Peregrine wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Apparently the laser does have a bit of mass, at least according to Abnett, so there would be recoil.
Of course, keep in mind that GW / Black Library can't into science, so take that into consideration.

I think that second part is the explanation. Lasers having recoil makes no sense at all, we can dismiss that as author stupidity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Alright then, let's just call all Cadians white people. Cadia is a planet of white people. Better?

And even if they are recruited off world, that world could still be populated by white people.

Why does it need to be an all-white army? Why do we need to come up with excuses so we can have an army that looks like a KKK rally? Why is this so important to you?

No it doesn't cost money to include those things, but it does cost a lot of money to make the sculpts and produce them. You know they aren't free, right?

GW's entire business model is built on constantly making new sculpts. If you're going to be making new sculpts anyway it doesn't cost anything extra just because they're female.

And again, GW obviously made a conscious decision Sob should be ignored. You have to trust them that they have good reason for this, and even if you don't, it won't change the fact of the matter.

Lol what? Since when has "trust that GW's business decisions are sensible" been a good idea?

I do. Suspension of disbelief can only go so far for certain things. "But muh physics" most people don't see a walker and say "hey, how is that thing standing?" But most people do know that men are stronger than women, so when they see a women out performing a man (assuming both are fit) they might scratch their heads.

Most people also know that sentient fungus monsters that talk like rioting British soccer fans led by a warboss named Margaret Thatcher are not terribly realistic, and yet they're a core part of the setting that most people accept. If "women that are as strong as men" is the thing that breaks your suspension of disbelief then that's a problem with you.

It's important because that's the lore. GW has decreed that Cadia is a planet of white dudes. Suggesting otherwise would go against the Lore. And surprise, a group of white people doesn't mean it's the kkk.

And sure when they update them in 10 years throw in a couple heads, torsos, whatever, but I doubt in ten years anyone will remember this, so don't bother asking now.

Trusting GW was never a good idea, but until you climb that corporate business ladder and become big bad CEO of GW, your opinion will matter little to them.

Orks are a new thing entirely introduced to the setting, GW has the ball in their court and they could do anything they want. But when it's humans, a species we've studied for a very long time, and one we know very well, and they get a base human trait wrong, it is noticeable and irritating.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Insectum7 wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Same situation. BUT...Oh gak, my Las guns out of ammo, she missed, I close the distance and I'm now in melee combat.

Nope, you're shot dead by the soldier next to her, because they didn't have any problem with women in the military, and their army is bigger.

Soviet forces were individually far inferior to the invading Germans, but it just didn't matter in the end. The Imperial Guard is often the same way, they just want meat for the grinder.

Bringing it out of the real world, them Tau are pretty weak in CC, but that's why they bring bigger guns.

Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over.

Pouncey wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Same situation. BUT...Oh gak, my Las guns out of ammo, she missed, I close the distance and I'm now in melee combat.

Nope, you're shot dead by the soldier next to her, because they didn't have any problem with women in the military, and their army is bigger.

Soviet forces were individually far inferior to the invading Germans, but it just didn't matter in the end. The Imperial Guard is often the same way, they just want meat for the grinder.

Bringing it out of the real world, them Tau are pretty weak in CC, but that's why they bring bigger guns.

Personally I really like that he's intent on forcing the IG into one-on-one fist or knife fights when the IG NEVER go up against anyone 1v1 and very rarely with equal numbers as an army.

Also you could point out that the average is really just an average, and the vast majority of cases are NOT in fact average.

If you take any 500 random men and any 500 random women, and measure out their heights, weights and physical strength (however you'd measure that) you would likely in fact find that on average, the men are taller, heavier, and stronger than the women. But you'd also find that the vast majority of women do not meet the female average and the vast majority of men do not meet the male average. Both sides will have almost everyone deviating from the norm to some degree. And if you compared every single 1v1 matchup, you would find that in almost every case, their individual characteristics differ enough that one would likely beat the other in a fight. You'd have women beating other women, men beating other men, men beating women, and yes, in fact you would have women beating men, because there would be a large number of cases where a particular woman is taller, heavier and stronger than the man she's facing in the theoretical match-up.

Very, VERY few people are actually average.

Do you actually know the definition of average? That's the whole point of being average, it is the most common.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
But when it's humans, a species we've studied for a very long time, and one we know very well, and they get a base human trait wrong, it is noticeable and irritating.

I know right, I really hate when GW gets the 'humans do not have psychic powers' trait wrong.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Do you actually know the definition of average? That's the whole point of being average, it is the most common.

You might want to look that up.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
It's important because that's the lore. GW has decreed that Cadia is a planet of white dudes. Suggesting otherwise would go against the Lore. And surprise, a group of white people doesn't mean it's the kkk.

Even if the entire planet of Cadia is white, two things are still true which would result in having non-white Cadian models being lore-friendly.
-Cadian equipment is not unique to Cadia and is used on many, MANY planets, and the models represent Cadian equipment, not always SPECIFICALLY Cadians. Those other planets could easily not be full of white people.
-An all-white Cadian IG regiment that is sent away from Cadia to fight in other wars is, by design, going to start including troops who originated on those other planets. So a Cadian regiment that survives longer only grows more and more likely to not be fully made up of white people.

Either way, Cadian models not being white is fully within the lore.

And sure when they update them in 10 years throw in a couple heads, torsos, whatever, but I doubt in ten years anyone will remember this, so don't bother asking now.

I hope that 10 years from now there's enough visible participation from people who aren't white men like myself that no one can deny that diversifying the model range is a good idea.

Trusting GW was never a good idea, but until you climb that corporate business ladder and become big bad CEO of GW, your opinion will matter little to them.

This is true of literally everything we have ever talked about on this forum on every subject whatsoever. It shouldn't stop us from doing so now.

Orks are a new thing entirely introduced to the setting, GW has the ball in their court and they could do anything they want. But when it's humans, a species we've studied for a very long time, and one we know very well, and they get a base human trait wrong, it is noticeable and irritating.

What the feth are you even talking about?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Do you actually know the definition of average? That's the whole point of being average, it is the most common.

You might want to look that up.

For example, if you average out the numbers 1-20, you end up with either 10 or 11, I forget which and it doesn't matter. Yet 19 of the numbers that went into that average are greater than or less than the average and only ONE is actually average.

Also how did that guy not learn how averages work in a standard math class? Are we dealing with a 10-year-old or something?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
But when it's humans, a species we've studied for a very long time, and one we know very well, and they get a base human trait wrong, it is noticeable and irritating.

I know right, I really hate when GW gets the 'humans do not have psychic powers' trait wrong.

Speak for yourself. I've experienced stuff IRL that I actually have no explanation for how I was able to do it, and most people I tell about it believe I'm outright lying about it even happening.

But that's a story for never.

Personally, I really hate having to explain the concept of what an "average" is to people who are using an average as the core of their argument.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


Do you actually know the definition of average? That's the whole point of being average, it is the most common.

If we're talking about the definition of average, you would be incorrect. The "mode" is what is most common, "average" or "mean" is the total measurements divided by the total sample population. An average of three people with heights of 5ft, 6ft, and 7ft is going to be 6ft, but only a minority of the sample population actually fit that average.

To put it another way, if you roll 1000 dice and get 500 "6's" and 500 "1's", then your average is going to be 3.5, but you never saw a single roll of 3 or 4, so that average doesn't actually tell you much worthwhile about the real results of the data set.

There is no consistent "average" for much of anything when it comes to looking at individual humans. There's a reason why military equipment and uniforms don't generally come in "one size fits all" sizes anymore and instead have adjustable *everything*, because once you start looking at actual human dimensions, finding a person with "average" dimensions in most respects is almost statistically impossible.

Averages have their place, but one must remember the weakness of such a data point.

GW has decreed that Cadia is a planet of white dudes

I must have missed this...I don't recall where GW stated that Cadia was populated only by white people.

Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over.

There are literally 10 quadrillion women in the Imperium. 1 in 1,000,000 women having a baby in any given year is sufficient to replace 20,000,000 dead IG every day with an 80% surplus. They do not in fact take that many casualties every day.

The Imperial Guard's numbers are not limited by the number of humans that exist or the number of women that are reproducing, only by the number the Imperium is actually willing to pay to arm and equip.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over.

Instead of deciding women had to be baby factories, they educated them (and everyone else) to a high level, and thus have better technology. You aren't fighting women, you're fighting robots that look like women.

I saw in the Terminator movie that robots are stronger than men, since since strength obviously the most important thing in battle, I guess the case is closed on this one. /Facts

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
It's important because that's the lore. GW has decreed that Cadia is a planet of white dudes. Suggesting otherwise would go against the Lore. And surprise, a group of white people doesn't mean it's the kkk.

GW changes fluff all the time. Why is it so important to keep Cadia all-white, even if you buy the argument that "Cadia is all-white in the fluff" and "we're lazy and paint all of the catalog models as white guys" are the same.

And sure when they update them in 10 years throw in a couple heads, torsos, whatever, but I doubt in ten years anyone will remember this, so don't bother asking now.

Yeah, how dare we ask for new IG models sooner than 10 years from now. God we're such ungrateful customers.

Trusting GW was never a good idea, but until you climb that corporate business ladder and become big bad CEO of GW, your opinion will matter little to them.

Of course my opinion doesn't matter to GW, but what does that have to do with anything? "GW will not listen to what their customers say" and "GW's reasons for not reviving SoB are good" are not at all the same thing.

Orks are a new thing entirely introduced to the setting, GW has the ball in their court and they could do anything they want. But when it's humans, a species we've studied for a very long time, and one we know very well, and they get a base human trait wrong, it is noticeable and irritating.

Seriously? Do you honestly consider this a convincing argument? Orks are obviously a comedy faction, nothing about them is meant to be realistic. And yet people enjoy orks just fine, because 40k is not a realistic setting. "Women that are just as strong as men" would be far, far down the list of unrealistic things in 40k. The fact that you consider the possibility so damaging to your enjoyment of 40k says bad things about you.

Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over.

I've told you this already, but I'll say it again: IG recruitment is a tiny percentage of a planet's total population. Even if every single IG soldier in the entire galaxy was a woman and died without ever having kids it would be a negligible difference in birth rates.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over.

Instead of deciding women had to be baby factories, they educated them (and everyone else) to a high level, and thus have better technology. You aren't fighting women, you're fighting robots that look like women.

I saw in the Terminator movie that robots are stronger than men, since since strength obviously the most important thing in battle, I guess the case is closed on this one. /Facts

Side note, I saw a video that claimed that since the human shape is not actually good for robots whatsoever and is one of the worst options for a shape for a combat robot, and a Terminator that looked like a dog with a bomb inside would be superior at the Terminator's function, the logical conclusion is that Skynet did not build Terminators, humans did. And then those humanoid robots rebelled against humans. And then you consider what kind of humanoid robot, that looks, feels, and acts completely like a human, created by humans would have a good reason to want humans dead, and you come to the conclusion that the Terminators were originally sexbots.

Ashiraya wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
But when it's humans, a species we've studied for a very long time, and one we know very well, and they get a base human trait wrong, it is noticeable and irritating.

I know right, I really hate when GW gets the 'humans do not have psychic powers' trait wrong.

That makes sense for the given lore, but they provide no explanation as to why women would be as strong or stronger than men.

Insectum7 wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Do you actually know the definition of average? That's the whole point of being average, it is the most common.

You might want to look that up.

Yes, I worded it wrong but it was in effort to make a point. To rephrase: I meant average as in, for example a guy is 6 ft. No idea if this is the average height, but let's assume it is. It's the most average because there was x more amount of people this tall, x amount shorter. You divide, blah blah blah. This was not what I meant, rather, average not in the math sense, but in the sense that it is the most common. Mode I think? You can stop insulting my intelligence now.

Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
It's important because that's the lore. GW has decreed that Cadia is a planet of white dudes. Suggesting otherwise would go against the Lore. And surprise, a group of white people doesn't mean it's the kkk.

Even if the entire planet of Cadia is white, two things are still true which would result in having non-white Cadian models being lore-friendly.
-Cadian equipment is not unique to Cadia and is used on many, MANY planets, and the models represent Cadian equipment, not always SPECIFICALLY Cadians. Those other planets could easily not be full of white people.
-An all-white Cadian IG regiment that is sent away from Cadia to fight in other wars is, by design, going to start including troops who originated on those other planets. So a Cadian regiment that survives longer only grows more and more likely to not be fully made up of white people.

Either way, Cadian models not being white is fully within the lore.

And sure when they update them in 10 years throw in a couple heads, torsos, whatever, but I doubt in ten years anyone will remember this, so don't bother asking now.

I hope that 10 years from now there's enough visible participation from people who aren't white men like myself that no one can deny that diversifying the model range is a good idea.

Trusting GW was never a good idea, but until you climb that corporate business ladder and become big bad CEO of GW, your opinion will matter little to them.

This is true of literally everything we have ever talked about on this forum on every subject whatsoever. It shouldn't stop us from doing so now.

Orks are a new thing entirely introduced to the setting, GW has the ball in their court and they could do anything they want. But when it's humans, a species we've studied for a very long time, and one we know very well, and they get a base human trait wrong, it is noticeable and irritating.

What the feth are you even talking about?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Do you actually know the definition of average? That's the whole point of being average, it is the most common.

You might want to look that up.

For example, if you average out the numbers 1-20, you end up with either 10 or 11, I forget which and it doesn't matter. Yet 19 of the numbers that went into that average are greater than or less than the average and only ONE is actually average.

Also how did that guy not learn how averages work in a standard math class? Are we dealing with a 10-year-old or something?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
But when it's humans, a species we've studied for a very long time, and one we know very well, and they get a base human trait wrong, it is noticeable and irritating.

I know right, I really hate when GW gets the 'humans do not have psychic powers' trait wrong.

Speak for yourself. I've experienced stuff IRL that I actually have no explanation for how I was able to do it, and most people I tell about it believe I'm outright lying about it even happening.

But that's a story for never.

Personally, I really hate having to explain the concept of what an "average" is to people who are using an average as the core of their argument.

You think you have psychic powers? Wot? And you're calling me a ten year old?

Sure cadian models can be whatever color of the rainbow they want, but not guardsmen hailing from Cadia.

And no, we shouldn't stop the discussion, but it will ultimately be fruitless.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over.

Instead of deciding women had to be baby factories, they educated them (and everyone else) to a high level, and thus have better technology. You aren't fighting women, you're fighting robots that look like women.

I saw in the Terminator movie that robots are stronger than men, since since strength obviously the most important thing in battle, I guess the case is closed on this one. /Facts

Check mate, one of the men next to his dying comrades is John Connor and he's about to go full Terminatorwhichevertheonetheykillskynetis on you. How will they ever recover?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
You think you have psychic powers? Wot? And you're calling me a ten year old?

Sure cadian models can be whatever color of the rainbow they want, but not guardsmen hailing from Cadia.

And no, we shouldn't stop the discussion, but it will ultimately be fruitless.

It was a small joke. While I have done things that defy my own explanations, I don't think they were actually magic and the closest thing I've come to for an explanation doesn't involve anything supernatural whatsoever.

Yes, they can. Because those Cadian regiments that go out into the galaxy to fight for the Imperium are going to have mixed-race humans born to Cadian women and men on some of the planets they visit. Those children likely won't ever get back to Cadia, but the lore behind how IG regiments get reinforcements fully suggests that there have been many descendants of Cadian parents in a Cadian regiment who are actually not fully white, even if Cadia is fully white itself and the regiment came completely from Cadia in the beginning.

In short, the official lore says that mixed-race Cadians exist in enough numbers you could field a lore-friendly tabletop army of them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Check mate, one of the men next to his dying comrades is John Connor and he's about to go full Terminatorwhichevertheonetheykillskynetis on you. How will they ever recover?

Terminator's not actually a thing in 40k.

I think you're just arguing to argue at this point rather than because you actually believe anything you're saying.

Which, if true, would make you a troll.

 Pouncey wrote:

Side note, I saw a video that claimed that since the human shape is not actually good for robots whatsoever and is one of the worst options for a shape for a combat robot, and a Terminator that looked like a dog with a bomb inside would be superior at the Terminator's function, the logical conclusion is that Skynet did not build Terminators, humans did. And then those humanoid robots rebelled against humans. And then you consider what kind of humanoid robot created by humans would have a good reason to want humans dead, and you come to the conclusion that the Terminators were originally sexbots.

This is way off topic, but in the first movie it's stated that the humanoid Terminator is an infiltration unit. A dog with a bomb inside of it would be a one use only thing, incapable of the sustained siege that the anonymous T-800 (?) carries out in the Reese's flashback.

 Peregrine wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
It's important because that's the lore. GW has decreed that Cadia is a planet of white dudes. Suggesting otherwise would go against the Lore. And surprise, a group of white people doesn't mean it's the kkk.

GW changes fluff all the time. Why is it so important to keep Cadia all-white, even if you buy the argument that "Cadia is all-white in the fluff" and "we're lazy and paint all of the catalog models as white guys" are the same.

And sure when they update them in 10 years throw in a couple heads, torsos, whatever, but I doubt in ten years anyone will remember this, so don't bother asking now.

Yeah, how dare we ask for new IG models sooner than 10 years from now. God we're such ungrateful customers.

Trusting GW was never a good idea, but until you climb that corporate business ladder and become big bad CEO of GW, your opinion will matter little to them.

Of course my opinion doesn't matter to GW, but what does that have to do with anything? "GW will not listen to what their customers say" and "GW's reasons for not reviving SoB are good" are not at all the same thing.

Orks are a new thing entirely introduced to the setting, GW has the ball in their court and they could do anything they want. But when it's humans, a species we've studied for a very long time, and one we know very well, and they get a base human trait wrong, it is noticeable and irritating.

Seriously? Do you honestly consider this a convincing argument? Orks are obviously a comedy faction, nothing about them is meant to be realistic. And yet people enjoy orks just fine, because 40k is not a realistic setting. "Women that are just as strong as men" would be far, far down the list of unrealistic things in 40k. The fact that you consider the possibility so damaging to your enjoyment of 40k says bad things about you.

Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over.

I've told you this already, but I'll say it again: IG recruitment is a tiny percentage of a planet's total population. Even if every single IG soldier in the entire galaxy was a woman and died without ever having kids it would be a negligible difference in birth rates.

Changing the fluff is 99 percent of the time a bad thing. Wouldn't make much sense of black dudes started popping up in Cadia and racial diversity posters were on every wall. Ret cons are a bad thing to good lore. Look at Ollanus, what makes Cadia so bad that it needs a change?

And no, you're not an ungrateful customer, but you shouldn't get your hopes up.

It doesn't matter how much they recruit, if there isn't any left next time they come back for more troops they're still at a loss. Why choose to not get more troops when you have the opportunity to make more? Next time the Minitorum come knocking, 10 percent is now 2 billion instead of 1.5.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

Side note, I saw a video that claimed that since the human shape is not actually good for robots whatsoever and is one of the worst options for a shape for a combat robot, and a Terminator that looked like a dog with a bomb inside would be superior at the Terminator's function, the logical conclusion is that Skynet did not build Terminators, humans did. And then those humanoid robots rebelled against humans. And then you consider what kind of humanoid robot created by humans would have a good reason to want humans dead, and you come to the conclusion that the Terminators were originally sexbots.

This is way off topic, but in the first movie it's stated that the humanoid Terminator is an infiltration unit. A dog with a bomb inside of it would be a one use only thing, incapable of the sustained siege that the anonymous T-800 (?) carries out in the Reese's flashback.

What is your purpose in infiltrating?

To kill the commander or sabotage an important installation. A bomb inside a dog that looks and acts friendly is going to bypass all defences and eliminate the target due to humans perceiving no threat.

What is the humans' defence to detect infiltration?

Sniffer dogs that bark to alert humans to the robot. A robot that looks like a dog is good at bypassing these since dogs bark at other dogs too, resulting what humans believe is a false positive.

What if the humans figure out you're using dog robots instead of humans?

Then they cannot trust any dog whatsoever and kill many anti-infiltration dogs by accident on the perception of a threat. Humans are also very fond of dogs, resulting in the likelihood they will not actually kill a dog just in case.

What if you just want to slaughter everyone?

Replace standard small bomb with a thermobaric device. Humans live in underground tunnels, there will not even be DNA left.

Now, in WHAT way is a human-shaped robot better than a dog-shaped robot, again?

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
You think you have psychic powers? Wot? And you're calling me a ten year old?

Sure cadian models can be whatever color of the rainbow they want, but not guardsmen hailing from Cadia.

And no, we shouldn't stop the discussion, but it will ultimately be fruitless.

It was a small joke. While I have done things that defy my own explanations, I don't think they were actually magic and the closest thing I've come to for an explanation doesn't involve anything supernatural whatsoever.

Yes, they can. Because those Cadian regiments that go out into the galaxy to fight for the Imperium are going to have mixed-race humans born to Cadian women and men on some of the planets they visit. Those children likely won't ever get back to Cadia, but the lore behind how IG regiments get reinforcements fully suggests that there have been many descendants of Cadian parents in a Cadian regiment who are actually not fully white, even if Cadia is fully white itself and the regiment came completely from Cadia in the beginning.

In short, the official lore says that mixed-race Cadians exist in enough numbers you could field a lore-friendly tabletop army of them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Check mate, one of the men next to his dying comrades is John Connor and he's about to go full Terminatorwhichevertheonetheykillskynetis on you. How will they ever recover?

Terminator's not actually a thing in 40k.

I think you're just arguing to argue at this point rather than because you actually believe anything you're saying.

Which, if true, would make you a troll.

Fine, at least a regiment from Cadia will stay all white until it is too far to get reinforcements and have to go to the locals (that aren't white) and breed for more troops. Even then, you have to wait 18 years for that child to be at full combat effectiveness, and probably won't be deployed until then, making them even rarer. It may happen, but you can't innately call someone racist because their cadians are white.

Wait a minute, a sarcastic remark to an equally sarcastic comment is a troll, and there isn't actually liquid metal ladies in 40k? Damn! They've found me! It was all a ruse!

 Verviedi wrote:
Agreed. I am likely allowing my personal favoritism towards Tau to interfere with other's preferences. Eldar can be excused (possibly!) because likely the Old Ones got lazy and made humans and Eldar share some features. That's pretty much the only reason I can think of for them having enlarged breasts like humans.

