AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Over in the B&C BT thread there was mention of a BT Relic that let one unit within 6" of the bearer count as being in Assault Doctrine for the turn.

In the end a lot hinges on what the buff in that doctrine actually does though.

ohh agreed. I could see each Black templar unit getting an additional +1 attack, that'd be insanely potent (to the point of making them one of the best marine assault armies) without rendering white scars pointless. Black templars would be better in assault vs chaff. white scars would be better against tougher units (as benifits hunters)(

Or melee rerolls without having to be near characters. That's been the case before, after all.

If you're lucky you'll also get a single revised plastic character and a bunch of old Necron kits shoved in an expensive box...but you might at least get some rules buffs. Oddly the "Psychic Awakening" provided almost jack gak for Eldar (a third incredibly pointless list of six spells). I don't think the Psychic portion of the title means anything, so that's good news for Tau and Necrons.

"Jack gak"? Is that yet another new term the net has created to obfusciate commicantion and impair understanding? I am not being snarky. I gather it's negative.

 Elbows wrote:
If you're lucky you'll also get a single revised plastic character and a bunch of old Necron kits shoved in an expensive box...but you might at least get some rules buffs. Oddly the "Psychic Awakening" provided almost jack gak for Eldar (a third incredibly pointless list of six spells). I don't think the Psychic portion of the title means anything, so that's good news for Tau and Necrons.

People tried to make this point from the outset. GW themselves did.

"Psychic Awakening" refers to the events, as a whole. It's not tied specifically to the factions getting stuff.

 Sobekta wrote:
"Jack gak"? Is that yet another new term the net has created to obfusciate commicantion and impair understanding? I am not being snarky. I gather it's negative.

It's the forum language filter.

I wish Imperial Fists has a "Count as Devastator Doctrine" strat. It would help immensely.

Black Templars being able to grab units and make them stay in CC is really cool and thematic. I hope there is more stuff like that for other units (Blood Angels and Word Bearers would make sense to have something like that).

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

Eumerin wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Hellebore wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
the scythes thing was simply GSC infiltration of their human support staff, which is yes a weak link in their chain.

Except there is still screening of Serfs, and they also say that the Chapter's Marines were infected by the Genestealer's Kiss.

While unlikely, it is still possible.

How an AVATAR can merge with a patriarch is beyond me....

Infect a Pheonix Lord who is sacrficed and the psychic taint infests the Avatar's form?

Phoenix Lord's don't get sacrificed.

Also, if avatars were vulnerable that way, then I expect daemons would be as well.


In any case, infecting space marines would be a dead end since they don't have kids. And samples of the chapter's geneseed regularly get sent off for screening, making it likely that they'd quickly get discovered.

Unless Chapters go silent and stop sending off samples to be examined because they are almost destroyed and don’t have any to spare, and started actively using their now tainted Geneseed.

Which it’s revealed is exact what was happening, and is no explained as why in the previous Scythes of Emperor novels

Spoiler:

the 3rd Company Captain left the Chapter Master to die and later killed the Chief Apothecary. Because they knew the geneseed had been corrupted and kept using it.

Well I’ve spoilered it for anyone else but thanks for I guess ruining those books..

honestly, that's the B plot.

Oh boy 230$ Eldar boxset then we get another box set that costs over 200$.... see over 100$ was pushing it now it is getting crazy pricey.

BrianDavion wrote:
honestly, that's the B plot.

Though it does provide a glimpse at the future of 40k.

With all these releases coming out, the only thing that I can say, being a Deathwatch player is...

Well, at least some of this can be converted to Deathwatch Captains/Sergeants.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
With all these releases coming out, the only thing that I can say, being a Deathwatch player is...

Well, at least some of this can be converted to Deathwatch Captains/Sergeants.

I expect death watch will see some love soon re Phobos stuff, These troops are MADE for death watch.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
With all these releases coming out, the only thing that I can say, being a Deathwatch player is...

Well, at least some of this can be converted to Deathwatch Captains/Sergeants.

I expect death watch will see some love soon re Phobos stuff, These troops are MADE for death watch.

Not sure how they'd NOT use those guys.

If all else fails, I will just do a "Deathwatch" in name only detachment of Vanguard Phobos guys. Not sure whose chapter tactics to take.

BrianDavion wrote:
honestly, that's the B plot.

Seriously, actual friggen spoilers


Why the heck are Black Templar getting super chapter stuff and yet chaos marines traits don't get the same treatment? From the sound of it Black Templar are gonna get a ton of buffs and the chaos legions, who are known to need love too, are gonna be left high and dry comparitively? Yeah they get some warlord traits and stuff but how does that in any way compare to the craziness someone like Iron Hands got? I mean hell, Iron Hands get essentially 3 chapter traits in one compared to old books. If they were in a different book that makes sense, but they're in the same book as BT, that seems really odd.

Oh well, I went ahead and put in my black Templar order ahead of time to beat the rush, but I'm sure I've jynxed BT to be nothing but a half-hearted retcon saying a chapter of religious nutjobs is totally ok with Primaris, just like going through eldar webways and how they totally love pyskers

I just hope they leave the old units alone. If they remove crusader squads, or worse make them Primaris only, it's gonna suck. Some of these rumored rules sound cool/crazy though. BT charging out of deepstrike with +1 to charge and rerolls with being almost impossible to fallback from is gonna hurt. Vanguard vets, terminators, drop pods, etc are all gonna hurt on the way in. Also anything that benefits landraiders is a win in my book. I don't expect the chapter trait to add something like +1 attack but given the BS ironhands got I wouldn't be surprised if BT got some crazy rules

Because you can twist the knife farther if you continue to neglect the Legions in the same book you supercharge another Marine subfaction.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Why the heck are Black Templar getting super chapter stuff and yet chaos marines traits don't get the same treatment? From the sound of it Black Templar are gonna get a ton of buffs and the chaos legions, who are known to need love too, are gonna be left high and dry comparitively? Yeah they get some warlord traits and stuff but how does that in any way compare to the craziness someone like Iron Hands got? I mean hell, Iron Hands get essentially 3 chapter traits in one compared to old books. If they were in a different book that makes sense, but they're in the same book as BT, that seems really odd.

To be fair, Black Templars' actual Chapter kit is so old, the torsos aren't even compatible with the newer marines- it's made for the torsos from like, 2002. You gotta chop on them to get them to match up. This is a Chapter that hasn't seen a damned thing in almost 20 years. At all. At least with CSM you can get some cosmetic upgrades from Forge World. As far as rules go, well... let's just say BT's aren't the most effective and haven't been for a long time. They, before literally ANY Chapter of the Space Marines, were LONG overdue for something.

Now, don't get me wrong- I'd like to see some actual Legion stuff for CSM. Some upgrade kits and whatnot for the current era, rather than the Heresy.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
I just hope they leave the old units alone. If they remove crusader squads, or worse make them Primaris only, it's gonna suck. Some of these rumored rules sound cool/crazy though. BT charging out of deepstrike with +1 to charge and rerolls with being almost impossible to fallback from is gonna hurt. Vanguard vets, terminators, drop pods, etc are all gonna hurt on the way in. Also anything that benefits landraiders is a win in my book. I don't expect the chapter trait to add something like +1 attack but given the BS ironhands got I wouldn't be surprised if BT got some crazy rules

I predict in a few years, the 'old units' and 'new units' will be little more than a stat line difference. Eventually, it'll all be the same "Space Marines" and the word "Primaris" will be used less, and since a lot of the kits are interchangeable, you'll see 2-wound Space Marines with Heavy Bolters and Jump Packs.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Why the heck are Black Templar getting super chapter stuff and yet chaos marines traits don't get the same treatment? From the sound of it Black Templar are gonna get a ton of buffs and the chaos legions, who are known to need love too, are gonna be left high and dry comparitively? Yeah they get some warlord traits and stuff but how does that in any way compare to the craziness someone like Iron Hands got? I mean hell, Iron Hands get essentially 3 chapter traits in one compared to old books. If they were in a different book that makes sense, but they're in the same book as BT, that seems really odd.

To be fair, Black Templars' actual Chapter kit is so old, the torsos aren't even compatible with the newer marines- it's made for the torsos from like, 2002. You gotta chop on them to get them to match up. This is a Chapter that hasn't seen a damned thing in almost 20 years. At all. At least with CSM you can get some cosmetic upgrades from Forge World. As far as rules go, well... let's just say BT's aren't the most effective and haven't been for a long time. They, before literally ANY Chapter of the Space Marines, were LONG overdue for something.

Now, don't get me wrong- I'd like to see some actual Legion stuff for CSM. Some upgrade kits and whatnot for the current era, rather than the Heresy.

This is a good point, Black Templars haven't really gotten anything since the early 2000s, so if there is any group of marines that need something, they are certainly towards the top of the list. They also are functionally different enough to actually need a different list than most marines, with mixed crusader Squads, and all their religious fervor stuff. Functionally they are a lot different than the codex marines than most of the non-codex chapters (BA, DA, SW- at least before SW became a literal joke chapter).

Some Legion upgrades that's are current era would be awesome, and wouldn't require a ton of work from GW. This campaign includes Alpha Legion, Night Lords, Iron Warriors, World Eaters, and Emperor's Children? Put out an upgrade blister for Alpha Legion, Night Lords, and Iron Warriors wouldn't be a huge release or anything. I didn't mention World Eaters and Emperor's Children, because I'm hoping they get their own Berserker and Noise Marine kits relatively soon.

I mean we still have relatively.... all the phoenix lords, all the aspects, and almost the entire eldar range that still needs to be update namely the wave serpents, falcons, and eldar rangers that haven't been updated since 3rd edition...

Though honestly with how things are looking it will probably be wrapped into a box for 250$ and we will only get 2 new units per release.

Black templars definately need a rerelease and hopefully better codex rules, and a better representation, as it is currently we have no idea what they are going to do with em, as they were the face of 3rd edition it is sad that it has taken 5 editions for them to get new upgrades, a new character, and new models... And hopefully we will see Primaris Crusader squads and not this regular stupid stuff of them reusing the same primaris units over and over again.... I don't see for example black templars utilizing vanguard units like other chapters it makes no sense to their character or their archetype, they are crusading knights in space not special forces. If anything vanguard should vary chapter to chapter to the point some vanguard or primaris units aren't even utilized in the slightest.

But we will see if anything it will be the same as all the other supplements with no difference in units and saying "just use the regular primaris units" which honestly takes 0 creative energy.

Given the way the supplements have worked I'm not too worried about Black Templars. They'll proably come out pretty beastly.

BrianDavion wrote:
Given the way the supplements have worked I'm not too worried about Black Templars. They'll proably come out pretty beastly.

Why is it a Loyalist only paradigm? I honestly can't get my head around this.

It initially seemed to me to be a new epoch in faction rules but the PA books I hoped they were using to get everyone on this new page seem to be mailed in for non Loyalist factions.

 Eldarain wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Given the way the supplements have worked I'm not too worried about Black Templars. They'll proably come out pretty beastly.

Why is it a Loyalist only paradigm? I honestly can't gey my head around this.

It initially seemed to me to be a new epoch in faction rules but the PA books I hoped they were using to get everyone on this new page seem to be mailed in for non Loyalist factions.

.... because Black Templars are in codex space marines and have been long rumored to be getting something equivilant to the supplements in PA.

Bully for you guys?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Karthicus wrote:
The very concept of being able to get units stuck into CQC and deny a fallback is actually really cool.

Bring on the crusade!!!!!

It's incredibly strong and is an ability that should be given to more cc factions.

I have to agree, or at least a CC equivalent to overwatch when an enemy unit falls back. You shouldn't be able to fall back with nothing but a -1 to hit penalty or not being able to shoot next round.

Jacob29 wrote:
In the context of the current discussion.

I don't particularly feel sorry for the likes of Tau... Guard... Nids.. Necrons.

Yeah, you haven't had a release in a while.. but your model line is already pretty good.

You have a full range of plastics easily available. No real core issues with your line. What can they even do for Guard that isn't just a brand new thing that they don't exactly need but would be nice?


Meanwhile we have Eldar where a very large part of their army is resin. Dark Eldar also have similar issues, and are both missing flexible HQ like the SM Captain or Tau Commander.

Orks who still don't have a proper Warboss with options either. Plenty of resin hanging around, no Deffkopta model that isn't from 1990s, even though they do have a sculpt for it...

So sorry.. but I don't really care about Guard players moaning about lack of releases either.

Maybe you've missed the fight but I did bring Dark Eldar in there as well. As for Guard stuff, you are aware some of our kits are absolutely ancient, some have been dropped and didn't even get to finecrap so yeah we have things we could get. Like our rough riders back, for instance would be great. The Bassie kit actually redone with maybe a dual kit or tri kit design to get back some more of our lost options. That isn't even touching on the fact that people have wanted some new guard core infantry for a long time.

Eldar have it bad, I've been one of the vocal ones saying they need to get touched on. My point is, if you say guard don't need anything, then marines should actually not get anything for a long time by that same logic. All they do is keep growing and growing and growing. I even have marine armies but having other armies with more nuance get neglected for things seemingly for years and years on end, well it sucks.

Honestly the only people thinking guard don't need some attention are those who don't play them/dislike them, and I'm not even one saying they need an overhaul, just a couple things and I'd say aside from working on making some options and actual choice they'd be in a good spot. However, If they don't need anything, marines haven't needed anything new for a long time by that equal measure. They get stuff so often, I don't even think I have anything I'd want them to get or am looking forward to.

Unlike Guard, which I have a wish list, and Dark Eldar which I wish could get some more interesting HQ love and maybe get their finecast turned to plastic, as well as with Eldar.

Don't forget, guard still has metal and finecast models, like the primaris psyker, crusaders, dead cults etc.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Given the way the supplements have worked I'm not too worried about Black Templars. They'll proably come out pretty beastly.

Why is it a Loyalist only paradigm? I honestly can't gey my head around this.

It initially seemed to me to be a new epoch in faction rules but the PA books I hoped they were using to get everyone on this new page seem to be mailed in for non Loyalist factions.

.... because Black Templars are in codex space marines and have been long rumored to be getting something equivilant to the supplements in PA.

You haven't answered the question.

The answer Eldarain is because GW can't stop with their obsession for all things loyalist Marine to the detriment of everything else and the game as a whole. Welcome to 30k 2.0, ten thousand years later.

The next PA is rumoured to be BA vs Nids, I'd put money on GW giving BA all the rules and Nids virtually nothing.

The PA after that is rumoured to be SW vs Orks where again, I suspect the same thing will happen - the Marine faction gets the lions share of the rules updates and development effort.

This will likely be the theme of PA for any 'x vs Marine' set up. Expect nothing to very little. This campaign is a poor excuse to drive sales with little development cost - see Phoenix Rising for evidence of this.

terry wrote:
Don't forget, guard still has metal and finecast models, like the primaris psyker, crusaders, dead cults etc.

I'm not forgetting but people like to say they have all they could possibly want, when it isn't the case. Other factions need new stuff as well, as I'd love them all to get looked at I just wish other factions players wouldn't begrudge each other something new as it isn't each other which is taking time away. It's all the marine releases while some units stick around so old they dwarf some of the player base. I'd say much of it but I don't know many kids who can afford the rapidly growing prices.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I think BT will be just fine and will have the same amount of power creep as the other supplements. The French guy leaked some of the abilities for BT.

You want actual RUMOURS in this rumour thread?! How dare you

kikass wrote:Strat on a 2+ can't disengage from BT unit.
You have things like for 1CP, the turn where you land a land raider crusader you do not suffer overwatch in charge and the opponent has -1 to touch you to the cqc. Or you have a relic that gives an invaded 4+ to 3 "around the wearer for 1 round.A warlord trait that gives a bubble + 1Advance and + 1charge (so load has 8+ reroll for BT in FeP) .. yes there are some tips to reach the CqC For the characters do not bother you either, it is especially warlord traits that change, but once they are at the CqC, the target is unlikely to 'get out.

...

Also this for the relevant CSM factions;

Sorry I did not read much about CSM. I just know that the legions concerned will get 1 warlord / strat / relic trait pages each. But I have no more details. All I know is that they will not have a doctrine like SM or retouching their legion (which will not apply to vehicles like DMs ).

I can only hope that this means they’ll be revamping one “broad” faction at a time with the new setup. Maybe Heretic Astartes will be next, maybe Guard, maybe a Xenos faction etc… We can but hope.

As for that BT info… Well, I guess I know what colour and style to paint my upcoming Incursor Battalion then!

Csm won't get anything.
Remember we are allready 2.0 (1.1 really)
And show up in competitive (as codex alphaslaaneshobliterterminator with a bit off purge) so we are fine and Dandy.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Csm won't get anything.
Remember we are allready 2.0 (1.1 really)
And show up in competitive (as codex alphaslaaneshobliterterminator with a bit off purge) so we are fine and Dandy.

via that logic marines won't get anything, and we know thats not true. it's taken GW a few editions but they're cluing in that marine players really identify with a specific chapter and really want that chapter to feel distinct on the battle field. this should hopefully apply to chaos as well (since a lot of this identification ties into the horus heresy) chaos won't get as much but I expect each legion will get some stratigiuns etc and we'll get "build a renegade" rules. the differance is chaos will have this more spread out (and yeah proably be weaker due to a lack of doctrines etc)

but I admit I'm a glass half full kinda guy

Not Online!!! wrote:
Csm won't get anything.
Remember we are allready 2.0 (1.1 really)
And show up in competitive (as codex alphaslaaneshobliterterminator with a bit off purge) so we are fine and Dandy.

GW has already stated csm will get something in pa, not sure what

BrianDavion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Csm won't get anything.
Remember we are allready 2.0 (1.1 really)
And show up in competitive (as codex alphaslaaneshobliterterminator with a bit off purge) so we are fine and Dandy.

via that logic marines won't get anything, and we know thats not true. it's taken GW a few editions but they're cluing in that marine players really identify with a specific chapter and really want that chapter to feel distinct on the battle field. this should hopefully apply to chaos as well (since a lot of this identification ties into the horus heresy) chaos won't get as much but I expect each legion will get some stratigiuns etc and we'll get "build a renegade" rules. the differance is chaos will have this more spread out (and yeah proably be weaker due to a lack of doctrines etc)

but I admit I'm a glass half full kinda guy

Don't blame me, i got burned out too many times sofar.

No i am done.
Rant under spoilers.

for all i care PA does not exist on my rader.
It'sjust another excuse to throw out more loyalist marines.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

terry wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Csm won't get anything.
Remember we are allready 2.0 (1.1 really)
And show up in competitive (as codex alphaslaaneshobliterterminator with a bit off purge) so we are fine and Dandy.

