One race dominates all the lore and storyline. The game would be better if one race was not so central to everything. Having these supposed super warriors that are also so cool creates a game that is too focused on either playing space marines or beating space marines. Space marines are in every starter set, but are supposed to be an elite army, so the proliferation of SM stats distorts game play. SM's should be toned down and take a back seat for a while in the release schedule.
Having an army which all the lore is centred around and the antagonist factions are compared to is very fine and good, but the fact that the Space Marines are described as being the best is what makes the fluff so bad.
Take Eldar. High technology, developed culture, declining civilization and generally a humane psyche (which is detrimental in a world where everyone wants to kill everything). Lots of pros and cons.
Take Orks. Fungus based life form, no a lot of brain-power, loves combat, etc. Perfect antagonist, excellent fluff.
Take Tau. An empire on the rise, struggling with the finer points of technology, dubious ethics behind the scene. Excellent faction by large.
Take Imperial Guard. The common man, roughly trained, fighting the real fight against a universe struggling to kill humanity off. Perfect protector of mankind.
Against this background - why do we even need Space Marines? To have them as a specialist branch of the Imperial Guard would make excellent sense, but to have them dictate and dominate everything that happens to the point where the Imperial Guard victories and defeats are meaningless - and to where the other factions progress is measured by the distance to the closest Space Marine chapter (actually, scout squad in some cases). It just doesn't make for the best of fluff to support a game.
But I guess Games Workshop isn't about the game and that they are surprised every time they find someone who plays for the game and not the space marine novels.
Why do we have space marines in W40K? I guess it's because most (if not all) good sci-fi stories involve some way or another elite superhumans clad in thick armour. Think about Halo, starcraft, crysis, vanquish or even star wars...
GW simply developped this key element of science fiction and made it the center element its universe.
However, I agree that it somehow backfired at GW; since many, many W40K players choose to play the SM since they have the cooler fluff. As a result, we see LOTS of SM armies and it kills the idea of rare, elite supersoldiers.
Well, if you look at the halo franchise, you can count the number of spartans on two hands, yet spartans are everywhere. They are in very game, and almost evry book and graphic novel, even though there are many factions. This is because they are the main characters, the same goes for space marines.
Laodamia wrote:Why do we have space marines in W40K? I guess it's because most (if not all) good sci-fi stories involve some way or another elite superhumans clad in thick armour. Think about starship troopers or even star wars...
GW simply continued this key element of science fiction and made it the center element its universe.
Mr Nobody wrote:Well, if you look at the halo franchise, you can count the number of spartans on two hands, yet spartans are everywhere. They are in very game, and almost evry book and graphic novel, even though there are many factions. This is because they are the main characters, the same goes for space marines.
There were hundreds of spartans, counting all the different programs. Not 10.
Mr Nobody wrote:Well, if you look at the halo franchise, you can count the number of spartans on two hands, yet spartans are everywhere. They are in very game, and almost evry book and graphic novel, even though there are many factions. This is because they are the main characters, the same goes for space marines.
There were hundreds of spartans, counting all the different programs. Not 10.
But that's still a small elite group amongst other faction which are much larger, just like space marines.
SMs are one of the "coolest" armies around. They look super-badass and they perform incredibly well on the battlefield. I agree that they get a bit too much of the spotlight and would love to see some more focus on xenos forces, but I don't begrudge GW for giving their coolest and most popular army the most love.
MADLarkin wrote:
Mr Nobody wrote:Well, if you look at the halo franchise, you can count the number of spartans on two hands, yet spartans are everywhere. They are in very game, and almost evry book and graphic novel, even though there are many factions. This is because they are the main characters, the same goes for space marines.
There were hundreds of spartans, counting all the different programs. Not 10.
You may be restricted to 10 fingers, but you don't have to be limited to counting to 10. It's pretty easy to count to 1,024 on your fingers. Just use binary with "Up" for 1 and "Down" for 0.
And, I can use (although somewhat painfully) 2 intermediate "up" positions, letting you count up to 4 per finger and a total of 1,048,576.
Looks at Avatar of OP.....right, obvious title for a thread...
juraigamer wrote:I wouldn't mind at all if there wasn't a bazillion marine codexes (chaos marines don't count)
With so many, all the other armies gotta wait longer for stuff.
Were NOT there, still some quantillion marine codices to be done
Just remember: 40k is constructed around the IoM background.
And Csm do count as sm ( maybe less than that..).
Its not like DE aren't squatted and necrons may be not that far.
Nids don't count as non-space marine release?
Is it so hard to spot the path of updating the oldest codices and PDF-dexes first, material that relied upon other codices to work?
5th ed is meant to be self-containing (except USR of course ) codices.
GW has also said that they prefer the Imperium be the focus because they are easier for the consumer to relate to. Even the alien codices are supposed to be written from the Imperial standpoint (examples: Tyranid and Orks) because they could never properly display things in a non-human mindset.
Some might call it a cop-out, a cheap excuse for poor writing, but really there isn't much sci-fi that does a good job of positioning you in the alien mindset; it all comes out skewed.
As for "a billion" marine codices, can we really lay off the hyperbole? It doesn't add much to a discussion.
Sure we would like to see Lex bitch slap Superman to death, but isn't going to happen. To many people like the "holier than thou" heros, so thats what they get.
The problem isn't with Space Marines, it's the oversaturation of Space Marines. Of the 16 currently available Warhammer 40,000 Codexes, nearly half of them are Space Marine books (DH,SM,DA,BA,SW,BT,CSM). They cannibalize sales from each other, take development/marketing/release/retail time and resources away from other factions, and extend the time it takes to update all the army books by about 2 years. If they were to cut it down to DH/CSM/SM, amalgamating DA/BA/BT/SW into SM, then you might get all the armies updated within the span of a single edition, and you'd have less problems with differences between editions and supposedly identical wargear between all SM books. Additionally, you'd remove a lot of the angst and frustration from the rest of the playerbase.