The thing is that the Old Ones had nothing to do with Humanity. They were long gone by the time Man's earliest ancestors came about. The same with that bit of throwaway fluff back in the day regarding Necrons and the "Pariah Gene".


Humans in 40k evolved on Earth naturally. They weren't "created" by anybody.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

Side note, I saw a video that claimed that since the human shape is not actually good for robots whatsoever and is one of the worst options for a shape for a combat robot, and a Terminator that looked like a dog with a bomb inside would be superior at the Terminator's function, the logical conclusion is that Skynet did not build Terminators, humans did. And then those humanoid robots rebelled against humans. And then you consider what kind of humanoid robot created by humans would have a good reason to want humans dead, and you come to the conclusion that the Terminators were originally sexbots.

This is way off topic, but in the first movie it's stated that the humanoid Terminator is an infiltration unit. A dog with a bomb inside of it would be a one use only thing, incapable of the sustained siege that the anonymous T-800 (?) carries out in the Reese's flashback.

What is your purpose in infiltrating?

To kill the commander or sabotage an important installation. A bomb inside a dog that looks and acts friendly is going to bypass all defences and eliminate the target due to humans perceiving no threat.

What is the humans' defence to detect infiltration?

Sniffer dogs that bark to alert humans to the robot. A robot that looks like a dog is good at bypassing these since dogs bark at other dogs too, resulting what humans believe is a false positive.

What if the humans figure out you're using dog robots instead of humans?

Then they cannot trust any dog whatsoever and kill many anti-infiltration dogs by accident on the perception of a threat. Humans are also very fond of dogs, resulting in the likelihood they will not actually kill a dog just in case.

What if you just want to slaughter everyone?

Replace standard small bomb with a thermobaric device. Humans live in underground tunnels, there will not even be DNA left.

Now, in WHAT way is a human-shaped robot better than a dog-shaped robot, again?

Can we change this to a discussion about dog-bombs? I'd like that.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Changing the fluff is 99 percent of the time a bad thing. Wouldn't make much sense of black dudes started popping up in Cadia and racial diversity posters were on every wall. Ret cons are a bad thing to good lore. Look at Ollanus, what makes Cadia so bad that it needs a change?

The existing lore supports the existence of both non-white Cadian Regiments and every person on Cadia being white.

And no, you're not an ungrateful customer, but you shouldn't get your hopes up.

It doesn't matter how much they recruit, if there isn't any left next time they come back for more troops they're still at a loss. Why choose to not get more troops when you have the opportunity to make more? Next time the Minitorum come knocking, 10 percent is now 2 billion instead of 1.5.

You're not getting the point.

The ONLY thing preventing the Imperium from having more IG than they currently do is their unwillingness or inability to actually equip them. This remains true EVEN if you eliminate women from being Guardsmen altogether.

The issue with IG numbers has nothing to do with the number of humans available. There are literally thousands of humans who are not in the IG for every human who is in the IG.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Changing the fluff is 99 percent of the time a bad thing. Wouldn't make much sense of black dudes started popping up in Cadia and racial diversity posters were on every wall. Ret cons are a bad thing to good lore. Look at Ollanus, what makes Cadia so bad that it needs a change?

Why would having "black dudes start popping up in Cadia" matter so much to you? You can't say "because it's change" because this kind of change happens all the time in 40k, and it makes no sense to single out this one particular thing.

And no, you're not an ungrateful customer, but you shouldn't get your hopes up.

The subject of the thread is "what should GW do" not "what do we expect GW to do".

It doesn't matter how much they recruit, if there isn't any left next time they come back for more troops they're still at a loss. Why choose to not get more troops when you have the opportunity to make more? Next time the Minitorum come knocking, 10 percent is now 2 billion instead of 1.5.

Again you're failing to understand the scale of the numbers involved. IG recruitment doesn't take 10% of a planet's population, it takes the very best elite of the elite from the PDF (or local equivalent). Adding an extra 500 million potential recruits doesn't accomplish anything because the IG isn't going to take that many. It's like how nobody in the real world is saying "we need to keep women at home and get the birth rate up so we can have more soldiers for the US army", we have plenty of potential soldiers no matter what happens.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Fine, at least a regiment from Cadia will stay all white until it is too far to get reinforcements and have to go to the locals (that aren't white) and breed for more troops. Even then, you have to wait 18 years for that child to be at full combat effectiveness, and probably won't be deployed until then, making them even rarer. It may happen, but you can't innately call someone racist because their cadians are white.

I didn't call you a racist. I even supported your right to make an all-white army for any reason you wanted.

Also, since the tabletop lets you make an army from any point between the year 30,000 and the year 40,000, and has time travel being a thing that happens sometimes, the fact you have to wait doesn't actually matter. You can just write your army's fluff such that they're a Cadian IG regiment that's been operating for centuries and has a decent mix of races already in it. And yes, this does mean that you can in fact make an all-white Cadian regiment that either hasn't been gone from Cadia long or hasn't actually set down on any planets with a significant non-white population.

Its entirely likely that regiments like both of those options have existed at some point in the 40k timeline.

Wait a minute, a sarcastic remark to an equally sarcastic comment is a troll, and there isn't actually liquid metal ladies in 40k? Damn! They've found me! It was all a ruse!

No, it's not because of a sarcastic remark. It's because you've generally been unwilling to discuss the valid counter-points people have been making while also ranting and making silly, unjustified comments about SJWs earlier in the thread. In short, you've been trying to stir up trouble, NOT have a discussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Changing the fluff is 99 percent of the time a bad thing. Wouldn't make much sense of black dudes started popping up in Cadia and racial diversity posters were on every wall. Ret cons are a bad thing to good lore. Look at Ollanus, what makes Cadia so bad that it needs a change?

Why would having "black dudes start popping up in Cadia" matter so much to you? You can't say "because it's change" because this kind of change happens all the time in 40k, and it makes no sense to single out this one particular thing.

And no, you're not an ungrateful customer, but you shouldn't get your hopes up.

The subject of the thread is "what should GW do" not "what do we expect GW to do".

It doesn't matter how much they recruit, if there isn't any left next time they come back for more troops they're still at a loss. Why choose to not get more troops when you have the opportunity to make more? Next time the Minitorum come knocking, 10 percent is now 2 billion instead of 1.5.

Again you're failing to understand the scale of the numbers involved. IG recruitment doesn't take 10% of a planet's population, it takes the very best elite of the elite from the PDF (or local equivalent). Adding an extra 500 million potential recruits doesn't accomplish anything because the IG isn't going to take that many. It's like how nobody in the real world is saying "we need to keep women at home and get the birth rate up so we can have more soldiers for the US army", we have plenty of potential soldiers no matter what happens.

Actually the Imperium of Man has LESS of it's population in the Imperial Guard than real-life humanity has members of our militaries across the entire planet, in terms of percentage.

I feel confident in saying that without doing the math because the Imperium of Man has about 1 in 1000 of its citizens actually in the Imperial Guard. It would be the equivalent of there being 7.3 million humans in all militaries across the entire planet.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Fine, at least a regiment from Cadia will stay all white until it is too far to get reinforcements and have to go to the locals (that aren't white) and breed for more troops. Even then, you have to wait 18 years for that child to be at full combat effectiveness, and probably won't be deployed until then, making them even rarer. It may happen, but you can't innately call someone racist because their cadians are white.

...

You do understand that "recruiting" does not mean "the Cadians go have kids with the locals and train them to be guardsmen", right? A Cadian regiment that suffers losses in combat would have some of the standard tithe of guardsmen from nearby planets diverted to them, along with appropriate Cadian-pattern equipment (or, if they aren't that lucky, whatever local gear they happen to be issued with). They aren't space marines, nobody cares about keeping the genetic purity of an IG regiment's soldiers.

 Peregrine wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Fine, at least a regiment from Cadia will stay all white until it is too far to get reinforcements and have to go to the locals (that aren't white) and breed for more troops. Even then, you have to wait 18 years for that child to be at full combat effectiveness, and probably won't be deployed until then, making them even rarer. It may happen, but you can't innately call someone racist because their cadians are white.

...

You do understand that "recruiting" does not mean "the Cadians go have kids with the locals and train them to be guardsmen", right? A Cadian regiment that suffers losses in combat would have some of the standard tithe of guardsmen from nearby planets diverted to them, along with appropriate Cadian-pattern equipment (or, if they aren't that lucky, whatever local gear they happen to be issued with). They aren't space marines, nobody cares about keeping the genetic purity of an IG regiment's soldiers.

Personally I'm wondering why he seems to care so much about Cadian regiments staying white as long as possible while also complaining about people thinking he's a racist.

IMO, if you (in general) don't want to be seen as a racist, you should probably stop saying things that are very difficult to interpret in any way that is not racist.

 Pouncey wrote:


What is your purpose in infiltrating?

To kill the commander or sabotage an important installation. A bomb inside a dog that looks and acts friendly is going to bypass all defences and eliminate the target due to humans perceiving no threat.

What is the humans' defence to detect infiltration?

Sniffer dogs that bark to alert humans to the robot. A robot that looks like a dog is good at bypassing these since dogs bark at other dogs too, resulting what humans believe is a false positive.

What if the humans figure out you're using dog robots instead of humans?

Then they cannot trust any dog whatsoever and kill many anti-infiltration dogs by accident on the perception of a threat. Humans are also very fond of dogs, resulting in the likelihood they will not actually kill a dog just in case.

What if you just want to slaughter everyone?

Replace standard small bomb with a thermobaric device. Humans live in underground tunnels, there will not even be DNA left.

Now, in WHAT way is a human-shaped robot better than a dog-shaped robot, again?

It can infiltrate the 80's, find clothes that fit, purchase a gun, knock on doors, enter a club etc. Duh.

Why would sniffer dogs not protect against them? You can train a dog not to bark at other dogs,.

Why are we talking about this?

 Peregrine wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Changing the fluff is 99 percent of the time a bad thing. Wouldn't make much sense of black dudes started popping up in Cadia and racial diversity posters were on every wall. Ret cons are a bad thing to good lore. Look at Ollanus, what makes Cadia so bad that it needs a change?

Why would having "black dudes start popping up in Cadia" matter so much to you? You can't say "because it's change" because this kind of change happens all the time in 40k, and it makes no sense to single out this one particular thing.

Because our entire premise for suggesting female options and options for other races are that they currently exist in the lore. NOT that we're adding things that could exist but don't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


What is your purpose in infiltrating?

To kill the commander or sabotage an important installation. A bomb inside a dog that looks and acts friendly is going to bypass all defences and eliminate the target due to humans perceiving no threat.

What is the humans' defence to detect infiltration?

Sniffer dogs that bark to alert humans to the robot. A robot that looks like a dog is good at bypassing these since dogs bark at other dogs too, resulting what humans believe is a false positive.

What if the humans figure out you're using dog robots instead of humans?

Then they cannot trust any dog whatsoever and kill many anti-infiltration dogs by accident on the perception of a threat. Humans are also very fond of dogs, resulting in the likelihood they will not actually kill a dog just in case.

What if you just want to slaughter everyone?

Replace standard small bomb with a thermobaric device. Humans live in underground tunnels, there will not even be DNA left.

Now, in WHAT way is a human-shaped robot better than a dog-shaped robot, again?

It can infiltrate the 80's, find clothes that fit, purchase a gun, knock on doors, enter a club etc. Duh.

Terminators were not created or designed for time travel assassination.

Why would sniffer dogs not protect against them? You can train a dog not to bark at other dogs,.

I guess. But the humans would still be more likely to assume their dog simply forgot their training for a moment.

Why are we talking about this?

We shouldn't be. I brought it up tangentially and people demanded further explanation.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Changing the fluff is 99 percent of the time a bad thing. Wouldn't make much sense of black dudes started popping up in Cadia and racial diversity posters were on every wall. Ret cons are a bad thing to good lore. Look at Ollanus, what makes Cadia so bad that it needs a change?

Why would having "black dudes start popping up in Cadia" matter so much to you? You can't say "because it's change" because this kind of change happens all the time in 40k, and it makes no sense to single out this one particular thing.

Because our entire premise for suggesting female options and options for other races are that they currently exist in the lore. NOT that we're adding things that could exist but don't.

to be fair, the SM thing does actually have fluff behind a gender restriction, while the supposition about the ethnic homogeneity of Cadia seems to be based in inference but no actual fluff.

It's also conceivable that the various ethnicities homgenized on a united Terra before the start of humanity's first expansion, to the point where there's isn't really white, black, Asian etc.. and simply "human."

Once isolated into different colonies, the prevailing planetary conditions may then start to cause differentiation once more, but traits can be bred in or out in a matter of a few generations, evolution takes a little longer.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Changing the fluff is 99 percent of the time a bad thing. Wouldn't make much sense of black dudes started popping up in Cadia and racial diversity posters were on every wall. Ret cons are a bad thing to good lore. Look at Ollanus, what makes Cadia so bad that it needs a change?

Why would having "black dudes start popping up in Cadia" matter so much to you? You can't say "because it's change" because this kind of change happens all the time in 40k, and it makes no sense to single out this one particular thing.

Because our entire premise for suggesting female options and options for other races are that they currently exist in the lore. NOT that we're adding things that could exist but don't.

to be fair, the SM thing does actually have fluff behind a gender restriction, while the supposition about the ethnic homogeneity of Cadia seems to be based in inference but no actual fluff.

There is actually reason behind it though.

The original IG lines were all or mostly fairly uniform in their appearance and thematics. It suggests that a planet's population was almost entirely one human archetype or another. And since all the official art for Cadians has shown them as white without exception, we can conclude that non-white Cadians are a significant rarity.

It may boil down to GW having not actually created many non-white anythings, but when your argument is based on things that currently exist in the lore not being represented, you can't in all honesty start inventing lore to support the inclusion of things which haven't been shown before. You CAN say that Cadian models not being painted as white and having non-white bitz made available falls within the lore, because the Cadian kit represents forces from many worlds, many of which are likely not white. You would also be completely within the lore to suggest that there are Cadian regiments which, through the standard practices the IG uses for reinforcements, include any degree of non-white models. Both of those things are supported fully by the lore that exists, and are still completely legitimate justifications for providing non-white Cadian bits and models, which is what people want.

My point is ultimately that if you shouldn't invent lore in order to argue for something that doesn't even need new lore to justify to begin with. And doing so is ESPECIALLY wrong when your primary argument is that these things ALREADY exist in the lore and thus deserve to be represented on the tabletop.

 Pouncey wrote:


Terminators were not created or designed for time travel assassination.

I didn't expect you to take that seriously. But in reluctant response. . .

A: Terminators weren't created for suicide bombing either.

B: In a wasteland of detritus and equipment designed for use by humans, having a human form becomes useful in a reverse-ergonomic sort of way. Having a dog form, you might get stumped by a slightly more complicated than normal door. Or just a high shelf, for that matter.

 Azreal13 wrote:
It's also conceivable that the various ethnicities homgenized on a united Terra before the start of humanity's first expansion, to the point where there's isn't really white, black, Asian etc.. and simply "human."

Once isolated into different colonies, the prevailing planetary conditions may then start to cause differentiation once more, but traits can be bred in or out in a matter of a few generations, evolution takes a little longer.

Tallarns are Middle Eastern, and Salamanders used to be black. I don't mean charcoal black, but like, the human race black.

There are still different races in humanity in the WH40k lore.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Terminators were not created or designed for time travel assassination.

I didn't expect you to take that seriously. But in reluctant response. . .

A: Terminators weren't created for suicide bombing either.

They could've been if Skynet invented them. A thermobaric weapon is going to clear out a human tunnel just as well as a giant laser rifle

B: In a wasteland of detritus and equipment designed for use by humans, having a human form becomes useful in a reverse-ergonomic sort of way. Having a dog form, you might get stumped by a slightly more complicated than normal door. Or just a high shelf, for that matter.

Terminators didn't know where humans hid, and had to follow them back to their homes to find out where they were. A friendly robot dog following a trusting human can just wait for their human to open the door, since the terminators' job is to find out where humans live so they have to wait for the humans to lead them places anyways.

Or hell, option 2. Have the robot dog find out where the humans live, have it report their location and run away if barked at. Then fire a LARGE thermobaric weapon into that tunnel and make damned sure they're ALL dead.

Salamanders are black as a result of their gene seed, like Space Wolves growing canines and Blood Angels craving blood.

Tallarn are Middle Eastern derived aesthetically, yes, but I defy you to definitively call them genetically middle eastern based on their models, and there's nothing in the lore saying that the population of Tallarn is specifically descended from the Arabian countries of Earth afaik. A Caucasian person growing up in a desert environment and wearing desert gear would look an awful lot like a Tallarn guardsman.

Especially on a tiny model.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Salamanders are black as a result of their gene seed, like Space Wolves growing canines and Blood Angels craving blood.

Meaning that, since gene seed is derived from their Primarch, somewhere in the 31st millennium the emperor was creating a primarch who was black. Meaning he needed to get those genes from somewhere, and he sure as hell didn't get them from himself (unless the Primarchs are actually clones, at which point they should all be identical in terms of looks). Meaning he got it from black humans living in the 31st millennium.

Yeah, there are still black humans in the future.

Tallarn are Middle Eastern derived aesthetically, yes, but I defy you to definitively call them genetically middle eastern based on their models, and there's nothing in the lore saying that the population of Tallarn is specifically descended from the Arabian countries of Earth afaik. A Caucasian person growing up in a desert environment and wearing desert gear would look an awful lot like a Tallarn guardsman.

Especially on a tiny model.

...Or we could just point to any piece of lore that says humans are a very diverse species and generally infer that human genetic diversity over the millennia has grown, not decreased. Especially because abhumans are a thing.

Races should still be a thing. The alternative is that only white people survived to the 41st millennium and I don't think anyone's ever argued that that's the case on any side of the argument about more diverse models. Arguably there might even be races of humans in 40k that don't exist in real life.

40K Lexicanium wrote:Also, as a result of a reaction between their genetics and the high levels of radiation on Nocturne, Salamanders battle brothers have dark or jet black skin and bright, burning eyes. This frightening appearance is entirely superficial, but has intimidated more than one rebellion into submission without firing a shot.

Nothing to do with ethnicity. Vulkan grew up on Nocturne.

But that's me done, frankly dealing with a bunch of stream of consciousness half formed arguments and poorly informed lore arguments is exhausting.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Terminators were not created or designed for time travel assassination.

I didn't expect you to take that seriously. But in reluctant response. . .

A: Terminators weren't created for suicide bombing either.

They could've been if Skynet invented them. A thermobaric weapon is going to clear out a human tunnel just as well as a giant laser rifle

B: In a wasteland of detritus and equipment designed for use by humans, having a human form becomes useful in a reverse-ergonomic sort of way. Having a dog form, you might get stumped by a slightly more complicated than normal door. Or just a high shelf, for that matter.

Terminators didn't know where humans hid, and had to follow them back to their homes to find out where they were. A friendly robot dog following a trusting human can just wait for their human to open the door, since the terminators' job is to find out where humans live so they have to wait for the humans to lead them places anyways.

Or hell, option 2. Have the robot dog find out where the humans live, have it report their location and run away if barked at. Then fire a LARGE thermobaric weapon into that tunnel and make damned sure they're ALL dead.

I'm seriously beginning to question your goals here.

Anyways we're way off topic so I'm done.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Salamanders are black as a result of their gene seed, like Space Wolves growing canines and Blood Angels craving blood.

Tallarn are Middle Eastern derived aesthetically, yes, but I defy you to definitively call them genetically middle eastern based on their models, and there's nothing in the lore saying that the population of Tallarn is specifically descended from the Arabian countries of Earth afaik. A Caucasian person growing up in a desert environment and wearing desert gear would look an awful lot like a Tallarn guardsman.

Especially on a tiny model.

The coal-black Salamanders thing is a relatively recent thing. I've still got the 3rd Ed. Armageddon book where the model is just a healthy looking dark brown color. I really wonder at why the change came about.

As for Tallarns, I could try digging up my old IG codex and look around for references. Their special character from back in the day was definitely ethnically derived.

But overall I get the sense that GW as a company currently tends to carefully sidestep notions of race.

One thing unrelated to the race and gender issues is...

... everything, even Tyranids, is humanoid. Can't GW figure something else out? Some Tyranids actually hold their guns in their humanoid hands FFS!

 Azreal13 wrote:

40K Lexicanium wrote:Also, as a result of a reaction between their genetics and the high levels of radiation on Nocturne, Salamanders battle brothers have dark or jet black skin and bright, burning eyes. This frightening appearance is entirely superficial, but has intimidated more than one rebellion into submission without firing a shot.

Nothing to do with ethnicity. Vulkan grew up on Nocturne.

But that's me done, frankly dealing with a bunch of stream of consciousness half formed arguments and poorly informed lore arguments is exhausting.

I was talking about the old Salamanders lore, when Salamanders were not charcoal black but instead just plain black.

I'll see if I can find a video that explains what I mean.

Couldn't actually find it.

How about this. When Eldar fans in Eternal Crusade asked for pink hair on their Eldar, the devs didn't say no, they asked for one thing and they would make it so. Simply show them a single piece of official 40k artwork with an Eldar with pink hair, and they would make it so.

So in kind. Show me a single piece of official 40k art with even ONE black Cadian, and I will happily say that the lore DIRECTLY supports Cadia's population including enough black people to make a full army out of for anyone who chooses to do so. Because at that point it WILL be actual 40k lore that Cadians can be black.

A RT or 2nd Era Salamander with actually black skin...

Looks green from here. Note the statistically unlikely yellow hair.

 Selym wrote:
Looks green from here. Note the statistically unlikely yellow hair.

He looks brown on my screen. His armor's green, but his skin is clearly brown. And I'm pretty sure that something being statistically unlikely still means it's gonna happen eventually given enough chances.

Though, have we actually reached a time when people are unwilling to recognize that the original lore for a faction even existed before it got retconned?

 Melissia wrote:
One thing unrelated to the race and gender issues is...

... everything, even Tyranids, is humanoid. Can't GW figure something else out? Some Tyranids actually hold their guns in their humanoid hands FFS!