GW has already stated csm will get something in pa, not sure what

According to the rumorss token add ons, tacked on. No fix for traits. No lower points for our marines which are now paying more for less no nothing.

Honestly what I find incredible in all this is how silent GW is overall, wouldn't it be easier if they'd be more open and actually write about what are their plans for the future, what can all the faction expect, will it be a SM vs SM or is there hope for everybody?
Really is so weird to me that they do staff that pretty much is breaking the community in half and say absolutely nothing leaving people to discuss rumours and jump at each other's troths because understandably seeing the other kids get all the new toys while you get nothing is frustrating.
I'm kind of new to the hobby, was it always like that in the past? utter silence until it happens and then deal with it without a comment from GW side?

Comparatively to prior editions GW's talkative nowadays.

as for jumping at each others throats.
I don't think so, it's just that the release unbalance has become so severe that a lot of the players got desilusioned.

As people pointed out, the new Marines simply fit the larger pattern we've had for decades, be it Chaos 3.5, Mat Ward Grey Knights, TauDar Riptide-Wing, Screamerstar, whatever.

It was the past 6 months or so between Castellan-re-balancing and pre-Marines that was kinda the exception.

Remember and cherish that time. It probably was the best 40K there ever was.

Now back to the same-old-same-old.

deTox91 wrote:
Honestly what I find incredible in all this is how silent GW is overall, wouldn't it be easier if they'd be more open and actually write about what are their plans for the future, what can all the faction expect, will it be a SM vs SM or is there hope for everybody?
Really is so weird to me that they do staff that pretty much is breaking the community in half and say absolutely nothing leaving people to discuss rumours and jump at each other's troths because understandably seeing the other kids get all the new toys while you get nothing is frustrating.
I'm kind of new to the hobby, was it always like that in the past? utter silence until it happens and then deal with it without a comment from GW side?

That would reduce impulse buying which is GW's goal(the impulse purchases that is)

deTox91 wrote:

I'm kind of new to the hobby, was it always like that in the past? utter silence until it happens and then deal with it without a comment from GW side?

It used to be that the first we found out about a new product was when it went up for sale on the GW website (or someone got a copy of that month's White Dwarf a few weeks early and posted the pictures online).

Now we generally know about all releases due in the next 2-4 months, with details gradually being added throughout that time. The Adeptus Titanicus releases out this week were previewed almost 5 months ago.

 xttz wrote:

deTox91 wrote:

I'm kind of new to the hobby, was it always like that in the past? utter silence until it happens and then deal with it without a comment from GW side?

It used to be that the first we found out about a new product was when it went up for sale on the GW website (or someone got a copy of that month's White Dwarf a few weeks early and posted the pictures online).

Now we generally know about all releases due in the next 2-4 months, with details gradually being added throughout that time. The Adeptus Titanicus releases out this week were previewed almost 5 months ago.

I remember when they changed their website to a pure GW Store, and some tech guy was foolish enough to ask for feedback about the new look. Because GW previously had made exactly no interaction with the fanbase for decades, the feedback was drowned in years of pent up feelings about the hobby, lamentations of unsupported factions and everything that was wrong with GW.
Yup, GW is like an open book these days.

BrianDavion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Csm won't get anything.
Remember we are allready 2.0 (1.1 really)
And show up in competitive (as codex alphaslaaneshobliterterminator with a bit off purge) so we are fine and Dandy.

via that logic marines won't get anything, and we know thats not true. it's taken GW a few editions but they're cluing in that marine players really identify with a specific chapter and really want that chapter to feel distinct on the battle field. this should hopefully apply to chaos as well (since a lot of this identification ties into the horus heresy) chaos won't get as much but I expect each legion will get some stratigiuns etc and we'll get "build a renegade" rules. the differance is chaos will have this more spread out (and yeah proably be weaker due to a lack of doctrines etc)

but I admit I'm a glass half full kinda guy

It's a shame GW aren't clued in to the fact that every player of a faction really identifies with their chosen subfaction and wants them to feel distinct on the battlefield.

It shouldn't just apply to Marines of both flavours - it needs to apply to every goddamn faction in the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Comparatively to prior editions GW's talkative nowadays.

A slight improvement does not warrant celebration of course. They are still awful in terms of communication.

as for jumping at each others throats.
I don't think so, it's just that the release unbalance has become so severe that a lot of the players got desilusioned.

This is exactly right.

Your Orks will get something later, don’t panic AAE. Marines always get first go around. It made them rubbish at start of edition now it made them OP. Temporarily. Not worth generating endless threads over.

Hm, mixing in Primaris in Crusader Squads would be cool and different. There's no reason for BT to stick to the standard Primaris squad organization.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Your Orks will get something later, don’t panic AAE. Marines always get first go around. It made them rubbish at start of edition now it made them OP. Temporarily. Not worth generating endless threads over.

An Actual Englishman is our panic boy for panicing about orks all the time. He is just doing his job.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Your Orks will get something later, don’t panic AAE. Marines always get first go around. It made them rubbish at start of edition now it made them OP. Temporarily. Not worth generating endless threads over.

My concern stems from the fact that the first PA release, that was entirely dedicated for all things Eldar, did very little to help them compete with Marines in any meaningful way. The model releases in Phoenix Rising, though nice, were utterly lackluster and can only be found in an extremely expensive boxed set.

The most that any Xenos faction will get is a Phoenix Rising style release and since Orks are apparently paired with Marines (SW) I have no doubt the focus will be on them and "my" faction will get a typical, bare minimum effort.

I've made only one thread regarding my distaste for the continual Marine releases, hardly what I'd call "endless".

It's funny actually, if you read the start of this very thread (now spoilered) it's incredibly positive. I thought this would be the mechanism by which GW would update older, dated models and it would allow them to release models and rules for factions that aren't marines. Unfortunately GW have shown their intentions with the first volume of PA, not to mention the teaser video for this next volume and what I've seen fills me with no hope for any faction that isn't in Power Armour. As I don't collect a Power Armoured faction, I now have no hope for PA as a campaign.

I wasn't referring to your thread personally, more the sheer volume of "wahhhhh muhrines" threads in general discussion. Sorry if it read like a singular poke.

 Jidmah wrote:
An Actual Englishman is our panic boy for panicing about orks all the time. He is just doing his job.

Panic Boys would be an excellent new unit for us! Not quite a Weirdboy, not quite a Grot. Something in between.

Indeed, that would be awesome. He just reduces the morale of everyone to that of gretchin - friend and foe

 Karthicus wrote:
The very concept of being able to get units stuck into CQC and deny a fallback is actually really cool.

Bring on the crusade!!!!!

So glad they gave that ability to the super-speedy fast lads, the Black Templars, and not some other unit or faction where it'd be totally unfluffy like

genestealers

lictors

venomthropes

harlequins

howling banshees

Slaanesh Daemons

Necron Canoptek units

Those units are super slow and don't have any fluff backing behind wanting to grab and hold an enemy unit, not like lightning fast black templars units such as terminators and centurions.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
I wasn't referring to your thread personally, more the sheer volume of "wahhhhh muhrines" threads in general discussion. Sorry if it read like a singular poke.

Fair play and no worries. Interestingly the number of 'waahhhhh muhrines' threads show just how dissatisfied much of the playerbase are at the number of marine releases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Karthicus wrote:
The very concept of being able to get units stuck into CQC and deny a fallback is actually really cool.

Bring on the crusade!!!!!

So glad they gave that ability to the super-speedy fast lads, the Black Templars, and not some other unit or faction where it'd be totally unfluffy like

genestealers

lictors

venomthropes

harlequins

howling banshees

Slaanesh Daemons

Necron Canoptek units

Those units are super slow and don't have any fluff backing behind wanting to grab and hold an enemy unit, not like lightning fast black templars units such as terminators and centurions.

Slaanesh Daemons actually do have the same ability.

Seekers I think.

I'd argue the dissatisfaction would be a lot lower if the new marines weren't as powerful as they are...

Ah, you are right, it's on the new Fiends profile, I missed that. Wyches also do it as well, though they're nowhere near as fast and reliable as those lightning quick black templars.

If only we had some kind of stat to represent whether a model was a speedy go fast ninja type close combat unit or a lumbering crushing strong lad, then we could maybe compare the values of that stat to see whether a model could fall back away from melee combat.

Nope. That would be too complicated. Can't be confusing people like that!

the_scotsman wrote:

Spoiler:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
I wasn't referring to your thread personally, more the sheer volume of "wahhhhh muhrines" threads in general discussion. Sorry if it read like a singular poke.

Fair play and no worries. Interestingly the number of 'waahhhhh muhrines' threads show just how dissatisfied much of the playerbase are at the number of marine releases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Karthicus wrote:
The very concept of being able to get units stuck into CQC and deny a fallback is actually really cool.

Bring on the crusade!!!!!

So glad they gave that ability to the super-speedy fast lads, the Black Templars, and not some other unit or faction where it'd be totally unfluffy like

genestealers

lictors

venomthropes

harlequins

howling banshees

Slaanesh Daemons

Necron Canoptek units

Those units are super slow and don't have any fluff backing behind wanting to grab and hold an enemy unit, not like lightning fast black templars units such as terminators and centurions.

Slaanesh Daemons actually do have the same ability.

Seekers I think.

Ah, you are right, it's on the new Fiends profile, I missed that. Wyches also do it as well, though they're nowhere near as fast and reliable as those lightning quick black templars.

If only we had some kind of stat to represent whether a model was a speedy go fast ninja type close combat unit or a lumbering crushing strong lad, then we could maybe compare the values of that stat to see whether a model could fall back away from melee combat.

Nope. That would be too complicated. Can't be confusing people like that!

How dare you suggest deeper rules. INstead of bloating the sphere up by additional factions?
HOW DARE THOU.

the_scotsman wrote:

Spoiler:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
I wasn't referring to your thread personally, more the sheer volume of "wahhhhh muhrines" threads in general discussion. Sorry if it read like a singular poke.

Fair play and no worries. Interestingly the number of 'waahhhhh muhrines' threads show just how dissatisfied much of the playerbase are at the number of marine releases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Karthicus wrote:
The very concept of being able to get units stuck into CQC and deny a fallback is actually really cool.

Bring on the crusade!!!!!

So glad they gave that ability to the super-speedy fast lads, the Black Templars, and not some other unit or faction where it'd be totally unfluffy like

genestealers

lictors

venomthropes

harlequins

howling banshees

Slaanesh Daemons

Necron Canoptek units

Those units are super slow and don't have any fluff backing behind wanting to grab and hold an enemy unit, not like lightning fast black templars units such as terminators and centurions.

Slaanesh Daemons actually do have the same ability.

Seekers I think.

Ah, you are right, it's on the new Fiends profile, I missed that. Wyches also do it as well, though they're nowhere near as fast and reliable as those lightning quick black templars.

If only we had some kind of stat to represent whether a model was a speedy go fast ninja type close combat unit or a lumbering crushing strong lad, then we could maybe compare the values of that stat to see whether a model could fall back away from melee combat.

Nope. That would be too complicated. Can't be confusing people like that!

Initiative did no favours for Orks, I'm glad to see it gone.

I am rubber, you are glue, for the emprah, I stick to you.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Your Orks will get something later, don’t panic AAE. Marines always get first go around. It made them rubbish at start of edition now it made them OP. Temporarily. Not worth generating endless threads over.

My concern stems from the fact that the first PA release, that was entirely dedicated for all things Eldar, did very little to help them compete with Marines in any meaningful way. The model releases in Phoenix Rising, though nice, were utterly lackluster and can only be found in an extremely expensive boxed set.

The most that any Xenos faction will get is a Phoenix Rising style release and since Orks are apparently paired with Marines (SW) I have no doubt the focus will be on them and "my" faction will get a typical, bare minimum effort.

I've made only one thread regarding my distaste for the continual Marine releases, hardly what I'd call "endless".

It's funny actually, if you read the start of this very thread (now spoilered) it's incredibly positive. I thought this would be the mechanism by which GW would update older, dated models and it would allow them to release models and rules for factions that aren't marines. Unfortunately GW have shown their intentions with the first volume of PA, not to mention the teaser video for this next volume and what I've seen fills me with no hope for any faction that isn't in Power Armour. As I don't collect a Power Armoured faction, I now have no hope for PA as a campaign.

Yeah its been disappointing from a Xenos point of view - but GW did the same thing when they relaunched AoS - initially it was lots of Stormcast releases with smaller mostly chaos releases together what they saw as their primary faction established. Then they have broadened it out a lot with some brilliant factions. Marines are getting the same - Primaris being a relaunch of Marines - so they are reestablishing them first with a touch of Chaos as the "baddies". It sucks - I collect mainly Tyranids and some Eldar so the setting has been pretty uninteresting for me - AoS has seemed a lot more vibrant in terms of releases. Hopefully non marine factions will get more substantive release once the Primaris are broadly established..
But yes I was expecting more for Eldar to reignite my interest in them, NIds have a much better range but it would nice to get something to freshen it up a bit. No expectations though I am looking forward to an army box and hoping PA 3 isn't just all Blood Angels punching Nids in the face...

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Spoiler:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
I wasn't referring to your thread personally, more the sheer volume of "wahhhhh muhrines" threads in general discussion. Sorry if it read like a singular poke.

Fair play and no worries. Interestingly the number of 'waahhhhh muhrines' threads show just how dissatisfied much of the playerbase are at the number of marine releases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Karthicus wrote:
The very concept of being able to get units stuck into CQC and deny a fallback is actually really cool.

Bring on the crusade!!!!!

So glad they gave that ability to the super-speedy fast lads, the Black Templars, and not some other unit or faction where it'd be totally unfluffy like

genestealers

lictors

venomthropes

harlequins

howling banshees

Slaanesh Daemons

Necron Canoptek units

Those units are super slow and don't have any fluff backing behind wanting to grab and hold an enemy unit, not like lightning fast black templars units such as terminators and centurions.

Slaanesh Daemons actually do have the same ability.

Seekers I think.

Ah, you are right, it's on the new Fiends profile, I missed that. Wyches also do it as well, though they're nowhere near as fast and reliable as those lightning quick black templars.

If only we had some kind of stat to represent whether a model was a speedy go fast ninja type close combat unit or a lumbering crushing strong lad, then we could maybe compare the values of that stat to see whether a model could fall back away from melee combat.

Nope. That would be too complicated. Can't be confusing people like that!

Initiative did no favours for Orks, I'm glad to see it gone.

It'd be fairly silly for me to say I play Eldar factions so I want to see the Toughness stat removed.

I guess I joke but there is a non-zero chance of that happening, since they did remove Toughness in AOS, "Simplifying" the game system by making big tough monsters have a jillion wounds you have to track.

Initiative just wasn't a very interesting or useful mechanic.

If it were simplified then perhaps but I wouldn't want the old version to return.

the_scotsman wrote:
It'd be fairly silly for me to say I play Eldar factions so I want to see the Toughness stat removed.

I think the bigger issue with initiative was that it served as additional defensive stat against melee attacks on the vast majority of units, rather than an offensive stat for melee experts. Getting killed before striking by a heavy support unit with lascannons after crossing the entire battlefield to do so simply felt wrong.
In any case, the current fight phase with the "fights first", "fights normally" and "fights last" for initiatives works great, I would not want to trades that away.

I guess I joke but there is a non-zero chance of that happening, since they did remove Toughness in AOS, "Simplifying" the game system by making big tough monsters have a jillion wounds you have to track.

Well, Apocalypse kind of did that, too.

GW makes an Aeldari and Drukhari boxed set that looks fantastic, and adds new rules to create your own Covens/Cabals/Craftworlds as the first part of Psychic Awakening and Eldar players whine about it.

Then GW decides to throw a bone to a Space Marine faction that hasn't been touched in nearly 20 years and... Eldar players are whining again.

You know, for a LONG time GW just ignored the players. I'm not going to say this was a good business practice, but based on the amount of whining from 40k players- I can see exactly how they'd get to a point where they'd make that decision.

There's also more to keeping people locked in combat than being fast or having fast reflexes. Discipline goes a long way, for example, and I don't think anyone would argue that Astartes aren't disciplined.

Mind you, I think the current fall-back system is perhaps the worst change in all of 8th edition considering the massive implications it's had for melee units and the oversaturation of cheap (Troops) chaff units.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Initiative just wasn't a very interesting or useful mechanic.

If it were simplified then perhaps but I wouldn't want the old version to return.

It should just be the 'defence' stat tHat you compare your ws and bs to, similar to old ws rules:

If WS > I, 3+ hit
WS= I, 4+ hit
WS 2xI, 2+ hit
WS/2 I, 5+ hit

Identical rules for BS.


Suddenly genestealers and Eldar are harder to hit, actually using speed as a defence like they've said they do for 30+ years...

I'm torn with the "no retreat from combat" habilities. Because for me they felt a little "One and done", once the enemy reachs mele you lose.

Of course that doesn't mean I don't understand how powerfull is shooting vs meele.

My problem comes, I believe, because I don't want meele to become as powerfull as shooting and making the game even more deadly, but for shooting to be toned down significatly. Make things less deadly. Allow me to reach turn 3 with more than 20% of my army.

Being able to lock things in combat does tone down shooting though. It moves power from shooting to melee, but doesn't necessarily make the game more lethal overall.

It does punish turtling up in a castle though, which I really don't mind.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Being able to lock things in combat does tone down shooting though. It moves power from shooting to melee, but doesn't necessarily make the game more lethal overall.

It does punish turtling up in a castle though, which I really don't mind.

I suppose you are right. It also helps the weaker meele units. Because the "competitive" and powerfull mele units don't need to block anything in combat. Once they reach meele they destroy in one turn whatever they are charging.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


Then GW decides to throw a bone to a Space Marine faction that hasn't been touched in nearly 20 years and... Eldar players are whining again.

You realise BT has had uniqe rules and full access to every marine release for all those 20 years (Well, not uniqe SW units perhaps, but even BA and DA are good conversion material for templars).
Its really a laughable sentiment if you are serious
Your statement really illustrate the worst marine focused attitude.

Any sort of punishment for falling back would also be great.
Right now, falling back from a melee unit is always the correct choice, little tactics or skill involved here.

Something like getting to fight when a unit falls back, but only one attack per model. Or making fall back a consolidation move, so you have to stay in combat and fight before getting out of there.

