40K: Tips & Tricks to Make Custodes Competitive

How to get the most out of the Emperor’s Golden Boys.

We’ve got our hands on the shiny new Custodes Codex and one of the big questions people are asking are is it is competitive? Now the list has a fair amount of potential in for sure, but I think a lot of people will struggle with mono-Custodes lists. I’ve gone over the codex, played some test games and come up with a few nice tricks and tips to help out the big boys. Lets take a look at a few.

I’m mainly talking about how to get the most out of a majority Custodes lists here, for tips at how to use Custodes in other armies, tune in later.

The Battery

Custodes has some really awesome and powerful stratagems. What they do not have is a lot of command points to use them.  In order to fix that we look to the Imperium player’s best buddy, an Imperial Guard Detachment.

Astra Militarum Battalion 

Company Commander -30
Company Commander -30

10x Guardsmen 40
10x Guardsmen 40
10x Guardsmen 40

180pts

This simple 180 detachment can slot into just about any Custodes army and adds a lot to the list. At it’s most basic it gives the list an additional 3 Command Points, which is big. In addition, it gives the list some bodies. It’s not unlikely that this 180 pts detachment will have as many models or in fact many more as the other 1800 points of Custodes you take. The extra AM units go a long way to letting the Golden Glory Seekers free by holding down objectives and getting some board control for their “big brothers”. Of course depending on how you want to play the list you could aslo make one of the those company commanders your warlord and give them the Grand Strategist trait, letting you get CPs back, add in Kurov’s Aquila to get CPs from the enemy and you’ve gone a long way towards fixing your CP shortage and being able to hold ground better.

Get You Some Psykers

Another big weak spot the Custodes have is in the psychic department. With almost no defenses of their own and a weakness to mortal wounds the Custodes can really be in a pinch when facing enemy psykers. One way of dealing with this would be to get some allied ones. It would be pretty easy and cheap to add some Primaris Pykers to the above AM Battalion, replacing one Company Commander with a  PP, and then taking a second would give give you some solid defense.

If you want to be a little more thematic a couple cheap units of Sister of Silence (or even and Culexus Assassin) can also mess with an enemy and fit right in. Either way the goal is to cheaply get some pyskic defense.

Use Your Stratagems All The Time

As I mentioned above Custodes have some really amazing stratagems. A good number of them are cheap one point abilities that can seriously boost your potential. Both Avenge the Fallen and Piercing Strike should be used almost every turn if possible. The army has a lot of tricks up its sleeve – but unlike some armies won’t survive without using their stratagems well.

Take Some Big Units

Custodes are expensive models. In addition all their their multi model units can be 3-10 models. It’s going to be tempting to field a lot of small 3 man units of Custodes. While this will help you fill out detachments and cover more of the table I think its really the wrong way to go. As I talked about above they have a some great Stratagems, which they NEED  to use to win games. These stratagems really benefit from being used on large units. I really think taking a few large units and using the stratagems on them is going to be how to win with them. This combo will allow you to build super powerful units that will melt the enemy. By taking an AM Battalion in your lists you negate the need to spread out you Custodes.

Be Aggressive

A good Custodes list is going to be a a very aggressive one. Outside of Land Raiders the army can’t hurt things beyond 24″ inches. Even when in range the army is only ok at shooting. Custodes can get some good shots in a 12″, but really it’s an army that wants to be in combat. To win you are going to have to get into combat ASAP and tear the enemy apart ruthlessly. This is not an army that can endure turns of enemy shooting. In addition, due to the cost of your units, you need them to be doing stuff. Having 2-300 points units sit back and hold objectives is a waste. Get your Custodes in there and have them hurt the enemy. Leave the holding ground to the AM. That is the path to victory.

Let us know how you plan to make the Custodes competitive down in the comments! 

 

  • Jude Sanchez

    Or build a full brigade for 9 cp…

    • Huntard

      Please, explain how to build a Custodes brigade detachment at or under 2000 points

      • Karru

        I am very interested to hear this one as well, since even with Guard Allies, I believe the cheapest you can go with Guard is around 1000pts for a Brigade, leaving you with 1000pts to use with Custodes which equals to around 10 models.

        • Warrior24_7

          Then do you have a Custodes army or a AM army?