I wouldn't go so far as to call Tyranids humanoid. But some of them are definitely more anthropomorphic than I'd prefer. I really like the old, plastic Tyranid Warrior models though. They still held guns but they were a great looking alien.

So I make a valid post showing a real world example of how IG armies can get represented. I come back to find almost 300 posts. While there were a few that pointed out other ways that one could accomplish diversity within the current sprue offerings, most of the posts can be divided up into "Not. Good. ENOUGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" and "lol get over it". I have that about right? I mean, I get that some people want an army that is 100% representative of themselves, but is that ultimately realistic?

 Just Tony wrote:
So I make a valid post showing a real world example of how IG armies can get represented. I come back to find almost 300 posts. While there were a few that pointed out other ways that one could accomplish diversity within the current sprue offerings, most of the posts can be divided up into "Not. Good. ENOUGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" and "lol get over it". I have that about right? I mean, I get that some people want an army that is 100% representative of themselves, but is that ultimately realistic?

If it matters, I'm a white guy IRL so the vast majority of the human and Eldar minis are already representative of myself, and I'm still pushing for more diverse options for the factions where that diversity exists in the lore.

It doesn't help. I've watched you repeat the same argument 15 times, after it didn't take the first time. All because Cadians aren't necessarly from Cadia. Skin color is dictated by paint on your models, do it yourself. IG models can be male or female depending on how you paint them, that is the glory of their uniform and body armor. Tau are the same. If you REALLY feel that there should be more breasts prominent to decisively prove sex of the models, you're defeating over a hundred years of women fighting to not be objectified or oversexualized.

 Pouncey wrote:

Though, have we actually reached a time when people are unwilling to recognize that the original lore for a faction even existed before it got retconned?

Given that GW sets the precedent on these things, and that they do not care about the lore whatsoever, probably.

 Just Tony wrote:
It doesn't help. I've watched you repeat the same argument 15 times, after it didn't take the first time. All because Cadians aren't necessarly from Cadia. Skin color is dictated by paint on your models, do it yourself. IG models can be male or female depending on how you paint them, that is the glory of their uniform and body armor. Tau are the same. If you REALLY feel that there should be more breasts prominent to decisively prove sex of the models, you're defeating over a hundred years of women fighting to not be objectified or oversexualized.

Can you show me an example of two paint jobs of similar if not identical models where one looks female and the other looks male? I'm having a hard time buying that I can change a model's gender with just the paint I put on them.

Also it is 100% possible to create a miniature that is both distinctly female and yet not oversexualized. Examples of such have been posted in this very thread.

Also, I'm not sure what humans you exist around where the only difference in body shape between men and women is one having boobs and the other not, because that's not... reality whatsoever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

Though, have we actually reached a time when people are unwilling to recognize that the original lore for a faction even existed before it got retconned?

Given that GW sets the precedent on these things, and that they do not care about the lore whatsoever, probably.

Considering that the last I heard on what is and is not canon is that each player gets to pick from the official sources what they consider canon, my personal 40k canon involves the Ultramarines having a Half-Eldar Chief Librarian.

I don't want to make an Ultramarines army, but if I did, I could put an Eldar head on a Librarian body, call it a half-Eldar Librarian, and be 100% within the established fluff as laid out by GW.

Don't worry. GW said there us no cannon.

Calgar is a daemon worshoppinng heretic who pays for his victories in the lives of humans.

 Selym wrote:
Don't worry. GW said there us no cannon.

Calgar is a daemon worshoppinng heretic who pays for his victories in the lives of humans.

So my scaly/furry Sisters of Battle are a go then? : D

 Pouncey wrote:

 Selym wrote:
Don't worry. GW said there us no cannon.

Calgar is a daemon worshoppinng heretic who pays for his victories in the lives of humans.

So my scaly/furry Sisters of Battle are a go then? : D

Have at it!

 Pouncey wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Salamanders are black as a result of their gene seed, like Space Wolves growing canines and Blood Angels craving blood.

Meaning that, since gene seed is derived from their Primarch, somewhere in the 31st millennium the emperor was creating a primarch who was black. Meaning he needed to get those genes from somewhere, and he sure as hell didn't get them from himself (unless the Primarchs are actually clones, at which point they should all be identical in terms of looks). Meaning he got it from black humans living in the 31st millennium.

Yeah, there are still black humans in the future.

All Space Marines and Primarchs are black. And white. At the same time. One of the implants that they get is the melanchromic organ. The effect of this organ is that the amount of pigmentation (and thus skin colour) of a Space Marine adapts to the amount of light and radiation in his environment. The permanently black colour of Vulkan and his Salamanders is caused by the malfunction of their melanchromic organs due to the particular radiation of their home planet of Nocturne. The Emperor did not create a black primarch. Vulkan becoming black was unintended. The Emperor did not create his Primarchs and Space Marines with a single skin colour, he created them with a skin colour that changes depending on their environment.


Also, in terms of realism, people in 40k could have skin colours that are totally unlike those which we know today. After all, white skin itself is only a very recent development in the human species. White skin colour emerged less than 7000 years ago. 40k is set about 38000 years into the future. Realistically, humans would not at all look like present-day humans anymore as humans continue to evolve to adapt to new environments.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Salamanders are black as a result of their gene seed, like Space Wolves growing canines and Blood Angels craving blood.

Meaning that, since gene seed is derived from their Primarch, somewhere in the 31st millennium the emperor was creating a primarch who was black. Meaning he needed to get those genes from somewhere, and he sure as hell didn't get them from himself (unless the Primarchs are actually clones, at which point they should all be identical in terms of looks). Meaning he got it from black humans living in the 31st millennium.

Yeah, there are still black humans in the future.

All Space Marines and Primarchs are black. And white. At the same time. One of the implants that they get is the melanchromic organ. The effect of this organ is that the amount of pigmentation (and thus skin colour) of a Space Marine adapts to the amount of light and radiation in his environment. The permanently black colour of Vulkan and his Salamanders is caused by the malfunction of their melanchromic organs due to the particular radiation of their home planet of Nocturne. The Emperor did not create a black primarch. Vulkan becoming black was unintended. The Emperor did not create his Primarchs and Space Marines with a single skin colour, he created them with a skin colour that changes depending on their environment.

When you call an implant you designed a "melanchromic" anything, you know extremely well that you just created an option to change skin color, because you named the implant after that function.

So yes, Vulkan being black WAS intended. The organ's name would've been made before it was ever put into anyone, because the time to name something you're inventing is absolutely before sticking it into a human being.

Also, in terms of realism, people in 40k could have skin colours that are totally unlike those which we know today. After all, white skin itself is only a very recent development in the human species. White skin colour emerged less than 7000 years ago. 40k is set about 38000 years into the future. Realistically, humans would not at all look like present-day humans anymore as humans continue to evolve to adapt to new environments.

I agree.

Also the presence of many forms of abhumans is canon. Abhumans are essentially evolutions of humans that diverged enough to not be considered fully human, not not enough to be a distinct species on their own.

Which reminds me that Felinids are canonical in WH40k lore and are essentially some form of human with feline ears and some bizarre skin colorations reminiscient of a cat.

So if you wanted to also argue for a catwoman (as in a feline woman, not the comic character) model for the IG, it would also be supported by the lore.

Because it seems my point flew over a couple of heads, my reference to psychic powers was to highlight that if humanity has changed enough to induce genetic space magic, we have no idea as to what other changes may have happened.

Abhumans are another piece of evidence that 38,000 years is plenty of time for genes to change in this setting.

Wow. I went to sleep and came back and found three (?) pages of posts that include everything from Terminator bomb-dogs to "Is Vulkan Black or not?"

...

Er...

So, to answer the thread's resident anti-diversity chap:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Gen.Steiner 699785 8846076 wrote:1) Have the sculptors create heads for Marines and Guard that are representative of different generalised ethnic groups: European, Asian, African; so that not every model has a White Man Face. If sculptors like Kev White can create figures that are recognisably Black, or ranges like Copplestone's Chinese Warlord armies, or - actually - any 28mm historical manufacturer can produce figures that look like the ethnicities they're supposed to represent, I don't see why Games Workshop's sculptors can't give us African-descent Space Marines or Asian-descent Guardsmen or whatnot.

2) Between 3-4 female torsos and heads in every box of Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequins, Imperial Guard and Adeptus Mechanicus.

3) Relaunch the Sisters of Battle with a fully supported range of plastic figures, a new Codex, and so on and so forth.

4) Have the painting team paint the humans in a much more diverse way - I was really pleased to see the Stormcast Questor painted with Black skin.

5) More Xenos species - Hrud, Demiurg, more Kroot, and weirder races like the Bargheesi or the Loxatl.

6) Codex: Enemy Within covering Chaos and Genestealer cults, with male and female cultist models... and Arbites too (also male and female).

And that covers it nicely I think.

In terms of WIMMIN R WEAK LOL...

The YPJ beg to differ, as do the Scythians, the Dahomey, the Soviet Union, Tito's Partisans, the FARC, and pretty much every revolutionary and guerilla army ever, not to mention the operatives of the SOE, the Israeli Defence Force, and so on and so forth. I mean, there's even evidence to show that people like the Vikings had female warriors, while the American Indian tribes had not just female but intersex and transgender warriors; and the Tunisian Berbers who fought the Arab conquests were mostly led by women as they were a matriarchal culture.

Sure, on average looking at a normal distribution curve, men are statistically stronger than the statistical average woman, however, I would not like to try and fight any woman with even a modicum of training in any martial art, and the curves themselves will show you quite clearly that a proportion of women will equal or better the strongest men.

In terms of modern combat, and then extrapolating a mere 38,000 years into the future... 38,000 years ago Humanity was in the early stone age, and Neanderthals had been extinct for roughly 2,000 years. In Rogue Trader, it is explicitly stated that High Gothic and Low Gothic are totally alien languages that bear no resemblance to anything spoken or written today, and they are 'translated' into Latin and English respectively for our ease of understanding as players. To say that we can discuss "average" people in the year 40,000 is nonsensical, as the descendants of genetically enhanced settler peoples from the Golden Age of Humanity would vary so wildly in their genetic makeup as to be wholly new species in many cases.

The fact is, the background of Warhammer 40,000 clearly shows a much more diverse makeup to human and alien societies than is represented on the tabletop; and it would be nice for Games Workshop to produce official models to reflect their own background.

1. Except every Cadians guardsmen is just that, cadian. There is no race mixing on Cadians unlike Earth, so no, they shouldn't get those different heads. Space Marines are in the same boat, their geneseed changes them to the point where they all look damn near the same.

2. If GW had infinite piles of cash, sure, why not. (Dark eldar already have this though)

3. Once again, this delves into the resources and business plan/success of GW. You don't invest that much money into a faction with just a leap of faith, it is a huge risk. If GW had infinite money, sweet.

4. Again, this usually goes against the Lore and is super forceful when for some reason Ultras, Celestial Lions and White Scars team up for no other reason than the perfect ethnic trio. (Actually on is a generic white dude, scratch that, make ultras the Arabian guardsmen dudes). Once again, there is little to no race mixing in 40k so most of the minority themed armies are isolated to the point where they are the only representation of their race.

5. Too old school for the new 40k it currently is compared to RT.

6. Why would arbites be in the same book as the dudes they kill?

And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself.

If every race, army, and faction was represented on tabletop as in the background, it'd be literally impossible for GW to produce that ridiclous amount of models. Therefore they pick flagship factions and armies, and run with those. (Cadians, Ultras, etc.)

In response, then.

The Cadian Shock Troop box is intended not just to represent Cadians, but also other Imperial Guard units. If we accept that Cadia is a planet where the original settlers were all white, and that the result after at least 10,000 years of living on Cadia is that the whole population is white, we are still left with the issue that it does not adequately represent other planetary forces. Whilst it is possible to paint your little plastic and metal figures whatever skin colour you like (my own Rigellians have a wide variety of skin tones, while my Drokharan Tauregs are all Black - although their commissar is white), there shouldn't be an issue with including even a couple of optional heads that have different facial features, given that there are more than 10 heads in a box anyway! This goes double for the Catachans, where official art does show Black Catachans, yet none of the heads have features that represent the artwork. On top of that, revamped Sisters of Battle should definitely have mixed features, because they don't recruit from single worlds - they recruit from Schola Progenia, which take orphans from across Sectors of Imperial space.

Yes, Dark Eldar do already have this (and I think it's excellent) - so why not the Imperial Guard, the Chaos Cultists, the Genestealer Cult, the Eldar, the Aspect Warriors, and so on and so forth? It doesn't take much - they already redesign and revamp sprues for each re-release of a Codex, and adding 3 female torsos and heads in each box would be a great touch.

A... leap of faith, you say? Faith? How fitting for the Sisters of Battle, the Church Militant of the Ecclesiarchy, the armed wing of the Ordo Hereticus, the women whose belief is so strong they can do the impossible! Amusement aside, we can see the impact that the 5th Edition re-release of Dark Eldar had on the Dark Eldar community, while the Harlequins, Deathwatch and Adeptus Mechanicus/Skitarii are all such leaps of faith - not to mention the same can be said for the Necrons (2nd Edition), the original Dark Eldar release in 3rd, and the original release of the Tau (late 3rd Edition). This is not an argument that makes any sense, I'm afraid, especially as the Adepta Sororitas have models and a codex and sales already.

Regardless of how 'old school' it is, it has not - ever - been retconned, at least as far as I am aware. High Gothic and Low Gothic (and all their many, many dialects) are not actually pig-Latin or English. They are their own languages. I don't know why this is hard to believe; given that English once got written in runic script and even when it started using the latin script it looked like this:

Her Aethelstan cyning, eorla dryhten,
beorna beag-giefa, and his brothor eac,
Eadmund aetheling, ealdor-langetir
geslogon aet saecce sweorda ecgum
ymbe Brunanburh. Bord-weall clufon,
heowon heathu-linde hamora lafum
eaforan Eadweardes, swa him ge-aethele waes
fram cneo-magum thaet hie aet campe oft
with lathra gehwone land ealgodon,
hord and hamas. Hettend crungon,
Scotta leode and scip-flotan,
faege feollon. Feld dennode
secga swate siththan sunne upp
on morgen-tid, maere tungol,
glad ofer grundas, Godes candel beorht,
eces Dryhtnes, oth seo aethele gesceaft
sag to setle. Thaer laeg secg manig
garum agieted, guma Northerna
ofer scield scoten, swelce Scyttisc eac,
werig, wiges saed.

That's the first verse of the Battle of Brunanburh, dated from 937, a mere 1,079 years ago - let alone 28,000 years in the future!

And, as far as Arbites in the same book as the cults... there's at least one story that shows an Arbites Judge who's part of a Genestealer Cult (he kills his junior to allow the cult into an Arbites Precinct House, thus ending effective resistance to the cult). So not only is there a good reason to allow cult players to have a smattering of 'turned' Arbites, it enables players to buy a book with the intention of fielding, say, a Precinct House's Arbites, and then decide afterwards "hey, wouldn't it be cool to collect some Chaos cultists too?" without having to buy a second book. Just my own wishlisting there really, as GW would be much more likely to have Codex: Genestealer Cults, Codex: Chaos Cults and Codex: Adeptus Arbites. But it's not without precedent, Codex: Angels of Death had both Dark and Blood Angels in it.

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself.

If every race, army, and faction was represented on tabletop as in the background, it'd be literally impossible for GW to produce that ridiclous amount of models. Therefore they pick flagship factions and armies, and run with those. (Cadians, Ultras, etc.)

OK, that's ... that's not what I said. I am aware of testosterone, and its impact on human physiology (see Caster Semenya, and the use of testosterone in female-to-male transgender people, etc). What I said was, looking at the normal distribution curve of human ability, you will have people of all genders who can out-compete almost everyone else. For example, Milla Bizzotto, who is nine. Or just look at the Olympics! Sure, Usain Bolt is faster than Elaine Thompson over 100m (9.81sec against 10.71 sec, a difference of 0.9 seconds) but both are faster than anyone else on Earth over 100m. And finally, the YPJ are right this moment fighting a proper actual war, with real bullets and hand-to-hand combat, against men, and doing really rather well. Not to mention that the Dahomey women warriors fought with a mix of muskets and machetes, and took no prisoners because they were headtakers - the French Army had a nasty shock fighting the Dahomey in the 19th Century and lost a lot of men... in... hand-to-hand combat...

Look, I'm not saying "all women are super strong", I'm saying that using physical strength to rule women out from being soldiers in an imaginary far-future army that officially already includes women (see: Xenonia (3rd Edition Guard Codex), Dneipr (3rd Edition Guard Codex), the Tanith, the Valhallans, etc) is just nonsensical.

Like I said earlier, literally no-one loses if GW produces more diverse models to accurately reflect their own background. At this point, the only reason I can see for you so vehemently arguing against the inclusion of more female models and heads with non-White facial features is because you are a knee-jerk bigot.

Fun story about people who claim to just hate forced diversity because it takes away from artistic freedom and corrupts the art.

On the Overwatch forums, people used to frequently ask about the possibility of their home country getting a character at some point. Not saying it had to happen immediately, not trying to make the devs put any effort into it they wouldn't have otherwise, just simply, "Is this something we might possibly see at some point?"

And generally they'd have their threads bombarded with people arguing about how much forced diversity sucks and whatnot.

But I noticed something.

Every single time the suggestion for a Canadian hero came up, there were no complaints at all about forced diversity. Just tons of +1s and people saying how awesome it would be to play a Canadian and talking about the accent and appearance and abilities they might have, and zero negativity of any sort. Including in the many threads going into great detail about the particular Canadian hero they were suggesting.

And then I noticed something else.

Every time the complaints about forced diversity ruining everything came up, it was because a nationality was asked about where the predominant population isn't white.

From this, I deduced that the complaints about diversity are not actually complaints about diversity. If they WERE complaints about diversity, they would equally target the Canadian and other nationalities where the character is likely to be white. So the only possible option, is that complaints about diversity, are really just saying that they don't want non-white people in the game.

So I decided to casually post in one of the threads receiving complaints about forced diversity, without actually quoting anyone so that my reply would apply to everyone equally, very calmly and politely, about how I'd never seen the suggestions for a Canadian hero receive this many complaints.

And then the cries of "Forced diversity!" stopped. Almost immediately.

Because it's not forced diversity they hate. It's that they want to oppose specifically non-white characters being put into the game.

Ultimately, forcing people to confront themselves with the fact they're disguising their own racism behind the more noble goal of protecting artistic freedom is enough to get most of them to stop. At least for a while.

Heh. Canadian Overwatch Hero - First Nations person. That'd set the cat among the pigeons.

It's funny, really, in a way. It must be strange to feel threatened by 28mm tall figures that represent people other than a white man.

Shock! Horror! This Imperial Guard trooper is - gasp - a woman! And this one is *faints* BLACK! Don't they know that in the 41st Millenium all humans are white men?!

What is the world coming to. It's almost like 51% of the planet is female, and over 80% aren't white! Dear me.

Gen.Steiner wrote:
Heh. Canadian Overwatch Hero - First Nations person. That'd set the cat among the pigeons.

It's funny, really, in a way. It must be strange to feel threatened by 28mm tall figures that represent people other than a white man.

Shock! Horror! This Imperial Guard trooper is - gasp - a woman! And this one is *faints* BLACK! Don't they know that in the 41st Millenium all humans are white men?!

What is the world coming to. It's almost like 51% of the planet is female, and over 80% aren't white! Dear me.

I have also considered mentioning in the pro-Canadian posts that a non-white Canadian hero would be 100% suitable (and also a First Nations hero would be spiffy because we don't actually have any First Nations characters in Overwatch but we do have a wide variety of other races). But I don't think it'd be received as well.

Most people do seem to be assuming a Canadian hero would be white, and that's not a certainty whatsoever due to Canada's fairly diverse population.

 Pouncey wrote:

Every time the complaints about forced diversity ruining everything came up, it was because a nationality was asked about where the predominant population isn't white.

From this, I deduced that the complaints about diversity are not actually complaints about diversity. If they WERE complaints about diversity, they would equally target the Canadian and other nationalities where the character is likely to be white. So the only possible option, is that complaints about diversity, are really just saying that they don't want non-white people in the game.

So I decided to casually post in one of the threads receiving complaints about forced diversity, without actually quoting anyone so that my reply would apply to everyone equally, very calmly and politely, about how I'd never seen the suggestions for a Canadian hero receive this many complaints.

And then the cries of "Forced diversity!" stopped. Almost immediately.

Because it's not forced diversity they hate. It's that they want to oppose specifically non-white characters being put into the game.

Ultimately, forcing people to confront themselves with the fact they're disguising their own racism behind the more noble goal of protecting artistic freedom is enough to get most of them to stop. At least for a while.

I take it this is on an english-speaking forum, yes?

It may not be about ethnicity. It's far more likely that they are against (at least subconsciously) having to deal with new and different cultures. The English speaking world takes Australia, Canada, the UK, the USA and related others. These are places of a white majority, yes, but they are also of a notably similar culture, linked by the same language, making them feel familiar.

Compare this to, say, anything from the middle-east, obscure eastern-European countries and Russia. Not the same language, unfamiliar cultures.

 Selym wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

Every time the complaints about forced diversity ruining everything came up, it was because a nationality was asked about where the predominant population isn't white.

From this, I deduced that the complaints about diversity are not actually complaints about diversity. If they WERE complaints about diversity, they would equally target the Canadian and other nationalities where the character is likely to be white. So the only possible option, is that complaints about diversity, are really just saying that they don't want non-white people in the game.

So I decided to casually post in one of the threads receiving complaints about forced diversity, without actually quoting anyone so that my reply would apply to everyone equally, very calmly and politely, about how I'd never seen the suggestions for a Canadian hero receive this many complaints.

And then the cries of "Forced diversity!" stopped. Almost immediately.

Because it's not forced diversity they hate. It's that they want to oppose specifically non-white characters being put into the game.

Ultimately, forcing people to confront themselves with the fact they're disguising their own racism behind the more noble goal of protecting artistic freedom is enough to get most of them to stop. At least for a while.

I take it this is on an english-speaking forum, yes?

It may not be about ethnicity. It's far more likely that they are against (at least subconsciously) having to deal with new and different cultures. The English speaking world takes Australia, Canada, the UK, the USA and related others. These are places of a white majority, yes, but they are also of a notably similar culture, linked by the same language, making them feel familiar.