 Fayric wrote:
You realise BT has had uniqe rules and full access to every marine release for all those 20 years (Well, not uniqe SW units perhaps, but even BA and DA are good conversion material for templars).
Its really a laughable sentiment if you are serious
Your statement really illustrate the worst marine focused attitude.

You mean "Re-roll charges" and "No Psykers" as far as unique rules? Otherwise, "paint stuff black".

Your statement is exactly why I wholeheartedly support GW releasing a Primaris Lieutenant every week. If you want a Xeno army, make it out of green stuff.

The only BT models released are Finecast, and the upgrade kit is from like 2002.

 Galas wrote:
I'm torn with the "no retreat from combat" habilities. Because for me they felt a little "One and done", once the enemy reachs mele you lose.

Of course that doesn't mean I don't understand how powerfull is shooting vs meele.

My problem comes, I believe, because I don't want meele to become as powerfull as shooting and making the game even more deadly, but for shooting to be toned down significatly. Make things less deadly. Allow me to reach turn 3 with more than 20% of my army.

I think the key difference comes when these abilities are on a dedicated, effective combat unit as opposed to an expendable one that is used solely for pinning down enemy units. The former is far more likely to kill their target in a single phase anyway, so such an ability only becomes overpowered when it can be used with chaff like gaunts or boyz.

I like the 'no fall-back' stratagem, for sure. Hopefully it's not 2 or 3 CP to pull off.

But honestly, all 'CC' armies should have access to that in some way. Melee needs the help in 8th, and the alternative to wiping out a unit in CC in one turn is to immediately get blown off the table the next turn at the moment.

I'd even go so far as to suggest that when targeting an enemy unit that a friendly unit fell back from at the beginning of your turn, all missed shots (before re-rolls) are resolved against your friendly unit that fell back. Something that makes you really have to think about it.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
You realise BT has had uniqe rules and full access to every marine release for all those 20 years (Well, not uniqe SW units perhaps, but even BA and DA are good conversion material for templars).
Its really a laughable sentiment if you are serious
Your statement really illustrate the worst marine focused attitude.

You mean "Re-roll charges" and "No Psykers" as far as unique rules? Otherwise, "paint stuff black".

Your statement is exactly why I wholeheartedly support GW releasing a Primaris Lieutenant every week. If you want a Xeno army, make it out of green stuff.

The only BT models released are Finecast, and the upgrade kit is from like 2002.

I get where you're coming from, but you are mixing up a subfaction with a proper faction. Black-Templar are black Spacemarines in the same way that Ulthwé are Black Eldar....so your army was playable and the most supported as well. The privilege that your subfaction gets more than a random Craftworld, Sept, Hivefleet etc is exactly that: A privilege

Waaaghbert wrote:
I get where you're coming from, but you are mixing up a subfaction with a proper faction. Black-Templar are black Spacemarines in the same way that Ulthwé are Black Eldar....so your army was playable and the most supported as well. The privilege that your subfaction gets more than a random Craftworld, Sept, Hivefleet etc is exactly that: A privilege

Are you telling me to check my Space Marine Privilege?

Also don't assume my Chapter. I'm Chapter-fluid and Poly-army, and part of the LGBT (Lasguns, Grenades, Bolters, Tanks) community.

 godswildcard wrote:
I like the 'no fall-back' stratagem, for sure. Hopefully it's not 2 or 3 CP to pull off.

But honestly, all 'CC' armies should have access to that in some way. Melee needs the help in 8th, and the alternative to wiping out a unit in CC in one turn is to immediately get blown off the table the next turn at the moment.

I'd even go so far as to suggest that when targeting an enemy unit that a friendly unit fell back from at the beginning of your turn, all missed shots (before re-rolls) are resolved against your friendly unit that fell back. Something that makes you really have to think about it.

I'd love to see this as a Tyranid stratagem usable by any unit with Lash Whips or Toxic Lashes. Would add value to a whole bunch of under-par units & wargear options as well as being a generally great tactical ability.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Waaaghbert wrote:
I get where you're coming from, but you are mixing up a subfaction with a proper faction. Black-Templar are black Spacemarines in the same way that Ulthwé are Black Eldar....so your army was playable and the most supported as well. The privilege that your subfaction gets more than a random Craftworld, Sept, Hivefleet etc is exactly that: A privilege

Are you telling me to check my Space Marine Privilege?

Also don't assume my Chapter. I'm Chapter-fluid and Poly-army, and part of the LGBT (Lasguns, Grenades, Bolters, Tanks) community.

Hahaha This made me lol at work. I guess most Xenos player just dream of what the space marines are getting, of course I'm happy for you guys, I'll just wish we'd get the same for Craftworlds, Ork-Klans etc.

But I won't derail this Thread any further

I just hope the rest of the PA will be handled better than the eldar stuff!

 xttz wrote:

I'd love to see this as a Tyranid stratagem usable by any unit with Lash Whips or Toxic Lashes. Would add value to a whole bunch of under-par units & wargear options as well as being a generally great tactical ability.

If I'm going to be honest, as much as I'd like to see something of this nature for Tyranids? It cannot be a thing where just one model in the unit can cause it to happen unless there's a fairly hefty pricetag added to Lash Whips/Toxic Lashes.

Waaaghbert wrote:
Hahaha This made me lol at work. I guess most Xenos player just dream of what the space marines are getting, of course I'm happy for you guys, I'll just wish we'd get the same for Craftworlds, Ork-Klans etc.

Here's the thing- GW needs to ease back from their own Chapters/Craftworlds/Cabals/Klans/Tau toilets for a while.

We get it, they're cool.

But give me the tools to make my own army and unique characters. Not just some chart to roll up a name, but an actual system to build characters and set up tactics for that faction.

Do this, and all the primary factions have more appeal.

Except Tau, they will always be dumb and their only tactics option should be "throw your dumb models in the garbage and go home".

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Waaaghbert wrote:
Hahaha This made me lol at work. I guess most Xenos player just dream of what the space marines are getting, of course I'm happy for you guys, I'll just wish we'd get the same for Craftworlds, Ork-Klans etc.

Here's the thing- GW needs to ease back from their own Chapters/Craftworlds/Cabals/Klans/Tau toilets for a while.

We get it, they're cool.

But give me the tools to make my own army and unique characters. Not just some chart to roll up a name, but an actual system to build characters and set up tactics for that faction.

Do this, and all the primary factions have more appeal.

Except Tau, they will always be dumb and their only tactics option should be "throw your dumb models in the garbage and go home".

I've longed hoped that the Chapters would get replaced with just Tactics to pick freely and fluffwise each Tactic would be considered the "preferred" of whatever Chapter they're based one.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
GW makes an Aeldari and Drukhari boxed set that looks fantastic, and adds new rules to create your own Covens/Cabals/Craftworlds as the first part of Psychic Awakening and Eldar players whine about it.

Then GW decides to throw a bone to a Space Marine faction that hasn't been touched in nearly 20 years and... Eldar players are whining again.

You know, for a LONG time GW just ignored the players. I'm not going to say this was a good business practice, but based on the amount of whining from 40k players- I can see exactly how they'd get to a point where they'd make that decision.

Love the Black Templars ever since Helsreach novel - have my own small but growing army for them.

BUT - BT are a sub sub faction of the Space Marine sub faction of the Imperium Faction.

They already have unique characters and models as well as unique unit. Any non Marine sub sub faction have anyyhing remotely similar to this?

Would it not be nice to have something, anything for all the neglected full Factions before we get yet more Marine bloat?

The Eldar box set is quite disapointing - imagine if the same had been done for one of myriad of unending marine boxsets and releases....

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
GW makes an Aeldari and Drukhari boxed set that looks fantastic, and adds new rules to create your own Covens/Cabals/Craftworlds as the first part of Psychic Awakening and Eldar players whine about it.

Then GW decides to throw a bone to a Space Marine faction that hasn't been touched in nearly 20 years and... Eldar players are whining again.

You know, for a LONG time GW just ignored the players. I'm not going to say this was a good business practice, but based on the amount of whining from 40k players- I can see exactly how they'd get to a point where they'd make that decision.

This statement is so far off the mark.

The box set does not look fantastic (unless you are just discussing the artwork). It has several units that most Aeldari players have zero interest in getting (either because they have enough or the rules are just terrible) which jacked up the price to a level where it wasn't worth it just to get th new models.

Also, if you've taken the time to go through PA, it is nice to get custom craftworld attributes but the book actually didn't give much else. The entire Aspect shrine powers could have been great but there are very few you'd actually want to use. It's literally less than 20% useful. Same with the psychic discipline added. Jain Zar and banshees got new models but the rules remained the same. They're not going to see much tabletop time. And Ynnari were just plopped in there with a points reduction for the characters.

This is no way compares to any of the buffs the marines got recently, not by a long shot. Some of it is cool and quirky and may work in a fluff/narrative perspective (which I'm cool with, it's what I'm doing this weekend with a bunch of guys) but it didn't offer Aeldari players any alternative to their power builds they have been running up until this point. It won't change the Aeledai meta one single bit. It was an opportunity missed IMHO.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Your statement is exactly why I wholeheartedly support GW releasing a Primaris Lieutenant every week. If you want a Xeno army, make it out of green stuff.

And this is exactly why I can take nothing you say seriously.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
You realise BT has had uniqe rules and full access to every marine release for all those 20 years (Well, not uniqe SW units perhaps, but even BA and DA are good conversion material for templars).
Its really a laughable sentiment if you are serious
Your statement really illustrate the worst marine focused attitude.

You mean "Re-roll charges" and "No Psykers" as far as unique rules? Otherwise, "paint stuff black".

Your statement is exactly why I wholeheartedly support GW releasing a Primaris Lieutenant every week. If you want a Xeno army, make it out of green stuff.

The only BT models released are Finecast, and the upgrade kit is from like 2002.

So, in other words....exactly the same as every other army's sub-faction support, but with more unit entries than nearly everybody else gets, their own unique troop choice, and their own specialist detachment?

Damn, man, I feel so awful for you poor black templars players.

IIRC the only sub-faction that has more unique units than BT's outside of the Grand Marine Bloat Empire is....cadia? Maybe T'au sept? I don't know Tau that well, how many Tau SC's are actually specifically "T'au Tau"?

BTs get Crusaders, Helbrecht, Grimaldus, and the Emperor's Champion. We won't count the Cenobyte Servitors because I ain't googling what unique bs drone units the unique tau guys get or whatever.

Cadia gets Creed, Kell, and Pask.

T'au gets Longstrike, Aunva, Darkstrider, and Shadowsun.

Goffs get Ghazghkull, Zagstruk...and that's apparently it. The unique dok character seems to be a deffskull. TIL.

I dunno, man, it seems like your marine privilege is showing here. More unique datasheets than all but one non-marine subfaction in the entire game. A dedicated specialist detachment, a chapter tactic, a relic, a warlord trait and a stratagem. That is more than annnnnnnnnnnnybody else gets who is a subfaction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 bullyboy wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
GW makes an Aeldari and Drukhari boxed set that looks fantastic, and adds new rules to create your own Covens/Cabals/Craftworlds as the first part of Psychic Awakening and Eldar players whine about it.

Then GW decides to throw a bone to a Space Marine faction that hasn't been touched in nearly 20 years and... Eldar players are whining again.

You know, for a LONG time GW just ignored the players. I'm not going to say this was a good business practice, but based on the amount of whining from 40k players- I can see exactly how they'd get to a point where they'd make that decision.

This statement is so far off the mark.

The box set does not look fantastic (unless you are just discussing the artwork). It has several units that most Aeldari players have zero interest in getting (either because they have enough or the rules are just terrible) which jacked up the price to a level where it wasn't worth it just to get th new models.

Also, if you've taken the time to go through PA, it is nice to get custom craftworld attributes but the book actually didn't give much else. The entire Aspect shrine powers could have been great but there are very few you'd actually want to use. It's literally less than 20% useful. Same with the psychic discipline added. Jain Zar and banshees got new models but the rules remained the same. They're not going to see much tabletop time. And Ynnari were just plopped in there with a points reduction for the characters.

This is no way compares to any of the buffs the marines got recently, not by a long shot. Some of it is cool and quirky and may work in a fluff/narrative perspective (which I'm cool with, it's what I'm doing this weekend with a bunch of guys) but it didn't offer Aeldari players any alternative to their power builds they have been running up until this point. It won't change the Aeledai meta one single bit. It was an opportunity missed IMHO.

By number of pages devoted to it, the rules section for Psychic Awakening book one is mostly a straight-up reprint of a white dwarf.

Thanks, GW, us Eldar players should really be worshipping at your feet I guess?

the_scotsman wrote:

So, in other words....exactly the same as every other army's sub-faction support, but with more unit entries than nearly everybody else gets, their own unique troop choice, and their own specialist detachment?

Damn, man, I feel so awful for you poor black templars players.

IIRC the only sub-faction that has more unique units than BT's outside of the Grand Marine Bloat Empire is....cadia? Maybe T'au sept? I don't know Tau that well, how many Tau SC's are actually specifically "T'au Tau"?

BTs get Crusaders, Helbrecht, Grimaldus, and the Emperor's Champion. We won't count the Cenobyte Servitors because I ain't googling what unique bs drone units the unique tau guys get or whatever.

Cadia gets Creed, Kell, and Pask.

T'au gets Longstrike, Aunva, Darkstrider, and Shadowsun.

Goffs get Ghazghkull, Zagstruk...and that's apparently it. The unique dok character seems to be a deffskull. TIL.

I dunno, man, it seems like your marine privilege is showing here. More unique datasheets than all but one non-marine subfaction in the entire game. A dedicated specialist detachment, a chapter tactic, a relic, a warlord trait and a stratagem. That is more than annnnnnnnnnnnybody else gets who is a subfaction.

Let's not forget the myriad of subfactions with no special character, detachment etc etc etc

the_scotsman wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
You realise BT has had uniqe rules and full access to every marine release for all those 20 years (Well, not uniqe SW units perhaps, but even BA and DA are good conversion material for templars).
Its really a laughable sentiment if you are serious
Your statement really illustrate the worst marine focused attitude.

You mean "Re-roll charges" and "No Psykers" as far as unique rules? Otherwise, "paint stuff black".

Your statement is exactly why I wholeheartedly support GW releasing a Primaris Lieutenant every week. If you want a Xeno army, make it out of green stuff.

The only BT models released are Finecast, and the upgrade kit is from like 2002.

So, in other words....exactly the same as every other army's sub-faction support, but with more unit entries than nearly everybody else gets, their own unique troop choice, and their own specialist detachment?

Damn, man, I feel so awful for you poor black templars players.

IIRC the only sub-faction that has more unique units than BT's outside of the Grand Marine Bloat Empire is....cadia? Maybe T'au sept? I don't know Tau that well, how many Tau SC's are actually specifically "T'au Tau"?

BTs get Crusaders, Helbrecht, Grimaldus, and the Emperor's Champion. We won't count the Cenobyte Servitors because I ain't googling what unique bs drone units the unique tau guys get or whatever.

Cadia gets Creed, Kell, and Pask.

T'au gets Longstrike, Aunva, Darkstrider, and Shadowsun.

Goffs get Ghazghkull, Zagstruk...and that's apparently it. The unique dok character seems to be a deffskull. TIL.

I dunno, man, it seems like your marine privilege is showing here. More unique datasheets than all but one non-marine subfaction in the entire game. A dedicated specialist detachment, a chapter tactic, a relic, a warlord trait and a stratagem. That is more than annnnnnnnnnnnybody else gets who is a subfaction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 bullyboy wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
GW makes an Aeldari and Drukhari boxed set that looks fantastic, and adds new rules to create your own Covens/Cabals/Craftworlds as the first part of Psychic Awakening and Eldar players whine about it.

Then GW decides to throw a bone to a Space Marine faction that hasn't been touched in nearly 20 years and... Eldar players are whining again.

You know, for a LONG time GW just ignored the players. I'm not going to say this was a good business practice, but based on the amount of whining from 40k players- I can see exactly how they'd get to a point where they'd make that decision.

This statement is so far off the mark.

The box set does not look fantastic (unless you are just discussing the artwork). It has several units that most Aeldari players have zero interest in getting (either because they have enough or the rules are just terrible) which jacked up the price to a level where it wasn't worth it just to get th new models.

Also, if you've taken the time to go through PA, it is nice to get custom craftworld attributes but the book actually didn't give much else. The entire Aspect shrine powers could have been great but there are very few you'd actually want to use. It's literally less than 20% useful. Same with the psychic discipline added. Jain Zar and banshees got new models but the rules remained the same. They're not going to see much tabletop time. And Ynnari were just plopped in there with a points reduction for the characters.

This is no way compares to any of the buffs the marines got recently, not by a long shot. Some of it is cool and quirky and may work in a fluff/narrative perspective (which I'm cool with, it's what I'm doing this weekend with a bunch of guys) but it didn't offer Aeldari players any alternative to their power builds they have been running up until this point. It won't change the Aeledai meta one single bit. It was an opportunity missed IMHO.

By number of pages devoted to it, the rules section for Psychic Awakening book one is mostly a straight-up reprint of a white dwarf.

Thanks, GW, us Eldar players should really be worshipping at your feet I guess?

Or stop being aggressive and acting like you're owed something? It's a game companies release schedule not social discrimination.

Waaaghbert wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
You realise BT has had uniqe rules and full access to every marine release for all those 20 years (Well, not uniqe SW units perhaps, but even BA and DA are good conversion material for templars).
Its really a laughable sentiment if you are serious
Your statement really illustrate the worst marine focused attitude.

You mean "Re-roll charges" and "No Psykers" as far as unique rules? Otherwise, "paint stuff black".

Your statement is exactly why I wholeheartedly support GW releasing a Primaris Lieutenant every week. If you want a Xeno army, make it out of green stuff.

The only BT models released are Finecast, and the upgrade kit is from like 2002.

I get where you're coming from, but you are mixing up a subfaction with a proper faction. Black-Templar are black Spacemarines in the same way that Ulthwé are Black Eldar....so your army was playable and the most supported as well. The privilege that your subfaction gets more than a random Craftworld, Sept, Hivefleet etc is exactly that: A privilege

In the same way that Kroot are perfectly playable. Techincally true, but also missing the point. You're focussing entirely on whether models are the same as another faction and not on whether the rules for the faction makes any sense.