Monster Rain wrote:
Genocide and violent religious fanaticism from genetically engineered super soldiers is "holier than thou?"
Unfortunately, yes, recent SM fluff is far more of the "holy knight in shining armor" crap, and a lot less the psycho-indoctrinated, genetically engineered super soldier religious fanatic stuff. You won't find much, if any fluff, in the recent SM books of the extremism that heralded some of the older books. They're almost all Mary Sue's.
Mr Nobody wrote:Well, if you look at the halo franchise, you can count the number of spartans on two hands, yet spartans are everywhere. They are in very game, and almost evry book and graphic novel, even though there are many factions. This is because they are the main characters, the same goes for space marines.
There were hundreds of spartans, counting all the different programs. Not 10.
It is possible to count to more than 10 using two hands. If you use each finger as a digit in a binary number, it is possible to count to 1023 using both hands. Mr. Nobody's statement still stands.
I dont get how people think that Marine Chapters are all that rare...
Legions split into countless chapters across multiple foundings. They are the knights of a failing realm and flawed in many ways, with exception to the Ultramarines but that is their gimmick.
Overall I think it would alleviate a lot of problems if people where to create their own or more unique chapters or pick more obscure insperations instead of just doing the standard few that you see revolve around LFGS. Also the death of fluffy competative Marine armies with SC spamming ruins a lot of what a marine player can do. Why take a generic Chapter master when you can have Pedro, kantor, Shrike, Vulckan, etc which dramatically increases the utility of what that force could do without the SC.
For instance, instead of running a BA army why not do a Lamentars Chapter?
I wish people would do this more. Seems like all I see is the standard
Salamanders
Ultramarines
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
All of the above, with the exception of SW, have countless seedling chapters.
I don't think SM need to be toned down. GW should tone up all the other xeno factions. They need some love.
Space Marines aren't all that bad. They still feel "epic" imho, which is what they're all about. The mistake GW makes with them is that SM steal the spotlight from everyone else. As long as GW can get people like Phil Kelly, Jes Goodwin, et al. to keep up their great work on the xeno fluff/codices/models, things will be alright.
Mr Nobody wrote:Well, if you look at the halo franchise, you can count the number of spartans on two hands, yet spartans are everywhere. They are in very game, and almost evry book and graphic novel, even though there are many factions. This is because they are the main characters, the same goes for space marines.
There were hundreds of spartans, counting all the different programs. Not 10.
It is possible to count to more than 10 using two hands. If you use each finger as a digit in a binary number, it is possible to count to 1023 using both hands. Mr. Nobody's statement still stands.
Technically you could also count to infinity with a single finger if you assign it that value. Let us not argue semantics, however, especially against ones that are as simple as counting fingers.
As previously stated: Humans are the main characters.
Perhaps some people want to play aliens fighting other aliens, or aliens fighting humans, but in general, most humans like to root for their own team. Space Marines were among the first races in the lore that became Warhammer 40k, and have been the flagship army since the game started (long before the Imperial Army was available). If Games Workshop suddenly shifted from focussing on Space Marines even to Imperial Guardsmen, they would risk loosing both current customers, 'fence sitting' customers, and future customers who might be interested in buying product. If you like science fiction, you're just as likely to associate with a Space Marine as you are with a Guardsmen, but not necessarily the other way around. As much as I like the Orks, I don't associate myself with them, and they are the next closest
However, I do agree, I would like to see alternate starter sets than just Space Marines v. "Somebody." Space Marines were not my first army, nor a lot of other people's.
purplefood wrote:Hang on...
Why have you made another thread saying SM are the best?
I think you mistook the other poster as CymrA, the Bizarro version of ArmyC. Unlike ArmyC, CymrA is born in Aibmuloc, North Carolina.
Seriously tho, I always thought that if they released Warhammer 40k starter boxes, they could do an alternative box every so often. Fantasy releases all different armies when there is a reboot. But for 40k, they could do a main starter box w/Marines vs. 'X', and alternative box with the two different armies. The alternative box would be smaller and have less troops than if you buy the main box w/Marines, but at least there would be more flavor
I'm glad that they have the starter army boxes though, it makes starting a new army a lot cheaper and faster than it used to be. I think the OP is missing the fact that the main powerhouse empire of 40k is the Imperium and that Space Marines are the spear that normally engages enemies first. Makes sense they would take the fore front, even though sometimes we want a little variety...
obsidianaura wrote:Shift marines save to 4+ and watch everyone switch armys .
I'd rather see them toned down fluff wise rather than game wise. Game wise they can be fun to play, fluff wise they are the most boring army IMHO
This.
They lack any humanity in the fluff. They are super badasses that kill EVERYTHING, and therefore have no fear. When I play, I know that my guys aren't that amazing, and so the fear is bred into my games, making the miniatures under my command much more human than many of the Soulless, abhuman automatons that we see doing synchronized wading in a sea of dead, dying, or horribly maimed foes.
Tone it down.. just a little bit. Conflicts between fear for survival and duty and honor are always fun and interesting to exploit.
Every universe needs a central figure to focus on. Star Wars wouldn't be terribly interesting if it put as much focus on the Bothans, Jawas, Wookies and Ewoks as it did on the Rebels and Imperials. Marines also are the de facto starter army/marketing tool, so to shift focus would be counter-intuitive.
Brother SRM wrote:Every universe needs a central figure to focus on. Star Wars wouldn't be terribly interesting if it put as much focus on the Bothans, Jawas, Wookies and Ewoks as it did on the Rebels and Imperials. Marines also are the de facto starter army/marketing tool, so to shift focus would be counter-intuitive.
I'm struggling to find the blatantly obvious poster child focus army in Warhammer Fantasy. Empire is the central faction, but they take about as much credit as Imperial Guard. It's like the mirror of Warhammer 40kwithout the Space Marines.
Mr Nobody wrote:Well, if you look at the halo franchise, you can count the number of spartans on two hands, yet spartans are everywhere. They are in very game, and almost evry book and graphic novel, even though there are many factions. This is because they are the main characters, the same goes for space marines.
There were hundreds of spartans, counting all the different programs. Not 10.
But that's still a small elite group amongst other faction which are much larger, just like space marines.
In the Halo lore, the reason they were a "small" Elite group was that the Covenant attacked as the program was being started. Marines, in general, are fewer in number than the amount of soldiers in any army. If you read the fluff, there are, maybe, 2 to 3 marines for every planet in the Emperium. However, IG are drafted from planets every so many years, or when theres a need for soldiers.
Also, there used to be fewer chapters of the SM until the Horus Heresy. After words, the Emperium split the chapters so they would have less Marines, creating a whole mess of chapters. Same reason the split the artillery, air support, and ground troops of the IG
Brother SRM wrote:Every universe needs a central figure to focus on. Star Wars wouldn't be terribly interesting if it put as much focus on the Bothans, Jawas, Wookies and Ewoks as it did on the Rebels and Imperials. Marines also are the de facto starter army/marketing tool, so to shift focus would be counter-intuitive.
If you read the books, they Do put emphasis on these lesser races. Humans sometimes show up as, wait for it, Side Characters. The wide number of aliens that Star Wars has does allow for a far greater variety of beings to chose from as opposed to 40K, but even so the Star Wars universe has been unafraid of putting the main characters on the side in favor of exploring some of the lesser known races to flesh them out. Does this always work out for the best, absolutely not, but occasionally it comes up with a really cool idea that gets explored and grown to full potential throughout the series. 40K, I feel, should try producing some stuff that just kinda ignores the humans, maybe some Tau vs. 'Nids and Orks as they expand or some lesser, newly formed race just getting into the space fairing mode then attempting to colonize a Tomb World before getting entirely wiped out. Stuff like this could elaborate on other races without being another Imperial focused novel.
i think some of the xeno races need some more spotlight on them. orks obvious are secondary but i think tau would be a good secondary race to put against another race like necrons.
By older I mean 21. I'm 22 and I consider myself "old" compared to all those punk-ass kids with their crappy painted ultra-marines.
Not to mention Space Marines are WAYYY EASIER to paint then Eldar or horde armies. Most kids do not have the patience to buy & paint a lot of models (like hordes) and they prefer the most shinyest oohhh ahhh thing out there rather than "gay space elves" (I've been told me by a 11 year old kid) or regular guys (IG) who wants to be regular guys in a sci-fi game?
It's all a sign of immaturity. Kid + space marines = GW target market. I consider Chaos Space Marines to be the same sign of immaturity. Spiky SMFTW
Real men play Xenos. (or some non-SM faction)
IS ANYONE gonna deny that Dark Eldar or Tau simply takes way more skill than 3+ saves all around Space Marines? Kids can't handle it they want the Terminators man. Kids don't like playing with fragile glass-cannon armies that require skill and is unforgiving.
DorianGray wrote:By older I mean 21. I'm 22 and I consider myself "old" compared to all those punk-ass kids with their crappy painted ultra-marines.
Not to mention Space Marines are WAYYY EASIER to paint then Eldar or horde armies. Most kids do not have the patience to buy & paint a lot of models (like hordes) and they prefer the most shinyest oohhh ahhh thing out there rather than "gay space elves" (I've been told me by a 11 year old kid) or regular guys (IG) who wants to be regular guys in a sci-fi game?
It's all a sign of immaturity. Kid + space marines = GW target market. I consider Chaos Space Marines to be the same sign of immaturity. Spiky SMFTW
Real men play Xenos. (or some non-SM faction)
I see more people older than me(23) playing Marines. The "kids+space marines=GW target market" is actually a mistake.
Power Armor appeals to the tournament players, Marines especially do. It has nothing to do with immaturity, like you hypothesize.
It's all about proxying. Space Marines can proxy as damned near anything out there, leading to a larger amount of potential armies for a tournament player at the least expenditure.
IS ANYONE gonna deny that Dark Eldar or Tau simply takes way more skill than 4+ saves all around Space Marines? Kids can't handle it they want the Terminators man.
...You do realize Marines are 3+ saves all around, right?
Dorian Gray wrote:By older I mean 21. I'm 22 and I consider myself "old" compared to all those punk-ass kids with their crappy painted ultra-marines.
Not to mention Space Marines are WAYYY EASIER to paint then Elder or horde armies. Most kids do not have the patience to buy & paint a lot of models (like hordes) and they prefer the most shiniest ooh ohhh thing out there rather than "gay space elves" (I've been told me by a 11 year old kid) or regular guys (IG) who wants to be regular guys in a sci-fi game?
It's all a sign of immaturity. Kid + space marines = GW target market. I consider Chaos Space Marines to be the same sign of immaturity. Spiky SMFTW
Real men play Xenos. (or some non-SM faction)
IS ANYONE gonna deny that Dark Eldar or Tau simply takes way more skill than 3+ saves all around Space Marines? Kids can't handle it they want the Terminators man. Kids don't like playing with fragile glass-cannon armies that require skill and is unforgiving.
Your painting with a rather broad brush there man,people chose the armies they do for a variety of reasons and they certainly aren't as limited as you seem to believe.
Is anyone gonna deny "IN GENERAL" Space Marines are a lot more forgiving to play than almost every other army out there. Also they are A LOT easier to paint and magnetize than those tiny Eldar torsos or Tau. (Except Necrons, lol they are easy to paint)
I was magnetizing my models, I originally got magnets meant for Space Marine shoulders only to realize they were WAY TOO BIG for my Eldar arms. I had to get really really tiny magnets to magnetize my Exarchs and it was a PAIN to glue them, etc. Also 2000 pt. Space Marine Army is a hell of a lot cheaper than a 2000 pt. Guard Army or a 2000 pt. Dark Eldar Army. Kidz have less money or are dependent on their parents.
This appeals to beginners. This appeals to kids. Most kids play Space Marines.
Sure some die-hard veterans play Space Marines (namely Space Wolves or Blood Angels) because they are WAAC gamers.
Seriously guys Space Marines suck... 8 out of 10 players at your club has a Space Marine army. Stop the madness take a stand and MAKE a difference.!
That said, there is always that 1 kid who is extremely dedicated to painting his models to a high quality, have great manners, is very mature, started with Tau or some other underpowered Xenos faction and plays with stoic dignity against cheese Blood Angels. That kid is a prodigy, going against the grain, that kid is a hero. 1 in a hundred (the rest decided to start 40k with space marines) REMEMBER THIS KID. He should be praised.
Monster Rain wrote:The Space Marines are the focus of the story in 40k.
It's like complaining that there's too much focus on Hobbits in the Lord of the Rings.
Then there's the fact that Space Marines are awesome.
^ This. I have to agree that Space Marines are the story. I also agree that, sometimes it's good to branch off. It's healthy for the game. Lets the Space Marines relax abit, while another race refreshes the storyline. They don't have to be put on the back burner, just not in your grill constantly.
I also play SM, Space Wolves in particular. Some people like to play the game for the connection aspect. it allows people to play other people for fun and get to know others who play the same game, even if they dont use the same faction or play the same way. I play Space wolves because my wife and i are in the SCA, and we are both from Norwegian backgrounds. The Space wolves remind me of the Vikings, which came from around and in Norway. Its a connection for me. I don't expect to be as good as any tourny player (though i wish i could be) and just enjoy the game for what it is. If that means getting crushed by some Xeno-Horde or glasscannon fragile army, i'm going to laugh. Hard. Then shake hands with the guy who beat me and then play the next guy. Pure and simple.
Its just a game. It shouldn't matter what army you play as long as you have fun while you play. I enjoy seeing how the enemy is going to destroy my army until i build it up enough to no longer worry about being wiped off the board. ( My orks are slowly being built up and i mean very slowly)
Is anyone gonna deny "IN GENERAL" Space Marines are a lot more forgiving to play than almost every other army out there. Also they are A LOT easier to paint and magnetize than those tiny Eldar torsos or Tau. (Except Necrons, lol they are easy to paint)
I was magnetizing my models, I originally got magnets meant for Space Marine shoulders only to realize they were WAY TOO BIG for my Eldar arms. I had to get really really tiny magnets to magnetize my Exarchs.
This appeals to beginners. This appeals to kids. Most kids play Space Marines.
Actually, Eldar are far easier to paint using "simple" methods. If I were to actually want to?
I could do a Dark Eldar army in a manner of days using two colors and washes--and it would look good.
You can't really do that with Marines, simply because of the way the armor is set up.
Magnetizing is something beginners don't do, so that's a terrible example.
Sure some die-hard veterans play Space Marines (namely Space Wolves or Blood Angels) because they are WAAC gamers.
Seriously guys Space Marines suck... 8 out of 10 players at your club has a Space Marine army. Stop the madness take a stand and MAKE a difference.!
Uh, actually at my club?
It's the exact opposite. 14 out of our 15 players has a Dark Eldar or Eldar army.
8 of those 14 have either a Tyranid or Tau army as well.
I'm one of maybe three people who actually have a Marine army, and that's Dark Angels.
People who play unique Marine Armies like Ravenwing, or Deathwing or fluffy armies get a pass.
WAAC Space Wolves players who spam IMBA long fangs, Thunderwolves, and Blood Angels running Mephiston, lord of cheese don't. Note this also applies to IG running leafblower lists with 10 Chimeras, Vendettas, etc. (aka. a@@holes)
I wish 95% of kids didn't start 40k with Space Marines. They aren't cool , they're over-done, and being drawn to "THIS IS SPARTAAA" wearing power-armor is really immature.
I actually plan on getting a second army, but i don't have any clues on what to do. Yes, i started with SM's. Do i enjoy it? Yes i do. I this all i'm going to want? no. (If anyone here could pm me what kind of army would go good with close combat, rip you to shreds tactics. any and all help is accepted and appreciated.)
DorianGray wrote:People who play unique Marine Armies like Ravenwing, or Deathwing or fluffy armies get a pass.
WAAC Space Wolves players who spam IMBA long fangs, Thunderwolves, and Blood Angels running Mephiston, lord of cheese don't.
Note this also applies to IG running leafblower lists with 10 Chimeras, Vendettas, etc. (aka. a@@holes)
How is this different to 3x Monolith Necrons, Serpentspam Eldar, Wych Cults, or Haemonculi Covens?
The Xenos codices have got the potential to be nasty, same as the Marine ones.
I wish 95% of kids didn't start 40k with Space Marines. They aren't cool , they're over-done, and being drawn to "THIS IS SPARTAAA" wearing power-armor is really immature.
"95% of kids start 40k with Space Marines" for none of the reasons you listed.
They start with Space Marines because Space Marines are a good starter army. They're forgiving to the player, and they're a well-supported range of multi-part plastics.
And as an aside? " "THIS IS SPARTAAA" wearing power armor" is a huge misinterpretation of the Ultramarines.
First, they're based off the Roman Empire not the Hellenic Greeks or Spartans.
Second, the Ultramarines are nowhere near being "overdone" like the Space Wolves(Hurr! Vikings in Spehss!), the Tau(ANIMEALIENS!ZOMG!), the Dark Eldar(Hurr! Bondage Elveses!), or Slaanesh Daemons(OMGDEYHAVEBEWBS!).
You're just using an inaccurate stereotype to work from, and it's just backfiring all over the place.
Vierhof wrote:I actually plan on getting a second army, but i don't have any clues on what to do. Yes, i started with SM's. Do i enjoy it? Yes i do. I this all i'm going to want? no. (If anyone here could pm me what kind of army would go good with close combat, rip you to shreds tactics. any and all help is accepted and appreciated.)
I like this kid.
If you like close combat, rip to threads tactics - then obviously Tyranids or Orks. Both Xenos which is awesome. I'd recommend Dark Eldar if you really want to go into the deep end and be a man. They are fragile - most fragile in the game - arguably takes the most skill to use but they are very good at Close Combat and Assaulting. Also they are very rewarding once you get skills. They can be the 3rd or 4th most powerful army if you use them properly and well.
@Kanluwen: I already said Space Marines are the most forgiving army by far. Your entire army doesn't disintegrate if you made a terrible movement phase - if you're Dark Eldar on the other hand... good game. Space Marines are also the top 2 codexes right now. This is why kidz plays Space Marines.
Dorian, you really do seem to be throwing a ton of stereotypes around. In fact, your tone can really be interpreted as trolling.
You claim that SMs are mostly played because of how forgiving they are with well-rounded stats along with 3+ armor saves.
What if people play SMs (note: I'm referring to vanilla when I say SMs) because they enjoy the fluff? Or, better yet, the playstyle they offer? Or, the technology? (I myself LOVE SMs because of their tech; I'm the kind of person that doesn't complain about Star Trek's technobabble, in fact, I understand it and contribute to it. For the sake of argument though, anecdotes and personal preference can't really apply) You can't really apply sweeping broad statements without knowing the motivations behind players picking SMs as their main army.
While yes, there ARE players that play SMs because of how forgiving they are (or the flavorful SMs because of their sheer overpowered capabilities), what right do you have to judge them? It's their money, their time, their models. Not yours. You should be happy they're actually participating in a niche hobby rather than playing Call of Duty #1342452: Modern Grenade Spamtoss with 15 killstreak nuke the world and not actually trying out something different.
I also think it's kinda funny how he keeps saying 'If you want to be a man you should....'
The army you pick has nothing to do with how manly you are, and if you really think of it that way, SM are pretty damn manly.
The fact is Space Marines have grown so popular and large that they're actually hurting the hobby.
It seems kids are almost compelled to start with Space Marines. I remember when I first started 40k and asked players "whats a good army to begin with" I got Space Marines as the response every time.
GW's almost forces beginners to start with Space Marines with their adverts, and inclusions of them in the starter pack (Orks are at a big point disadvantage in that box)
All the Space Marine propaganda out there like the New Movie and the new SPACE MARINE video game coming out by relic psychologically rams new comers to play Space Marines.
Then once you start - this hobby is expensive - its REALLY hard to switch to a brand new army. GW promotes people to keep playing Space Marines because you can easily just swtich army books on the fly.
I started out with Imperial Guard, cause I loved their fluff. Well, that's just me.
As far as overemphasizing Marines in video games....well yeah! I mean, what players wants to play a Guardsman in FPS? 'Ok, level starrt! CHAR....oh you're dead.' Doesn't sound very fun to me. To be honest, Space Marines are GW's flagship army, and, they are the easiest to just set up as old fashioned, chivalric heroes. They're easy to understand, and they're easy to paint, and easy to play. Which...to be honest is kind of the point of getting young, new players to play Marines.
How many players do you think would keep coming back to this hobby they barely knew if they took say...Tau, and then just got their ass handed to them again, and again and again? I personally would feel a bit...underwhelmed by that kind of thing, and not be too interested. By giving new players easy access to Marines, GW kinda helps to draw them in. They have an army that's tough, and even win a few games even without a lot of experience. As they get more involved in the hobby, they may consider switching hobbies...and even if they don't? Oh, well!
I mean, seriously, who cares if alot of armies are Space Marines...I personally don't think it's the armies that make great game clubs great, it's the players themselve. I bet I could find a game club where everyone plays Space marines, but since everyone is a good gamer, it's an awesome club. Similarly, I'd bet there are clubs out there where everyone has a wide range of armies, but everyone is a whining TFG, so...yeah.
You want to know what? I have always loved fighting. In DnD, I played as the Fighter, simply because THEY FREAKIN BREAK FACE IN CLOSE COMBAT. When I started Warhammer Fantasy, I played Orcs, because they came with the box set AND THEY BROKE FACE IN CLOSE COMBAT. When I got older, and started to realize that Orcs aren't the greatest thing ever, I saw one unit of Khornate Warriors of Chaos tank not one, not two, not even three, but four units of Empire soldiers. These Khornate Warriors were flanked on each side, and had a unit in their rear, AND were engaged in close combat in the front. I don't remember, but they were already down something like 12 to their Leadership test, not to mention that some of them were getting torn down in combat.
You want to know something? When I saw that unit of Khornate Warriors actually win that combat (They inflicted around 17 casualties each turn), this at-the-time twelve year old, who oh so loved to break peoples faces in close combat, was mesmerized by the sheer killing power they displayed. I immediately dropped Orcs and Gobbos, and started to play a Khorne Warriors of Chaos army. Eventually I started reading the fluff, and fell for each of the Gods in turn. I loved the fluff, that they were warriors of the gods, and that it wasn't their place to question the God's will, only to enact it. I started losing, simply because of the lack of Ranged options in the then Chaos Codex, and my parents wouldn't even let me use Spawn or Daemons in the army, because they didn't want me to "personify Daemons with my playing". But I still playd, because I loved the army.
When we made the switch to Warhammer 40k, my army was already decided; Chaos Space Marines. They were familiar, if not exact, and they had basically the same fluff, God wise.
You can call me an ADD little kid who only likes the 3+ save, terminator armour, and the easy paint scheme. Go ahead. But I know that there is a very specific reason as to why I wont use another codex for a Chaos Count As, and why I have only ever deviated out of Chaos Space Marines once, for two battles.
I also know that the only thing that will take me out of Chaos Space Marines is when I start building up my third of the Appocolypse army me and my brothers are putting together. After those 30,000pts, I am never touching it outside of Apocolypse again.
At the end of the day it doesn't change the fact that Space Marines and Spiky Space Marines are:
-Forgiving
-Easy to Paint
-Cheap
-Overpowered (Blood Angels & Space Wolves)
-Overplayed
But like I said there is always that one kid who started with Tau, paints extremely well and still owned playing a underpowered codex. This kid is awesome.
All the kids who chose to play Space Marines are not as virtuous as the kid above.
At the end of the day it doesn't change the fact that Space Marines and Spiky Space Marines are:
-Forgiving
-Easy to Paint
-Cheap
-Overpowered (Blood Angels & Space Wolves)
-Overplayed
But like I said there is always that one kid who started with Tau, paints extremely well and still owned playing a underpowered codex. This kid is awesome.
All the kids who chose to play Space Marines are not as virtuous as the kid above.
There's a huge hole in your understanding of Chaos Space Marines and Loyal Space Marines. It's more than just spikes, it goes deeper than that.
At the end of the day it doesn't change the fact that Space Marines and Spiky Space Marines are:
-Forgiving
-Easy to Paint
-Cheap
-Overpowered (Blood Angels & Space Wolves)
-Overplayed
But like I said there is always that one kid who started with Tau, paints extremely well and still owned playing a underpowered codex. This kid is awesome.
All the kids who chose to play Space Marines are not as virtuous as the kid above.
Dude seriously?..are you off your meds?
Are you honestly attempting to some how link virtuosity to what group of little plastic soldiers a person decides to play?
Really?
At the end of the day it doesn't change the fact that Space Marines and Spiky Space Marines are:
-Forgiving
-Easy to Paint
-Cheap
-Overpowered (Blood Angels & Space Wolves)
-Overplayed
But like I said there is always that one kid who started with Tau, paints extremely well and still owned playing a underpowered codex. This kid is awesome.
All the kids who chose to play Space Marines are not as virtuous as the kid above.
If "spikey" Space Marines are so forgiving, why are there Spawn?
Dorian Gray wrote:First of all no one uses spawn or lesser Daemons.
2nd of all, I love it how space marine fanboys label me a troll when I post the obvious.
This is my opinion, if you don't like it that doesn't make me a troll. Later a@@hole.
Incorrect again...I use over 30 Plaguebearers in my Death Guard,which is built around fluff...not WAAC (which incidentally one can do with ANY army).
Posting your opinion doesn't make you a troll...making broad inflammatory statements does.
However, I do agree, I would like to see alternate starter sets than just Space Marines v. "Somebody." Space Marines were not my first army, nor a lot of other people's.
Space marines were my first army, and I think Skinnattittar (there must be a story behind that name..) is absolutely right. As far as the rest of the SM hate goes:
Yes, there is oversaturation of space marine armies, both in fluff and game terms.
That is just as annoying to me as a space marine player as it, obviously, is to you as a... something player.
Oversaturation does not mean that every single gamer who plays space marines is a power-gamer who's only joy comes from the screams of little children as he smashes their armies to bits.
Space Marines are WAYYY EASIER to paint then Eldar or horde armies. Most kids do not have the patience to buy & paint a lot of models (like hordes) and they prefer the most shinyest oohhh ahhh thing out there rather than "gay space elves" (I've been told me by a 11 year old kid) or regular guys (IG) who wants to be regular guys in a sci-fi game?
It's all a sign of immaturity. Kid + space marines = GW target market. I consider Chaos Space Marines to be the same sign of immaturity. Spiky SMFTW
Real men play Xenos. (or some non-SM faction)
IS ANYONE gonna deny that Dark Eldar or Tau simply takes way more skill than 3+ saves all around Space Marines? Kids can't handle it they want the Terminators man. Kids don't like playing with fragile glass-cannon armies that require skill and is unforgiving.
I just started playing 40k this year, and I do play Space Marines. I know it's childish to even respond to this, but I'm going to anyway. I'm not accusing, or inciting anything, these are simply my reasons.
1. I picked to play Space Marines because they were recommended to me by experienced players. They told me they had a wide range of tactics available, and were the best all-around army. I don't feel stupid or immature for taking their advice. Why would I choose something more difficult when my understanding of the game was already weak at best? Just to be different? I'd be pissed as hell if I spent $200.00 on an army I decided I hated playing as. With the Space Marines, there is flexibilty. (I'm not saying other factions lack this, but the Space Marines are among the most versatile.)
2. When it comes to scifi or fantasy movies, games and video games: I'm racist. I will pick the human race EVERY time, over ANY other alien race. In this case, I choose Space Marines over Imperial Guard because I think they look better. (That is not to say that I think the other factions don't look good.)
3. I think the Space Marine fluff is kind of engaging. I like all the different armies backstories, but the idea of representing a selfless holy warrior who will live and die in service to his kind is just more appealing to me than playing as a souless Necron. (But they ARE cool, I'd just rather be a hero than a villain.)
4. While I agree that Space Marines are the prime marketing material for the game, and that is is not uncommon for new players to choose them, I disagree when it comes to skill. I got my ass handed to me by Dark Eldar, even with my 3+ saves and my 2+ saves. Obviously, the army takes some measure of skill to play effectively.
5. More importantly, I see the Space Marines as a branching off point for other players. A new player can see the different army's play styles, and can modify his own Space Marine force to reflect something they thought was cool or effective. They also may change their faction entirely - which is good. Not only are they trying something new, they can always fall back on an army they are more comfortable with. And as far as I know (which is minimal) most people like the Space Marines in general, so moving on to a new race won't be so much as, "Ah man I just wasted so much money on Space Marines," but more like, "Now I have two cool forces to fight with."
That's really all I have to say. I'm sorry you hate us so.
I started guard as they were the closest thing to WW2 G.Is then I played orks (because they're green ) I admit I played marines when Black Reach came out, but I sold them to fund my Eldar army. On a different note, I wanna feed the troll as long as he doesnt bite my fingers.
Mr Hyena wrote:I just wish that factions like the Inquisition got more. They are so unique; yet look how long its taken them to get a codex update.
What could they possibly give the Inquisition?
It's not a common faction. The Inquisition operates in such a way that it makes the Adeptus Astartes look common. Add to it that they're an investigative branch, not a predominantly combat branch and it makes for weirdness on the tabletop.
They're better as a storytelling element, not a gameplay element.
At the end of the day it doesn't change the fact that Space Marines and Spiky Space Marines are:
-Forgiving
-Easy to Paint
-Cheap
-Overpowered (Blood Angels & Space Wolves)
-Overplayed
But like I said there is always that one kid who started with Tau, paints extremely well and still owned playing a underpowered codex. This kid is awesome.
All the kids who chose to play Space Marines are not as virtuous as the kid above.
To be honest, I don't understand why people say they are easy to paint
You have to make the paint as smooth as possible for armour so it looks nice and for beginners thats not gonna work out, it will always be filled with brushmarks
I find ork skin or things with groves to be much easier, because you can do washes over them and make them look much better, even if you did a sketchy paint job
As for Space Marines?
I like them, I like how they're represented and I like what they do
I like the representation of something that fights until its dying breath for a cause they see worthy even if it is false
I chose CSM as my army because I love the chaos gods, how they make things unique and fun, while knowing when I finish them, I will have a force that is very flexible and I can fit my strategies around that fact
I don't understand whats wrong with an army being forgiving? Is there something inherently wrong with a army being able let you make less mistakes?
If you don't like that I enjoy collecting Space marines or using them , well buddy you can sod off as far as I'm concerned
Space marines dominate literature of 40k cause they're the easiest to understand.
Warrior knights that are like hercules, fight foes out of nightmares and don't run in terror.
They get written about cause they epitomise everything a normal person wants to be.
And some authors delight in showing the inner darkness of those perfect beings.
Also the writers are generally terrible and the so called challenge of writing something from an alien view point is insurmountable for them. Actual characterization and involving plot basically doesn't happen in the majority of the 'literature', so it's always Awesome McBadass Von Awesomeness destroying his enemies with the power of awesome.
Hmm, you could have a point there Monster Rain! Though, I would think that anyone who agrees with Dorian here....well, I begin to fear they may be beyond redemption.
There are a lot of people sick of Space Marines then you think - Not just me.
People can only stand cheese Blood Angels and Space Wolves. (Not to mention WAACSM players who jump from codex to codex using their ultra-marines as "count as" models)
People get a lot more satisfaction beating Space Marines then some underpowered helpless army like Necrons or Eldar.
I don't mind SM that much...
Though i would like to see GW mix things up and place a different faction in the driving seat... Imperial Guard for instance. Though people would be sick of them quickly as well.
Personally I like that eeeeveryone plays space marines (they do, we know it, get OVER it)..
It makes my listbuilding assumptions that much easier for my Necrons and Orks.
Yeah, there are some steaming piles of gouda in SW and in BA, and as they're fresher than the other codecii they get noticed more. Nonetheless, you'd be amazed at how freaked out a marine player (who has only ever fought other marine players and maybe Evil Marines or Eldar) will get when you politely inform him that his much vaunted 2+ 3++ save deathstar thunderhammer/stormshield termies (that he's been taunting you as being unbreakable) are going to find their armour and invulnerable utterly invalid against the NIghtbringer, or that his uber-super-dooper HQ has been reduced to squighood...
We have our cheese too, but ours either costs more per slice or isn't particularly reliable.
Cheese is good, within reason, as it generally comes with Whine, and it's nice to turn the tables once in a while...
*edited for clarity, dyslexia and removal of caffiene-lack illogic*
"Power Armor 3+ save" armies are almost half of all the co dexes out there.
Think about it: BT, SW, DA, SM, BA, GK, CSM
Compared to how many Xenos there are: Necrons, Eldar, DE, Tau, Tyranids.
Every "other" GW codex update is space marines.
Don't you SM players think we need to mix it up a little?
I'm in favour of a combined marine codex, it would basically cut the number down to 3 at most.
This could also be a test run to see how well it works and whether they can apply it to other armies. It won't impact that much on SM because they already have such a massive following...
What is stopping people from playing Xenos armies again?
Lack of support and promotion from GW compared to SM relatively. I have to say the new Dark Eldar release was awesomely done but I've yet to see any newcomers start with them or a lot of little kids play them. The Tyranid release was abysmal and half the codex still doesn't have models.
That said Blood Angels and Wolves got the shiniest most over-powered books.
The 40k universe is so rich and wide, so GW needs to stop excessive promoting SM over everything else.
Heh. I don't know who you're playing but Tyranids aren't that bad.
And you can't just discount the Dark Eldar because their release makes a mockery of your entire argument. That was an amazing Xenos release, man. And Necrons are due out sometime in the relatively near future and judging by the rumors it's going to be great.
DorianGray wrote:I know Dark Eldar was amazing. I said that. Also I'm not saying Tyranids Codex is bad but their release was (as in zero hype, not much promotion)
But face it, it was only because it was a pet project of Jervis and Jes that it got so much attention and models.
DorianGray wrote:I know Dark Eldar was amazing. I said that. Also I'm not saying Tyranids Codex is bad but their release was (as in zero hype, not much promotion)
But face it, it was only because it was a pet project of Jervis and Jes that it got so much attention and models.
The rest of the year is back to Space Marines.
I'm not asking for much. 1 SM codex a year instead of 2-3 we get now. Give the 2 other slots to something NOT wearing power armor.
What "2 or 3 SM codices" a year? 2010 BA, 2009 SW, 2008 Vanilla Space Marines, OK in 2007 there were two codices, BA and DA, but BA was just a stripped down mini-codex, which caused no end of whining amongst the BA players how they're always screwed over by GW.
DorianGray wrote:I know Dark Eldar was amazing. I said that. Also I'm not saying Tyranids Codex is bad but their release was (as in zero hype, not much promotion)
You mean other than 2-3 issues of White Dwarf, "Trygonathon" competitions where people built the nastiest looking critter to date, etc?
Yeah. Clearly that's zero hype.