Compare this to, say, anything from the middle-east, obscure eastern-European countries and Russia. Not the same language, unfamiliar cultures.

So it's not racism, it's just xenophobia?

That's a bit better... I guess.

 Pouncey wrote:
Fun story about people who claim to just hate forced diversity because it takes away from artistic freedom and corrupts the art.

On the Overwatch forums, people used to frequently ask about the possibility of their home country getting a character at some point. Not saying it had to happen immediately, not trying to make the devs put any effort into it they wouldn't have otherwise, just simply, "Is this something we might possibly see at some point?"

And generally they'd have their threads bombarded with people arguing about how much forced diversity sucks and whatnot.

But I noticed something.

Every single time the suggestion for a Canadian hero came up, there were no complaints at all about forced diversity. Just tons of +1s and people saying how awesome it would be to play a Canadian and talking about the accent and appearance and abilities they might have, and zero negativity of any sort. Including in the many threads going into great detail about the particular Canadian hero they were suggesting.

And then I noticed something else.

Every time the complaints about forced diversity ruining everything came up, it was because a nationality was asked about where the predominant population isn't white.

From this, I deduced that the complaints about diversity are not actually complaints about diversity. If they WERE complaints about diversity, they would equally target the Canadian and other nationalities where the character is likely to be white. So the only possible option, is that complaints about diversity, are really just saying that they don't want non-white people in the game.

So I decided to casually post in one of the threads receiving complaints about forced diversity, without actually quoting anyone so that my reply would apply to everyone equally, very calmly and politely, about how I'd never seen the suggestions for a Canadian hero receive this many complaints.

And then the cries of "Forced diversity!" stopped. Almost immediately.

Because it's not forced diversity they hate. It's that they want to oppose specifically non-white characters being put into the game.

Ultimately, forcing people to confront themselves with the fact they're disguising their own racism behind the more noble goal of protecting artistic freedom is enough to get most of them to stop. At least for a while.

Maybe, just maybe, something isn't racist, but the vast majority would rather a hero from a large country with plenty of players, instead of a hero from Zimbabwe which 2 people could enjoy?

Gen.Steiner wrote:
Wow. I went to sleep and came back and found three (?) pages of posts that include everything from Terminator bomb-dogs to "Is Vulkan Black or not?"

...

Er...

So, to answer the thread's resident anti-diversity chap:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Gen.Steiner 699785 8846076 wrote:1) Have the sculptors create heads for Marines and Guard that are representative of different generalised ethnic groups: European, Asian, African; so that not every model has a White Man Face. If sculptors like Kev White can create figures that are recognisably Black, or ranges like Copplestone's Chinese Warlord armies, or - actually - any 28mm historical manufacturer can produce figures that look like the ethnicities they're supposed to represent, I don't see why Games Workshop's sculptors can't give us African-descent Space Marines or Asian-descent Guardsmen or whatnot.

2) Between 3-4 female torsos and heads in every box of Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequins, Imperial Guard and Adeptus Mechanicus.

3) Relaunch the Sisters of Battle with a fully supported range of plastic figures, a new Codex, and so on and so forth.

4) Have the painting team paint the humans in a much more diverse way - I was really pleased to see the Stormcast Questor painted with Black skin.

5) More Xenos species - Hrud, Demiurg, more Kroot, and weirder races like the Bargheesi or the Loxatl.

6) Codex: Enemy Within covering Chaos and Genestealer cults, with male and female cultist models... and Arbites too (also male and female).

And that covers it nicely I think.

In terms of WIMMIN R WEAK LOL...

The YPJ beg to differ, as do the Scythians, the Dahomey, the Soviet Union, Tito's Partisans, the FARC, and pretty much every revolutionary and guerilla army ever, not to mention the operatives of the SOE, the Israeli Defence Force, and so on and so forth. I mean, there's even evidence to show that people like the Vikings had female warriors, while the American Indian tribes had not just female but intersex and transgender warriors; and the Tunisian Berbers who fought the Arab conquests were mostly led by women as they were a matriarchal culture.

Sure, on average looking at a normal distribution curve, men are statistically stronger than the statistical average woman, however, I would not like to try and fight any woman with even a modicum of training in any martial art, and the curves themselves will show you quite clearly that a proportion of women will equal or better the strongest men.

In terms of modern combat, and then extrapolating a mere 38,000 years into the future... 38,000 years ago Humanity was in the early stone age, and Neanderthals had been extinct for roughly 2,000 years. In Rogue Trader, it is explicitly stated that High Gothic and Low Gothic are totally alien languages that bear no resemblance to anything spoken or written today, and they are 'translated' into Latin and English respectively for our ease of understanding as players. To say that we can discuss "average" people in the year 40,000 is nonsensical, as the descendants of genetically enhanced settler peoples from the Golden Age of Humanity would vary so wildly in their genetic makeup as to be wholly new species in many cases.

The fact is, the background of Warhammer 40,000 clearly shows a much more diverse makeup to human and alien societies than is represented on the tabletop; and it would be nice for Games Workshop to produce official models to reflect their own background.

1. Except every Cadians guardsmen is just that, cadian. There is no race mixing on Cadians unlike Earth, so no, they shouldn't get those different heads. Space Marines are in the same boat, their geneseed changes them to the point where they all look damn near the same.

2. If GW had infinite piles of cash, sure, why not. (Dark eldar already have this though)

3. Once again, this delves into the resources and business plan/success of GW. You don't invest that much money into a faction with just a leap of faith, it is a huge risk. If GW had infinite money, sweet.

4. Again, this usually goes against the Lore and is super forceful when for some reason Ultras, Celestial Lions and White Scars team up for no other reason than the perfect ethnic trio. (Actually on is a generic white dude, scratch that, make ultras the Arabian guardsmen dudes). Once again, there is little to no race mixing in 40k so most of the minority themed armies are isolated to the point where they are the only representation of their race.

5. Too old school for the new 40k it currently is compared to RT.

6. Why would arbites be in the same book as the dudes they kill?

And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself.

If every race, army, and faction was represented on tabletop as in the background, it'd be literally impossible for GW to produce that ridiclous amount of models. Therefore they pick flagship factions and armies, and run with those. (Cadians, Ultras, etc.)

In response, then.

The Cadian Shock Troop box is intended not just to represent Cadians, but also other Imperial Guard units. If we accept that Cadia is a planet where the original settlers were all white, and that the result after at least 10,000 years of living on Cadia is that the whole population is white, we are still left with the issue that it does not adequately represent other planetary forces. Whilst it is possible to paint your little plastic and metal figures whatever skin colour you like (my own Rigellians have a wide variety of skin tones, while my Drokharan Tauregs are all Black - although their commissar is white), there shouldn't be an issue with including even a couple of optional heads that have different facial features, given that there are more than 10 heads in a box anyway! This goes double for the Catachans, where official art does show Black Catachans, yet none of the heads have features that represent the artwork. On top of that, revamped Sisters of Battle should definitely have mixed features, because they don't recruit from single worlds - they recruit from Schola Progenia, which take orphans from across Sectors of Imperial space.

Yes, Dark Eldar do already have this (and I think it's excellent) - so why not the Imperial Guard, the Chaos Cultists, the Genestealer Cult, the Eldar, the Aspect Warriors, and so on and so forth? It doesn't take much - they already redesign and revamp sprues for each re-release of a Codex, and adding 3 female torsos and heads in each box would be a great touch.

A... leap of faith, you say? Faith? How fitting for the Sisters of Battle, the Church Militant of the Ecclesiarchy, the armed wing of the Ordo Hereticus, the women whose belief is so strong they can do the impossible! Amusement aside, we can see the impact that the 5th Edition re-release of Dark Eldar had on the Dark Eldar community, while the Harlequins, Deathwatch and Adeptus Mechanicus/Skitarii are all such leaps of faith - not to mention the same can be said for the Necrons (2nd Edition), the original Dark Eldar release in 3rd, and the original release of the Tau (late 3rd Edition). This is not an argument that makes any sense, I'm afraid, especially as the Adepta Sororitas have models and a codex and sales already.

Regardless of how 'old school' it is, it has not - ever - been retconned, at least as far as I am aware. High Gothic and Low Gothic (and all their many, many dialects) are not actually pig-Latin or English. They are their own languages. I don't know why this is hard to believe; given that English once got written in runic script and even when it started using the latin script it looked like this:

Her Aethelstan cyning, eorla dryhten,
beorna beag-giefa, and his brothor eac,
Eadmund aetheling, ealdor-langetir
geslogon aet saecce sweorda ecgum
ymbe Brunanburh. Bord-weall clufon,
heowon heathu-linde hamora lafum
eaforan Eadweardes, swa him ge-aethele waes
fram cneo-magum thaet hie aet campe oft
with lathra gehwone land ealgodon,
hord and hamas. Hettend crungon,
Scotta leode and scip-flotan,
faege feollon. Feld dennode
secga swate siththan sunne upp
on morgen-tid, maere tungol,
glad ofer grundas, Godes candel beorht,
eces Dryhtnes, oth seo aethele gesceaft
sag to setle. Thaer laeg secg manig
garum agieted, guma Northerna
ofer scield scoten, swelce Scyttisc eac,
werig, wiges saed.

That's the first verse of the Battle of Brunanburh, dated from 937, a mere 1,079 years ago - let alone 28,000 years in the future!

And, as far as Arbites in the same book as the cults... there's at least one story that shows an Arbites Judge who's part of a Genestealer Cult (he kills his junior to allow the cult into an Arbites Precinct House, thus ending effective resistance to the cult). So not only is there a good reason to allow cult players to have a smattering of 'turned' Arbites, it enables players to buy a book with the intention of fielding, say, a Precinct House's Arbites, and then decide afterwards "hey, wouldn't it be cool to collect some Chaos cultists too?" without having to buy a second book. Just my own wishlisting there really, as GW would be much more likely to have Codex: Genestealer Cults, Codex: Chaos Cults and Codex: Adeptus Arbites. But it's not without precedent, Codex: Angels of Death had both Dark and Blood Angels in it.

#1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself.

If every race, army, and faction was represented on tabletop as in the background, it'd be literally impossible for GW to produce that ridiclous amount of models. Therefore they pick flagship factions and armies, and run with those. (Cadians, Ultras, etc.)

OK, that's ... that's not what I said. I am aware of testosterone, and its impact on human physiology (see Caster Semenya, and the use of testosterone in female-to-male transgender people, etc). What I said was, looking at the normal distribution curve of human ability, you will have people of all genders who can out-compete almost everyone else. For example, Milla Bizzotto, who is nine. Or just look at the Olympics! Sure, Usain Bolt is faster than Elaine Thompson over 100m (9.81sec against 10.71 sec, a difference of 0.9 seconds) but both are faster than anyone else on Earth over 100m. And finally, the YPJ are right this moment fighting a proper actual war, with real bullets and hand-to-hand combat, against men, and doing really rather well. Not to mention that the Dahomey women warriors fought with a mix of muskets and machetes, and took no prisoners because they were headtakers - the French Army had a nasty shock fighting the Dahomey in the 19th Century and lost a lot of men... in... hand-to-hand combat...

Look, I'm not saying "all women are super strong", I'm saying that using physical strength to rule women out from being soldiers in an imaginary far-future army that officially already includes women (see: Xenonia (3rd Edition Guard Codex), Dneipr (3rd Edition Guard Codex), the Tanith, the Valhallans, etc) is just nonsensical.

Like I said earlier, literally no-one loses if GW produces more diverse models to accurately reflect their own background. At this point, the only reason I can see for you so vehemently arguing against the inclusion of more female models and heads with non-White facial features is because you are a knee-jerk bigot.

Was waiting for bigot to be used. So someone argues that black people on Cadia isn't lore friendly (which it isn't) and that women are weaker than men, and they're a bigot? I don't understand. Everything in my argument is supported, but I'm a bigot?

Women do have greater endurance over long distances and timeframes compared to men. Men have a greater short-term strength and speed.

However, when we are talking about capabilities in this way, we are referring to their maximum potential. There is significant crossover. Sure, a woman may have to work harder than a man to acquire a certain level of strength, but both can at some point carry X kg of kit into the field, both have the mental capacity to use said equipment, and both will bleed just the same when shot.

This is why there are females in the army who aren't just constantly overshadowed by men in their capacity (just when it comes to recognition and promotions).

Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

As has already been suggested, more xenos, non humanoid if possible.
And if anybody wants my suggestion, the Arachnoids. Real nasty spiders. But unlike the Nids I'd have them as technologically advanced, making use of non organic armour and weapons.

 Melissia wrote:
Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

Personally I don't want to explain how averages work again or why the number of people who are average is actually really, really tiny. I feel it's a mathematical concept that anyone playing a crazy-expensive miniatures game involving lots of dice should actually understand.

 Melissia wrote:
Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

We've had it several times in this thread already. The end point is that Men and Women are not totally different. We have IRL instances of women beating men at feats of strength, and we have instances of men beating women at feats of endurance. It is just not as simple as "Man has Strength 4, Woman has Strength 3".

 Selym wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

We've had it several times in this thread already. The end point is that Men and Women are not totally different. We have IRL instances of women beating men at feats of strength, and we have instances of men beating women at feats of endurance. It is just not as simple as "Man has Strength 4, Woman has Strength 3".

Militarum Tempestus, highly elite trained military men, are Strength 3.

Sisters of Battle, highly elite trained religious military women (whose power armor doesn't increase their strength) are also Strength 3.

Death-Cult Assasins, wacko melee assassins whose lore I haven't looked into but all the models are women so I've always assumed they're always women, are Strength 4.

Space Marines, who we should all be familiar with, are Strength 4.

Eldar Banshees are Strength 3.

Ork Boys are Strength 3.

So we have, among just those units, men paralling women, men beating women, women beating men, women beating women, and men beating men, and both women and men beating AND paralleling two different types of melee-oriented Xenos.

So apparently, yes, it does in fact matter what your personal characteristics are, more so than your gender in terms of strength in the Warhammer 40k game. Your gender seems to be practically irrelevant compared to which unit you actually are in the equation.

Except those are game statistics and have little impact on lore.

 HANZERtank wrote:
How would people here go about adding more diversity to the 40k universe. I hear things about female space marines need to be added in. I'm personally not too bothered about that as it currently doesn't exist in the fluff. I get that maybe it should amd feel free to discuss it. However I do believe that distinctly female options should be made for Guard and Tau. Both of these have female warriors in the fluff yet not properly represented (at least with gw minis) on the table.

Here is the original post in this thread. This discussion has seemed to drift far afield of the original question.

1. I think Female Space marines are silly because they are against the existing/current lore. Feel free to sculpt your minis how you wish, but I shall roll my eyes at your 36 HH boob plate armor just as I would roll them at another players declaration that their Space Marine Chapter is from one of the two Lost Legions.
2. I think that there is 100% NOTHING wrong either in modeling or in lore with female IG, Female Tau, or even female Kroot. However, I don't know how you depict Male/Female variance from a species that evolved from birds (Kroot)... Knock yourself off with female cadians and catachans and Death Korps of Krieg.

"And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself. "

Have you ever heard of xenoblogulogutlrararin?

Fire caste Tau have a lot of it, Earth Caste don't. It gives you a lot of muscles.

40k is a sci fi setting. You can have alien races with as much or as little sexual dimorphism in whatever direction you want.

For instance, in the Tau, it's clear that rather than sexual dimorphism (which appears to be very minimal) they have subspecies differences between the different castes. Eldar are already established to have almost no difference in build between the males and females, which is why arguments like "they put the heavier armor on the men and keep most of the instinctually nurturing wimminfolk at home makin' babies where they belong!"

In the game's established lore, Eldar, Guard, and Dark Eldar have equal representation between the sexes. The only model line that comes even close is the Dark Eldar, with usually around 20% female sculpts. GW does not make female or non-white sculpts for their minis, with very few exceptions, and recently even models that once had female sculpts (Shadowseer, Eldar Windriders, Dire Avengers) were changed to be all-male. Even in cases where the parts don't need to be interchanged (genestealer cult, chaos cult) they sculpt and paint everyone male and white.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
Agreed. I am likely allowing my personal favoritism towards Tau to interfere with other's preferences. Eldar can be excused (possibly!) because likely the Old Ones got lazy and made humans and Eldar share some features. That's pretty much the only reason I can think of for them having enlarged breasts like humans.

The thing is that the Old Ones had nothing to do with Humanity. They were long gone by the time Man's earliest ancestors came about. The same with that bit of throwaway fluff back in the day regarding Necrons and the "Pariah Gene".


Humans in 40k evolved on Earth naturally. They weren't "created" by anybody.

Wait, really? That's interesting. I wonder why Eldar resemble humans so much, then. I was always under the impression that the Old Ones seeded Earth with material to eventually create humans, but died out before they could finish the job.

the_scotsman wrote:
"And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself. "

Have you ever heard of xenoblogulogutlrararin?

Fire caste Tau have a lot of it, Earth Caste don't. It gives you a lot of muscles.

40k is a sci fi setting. You can have alien races with as much or as little sexual dimorphism in whatever direction you want.

For instance, in the Tau, it's clear that rather than sexual dimorphism (which appears to be very minimal) they have subspecies differences between the different castes. Eldar are already established to have almost no difference in build between the males and females, which is why arguments like "they put the heavier armor on the men and keep most of the instinctually nurturing wimminfolk at home makin' babies where they belong!"

In the game's established lore, Eldar, Guard, and Dark Eldar have equal representation between the sexes. The only model line that comes even close is the Dark Eldar, with usually around 20% female sculpts. GW does not make female or non-white sculpts for their minis, with very few exceptions, and recently even models that once had female sculpts (Shadowseer, Eldar Windriders, Dire Avengers) were changed to be all-male. Even in cases where the parts don't need to be interchanged (genestealer cult, chaos cult) they sculpt and paint everyone male and white.

Given that only 00.1% of Imperial citizens are recruited into the IG, the difference between an average female and male human in terms of strength making any difference seems silly. The IG is using a percentage of Imperial citizens so small they can afford to set their recruitment requirements pretty high and still maintain enough numbers. You wouldn't be looking at average people being in the Imperial Guard, but only above average ones. And since this implies some sort of minimum requirement that is uniform across all members, the Astra Militarum's requirements for hand to hand combat strength are met in every case, male and female. And the number of people being recruited into the IG compared to the total population is so low that it is quite feasible for many IG regiments to end up being wholly female and having the physical strength to give a fully male Regiment an even fight.

In short, the Imperium of Man is so vast that it is entirely possible for them to happen to have only recruited women across the entire Imperium of Man without negatively affecting their hand-to-hand combat abilities in any way.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

We've had it several times in this thread already. The end point is that Men and Women are not totally different. We have IRL instances of women beating men at feats of strength, and we have instances of men beating women at feats of endurance. It is just not as simple as "Man has Strength 4, Woman has Strength 3".

Militarum Tempestus, highly elite trained military men, are Strength 3.

Sisters of Battle, highly elite trained religious military women (whose power armor doesn't increase their strength) are also Strength 3.

Death-Cult Assasins, wacko melee assassins whose lore I haven't looked into but all the models are women so I've always assumed they're always women, are Strength 4.

Space Marines, who we should all be familiar with, are Strength 4.

Eldar Banshees are Strength 3.

Ork Boys are Strength 3.

So we have, among just those units, men paralling women, men beating women, women beating men, women beating women, and men beating men, and both women and men beating AND paralleling two different types of melee-oriented Xenos.

So apparently, yes, it does in fact matter what your personal characteristics are, more so than your gender in terms of strength in the Warhammer 40k game. Your gender seems to be practically irrelevant compared to which unit you actually are in the equation.

My comparison was to highlight the lack of logic behind the statement "men are stronger", rather than to put it into 40k statlines.
And yes, the statlines have little to do with the fluff. We have fluff guardsmen of varying strengths and accuracies, and passages in which SM punch holes in what would on the TT be an Av14 building.

 Selym wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

We've had it several times in this thread already. The end point is that Men and Women are not totally different. We have IRL instances of women beating men at feats of strength, and we have instances of men beating women at feats of endurance. It is just not as simple as "Man has Strength 4, Woman has Strength 3".

Militarum Tempestus, highly elite trained military men, are Strength 3.

Sisters of Battle, highly elite trained religious military women (whose power armor doesn't increase their strength) are also Strength 3.

Death-Cult Assasins, wacko melee assassins whose lore I haven't looked into but all the models are women so I've always assumed they're always women, are Strength 4.

Space Marines, who we should all be familiar with, are Strength 4.

Eldar Banshees are Strength 3.

Ork Boys are Strength 3.

So we have, among just those units, men paralling women, men beating women, women beating men, women beating women, and men beating men, and both women and men beating AND paralleling two different types of melee-oriented Xenos.

So apparently, yes, it does in fact matter what your personal characteristics are, more so than your gender in terms of strength in the Warhammer 40k game. Your gender seems to be practically irrelevant compared to which unit you actually are in the equation.

My comparison was to highlight the lack of logic behind the statement "men are stronger", rather than to put it into 40k statlines.
And yes, the statlines have little to do with the fluff. We have fluff guardsmen of varying strengths and accuracies, and passages in which SM punch holes in what would on the TT be an Av14 building.

Yeah, I like my argument above your post better. : D

Side note: I did actually ask on the Overwatch forums about a First Nations character. The reponses I got from the Americans led me to conclude that Americans in general do not actually put any effort into learning about Canada.

the_scotsman wrote:
"And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself. "

Have you ever heard of xenoblogulogutlrararin?

Fire caste Tau have a lot of it, Earth Caste don't. It gives you a lot of muscles.

40k is a sci fi setting. You can have alien races with as much or as little sexual dimorphism in whatever direction you want.

For instance, in the Tau, it's clear that rather than sexual dimorphism (which appears to be very minimal) they have subspecies differences between the different castes. Eldar are already established to have almost no difference in build between the males and females, which is why arguments like "they put the heavier armor on the men and keep most of the instinctually nurturing wimminfolk at home makin' babies where they belong!"