        • John Archiquette

          You can put together an AM Brigade for around 650 points.
          HQ= 4x Company Commander
          Troops=6x Infantry Squad
          Elites=3x Wyrdvane/Platoon Comm
          FA= 3 Scout Sentinels
          HS= 3x Mortar Teams

          • Karru

            But why would you do that when you can just take 9CP for 540pts using 3x Battalion using the units from above? Remember, the “limited” detachment thingy from the Rulebook isn’t actually a rule, it is a suggestion.

          • stinkoman

            but competition…

      • Jeremy Larson

        I’m assuming the OP meant build a brigade out of the guard battery, since you literally can’t do that with Custodes.

    • OctopusVolcano

      Easier to build 3 guard brigades for the cp if that was your aim lol

  • YetAnotherFacelessMan

    Let the codex come out? I’m not how much discussion this will generate because we don’t have all the info yet. All I can do is sit here like “Mmmhmm. Yep. I was gonna add Guilliman for 3 more points and a chance to get more back.”

    • Calgar

      I’ve already been planning the same. Guilliman helps the army alot, 3cp’s, getting points back, plus the +1 to charge and advance will come in handy for an army that wants to be in CC.

      Plus thematically he fits, Commander of the Imperium and his bodyguard force.

      Im actually thinking of picking up a second Guilliman and painting him all gold to fit the army.

      • Rob brown

        Heresy! Guilliman is not the Emperor!

        Well at least I didn’t vote for him.

      • Ronin

        I’ve got Guilliman and custodes together too along with the Victrix Guard and Sisters of Silence. That’s exactly the force he brings when he needs to personally deal with a problem like in the Dark Imperium novel.

    • Calgar

      I’ve already been planning the same. Guilliman helps the army alot, 3cp’s, getting points back, plus the +1 to charge and advance will come in handy for an army that wants to be in CC.

      Plus thematically he fits, Commander of the Imperium and his bodyguard force.

      Im actually thinking of picking up a second Guilliman and painting him all gold to fit the army.

  • “How to make Custodes competitive: Just fill your army list with other Imperial armies instead”

    Awesome.

    • Pl4gu3 B4st4rd

      “Codex : Cost-odds”

    • Muninwing

      which is funny, because there are a number of tactical strategies to be used to help small-count resilient armies do well.

      anyone who has been successfully playing Terminator armies (Deathwing, Grey Knights, etc) for awhile knows how important positioning and deployment are.

      that’s what this article should have been. not this limp no-brainer that tells you nothing.

      • Karru

        The only issue there is that when playing in the competitive scene, only pure luck will bring you victory. In regular and casual play, low count armies such as the ones you listed and Custodes can be dangerous and successful opponents, but when competitive scene gets a go at it, if you try a pure list, you will get crushed by a proper horde army.

        • Muninwing

          oh, no doubt. so baybe the article’s title should be
          “tips and tricks to make Custodes less terrible in a tournament”
          or
          “tips and tricks to make Custodes more interesting to play”
          or even
          “tips and tricks to make those horde armies take longer to drown a Custodes army in bodies”

          • hazal

            My Greyknight know this well…. it also why my Inquisitorial ally exists to give me single model acolytes to stop deepstrike 😐

          • Muninwing

            yes!

            even back in 5th, i started taking an Inquisitor in some lists. in the old codex, if you took a mystic and a gun servitor, you could get a free shot (like with a plasma cannon) at any deepstriker within a certain range (3d6 or 4d6 inches iirc).

            i’m glad they keep the spirit of that going.

  • Valeli

    To me, it sounds like the biggest advice here is “include other lists to do your best”.

    I can’t really fault the logic, but I’m also definitely not a fan of army lists based around the use of other armies to do X. I definitely preferred it when everything could (or, at least, was intended to) do X, Y, and Z on their own.

    • Or not. In order to give them a balanced point which they are bad at instead of just being awesome at everything. That’s one of the biggest issues I have with the Imperial keyword. You basically get everything without a need to think about how to strategically compensate for your lack in ability XYZ.

      • Warrior24_7

        This is a business man, they’re trying to sell models. I guess all Eldar are the same now too.

    • Karru

      I’m there with you. It was greatly enjoyable in 5th edition when you had to learn your army’s weaknesses and then play around them to win or exploit that of your opponent to win, but now it is all about taking allies to fill out the weakness.

      • ZeeLobby

        Yeah. Miss those days.

    • OctopusVolcano

      I have similar issues with my Admech, they’re great but they have gaping holes. No psychic defense or offense, virtually no mobility and assault units that dont meld well with the rest of the army.

