and the unit was just brutal. It's also another way to get a Flyer for Sisters without Forge World, albeit the less broken one.
For Guard, you get a Psyker with Divination for an absolute pittance of points who doesn't need to bring any Troops with him, and of course the assault option is handy, though less necessary since in my experience Guard don't have to get as close as Sisters do. The Punisher, in particular, has good reason to celebrate.

Most of the art is new to me, which is ultimately all I can say on that subject.

Armies and other stuff:
http://majere613.deviantart.com/
Short stories and writing:
http://thetheleniccurriculum.blogspot.co.uk/
My novel, The Wake of Manadar, on Kindle:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...=1&*entries*=0
Majere613 is offline  
post #75 of 81 (permalink) Old 11-16-13, 09:32 PM
Senior Member
 
Varakir's Avatar
Varakir's Flag is: United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 4,634
Reputation: 42
Default

I'm quite disappointed about the lack of assassins - i really wanted to run one with my allied Inquisitorial entourage.

The annoying thing now is that i could still do that with the GK codex, but i'd prefer to be flexible on taking Coteaz, and i miss out on the battle brothers rules.

I think i'll probably pick this up, but it's a shame there are a few more options in the book.


My Salamander Logs & Army Showcase:
The Ashbringers 3rd co. ::: Into the fires of Battle:::Army Showcase


Currently Painting:

Landraider Redeemer
Varakir is offline  
post #76 of 81 (permalink) Old 11-17-13, 12:07 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 364
Reputation: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varakir View Post
I'm quite disappointed about the lack of assassins - i really wanted to run one with my allied Inquisitorial entourage.

The annoying thing now is that i could still do that with the GK codex, but i'd prefer to be flexible on taking Coteaz, and i miss out on the battle brothers rules.

I think i'll probably pick this up, but it's a shame there are a few more options in the book.
Call me cynical, but if we don't see something very similar for Assassins at some point I will be very surprised.

TBH, neither Assassins or non-Malleus Inquisitors ever really belonged in the GK book in the first place. Next time they come around, I suspect they'll be removed in favour of including them via the mini-dexes.

Armies and other stuff:
http://majere613.deviantart.com/
Short stories and writing:
http://thetheleniccurriculum.blogspot.co.uk/
My novel, The Wake of Manadar, on Kindle:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...=1&*entries*=0
Majere613 is offline  
post #77 of 81 (permalink) Old 11-17-13, 12:39 AM
Token Trans Mod
 
Zion's Avatar
Zion's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On the internet.
Posts: 6,385
Reputation: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
Please, spare me your irony, Zion. It's not needed, and I'm clearly able to see each and every one of the points your raising.
Actually, it's sarcasm. I know irony has basically lost it's meaning, but that was not an attempt to be ironic.

Also, it'd be nice if you saw them if you had acknowledged them, even in passing, just so I knew that you didn't skip the rest of my post (which is something that has and does happen).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
Well, sure, you're right, I didn't bother to give any constructive criticism .... because there was no new material that would've been worth digging into.
There is stuff that's changed, but yes it's not much. I really do think it's because of the GK book though as they'd be punishing Grey Knights players for not having the "new" and "better" rules by changing things too much. What little did change can be done via an errata if need be, but to drastic of a change and they'd basically have to publish new pages for the GK book or piss off all the people who run GK Inquisition armies.

Does it mean the book is less awesome than I hope? Yes. Does it mean that the book is a steaming pile of gak? Not in my mind. I think that thanks to the nature of it being a digital only codex that when GK get their update this codex can be rather effortlessly updated with all the changes without any real issues and without forcing people to buy a new version.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
Sure, someone who never picked up the Grey Knights book in the past will find information aplenty, but not us people who allready own that one.
Except all the changes to allies, FOC and things like that, sure. But maybe, just maybe this book isn't strictly for GK players. Not everyone could take Inquisition without being stuck at Allies of Convenience or worse like GK could.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
At the very least, GW could've been hinting at that, stating that Codex =][= will be a compilation of formerly published rules (plus the 3 relics ... yeah).
So, I'm neither 'bashing' nor 'raging' nor whatever ... I'm simply a very dysatisfied customer, quite unhappy with the product I've recently purchased. Let's see if they give a refund ...
You're also posting with a strong bias and doing so in such a way that it suggest you're claiming objective facts and not opinions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
As for the detachment rules you've been metioning ... if you'd read my post you'd have seen I was talking about =][= as the allied detachment. I'm quite aware it works the other way 'round.
If you're aware then posting like there isn't a work around is a little misleading.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sworn Radical View Post
Fluff, sure, I love fluff, even if I believe that a fair amount of the fluff in Codex =][= has been pusbilshed before as well.
New Artworks ? Most were actually shown before in FFG's Dark Heresy line of books.
Yes, it's probably all recycled, but it's also all consolidated for easy reference and there is art I haven't seen because I don't own all the Dark Heresy books (and some people have possible never seen it) so it doesn't make it less "new" to us exposure wise. It's good art and fluff and I'm glad to have it all in one easy to find place now.
Zion is offline  
post #78 of 81 (permalink) Old 11-17-13, 12:50 AM
Senior Member
 