The fact that Space Marines have gotten a veritable pile of units and model kits doesn't really matter when the faction in question don't get the rules to back them up. We've seen this to an even more extreme degree with various Inquisition players who've been fethed over because their army essentially no longer exists. The models may very well be playable as Imperial Guard, but just because the models are the same does not mean the army isn't for all intents and purposes dead. Sure, there's been a pile of units that Black Templars could take, but the army has spent three editions as "lol why even bother?". A Black Templars player who has to buy an entire army of Space Marine models because none of the Black Templars stuff he has works for anything but the most casual of games is just as poorly off as someone who plays Necrons, with the exceptions that he can save a little on already having HQs.

Take the Gladius formation in 7th edition for example. It propped Codex: Space Marines up. It also required you to take Tactical Squads, explicitly excluding Crusader Squads. Sure, you could rip your Crusader Squads into pieces, hope you had the bits to rebuild them into Tactical Squads and then buy the rest of the stuff that made the Gladius good, but at that point why would you still be playing Black Templars, and how are you better off than a Tyranid player being told his army is gak outta luck and that he has to buy something else?

I got into Black Templars in the first place back at the start of 5th edition not because they were better than anyone else (God knows they weren't!) but because they were DIFFERENT. They had a playstyle that appealed to me; one that no longer exists. Existing as a Chapter Tactic with unique stuff that was old when I joined the hobby in 2009 doesn't mean that Black Templars as a rules identity have de facto seen any support beyond lip service. You've had the same option to buy Space Marine units you don't like as I have to buy those I don't like. My army, understood as a rules archetype, has not received anything decent rules wise over the last three editions with the exception for the Skyhammer formation in 7th edition. Models-wise I've had great support, but as an army not so much, because most if not all the units released do not fit into the army archetype. It's like releasing a bunch of Tau melee units (note, not Kroot, not Battlesuits, just Tau on foot with melee weapons) and then acting all surprised that Tau players aren't grateful when a bunch of new model kits don't mesh at all with their previous stuff.

No one complains that Ork players that want Speed Freeks to be viable are entitled (or, at least, no one ought to, because it'd be stupid) just because Boyz and Lootas are in a strong position. No one (including myself, blame where blame is due) should be complaining about Eldar players wanting Howling Banshees or Striking Scorpions or any other number of perennial underachievers to be viable. Why am I entitled for asking that my army not spend another entire edition getting pummled into dust by the poor, victimised Orks, Eldar and Tau who never get a break from anything?

I guess I should just accept playing an NPC Marine faction, right? That's how the nomenclature goes these days, no?

I'm not saying Black Templar players are entitled, absolutely not. And it is not about working or not working. A subfaction with one Warlord Trait, one relic and one Chapter Tactic can still be playable and incredible powerfull. It is just wrong to say that Black Templar had no releases for 20 years. Just because I dislike Aspect Warriors and play Iyanden I don't go around telling everyone that Rise fo the Phoenix has no Iyanden-Kit.

I just want the Marine players to understand that I , as a Xenos player, want the same thing you get. And most of the times, we simply dont....we do not get a psychic disciplin for each craftworld/Hivefleet/Klan, we don't get 6 Warlord Traits for each subfaction etc.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 xttz wrote:

I'd love to see this as a Tyranid stratagem usable by any unit with Lash Whips or Toxic Lashes. Would add value to a whole bunch of under-par units & wargear options as well as being a generally great tactical ability.

If I'm going to be honest, as much as I'd like to see something of this nature for Tyranids? It cannot be a thing where just one model in the unit can cause it to happen unless there's a fairly hefty pricetag added to Lash Whips/Toxic Lashes.

You've gotta be kidding me... you really think there's a threat of a seismic meta shift of (checks notes) *Venomthropes and Toxicrenes*? I guess since Nids are such a dominant part of the meta though, any boost might put them over the edge. Oh wait, Nids are entirely absent! Hmm...

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

So, in other words....exactly the same as every other army's sub-faction support, but with more unit entries than nearly everybody else gets, their own unique troop choice, and their own specialist detachment?

Damn, man, I feel so awful for you poor black templars players.

IIRC the only sub-faction that has more unique units than BT's outside of the Grand Marine Bloat Empire is....cadia? Maybe T'au sept? I don't know Tau that well, how many Tau SC's are actually specifically "T'au Tau"?

BTs get Crusaders, Helbrecht, Grimaldus, and the Emperor's Champion. We won't count the Cenobyte Servitors because I ain't googling what unique bs drone units the unique tau guys get or whatever.

Cadia gets Creed, Kell, and Pask.

T'au gets Longstrike, Aunva, Darkstrider, and Shadowsun.

Goffs get Ghazghkull, Zagstruk...and that's apparently it. The unique dok character seems to be a deffskull. TIL.

I dunno, man, it seems like your marine privilege is showing here. More unique datasheets than all but one non-marine subfaction in the entire game. A dedicated specialist detachment, a chapter tactic, a relic, a warlord trait and a stratagem. That is more than annnnnnnnnnnnybody else gets who is a subfaction.

Let's not forget the myriad of subfactions with no special character, detachment etc etc etc

Tau get special problems too. Everything worth taking is Tau sept, there are exactly 3 generic HQ types since the Commander rule homogenizes them into one but worse since they also have to be separated by detachment. They even have a HQ that is specifically for a Sept that has no rules.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
You realise BT has had uniqe rules and full access to every marine release for all those 20 years (Well, not uniqe SW units perhaps, but even BA and DA are good conversion material for templars).
Its really a laughable sentiment if you are serious
Your statement really illustrate the worst marine focused attitude.

You mean "Re-roll charges" and "No Psykers" as far as unique rules? Otherwise, "paint stuff black".

Your statement is exactly why I wholeheartedly support GW releasing a Primaris Lieutenant every week. If you want a Xeno army, make it out of green stuff.

The only BT models released are Finecast, and the upgrade kit is from like 2002.

So, in other words....exactly the same as every other army's sub-faction support, but with more unit entries than nearly everybody else gets, their own unique troop choice, and their own specialist detachment?

Damn, man, I feel so awful for you poor black templars players.

IIRC the only sub-faction that has more unique units than BT's outside of the Grand Marine Bloat Empire is....cadia? Maybe T'au sept? I don't know Tau that well, how many Tau SC's are actually specifically "T'au Tau"?

BTs get Crusaders, Helbrecht, Grimaldus, and the Emperor's Champion. We won't count the Cenobyte Servitors because I ain't googling what unique bs drone units the unique tau guys get or whatever.

Cadia gets Creed, Kell, and Pask.

T'au gets Longstrike, Aunva, Darkstrider, and Shadowsun.

Goffs get Ghazghkull, Zagstruk...and that's apparently it. The unique dok character seems to be a deffskull. TIL.

I dunno, man, it seems like your marine privilege is showing here. More unique datasheets than all but one non-marine subfaction in the entire game. A dedicated specialist detachment, a chapter tactic, a relic, a warlord trait and a stratagem. That is more than annnnnnnnnnnnybody else gets who is a subfaction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 bullyboy wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
GW makes an Aeldari and Drukhari boxed set that looks fantastic, and adds new rules to create your own Covens/Cabals/Craftworlds as the first part of Psychic Awakening and Eldar players whine about it.

Then GW decides to throw a bone to a Space Marine faction that hasn't been touched in nearly 20 years and... Eldar players are whining again.

You know, for a LONG time GW just ignored the players. I'm not going to say this was a good business practice, but based on the amount of whining from 40k players- I can see exactly how they'd get to a point where they'd make that decision.

This statement is so far off the mark.

The box set does not look fantastic (unless you are just discussing the artwork). It has several units that most Aeldari players have zero interest in getting (either because they have enough or the rules are just terrible) which jacked up the price to a level where it wasn't worth it just to get th new models.

Also, if you've taken the time to go through PA, it is nice to get custom craftworld attributes but the book actually didn't give much else. The entire Aspect shrine powers could have been great but there are very few you'd actually want to use. It's literally less than 20% useful. Same with the psychic discipline added. Jain Zar and banshees got new models but the rules remained the same. They're not going to see much tabletop time. And Ynnari were just plopped in there with a points reduction for the characters.

This is no way compares to any of the buffs the marines got recently, not by a long shot. Some of it is cool and quirky and may work in a fluff/narrative perspective (which I'm cool with, it's what I'm doing this weekend with a bunch of guys) but it didn't offer Aeldari players any alternative to their power builds they have been running up until this point. It won't change the Aeledai meta one single bit. It was an opportunity missed IMHO.

By number of pages devoted to it, the rules section for Psychic Awakening book one is mostly a straight-up reprint of a white dwarf.

Thanks, GW, us Eldar players should really be worshipping at your feet I guess?

Technically a Craftworld has the most special characters available to it out of everyone -
You get,
1 Avatar,
6 Phoenix Lords,
Yriel/Eldrad/Illic/Blackstone sniper Elf

Whilst the Phoenix Lords aren't Craftworld "tied" they are available to anyone running Craftworlds.

But releases are entirely meaningless from a rules-perspective if they're bad. For an Iyanden player, the stuff in Rise of the Phoenix really doesn't do anything. Similarly, an Ork Speed Freak player like my local Ork player is entirely reasonable in pointing out that while they got a bunch of new kits they're mostly hot garbage rules-wise. It'd be silly to tell Ork players to suck it up because they got a bunch of bad units. It's silly to tell Eldar/Dark Eldar players to just bite the bullet and buy a boxset full of junk for six new models that aren't even that good. It's silly to tell Black Templars players how good they have it because they can buy a bunch of new units and still be worse than every other permutation of one of the worst armies in the game (prior to the new book). The thing is Black Templars went from having support and their own identity to being the worst-in-class three editions in a row.

It's kinda like Eldar players having to take flak because Ynnari steamrolled everyone for quite a while. None of the stuff that actually does anything did that for Eldar players, but they got collectively tarred and feathered anyway. The fact that I get more opportunities to buy things doesn't practically make a difference if those things don't actually do anything for my army.. If GW released plastic Dire Avengers tomorrow but they cost 22 PPM and didn't have any decent rules they wouldn't sell very well. If anything Primaris Marines are somewhat of an anomaly in that they've sold despite being at best mediocre before the new Codex.

By all means, be angry that there's a bunch of Eldar units, such as Howling Banshees, that are perpetually bad. Be mad that a bunch of Ork units might as well not exist. Raise a middle finger to the sky over the fact that anyone ever thought the current Word Bearers Legion Tactic was a good idea. Be miffed that Khorne Berzerkers are channeling their inner killer bunny instead of getting a modern sculpt.

Just don't kick the legs out from under factions that have spent three editions sinking further and further into obscurity just because you don't like the fact that there's a bunch of unneccessary Marine releases, because I don't like that either.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
But releases are entirely meaningless from a rules-perspective if they're bad. For an Iyanden player, the stuff in Rise of the Phoenix really doesn't do anything. Similarly, an Ork Speed Freak player like my local Ork player is entirely reasonable in pointing out that while they got a bunch of new kits they're mostly hot garbage rules-wise. It'd be silly to tell Ork players to suck it up because they got a bunch of bad units. It's silly to tell Eldar/Dark Eldar players to just bite the bullet and buy a boxset full of junk for six new models that aren't even that good. It's silly to tell Black Templars players how good they have it because they can buy a bunch of new units and still be worse than every other permutation of one of the worst armies in the game (prior to the new book). The thing is Black Templars went from having support and their own identity to being the worst-in-class three editions in a row.

It's kinda like Eldar players having to take flak because Ynnari steamrolled everyone for quite a while. None of the stuff that actually does anything did that for Eldar players, but they got collectively tarred and feathered anyway. The fact that I get more opportunities to buy things doesn't practically make a difference if those things don't actually do anything for my army.. If GW released plastic Dire Avengers tomorrow but they cost 22 PPM and didn't have any decent rules they wouldn't sell very well. If anything Primaris Marines are somewhat of an anomaly in that they've sold despite being at best mediocre before the new Codex.

By all means, be angry that there's a bunch of Eldar units, such as Howling Banshees, that are perpetually bad. Be mad that a bunch of Ork units might as well not exist. Raise a middle finger to the sky over the fact that anyone ever thought the current Word Bearers Legion Tactic was a good idea. Be miffed that Khorne Berzerkers are channeling their inner killer bunny instead of getting a modern sculpt.

Just don't kick the legs out from under factions that have spent three editions sinking further and further into obscurity just because you don't like the fact that there's a bunch of unneccessary Marine releases, because I don't like that either.

Worst-in-class Marines in 7th still puts you middle of the pack. Worst-in-class Marines were at the bottom of the haves, but they still demolished the have-nots. In 8th, you have a fair point prior to the new codex but even if you stuck with just the new codex and no amped-up supplement, you'd again be better off than most of the other codexes in the game (I'd put the new Marines book on par with the IG book; it's full of strong stuff, not a lot of OP stuff outside of supplements, but very little that's actually weak either).

Again, PA is probably the 2 year balance pass for all these Xenos armies. Basically, to me it means that CWE in particular (and probably Orks, and probably Nids; less so DE because I think that's a really strong book to begin with) are just going to miss out. I don't think BT would be comparable because you do benefit from the power increase of the Codex and get things like T1 DS. You've got your strength back even before the supplement.

Dudeface wrote:


Or stop being aggressive and acting like you're owed something? It's a game companies release schedule not social discrimination.

This is very true and important to remember once in a vhile.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 xttz wrote:

I'd love to see this as a Tyranid stratagem usable by any unit with Lash Whips or Toxic Lashes. Would add value to a whole bunch of under-par units & wargear options as well as being a generally great tactical ability.

If I'm going to be honest, as much as I'd like to see something of this nature for Tyranids? It cannot be a thing where just one model in the unit can cause it to happen unless there's a fairly hefty pricetag added to Lash Whips/Toxic Lashes.

You've gotta be kidding me... you really think there's a threat of a seismic meta shift of (checks notes) *Venomthropes and Toxicrenes*? I guess since Nids are such a dominant part of the meta though, any boost might put them over the edge. Oh wait, Nids are entirely absent! Hmm...

I think you missed a key part of what Xttz's statement, so better recheck them notes.
It wasn't just Toxic Lashes. Lash whips were a big thing too.

Kdash wrote:

Whilst the Phoenix Lords aren't Craftworld "tied" they are available to anyone running Craftworlds.

A giant pile of terrible options doesnt change the fact that they're terrible options.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Being able to lock things in combat does tone down shooting though. It moves power from shooting to melee, but doesn't necessarily make the game more lethal overall.

It does punish turtling up in a castle though, which I really don't mind.

Big issue i can see is combining that with t1 charges(maybe even multiple units) against factions that have zero credible h2h threats. If you get zero chance to shoot before they hit your line and can prevent you from falling back regardless of how you position and your codex's h2h units hit like wet paper...you are left begging your units die to charge or you are screwed. And if you can quarantee no fall back and have no fear of counter charge that's trivial to prevent as attacker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galas wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Being able to lock things in combat does tone down shooting though. It moves power from shooting to melee, but doesn't necessarily make the game more lethal overall.

It does punish turtling up in a castle though, which I really don't mind.

I suppose you are right. It also helps the weaker meele units. Because the "competitive" and powerfull mele units don't need to block anything in combat. Once they reach meele they destroy in one turn whatever they are charging.

Not if they don't want to.

Just a thought, perhaps you shouldn't go after BT players who are excited to see a little love thrown their way? You come off sounding like a jerk.

How dare BT players be excited that they are getting something in PA... like the Eldar players did....

On top of that, just because you don't like your new toys doesn't mean you get to stop all over everyone else. Over at my LFGS there are a handful of Eldar players, and they got really excited about the box set - some complains about price. Not every release is going to blow you away, right? Every faction has had sub-par releases. SM included.

Guys, the 2.0 wave has JUST started. The other factions are going to get some love too. Relax a bit. Give it time.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 xttz wrote:

I'd love to see this as a Tyranid stratagem usable by any unit with Lash Whips or Toxic Lashes. Would add value to a whole bunch of under-par units & wargear options as well as being a generally great tactical ability.

If I'm going to be honest, as much as I'd like to see something of this nature for Tyranids? It cannot be a thing where just one model in the unit can cause it to happen unless there's a fairly hefty pricetag added to Lash Whips/Toxic Lashes.

You've gotta be kidding me... you really think there's a threat of a seismic meta shift of (checks notes) *Venomthropes and Toxicrenes*? I guess since Nids are such a dominant part of the meta though, any boost might put them over the edge. Oh wait, Nids are entirely absent! Hmm...

I think you missed a key part of what Xttz's statement, so better recheck them notes.
It wasn't just Toxic Lashes. Lash whips were a big thing too.

My bad... d'oh. That being said, I still don't think that would break Warriors, Tyrant Guard, and Tyrants.

eh, whatever. Sure. Black Templars, a single subfaction within Codex: Space Marines, should probably get more rules content in PA than Codex: Drukhari. Give 'em the seven-layer dip chapter tactics, the special stratagems, their own relics, feth it, why not templaromancy psychic powers! How 'bout a special dreadnought with a sword, dreadnoughts haven't got swords yet.

The point is that the game has gone through more than half of its total editions without Black Templars being more than an "oh, these guys exist too I guess" afterthought. In principle this is the same as subfactions of other Codices not getting much love (if any) with the exception that it left a bunch of us sitting on a bunch of models (including those oh so precious unique units) that have been borderline unplayable since fifth edition (and even then they weren't exactly good). Imagine if next edition they decide that Thousand Sons should be part of the Chaos Marine Codex again and let them keep Ahriman, Rubric Marines and all that jazz as units in the book but those units also were meaningless because they didn't synergize with the rest of the book at all? Would Thousand Sons players be entitled for complaining that what they bought into no longer exists?

Explain why your army is worth more than mine just because mine is a subfaction and yours isn't. Yes, I could buy a bunch of new models and play Iron Hands instead, but you could just as easly drop a bunch of cash and buy an Eldar flying circus. Why is the second unreasonable to expect but not the first?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
No one complains that Ork players that want Speed Freeks to be viable are entitled (or, at least, no one ought to, because it'd be stupid) just because Boyz and Lootas are in a strong position.

Lol, people complain about me suggesting this all the time man!

Though not you, you're one of the good one's.

As an aside if I had to play a Marine army it would definitely be BT - they're basically the Marine equivalent of Orks.

the_scotsman wrote:
eh, whatever. Sure. Black Templars, a single subfaction within Codex: Space Marines, should probably get more rules content in PA than Codex: Drukhari. Give 'em the seven-layer dip chapter tactics, the special stratagems, their own relics, feth it, why not templaromancy psychic powers! How 'bout a special dreadnought with a sword, dreadnoughts haven't got swords yet.

Thanks for proving my point. How about you actually contribute something useful to the thread? We don't even have the BT content released yet and you are throwing a temper tantrum.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
No one complains that Ork players that want Speed Freeks to be viable are entitled (or, at least, no one ought to, because it'd be stupid) just because Boyz and Lootas are in a strong position.

Lol, people complain about me suggesting this all the time man!

Though not you, you're one of the good one's.

As an aside if I had to play a Marine army it would definitely be BT - they're basically the Marine equivalent of Orks.

They do, but I consider it just as stupid as the people whining about BT getting stuff. More internal balance is good for everyone; it means Ork players (in this example) can play a greater variety of units without getting fethed over, and it means I won't have to face the same list everytime I fight Orks.

There's an argument that more supplements for Marines actually increases diversity. Considering how popular Marines are as an army, making a bunch of different playstyles viable splits the field up somewhat. If you're going to be fighting Marines regardless, would you rather fight 12 Guilliman parking lots or 3 IH lists with a bunch of Dreadnoughts, 3 Salamanders lists with melta and flamer focus, 3 White Scars bike lists, 2 Imperial Fists bolterspam lists, and one Tack Blemplars list that focusses on psychic support and long-range shooting? This argument is somewhat incompatible with the argument that Marines are only popular because of marketing though, as it assumes that people want to play Marines at a relatively high constant level.

 Karthicus wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
eh, whatever. Sure. Black Templars, a single subfaction within Codex: Space Marines, should probably get more rules content in PA than Codex: Drukhari. Give 'em the seven-layer dip chapter tactics, the special stratagems, their own relics, feth it, why not templaromancy psychic powers! How 'bout a special dreadnought with a sword, dreadnoughts haven't got swords yet.

Thanks for proving my point. How about you actually contribute something useful to the thread? We don't even have the BT content released yet and you are throwing a temper tantrum.

Aight. I haven't got any news, or rumors, so really it'd just be speculation for what BT would need to get into the meta.

Reroll charges is only a good trait if it's paired with some way to get stuff into combat out of deep strike. The full reroll raises the odds from 28 to 47%, which is decent, but not decent enough to risk a whole unit's usefulness on. Orks only really got use out of that when they added on the Evil Sunz +1 to charge - that gets the odds up towards 70%.

So a +1 to charge aura added on to a relic or added to one of the two special lads would be good for BT.

We don't really have a primaris unit that does melee and doesn't deep strike, which would pair in really well with the new transport, which is kiiiinda wasted just shuttling intercessors around. intercessors of any type can pretty much fire from the DZ so the amazing assault transport rule on the im...thingy is not super useful right now.

BT Chapter tactic would pair quite well with such a unit.

I don't know how you run Crusader squads through the Primaris bland-o-filter like they did with Deathwatch Kill Teams without totally losing what they're supposed to be. Allow a mixed squad of reivers and intercessors? They haven't released anything with the primaris range that really looks like a gothic, medieval sort of space marine, they've been pretty much all the super futuristic commando stuff. In practice though, crusader squads have looked a little bit silly to me ever since they made the scout design a lot more modern looking with the plastic Scouts of Notre Dame Who All Have The Same Face kit. I've never been able to shake the feeling that neophytes were supposed to be dressed differently somehow, maybe with robes and medieval swords rather than the big rambo knives.

Get some charge bonuses somehow, some ability to get into assault doctrine prematurely, and black templars are perfectly respectable into the current meta.

 bullyboy wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
GW makes an Aeldari and Drukhari boxed set that looks fantastic, and adds new rules to create your own Covens/Cabals/Craftworlds as the first part of Psychic Awakening and Eldar players whine about it.

Then GW decides to throw a bone to a Space Marine faction that hasn't been touched in nearly 20 years and... Eldar players are whining again.

You know, for a LONG time GW just ignored the players. I'm not going to say this was a good business practice, but based on the amount of whining from 40k players- I can see exactly how they'd get to a point where they'd make that decision.

This statement is so far off the mark.

The box set does not look fantastic (unless you are just discussing the artwork). It has several units that most Aeldari players have zero interest in getting (either because they have enough or the rules are just terrible) which jacked up the price to a level where it wasn't worth it just to get th new models.

Also, if you've taken the time to go through PA, it is nice to get custom craftworld attributes but the book actually didn't give much else. The entire Aspect shrine powers could have been great but there are very few you'd actually want to use. It's literally less than 20% useful. Same with the psychic discipline added. Jain Zar and banshees got new models but the rules remained the same. They're not going to see much tabletop time. And Ynnari were just plopped in there with a points reduction for the characters.

This is no way compares to any of the buffs the marines got recently, not by a long shot. Some of it is cool and quirky and may work in a fluff/narrative perspective (which I'm cool with, it's what I'm doing this weekend with a bunch of guys) but it didn't offer Aeldari players any alternative to their power builds they have been running up until this point. It won't change the Aeledai meta one single bit. It was an opportunity missed IMHO.

Do you really think a top-tier faction should get the same amount of buffs out of a campaign book than a trash faction out of a new codex
Campaign books are not meant to shake up the meta

 Karthicus wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
eh, whatever. Sure. Black Templars, a single subfaction within Codex: Space Marines, should probably get more rules content in PA than Codex: Drukhari. Give 'em the seven-layer dip chapter tactics, the special stratagems, their own relics, feth it, why not templaromancy psychic powers! How 'bout a special dreadnought with a sword, dreadnoughts haven't got swords yet.

Thanks for proving my point. How about you actually contribute something useful to the thread? We don't even have the BT content released yet and you are throwing a temper tantrum.

Surely you see his point though right?

A subfaction of a faction (BT) get MORE love and rules than an entire faction in DE or CWE. That is insanity and it makes no sense.

No one begrudges BT good, fluffy rules. What we begrudge is these subfactions getting MORE than entire Xenos factions. As Walrus said - my Speed Freeks/Evil Sunz should have exactly the same rule depth as these new Marine subfactions. They're nowhere near currently and though people keep saying "be patient" and "it's coming", nothing and I mean nothing suggests this. Quite the opposite, given the piss poor stuff Eldar got in Phoenix Rising.

GW need to take a good, hard look at their priorities or they risk ostracising a massive portion of their playerbase and they risk losing players (and therefore money).

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Karthicus wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
eh, whatever. Sure. Black Templars, a single subfaction within Codex: Space Marines, should probably get more rules content in PA than Codex: Drukhari. Give 'em the seven-layer dip chapter tactics, the special stratagems, their own relics, feth it, why not templaromancy psychic powers! How 'bout a special dreadnought with a sword, dreadnoughts haven't got swords yet.

Thanks for proving my point. How about you actually contribute something useful to the thread? We don't even have the BT content released yet and you are throwing a temper tantrum.

Surely you see his point though right?

A subfaction of a faction (BT) get MORE love and rules than an entire faction in DE or CWE. That is insanity and it makes no sense.

No one begrudges BT good, fluffy rules. What we begrudge is these subfactions getting MORE than entire Xenos factions. As Walrus said - my Speed Freeks/Evil Sunz should have exactly the same rule depth as these new Marine subfactions. They're nowhere near currently and though people keep saying "be patient" and "it's coming", nothing and I mean nothing suggests this. Quite the opposite, given the piss poor stuff Eldar got in Phoenix Rising.

GW need to take a good, hard look at their priorities or they risk ostracising a massive portion of their playerbase and they risk losing players (and therefore money).

So you would stop playing entirely because something you're not interested in gets a release? Arguably if orks don't get a release you're not buying anything anyway so what have they lost?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
There's an argument that more supplements for Marines actually increases diversity.

It increases the diversity of Marine lists, sure.

Considering how popular Marines are as an army, making a bunch of different playstyles viable splits the field up somewhat. If you're going to be fighting Marines regardless, would you rather fight 12 Guilliman parking lots or 3 IH lists with a bunch of Dreadnoughts, 3 Salamanders lists with melta and flamer focus, 3 White Scars bike lists, 2 Imperial Fists bolterspam lists, and one Tack Blemplars list that focusses on psychic support and long-range shooting? This argument is somewhat incompatible with the argument that Marines are only popular because of marketing though, as it assumes that people want to play Marines at a relatively high constant level.

People don't want to play Marines at a relatively high and consistent level - until the recent codex and supplements Marines weren't very popular as a faction at competitive events. Now Marines are significantly more powerful they are significantly more popular - weird, right?

Like when Castellans, Guard soup and Smash Captains were incredibly powerful they were also incredibly popular.

Or when Ynnari were broken and could act in their opponents turn as well as their own - they were also incredibly popular.

There is no doubt that Marines are the most prevalent faction in the game. But prevalence does not equal popularity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:

So you would stop playing entirely because something you're not interested in gets a release? Arguably if orks don't get a release you're not buying anything anyway so what have they lost?

No, I'll stop playing because I'm BORED. I'm bored of the neverending Marine focus. I'm bored of losing games because Marines are simply more powerful than my faction. I'm bored of Marines having more rules than any other faction first. I'm bored of the fact that every new model is a Marine. Unfortunately I'm becoming bored with the hobby, because GW are focusing on one faction and one faction alone, which to me is boring.

Sisters are part of this one, right? I wonder if they are getting any tweaking to their anti-psyker...

..ehh, general stuff in this pass, if anything. im done hoping for Stern, and ill be hsocked for anti-psyker support.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
There's an argument that more supplements for Marines actually increases diversity.

It increases the diversity of Marine lists, sure.

All else equal a game where you have a bunch of different Marine builds is more diverse than one where every Marine build is a monobuild. Having more diverse armies is good even if you don't play them yourself.

EDIT: I guess the way I see it, releases for the macro faction of a subfaction isn't necessarily beneficial to all the subfactions. An Ork Speed Freeks player wouldn't benefit much from better Lootas, an Iyanden player isn't benefitted from a hypothetical Shining Spears release, and a Black Templars player doesn't benefit when a bunch of stuff that's great for Ultramarines is released.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
There's an argument that more supplements for Marines actually increases diversity.

It increases the diversity of Marine lists, sure.

All else equal a game where you have a bunch of different Marine builds is more diverse than one where every Marine build is a monobuild. Having more diverse armies is good even if you don't play them yourself.

Yes but all else isn't equal. The diversity of different lists has actually dropped as all of those factions that aren't SM have virtually disappeared from competitive play. No more Orks. No more Eldar. No more Dark Eldar. No more Ynnari. No more Necrons. No more Tau. You get the picture?

I get the argument, but you're drawing those conclusions too soon.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I get the argument, but you're drawing those conclusions too soon.

This has already happened, we've seen these numbers from events since the SM codex dropped. Other factions have quickly all but disappeared from the top 4s at events.

There are numerous ways to update factions and Sub factions now.

White Dwarf mini-dexes - guess who have had nearly all of these even for sub-subfactions with their own fething codexes wheras Sisters of Silence had Zero new rules, Zero models and Zero effort put in - especially annoying since they have a whole load of models that Could be used in Forge World Just like dozens of "30k" marine units that also have 40k rules.

Campaign Books - Eldar have got some new stuff - hurrah and then wants in the pipeline for the rest of the books - Marines, Marines, Marines followed by ....Marines. The leaks alreayd show loads of extras for.....Marines and Feth everyone else.

So not only do Marines dominate the main release scheudle stopping anything else but they do it for every release format - Forgeworld, White Dwarf whatever - its going to be wall to wall Maines with occassional other proper Factions to chuck with half hearedly in a lunch break.

And then there is the usual refrain of "oh you will get something soon" just like the start of 8th - we just need to get alll the releases for the dozen Marine dexes out, oh and all the other Marine stuff and sorry no its time for the 3rd Wave of marines - why can;t you just wait until thats finished.

I like Marines, I have hundreds of them - but for feths sake can;t they do something else for one whole week..

Bdrone wrote:
Sisters are part of this one, right? I wonder if they are getting any tweaking to their anti-psyker...

..ehh, general stuff in this pass, if anything. im done hoping for Stern, and ill be hsocked for anti-psyker support.

Leaks suggest that the main drive for the book is guess what - Marines. Sisters in the lore, Guard in the lore - Marines for lore AND Models AND Rules - as always

Nope.
Because it would kill them probably

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I get the argument, but you're drawing those conclusions too soon.

This has already happened, we've seen these numbers from events since the SM codex dropped. Other factions have quickly all but disappeared from the top 4s at events.

Correlation =/= causation. That's not proof of the SM Codex being too powerful.

It could very well be, but there are other plausible explanations (influx of people who want to play Marines after them being trash for two years, Marines being a powerful counter-meta faction, Iron Hands being too powerful pre-nerf but not post-nerf) too.

That's bollocks though if unoptimized marine lists literally kick out the established fine tuned ones on the first go that is a redflag imo.

I think everyone agrees that Space Marine launches have gotten to pretty absurd levels recently (at least I hope so). Seems odd when someone tells me, that as a Necron player, I should just wait for my turn to get something, and be patient. I think that they should lead by example, though, and be patient, and let someone other than themselves be in spotlight.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Karthicus wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
eh, whatever. Sure. Black Templars, a single subfaction within Codex: Space Marines, should probably get more rules content in PA than Codex: Drukhari. Give 'em the seven-layer dip chapter tactics, the special stratagems, their own relics, feth it, why not templaromancy psychic powers! How 'bout a special dreadnought with a sword, dreadnoughts haven't got swords yet.

Thanks for proving my point. How about you actually contribute something useful to the thread? We don't even have the BT content released yet and you are throwing a temper tantrum.

Surely you see his point though right?

A subfaction of a faction (BT) get MORE love and rules than an entire faction in DE or CWE. That is insanity and it makes no sense.

No one begrudges BT good, fluffy rules. What we begrudge is these subfactions getting MORE than entire Xenos factions. As Walrus said - my Speed Freeks/Evil Sunz should have exactly the same rule depth as these new Marine subfactions. They're nowhere near currently and though people keep saying "be patient" and "it's coming", nothing and I mean nothing suggests this. Quite the opposite, given the piss poor stuff Eldar got in Phoenix Rising.

GW need to take a good, hard look at their priorities or they risk ostracising a massive portion of their playerbase and they risk losing players (and therefore money).

I do see the point, but the reason I took issue is the way it was redirected as snarky comments toward BT players. I don't recall (and in fairness I don't read Dakka all the time) anyone giving Orks that level of snark when we had Orktober last year. The general community feel was "hey cool. Good for the Orks.", and frankly I think that should be the attitude when factions - like say BT - get some love when they haven't really had much attention in 5 editions.

Rail on GW with "wtf? X faction needs help!" and I don't think you will get much flack. Hell, I bet you will have plenty of people join in. Turning it into "how dare other players be happy they are getting attention! They dont need it, I do! They should check their privilege that they are X faction, and get out of the way of what I want!" is going to receive some push back, and makes things get toxic real quick.

In a perfect world, we would see ALL factions get the depth of rules they need. Maybe I am less Jaded than some of you because I have only been playing 40k for a couple of years, but from what I see in 8th edition it seems that GW has stepped up their game in terms of released and balance updates. We get Chapter Approved Q4 every year, and two large scale FAQ's each year - but this last one felt very small. I think that's progress compared to what I have been told 40k players have been given in years past.

I know that you are unhappy to some degree with where Orks currently are, but aren't they in a better place than before Orktober last year? There was improvement, yes? Hell, Spikey Bits just posted a link showing that Orks took 3rd in some tournament recently. Might be an outlier, but they aren't hot garbage it seems.

TLDR - Yes, understand the point, but being unhappy with what your chosen faction does or doesn't have should not be license to dump on players of other factions.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
There's an argument that more supplements for Marines actually increases diversity.

It increases the diversity of Marine lists, sure.

All else equal a game where you have a bunch of different Marine builds is more diverse than one where every Marine build is a monobuild. Having more diverse armies is good even if you don't play them yourself.

EDIT: I guess the way I see it, releases for the macro faction of a subfaction isn't necessarily beneficial to all the subfactions. An Ork Speed Freeks player wouldn't benefit much from better Lootas, an Iyanden player isn't benefitted from a hypothetical Shining Spears release, and a Black Templars player doesn't benefit when a bunch of stuff that's great for Ultramarines is released.

I gotta disagree. Let's compare the recent release for a second as a microcosm of this:

Drukhari are a single faction that have been functionally splintered. You CAN take a detachment that just has the DRUKHARI keyword, but it's the same as taking a detachment that just has the ASTARTES keyword - you lose all subfaction traits, stratagems, benefits etc.

The codex has been split into 3 - Wych Cults, Kabals, and Covens. For the most part with a few exceptions (The Fliers can be taken by both Cults and Kabals, and Transports are agnostic) the units of a certain type have been shunted into one particular subgroup.

All the fast, melee oriented units have been shuffled into Wych Cults (including Reavers, Beast Packs and Hellions, who are in fluff mercenaries who could be hired by any group)
All the shooting units have been sorted into Kabals.
All the tough, slow melee units have been put into Covens.

Compare to CWE, which are if anything, one of the most open factions in the game. They have a HUGE unit range and even their named characters can go with any faction except for a couple.

GW released two sets of custom chapter tactics in PA, I believe both had 22 traits in them. However, the CWE factions all got the same big list, and Drukhari factions got a trisected list of 7, 7, and 8.

There's no huge gulf of quality between the CWE traits and the Drukhari traits, but there are very, very few combinations of drukhari traits worth even considering. Kabals are saddled with several traits oriented toward melee and toward durability, despite being a faction of only T3 5+ bodies with exactly 0 dedicated melee units. Wych traits are mostly melee based which is good, and they're widely considered the best of the bunch, but the lower number of traits they were given does reduce their overall usefulness. Haemonculus Covens have 1 combo people are talking about.

By contrast there are around 10 CWE traits worth considering, in any combination, versus the best premade Craftworld rules. The more possible combinations you have that you can apply to the more possible combinations of units, the more you can make those builds work for you. a 6++ invuln trait would be useless if CWE were divided and the faction that got that trait was the "Wraithhosts" subfaction, but given the option to take a whole list of flimsy guardians, it's worth thinking about.

And then there's...well, the exact problem BT are having right now, which is the issue of same unit, very different rules. When (not if) gw gets back on their bs trying to balance the game by tweaking unit points values in Chapter Approved, how confident are you that they won't change Intercessors because of how good they are with, say, IF and UM and end up nerfing your mostly melee-focused BTs?

Bespoke subfaction rules make people FEEL really, really good. But their effect on balance versus just giving the units they benefit most the rules they need is...pretty debatable IMO.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I get the argument, but you're drawing those conclusions too soon.

This has already happened, we've seen these numbers from events since the SM codex dropped. Other factions have quickly all but disappeared from the top 4s at events.

True I mean orks in 2nd and 4th at midtcon, a tourney won by renegade knights, 2 gsc top places, orks 3rd at glass hammer open. There are more marines but tell me other factions can't beat them.

Be bored of marines. I'm bored of people acting like the tourney scene is the entire world and I'm bored of people whining about space marines.

It won't stop me playing but it does make me want to not care about other factions (which is concerning as a none marine player).

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
There's an argument that more supplements for Marines actually increases diversity.

It increases the diversity of Marine lists, sure.

All else equal a game where you have a bunch of different Marine builds is more diverse than one where every Marine build is a monobuild. Having more diverse armies is good even if you don't play them yourself.

Yes but all else isn't equal. The diversity of different lists has actually dropped as all of those factions that aren't SM have virtually disappeared from competitive play. No more Orks. No more Eldar. No more Dark Eldar. No more Ynnari. No more Necrons. No more Tau. You get the picture?

Source for previously mentioned tournament - https://spikeybits.com/2019/10/this-weeks-top-3-homebrew-40k-army-lists-for-the-meta.html

1 - IF
2 - GSC
3 - Orks

the_scotsman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
There's an argument that more supplements for Marines actually increases diversity.

It increases the diversity of Marine lists, sure.

All else equal a game where you have a bunch of different Marine builds is more diverse than one where every Marine build is a monobuild. Having more diverse armies is good even if you don't play them yourself.

EDIT: I guess the way I see it, releases for the macro faction of a subfaction isn't necessarily beneficial to all the subfactions. An Ork Speed Freeks player wouldn't benefit much from better Lootas, an Iyanden player isn't benefitted from a hypothetical Shining Spears release, and a Black Templars player doesn't benefit when a bunch of stuff that's great for Ultramarines is released.

I gotta disagree. Let's compare the recent release for a second as a microcosm of this:

Drukhari are a single faction that have been functionally splintered. You CAN take a detachment that just has the DRUKHARI keyword, but it's the same as taking a detachment that just has the ASTARTES keyword - you lose all subfaction traits, stratagems, benefits etc.

The codex has been split into 3 - Wych Cults, Kabals, and Covens. For the most part with a few exceptions (The Fliers can be taken by both Cults and Kabals, and Transports are agnostic) the units of a certain type have been shunted into one particular subgroup.

All the fast, melee oriented units have been shuffled into Wych Cults (including Reavers, Beast Packs and Hellions, who are in fluff mercenaries who could be hired by any group)
All the shooting units have been sorted into Kabals.
All the tough, slow melee units have been put into Covens.

Compare to CWE, which are if anything, one of the most open factions in the game. They have a HUGE unit range and even their named characters can go with any faction except for a couple.

GW released two sets of custom chapter tactics in PA, I believe both had 22 traits in them. However, the CWE factions all got the same big list, and Drukhari factions got a trisected list of 7, 7, and 8.

There's no huge gulf of quality between the CWE traits and the Drukhari traits, but there are very, very few combinations of drukhari traits worth even considering. Kabals are saddled with several traits oriented toward melee and toward durability, despite being a faction of only T3 5+ bodies with exactly 0 dedicated melee units. Wych traits are mostly melee based which is good, and they're widely considered the best of the bunch, but the lower number of traits they were given does reduce their overall usefulness. Haemonculus Covens have 1 combo people are talking about.

By contrast there are around 10 CWE traits worth considering, in any combination, versus the best premade Craftworld rules. The more possible combinations you have that you can apply to the more possible combinations of units, the more you can make those builds work for you. a 6++ invuln trait would be useless if CWE were divided and the faction that got that trait was the "Wraithhosts" subfaction, but given the option to take a whole list of flimsy guardians, it's worth thinking about.

And then there's...well, the exact problem BT are having right now, which is the issue of same unit, very different rules. When (not if) gw gets back on their bs trying to balance the game by tweaking unit points values in Chapter Approved, how confident are you that they won't change Intercessors because of how good they are with, say, IF and UM and end up nerfing your mostly melee-focused BTs?

Bespoke subfaction rules make people FEEL really, really good. But their effect on balance versus just giving the units they benefit most the rules they need is...pretty debatable IMO.

That's not much different from Orks getting repeatedly dumpstered or Chaos getting to be great for two months at the start of 6th edition. The problem is not intrinsic to supplements, it's in making some abilities far stronger than others (cf. Word Bearers vs, Alpha Legion).

I apologize for the tone. I read a post about "if you want a xenos army, go build it out of greenstuff" a few pages back, and it got me annoyed. If marines get an extra-special supplement treatment where they get special doctrines, unique stratagems, WL traits and relics and everybody else just gets pick your own chapter tactics, then BT's more than deserve to get their fancy piece of that pie as well. My irritation is more directed at that particular design paradigm (which if rumors and current books are to be believed, is in fact what we are getting) than with any BT players or fans.

 Karthicus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Karthicus wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
eh, whatever. Sure. Black Templars, a single subfaction within Codex: Space Marines, should probably get more rules content in PA than Codex: Drukhari. Give 'em the seven-layer dip chapter tactics, the special stratagems, their own relics, feth it, why not templaromancy psychic powers! How 'bout a special dreadnought with a sword, dreadnoughts haven't got swords yet.

Thanks for proving my point. How about you actually contribute something useful to the thread? We don't even have the BT content released yet and you are throwing a temper tantrum.

Surely you see his point though right?

A subfaction of a faction (BT) get MORE love and rules than an entire faction in DE or CWE. That is insanity and it makes no sense.

No one begrudges BT good, fluffy rules. What we begrudge is these subfactions getting MORE than entire Xenos factions. As Walrus said - my Speed Freeks/Evil Sunz should have exactly the same rule depth as these new Marine subfactions. They're nowhere near currently and though people keep saying "be patient" and "it's coming", nothing and I mean nothing suggests this. Quite the opposite, given the piss poor stuff Eldar got in Phoenix Rising.

GW need to take a good, hard look at their priorities or they risk ostracising a massive portion of their playerbase and they risk losing players (and therefore money).

I do see the point, but the reason I took issue is the way it was redirected as snarky comments toward BT players. I don't recall (and in fairness I don't read Dakka all the time) anyone giving Orks that level of snark when we had Orktober last year. The general community feel was "hey cool. Good for the Orks.", and frankly I think that should be the attitude when factions - like say BT - get some love when they haven't really had much attention in 5 editions.

Rail on GW with "wtf? X faction needs help!" and I don't think you will get much flack. Hell, I bet you will have plenty of people join in. Turning it into "how dare other players be happy they are getting attention! They dont need it, I do! They should check their privilege that they are X faction, and get out of the way of what I want!" is going to receive some push back, and makes things get toxic real quick.

In a perfect world, we would see ALL factions get the depth of rules they need. Maybe I am less Jaded than some of you because I have only been playing 40k for a couple of years, but from what I see in 8th edition it seems that GW has stepped up their game in terms of released and balance updates. We get Chapter Approved Q4 every year, and two large scale FAQ's each year - but this last one felt very small. I think that's progress compared to what I have been told 40k players have been given in years past.

I know that you are unhappy to some degree with where Orks currently are, but aren't they in a better place than before Orktober last year? There was improvement, yes? Hell, Spikey Bits just posted a link showing that Orks took 3rd in some tournament recently. Might be an outlier, but they aren't hot garbage it seems.

TLDR - Yes, understand the point, but being unhappy with what your chosen faction does or doesn't have should not be license to dump on players of other factions.

Really Orktober?? bad choice - given that we saw guess how much Marine focus in that period.

I would like to see a BT supplement as I am lore person - but I think we marine players should do what many marines cosntantly tell OTHER people - wait a bit - let other Full Factions get some stuff. Just for one Week would be nice.

Scotsman - No harm, no foul. I am sure being told to make some green stuff would irritate me as well. The two Eldar players that I game with seem to be fairly happy with where they are at a faction, but that being a small sample size I am trying to figure out what the issues are. I can say that both of them picked up the box that just came out as well. They were both stoked about it. I did a double take at the price, and am NOT looking forward to the idea of paying $230 for a BT box.

Morden - Why is that a bad example? It was a month dedicated to the Orks. I don't recall a bunch of SM releases during that time. Feel free to enlighten me.

To suggest that non-SM factions haven't gotten at least a single week of time in the spotlight is absurd.

 Karthicus wrote:

To suggest that non-SM factions haven't gotten at least a single week of time in the spotlight is absurd.

Not what I said - they are ALWAYS overshaddowed by Marines showcases, models, supplements, releases etc etc - always

I've spent three editions being told how lucky I am that BT got rolled into Codex Space Marines because it means I can play with all the stuff that I didn't give two hoots about. "Be patient, just let other people get some stuff!" is half of what I've been told for ten years, while the other half is "look at all this stuff you're getting (that does you no good), stop being so entitled!". And that's when people don't want my army just deleted outright so that they can have more of whatever their own pet project is.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I've spent three editions being told how lucky I am that BT got rolled into Codex Space Marines because it means I can play with all the stuff that I didn't give two hoots about. "Be patient, just let other people get some stuff!" is half of what I've been told for ten years, while the other half is "look at all this stuff you're getting (that does you no good), stop being so entitled!". And that's when people don't want my army just deleted outright so that they can have more of whatever their own pet project is.

I collect Black Templars.

True or false - Black Templars as a sub-sub-Faction of the Imperium have their own Relic, Characters (with models), unique units etc? yes they don't get the vast amount of stuff that the Wolves and the Angels get but thats more than many subfactions. Hell its more than the entire Sisters of Silence Faction gets and they, like the bT have thousands of elite warriors.

Oh and of course our BT got the Marine boosts - none of them any use?

Oh and the super special Drop Pod rules that no-one else is allowed to have anything similar.

You might not want or like the huge number of recent models that are no available but just for a moment consider all those Full factions that have not been given anything.....that you are telling should just wait because you want yet more Marine stuff.

Umm. As I've seen three new unread pages in this thread I was excited for a short amount of time before realising that I'll only see more whining from anyone. Gimme some leaks and please discuss somewhere else.

Dudeface wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I get the argument, but you're drawing those conclusions too soon.

This has already happened, we've seen these numbers from events since the SM codex dropped. Other factions have quickly all but disappeared from the top 4s at events.

True I mean orks in 2nd and 4th at midtcon, a tourney won by renegade knights, 2 gsc top places, orks 3rd at glass hammer open. There are more marines but tell me other factions can't beat them.

I didn't say other factions can't beat them. And are you seriously going to go down the statistical analysis route? Really? If you had looked at the data at all you must know that it doesn't reflect well on your argument.

Here's a statement from Panda who compiles the top 4 every week, this statement is from this week;

Panda wrote:Panda's Weekend Rundown 10.19-10.20
40k Event Results

Space Marines drop from 67% of all top 4’s down to 55%; IH drop down to 40% [/u][b]from 50%.

Yay.

Wow look at all that balance. They were only 67% of ALL TOP 4s?! So balanced. Now they're just 55%?! One faction. Accounting for 55% of ALL TOP 4 RESULTS. Awesome.

How many Ork lists did we have in the top 4 last week, I hear you cry? They must be up there, right?! 1. 1 Ork list.

How many SM lists did we have last week in the top 4 last week? Surely it's not too many because *balance*! 12! 12 SM lists out of 20 total lists at 5 events.

AND THIS IS AN IMPROVEMENT ON PREVIOUS WEEKS.

 Karthicus wrote:
Source for previously mentioned tournament - https://spikeybits.com/2019/10/this-weeks-top-3-homebrew-40k-army-lists-for-the-meta.html

1 - IF
2 - GSC
3 - Orks

See above, you think one event with an Ork player finishing third somehow excuses the utter Marine dominance? I don't think so.

 Karthicus wrote:
Morden - Why is that a bad example? It was a month dedicated to the Orks. I don't recall a bunch of SM releases during that time. Feel free to enlighten me.

I'll try to be gentle. This so called "month dedicated to Orks" had 0 Ork releases and a boxed set with, guess what, a NeW pRImarIS LEUitenaNT and a new Wraithseer in something called WRATH OF THE DEAD. It also had a new Kill Team set for Tau and SW I believe. Are you enlightened now?

Oh good Gork (or was it Mork?), Orktober and the time for whining about it was a year ago. Let it go, man. Let it go.

It was such a disappointment though.
I mean, a Month "dedicated" to Orks, and there were non-Ork articles and 6 buggies that aren't even that good? What about all those kits in finecast that needs updating? Orktober should have been the buggies + plastic Tankbustas + plastic Kommandos + Deffkopters + plastic Weirdboy + Big Mek kit that can be either built with KFF or SAG + Plastic Warboss in Mega Armor kit.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Oh good Gork (or was it Mork?), Orktober and the time for whining about it was a year ago. Let it go, man. Let it go.

You say this as if I'm the one that brought it up.

I'm over it. It doesn't mean I'm going to pretend that it was the best time to be an Ork player and that we had a ton of releases as was claimed.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Oh good Gork (or was it Mork?), Orktober and the time for whining about it was a year ago. Let it go, man. Let it go.

Soo the Marine player who was the one who brought it up as an example of why marines need more stuff was in the right - got it.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I get the argument, but you're drawing those conclusions too soon.

This has already happened, we've seen these numbers from events since the SM codex dropped. Other factions have quickly all but disappeared from the top 4s at events.

True I mean orks in 2nd and 4th at midtcon, a tourney won by renegade knights, 2 gsc top places, orks 3rd at glass hammer open. There are more marines but tell me other factions can't beat them.

I didn't say other factions can't beat them. And are you seriously going to go down the statistical analysis route? Really? If you had looked at the data at all you must know that it doesn't reflect well on your argument.

Here's a statement from Panda who compiles the top 4 every week, this statement is from this week;

Panda wrote:Panda's Weekend Rundown 10.19-10.20
40k Event Results

Space Marines drop from 67% of all top 4’s down to 55%; IH drop down to 40% [/u][b]from 50%.

Yay.

Wow look at all that balance. They were only 67% of ALL TOP 4s?! So balanced. Now they're just 55%?! One faction. Accounting for 55% of ALL TOP 4 RESULTS. Awesome.

How many Ork lists did we have in the top 4 last week, I hear you cry? They must be up there, right?! 1. 1 Ork list.

How many SM lists did we have last week in the top 4 last week? Surely it's not too many because *balance*! 12! 12 SM lists out of 20 total lists at 5 events.

AND THIS IS AN IMPROVEMENT ON PREVIOUS WEEKS.

 Karthicus wrote:
Source for previously mentioned tournament - https://spikeybits.com/2019/10/this-weeks-top-3-homebrew-40k-army-lists-for-the-meta.html

1 - IF
2 - GSC
3 - Orks

See above, you think one event with an Ork player finishing third somehow excuses the utter Marine dominance? I don't think so.

 Karthicus wrote:
Morden - Why is that a bad example? It was a month dedicated to the Orks. I don't recall a bunch of SM releases during that time. Feel free to enlighten me.

I'll try to be gentle. This so called "month dedicated to Orks" had 0 Ork releases and a boxed set with, guess what, a NeW pRImarIS LEUitenaNT and a new Wraithseer in something called WRATH OF THE DEAD. It also had a new Kill Team set for Tau and SW I believe. Are you enlightened now?

September onwards marines have a 56.5% faction win rate. Drukhari are 55%, thousand sons 54% hell harlequins are 53%.

So yes, marines are on top by a tiny margin. Let's top it off, they've been top dogs what, a whole 3 months max? All this hatred and hostility because someone that isn't you, is winning tournaments you're not at, with a faction you don't play.

We get it, you dont like marines, arguing on here won't help that. Just let the thread be about the goddamn release and its contents rather than bickering with anyone who doesn't agree with your perspective.

Please let this be the end of the discussion on what factions do or do not deserve or who needs the smallest violin.

I don't mind the Space Marine double feature as the next Psychic Awakening, even after it following another Space Marine launch wave, if it results in other factions finally getting the spotlight. No trying to wedge in a Space Marine launch with the Tau release in Psychic Awakening or anything of the sort to try to redirect attention away from who should be getting some much deserved attention.

Dudeface wrote:
September onwards marines have a 56.5% faction win rate. Drukhari are 55%, thousand sons 54% hell harlequins are 53%.

So? Those factions aren't broken because they AREN'T THE MAJORITY OF TOP 4s AT EVENTS.

So yes, marines are on top by a tiny margin.

No, they're not. The margin is massive.

Let's top it off, they've been top dogs what, a whole 3 months max? All this hatred and hostility because someone that isn't you, is winning tournaments you're not at, with a faction you don't play.

I don't have any hatred or hostility, the reason I'm irritated with regards to their results is because they are/were broken. When a singular codex accounts for 55% of all top 4s across all large tournaments across the world there is a problem. I would be saying the exact same thing if the faction in question was mine (Orks).

We get it, you dont like marines, arguing on here won't help that. Just let the thread be about the goddamn release and its contents rather than bickering with anyone who doesn't agree with your perspective.

Please let this be the end of the discussion on what factions do or do not deserve or who needs the smallest violin.

I actually quite like marines, they're superhuman badasses in suits of armour that makes them a walking tank. That's awesome. The thing I dislike about marines is GW's obsession with them. Again, I'd say the same thing if this were the case for any other faction in the game.

As to the current topic, the reason we're discussing marine releases and rules is because I provided rumours around the contents of the next PA volume. People have expressed disappointment at the focus on marines. Others have said it's justified because BT get very little and deserve a buff. I think it's still vaguely on topic but if you disagree and have nothing to add (apart from telling me not to participate), feel free to leave.

Good advice at last, I think this site isn't for me anymore.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I wish Imperial Fists has a "Count as Devastator Doctrine" strat. It would help immensely.

Black Templars being able to grab units and make them stay in CC is really cool and thematic. I hope there is more stuff like that for other units (Blood Angels and Word Bearers would make sense to have something like that).

There is a strat in C:SM that lets us back up a doctrine, so you could go Devastator > Tactical > Devastator in a game.

Dudeface wrote:
September onwards marines have a 56.5% faction win rate. Drukhari are 55%, thousand sons 54% hell harlequins are 53%.

So yes, marines are on top by a tiny margin. Let's top it off, they've been top dogs what, a whole 3 months max? All this hatred and hostility because someone that isn't you, is winning tournaments you're not at, with a faction you don't play.

We get it, you dont like marines, arguing on here won't help that. Just let the thread be about the goddamn release and its contents rather than bickering with anyone who doesn't agree with your perspective.

Please let this be the end of the discussion on what factions do or do not deserve or who needs the smallest violin.

I'd argue that the mono-faction win rate gives a better indication as to the overall strength of a Codex... and since September the Marines have been both the most played mono faction (understandable, since they're the only Codex with a Combat Doctrine equivalent) and also the highest win rate by far at 57% (barring 3 plucky Thousand Sons players who apparently did very well).

Harlequins, on the other hand, are way down at a 37% win rate. Slotting Skyweavers into other lists? Great. Actually running a Harlequins army? Decidedly not great.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

I'll try to be gentle. This so called "month dedicated to Orks" had 0 Ork releases and a boxed set with, guess what, a NeW pRImarIS LEUitenaNT and a new Wraithseer in something called WRATH OF THE DEAD. It also had a new Kill Team set for Tau and SW I believe. Are you enlightened now?

And ~6 new kits and codex. All releases were just crammed into two weeks.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Karthicus wrote:

To suggest that non-SM factions haven't gotten at least a single week of time in the spotlight is absurd.

Not what I said - they are ALWAYS overshaddowed by Marines showcases, models, supplements, releases etc etc - always

Keeping in line with the example.... What was Orktober "overshadowed" by? Enlighten me.

Edit - Adding from what AAE said...

I'll try to be gentle. This so called "month dedicated to Orks" had 0 Ork releases and a boxed set with, guess what, a NeW pRImarIS LEUitenaNT and a new Wraithseer in something called WRATH OF THE DEAD. It also had a new Kill Team set for Tau and SW I believe. Are you enlightened now?

Perhaps dedicated was the wrong word to use, but that was the main focus for that month. I went back and looked over the community posts, and Orks dominated the news. Isn't that also when your last Codex dropped? Regardless, from some of the responses here, it seems this was a really bad example to use as Morden said. My bad.

terry wrote:
Don't forget, guard still has metal and finecast models, like the primaris psyker, crusaders, dead cults etc.

Death Cults and Crusaders are Ministorum units so will likely see updates with the Sisters. The Primaris Psyker and Crusaders got a plastic update in BSF, so the digital sculpts exist to do blister packs with too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Csm won't get anything.
Remember we are allready 2.0 (1.1 really)
And show up in competitive (as codex alphaslaaneshobliterterminator with a bit off purge) so we are fine and Dandy.

Nah. 1.5 maybe, but not 2.0.

tneva82 wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

I'll try to be gentle. This so called "month dedicated to Orks" had 0 Ork releases and a boxed set with, guess what, a NeW pRImarIS LEUitenaNT and a new Wraithseer in something called WRATH OF THE DEAD. It also had a new Kill Team set for Tau and SW I believe. Are you enlightened now?

And ~6 new kits and codex. All releases were just crammed into two weeks.

They were available in November.

Pre-orders were last week of October.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Wow look at all that balance. They were only 67% of ALL TOP 4s?! So balanced. Now they're just 55%?! One faction. Accounting for 55% of ALL TOP 4 RESULTS. Awesome.

If the Marines were 67% of all tournament armies entered (or more) then it's actually fine and healthy. If they're less than that then we have an issue.

You can't just look at that number without comparing it to the overall tournament turnout after all.

Removed - BrookM

 ClockworkZion wrote:

terry wrote:
Don't forget, guard still has metal and finecast models, like the primaris psyker, crusaders, dead cults etc.

Death Cults and Crusaders are Ministorum units so will likely see updates with the Sisters. The Primaris Psyker and Crusaders got a plastic update in BSF, so the digital sculpts exist to do blister packs with too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Csm won't get anything.
Remember we are allready 2.0 (1.1 really)
And show up in competitive (as codex alphaslaaneshobliterterminator with a bit off purge) so we are fine and Dandy.

Nah. 1.5 maybe, but not 2.0.

There is also a plastic DCA in Rogue Trader. If GW just...designed rules like they used to, and allowed players to use the existing models or convert them as they like to some new weapon options, the only Inquisition/Ministorium model that would need an update in plastic now (not counting arcos and penitents, which have been previewed) are:

-the actual inquisitors.
-Jokaero.
-daemonhost.

We've got amazing acolyte sculpts in the form of the various human sculpts from Rogue Trader, Necromunda, BSF and its expansions. More variation and customizability than you could ever possibly want, especially if they released 40k rules for all the weapon options that they have sculpts for in necromunda, not even having to violate the sacred No Model No Rules

We've got plastic DCA, plastic crusaders, plastic primaris psykers, and plastic ministorum priests covered.

Can you imagine how freakin sweet an Inquisition/Imperial Agents codex would be with the following unit lineup?



Nothing in that list would require breaking No Model No Rules, the vast majority of it would be plastic, it would bring every rando plastic kit they've released for Specialist Games into full 40k in a way that would be fun, customizable and fluffy, and it would have a more filled-out roster than a lot of full model books.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

terry wrote:
Don't forget, guard still has metal and finecast models, like the primaris psyker, crusaders, dead cults etc.

Death Cults and Crusaders are Ministorum units so will likely see updates with the Sisters. The Primaris Psyker and Crusaders got a plastic update in BSF, so the digital sculpts exist to do blister packs with too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Csm won't get anything.
Remember we are allready 2.0 (1.1 really)
And show up in competitive (as codex alphaslaaneshobliterterminator with a bit off purge) so we are fine and Dandy.

Nah. 1.5 maybe, but not 2.0.

For what do you assume the () stands?

Not Online!!! wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

terry wrote:
Don't forget, guard still has metal and finecast models, like the primaris psyker, crusaders, dead cults etc.

Death Cults and Crusaders are Ministorum units so will likely see updates with the Sisters. The Primaris Psyker and Crusaders got a plastic update in BSF, so the digital sculpts exist to do blister packs with too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Csm won't get anything.
Remember we are allready 2.0 (1.1 really)
And show up in competitive (as codex alphaslaaneshobliterterminator with a bit off purge) so we are fine and Dandy.

Nah. 1.5 maybe, but not 2.0.

For what do you assume the () stands?

Point was that C:SM looks like the true start of the 2.0 line. The CSM update was just to roll Vigilus in so they could eventually retire the book.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Wow look at all that balance. They were only 67% of ALL TOP 4s?! So balanced. Now they're just 55%?! One faction. Accounting for 55% of ALL TOP 4 RESULTS. Awesome.

If the Marines were 67% of all tournament armies entered (or more) then it's actually fine and healthy. If they're less than that then we have an issue.

You can't just look at that number without comparing it to the overall tournament turnout after all.

You don't think it's a problem if 67% of competitive players all decide at the same time to switch to one faction? You don't think there's a reason they might be doing that (if that were the case)?

Really?

They weren't, by the way.

Removed - BrookM

I don't understand the Ork issue at all. You got a Speed Freaks box plus several new vehicles, all which look cool as hell. Quit moaning.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Wow look at all that balance. They were only 67% of ALL TOP 4s?! So balanced. Now they're just 55%?! One faction. Accounting for 55% of ALL TOP 4 RESULTS. Awesome.

If the Marines were 67% of all tournament armies entered (or more) then it's actually fine and healthy. If they're less than that then we have an issue.

You can't just look at that number without comparing it to the overall tournament turnout after all.

You don't think it's a problem if 67% of competitive players all decide at the same time to switch to one faction? You don't think there's a reason they might be doing that (if that were the case)?

Really?

They weren't, by the way.

Considering more than 67% of the player base owns a Marine army that was likely collecting dust before this update? Not really. And tournaments ALWAYS chase the latest update. I can't think of a codex update that hasn't seen a spike of players, especially when that codex is a Marine based one and anyone's off-brand successor chapter can run it since it was painted specifically to let it hop books as often as possible.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
It's a shame GW aren't clued in to the fact that every player of a faction really identifies with their chosen subfaction and wants them to feel distinct on the battlefield.

It shouldn't just apply to Marines of both flavours - it needs to apply to every goddamn faction in the game.

Not true. I play Sisters, I got my own personal Order (the Order of the Ebon Lance), but it's really just a name and a paintjob. I would be very annoyed to be forced to be forced to play one of the main order, but beside that I don't really mind if there aren't subfaction traits. I mean, Sisters have always been one of the few very homogeneous organization on the Imperium.
Similarly, having Custodes subfactions is… weird as hell. And I doubt many Tyranid players have a strong attachment to their own hive fleet, given that I still see all tyranids as part of the same hive mind, but I guess YMMV.

 bullyboy wrote:
I don't understand the Ork issue at all. You got a Speed Freaks box plus several new vehicles, all which look cool as hell. Quit moaning.

I could say the same thing about the Blood of the Phoenix box.

Not that I'm moaning about the Orktober release of last year.

I'm talking about the releases THIS YEAR.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
It's a shame GW aren't clued in to the fact that every player of a faction really identifies with their chosen subfaction and wants them to feel distinct on the battlefield.

It shouldn't just apply to Marines of both flavours - it needs to apply to every goddamn faction in the game.

Not true. I play Sisters, I got my own personal Order (the Order of the Ebon Lance), but it's really just a name and a paintjob. I would be very annoyed to be forced to be forced to play one of the main order, but beside that I don't really mind if there aren't subfaction traits. I mean, Sisters have always been one of the few very homogeneous organization on the Imperium.
Similarly, having Custodes subfactions is… weird as hell. And I doubt many Tyranid players have a strong attachment to their own hive fleet, given that I still see all tyranids as part of the same hive mind, but I guess YMMV.

OK not every player. 95% of them. Obviously if you play a "mono (sub) faction" like Custodes, Death Guard, Thousand Sons etc then this won't apply.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Considering more than 67% of the player base owns a Marine army that was likely collecting dust before this update?

Citation Needed

Not really. And tournaments ALWAYS chase the latest update. I can't think of a codex update that hasn't seen a spike of players, especially when that codex is a Marine based one and anyone's off-brand successor chapter can run it since it was painted specifically to let it hop books as often as possible.

There are the stats if you can be bothered to find them. I believe they are sub 20% of the players but still very high. I can't remember the exact figure, you'll have to dig it out yourself.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Considering more than 67% of the player base owns a Marine army that was likely collecting dust before this update?

Citation Needed

Not really. And tournaments ALWAYS chase the latest update. I can't think of a codex update that hasn't seen a spike of players, especially when that codex is a Marine based one and anyone's off-brand successor chapter can run it since it was painted specifically to let it hop books as often as possible.

There are the stats if you can be bothered to find them. I believe they are sub 20% of the players but still very high. I can't remember the exact figure, you'll have to dig it out yourself.

I can't give hard numbers (at least not without too much work on my side) but considering Marines make up a majority of the sales for 40k it's safe to say they make up a majority of active players too.

And stats for what exactly? For the number of people who army hop? The percentage of people who already owned a Marine army? The average jump in number of armies for a given faction upon new release?

And why would I spend all my time looking for any of that?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Obviously if you play a "mono (sub) faction" like Custodes, Death Guard, Thousand Sons etc then this won't apply.

Custodes aren't a subfaction. GW has been pushing subfactions into monofactions, in order to give every codex the same toolset.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Considering more than 67% of the player base owns a Marine army that was likely collecting dust before this update?

Citation Needed

Not really. And tournaments ALWAYS chase the latest update. I can't think of a codex update that hasn't seen a spike of players, especially when that codex is a Marine based one and anyone's off-brand successor chapter can run it since it was painted specifically to let it hop books as often as possible.

There are the stats if you can be bothered to find them. I believe they are sub 20% of the players but still very high. I can't remember the exact figure, you'll have to dig it out yourself.

I can't give hard numbers (at least not without too much work on my side) but considering Marines make up a majority of the sales for 40k it's safe to say they make up a majority of active players too.

And stats for what exactly? For the number of people who army hop? The percentage of people who already owned a Marine army? The average jump in number of armies for a given faction upon new release?

And why would I spend all my time looking for any of that?

Stats for exactly what you're disputing? Marine players at tournaments, despite your unfounded belief that a - everyone owns a marine army and b - everyone desperately wants to play their marine army, are less than 20% (I believe). They are a high proportion still, relatively, but they are nowhere near 67%.

Now can we stop trying to defend an OP faction with this circular, bogus logic? We all know it's stupid and the only real saving grace is that marines have been so weak and bland for most of the edition they kinda deserve their time. That does not excuse the relentless focus in terms of models but there we are.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Considering more than 67% of the player base owns a Marine army that was likely collecting dust before this update?

Citation Needed

Not really. And tournaments ALWAYS chase the latest update. I can't think of a codex update that hasn't seen a spike of players, especially when that codex is a Marine based one and anyone's off-brand successor chapter can run it since it was painted specifically to let it hop books as often as possible.

There are the stats if you can be bothered to find them. I believe they are sub 20% of the players but still very high. I can't remember the exact figure, you'll have to dig it out yourself.

I can't give hard numbers (at least not without too much work on my side) but considering Marines make up a majority of the sales for 40k it's safe to say they make up a majority of active players too.

And stats for what exactly? For the number of people who army hop? The percentage of people who already owned a Marine army? The average jump in number of armies for a given faction upon new release?

And why would I spend all my time looking for any of that?

Stats for exactly what you're disputing? Marine players at tournaments, despite your unfounded belief that a - everyone owns a marine army and b - everyone desperately wants to play their marine army, are less than 20% (I believe). They are a high proportion still, relatively, but they are nowhere near 67%.

Now can we stop trying to defend an OP faction with this circular, bogus logic? We all know it's stupid and the only real saving grace is that marines have been so weak and bland for most of the edition they kinda deserve their time. That does not excuse the relentless focus in terms of models but there we are.

You're the one whose trying to prove there is an issue with the number of Marine armies in the tournament scene right now, so the burden proof is on you. You provided non, so I need non to dismiss your claims. I was trying to at least use logic to dismiss them instead of laughing at you and blowing you off.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Obviously if you play a "mono (sub) faction" like Custodes, Death Guard, Thousand Sons etc then this won't apply.

Custodes aren't a subfaction. GW has been pushing subfactions into monofactions, in order to give every codex the same toolset.

Since when and for whom? Because so far only marines have this and it's a very recent thing.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Considering more than 67% of the player base owns a Marine army that was likely collecting dust before this update?

Citation Needed

Not really. And tournaments ALWAYS chase the latest update. I can't think of a codex update that hasn't seen a spike of players, especially when that codex is a Marine based one and anyone's off-brand successor chapter can run it since it was painted specifically to let it hop books as often as possible.

There are the stats if you can be bothered to find them. I believe they are sub 20% of the players but still very high. I can't remember the exact figure, you'll have to dig it out yourself.

I can't give hard numbers (at least not without too much work on my side) but considering Marines make up a majority of the sales for 40k it's safe to say they make up a majority of active players too.

And stats for what exactly? For the number of people who army hop? The percentage of people who already owned a Marine army? The average jump in number of armies for a given faction upon new release?

And why would I spend all my time looking for any of that?

Stats for exactly what you're disputing? Marine players at tournaments, despite your unfounded belief that a - everyone owns a marine army and b - everyone desperately wants to play their marine army, are less than 20% (I believe). They are a high proportion still, relatively, but they are nowhere near 67%.

Now can we stop trying to defend an OP faction with this circular, bogus logic? We all know it's stupid and the only real saving grace is that marines have been so weak and bland for most of the edition they kinda deserve their time. That does not excuse the relentless focus in terms of models but there we are.

Are they OP though? What's the rate that they show up compared to the number of times they end up in the Top 8? Clearly of 99% of people switched over to using them but they're not basically always Top 8, what's really overpowered here?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Spoiler:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Considering more than 67% of the player base owns a Marine army that was likely collecting dust before this update?

Citation Needed

Not really. And tournaments ALWAYS chase the latest update. I can't think of a codex update that hasn't seen a spike of players, especially when that codex is a Marine based one and anyone's off-brand successor chapter can run it since it was painted specifically to let it hop books as often as possible.

There are the stats if you can be bothered to find them. I believe they are sub 20% of the players but still very high. I can't remember the exact figure, you'll have to dig it out yourself.

I can't give hard numbers (at least not without too much work on my side) but considering Marines make up a majority of the sales for 40k it's safe to say they make up a majority of active players too.

And stats for what exactly? For the number of people who army hop? The percentage of people who already owned a Marine army? The average jump in number of armies for a given faction upon new release?

And why would I spend all my time looking for any of that?

Stats for exactly what you're disputing? Marine players at tournaments, despite your unfounded belief that a - everyone owns a marine army and b - everyone desperately wants to play their marine army, are less than 20% (I believe). They are a high proportion still, relatively, but they are nowhere near 67%.

Now can we stop trying to defend an OP faction with this circular, bogus logic? We all know it's stupid and the only real saving grace is that marines have been so weak and bland for most of the edition they kinda deserve their time. That does not excuse the relentless focus in terms of models but there we are.

You're the one whose trying to prove there is an issue with the number of Marine armies in the tournament scene right now, so the burden proof is on you. You provided non, so I need non to dismiss your claims. I was trying to at least use logic to dismiss them instead of laughing at you and blowing you off.

You've clearly missed my point, despite me spelling it out real clear multiple times.

The reason I can safely say that (Codex) Marines are OP is because of a number of factors, the primary one being how often they finish in the top 4 of large tournaments (it's 55% as of last week's events, as you should be able to see from my previous post) compared to every other faction in the game.

E - I'm wasting my time here with you marine apologists. I've gone back and re-read your initial comment to me that started this discussion and you are clearly strawmanning. I can't be bothered. The long and short is pretty simple - Marines are 55% of the top 4 finishes but account for less than 20% of the total players at tournaments. That's not normal and needs to be addressed.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

You've clearly missed my point, despite me spelling it out real clear multiple times.

The reason I can safely say that (Codex) Marines are OP is because of a number of factors, the primary one being how often they finish in the top 4 of large tournaments (it's 55% as of last week's events, as you should be able to see from my previous post) compared to every other faction in the game.

And yet you have yet to prove they aren't 55% of the armies played. Plus you insisted that people switching to the army is somehow a problem, but haven't proven that either.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

You've clearly missed my point, despite me spelling it out real clear multiple times.

The reason I can safely say that (Codex) Marines are OP is because of a number of factors, the primary one being how often they finish in the top 4 of large tournaments (it's 55% as of last week's events, as you should be able to see from my previous post) compared to every other faction in the game.

And yet you have yet to prove they aren't 55% of the armies played. Plus you insisted that people switching to the army is somehow a problem, but haven't proven that either.

As I said, the stats are out there but I can't be bothered to find them (again). I've posted them before - look at my post history if you're really interested. Of course you won't bother looking, because you're not interested in an actual (English, heh) discussion, you just want to keep believing that marines are absolutely balanced compared to other factions while rolfstomping your opponents. Have fun with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Are they OP though?

Yes.

What's the rate that they show up compared to the number of times they end up in the Top 8?

They're 55% of the top 4 at the moment and account for sub 20% of the players.

Clearly of 99% of people switched over to using them but they're not basically always Top 8, what's really overpowered here?

False.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

You've clearly missed my point, despite me spelling it out real clear multiple times.

The reason I can safely say that (Codex) Marines are OP is because of a number of factors, the primary one being how often they finish in the top 4 of large tournaments (it's 55% as of last week's events, as you should be able to see from my previous post) compared to every other faction in the game.

And yet you have yet to prove they aren't 55% of the armies played. Plus you insisted that people switching to the army is somehow a problem, but haven't proven that either.

As I said, the stats are out there but I can't be bothered to find them (again). I've posted them before - look at my post history if you're really interested. Of course you won't bother looking, because you're not interested in an actual (English, heh) discussion, you just want to keep believing that marines are absolutely balanced compared to other factions while rolfstomping your opponents. Have fun with that.

You posted a win percentage in a vacuum and went on a tirade while ignoring to post the other data points involved. And I'd be more interested in a discussion if it wasn't on a website where most "discussions" result in an argument as people ignore data in favor for their feelings.

And roflstomping my opponent? With mono-Primaris IF? Not likely. My other army is Sisters and I'm more eager to get that update than the Marine one right now anyways.

Black templars are essentially what greenskinz were in AoS, rarely played, old army. Just do the same, either squat them as separate army or roll them into a bigger codex, where small factions belong.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Since when and for whom? Because so far only marines have this and it's a very recent thing.

Since 8th edition first codex and for, afaik, every faction with a codex and then some.
<Chapter>, <Legion>, <Craftworld>, <Klan>, <Tau planets>, <Kabal>, <Coven>, <Cult>, <Regiment>, <Order>, <Hive Fleet>, <Forge World>, <Masque> and so on and so forth. Which factions doesn't get those? IIRC Custodes don't have keyword but they have fluff about subfactions and reasons to use a different paint scheme.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You posted a win percentage in a vacuum

No, I didn't. Here's my post again. I'll highlight the point that you repeatedly (and presumably, on purpose, keep missing);

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Wow look at all that balance. They were only 67% of ALL TOP 4s?! So balanced. Now they're just 55%?! One faction. Accounting for 55% of ALL TOP 4 RESULTS. Awesome.

and went on a tirade while ignoring to post the other data points involved. And I'd be more interested in a discussion if it wasn't on a website where most "discussions" result in an argument as people ignore data in favor for their feelings.

And roflstomping my opponent? With mono-Primaris IF? Not likely. My other army is Sisters and I'm more eager to get that update than the Marine one right now anyways.

It's hard not to get frustrated when you're discussing something with someone who seems to lack even the most basic understanding of the points raised. I didn't post a win percentage. I posted THE PERCENTAGE OF MARINE LISTS THAT FINISHED IN THE TOP 4 OF ALL MAJOR TOURNAMENTS LAST WEEK. So of the 20 top 4 lists last week, 11 of them (55%) were Marines. For clarity, because you're so desperate to defend your broken boys in yellow - Marine lists account for around 12.5% of the total tournament lists last stats I have. 55% of the top 4 lists. 12.5% of all lists. Please tell me you understand my concerns now?

IF are super strong. Their damage output is insane, but let's not get into that 'discussion' now.

Cronch wrote:
Black templars are essentially what greenskinz were in AoS, rarely played, old army. Just do the same, either squat them as separate army or roll them into a bigger codex, where small factions belong.

Orks are essentially what greenskinz were in Aos, green mean killing machines that worship Gork and Mork. Change my mind.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You posted a win percentage in a vacuum

No, I didn't. Here's my post again. I'll highlight the point that you repeatedly (and presumably, on purpose, keep missing);

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Wow look at all that balance. They were only 67% of ALL TOP 4s?! So balanced. Now they're just 55%?! One faction. Accounting for 55% of ALL TOP 4 RESULTS. Awesome.

and went on a tirade while ignoring to post the other data points involved. And I'd be more interested in a discussion if it wasn't on a website where most "discussions" result in an argument as people ignore data in favor for their feelings.

And roflstomping my opponent? With mono-Primaris IF? Not likely. My other army is Sisters and I'm more eager to get that update than the Marine one right now anyways.

It's hard not to get frustrated when you're discussing something with someone who seems to lack even the most basic understanding of the points raised. I didn't post a win percentage. I posted THE PERCENTAGE OF MARINE LISTS THAT FINISHED IN THE TOP 4 OF ALL MAJOR TOURNAMENTS LAST WEEK. So of the 20 top 4 lists last week, 11 of them (55%) were Marines. For clarity, because you're so desperate to defend your broken boys in yellow - Marine lists account for around 12.5% of the total tournament lists last stats I have. 55% of the top 4 lists. 12.5% of all lists. Please tell me you understand my concerns now?

IF are super strong. Their damage output is insane, but let's not get into that 'discussion' now.

What was the percentage of Marine armies compared to all armies for all those tournies? Is it greater or less than the percentage in the top 4? That's the sign of there being a problem, not how many finished in the top 4 in a vacuum.

And your concerns seem to be more hyperbole back up by emotion than actual fact, so no. Especially since that "insane" damage output is 1-2 extra wounds on average.

Cronch wrote:
Black templars are essentially what greenskinz were in AoS, rarely played, old army. Just do the same, either squat them as separate army or roll them into a bigger codex, where small factions belong.

They're already rolled into Codex: Space Marines. Arguably that's why they don't see much play anymore.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
What was the percentage of Marine armies compared to all armies for all those tournies? Is it greater or less than the percentage in the top 4? That's the sign of there being a problem, not how many finished in the top 4 in a vacuum.

I literally told you in the post of mine that you quoted. 12.5% is the percentage of Marine players compared to all other armies at those tournies. Significantly less than their numbers in the top 4. Get it now?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
What was the percentage of Marine armies compared to all armies for all those tournies? Is it greater or less than the percentage in the top 4? That's the sign of there being a problem, not how many finished in the top 4 in a vacuum.

I literally told you in the post of mine that you quoted. 12.5% is the percentage of Marine players compared to all other armies at those tournies. Significantly less than their numbers in the top 4. Get it now?

Sorry, missed that because my eyes were glazing over reading past the salt you were too busy throwing around.

And you're right, it might be a problem. Seeing as there was a 12% drop from one week to the next though it could be a case that the meta is playing catch up right now. I think two weeks of data might not be enough to tell long term implications of the Marines.

EDIT: And before you start trying to insult me again, I actually have trouble playing armies that win too easily. I'd rather be fluffy over crunchy. I'll leave the game breaking stuff to the tournament players.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Since when and for whom? Because so far only marines have this and it's a very recent thing.

Since 8th edition first codex and for, afaik, every faction with a codex and then some.
<Chapter>, <Legion>, <Craftworld>, <Klan>, <Tau planets>, <Kabal>, <Coven>, <Cult>, <Regiment>, <Order>, <Hive Fleet>, <Forge World>, <Masque> and so on and so forth. Which factions doesn't get those? IIRC Custodes don't have keyword but they have fluff about subfactions and reasons to use a different paint scheme.

Did you miss my post, Actual?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
What was the percentage of Marine armies compared to all armies for all those tournies? Is it greater or less than the percentage in the top 4? That's the sign of there being a problem, not how many finished in the top 4 in a vacuum.

I literally told you in the post of mine that you quoted. 12.5% is the percentage of Marine players compared to all other armies at those tournies. Significantly less than their numbers in the top 4. Get it now?

Sorry, missed that because my eyes were glazing over reading past the salt you were too busy throwing around.

And you're right, it might be a problem. Seeing as there was a 12% drop from one week to the next though it could be a case that the meta is playing catch up right now. I think two weeks of data might not be enough to tell long term implications of the Marines.

You missed it because you're too busy desperately wracking your brain for yet more excuses as to why your toys aren't broken and this is all my imagination.

It is a problem. The 12% drop was certainly due to the fact that IH have had their comeuppance.

There is a lot more than 2 weeks of data to back all of this up. This has been the case since the UM and WS supplements dropped.

Anyway, we're done here. Your repeated ignorance and now snarky, desperate attempt to act like this data is bogus proves where you're at, I think.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
What was the percentage of Marine armies compared to all armies for all those tournies? Is it greater or less than the percentage in the top 4? That's the sign of there being a problem, not how many finished in the top 4 in a vacuum.

I literally told you in the post of mine that you quoted. 12.5% is the percentage of Marine players compared to all other armies at those tournies. Significantly less than their numbers in the top 4. Get it now?

Sorry, missed that because my eyes were glazing over reading past the salt you were too busy throwing around.

And you're right, it might be a problem. Seeing as there was a 12% drop from one week to the next though it could be a case that the meta is playing catch up right now. I think two weeks of data might not be enough to tell long term implications of the Marines.

You missed it because you're too busy desperately wracking your brain for yet more excuses as to why your toys aren't broken and this is all my imagination.

It is a problem. The 12% drop was certainly due to the fact that IH have had their comeuppance.

There is a lot more than 2 weeks of data to back all of this up. This has been the case since the UM and WS supplements dropped.

Anyway, we're done here. Your repeated ignorance and now snarky, desperate attempt to act like this data is bogus proves where you're at, I think.

Looks like you were too busy trying to insult me again to see my edit: I don't actually have fun playing with broken armies. I love me a good fluffy list, not some steam roller. The fact you're projecting that play style on me is rather insulting and shows a lack of good faith for anyone on the opposite side of you.

And then there's the fact you're ignoring my concession that there could be a problem, but since there was a downward trend here I'm not sure if it's a long term problem, instead of just a short term one.

Let's see what the 1.5 updates from PA and the updates from CA do the game before we decry the game as completely broken beyond repair.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Since when and for whom? Because so far only marines have this and it's a very recent thing.

Since 8th edition first codex and for, afaik, every faction with a codex and then some.
<Chapter>, <Legion>, <Craftworld>, <Klan>, <Tau planets>, <Kabal>, <Coven>, <Cult>, <Regiment>, <Order>, <Hive Fleet>, <Forge World>, <Masque> and so on and so forth. Which factions doesn't get those? IIRC Custodes don't have keyword but they have fluff about subfactions and reasons to use a different paint scheme.

Did you miss my post, Actual?

Yea I missed it.

These keywords are nowhere near the same thing as separate supplements that SM have which is what I thought you were referring to. What's your point?

AAE, take your neglected ork tantrum show or whatever this mess is somewhere else. It has completely derailed the discussion. Some of us keep clicking this thread in hopes of some Psychic Awakening news and rumours.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
What was the percentage of Marine armies compared to all armies for all those tournies? Is it greater or less than the percentage in the top 4? That's the sign of there being a problem, not how many finished in the top 4 in a vacuum.

I literally told you in the post of mine that you quoted. 12.5% is the percentage of Marine players compared to all other armies at those tournies. Significantly less than their numbers in the top 4. Get it now?

Sorry, missed that because my eyes were glazing over reading past the salt you were too busy throwing around.

And you're right, it might be a problem. Seeing as there was a 12% drop from one week to the next though it could be a case that the meta is playing catch up right now. I think two weeks of data might not be enough to tell long term implications of the Marines.

You missed it because you're too busy desperately wracking your brain for yet more excuses as to why your toys aren't broken and this is all my imagination.

It is a problem. The 12% drop was certainly due to the fact that IH have had their comeuppance.

There is a lot more than 2 weeks of data to back all of this up. This has been the case since the UM and WS supplements dropped.

Anyway, we're done here. Your repeated ignorance and now snarky, desperate attempt to act like this data is bogus proves where you're at, I think.

Looks like you were too busy trying to insult me again to see my edit: I don't actually have fun playing with broken armies. I love me a good fluffy list, not some steam roller. The fact you're projecting that play style on me is rather insulting and shows a lack of good faith for anyone on the opposite side of you.

And then there's the fact you're ignoring my concession that there could be a problem, but since there was a downward trend here I'm not sure if it's a long term problem, instead of just a short term one.

Let's see what the 1.5 updates from PA and the updates from CA do the game before we decry the game as completely broken beyond repair.

I believe that it was you who said something about salt and missing my point? Real classy, not insulting at all.

I'm not interested in your claims or your so called concession. You aren't arguing in good faith, you aren't reading my posts and you have continually strawmanned during this entire "conversation". You're literally not worth discussing with, I'm afraid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
AAE, take your neglected ork tantrum show or whatever this mess is somewhere else. It has completely derailed the discussion. Some of us keep clicking this thread in hopes of some Psychic Awakening news and rumours.

I have derailed the discussion? Read the thread Crimson.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I believe that it was you who said something about salt and missing my point? Real classy, not insulting at all.

I'm not interested in your claims or your so called concession. You aren't arguing in good faith, you aren't reading my posts and you have continually strawmanned during this entire "conversation". You're literally not worth discussing with, I'm afraid.

You were throwing insults long before I mentioned salt. It's because you were insulting me that I actually ended up missing the valid points you made which led to the salt comment.

And for someone claiming the moral high ground you've been far to quick to jump into the mud with name calling, projecting and generally acting poorly. Calling you out on any of that is hardly strawmanning, nor is it bad faith. It's calling your BS for what it is, and pointing out that the top 4 percentages alone aren't enough to make a point about if something is actually broken or not.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I believe that it was you who said something about salt and missing my point? Real classy, not insulting at all.

I'm not interested in your claims or your so called concession. You aren't arguing in good faith, you aren't reading my posts and you have continually strawmanned during this entire "conversation". You're literally not worth discussing with, I'm afraid.

You were throwing insults long before I mentioned salt. It's because you were insulting me that I actually ended up missing the valid points you made which led to the salt comment.

And for someone claiming the moral high ground you've been far to quick to jump into the mud with name calling, projecting and generally acting poorly. Calling you out on any of that is hardly strawmanning, nor is it bad faith. It's calling your BS for what it is, and pointing out that the top 4 percentages alone aren't enough to make a point about if something is actually broken or not.

The beauty about discussing something in a forum is that we can literally go back through my posts and see that I have not insulted you at all. If you feel that I have, however, you can always use the report function to notify a moderator of the offending post.

Let's end the discussion around whether Marines are OP or not now, I'm amazed you disagree and am genuinely a little baffled. Either way this isn't the thread. If you'd actually like more proper information PM me and I'll send you some stuff.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I believe that it was you who said something about salt and missing my point? Real classy, not insulting at all.

I'm not interested in your claims or your so called concession. You aren't arguing in good faith, you aren't reading my posts and you have continually strawmanned during this entire "conversation". You're literally not worth discussing with, I'm afraid.

You were throwing insults long before I mentioned salt. It's because you were insulting me that I actually ended up missing the valid points you made which led to the salt comment.

And for someone claiming the moral high ground you've been far to quick to jump into the mud with name calling, projecting and generally acting poorly. Calling you out on any of that is hardly strawmanning, nor is it bad faith. It's calling your BS for what it is, and pointing out that the top 4 percentages alone aren't enough to make a point about if something is actually broken or not.

The beauty about discussing something in a forum is that we can literally go back through my posts and see that I have not insulted you at all. If you feel that I have, however, you can always use the report function to notify a moderator of the offending post.

Let's end the discussion around whether Marines are OP or not now, I'm amazed you disagree and am genuinely a little baffled. Either way this isn't the thread. If you'd actually like more proper information PM me and I'll send you some stuff.

Sorry, perhaps "provoking language" would be the better term for going all caps like Angron's twitter, or the "For clarity, because you're so desperate to defend your broken boys in yellow" claim.

Clockwork never said Marines weren't OP (and actually explicitly pointed out that they well might be), just that your methodology is flawed. Which it is.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Clockwork never said Marines weren't OP (and actually explicitly pointed out that they well might be), just that your methodology is flawed. Which it is.

Exactly.

My belief is that the problem is that the Marines are running around with 2.0 rules and everyone else has 1.0 rules (maybe 1.2 for CSM). PA seems to a 1.5 update, so I'm sincerely hoping this gets everyone else closer to where the game should be before their 2.0 update comes out.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Clockwork never said Marines weren't OP (and actually explicitly pointed out that they well might be), just that your methodology is flawed. Which it is.

Well it took Clockwork around 20 posts to understand my methodology and, if I'm honest, I have already said that this is only one (of many) indicators that Marines are OP. TWIP, win percentages against various factions, win percentages excluding mirror matches, average points scored and average points denied all feed into the general idea that marines are too strong, for me. I'm surprised at you Walrus, I thought you more objective than this.

You can continue to clog this thread up with this chat, or you can discuss the rumours. I don't care either way - I have no interest in the next PA volume

Your methodology is leaping to conclusions that are plausible but not yet provable because there's a bunch of variables you can't control for. That is the objective truth.That doesn't mean that you are wrong in your conclusion, only that the means you used to get to the conclusion are.

There's plenty of indications that suggest the SM Codex is OP, but there's also a bunch of stuff suggesting it isn't. "Results inconclusive, needs more data" doesn't mean you're not right, just that you cannot prove it yet.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Your methodology is leaping to conclusions that are plausible but not yet provable because there's a bunch of variables you can't control for. That is the objective truth.That doesn't mean that you are wrong in your conclusion, only that the means you used to get to the conclusion are.

There's plenty of indications that suggest the SM Codex is OP, but there's also a bunch of stuff suggesting it isn't. "Results inconclusive, needs more data" doesn't mean you're not right, just that you cannot prove it yet.

And when is there "enough data" Walrus?

When the fabled 2.0 codexes are rolled out for the next army? When they're rolled out for all armies?

When we're about to enter 9th edition?

When marine players have had enough of winning?

Now, under normal circumstances I'd agree with you. But from what all of the boffins who actually compile, look at and interpret this data have said, the results are drastically different to what they have seen in the past with other codex releases and with other new model releases. The difference is so staggering that they believe there is an issue. The numbers we are talking about here are more extreme than pre-nerf Ynnari and Castellan soup. To be clear also, we're not talking about a small sample size of 100 or so games. We're talking well over 1000 games here.

Can someone tell me if there are any more rumours? I can't be bothered wading through 10 pages of crying.