      Sure I can fill those in with other armies of the imperium, but i’d much rather have a means to counter these in my own army. Doesn’t have to be exact opposites, just. Something. to compete with all the large number, fast moving psychic spamming armies that we have no answer for.

  • OctopusVolcano

    FYI all of this advice can directly be applied to an Admech force, has exactly the same benefits and problems. Take good units in large numbers, find as much CP as you can and draft in psychic and chaff because you dont have the bodies to compete with a horde.

  • Damien 1.0

    I have similar issues with my Admech, they’re great but they have gaping holes. No psychic defense or offense, virtually no mobility and assault units that dont meld well with the rest of the army.Sure I can fill those in with other armies of the imperium, but i’d much rather have a means to counter these in my own army

    • Erber

      Here’s hoping for an update to mechanicus in a few years with new models 🙂 we need a flyer, some form of transport, more robots etc.

      • orionburn III

        Giving 40k rules to the Ad Mech 30k range from Forge World solves a lot of that (outside of a flyer). I know, not cheap, but at least the models already exist.

  • Warrior24_7

    I was thinking the same thing, not about guard, but some kind of assistance from another army. A pure Custodes Army would be tough to play in a competitive game. Actually, this isn’t going to help much. This army has an “attrition” problem as well as a problem with horde armies. If it doesn’t go first it’s in trouble. Immediately kill anything fast (jet bikes) and tough (Land Raider), then pick them apart. If I’d lose to a Custodes army I’d be embarrassed.

    • ellobouk

      I feel like wiping out a group of minimum T5 W3 2+/4++ jetbikes in a single round isn’t going to be easy, that’s a dedicated slab of firepower going in that direction.

      • Warrior24_7

        YEP! That is EXACTLY what you do! That’s what I’d do! Tau’s base troops have 30″ Str 5 guns, against how many bikes in a unit, 3? Long range, multi-wound fire power is the key. Eldar Wraith Guard, Missiles, Lascannons Plasma guns, Autocannons, and the like.

      • Rasheed Jones

        IIRC the bikes are actually T6

  • James Regan

    what i do wonder is why, as part of this release, they did’t just say ‘oh, and we’re giving them 8th ed rules for all their heresy stuff’- they aren’t transferable from the heresy rules anymore, but it’d expand up the armies options greatly, and play into them being relics from the height of imperial power, and not having been involved in the mess that has been the last 10,000 years

    • Warrior24_7

      Not transferable? I thought all (most) of Forge World’s heresy models had 8th ed stats and were transferable to 40k?

    • Blinghop

      They..uh… did say that. At the FW open day, they said that 40k rules for the heresy models wills be coming to use alongside the new plastics.

      • James Regan

        ah good, didn’t hear that. gives them, what, a flyer, a few new tanks, an extra type of terminator and long range infantry squad if you want a mono custodes force

        • BaronSnakPak

          and a few different types of Dreads.

        • Blinghop

          Yeah, They basically have another half of their potential army in resin. The most important potential additions being the grav tanks since the tanks provide both volume of fire as well as another transport option.

          They will still have the high cost (in both ways) with these though, but hopefully the FW stuff will fill some gaps in their list.

  • Drpx

    The moment you realize 8th was about selling Guard.

    • Lando G

      all kinds of guard. Death Guard, Raven Guard, Custodian Guard, Imperial Guard…

    • BaronSnakPak

      7th was Eldar, 6th was Tau, 5th was GK…

  • Muninwing

    how about this:

    “tips and tricks to make Custodes competitive”

    1. ratios of dedicated units
    2. rate of fire and close combat proced out
    3. deployment tricks to help you control zones
    4. using terrain to your advantage
    5. using distances to your benefit
    6. when to charge and when to fall back
    7. how to justify decoy/bait units, sacrifice units, and spearhead units in your strategy
    8. how to get used to the new jetbikes, and how this will change play
    9. top 3 stratagems
    10. what (if any) considerations should you give toward including allies in your force
    11. army must-haves
    12. final thoughts: what it means to play Custodes, the mindset, and the unique resource management that comes with a low-count elite army

    also, for S&G after…

    some great ideas for narrative missions and fun games to play with narrative players and lists

    but no… instead we get this useless article that tells you to just play IG instead. bad writing is bad.

    • Karru

      Alright, let’s look at some “facts” we know about Custodes at this point.

      1. Expensive Elite Army
      Custodes are very expensive per model, meaning you are limited to very low numbers AND detachments during the game. This means very low CP count as your only real option is a single Battalion detachment most likely, 2 at best would be a good guess.

      2. Heavily CP dependant
      While Custodes themselves are dangerous, in order to counter many problem units and lists in the competitive scene, they need access to their Stratagems. These Stratagems are rather expensive, which means you will find yourself starved very fast against high tier lists.

      3. No Psychic Defense
      This was mentioned in the article, Custodes lacks all defence against Psychic Powers. Current ruling tactic for many lists is to spam Smite AKA Mortal Wounds, which goes through Custodes saves and Toughness. Of course, you can use a Stratagem against this one, oh wait, you need CP for that which you don’t have.

      Custodes don’t have the luxury of “tactical deployment” or “Sacrificing units”. Every model is worth the same as the other guys chaff unit. You will be outmanoeuvred easily thanks to this, you will be swarmed or you will be picked apart and destroyed one unit at a time.

      This is why Guard is there. You need their bodies and CP in order to make Custodes a fighting force that can actually do something. If GW made the CP system more playing dependant instead of list making, it would be much more balanced and fun for everyone. The system my group uses is giving the 3CP from being Battleforged and then you get CP from holding Objectives, which makes the game much more dynamic and balanced as neither side can stack on CP from spamming detachments or just pull off insane combos using them.

      • Muninwing

        i really like that idea… CP earned in game instead of in list construction.

        as for the rest…

        small-count armies have more ability to deploy effectively. you want to see someone lose their s**t? take that steamroller army that normally alphastrikes, watch them get turn one, and then make them realize that their normal units have no move they can make to get into position to meaningfully fire at your army… because you’re behind LoS-blocking cover. then watch them move into your arcs of fire, and take them apart on the bottom of turn one… but do so precisely, bringing weight of fire to bear on one or two units that get erased, and keeping the others out of range or sight.

        it’s amazing what you can do when you can hide your whole army. if you can waste your opponent’s first (and potentially most effective) round of shooting, then you are already controlling the momentum of the game.

        then when you move a unit, you know which units are more safe and which ones will take fire. you can deliberately leave one low-count unit twisting in the wind to get your opponent’s attention, then use it to set a trap.

        the longer they only make the moves you want them to make, the more likely you are to win.

        even if you can manage to trick them into deploying in a battle line, and you instead deploy strong-flank… being able to fight one unit at a time with multiple of yours means winning each successive round of combat like in a kung-fu flick: your 15 (3×5, or 5 and 10) Custodes bait a new unit into cc each turn, kill them, then position to meet the next unit.

        also knowing just who and what you cannot take in a charge (or when being charged), and knowing when to back up and put some distance between you and another unit so that you can charge them when they fail (with some luck)… and knowing which units *need* to be taken apart by shooting.

        these are all really important to the target priority and setup/movement of an elite army.

        one of the worst ideas that has come out of 40k in years (and i blame M:tG for the import) is that the game is won in the building of the list. i’ve seen unlucky players with bad list beat well-rolling players with solid lists. at least some of the game is not the units taken, but knowing what to do with them.

        this article addresses listbuilding as the only real concern. it’s lazy. and it doesn’t talk about all those other things you can do to make it worth playing, because they are sometimes hard to learn.

        • Apocryphus

          This is the best tactical speech I have ever read on this site.

          • Muninwing

            this is why i’m a huge advocate for balance. this — not just listbuilding (which i find dull) and not just painting and not just the new trick of the week — is what the game is to me, and what i find to be fun.

            if the game was better balanced, and all these cheap tricks were mitigated somewhat, these are the discussions that would be being had on the higher levels of play.

            getting better would be through experience, attempts, shrewd moves, and knowing your (and others’) army. it would literally be about learning the skills and playing well.

          • Apocryphus

            I totally agree, and I think this is why the game has lost a lot of it’s depth, not so much the streamlining of rules, but the elimination of the need to play your army. It has come down to getting first turn and pointing and rolling dice, and that to me is an extremely poor imitation of a wargame.

          • Warrior24_7

            You have a low standard. The obvious thing to do here is simple, shoot it and charge it, game over. A couple Wave Serpents w/Wraith Guard ought to blows them off of the board for equal or less points. Also, Knock out their speed and it’s over. Their slow with no vehicle and the shooting range is short. Their is too much long range, multi-wound, mortal wound causing fire power in each army for these guys to be much of a problem. Concentrate on attrition, the best thing about them is the Land Raider and their jet bikes!

            I played against a Khorne army once with DE (different Ed, same tactic) I shot their Rhinos out from under them and my guys never got out of their Raiders (there were blast markers back then too…he he!). He was built to charge, that’s it! I took that away, same here, take that charge away, take H to H combat away, and exploit the low model count by attrition. Those that can see this understand why they “need” allies.

          • Apocryphus

            I was talking about Muningwing’s statement, in case you thought I was talking about the article. The “rush rush rush” method of play, and by that I mean “rush to end the game as fast as possible by whatever means necessary”,is incredibly dull and one dimensional to me and why I’ve gone back to playing older editions with my friends. There’s no desire to become a better player, it’s just cram ascmany CPs and high power models into a list, roll to see who goes first, and concede when you don’t get first turn. I see it all the time in my area and it makes me wonder why people bother buying and painting models in the first place.

          • Warrior24_7

            Understood. I just see no difference as each edition exploited something and had its issues. I build lists for my style of play AND to the strength of the army. Maybe a Land Raider is not the best thing to take in an 1800 pt game, but you better have the ability to kill one though.

          • Apocryphus

            I guess I was confused by the “low standard” accusation. Every edition has had flaws, this is GW we’re talking about, and I build lists similarly to your mentality as well, but I have to say that list building is not the only tactic in the game. Posistioning is rarely considered when speaking about tactics anymore, it always comes down to, as I mentioned, cramming as many CPs and high power units in as you can. Min-max detachments and find the highest volume of firepower in your army and max it out. If we look at the trends, it starts to remove faction identity. People always say “Chaos is strong!” when in reality they mean the ability to deliver Mortarion across the table in turn 1 is strong. The winning Chaos lists at events are rarely, if ever, balanced out lists because those lists require more tactical effort than point and click shooting/charging. Positioning and counter positioning should be important to the game and are especially important for low model count, extra elite armies like Custodes.

          • Warrior24_7

            I heard this before and I agree, tournaments are a bad source for judging how good an army is. There are rules changes, restrictions, and outright banned models from the games. This is competetive play and the cookie cutter list look almost identical because that’s what wins. Custodes can be exploited in the exact same way since you have the whole Imperial range to ally them with.

            The low standard comment wasn’t an attack, I just thought, “really?”, the best thing ever read? It’s obvious to me to just do what they’re vulnerable to. Shoot ’em, out maneuver them, and psych them out.

          • Apocryphus

            Best thing I ever read on this site, emphasis on “on this site”. I’ve read plenty of excellent tactic and list building articles in my time. 😛 I think the major issue is how pervasive the tournament scene is, to the point where we are getting articles about how to make Custodes “competative” and not just about how to play the army well and maximize it’s strengths, manage your limited CPs, where and when to charge or shoot or hold posistion, those sort of things. So much of BoLS is “Look at this combo!” then “Look how broken this combo we just showed you is, can’t wait till GW nerfs it!” for tactics.

          • Warrior24_7

            It was shock and not an attack. I also agree with the last part of your statement.

          • Apocryphus

            No worries 🙂

        • Karru

          Now this is a good answer good sir, I applaud.

          I wholeheartedly agree with you regarding the “winning via list building”. My group has been doing tons of changes to fix this problem and we have been doing quite well on that front. Our games are much more fun, balanced and still keep the simplicity and streamlining of 8th edition.

        • Warrior24_7

          I don’t applaud this. I like playing with rules as they are and do not favor “house rules” for a simple reason, that’s not how the game is to be played. There are tactics in the rules. The armies were designed with some flaws and weaknesses that are now gone because of some made up rule. I totally respect the fact that this “your” game and you have the right to play it as you see fit, “I” just like to play straight up, no rule changes (GW does enough of that on their own), and everything that is legal, is legal to be used.

          • Karru

            Then good for you sir, glad you can enjoy 8th edition without changes, not many can say that.

          • Warrior24_7

            I don’t actually care for it, I just deal with it. I view “house rules” as nerfs or exploits that favor some armies and hurt others. Bottom line, It’s a way to get around the rules and does exactly what everybody is complaint about… It doesn’t force the player to learn his army and develop decisive tactics to win. If your low on CPs, so be it. There is a reason why GW intended this über, specialized army to be played that way. You can’t have everything.