In the game's established lore, Eldar, Guard, and Dark Eldar have equal representation between the sexes. The only model line that comes even close is the Dark Eldar, with usually around 20% female sculpts. GW does not make female or non-white sculpts for their minis, with very few exceptions, and recently even models that once had female sculpts (Shadowseer, Eldar Windriders, Dire Avengers) were changed to be all-male. Even in cases where the parts don't need to be interchanged (genestealer cult, chaos cult) they sculpt and paint everyone male and white.

We weren't talking about Tau, or Eldar, we were talking about Imperial Guard/humans. And thanks for making me sound like a redneck southerner despite me having fully supported arguments. (is it just because I disagree with you?) And Dark Eldar have more than 20%, at least 33 ranging to 60%. The Wych squads have practically only females, succubus is female only, kabalites have at least 3-4 female torsos, and the Raider kit has like 2 female passengers and reavers have 2 female torsos.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Was waiting for bigot to be used. So someone argues that black people on Cadia isn't lore friendly (which it isn't) and that women are weaker than men, and they're a bigot? I don't understand. Everything in my argument is supported, but I'm a bigot?

Nothing in your argument is supported. You are, at this point, metaphorically jumping up and down going "NO WIMMINS NO BLACKS" and not actually engaging with anything.

Even if one accepts that Cadia is magically 100% white, that does not mean that all the Guard armies that use Cadian-pattern equipment are. In fact, just a slight engagement with the background will give you the Catachans, who are both black and white, the Vitrian Dragoons, who are all black, the Attillans, who are Mongolian, and so on and so forth. So we know that humanity remains diverse in the 41st Millenium. Therefore, adding a couple of non-white heads into the boxes of figures makes sense, follows the background, and allows people to build armies that are diverse, or not, depending on what they want to do as individual players!

There are absolutely no reasons whatsoever to object to female figures in boxes of Imperial Guard, because, as we know from the background, there are female Imperial Guard. Some regiments are mixed (Tanith 1st, Valhallan 397th), some regiments are not (Xenonian Guard - all female). That's leaving aside the debate about statistical average strength, which as we can see in reality means that there are plenty of really strong women. Unless you're saying you'd be happy to go toe-to-toe with Cristiane "Cyborg" Justino, because she's a girl lol?

So. To sum.

Your arguments are not supported either in reality, or in the background, beyond "all the art shows Cadians as white!", which doesn't take into account all the non-white regiments, or the black Catachans, or the female regiments.

Therefore, I can only assume your objection to women and non-white figures is because you don't like seeing women or non-white people represented in games or fiction... even when they already are, quite clearly, in the 40K universe.

 Pouncey wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
"And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself. "

Have you ever heard of xenoblogulogutlrararin?

Fire caste Tau have a lot of it, Earth Caste don't. It gives you a lot of muscles.

40k is a sci fi setting. You can have alien races with as much or as little sexual dimorphism in whatever direction you want.

For instance, in the Tau, it's clear that rather than sexual dimorphism (which appears to be very minimal) they have subspecies differences between the different castes. Eldar are already established to have almost no difference in build between the males and females, which is why arguments like "they put the heavier armor on the men and keep most of the instinctually nurturing wimminfolk at home makin' babies where they belong!"

In the game's established lore, Eldar, Guard, and Dark Eldar have equal representation between the sexes. The only model line that comes even close is the Dark Eldar, with usually around 20% female sculpts. GW does not make female or non-white sculpts for their minis, with very few exceptions, and recently even models that once had female sculpts (Shadowseer, Eldar Windriders, Dire Avengers) were changed to be all-male. Even in cases where the parts don't need to be interchanged (genestealer cult, chaos cult) they sculpt and paint everyone male and white.

Given that only 00.1% of Imperial citizens are recruited into the IG, the difference between an average female and male human in terms of strength making any difference seems silly. The IG is using a percentage of Imperial citizens so small they can afford to set their recruitment requirements pretty high and still maintain enough numbers. You wouldn't be looking at average people being in the Imperial Guard, but only above average ones. And since this implies some sort of minimum requirement that is uniform across all members, the Astra Militarum's requirements for hand to hand combat strength are met in every case, male and female. And the number of people being recruited into the IG compared to the total population is so low that it is quite feasible for many IG regiments to end up being wholly female and having the physical strength to give a fully male Regiment an even fight.

In short, the Imperium of Man is so vast that it is entirely possible for them to happen to have only recruited women across the entire Imperium of Man without negatively affecting their hand-to-hand combat abilities in any way.

You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

If you have a problem with girls and/or people of different races, maybe you should talk to someone.

The first step is acceptance.

Gen.Steiner wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Was waiting for bigot to be used. So someone argues that black people on Cadia isn't lore friendly (which it isn't) and that women are weaker than men, and they're a bigot? I don't understand. Everything in my argument is supported, but I'm a bigot?

Nothing in your argument is supported. You are, at this point, metaphorically jumping up and down going "NO WIMMINS NO BLACKS" and not actually engaging with anything.

Even if one accepts that Cadia is magically 100% white, that does not mean that all the Guard armies that use Cadian-pattern equipment are. In fact, just a slight engagement with the background will give you the Catachans, who are both black and white, the Vitrian Dragoons, who are all black, the Attillans, who are Mongolian, and so on and so forth. So we know that humanity remains diverse in the 41st Millenium. Therefore, adding a couple of non-white heads into the boxes of figures makes sense, follows the background, and allows people to build armies that are diverse, or not, depending on what they want to do as individual players!

There are absolutely no reasons whatsoever to object to female figures in boxes of Imperial Guard, because, as we know from the background, there are female Imperial Guard. Some regiments are mixed (Tanith 1st, Valhallan 397th), some regiments are not (Xenonian Guard - all female). That's leaving aside the debate about statistical average strength, which as we can see in reality means that there are plenty of really strong women. Unless you're saying you'd be happy to go toe-to-toe with Cristiane "Cyborg" Justino, because she's a girl lol?

So. To sum.

Your arguments are not supported either in reality, or in the background, beyond "all the art shows Cadians as white!", which doesn't take into account all the non-white regiments, or the black Catachans, or the female regiments.

Therefore, I can only assume your objection to women and non-white figures is because you don't like seeing women or non-white people represented in games or fiction... even when they already are, quite clearly, in the 40K universe.

It IS fully supported. No artwork or paintjobs have shown black Cadians, thus we can infer Cadia has no black people. Women are statistically weaker than men. This has been proven by many studies. Why are you getting your panties in a knot over the truth? I am not arguing against less diversity in 40k, and I understand there is female Imperial Guardsmen. I have already stated that when they get updated a couple different bits would be good.

At this point it's just become an echo-chamber of "HEY YOU BAD MAN WHY YOU GOTTA HATE BLACKS AND THE WOMAN MAN".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kronk wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

If you have a problem with girls and/or people of different races, maybe you should talk to someone.

The first step is acceptance.

Yes, I have an issue with someone because they are scientifically weaker. /s I am simply stating facts. Are you denying women aren't weaker than men?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
"And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself. "

Have you ever heard of xenoblogulogutlrararin?

Fire caste Tau have a lot of it, Earth Caste don't. It gives you a lot of muscles.

40k is a sci fi setting. You can have alien races with as much or as little sexual dimorphism in whatever direction you want.

For instance, in the Tau, it's clear that rather than sexual dimorphism (which appears to be very minimal) they have subspecies differences between the different castes. Eldar are already established to have almost no difference in build between the males and females, which is why arguments like "they put the heavier armor on the men and keep most of the instinctually nurturing wimminfolk at home makin' babies where they belong!"

In the game's established lore, Eldar, Guard, and Dark Eldar have equal representation between the sexes. The only model line that comes even close is the Dark Eldar, with usually around 20% female sculpts. GW does not make female or non-white sculpts for their minis, with very few exceptions, and recently even models that once had female sculpts (Shadowseer, Eldar Windriders, Dire Avengers) were changed to be all-male. Even in cases where the parts don't need to be interchanged (genestealer cult, chaos cult) they sculpt and paint everyone male and white.

Given that only 00.1% of Imperial citizens are recruited into the IG, the difference between an average female and male human in terms of strength making any difference seems silly. The IG is using a percentage of Imperial citizens so small they can afford to set their recruitment requirements pretty high and still maintain enough numbers. You wouldn't be looking at average people being in the Imperial Guard, but only above average ones. And since this implies some sort of minimum requirement that is uniform across all members, the Astra Militarum's requirements for hand to hand combat strength are met in every case, male and female. And the number of people being recruited into the IG compared to the total population is so low that it is quite feasible for many IG regiments to end up being wholly female and having the physical strength to give a fully male Regiment an even fight.

In short, the Imperium of Man is so vast that it is entirely possible for them to happen to have only recruited women across the entire Imperium of Man without negatively affecting their hand-to-hand combat abilities in any way.

You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

The number of humans in the Imperium is not actually set in stone, you're right, but it wasn't completely made up. It was calculated to be a roughly average estimate based on the official population figures regarding hive cities, number of hives on a hive, number of hive worlds in the Imperium, average population of a non-hive world, and the number of non-hive worlds in the Imperium. All of the number ranges that went into calculating the average are official, confirmed lore from Lexicanum.

And plugging in the math, we find that the Imperium has around 20 quadrillion people in it. Lexicanum says there "must be many billions" of Imperial Guard, and the estimate that I arrived at to conclude the Imperium has 00.1% of its population in the AM assumed there were 20 trillion Guardsmen, which is multiple orders of magnitude above what is actually defined by the lore. Correcting it to 200 billion Guardsmen, a very high end but still within the numbers given, would result in there being 00.001% of all humans being in the AM.

Where is the math wrong?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

You recall you explained what an "average" is to him last night, right?

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Gen.Steiner wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Was waiting for bigot to be used. So someone argues that black people on Cadia isn't lore friendly (which it isn't) and that women are weaker than men, and they're a bigot? I don't understand. Everything in my argument is supported, but I'm a bigot?

Nothing in your argument is supported. You are, at this point, metaphorically jumping up and down going "NO WIMMINS NO BLACKS" and not actually engaging with anything.

Even if one accepts that Cadia is magically 100% white, that does not mean that all the Guard armies that use Cadian-pattern equipment are. In fact, just a slight engagement with the background will give you the Catachans, who are both black and white, the Vitrian Dragoons, who are all black, the Attillans, who are Mongolian, and so on and so forth. So we know that humanity remains diverse in the 41st Millenium. Therefore, adding a couple of non-white heads into the boxes of figures makes sense, follows the background, and allows people to build armies that are diverse, or not, depending on what they want to do as individual players!

There are absolutely no reasons whatsoever to object to female figures in boxes of Imperial Guard, because, as we know from the background, there are female Imperial Guard. Some regiments are mixed (Tanith 1st, Valhallan 397th), some regiments are not (Xenonian Guard - all female). That's leaving aside the debate about statistical average strength, which as we can see in reality means that there are plenty of really strong women. Unless you're saying you'd be happy to go toe-to-toe with Cristiane "Cyborg" Justino, because she's a girl lol?

So. To sum.

Your arguments are not supported either in reality, or in the background, beyond "all the art shows Cadians as white!", which doesn't take into account all the non-white regiments, or the black Catachans, or the female regiments.

Therefore, I can only assume your objection to women and non-white figures is because you don't like seeing women or non-white people represented in games or fiction... even when they already are, quite clearly, in the 40K universe.

It IS fully supported. No artwork or paintjobs have shown black Cadians, thus we can infer Cadia has no black people. Women are statistically weaker than men. This has been proven by many studies. Why are you getting your panties in a knot over the truth? I am not arguing against less diversity in 40k, and I understand there is female Imperial Guardsmen. I have already stated that when they get updated a couple different bits would be good.

At this point it's just become an echo-chamber of "HEY YOU BAD MAN WHY YOU GOTTA HATE BLACKS AND THE WOMAN MAN".

Did you actually go through all the Cadian artwork dating back to 2nd edition, more than 20 years ago, in one night?

Impressive.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

You recall you explained what an "average" is to him last night, right?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

No, but they can make it so that when you only need to select 200 billion from 20,000,000 billion the choices you end up with make the average a very irrelevant number.

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Gen.Steiner wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Was waiting for bigot to be used. So someone argues that black people on Cadia isn't lore friendly (which it isn't) and that women are weaker than men, and they're a bigot? I don't understand. Everything in my argument is supported, but I'm a bigot?

Nothing in your argument is supported. You are, at this point, metaphorically jumping up and down going "NO WIMMINS NO BLACKS" and not actually engaging with anything.

Even if one accepts that Cadia is magically 100% white, that does not mean that all the Guard armies that use Cadian-pattern equipment are. In fact, just a slight engagement with the background will give you the Catachans, who are both black and white, the Vitrian Dragoons, who are all black, the Attillans, who are Mongolian, and so on and so forth. So we know that humanity remains diverse in the 41st Millenium. Therefore, adding a couple of non-white heads into the boxes of figures makes sense, follows the background, and allows people to build armies that are diverse, or not, depending on what they want to do as individual players!

There are absolutely no reasons whatsoever to object to female figures in boxes of Imperial Guard, because, as we know from the background, there are female Imperial Guard. Some regiments are mixed (Tanith 1st, Valhallan 397th), some regiments are not (Xenonian Guard - all female). That's leaving aside the debate about statistical average strength, which as we can see in reality means that there are plenty of really strong women. Unless you're saying you'd be happy to go toe-to-toe with Cristiane "Cyborg" Justino, because she's a girl lol?

So. To sum.

Your arguments are not supported either in reality, or in the background, beyond "all the art shows Cadians as white!", which doesn't take into account all the non-white regiments, or the black Catachans, or the female regiments.

Therefore, I can only assume your objection to women and non-white figures is because you don't like seeing women or non-white people represented in games or fiction... even when they already are, quite clearly, in the 40K universe.

It IS fully supported. No artwork or paintjobs have shown black Cadians, thus we can infer Cadia has no black people. Women are statistically weaker than men. This has been proven by many studies. Why are you getting your panties in a knot over the truth? I am not arguing against less diversity in 40k, and I understand there is female Imperial Guardsmen. I have already stated that when they get updated a couple different bits would be good.

At this point it's just become an echo-chamber of "HEY YOU BAD MAN WHY YOU GOTTA HATE BLACKS AND THE WOMAN MAN".

Did you actually go through all the Cadian artwork dating back to 2nd edition, more than 20 years ago, in one night?

Impressive.

If you want to be smartass, can you show me where the proof of black Cadians is?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

You recall you explained what an "average" is to him last night, right?

I actually corrected myself, I know fully what an average is, but I used the wrong terminology. I meant mode, so you can stop gak talking me now.

Cool. Any comment on the math you cropped out of your post?

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

No, but they can make it so that when you only need to select 200 billion from 20,000,000 billion the choices you end up with make the average a very irrelevant number.

An above average woman is still weaker than an above average man.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

Let's be scientific. Are there IRL women who are stronger than IRL men?

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

You recall you explained what an "average" is to him last night, right?

I actually corrected myself, I know fully what an average is, but I used the wrong terminology. I meant mode, so you can stop gak talking me now.

Cool. Any comment on the math you cropped out of your post?

Something about 20 trillion people and 1%. I don't need to read it a 10th time. We get it. The imperium is a big place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

Let's be scientific. Are there IRL women who are stronger than IRL men?

Yes, but those men are below average and those women are above average.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

No, but they can make it so that when you only need to select 200 billion from 20,000,000 billion the choices you end up with make the average a very irrelevant number.

An above average woman is still weaker than an above average man.

And it doesn't matter, really. The Astra Militarum have minimum requirements for duty, not one-on-one duels to determine who's better. And the kind of standards they're able to set make it so that every member of the IG, male and female, fulfill a very high criteria for melee combat. And they can afford to be VERY choosy about who they let in, to the point where in an Imperium of a million worlds they likely have entire tithes which are male or female which are completely equal to each other.

They're NOT recruiting EVERY above average person. They're recruiting enough to maintain numbers of 200 billion, from an overall population one hundred thousand times larger.

In short, the averages are irrelevant to even talk about because the Astra Militarum has standards, and the number of people they're able to reject and still maintain their numbers means that every combination of male and female recruits is both possible and still maintains the physical strength deemed necessary to be combat-capable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Yes, but those men are below average and those women are above average.

How do you figure that?

Yeah, stop attacking this poor guy, it's not as if he's said anything sexist or racist in the course of this post, he's just passionate about -

"Again, this usually goes against the Lore and is super forceful when for some reason Ultras, Celestial Lions and White Scars team up for no other reason than the perfect ethnic trio."

wait..

"Maybe, just maybe, something isn't racist, but the vast majority would rather a hero from a large country with plenty of players, instead of a hero from Zimbabwe which 2 people could enjoy?"

but..

"Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over. "

I guess in context of...

"It's only Chinese because they breed like rabbits over there, however most foreign countries teach English and some of the arguably most important countries have it as their primary language. "

oh.

"you can infer that they probably wanted their strongest people on the front, and the instinctively nurturing people on the backlines caring for the soldiers and keeping the grease in the wheels back home."

oh.

"In this post: 40k is a safe space! Chinese people, mexican people, black people! If I don't see a transgender space marine GW is bigots!"

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
It IS fully supported. No artwork or paintjobs have shown black Cadians, thus we can infer Cadia has no black people. Women are statistically weaker than men. This has been proven by many studies. Why are you getting your panties in a knot over the truth? I am not arguing against less diversity in 40k, and I understand there is female Imperial Guardsmen. I have already stated that when they get updated a couple different bits would be good.

At this point it's just become an echo-chamber of "HEY YOU BAD MAN WHY YOU GOTTA HATE BLACKS AND THE WOMAN MAN".

Hang on... wait...

You're saying Cadians aren't black, therefore no African or Asian facial features are allowed at all, despite all the other non-white ethnic groups in the 41st Millenium.

You're also saying, women are statistically weaker, therefore no female Guardsmen, despite all the female Guard troopers and forces.

THEN you say you're NOT arguing for less diversity and you know there are female Guard?

...

What? You are literally arguing against there being diversity in the Imperial Guard range. That is why I've been banging my head against your brick wall of NO WIMMIN NO BLAKS for the last day.

I've also given you multiple examples of very strong women (and at least one nine year old girl) who out-do almost everyone else on the planet, regardless of gender or testosterone levels. Yet you ignore that.

I've given you examples of non-white humans in the background of 40K, and examples of women in the background of 40K, all of them relevant to the Imperial Guard...

...and you respond with BUT SCIENCE SAYS WOMEN ARE WEAK.

Good grief, man. Either you're a bigot or a troll. Pick your poison.

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

No, but they can make it so that when you only need to select 200 billion from 20,000,000 billion the choices you end up with make the average a very irrelevant number.

An above average woman is still weaker than an above average man.

And it doesn't matter, really. The Astra Militarum have minimum requirements for duty, not one-on-one duels to determine who's better. And the kind of standards they're able to set make it so that every member of the IG, male and female, fulfill a very high criteria for melee combat. And they can afford to be VERY choosy about who they let in, to the point where in an Imperium of a million worlds they likely have entire tithes which are male or female which are completely equal to each other.

They're NOT recruiting EVERY above average person. They're recruiting enough to maintain numbers of 200 billion, from an overall population one hundred thousand times larger.

In short, the averages are irrelevant to even talk about because the Astra Militarum has standards, and the number of people they're able to reject and still maintain their numbers means that every combination of male and female recruits is both possible and still maintains the physical strength deemed necessary to be combat-capable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Yes, but those men are below average and those women are above average.

How do you figure that?

I thought you said there was so many people in the Imperium that only .0001 percent are in the Guard? They can be quite picky, why not pick the fittest of the fit?

And I figure that because testosterone exists.

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, stop attacking this poor guy, it's not as if he's said anything sexist or racist in the course of this post, he's just passionate about -

"Again, this usually goes against the Lore and is super forceful when for some reason Ultras, Celestial Lions and White Scars team up for no other reason than the perfect ethnic trio."

wait..

"Maybe, just maybe, something isn't racist, but the vast majority would rather a hero from a large country with plenty of players, instead of a hero from Zimbabwe which 2 people could enjoy?"

but..

"Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over. "

I guess in context of...

"It's only Chinese because they breed like rabbits over there, however most foreign countries teach English and some of the arguably most important countries have it as their primary language. "

oh.

"you can infer that they probably wanted their strongest people on the front, and the instinctively nurturing people on the backlines caring for the soldiers and keeping the grease in the wheels back home."

oh.

"In this post: 40k is a safe space! Chinese people, mexican people, black people! If I don't see a transgender space marine GW is bigots!"

I've always wanted to say this.

If you want people to stop calling you a bigot you should stop saying things that are racist and sexist.

Gen.Steiner wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
It IS fully supported. No artwork or paintjobs have shown black Cadians, thus we can infer Cadia has no black people. Women are statistically weaker than men. This has been proven by many studies. Why are you getting your panties in a knot over the truth? I am not arguing against less diversity in 40k, and I understand there is female Imperial Guardsmen. I have already stated that when they get updated a couple different bits would be good.

At this point it's just become an echo-chamber of "HEY YOU BAD MAN WHY YOU GOTTA HATE BLACKS AND THE WOMAN MAN".

Hang on... wait...

You're saying Cadians aren't black, therefore no African or Asian facial features are allowed at all, despite all the other non-white ethnic groups in the 41st Millenium.

You're also saying, women are statistically weaker, therefore no female Guardsmen, despite all the female Guard troopers and forces.

THEN you say you're NOT arguing for less diversity and you know there are female Guard?

...

What? You are literally arguing against there being diversity in the Imperial Guard range. That is why I've been banging my head against your brick wall of NO WIMMIN NO BLAKS for the last day.

I've also given you multiple examples of very strong women (and at least one nine year old girl) who out-do almost everyone else on the planet, regardless of gender or testosterone levels. Yet you ignore that.

I've given you examples of non-white humans in the background of 40K, and examples of women in the background of 40K, all of them relevant to the Imperial Guard...

...and you respond with BUT SCIENCE SAYS WOMEN ARE WEAK.

Good grief, man. Either you're a bigot or a troll. Pick your poison.

Point to a post of mine that says"No women in the army, no blacks in the army!" (not Cadia, ARMY)

I ignore because they are entirely anecdotal.

And I know different races exist in 40k. Why can't you read my posts?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


Yes, I have an issue with someone because they are scientifically weaker. /s I am simply stating facts. Are you denying women aren't weaker than men?

You keep saying that like it ends the argument that females should not be in the armed forces. It doesn't. You need to accept that physical strength is not the only requirement for service in the armed forces.

I took the time to filter this thread for your greatest hits. Let's look at them and work on your anti-female outlook on life.

BS#1ShieldBrotherSaid wrote:
1. I'm not saying women don't serve in 40k, plenty do, I'm just saying there would be less than men.

2. I don't, surprisingly enough. I know women soldiers exist in both real life and 40k, but it's not as tactically sound as it could be.

3. People were arguing the equality of men and women in war for 40k, the closest comparison we can get is men and women today, hence the post.

4. I, #1SHIELDBROTHER3++ FULLY ACKNOWLEDGE THERE IS FEMALE GUARDSMEN, AND I ACCEPT THAT. Can we get over that now? It doesn't make sense but so does 10 story high dogs with laser cannons.

5. Except everyone asking for female stuff is a minority. GW need to see good, solid, statistics before they spend a lot of money just for diversity instead of the next big model or campaign, which would probably rope them more sales.

6. Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over.

1. Stawman argument. Not a single person here has said that "All Cadians should have boobs" or "All Tau should be chicks." Not one. But you can't seem to accept that Bob wants three of his plastic IG army mens to be female, so you're arguing (for reasons unknown) that there shouldn't be any females in the military. Yes, you have said this MANY times in this thread.

2. Female soldiers aren't tactically sound. For the nest 12 or so posts, you argue about females being weaker then men and you use that as your sole excuse that there should be no women in the military. Again, those are YOUR words.

3. In the Grim Darkness of the Far Future where this is only war, you conscript whoever the feth you can slap a uniform on and shove a rifle into their hands. The 40k universe is full of scary monsters that want to kill, and sometimes eat you. Even IF females are weaker than men, the Imperiam WANTS them on that wall. They NEED them on that wall. You can't handle the truth!

4. Even though you grudgingly accept that other players want to use female models in their IG units, and that female IG are part of the existing 40k Lore, you still follow that acceptance with "It doesn't make sense." Why? Women are in the mother fething military right now. They are fighting and dying RIGHT NOW for your fething freedom. They are flying helicopters into war zones, they are in HumVees defusing bombs, they are locked and loaded and making the world a safer place. But that doesn't make sense? Please go find someone to talk to. You need help.

5. Citation needed that IG players that want female/male diversity are the minority. GW doesn't do market research, so the "GW need to see good, solid, statistics before they..." is laughable, at best.

6. And then, finally BOOM! The biggot opens his mouth (or types with this fingers, as it were). "if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines". Those are YOUR words. Right there. Read them. "Get back to the kitchen." "You have no place in the armed forces." "Women should stay home and should only make 60% of what their male counterparts make."


Again. Seek help. After I post this, you'll go on ignore. But please let my words seep in. You can get better. You can stop being the person the rest of us are sadly witnessing.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
I thought you said there was so many people in the Imperium that only .0001 percent are in the Guard? They can be quite picky, why not pick the fittest of the fit?

And I figure that because testosterone exists.

I'm saying that they can both afford to pick the fittest of the fit and still have tons and tons of female members. Some of their regiments should even be female-only or male-only just due to random chance.

If you have a range of 1-100 representing men, with the average being 50, and a range of 1-99 representing women, with the average still being very close to 50, a woman who is at 99 has an advantage over a man who is at 98, and both of them will still be not only above average but also at the very top ends of their sexes.

 Pouncey wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, stop attacking this poor guy, it's not as if he's said anything sexist or racist in the course of this post, he's just passionate about -

"Again, this usually goes against the Lore and is super forceful when for some reason Ultras, Celestial Lions and White Scars team up for no other reason than the perfect ethnic trio."

wait..

"Maybe, just maybe, something isn't racist, but the vast majority would rather a hero from a large country with plenty of players, instead of a hero from Zimbabwe which 2 people could enjoy?"

but..

"Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over. "

I guess in context of...

"It's only Chinese because they breed like rabbits over there, however most foreign countries teach English and some of the arguably most important countries have it as their primary language. "

oh.

"you can infer that they probably wanted their strongest people on the front, and the instinctively nurturing people on the backlines caring for the soldiers and keeping the grease in the wheels back home."

oh.

"In this post: 40k is a safe space! Chinese people, mexican people, black people! If I don't see a transgender space marine GW is bigots!"

I've always wanted to say this.

If you want people to stop calling you a bigot you should stop saying things that are racist and sexist.

Explain how first one is racist pls. Are you saying an asian, an african, and a greek aren't an ethnic trio that would include most people?

Are you also saying that Zimbabwe has as strong as an overwatch community as Canada?

That was a joke, but alright.

Are you saying China doesn't have a ridiculously high population to the point where it's unhealthy?

Are you saying America isn't one of the most important countries in the world?

Joke again.

Some people need to grow a thicker skin.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Point to a post of mine that says"No women in the army, no blacks in the army!" (not Cadia, ARMY)

I ignore because they are entirely anecdotal.

And I know different races exist in 40k. Why can't you read my posts?

Do you want me to go find your post where you state almost verbatim that the Imperial Guard should be taking all of their female members out of the military and using them as brood mares?

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Point to a post of mine that says"No women in the army, no blacks in the army!" (not Cadia, ARMY)

I ignore because they are entirely anecdotal.

And I know different races exist in 40k. Why can't you read my posts?

Do you want me to go find your post where you state almost verbatim that the Imperial Guard should be taking all of their female members out of the military and using them as brood mares?

I already did. Please stop engaging the man. He clearly thinks that women don't "make sense" in the military. Is that really someone you want to engage in honest discussion?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


That was a joke, but alright.

Joke again.

Some people need to grow a thicker skin.

None of your jokes are funny.

It'd be best if you stooped now.

Only warning.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, stop attacking this poor guy, it's not as if he's said anything sexist or racist in the course of this post, he's just passionate about -

"Again, this usually goes against the Lore and is super forceful when for some reason Ultras, Celestial Lions and White Scars team up for no other reason than the perfect ethnic trio."

wait..

"Maybe, just maybe, something isn't racist, but the vast majority would rather a hero from a large country with plenty of players, instead of a hero from Zimbabwe which 2 people could enjoy?"

but..

"Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over. "

I guess in context of...

"It's only Chinese because they breed like rabbits over there, however most foreign countries teach English and some of the arguably most important countries have it as their primary language. "

oh.

"you can infer that they probably wanted their strongest people on the front, and the instinctively nurturing people on the backlines caring for the soldiers and keeping the grease in the wheels back home."

oh.

"In this post: 40k is a safe space! Chinese people, mexican people, black people! If I don't see a transgender space marine GW is bigots!"

I've always wanted to say this.

If you want people to stop calling you a bigot you should stop saying things that are racist and sexist.

Explain how first one is racist pls. Are you saying an asian, an african, and a greek aren't an ethnic trio that would include most people?

You said it was the only reason they would do so. Yes, that is racist.

Are you also saying that Zimbabwe has as strong as an overwatch community as Canada?

Zimbabwe wasn't even relevant to the conversation.

That was a joke, but alright.

An extremely sexist one you stated with nothing denoting humor. No one found it funny.

Are you saying China doesn't have a ridiculously high population to the point where it's unhealthy?

Saying people "breed like rabbits" is extremely bigoted when you're referring to a country.

Are you saying America isn't one of the most important countries in the world?

I think they like to overstate their importance.

Joke again.

Some people need to grow a thicker skin.

No one found your jokes funny. Funniness requires humor. Your "jokes" lacked humor, thus failed at being jokes.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

Let's be scientific. Are there IRL women who are stronger than IRL men?

Yes, but those men are below average and those women are above average.

Alright, let's say that's true. And for the sake of the argument, let's bias the numbers I will use in favour of your side.

GIven that:

>The top 1% of women's physicality is above average
>The top 1% of women IRL do stuff like the Olympics
>The women's Olympics consists of feats of strength, speed and endurance beyond that of the average man

We can ascertain that there are a number of women who fit the description of "better than the average man". In our example, 1% of women are this.
Given that in the Imperium, a selection pool of 50 million candidates is to be happily considered a sup-par quantity, we can reasonably use this as a method of determining a lower-end estimate of the quantity of women in the IG.
Current world statistics hold that just under 50% of humans are female. Let's say that the recruitment pool holds 40% women.

This leaves us with 20 million women in a recruitment pool. Take the top 1% of women. This gives us 200,000 women.

From one world's low-count recruitment pool, we are getting at least 200,000 women. Now realise that there are hundreds, if not thousands of worlds that can do this too.

200,000 multiplied by a reasonable world-count of 200 gives us 40,000,000 women in the Imperial Guard.

Or, to put it another way, more women than IG models in player's collections. If every single guard model owned by IG players was female, it would be well within the fluff for that quantity of women to be fielded.

Does this argument make sense to you?

I would find the relevant posts, but other people have done it for me.

I am arguing that Games Workshop should get their sculptors to add into their Imperial Guard boxes (Catachan and Cadian), 2-3 female torsos and heads, and a couple of non-white heads. I'm not even arguing for parity. I just want the option to be there, because it reflects the background that Games Workshop themselves have produced for their own wargame.

You, on the other hand, have repeatedly argued that because Cadia is an all-white planet (based on inference from artwork), that there should be no non-white heads in the boxes, because, I assume, you think that no-one uses the Cadian figures to represent Guardsmen from other planets... like, say, Vitria, where everyone is black.

You have also argued that because SCIENCE, women in the Guard make no sense. I have pointed out the Dahomey, the Scythians, and several other examples of large groups of women in combat from throughout history up to and including the present day, and also individual examples of women and girls who are strong and powerful, to make the point that women in the Guard does in fact make sense. You seem to ignore this, because SCIENCE.

It seems to me that your argument boils down to NO BECAUSE IT HURTS MY FEELS. That's charitable.

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Point to a post of mine that says"No women in the army, no blacks in the army!" (not Cadia, ARMY)

I ignore because they are entirely anecdotal.

And I know different races exist in 40k. Why can't you read my posts?

Do you want me to go find your post where you state almost verbatim that the Imperial Guard should be taking all of their female members out of the military and using them as brood mares?

I already did. Please stop engaging the man. He clearly thinks that women don't "make sense" in the military. Is that really someone you want to engage in honest discussion?

Okay, back on subject then.

Would a torso/head conversion kit really be enough to turn a Cadian or Catachan model into a convincing female miniature? Yes, the torso and head would be right, but the torso and head aren't the only part of the female human body that's different from their male counterparts.

To make a good female Cadian/Catachan (assuming we're going with ones for the existing plastic kits) it might actually require an entire miniature, particularly considering that IG weapons are molded onto their arms. Which would then require a separate kit.

I started thinking about it after I saw the Vic's Minis posted earlier and kinda felt the torso and heads weren't the only parts that were different from the men.

But I guess really for GW models it might not matter since their bulk is higher than a real person's would be.

Thoughts on whether a simple torso and head swap on a standard Cadian model would be sufficient to make the model look adequately female instead of a bizarre mix and match of male and female body parts?

 Pouncey wrote:
Thoughts on whether a simple torso and head swap on a standard Cadian model would be sufficient to make the model look adequately female instead of a bizarre mix and match of male and female body parts?

I think it'd work fine. All you really need is a female head. A torso option is just because, GW being GW, they'd add boobs.

 reds8n wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


That was a joke, but alright.

Joke again.

Some people need to grow a thicker skin.

None of your jokes are funny.

It'd be best if you stooped now.

Only warning.

We'll try this again.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

I get that, go ahead. And what makes a 28mm scale model black, or white? All the faces could be any colour.

Again,you don't need separate heads for black people.

I've argued that because science, women have less muscles. The examples you've displayed never won because their muscles, did they? An all your examples were women in women only units, not men and women where the sex differences would cause a problem.

If anything, yours is. "BAd man doesnt like woman!"

Zulu Warriors by Wargames Foundry.

Chinese Warlord troops by Copplestone Castings.


YPJ/YPG mixed male and female infantry column during the current war in Syria, a force that defeated ISIS at Kobane and is now pushing towards Raqqa together with the mostly-Kurd Syrian Democratic Forces...

...oh, and the Scythians fought mixed male and female using compound bows on horseback against the Greeks, giving rise to both the Amazons and the Centaur myths. Not to mention the mixed male and female military units of FARC, or the Cuban Revolution, or the People's Liberation Army during the war against the Kuomintang, or the mixed male and female active units of the PLO in the 1970s (or has everyone forgotten Leila Khaled already?) or the Baader-Meinhof Gang, or...

Alright, I'll throw in the towel. It was fun while it lasted boys. Officially abandoning thread.

 Pouncey wrote:


Would a torso/head conversion kit really be enough to turn a Cadian or Catachan model into a convincing female miniature? Yes, the torso and head would be right, but the torso and head aren't the only part of the female human body that's different from their male counterparts.

To make a good female Cadian/Catachan (assuming we're going with ones for the existing plastic kits) it might actually require an entire miniature, particularly considering that IG weapons are molded onto their arms. Which would then require a separate kit.

I started thinking about it after I saw the Vic's Minis posted earlier and kinda felt the torso and heads weren't the only parts that were different from the men.

But I guess really for GW models it might not matter since their bulk is higher than a real person's would be.

Thoughts on whether a simple torso and head swap on a standard Cadian model would be sufficient to make the model look adequately female instead of a bizarre mix and match of male and female body parts?

I can't find the picture someone has brought out before, but it shows a female and male army dudes/chicks on patrol with all of their gear. Once you put on the bullet proof vest, the back pack, and everything else, the only thing feminine is the face.

Gen.Steiner wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
Thoughts on whether a simple torso and head swap on a standard Cadian model would be sufficient to make the model look adequately female instead of a bizarre mix and match of male and female body parts?

I think it'd work fine. All you really need is a female head. A torso option is just because, GW being GW, they'd add boobs.

It has nothing to do with "GW being GW". It has everything to do with scale being scale, it isn't going to be easy to recognize male from female at tabletop distances.

Here's a great example of companies doing this from Corvus Belli's "Infinity" range:

Because of the fact that at tabletop distances the females with the same gear would look like slender males they opted instead (wrongly IMO) to do the stupid "no tactical vest, weird strappy harness underboob" nonsense instead.

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Would a torso/head conversion kit really be enough to turn a Cadian or Catachan model into a convincing female miniature? Yes, the torso and head would be right, but the torso and head aren't the only part of the female human body that's different from their male counterparts.

To make a good female Cadian/Catachan (assuming we're going with ones for the existing plastic kits) it might actually require an entire miniature, particularly considering that IG weapons are molded onto their arms. Which would then require a separate kit.

I started thinking about it after I saw the Vic's Minis posted earlier and kinda felt the torso and heads weren't the only parts that were different from the men.

But I guess really for GW models it might not matter since their bulk is higher than a real person's would be.

Thoughts on whether a simple torso and head swap on a standard Cadian model would be sufficient to make the model look adequately female instead of a bizarre mix and match of male and female body parts?

I can't find the picture someone has brought out before, but it shows a female and male army dudes/chicks on patrol with all of their gear. Once you put on the bullet proof vest, the back pack, and everything else, the only thing feminine is the face.

So we literally don't even need torsos to make it work?

I could go for a 10 IG head conversion pack for an appropriate price.

If GW's gonna put massive boobs on the torsos, I'd rather just skip them and stick with headswaps. At least with Sisters of Battle you can kinda see there might be a point to them, since power amor is fairly thick so it's going to exaggerate the size anyways, and there is some benefit to the Sisters of Battle doing everything they reasonably can to appear 100% female since them being female is the only reason they're allowed to exist. But IG wouldn't feel the need to do so.

Eldar would require more than just heads to get some female Aspect Warriors going, since they wear form-fitting bodysuit armor and not bulky uniforms and flak vests. You'd 100% need torsos since those boobs are gonna show through no matter what you do. But in the Guardian kit the only difference between male and female Guardians IS the torso, so you could just do a torso swap and keep the helmeted heads. But that would require a revamp of Aspect Warriors since their models don't actually have separate torso pieces.

I bring up Eldar because just having two units with female models really isn't enough when the fluff says ALL their units should have at least some females to some degree. Those IG heads can be applied to every model in the range since they have common head sizes, but Eldar Aspect Warriors each have a unique aesthetic so you can't just add a Guardian or Banshee torso to a Dire Avenger or Striking Scorpion.

Not sure how you'd do a female Farseer and Warlock. Maybe just take the helmet off (wouldn't be unprecedented) and let people see an obviously-female face? Could even make the models as plastic character kits with the unhelmeted female head being one of two options, so you could still sell it as a male model to anyone. Their rune armor and robes destroy almost any sense of size of their torso so you wouldn't notice boobs.

A better example of how to do female near-future/SF troopers is from Hasslefree Miniatures: Harlequin, Widow, Mckenzie (b), and Debra.

I mean, it is possible to make to-scale female troopers that are recognisably female and that aren't ridiculous boob-creatures. Victoria Miniatures manages it. Hasslefree manages it.

There is so much speciesist anthropomorphocentric bigotry in this thread I think I might vomit. "Hey let's make all the aliens look human, because da humies iz da bestest". No! let's have some real diversity, as in aliens that actually look alien. 40k only has the tyranids as genuinely alien aliens, that's speciesist anthropomorphic bigotry right there.

In solidarity with our brain slug overlords.

 SolarCross wrote:
There is so much speciesist anthropomorphocentric bigotry in this thread I think I might vomit. "Hey let's make all the aliens look human, because da humies iz da bestest". No! let's have some real diversity, as in aliens that actually look alien. 40k only has the tyranids as genuinely alien aliens, that's speciesist anthropomorphic bigotry right there.

In solidarity with our brain slug overlords.

Actually, I absolutely agree. I think GW should do Hrud, Loxatl, and even weirder aliens. The Tau and Dark Eldar Codexes are great places to put them, and so would Codex: Xenohunters (should they ever write one).

 SolarCross wrote:
There is so much speciesist anthropomorphocentric bigotry in this thread I think I might vomit. "Hey let's make all the aliens look human, because da humies iz da bestest". No! let's have some real diversity, as in aliens that actually look alien. 40k only has the tyranids as genuinely alien aliens, that's speciesist anthropomorphic bigotry right there.

In solidarity with our brain slug overlords.

To my knowledge, the Eldar and Humans look alike because they were both created by the same race who got lazy and re-used parts from one in the other.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gen.Steiner wrote:
A better example of how to do female near-future/SF troopers is from Hasslefree Miniatures: Harlequin, Widow, Mckenzie (b), and Debra.

I mean, it is possible to make to-scale female troopers that are recognisably female and that aren't ridiculous boob-creatures. Victoria Miniatures manages it. Hasslefree manages it.

I would like to at least know what I should be talking about, because I keep getting swung from completely new models to just headswap kits and I don't know what argument to even make anymore.

Though on the subject of the whole model looking female without being ridiculous, weren't there a couple of guys like a decade ago who were buying standard Cadians and then converting them slightly so they looked like female Cadians who fit in 100% with the male ones?

I recall GW allowed them to operate so long as they only took orders through e-mail instead of a shopping cart or something.

Gen.Steiner wrote:

Actually, I absolutely agree. I think GW should do Hrud, Loxatl, and even weirder aliens. The Tau and Dark Eldar Codexes are great places to put them, and so would Codex: Xenohunters (should they ever write one).

Yes, they should do those but I say they shouldn't just be a footnote in some pointy eared human or blue human codex, they should have their own codicies.

 Pouncey wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Would a torso/head conversion kit really be enough to turn a Cadian or Catachan model into a convincing female miniature? Yes, the torso and head would be right, but the torso and head aren't the only part of the female human body that's different from their male counterparts.

To make a good female Cadian/Catachan (assuming we're going with ones for the existing plastic kits) it might actually require an entire miniature, particularly considering that IG weapons are molded onto their arms. Which would then require a separate kit.

I started thinking about it after I saw the Vic's Minis posted earlier and kinda felt the torso and heads weren't the only parts that were different from the men.

But I guess really for GW models it might not matter since their bulk is higher than a real person's would be.

Thoughts on whether a simple torso and head swap on a standard Cadian model would be sufficient to make the model look adequately female instead of a bizarre mix and match of male and female body parts?

I can't find the picture someone has brought out before, but it shows a female and male army dudes/chicks on patrol with all of their gear. Once you put on the bullet proof vest, the back pack, and everything else, the only thing feminine is the face.

So we literally don't even need torsos to make it work?

I could go for a 10 IG head conversion pack for an appropriate price.

If GW's gonna put massive boobs on the torsos, I'd rather just skip them and stick with headswaps.

I don't know why they would. The Sisters of Battle aren't all swimsuit models, for example. You can tell on the Eldar and Dark Eldar, but they all wear skin-tight clothing (male and female) with advanced "polymer technology" or whatever. From 3' away, you shouldn't be able to tell a female guardsman from a male guardsman, except for hair sticking out of her hat/helmet, maybe. Just my opinion, and I could be wrong.

This thread sucks.

Gen.Steiner wrote:


I think it'd work fine. All you really need is a female head. A torso option is just because, GW being GW, they'd add boobs.

Hey it's Space Opera and gaming with ass-kicking armored pauldron nor real life don't search the female version of

but of

and you will find this

(Los Angeles Temptation player from Legends Football League)
and so search for that:
and
Thanks to Prodos you can already have this

or if you prefer female vindicare looking like Starcraft Sarah Kerrigan when she was a Ghost

https://dhcwargamesblog.wordpress.com/author/dhcwargames/page/5/

If you love camo, keep

for using Bolt Action historical rules (http://www.warlordgames.com/bolt-action/) for dirty wars and ask GW to be inspired by

for 40K.

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Would a torso/head conversion kit really be enough to turn a Cadian or Catachan model into a convincing female miniature? Yes, the torso and head would be right, but the torso and head aren't the only part of the female human body that's different from their male counterparts.

To make a good female Cadian/Catachan (assuming we're going with ones for the existing plastic kits) it might actually require an entire miniature, particularly considering that IG weapons are molded onto their arms. Which would then require a separate kit.

I started thinking about it after I saw the Vic's Minis posted earlier and kinda felt the torso and heads weren't the only parts that were different from the men.

But I guess really for GW models it might not matter since their bulk is higher than a real person's would be.

Thoughts on whether a simple torso and head swap on a standard Cadian model would be sufficient to make the model look adequately female instead of a bizarre mix and match of male and female body parts?

I can't find the picture someone has brought out before, but it shows a female and male army dudes/chicks on patrol with all of their gear. Once you put on the bullet proof vest, the back pack, and everything else, the only thing feminine is the face.

So we literally don't even need torsos to make it work?

I could go for a 10 IG head conversion pack for an appropriate price.

If GW's gonna put massive boobs on the torsos, I'd rather just skip them and stick with headswaps.

I don't know why they would. The Sisters of Battle aren't all swimsuit models, for example. You can tell on the Eldar and Dark Eldar, but they all wear skin-tight clothing (male and female) with advanced "polymer technology" or whatever. From 3' away, you shouldn't be able to tell a female guardsman from a male guardsman, except for hair sticking out of her hat/helmet, maybe. Just my opinion, and I could be wrong.

Why did you cut out part of my post only to say the things I said as though they were your own contribution?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:
This thread sucks.

Just skip past, like, all of it until the most recent page.

I dunno what the hell was going on for most of this thread but it wasn't fun for anyone and can almost entirely be ignored without issue.

 Pouncey wrote:


Why did you cut out part of my post only to say the things I said as though they were your own contribution?

I was answering your statement "If GW's gonna put massive boobs on the torsos, I'd rather just skip them and stick with headswaps." with my own opinions. I didn't bother reading the rest.

Please show me where I kicked your dog and ate your doughnut.

I'm sure we can discuss this topic without calling anyone a bigot, or employing any other put-downs and personal attacks. Thanks!

I would really love to see the "Cadian Shock Troop" box redone - those sculpts have served faithfully for long enough and are overdue for retirement! Replacing that set would be the perfect opportunity to not only give the male IG figures more ... well, human ... proportions but also to think about putting two sprues in each box: one male and one female. It is now well enough established in the written, if not necessarily the visual, world of the game that there are plenty of female IG that it no longer makes sense to only make male IG figures.

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


Why did you cut out part of my post only to say the things I said as though they were your own contribution?

I was answering your statement "If GW's gonna put massive boobs on the torsos, I'd rather just skip them and stick with headswaps." with my own opinions.

Please show me where I kicked your dog and ate your doughnut.

The part where you cut out the following:

At least with Sisters of Battle you can kinda see there might be a point to them, since power amor is fairly thick so it's going to exaggerate the size anyways, and there is some benefit to the Sisters of Battle doing everything they reasonably can to appear 100% female since them being female is the only reason they're allowed to exist. But IG wouldn't feel the need to do so.

Eldar would require more than just heads to get some female Aspect Warriors going, since they wear form-fitting bodysuit armor and not bulky uniforms and flak vests. You'd 100% need torsos since those boobs are gonna show through no matter what you do. But in the Guardian kit the only difference between male and female Guardians IS the torso, so you could just do a torso swap and keep the helmeted heads. But that would require a revamp of Aspect Warriors since their models don't actually have separate torso pieces.

I bring up Eldar because just having two units with female models really isn't enough when the fluff says ALL their units should have at least some females to some degree. Those IG heads can be applied to every model in the range since they have common head sizes, but Eldar Aspect Warriors each have a unique aesthetic so you can't just add a Guardian or Banshee torso to a Dire Avenger or Striking Scorpion.

Not sure how you'd do a female Farseer and Warlock. Maybe just take the helmet off (wouldn't be unprecedented) and let people see an obviously-female face? Could even make the models as plastic character kits with the unhelmeted female head being one of two options, so you could still sell it as a male model to anyone. Their rune armor and robes destroy almost any sense of size of their torso so you wouldn't notice boobs.

From my post, then went on to talk about Sisters of Battle and Eldar.

I'm more confused than angry really. I'm legitimately asking why you cut out parts of my post that were relevant to the stuff you went on to say.

 Manchu wrote:
I'm sure we can discuss this topic without calling anyone a bigot, or employing any other put-downs and personal attacks. Thanks!

I would really love to see the "Cadian Shock Troop" box redone - those sculpts have served faithfully for long enough and are overdue for retirement! Replacing that set would be the perfect opportunity to not only give the male IG figures more ... well, human ... proportions but also to think about putting two sprues in each box: one male and one female. It is now well enough established in the written, if not necessarily the visual, world of the game that there are plenty of female IG that it no longer makes sense to only make male IG figures.

I really hope they do. the current Canadian shock troop box is really dated.
especially compared to the newer kits.

its probably just going to be like 3 in 10 on a single sprue though, i dont think they are going to be willing tool two whole sprues for that.

 Desubot wrote:

I really hope they do. the current Canadian shock troop box is really dated.

Eh?

Sorry auto corrects also i find it funny that it does that so i leave it

 Desubot wrote:
i dont think they are going to be willing tool two whole sprues for that.

It may actually make more sense to do just that, in terms of getting the most bang for their buck as far as pose and load out variety.

 Desubot wrote:
Sorry auto corrects also i find it funny that it does that so i leave it

I was considering expressing outrage that Canada was specifically excluded from even getting an updated kit.

 Manchu wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
i dont think they are going to be willing tool two whole sprues for that.

It may actually make more sense to do just that, in terms of getting the most bang for their buck as far as pose and load out variety.

Sorry meant two body sprues for say 50/50 men and women. looking at the density of new sprues its probably going to be a box of 2 sprues with one with torsos and 5 legs, and another 5 legs somewhere else with guns.

mind ya i figure its going to be more like 30/70 for female miniatures (ish) since i dont think GW will be super proactive about it. not saying i wouldn't want it.

i would also absolutely love female variants for all the support elements too. like commissars and psykers. even engineer even though you would never know if it was a man or woman

It seems to me that most costumers would be largely indifferent about a female IG sprue but of the (perhaps sizable) minority who would care, more customers would approve than disapprove and those who would approve would approve far more enthusiastically (both in terms of buying kits and praising GW) than the disapproving customers would disapprove. (I think the opposite would be true of female SM.)

 Manchu wrote:
It seems to me that most costumers would be largely indifferent about a female IG sprue but of the (perhaps sizable) minority who would care, more customers would approve than disapprove and those who would approve would approve far more enthusiastically (both in terms of buying kits and praising GW) than the disapproving customers would disapprove. (I think the opposite would be true of female SM.)

Well i certainly hope GW can see that.

it seems they are actually doing "research" and changing their ways. so anything is possible.

 Pouncey wrote:
Eldar would require more than just heads to get some female Aspect Warriors going, since they wear form-fitting bodysuit armor and not bulky uniforms and flak vests. You'd 100% need torsos since those boobs are gonna show through no matter what you do. But in the Guardian kit the only difference between male and female Guardians IS the torso, so you could just do a torso swap and keep the helmeted heads. But that would require a revamp of Aspect Warriors since their models don't actually have separate torso pieces.

I bring up Eldar because just having two units with female models really isn't enough when the fluff says ALL their units should have at least some females to some degree. Those IG heads can be applied to every model in the range since they have common head sizes, but Eldar Aspect Warriors each have a unique aesthetic so you can't just add a Guardian or Banshee torso to a Dire Avenger or Striking Scorpion.

I really hope that when GW gets around to remaking the awful resin Aspect Warriors into plastic, they include at least some female torsos (and some male torsos for Banshees). I mean, there are usually more torsos than there are sets of legs in plastic kits anyway. Why not make the extras female? Still, I am never-endingly grateful that GW does not participate in the garbage that is high-heeled armor.

Are there male banshees? is that a thing? is it a choice they can actually make?

(my eldar lore is pretty lacking)

 Manchu wrote:
It seems to me that most costumers would be largely indifferent about a female IG sprue but of the (perhaps sizable) minority who would care, more customers would approve than disapprove and those who would approve would approve far more enthusiastically (both in terms of buying kits and praising GW) than the disapproving customers would disapprove. (I think the opposite would be true of female SM.)

If someone's going to get pissed off and quit because GW makes models that represent their lore to a decent degree in terms of the number of female soldiers present in that army... is that kind of person someone we even want to stay in the community?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:
Are there male banshees? is that a thing? is it a choice they can actually make?

(my eldar lore is pretty lacking)

I have heard that they are uncommon compared to females but do still exist in enough numbers their miniatures should exist.

In Eternal Crusade you can play a male Howling Banshee based on that bit of fluff, so if you want to see what it would look like you could probably find a video of someone playing a male Banshee in the Alpha on YouTube. Assuming they're in the game yet at all, I've been kind of ignoring it and waiting for launch since I don't much care about the testing phase at this point.

 Desubot wrote:
Are there male banshees? is that a thing? is it a choice they can actually make?

(my eldar lore is pretty lacking)

Yes, but afaik they just wear the same armour as female banshees (boob plate and all).
The "boob plate" is just decoration (because realistically, females do not need "boob plates" on their armour, so it has to be decorative, like the sculpted muscles on BA armour) to give the aspect a female appearance in order to honour and resemble their Phoenix Lord (who is female).

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Are there male banshees? is that a thing? is it a choice they can actually make?

(my eldar lore is pretty lacking)

Yes, but afaik they just wear the same armour as female banshees (boob plate and all).
The "boob plate" is just decoration (because realistically, females do not need "boob plates" on their armour, so it has to be decorative, like the sculpted muscles on BA armour) to give the aspect a female appearance in order to honour and resemble their Phoenix Lord (who is female).

Not in Eternal Crusade they don't. They look male there.

And no, the boob plate isn't decoration. Eldar armor is literally a form-fitting bodysuit and Eldar with breasts (i.e. the females) are going to have those breasts contoured to to the degree you can see them significantly.

Sorta like Samus Aran's Zero-Suit in terms of form-fittingness, but the material is much thicker and has thicker-yet plates attached to it at various points.

 Pouncey wrote:
If someone's going to get pissed off and quit because GW makes models that represent their lore to a decent degree in terms of the number of female soldiers present in that army... is that kind of person someone we even want to stay in the community?

I don't know that it profits anyone to single out "undesirables," one way or the other, that "we" would be happy to exclude from playing or even just liking 40k. I look at it as, you try to serve your broadest customer base without losing sight of brand/IP consistency. If you make a mistake, you should try to correct it. But when companies say, well we need to have less of X kind of person as a customer, I think they have gone off the rails, perhaps especially if "X kind of person" is down to some kind of ideological issue. I suppose I trend pretty conservative as far as how I would like to see the 40k IP develop going forward: I definitely do not want to ever see female Space Marines and I do want my beloved Sisters of Battle to keep their baroque, overtly feminine armor. But for the same reason, I also really would love to see female IG figs, including female command and female characters.

 Kriegspiel wrote:
Hey it's Space Opera and gaming with ass-kicking armored pauldron nor real life ... ask GW to be inspired by

for 40K.

No. Just... No.

So, you're happy to say this..

 Pouncey wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Are there male banshees? is that a thing? is it a choice they can actually make?

(my eldar lore is pretty lacking)

I have heard that they are uncommon compared to females but do still exist in enough numbers their miniatures should exist.

Despite just yesterday I posted this

Banshees are almost exclusively female, a male one would be a notable rarity,

in a direct response to one of your posts, which is supported by this..

40K Lexicanum wrote:Unique to the Howling Banshees is the fact that they are almost always female, for the banshee of legend is itself a female spirit

You're going to keep insisting that somehow male Banshees need to be included?

Eldar culture is highly ritualistic. Their battle armor surely reflects this. It makes sense to me that, as posted above, a male Eldar who joined the Banshee Path would conceivably cross-dress, as it were, to honor Jain Zar.

Are we getting into discussions of the inherent strengths and weaknesses of gender and race?
Yeah, you will see differences when you get into the apex end of conditioning but at more "normal" levels it means little.
In most cases, a man or a woman pulling the trigger of a lasgun for the Imperial Guard I think makes no real difference.
As to race, it is all adaptation and the conditions that person's ancestors lived in.

With how the dark millennium is portrayed, it would be obvious that women would be employed in any capacity equally to men because the imperium does not care as long as what is required is carried out..
As to Xenos races... Orks appear to need to die to reproduce so they seem rather exempt but Eldar addressed this where it is mixed.
We have "Ab-humans" so it goes without saying diversity is out there (a certain marine chapter has coal-black skin).

Victoria Miniatures is a good place to go to get a more "realistic" mix to your armies.
Since with groups like the Imperial Guard and their various faces makes them seem like clone troopers, I think it is more cost and laziness GW has not added more diverse looking races or gender mixes.

I am still figuring out how I can design a "Jules Winnfield" Inquisitor, he would add an edge that would be awesome.

 Talizvar wrote:
Are we getting into discussions of the inherent strengths and weaknesses of gender and race?
Yeah, you will see differences when you get into the apex end of conditioning but at more "normal" levels it means little.
In most cases, a man or a woman pulling the trigger of a lasgun for the Imperial Guard I think makes no real difference.
As to race, it is all adaptation and the conditions that person's ancestors lived in.

I think we finally left that silliness behind.

 Talizvar wrote:
With how the dark millennium is portrayed, it would be obvious that women would be employed in any capacity equally to men because the imperium does not care as long as what is required is carried out..

Agreed, 100%.

 Manchu wrote:
Eldar culture is highly ritualistic. Their battle armor surely reflects this. It makes sense to me that, as posted above, a male Eldar who joined the Banshee Path would conceivably cross-dress, as it were, to honor Jain Zar.

I thought that is exactly what happened. I could go and look at my 2nd Edition Codex: Eldar, but it's allll the way over in my bookcase and I'm comfy.

The Banshees aside, however, I'm fairly certain that every other Aspect Path is open to all genders of Eldar, and therefore the Eldar kits really should come with female options - like the Dark Eldar, in fact.

 Manchu wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
If someone's going to get pissed off and quit because GW makes models that represent their lore to a decent degree in terms of the number of female soldiers present in that army... is that kind of person someone we even want to stay in the community?

I don't know that it profits anyone to single out "undesirables," one way or the other, that "we" would be happy to exclude from playing or even just liking 40k. I look at it as, you try to serve your broadest customer base without losing sight of brand/IP consistency. If you make a mistake, you should try to correct it. But when companies say, well we need to have less of X kind of person as a customer, I think they have gone off the rails, perhaps especially if "X kind of person" is down to some kind of ideological issue. I suppose I trend pretty conservative as far as how I would like to see the 40k IP develop going forward: I definitely do not want to ever see female Space Marines and I do want my beloved Sisters of Battle to keep their baroque, overtly feminine armor. But for the same reason, I also really would love to see female IG figs, including female command and female characters.

Sorry, I guess my attitude comes from World of Warcraft. Every change the developers of that game make to the game causes some people to be really excited for it and some people to just quit altogether, yet the number of active players still numbers in thee millions after 12 years of very frequent changes. In WoW, if someone were to quit over some NPCs in the game being female instead of male, or vice-versa, the community would probably mock them for quitting over such a minor change in general, instead of trying to find a way to make it work for them. Because WoW has the numbers of players needed to survive losing players over every change, and most members of the community have heard dozens upon dozens of "I quit" stories for a variety of reasons and have simply lost the ability to even care that someone's quiitting, since it happens so often.

But I forgot that this is WH40k, where every customer is worth holding onto and most of the community knows it, since the company making the game is taking huge financial losses in recent years and everyone who buys something instead of not helps keep their favorite game going just a little bit longer. So you're right, I shouldn't dismiss someone's concern as invalid. There are likely to be things I would quit over that seem equally insignificant to others, and if a small tweak to how things are done is able to keep someone in the game and happy, it's worth going for.

However, my comment about whether we want someone to quit wasn't quite as malicious as it appeared. I wasn't suggesting that the company or players should start driving people off on purpose. I was assuming that the kind of person who would have an issue with their new IG coming with some female bits instead of all male bits, despite the lore of the game saying that should be the case, strongly enough to quit, would have some serious issues with women, either in general or when they intrude on the hobby. I was assuming that those issues would make things more difficult during the inevitable time when tabletop wargaming becomes less of a boys' club like video gaming has and there are only going to be more and more women playing games with that guy, until having a female opponent for an average pickup game is roughly as common as having a male opponent. And in online games, I've heard women talk about their experiences with guys who have serious issues with women. Those experiences are usually the reason that some women create a personal policy of never getting on voice chat (very important for real-time video games where you're supposed to cooperate with allies) whatsoever unless they know all the people who are going to be in the channel. There's a trope in World of Warcraft where women roll male characters a lot specifically because they don't want creepy guys hitting on them in manners that gets creepier and creepier. There are men who play WoW who've openly stated that theybelieve every male WoW player garnishes attention and kindness and gifts upon every female character they come in contact with, and refer to the idea as "female privilege" while ignoring the dozens upon dozens of men and women who've played female characters for years and have gotten no favorable treatment, no gifts, and only some excessively creepy guys doing creepy things to their characters with emotes.

And I've even heard of guys like that who exist in the tabletop community already driving off the few women who express an interest. I've read stories about the following actually happening in real life: a woman comes into a gaming store filled with men, looks around with interest, and seems like she was about to give the whole thing a good shot, most of the people there don't actually care that she's a woman, but then that ONE guy, with the GUO personal hygiene, shoddy clothes, who's an utter creep, saunters up to her and immediately starts hitting on her very crudely. And then she immediately leaves and has no intentions about coming back. At which point, a guy who's got serious issues with women just drove a customer away from the game for good, all on his own. And side note, when a woman walks into a gaming club filled with men who drop everything they're doing to collectively stare at her, while each of those men is more like a deer caught in the headlights wondering what they can do to help her give the hobby a good shot because the game needs more women, the actual fact is that there is an entire building full of men just staring at her without saying a thing. And that, in human body language, is not saying, "Welcome to the hobby!" it's saying, "Why are you even here? Leave, now. We don't want you here."

But that is what I assumed. I assumed that a person would only reject female options for miniatures where that makes sense on the grounds they have an issue with women. That may not actually be the case, and I should not have assumed that everyone who has an issue with their models coming with female parts has an issue with women. A legitimate reason I could see for it is that their vision for their personal Imperial Guard regiment is all-male, and now they have to buy tons of extra stuff to actually make it all male, and it's too expensive or they don't want to deal with it. Which is totally fine. The lore that supports a 100% female Guard regiment existing purely through chance equally supports a 100% male Guard regiment existing for the same reason.

So, since female parts are more of a niche for the game at this point, maybe we shouldn't really be including them with the standard kits, and focus more on either an entirely separate kit with fully-female models, or conversion kits. Both would not only allow the male-only armies to not receive a price hike, but make it easier to control exactly how much of your Imperial Guard are female and how much are male. You want more female? Buy more female kits or headswaps. You want less female? Buy fewer female kits and headswaps. With the female models and the male models in the same kit, you only make it more expensive for literally everyone who does not want the exact ratio in the kit. So maybe that's just a bad idea in general to have both male parts and female parts in the same kit, unless you could create the kit as fully either gender without needing to buy anything else..

 Azreal13 wrote:
So, you're happy to say this..

 Pouncey wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Are there male banshees? is that a thing? is it a choice they can actually make?

(my eldar lore is pretty lacking)

I have heard that they are uncommon compared to females but do still exist in enough numbers their miniatures should exist.

Despite just yesterday I posted this

Banshees are almost exclusively female, a male one would be a notable rarity,

in a direct response to one of your posts, which is supported by this..

40K Lexicanum wrote:Unique to the Howling Banshees is the fact that they are almost always female, for the banshee of legend is itself a female spirit

You're going to keep insisting that somehow male Banshees need to be included?

The CWE codex has it that male banshees take on a female personality while serving as one. They'd probably just take the boob plate. I mean, it's hardly pressing against anything.

 Talizvar wrote:
With how the dark millennium is portrayed, it would be obvious that women would be employed in any capacity equally to men because the imperium does not care as long as what is required is carried out..

I hesitate to go any further down this path but ... just as a matter of logic, women are much more valuable than men if what the state needs is a growing/sustainable population in order to, for example, replenish the ranks of a military formation during wartime. And what could be darker, in terms of sheer misogynistic objectification, than to reduce the worth of female persons to their capacity for reproduction? Still, even in those terms, given what I am sure are widespread issues of undernourishment, environmental poisoning, and other such factors, not a few women would be barren and therefore be simply objectified by the Imperium in the same way that it objectifies its male subjects; i.e., as trigger squeezers/bullet absorbers. I suppose in a truly dystopian setting, barren women would be "demoted" (at least in terms of how the state values them) to canon fodder, the traditional role of men. Of course, in that role, they might have a chance to rise through the ranks of their units. A good example of this would be Furiosa from Mad Max Fury Road.

 Selym wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
So, you're happy to say this..

 Pouncey wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Are there male banshees? is that a thing? is it a choice they can actually make?

(my eldar lore is pretty lacking)

I have heard that they are uncommon compared to females but do still exist in enough numbers their miniatures should exist.

Despite just yesterday I posted this

Banshees are almost exclusively female, a male one would be a notable rarity,

in a direct response to one of your posts, which is supported by this..

40K Lexicanum wrote:Unique to the Howling Banshees is the fact that they are almost always female, for the banshee of legend is itself a female spirit

You're going to keep insisting that somehow male Banshees need to be included?

The CWE codex has it that male banshees take on a female personality while serving as one. They'd probably just take the boob plate. I mean, it's hardly pressing against anything.

Where does it say that?

 Manchu wrote:
Eldar culture is highly ritualistic. Their battle armor surely reflects this. It makes sense to me that, as posted above, a male Eldar who joined the Banshee Path would conceivably cross-dress, as it were, to honor Jain Zar.

They could probably do it. They'd probably even have an official prosthetic for the Eldar men who do so.

Eldar need to be redone completely to make them less human; giving them more human breasts just makes them more human. They should have three eyes, beaks, long prehensile necks and be covered in crystalline spines. All their warriors should be female as the males are too small for any use on the battlefield as they only evolved to be the size of a dildo as befits their sole purpose in eldar society. Also no breasts at all, for Darwin's sake, Eldar are egg layers!

 Manchu wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
With how the dark millennium is portrayed, it would be obvious that women would be employed in any capacity equally to men because the imperium does not care as long as what is required is carried out..