Stormxlr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 443
Reputation: 7
Default

@Mokuren by your standards what's a good Codex and whats a bad one? I think Codex Dark Angels is quite good but a bit lacking, while chaos codices are good imho .
@Majere613 actually Ye I agree and honestly Codex inquisition should have been a proper Codex that has all 3 ordos and their militant arms represented in 3 different chapters of the book with personal rules, relics, wargear, heroes, and armies. Alas we got 2 half assed digital mini Codex that failed to represent =][=nquisition for a vast, omnipotent organization that it is.
Stormxlr is offline  
post #79 of 81 (permalink) Old 11-17-13, 01:49 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormxlr View Post
@Mokuren by your standards what's a good Codex and whats a bad one? I think Codex Dark Angels is quite good but a bit lacking, while chaos codices are good imho .
Codex: Chaos Marines is a bad joke.

There's one good unit (the Heldrake) and everything else varies between mediocre and utter trash. I still remember hearing about this being the first codex of 6th edition so everything was changing, as the edition turnover really did shake things up rules-wise and forced everyone to re-think their army. It was even being said that as soon as a good chunk of 6e codexes would come out, the game would turn a bit more balanced and out of its power creep curve.

No. Bullshit. This was proven to be false over and over. They told us it was impossible to detail the various Chaos legions and produce rules for them and that we should stop being nostalgic old farts only capable of crying about how good we were in 3rd edition, and THEN they made Codex: Space Marines with a 7-in-one deal.

This edition thoroughly nerfed assault units, and yet the dedicated CC units from Chaos Marines that didn't go up in cost were nerfed further. Berzerkers are unplayable, Mark of Khorne is an expensive bad joke, Daemon princes are only good for abusing Iron Arm combined with flyer cheese and even then Codex: Chaos Daemons made them better anyways. Daemonic possession was nerfed for no apparent reason despite vehicles being a lot frailer in 6th edition already.

Oh but the other codexes balanced things, right? Yeah, sure, aside from loyalist marines being only 1 point more expensive than their chaotic counterparts and getting ATSKNF and chapter tactics for that one extra point, Eldar got a noticeable boost on their wave serpents and most of their previously problematic or subpar units (except Banshees, because apparently assaulting was overpowered? I seriously don't know), Tau got plenty of upgrades and point discounts and the ability to be battle bros with people like Eldar and Space Marines, the Imperial Guard has some of the best cost/benefit ratio for flyers and it's still a 5th edition codex, Necrons have extremely cheap flyers and skimmers who got boosted by virtue of being flyers and skimmers.

And now we have Adepta Sororitas who still have models from 1993, are losing more and more options at every update and are still the army with the worst model cost/game effectiveness ratio. Go look how much you need to shell out for 10 seraphim with two special weapons. Go look how much this immolator spam will cost your wallet. Go look and compare with other armies' "competitive" lists. Now remember they're models from over a dozen years ago, so old they're out of scale with the rest of the range.

Practically a month later, Codex: Inquisition comes out of the blue, and look! It's a copypasta of the same rules we had in Codex: Grey Knights! With a price tag! For something you probably already have! Oh sure, let's be honest and say they have updated the Priests to be on par with Adepta Sororitas standards. That is: they copy-pasted that part from the Adepta Soriritas codex instead of the Grey Knights one, because everything else has Grey Knights costs back from 5th edition and it shows. Damn it shows. It shows so hard. Power armour and bolter acolytes for more than a Space Marine? Yeah, sure! Maybe it made sense back when Space Marines were 18 per model without grenades, I guess whomever made this "digital codex" hasn't played the game since then.

But I guess I'm also tired of all the fanboy apologism. They're blatantly playing favourites and coming up with poor copy-paste to rip off more and more money with practically no effort, and I'm being told I should be grateful I'm getting to pay for the option to field a super special new detachment and look at some yet again recycled art? As if people couldn't do image searches on the internet or fan art never existed? Seriously? I'm supposed to be glad part of those 20 went into the privilege of looking at pictures on a tablet?

Yes, I know, I'm annoying myself too. Tell you what, I'm fucking done. I'm not buying into an army where models from 1993 cost me 11 each, I'm not spending twice that much for the privilege of knowing how I'm supposed to field them and I'm not spending way more than that as a tax for the privilege of knowing how to play the game at all, not when I already have miniatures from other manufacturers with free rules where I can expand without feeling like I'm being laughed at for picking the "wrong" side.

I'm sorry, this time I'm done, I'm fucking done. Time to bring my business elsewhere as they say.
Mokuren is offline  
post #80 of 81 (permalink) Old 11-17-13, 04:47 AM
Token Trans Mod
 
Zion's Avatar
Zion's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On the internet.
Posts: 6,385
Reputation: 103
Default

So all this back and forth and the feeling that people seem to pay attention to my points more when I write them as an article led to me writing them up an article: http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/11...tion-what.html

It's not me defending what happened, it's just my thoughts on what may have gotten us what we got.
Zion is offline  
Reply

  Lower Navigation
Go Back   Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums > Wargaming News, New Releases and Information > Wargaming News and 40k Rumors

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome