This might be wrong to post this (if so apologies & pls delete) but have you seen the links to the new Empire pics posted up on warseer?

Some insane contraptions and monsters. Will be interesting to see them on the battlefield (or not)!

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.p...-rumours/page24

A two headed Griffon.... HA! Choas wanna-be Empire...

Looks cool though for the most part. Looking forward to using my "old" army book to stomp on the New ones :)

Maybe keep the griffon model as a prize! MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!

-Tremendous

Everything about this Empire release is awesome.. Or seems awesome as we really haven't seen the most important bits yet.

The Waltar/Hurricanium/Luminark could have been cooler I guess. But suspect that my expectations were just so damn high there was no other way of going about it than getting dissappointed.
I'm sure once I see those 'chariots' in real life I'll go *wow* (just like with the Mangler Squigs, or Crypt Horrors - where I had the same initial feeling of conservative *wtf?!*)

It's a releif that the DemiGryphs turned out as well as they did. I reckon 6 of those are likely popping up in my painting thread a few months down the line.

Oh and as to your question TheManBelow; I guess you should have posted this somewhere in the 'off-topic' section of the Forum. ;) Where it is now this thread should really have a sort of angle like 'How does the New Empire release effect Daemons?' or something like that.. hehe

I really dislike the Griffin model as well as the chariot things. The Demigryphs are pretty sweet though. The mounts might have to make an appearance in my army as Tzeentchian juggers at some point...

I think I see where you're coming from regarding the Griffin Noisy.. It's one of those models that will probably come to life "IRL" though.. Or at least that's what I am hoping.

Also: Those DemiGryphs have got to be mounted on the same kind of base the Plastic Giant has, right? I asked at Warseer but my question was ignored. :(

Yeah, looks like you're right. The bases aren't quite square.

To make this daemon related.. i'm guessing not many will take the light wizard lascannon mobile.. but I bet it will fry daemons, especially greater daemons.

Yes I should have related it to Daemons. Good idea.

Yes these new models seem tailor made to taking out our GD...so *sigh*.

I haven't bought a GD as I think I'll just get annoyed in a battle when I have to take it off the pitch in the first couple of turns (either that or ill waste its use by trying to hide it!).

I wonder if it's going to give Mourtis Engine like benefits to casting... Would be interesting as it may streamline Empire magic (make some lores better then others...)a bit much like very other new release...

*meh* They always had the Great Cannon for that. I think (in that case) the Luminarc (can we please stop referring to it as anything laser-related lest the wonder of this release be completely deflated! *lol*) poses a greater possible threat to our UNITS.
.. Of course, you may well be correct Colonel: If they give the Luminarc rules like for example negating our Daemonic Aura Wardsave and causing ridiculous amount of damage then of course it will be a whole new threat..
All though I would personally welcome it because Empire kinda struggles against Daemons in my experience, and secondly it would basically be the ultimate "proof" that Daemons will retain their Army Wide Wardsave whenever they get redone.

What I suspect will possibly be the biggest 'change' for our Daemonic perspective on the Empire is actually those DemiGrypth Knights. By the looks of it they are going to add a whole new element to the Emire arsenal - i.e. a fairly Hardhitting unit that keeps hitting hard also in subsequent rounds of combat.

So far the worst they've had to offer us has been what.. GreatSwords and charging Knights..(?) Everything else is just cannon-fodder.

btw: I am not having a go at you for using the word "lascannon" Colonel.. haha It's just it's the umphteenth time I see the Luminarc described that way and it just happened to become the tipping point where I felt like making a little rant about it. :) to be fair, "Luminarc" is surpricingly difficult to type out..

Moved. :)

.. but.. but.. we tried to wrench the discussion back to being a suitable topic for the main Forum! *lol*

Just kidding Squalie.. We saw this one coming! :D

Great gryphon is out of proportions and does not really look that great to me. After seeing the awesome mortis machine, those two "things" look kinda lame. They actually look like they would fall to their side any minute. Well they are ok but I was only bit dissapointed after mortis engine. I love demigryph models though they might be bit static. Witch hunter is also wicked cool looking =)

Gamewise I am bit sceptic. Empire general really isnt that tough bite on the stat side and even core elves could kill it unless you pump it full of wards and armour and thus make him expensive but not killy character. Gryphon might be ok, sure, but I doupt that it will have much armour on it, so we could be expecting a T6 max 5+ armoured monster with squishy character on top of it. After reading that empire units now get coldblooded rule if empire general or captain joins them, I would much rather have the character in the unit that squishy monster. 2 Headed gryphon will likely give some buffs for a wizard, so that might actually be bit more worthy choice than a captain and one could play it bit like LoC.