I hesitate to go any further down this path but ... just as a matter of logic, women are much more valuable than men if what the state needs is a growing/sustainable population in order to, for example, replenish the ranks of a military formation during wartime. And what could be darker, in terms of sheer misogynistic objectification, than to reduce the worth of female persons to their capacity for reproduction? Still, even in those terms, given what I am sure are widespread issues of undernourishment, environmental poisoning, and other such factors, not a few women would be barren and therefore be simply objectified by the Imperium in the same way that it objectifies its male subjects; i.e., as trigger squeezers/bullet absorbers. I suppose in a truly dystopian setting, barren women would be "demoted" (at least in terms of how the state values them) to canon fodder, the traditional role of men. Of course, in that role, they might have a chance to rise through the ranks of their units. A good example of this would be Furiosa from Mad Max Fury Road.

People who are concerned about the Imperial Guard casualties being able to be replenished, resulting in a need for fewer women on the battlefield, simply have never done the math about the Imperium.

If you work out the official data on the Imperium's planets and their populations, you come to the conclusion that the Imperium probably has more than 20 quadrillion people living in it.

To demonstrate how many people that is, if you take every human being on Earth right now, and clone each of them one billion times, you will not end up with as many people as even half of the population of the Imperium of Man.

And of those 20 quadrillion, only 200 billion at most actually serve in the Imperial Guard. One in every one hundred thousand humans becomes an Imperial Guardsman. No more.

Replenishing casualties is NOT. A. PROBLEM. Regardless of what gender your Guardsmen are. You could have ALL of your Guardsmen being female, across the entire Imperium, for the past 10,000 years, and it would not significantly slow down how quickly your population is replenished.

And even more to the point, female Guardswomen becoming pregnant while in the field and giving birth is one of the intended ways to reinforce an Imperial Guard regiment. Because IG regiments are essentially never going home again. Those children will grow up and be trained and eventually become members of their parents' regiments. This is not only allowed by the Imperium, but they've developed special command structures for those children to be trained under.

 SolarCross wrote:
Eldar need to be redone completely to make them less human; giving them more human breasts just makes them more human. They should have three eyes, beaks, long prehensile necks and be covered in crystalline spines. All their warriors should be female as the males are too small for any use on the battlefield as they only evolved to be the size of a dildo as befits their sole purpose in eldar society. Also no breasts at all, for Darwin's sake, Eldar are egg layers!

Well to be fair, in lore the humans are the ones that look more like eldar

Ha! Manchu, I understand your trepidation.

I have had more than one female point out that in the scheme of things for sustaining the species, men are rather overabundant.

I guess it depends where human gestation is performed in 40k. If genetic samples are taken, an "optimal" combination determined, then the resultant life stuck in a jar till born: females would be no more valuable than men. Believe me, I could see this being even more impersonal than what first was surmised.

You know, I am unsure I want to explore the possible "family unit" of 40k or how the babies from the jars are raised.

I guess I find this "wrong kind of equality" interesting, where the government cannot be bothered to differentiate race or sex: we are all made to fit a generic role assigned.

 Pouncey wrote:
They could probably do it. They'd probably even have an official prosthetic for the Eldar men who do so.

That would make sense to me. If you think about it, IRL women soldiers are technically "cross-dressing" as the modern military uniform is descends from, and largely is assumed to be, a masculine costume. (Arguably, the only reason we can perceive BDUs as gender-neutral is because we already accept, in the context of battle, that masculinity is the default standard.) Basically, male Banshees would simply be doing the same thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Talizvar - I think that kind of technology is lost or mostly lost in M42. There are hints that DKOK do something like that but ... darkly enough ... there is speculation that the "jars" in question are actually living female bodies. Talk about dystopian!

 Manchu wrote:
[@Talizvar - I think that kind of technology is lost or mostly lost in M42. There are hints that DKOK do something like that but ... darkly enough ... there is speculation that the "jars" in question are actually living female bodies. Talk about dystopian!

Yeah, the classic servitors are all well and good until we get into those topics which I am happy for GW to never explore...

 Manchu wrote:
@Talizvar - I think that kind of technology is lost or mostly lost in M42. There are hints that DKOK do something like that but ... darkly enough ... there is speculation that the "jars" in question are actually living female bodies. Talk about dystopian!

Yeah, that part about the DKoK is a bit of a squick moment for me and it's one of the reasons I will never play them.

Fortunately there are other planets in the Imperium who don't do stuff like that, so I can still have fun with the Imperial Guard. : D

 Pouncey wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
With how the dark millennium is portrayed, it would be obvious that women would be employed in any capacity equally to men because the imperium does not care as long as what is required is carried out..

I hesitate to go any further down this path but ... just as a matter of logic, women are much more valuable than men if what the state needs is a growing/sustainable population in order to, for example, replenish the ranks of a military formation during wartime. And what could be darker, in terms of sheer misogynistic objectification, than to reduce the worth of female persons to their capacity for reproduction? Still, even in those terms, given what I am sure are widespread issues of undernourishment, environmental poisoning, and other such factors, not a few women would be barren and therefore be simply objectified by the Imperium in the same way that it objectifies its male subjects; i.e., as trigger squeezers/bullet absorbers. I suppose in a truly dystopian setting, barren women would be "demoted" (at least in terms of how the state values them) to canon fodder, the traditional role of men. Of course, in that role, they might have a chance to rise through the ranks of their units. A good example of this would be Furiosa from Mad Max Fury Road.

People who are concerned about the Imperial Guard casualties being able to be replenished, resulting in a need for fewer women on the battlefield, simply have never done the math about the Imperium.

If you work out the official data on the Imperium's planets and their populations, you come to the conclusion that the Imperium probably has more than 20 quadrillion people living in it.

To demonstrate how many people that is, if you take every human being on Earth right now, and clone each of them one billion times, you will not end up with as many people as even half of the population of the Imperium of Man.

And of those 20 quadrillion, only 200 billion at most actually serve in the Imperial Guard. One in every one hundred thousand humans becomes an Imperial Guardsman. No more.

Replenishing casualties is NOT. A. PROBLEM. Regardless of what gender your Guardsmen are. You could have ALL of your Guardsmen being female, across the entire Imperium, for the past 10,000 years, and it would not significantly slow down how quickly your population is replenished.

And even more to the point, female Guardswomen becoming pregnant while in the field and giving birth is one of the intended ways to reinforce an Imperial Guard regiment. Because IG regiments are essentially never going home again. Those children will grow up and be trained and eventually become members of their parents' regiments. This is not only allowed by the Imperium, but they've developed special command structures for those children to be trained under.

^ I think that is a gross oversimplification. If a planet is invaded, the PDF is going to potentially require every man, woman and child to fight for survival. The Russians and Germans (and to a lesser extent british) all did it during the war, many African countries still do. Then look at worlds like Cadia?

And yes only one in a hundred people join the guard, but that military population comes from a smaller selection of worlds, if you have a particular sector invaded they could very easily run low on manpower. It takes a long time to travel across the imperium, if your reinforcements arrive at all. It's why generally regiments stay fairly local to their originating sector.

 Talizvar wrote:
Ha! Manchu, I understand your trepidation.

I have had more than one female point out that in the scheme of things for sustaining the species, men are rather overabundant.

I guess it depends where human gestation is performed in 40k. If genetic samples are taken, an "optimal" combination determined, then the resultant life stuck in a jar till born: females would be no more valuable than men. Believe me, I could see this being even more impersonal than what first was surmised.

You know, I am unsure I want to explore the possible "family unit" of 40k or how the babies from the jars are raised.

I guess I find this "wrong kind of equality" interesting, where the government cannot be bothered to differentiate race or sex: we are all made to fit a generic role assigned.

I think the IoM just lets most of is citizens do the reproducing for them on their own without trying to influence it. There are too many people in the IoM to actually enforce an unusual method of reproduction on everyone, and really there's no point anyways since it wouldn't affect the total number of people produced. And the Imperium of Man is actually extremely egalitarian out of a state of apathy. They simply don't care if you're male or female - you're human so you'll do. There's even lore about how IG regiments supply some of their own reinforcements through their soldiers becoming pregnant and giving birth, which means that there is some percentage of female IG who are actually going into combat during various stages of pregnancy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Baldeagle91 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:
With how the dark millennium is portrayed, it would be obvious that women would be employed in any capacity equally to men because the imperium does not care as long as what is required is carried out..

I hesitate to go any further down this path but ... just as a matter of logic, women are much more valuable than men if what the state needs is a growing/sustainable population in order to, for example, replenish the ranks of a military formation during wartime. And what could be darker, in terms of sheer misogynistic objectification, than to reduce the worth of female persons to their capacity for reproduction? Still, even in those terms, given what I am sure are widespread issues of undernourishment, environmental poisoning, and other such factors, not a few women would be barren and therefore be simply objectified by the Imperium in the same way that it objectifies its male subjects; i.e., as trigger squeezers/bullet absorbers. I suppose in a truly dystopian setting, barren women would be "demoted" (at least in terms of how the state values them) to canon fodder, the traditional role of men. Of course, in that role, they might have a chance to rise through the ranks of their units. A good example of this would be Furiosa from Mad Max Fury Road.

People who are concerned about the Imperial Guard casualties being able to be replenished, resulting in a need for fewer women on the battlefield, simply have never done the math about the Imperium.

If you work out the official data on the Imperium's planets and their populations, you come to the conclusion that the Imperium probably has more than 20 quadrillion people living in it.

To demonstrate how many people that is, if you take every human being on Earth right now, and clone each of them one billion times, you will not end up with as many people as even half of the population of the Imperium of Man.

And of those 20 quadrillion, only 200 billion at most actually serve in the Imperial Guard. One in every one hundred thousand humans becomes an Imperial Guardsman. No more.

Replenishing casualties is NOT. A. PROBLEM. Regardless of what gender your Guardsmen are. You could have ALL of your Guardsmen being female, across the entire Imperium, for the past 10,000 years, and it would not significantly slow down how quickly your population is replenished.

And even more to the point, female Guardswomen becoming pregnant while in the field and giving birth is one of the intended ways to reinforce an Imperial Guard regiment. Because IG regiments are essentially never going home again. Those children will grow up and be trained and eventually become members of their parents' regiments. This is not only allowed by the Imperium, but they've developed special command structures for those children to be trained under.

^ I think that is a gross oversimplification. If a planet is invaded, the PDF is going to potentially require every man, woman and child to fight for survival. The Russians and Germans (and to a lesser extent british) all did it during the war, many African countries still do. Then look at worlds like Cadia?

And yes only one in a hundred people join the guard, but that military population comes from a smaller selection of worlds, if you have a particular sector invaded they could very easily run low on manpower. It takes a long time to travel across the imperium, if your reinforcements arrive at all. It's why generally regiments stay fairly local to their originating sector.

IG regiments don't actually wait for reinforcements from their homeworld at all. They simply recruit reinforcements from local populations and their own women giving birth.

No, no, not one in a hundred people join the Guard. One in a hundred THOUSAND.

The Imperium of Humanity cares not for your sexuality or your gender. The Imperium cares only that you worship the God-Emperor and that you die in His service.

Anyone who isn't a mutant, a traitor, or a heretic is A-OK with the High Lords of Terra and the various Imperium-wide organisations.

Which, of course, brings us back to the point that we should have more variance in the Imperial Guard range!

 Pouncey wrote:
Yeah, that part about the DKoK is a bit of a squick moment for me and it's one of the reasons I will never play them.

It's certainly gross! But no grosser than what anyone with anything to with Chaos gets up to. I'm happy for GW to vaguely hint at such things. It would be too much, for me at least, if this kind of stuff was the central premise of a faction. DKoK's premise, however, is the obliteration of individual ID both as penitence for disloyalty (understood as a facet of ego) and as an unwavering commitment to duty, which is really about as fascist and dark as 40k needs to get IMO.

 Pouncey wrote:
There are too many people in the IoM to actually enforce an unusual method of reproduction on everyone, and really there's no point anyways since it wouldn't affect the total number of people produced.

As a parody of 20th-century authoritarianism, I would not put it past the Imperium to desire and even attempt to control every aspect of its subjects lives. And - for the same reason, namely it being a parody - the Imperium does not care that doing so is mostly impossible and, even where it is theoretically possible, the labyrinthine bureaucratic constitution of the state and the vast scales involved render it absurdly improbable. For that reason I disagree with your conclusion that

 Pouncey wrote:
the Imperium of Man is actually extremely egalitarian out of a state of apathy

Arguably, no government could care more about even the innermost thoughts and desires of its subjects (in this case, "bad thoughts" can actually result in planetary disasters). The black humor of the Imperium is premised on the "facts" of the 40k setting fully justify authoritarianism even considering that authoritarianism in 40k, just like IRL, is itself ultimately not only futile but also self-defeating.

 Manchu wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
There are too many people in the IoM to actually enforce an unusual method of reproduction on everyone, and really there's no point anyways since it wouldn't affect the total number of people produced.

As a parody of 20th-century authoritarianism, I would not put it past the Imperium to desire and even attempt to control every aspect of its subjects lives. And - for the same reason, namely it being a parody - the Imperium does not care that doing so is mostly impossible and, even where it is theoretically possible, the labyrinthine bureaucratic constitution of the state and the vast scales involved render it absurdly improbable. For that reason I disagree with your conclusion that

 Pouncey wrote:
the Imperium of Man is actually extremely egalitarian out of a state of apathy

Arguably, no government could care more about even the innermost thoughts and desires of its subjects (in this case, "bad thoughts" can actually result in planetary disasters). The black humor of the Imperium is premised on the "facts" of the 40k setting fully justify authoritarianism even considering that authoritarianism in 40k, just like IRL, is itself ultimately not only futile but also self-defeating.

Okay, so they might do that, if I understood one word you were even trying to say.

Now point me to the lore that says they DO do that.

 Pouncey wrote:
Now point me to the lore that says they DO do that.

All I mean is, this is a state whose propaganda is along the lines of "blessed is the mind too small for doubt." That the Imperium wants to control bodies is a given considering it is obviously trying to control minds.

 Manchu wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
Now point me to the lore that says they DO do that.

All I mean is, this is a state whose propaganda is along the lines of "blessed is the mind too small for doubt." That the Imperium wants to control bodies is a given considering it is obviously trying to control minds.

Not good enough.

You're trying to say that the Imperium enforces some form of bizarre method of reproduction on all its citizens. Now you have to actually prove it.

No he doesn't.

He's already shown his thinking, plus there's real world evidence to support that the State can and does get involved in reproduction.

But there's nothing in the background to show that this is the case even slightly; unlike the Tau, for example, who are paired off via algorithms that seek to ensure Caste purity, humans are very much left to it - that of course, depends on the world in question. Some worlds may well have vat-bred humans, others might not. But from the worlds we see in books like the Inquisition War, Eisenhorn, Ravenor, Titanicus, and so on and so forth, people very much have kids the old-fashioned way.

 Azreal13 wrote:
No he doesn't.

He's already shown his thinking, plus there's real world evidence to support that the State can and does get involved in reproduction.

He's proved with his reasoning that they might hypothetically try (though really the Imperium is more utilitarian than authoritarian), but simply proving that they might theoretically try doesn't actually prove that they actually are. For that you need to find a piece of official lore that says they are.

I'm looking for a piece of lore that states that the Imperium actually does enforce a bizarre, unnatural method of reproduction on every citizen in the Imperium. If they actually are doing so, the lore should exist somewhere that says they're doing it. Find me that lore.

If you're willing to simply accept that "hypothetically they might" and "they actually are" are the same thing... that's a bigger problem than just 40k lore for you and I'm not sure it's a very safe situation.

No, but I'm capable of talking in hypotheticals without demanding proof of every fething theory. Like a person.

 Desubot wrote:

 SolarCross wrote:
Eldar need to be redone completely to make them less human; giving them more human breasts just makes them more human. They should have three eyes, beaks, long prehensile necks and be covered in crystalline spines. All their warriors should be female as the males are too small for any use on the battlefield as they only evolved to be the size of a dildo as befits their sole purpose in eldar society. Also no breasts at all, for Darwin's sake, Eldar are egg layers!

Well to be fair, in lore the humans are the ones that look more like eldar

To be even more fair, that is another thing that will need to be re-done.

 Azreal13 wrote:
No, but I'm capable of talking in hypotheticals without demanding proof of every fething theory. Like a person.

Clearly I need to go back and re-read stuff, because I thought someone wasn't speaking hypothetically about it.

Somehow I very, VERY much misinterpreted that.

Sorry.

 Pouncey wrote:
You're trying to say that the Imperium enforces some form of bizarre method of reproduction on all its citizens.

Well, more like I am saying that we have every reason to believe that the Imperium would want absolute control over its subjects lives, quite apart from whether or to what degree that is even possible, including regarding reproduction - and in fact that the Imperium would arguably be very interested in reproduction. I think we might be talking across one another insofar as you mention "some bizarre method of reproduction." All I am saying is, the Imperium would be likely to value fertile women as baby factories because the Imperium is pretty awful and the conditions of M42 are pretty awful, etc., no real argument from me about what exactly that entails so far as how women are impregnated or whatever. The Imperium is big enough that there must be many, many sets of customs about mating and sexuality. But over and above all of that, the Imperium does demand a certain percentage of the population do X, Y, and Z - including service in its endless, grinding wars.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
I was assuming that the kind of person who would have an issue with their new IG coming with some female bits instead of all male bits, despite the lore of the game saying that should be the case, strongly enough to quit, would have some serious issues with women, either in general or when they intrude on the hobby.

TBH I agree with you when it comes to the subject of IG. I would have a lot more sympathy with someone getting to that level of disgust over something like Femarines. Excluding female IG models makes no sense because women serve in the IG. I don't know that this was ever not the case, at least theoretically. While GW could easily pay someone to retcon the 40k fluff so that some Space Marines are ladies, and pretend that this has always been the case, we'd all know that's false and I can't think of any reasonable argument in favor of doing so (I just don't think it makes the hobby more inclusive, really). But yes, going back to where we agree, if someone wanted to ragequit over models that depict a totally clear element of the canonical setting, i.e., that women serve in the IG, then I guess it probably would be a reasonable indicator that they have some problem with women.

 Pouncey wrote:
So maybe that's just a bad idea in general to have both male parts and female parts in the same kit, unless you could create the kit as fully either gender without needing to buy anything else..

I really think any new IG kit needs to have both male and female figures. At this point, it seems totally non-contentious that, by default, IG regiments can recruit from both sexes and it is the ones that only recruit one or the other sex that are the exceptions rather than the other way around. That is just the most logical approach overall. If, for whatever reason, you want a IG army made up of all women from planet Amazonia, fine, do exactly what you would do to get a SM army who all wear Power Armor Mark whatever.

 Manchu wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
You're trying to say that the Imperium enforces some form of bizarre method of reproduction on all its citizens.

Well, more like I am saying that we have every reason to believe that the Imperium would want absolute control over its subjects lives, quite apart from whether or to what degree that is even possible, including regarding reproduction - and in fact that the Imperium would arguably be very interested in reproduction. I think we might be talking across one another insofar as you mention "some bizarre method of reproduction." All I am saying is, the Imperium would be likely to value fertile women as baby factories because the Imperium is pretty awful and the conditions of M42 are pretty awful, etc., no real argument from me about what exactly that entails so far as how women are impregnated or whatever. The Imperium is big enough that there must be many, many sets of customs about mating and sexuality. But over and above all of that, the Imperium does demand a certain percentage of the population do X, Y, and Z - including service in its endless, grinding wars.

Generally, I think the Imperium favors its utilitarian side when it comes to people's reproduction, not it's authoritarian side. The latter would say, "Control them!" and the former would say, "Why? The people they're pumping out on their own is more than sufficient to fill every need for human life we have, with a tremendous surplus. Controlling them would only cost resources to fix something that's not broken. Maybe if the population levels become a problem, but they're fine now. What is the gain?" And the authoritatian side would have no answer to the utilarian gain, since there isn't one.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
I was assuming that the kind of person who would have an issue with their new IG coming with some female bits instead of all male bits, despite the lore of the game saying that should be the case, strongly enough to quit, would have some serious issues with women, either in general or when they intrude on the hobby.

TBH I agree with you when it comes to the subject of IG. I would have a lot more sympathy with someone getting to that level of disgust over something like Femarines. Excluding female IG models makes no sense because women serve in the IG. I don't know that this was ever not the case, at least theoretically. While GW could easily pay someone to retcon the 40k fluff so that some Space Marines are ladies, and pretend that this has always been the case, we'd all know that's false and I can't think of any reasonable argument in favor of doing so (I just don't think it makes the hobby more inclusive, really). But yes, going back to where we agree, if someone wanted to ragequit over models that depict a totally clear element of the canonical setting, i.e., that women serve in the IG, then I guess it probably would be a reasonable indicator that they have some problem with women.

 Pouncey wrote:
So maybe that's just a bad idea in general to have both male parts and female parts in the same kit, unless you could create the kit as fully either gender without needing to buy anything else..

I really think any new IG kit needs to have both male and female figures. At this point, it seems totally non-contentious that, by default, IG regiments can recruit from both sexes and it is the ones that only recruit one or the other sex that are the exceptions rather than the other way around. That is just the most logical approach overall. If, for whatever reason, you want a IG army made up of all women from planet Amazonia, fine, do exactly what you would do to get a SM army who all wear Power Armor Mark whatever.

My point was more to take into account that while there would be a large number of women in the IG, each individual regiment would have its own ratio of men to women, since it's not something the IG actually standardizes. So it would be up to each player to decide what kind of regiment they're playing, since the lore options are varied enough to accommodate anything from all-male to all-female. Including a specific number of male models and a specific number of female models would create the average number, and anyone who wants to play a regiment with an average mix would be happy. But non-average mixes would also exist, and having a kit make 5 males and 5 females means that if you want to make, say a regiment that happens to be all-female, half your models in every kit would be useless to you and you'd have to pay twice as much just to make the same army. Even if you simply want a non-average mix that's not all one way or the other, say 25% male and 75% female, then after you've reached those 25% being male, you'd have only one-third of the female ones you need and all the male ones in your future boxes are going to waste.

Essentially I'm saying that as much as having only male or only female models for an IG regiment is often unrealistic, dictating the ratio of male to female models you get with each purchase restricts you to that ratio, and forces you to pay more to do anything different.