          • Karru

            Here’s the thing, the way you get around the low CP with Custodes is… *Drumroll*

            Taking Guard to fill some detachments for additional CP.

            You are not meant to play Custodes by themselves if you wish to play a full Custodes army. The way house rules are done is to make it so that everyone has a fun time, no matter what army they choose to play. If someone wants to play Custodes by themselves they either need to play them with allies or do house rules.

            The way GW has intended the game to work is to fill all weaknesses of your army with allies or just spam one strong unit in an army that has no access to allies. After that, you expand on your allied armies and the cycle continues and GW makes more money, that’s how the operate these days.

            The tactic these days is literally “What is my weakness? Okay, what units from other armies can I add to remove this weakness?” or “This army’s weakness is that it doesn’t have a codex with tons of stratagems, better switch to Chaos or Imperials until they do”. This isn’t the edition of solo armies any more, that died after 5th edition.

          • Warrior24_7

            I totally agree with what you said about GW and the game itself. However, if you cover weaknesses with allies, then there should be no need for house rules if you can “legally” “er” indirectly, exploit the rules and weaknesses by using allies. Now, you have an über army that has no weaknesses at all. They were covered by the allies, and exploited by the house rule buffs. So it back to complaints about this very thing, and it never ends.

            Again, to each his own, but “I” play with clean rules, if it’s a “printed”, then it’s legal. I also make sure that “I” have ALL of the current rules, FAQs, Chapter Approved, errata ect. I don’t leave that up to my opponent.

            You don’t know how many times something was stopped because an opponent “thought” that could do something and couldn’t because they were used to playing with house rules. Then when you show them they’re like “oh, okay. That’s the way “we” play though.

            If you think that I’m a rules Nazi then I beg to differ since I allow EVERYTHING! I’ve NEVER said that I won’t play a guy because he fielded a Wraith Knight or something else tough. If it’s within the rules, then you can do it. If it’s a legal model, then you can play it.

            I leave having fun is totally up to you.

          • Bootneck

            I regularly field lists with low CP totals – vanguards and spearheads, generally speaking most of the books have a few worthwhile stratagems and the rest are chaff or very situational.

            I played an Ultramarine and Guard army recently, I had 5 CPs and they had 13CPs.

            They couldn’t spend them fast enough and kept gaining them back, I don’t have a problem with this its the mechanic.

            They still lost the game and most of the things they were trying were pointless anyway.

            The point is stratagems have diminished returns, initially they are powerful but as the game goes on they become more and more useless as the size of both forces gets smaller.

            Obviously there are some very handy ones – life savers which are always good. But on the whole they are most effective at the start of the game.

            If your going to lose your still going to lose imo, they can’t alter the game that drastically in my mind.

            It always makes me laugh when GW come up with these combos – DG blight grenades, Biologus etc for example. I’ve used it quite a few times and despite rolling lots of dice they are rarely as good as are made out – its the subtle ones which are tactically most important.

          • Muninwing

            here’s the problem…

            there’s an interesting interaction between “official” and “responsible” that creates the very concept of authority here.

            GW has long been complained about, but also long been assumed to be the authority. players complain, and the complaints get ignored. there was an entire era of the Execs all but ignoring the fact that they even produced a game at all, except as a vehicle to sell models.

            people whine and moan and rage about their rules and the lack of certain important quality marks within them.

            but then people dismiss any efforts to correct them as “the wrong way”

            because official and bad is better than some schmoe’s attempts to homebrew anything.

            and often i’d agree — most people are not as good at anything as they think they are… except when they are much better at it than they give themselves credit for.

            and there’s Sturgeon’s Law: “90% of everything is crap”

            really, though… i just like the idea of playing the game as it seems it is intended — and that’s in a subjective, narrative form. if they really wanted the game to be tournament focused, they’d write tighter rules. so playing a mission or two with a change (such as where CPs are generated) makes for an interesting mission once in a while.

          • Warrior24_7

            I’ve read (can’t find the article now) that most of the GW fan base, doesn’t play at all! They’re just hobbyists and modelers, and GW knows this! So their attitude toward the game as you described isn’t too far off from this reality! It also could explain the emphasis on the tournament scene and competetive play.

            “My” experience has been more local game club and “friendly” one off games where people spend WAAAY too much time arguing or debating the rules. This slows a slow game down even more, and frustrates the players. Keeping the game at base level everybody knows (or should know) the rules. If not, I have them for you right here!

            Again, I respect the right to play the game with totally made up rules, it “your” game, I just won’t do it. I believe that certain armies have weaknesses built into them so they won’t have ALL of the advantages and no weaknesses. In the end, players complain about these uber lists, but then turn right around and contribute to it by literally making stuff up. This is supposed to be an elite, specialized list, so “GW” decided that they should have low CPs.

            I’ve been a long time Chaos player. Do you know how many times I’ve been outnumbered on the table top? Damn near EVERYTIME! I’ve “learned” to deal with this and play my army. It’s not an instant death sentence. I’ve actually won more than my fair share of games!

          • Muninwing

            the article you’re referring to was before the regime change at GW. it was the justification by the old CEO of the “we’re not a game company, we’re a model company” bs… the same BS that killed WHF and ran the games aground on balance issues for years.

            it was also very arbitrary with its categories…

            most of the GW customers see themselves as players, even when they don’t have the time to play actively. they buy armies to play once they are done with the painting and conversion and all that, even if the process takes a long time to get to product stage.

            when i took a break from GW games, back in the latter half of 5th edition 40k, i spent that time in a number of ways. i played other games. i started a new painting and modeling project (the 3rd company of the DA), and i didn’t play for over a year. because the rules were crap. and the balance was crap. so playing the game was not an enjoyable experience. was i suddenly any less of a player than i was in 4th edition when i averaged 3 games a week?

            during 7th… i had a kid, bought a house, and got a masters degree. i shelved projects and didn’t get to play much. i still bought a couple things, but due to time my purchasing was slowed. was i suddenly a painter (or more of one) because i didn’t play as much? because that was GW’s survey results.

            there’s a reason why the company has been plagued with some serious problems, and why many longtime veteran players really hate the “Ward Era” of codexes, games, and fluff. the focus on models and itter ignoring of balance or quality in the games was rampant — and it’s still going on.

            there are some strong indicators that the Sales team is driving the Creative team, instead of a more amicable or balanced relationship… and there’s some indicators that there is no strong leadership among Creative that is directing the bigger picture. it’s corporate culture at work.

            but because of that, it’s been made clear that we are on our own when it comes to playing quality games. so i don’t fault anyone who wants to explore tweaks to the ruleset, since that’s stuff that GW should be doing anyway.

  • ZeeLobby

    Of course it’s take good stuff from other books. That’s 40K in a nutt-shell right now.

    • BaronSnakPak

      8th Edition is very much the “MtG edition”.

    • Warrior24_7

      Who allies with Tyranids, Tau, and Necrons? Exactly!!

      • ZeeLobby

        Oh. You just don’t take those XD.

  • ZeeLobby

    Of course it’s take good stuff from other books. That’s 40K in a nutt-shell right now.

  • Muninwing

    this article, despite its huge holes and giant missed opportunity, is really making me consider building a new army.

    mostly because the Custodes look fun.

    I could actually use the idea here, and have an IG detachment… but for the theme, not the CP. convert and paint them like a unit of elite foot troops…. or heavily convert them to look… different.

    then, do a converted Gulliman. because screw him and his codex. maybe it’ll be a “what if” army that guesses what would have happened if Cawl was smarter and bargained to heal the Lion instead. or the angst-burger mister pain glove.

    the other idea i had while typing this was to actually field the whole thing as a counts-as series of conversions…
    imagine for a moment a Genestealer Cult army that used the Custodes, IG, and Gulliman rules… their cult troops and a conversion for the IG elements, a Tyrant with the trappings of WYSIWIG for Gulliman (i even have the model, so it’s not about looking for a plan b, but a better representation), and then using various Nids as elements for the custodes… but then this gets confusing and harder to justify.

    too many projects… too many ideas…

    • Blinghop

      As my flair would suggest, I really want Dorn to hit 40k at some point so I could run a fluffy Defenders of Terra list. I have a mess of terrain for planetstrike games waiting for this. (I could run Roboute as Dorn I guess, but I think I’d have to forfeit my flair… and a big army of Templars if I did ;p)

    • Warrior24_7

      Custodes look good too. Maybe a little too ornate in some respects, but definitely a good looking army! You have Forge World Custodes too.

  • Iggynous

    For an extra 40pts, but an extra 3CP, swap a Comany Commander for Creed.