Demigryphs I like. Trend seems to be that all armies will get some monstrous things and few big things and that is good start on balancing armies. I mean, when every army has some similar units with minor tweaks on them, it is much easier to balance the whole game. This is why infinity is quite balanced game, for example. These chicks would likely fall around 50pts, have 2 S5 attacks on gryphon + one S4+lance on rider. Rider would also have 2+ armour.

Laser cannon I highly dislike. It will very likely have some qualities like "Shoots D6 S8 bolts of light, 2D6 S8 against daemons and undead" just like on light lore. Against daemons thats not all that horrible, after all daemons are bit tougher army and empire might need some handicap against that BUT Tomb kings and VC really aren't that bad. So we are going to the "Gray knight" wrong direction here. Everyone who has played 40k daemons know what Im talking about now; im talking about bashing one of the weakest army with specialized anti army rules for no apparent reason. Witch hunters might go to this same category, but I highly doupt that they will be anything as tough as cannons, atleast against us.

Buff construc like that planetary would be quite ok in my opinion. Maybe it helps war machines instead of magic? Who knows, I like the idea of things like that. I am bit sceptic of this book as the same guy has already wrecked balance of 2 books earlier. He might do half of the book rotten and half of it plain broken, make whole book "new daemons" or tone it slightly down like TK. We will know about that soon enough.

And his name is Robin cruddace. Any I cold gladly do a rant of the abilities of Cruddance as a writer, however as a friend pointed out Cruddace wrote the IG codex so maybe this Armybook will not be a "tomb king" armybook. And be along the lines of something IG, however time will time.

... I'm wondering what the 'rationale' is to have Cruddace make 'book after book' like this. Out of the 8th Edition Books it seems to me that he's made the most of them. Not Ogre Kingdoms from what I remember.
My point is only.. well.. We're a whole bunch of (more or less) competent and balanced folks that have been tinkering for over a year with the 'New DoC Book' thread. That's at least really opened my eyes to how 'high' you can set the standards for writing a new book, how hard it actually is (just on a theorethical level, forget about playtesting) - and we're not even saying we're done yet (only 'just about' to start playtesting).
And by-and-large that fan-made little re-write is already looking more polished and serious in many ways compared to some of the things in these new Army Books being released.
Now I am not really complaining about the Army Books so far. With my limited grasp on things I haven't been tearing my hair out over anything that's happened in 8th Edition (well, I hate the lack of Army-specific Magic Items but that's about it) - but it's with a mix of wonder and amusement how little importance GW seems to ultimately assign to the actual Design process...
I realize Cruddace isn't doing everything by himself, but even so being the 'lead designer' for this many books over this breif a time-span simply cannot be very good.

I think I can deduce some 'signs' of this too. For example: I think how the Vampire Counts ld-debuffs just blatantly copies mechanics that are associated with Slaanesh Daemons (Phantasmagoria) is a good example (would it have been that hard to think of something unique for that Vampiric Power?)..
I also think the overly convoluted mechanics of the Mortiis Engine (what's the rule again? Count the number of turns, add a D6, measure a bubble from the thing and deal a randomized damage?) just looks like one of those less than great ideas that some inspired person would bring up in our DoC-thread and the rest of us wouldn't even allow into 'playtesting'.
And to be quite blunt: What's this I hear about Empire troops getting the equivalent of the ColdBlooded rule? I have to say I'm simply hoping that turns out to be a false rumour (all though it's probably true being this close to the release) - because *wtf* Coldblooded is a Lizardmen 'thing' ... giving it to the Empire is tantamount to the same crap as some idiots talking about the possibility of Daemons getting the Unstable rule as if it that was a good thing.

As for the Luminarc/Hurricanium I'm basically just dissappointed that they obviously suddenly felt "forced" to cram these things onto a 50x100mm base.
If the damn Terrorgheist could get a huge scenic plate for base I think these mage-platforms could have gotten it to. It would have given the Design bigger room to play in - just have four Horses pulling the thing rather than merely too (etcetera).
Even the 'original' Black Coach doesn't actially fit onto a chariot base (the Horses stand alone).

Hm.. Well.. Let's not pass judgement until we see the insides of the book. I wouldn't mind the Empire getting significantly more powerfull. I don't mind a good challange.

I just think it's highly doubtfull how you can have the same guy being the lead designer for book-after-book-after-book. Nobody is that good, I don't care how good he is. Sort of..

Cruddy was responsible for both TK and Tyranids, so I'm nervous to say the least. Who knows, maybe he won't completely bollocks it up, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Interestingly, with it coming out so soon, is anyone else amazed at how tightly they've controlled the leaks this time?

-und_ed

If it's on white dwarf, it pretty much means that empire just got cold blooded =P

Also, some stat lines:
Deathclaw WS 6, S 6, T 6, W 5, I 4, A 5
Imperial Griffon WS 5, S 6, T 5, W 5, I 4, A 4

So the big griffon is just T5 5W. Something that horde of Bloodletters will rip a part in one single round.

Thanks Kitsune. Those were some nice tidbits from the coming book.
I still don't like the fact that they've given Coldblooded to a race that's not Lizardmen. I don't think it's the sort of buff the Empire needed - they are steadfast alot anyway already..
It's cool that Karl Franz has an extended Ld-bubble but alas it won't matter to my group because we're not likely to start using SC's like ever. That extended ld-bubble would really be suiting for the sort of big games we have a penchant for though.

Which hunters have Sniper and Killing Blow.
If that's all they got I'm a bit dissappointed. It doesn't seem specific enough. They *should* get something like:
Multiple Wounds multiplier vs Undead/Daemons/Monsters (?)
All CC-enemies must re-roll successfull Wardsaves (?)
... That's the sort of stuff I was half expecting.

Thanks for those bits of info anyway. :)

GW really does seem to hate big monsters these days. Unless that thing is dirt cheap I don't see it getting much use, especially with the cold-blooded buff.

Some more rumours:

I've never been interested in Empire. Ever. This new stuff though has me breaking out in an anxious rash. I love Beasts and trinkets - and apparently Empire have Beasts and trinkets. :D

And in all fairness, any general worth his sugar won't charge a unit of Bloodletters in the front with a Griffon - and certainly not while they have hatred.

And Empire characters can be notoriously difficult to kill.

Speaking of 'difficult'..
If the rumour of "Coldblooded" being granted to units by Lords/Captains of the Empire they are gonna 'stay put' like the most Stubborn of Dwarves while retaining the basic capabilities of saturation comparable to Goblins.

I think there's little doubt, at this point, that this new Book of the Empire will mean a definate increase in 'power' for this Army. Not really complaining about that, and for all we know these buffs will be assoicated with cost-increases too so maybe the difference won't be that big.

Empire could possible become quite a tough opponant. Cannons laying down nasty template fire, vast quantities of nigh-unbreakable troopers, the addition of seemingly hard-hitting MC...

The Luminarc/Hurricanium still seem a bit exotic. We'll see where they end up, so to speak. I can't help still feeling I'd rather seen them on 100x150 bases though.. Seems a little off GW suddenly felt the appearant need to fit them completely (even the horses) on a Chariot base.. (?)

What I've learnt recently in regards to GW book authoring in regards to rules is that even if Cruddace or x put their name on the book, then it hasn't been designed by them and them alone in a vacuum.

Cruddace (or Mat Ward) may have the final say on certain things, but it's unlikely that he has some sort of rule veto above the other game developers to some sort of nth degree. Cruddace can't, for example, massively change the statlines for basic humans if he can't get the other game devs to agree.

Sorry, I just can't stand the sort of comments along the lines of 'I hate x' game dev author because it just seems ridiculous to assume that they have complete control over any particular aspect of rules dev. Lets not have this board demoted to being yet another Warseer.

I have no idea how 'alone' they are in the Design Process over at GW. I certainly think they discuss things with one another, like you say Feez.
It's intrigued me too.. This animosity toward Cruddace that's popping up in places now. He's being described as someone "Known for writing bad books" and yet it seems to me virtually every book for 8th Ed (where's he's done many) have been recieved as at least 'ok'.
Well.. Maybe not TK. But even Warseer seems to be generally content with VC..
I would be thrilled to have the "details" of this resentment for Cruddace explained to me. Because most of the time I've asked people what they base their opinion on I basically get shrugged shoulders and 'Because he sucks..' as an answer.
Which rings awfully similar to the wanna-be-Jervis undertones of the ETC comp board, and - to be fair - every other raging rant on the hobby forums..

Well Cruddace has only done TK for WFB up till now (VC was Phil Kelly), but like Feez I hate the designer-bashing that goes on sometimes. He's right that it is a team effort, although Cruddace will be the lead designer. The Empire is only Cruddace's 4th proper book so he has a lot less experience than the other main developers like Mat, Jervis and Phil. I think the "failure" of his previous books has been exagerated by internet hype to some extent (local Tyranid players seem to be managing fine with their codex). I'm prepared to wait until I've read it and played against it before I pass judgement on him.

Back to the main topic though, and some of these releases make me almost wish I hadn't sold my Empire army 2 months ago. Having seen better pictures in WD today they look a bit better than the 1st pictures I saw on Warseer. I particularly like the Witch Hunter and may get him anyway, while I keep looking at the Celestial Wizard-mobile wondering what I can use that for so I have an excuse to buy one. :D

People blast TK but I actually find them a really characterful book with a lot of fun builds, they are challenging in the extreme to use which I don't really think to be a bad thing. People claim they need magic to perform well but what Undead army doesnt!? Sure VC has better characters but they also lack the awesome constructs of the TK's my only real gripe with the book is the cost of TG and how they really slipped up with EBTS but it is what it is...

A bad player always blames his books :P

In any case the new models i think look really good if a little exotic (pew pew cannon and gusty bus :P ).

I would like to see rules where the ST can actually generate steam in the enemy turn if only half the amount or something...after your turn it just becomes this big tin can of nothing :P

Empire MC with halberds....hmm why would you ever need to equip em with spears again? S5 for a few turns is better than S6 round 1 then S4 later on so i guess the "Berdriders" will take president :P

As for the big birds....they look great personally but i never did find much use for a lone char on one of these things other than to kill WM's which a cannon can do anyway :D

Just looking forward to seeing the new book and it'll be the first one thats worth me getting whoop whoop! :P

It will be quite interesting to see the "Cold Blooded" rule on characters though as I can see spamming nekkid captains to be the new norm amongs Empire players, giving them Dwarf like resilience combined with (a probable) point drop means they will probably be harder to shift then their stunty cousins!

thats providing they keep the heroes as cheap as they are now :D

Touché good sir, touché.

I really do not fear that coldblooded that much to be honest. It mainly helps against shooting and magic but just think of it more and its only fair bonus for them. After all empire is mass army, theres over hundred models in almost every army and not all of them will be having these champions. One captain costs only 50pts, but has only T4 and 2W without any saves. You really do not want to spam weak stuff like this all over and if you buff it with armours and magic items you only get tough to crack character who has no hitting power. Power of empire is not on characters, they are totally support to them and this increases this role further.

Saw DReign try to talk logic over on Whineseer... poor guy don't you know your kinds not welcome there.

It looks to be a solid release IMO, the stank looks to be quite the grinder this time 'round and the re-roll hits &wounds buff coupled with the whole Hold the Line issue seems to be a great combo. Makes Daemonettes seem like a half good idea agains them (damage output that remains consistent as long as the herald keeps kicking!)

Even doubling up on either wizard mobile could be quite nice (+2 PD/DD) for 240 sure the bound spells are just that so are susceptible to easy dispell but if one manages their PD right BS can be amazing (I try to have 3 in my VC list at all times for ease of spamming plus they don't break concentration).

Cheaper Wizards and despite the doom and gloom about Archers being the only state troop to drop in points, enough shots are bound to hurt even hitting on 5's (my TK says so!)

Good riddance to Mortars, I have seen them level 1000 points worth of HE in one turn, and all the bitching about them being more expensive he met them on the middle ground with Plague Claw catapults so I don't see where the lack of precedence is. Combine with Withering if you want them to be good.

Complaints about the new MC's being undercosted so people have to buy them... Really!? Is that a legitimate concern!? On Warseer I suppose it is!

They got cheaper Priests which nerfed down to reality still have the opportunity to channel and then come with BS's to boot!

Greatswords with a 50 point banner is a nice edition to the army, combined with the re-roll to hit wagon and maybe a LoLight buff and they could be quite the monstrous unit!

Now how to bring this back to the main thread... Mayhaps I will just have to go buy this book and find out first hand!

I didn't see it mentioned here, but according to WD, units with generals/captains are only coldblooded for break tests. Of course, this could just be poor wording on the part of WD but it does make the whole concept more palatable.

No misunderstanding. If the rumour-thread on Warseer is any indication. ;)

Speaking of the new Empire, and specifically these new DemiGryph Knights that have just been released:

I just bought 2 boxes (so 6 models) to get the Empire player in our group started. Had they been Daemons I'd bought at least twice as many but hey we don't want to spoil the puny mortals now do we..?
Anyway, there's been talk in our group about "base size" of these DemiGryphs, where they are evidently packaged with a 50x75mm base.

We've started to think that we're gonna make our own bases for them. Namely 40x60mm. The models themselves looks as though they'd easily "fit" in that space, and you'd have the added benefit of the DemiGryphs actually fitting nicely into a unit of 20mm square bases (should you ever want to field them like that, or hell, I don't even remember if those DemiGryphs can actually be taken as individual character-mounts now that I think of it).

So would you guys be ok with that? From an opponant's perspective it could be seen as a slight "buff" for them to be getting a smaller base footprint.
And keep in mind that all my Disc-HoTs are modelled on 40mm square bases (not 50mm) and that's always been ok with my group, so this is not really a case of the Empire player trying to score an unfair advantage. At the same time, the base footprint of a CC-unit like the DemiGryphs might matter more compared to the base footprint of a Herald on Disc that just dies in combat either way.. (?)

Meh, Its against the rules to use a smaller base size than what they're suppose to be modeled on. In your gaming group I see no problem with it provided your group doesn't try to torch your empire player for doing so. However if you went to a GT or some other Tournament and your opponent noticed (Which would surprise me if they did... but stranger things have happened) You could get DQ'ed for it Because it IS an advantage. Namely you get more models into CC, your wheel arc is significantly changed, and the LOS footprint you should cast for that particular model / unit is altered in an advantagious way for the owner and not his opponent.

Saw a guy who was playing WoC at a GT in Dallas get DQ'd and removed from the tournament because he had his Chaos warriors (or maybe it was marauders) on 20mm bases instead of 25mm ones.

Rule of thumb is bigger base sizes are ok but smaller is a DQ-able offense.

-Tremendous

Given the fact that you game with such an insular group I wouldn't see a problem with it so long as no one objects. But as Tremendous pointed out, having a smaller base size comes with a set of advantages. I think the bigger bases are one of the ways that GW is trying to balance the power of monstrous infantry units. Whether they need such balance is up to your group.

I would be vehemently against changing the base size of the Griffs. Where does it end?

Of course I'm going to preface this with the obligatory "IMO", but campaigning to change the base size of any model starts a slippery slope. The book is barely even on the shelves and before people have played a game, they are changing inherent rules? and then saying it's ok, because "our group" says so? Why do they say so? Anyone using the argument "It's a game, just have fun with it", my own would be the same "It's a game, why not play as it's presented - just have fun with it."

I certainly couldn't look at the stats and point values of the Griffs and say "close, but if they only came on 40X60, THEN they'd be something else!" That's very true - they would be something else.

The last thing in the book that needs tweaking is the Demi's.

And anyone that shows up with Chaos Warriors on 20mm bases should be disqualified.

Sorry if I'm coming on strong here, but I see these threads all the time and it usually makes me bite my lip.

Yeah the 'slippery slope' is bothering me a little as well.

I mean, I'd love to see what my friends would say if I (for example) suggested that Bloodcrushers should go on square 40mm bases instead of 50mm bases simply because their original bases 'look ridiculously big compared to the model' - yeah the part in italics is actually the basic argument behind this idea of downsizing the base-footprint of the DemiGryphs. It's 'aesthethic', believe it or not, and the idea wasn't sprung by the Empire player (even) but rather everyone except him have been discussing it at this point. :)

Noisy is correct that we're a very insular group though. And very unlikely to every attend Tournaments of any kind so the risk of being disqualified is not an issue by itself..

I think we should have another round of talk about this probably. And this time we should involve the Empire player too *haha*
It does set a bit of a bad precedence, which is basically the source of my general dislike for HouseRules/Comp all together, so I certainly see where you're coming from Squalie. :)

Understand I'm not trying to pick on you - I love you all as brothers. :D

But really, the esthetic thing is silly at best. I also have issue with Crushers on 40mm if they are intended to be on 50mm. I shouldn't be able to change base size because I have a personal issue with trying to improve Crushers by putting them on smaller bases. Which, really, is exactly what you're doing. And you might be right! Maybe Crushers aren't quite good enough - maybe they do belong on 40mm. That's simply not my call to make. Take the opportunity on the 50mm to make awesome bases. I also don't feel that there is that much space surrounding a Jugger.

If anyone asked if they could put Griffs on 40X60 so they would settle in better with a unit I would certainly raise an eyebrow. There are exact rules that deal with that precise situation.

I guess what I'm trying to say (maybe a little overzealously) is that base size is an issue that should rarely, if ever, have to come up.