But face it, it was only because it was a pet project of Jervis and Jes that it got so much attention and models.
What did Jervis have to do with the Dark Eldar?
It was Phil Kelly and Jes Goodwin, Jervis really had nothing to do with it.
The rest of the year is back to Space Marines.
What "rest of the year"? We've got at least two more waves scheduled for Dark Eldar. That's far more attention than my Dark Angels got.
The Dark Eldar book got far more attention than my Dark Angels, or even my Imperial Guard did.
I'm really not seeing this SM love you're seeing.
I'm not asking for much. 1 SM codex a year instead of 2-3 we get now. Give the 2 other slots to something NOT wearing power armor.
So basically your argument is they have to be wearing power armour?
Interesting. Necrons and their 3+ want a word with you.
Also: please do a better job counting codex releases. "2-3 a year" would mean that, again, my Dark Angels would already have been fully updated with a brand spankin' new book.
That's clearly not the case, and to represent it otherwise is downright fallacious.
People get a lot more satisfaction beating Space Marines then some underpowered helpless army like Necrons or Eldar.
*coughs politely* mechdar */cough*
And are you really telling me that when you, supposedly, ream any and all necron and eldar armies -because they're underpowered and helpless... and how could you NOT ream something that is underpowered an helpless?- that you say to yourself "boy, I sure do wish that I had been playing against blood angels and won, because this hardly counts as a victory."?
I'd like you to know that necrons and eldar happen to be two of 3 armies that I have an insanely hard time dealing with using my GoI army. And necrons account for 1 of my three losses since the onset of 5th edition, and I've played them twice, barely scraping a win. I look forward to playing against these "under powered and helpless" armies. Because they, actually, are extremely challenging in the right hands. And while you might say that "yes, but any army is challenging in the right hands", and you'd be correct, but this means that even under the assumption that you are, in fact, correct and that these codecies are gimped, you can still make really great armies from them, given enough experience, and creativity.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Monster Rain wrote:
Backfire wrote:
Monster Rain wrote:They're the focus of the story though.
Isn't that to be expected?
"Oh crap, another Jedi Codex. When is LucasFilm going to redo the Trade Federation book?"
Thank you. Yes. Exactly this.
DorianGray wrote:
Backfire wrote:
"Oh crap, another Jedi Codex. When is LucasFilm going to redo the Trade Federation book?"
EXACTLY! This is BS man.
haha.
i think it's funny that both sides used this as evidence to prove their point..
I love my Space Marines. I don't see them as over or underpowered, I see their story as depthy and heroic and all that it is intended to be. I like that they are a feature of the game because they are an important part of the most crucial battles of the Imperium. The battles in 40k games represent the climax of larger scale wars, that's why every army has some kind of hero or abomination of great power leading it, so seeing them show up on a lot of tables should be no surprise.
As a new player the SM's are the easiest to pick up and play right away.
And the marine chapters that get the most love sell very well. I play Imperial Fists and the fluff available for my chapter is about 2 pages in the codex, 1 page for Lysander, 1/2 a page for the color scheme, and a couple of sentences on the Devastators page and the Razorbacks page. And there is 1 picture of Lysander in the back.
And most of the other vanilla marines are the same. Most of the codex is for the greats smurfs of 40k the Ultramarines. Granted the IF do have soem successor chapters that get love, the BT's have their own book if I recall.
If any SM army needs to be fluffed back for a short while it's the Ultramarines. However they are super easy to paint. My ten year old daughter took the five marines from the AoBR paint set and had them done in about 5 hours and 3 Orcs too. So that right there is a big reason why marines sell and why Ultras are so popular. Because they can be built quick and easy, and painted just as quick. Kids and new players can jump right in.
The other races require more time, and in some cases a lot more time. I'm building a Tervigon lead 'Nid list and it requires upwards of 400 points in termagaunts. Do the math on how many units that is at 7 points a model (add the 2 basic upgrades adrenal glands and toxin sacs). 20 basic marines is just 60 points shy of that. 170 + 170 = 340. IG are similiar in the need to field much larger infantry squads or more mech's and again those take time to buy and build and paint.
Orcs are similiar in that you need swarms of them, and I don't know about the Tau or Elder, but it looks as if they could need some time as well.
Necrons are probably like SM's except their codex is so old. I mean just a metallic grey and a little bit of green (or whatever color you want a the light/power source to be, GW has it green however in it's pics) and your on your way with them. But again they are the last xeno race to get the update.
yeenoghu wrote:I love my Space Marines. I don't see them as over or underpowered, I see their story as depthy and heroic and all that it is intended to be. I like that they are a feature of the game because they are an important part of the most crucial battles of the Imperium. The battles in 40k games represent the climax of larger scale wars, that's why every army has some kind of hero or abomination of great power leading it, so seeing them show up on a lot of tables should be no surprise.
Agree.
This is why I play Marines. I still love my Eldar though too.
I just dislike how power armour make the cover aspect of the game almost invalid (atleast for small arms) and of course grey marines posing as whatever chapter they want.
Apart from those reasons I cant really knock someone for picking an easy to paint and cheap to collect army It just gets on my nerves that I could have built a 3500 point marine army for what ive sunk into my orks (who cant really be competive over 1750 points due to having to run garbage to make points)
DorianGray wrote:People who play unique Marine Armies like Ravenwing, or Deathwing or fluffy armies get a pass.
WAAC Space Wolves players who spam IMBA long fangs, Thunderwolves, and Blood Angels running Mephiston, lord of cheese don't. Note this also applies to IG running leafblower lists with 10 Chimeras, Vendettas, etc. (aka. a@@holes)
I wish 95% of kids didn't start 40k with Space Marines. They aren't cool , they're over-done, and being drawn to "THIS IS SPARTAAA" wearing power-armor is really immature.
You piss me off so much, I can't even begin. I bet you're just mad that people who actually make competitive lists destroyed your gakky-ass "fluffy" footdar army. There's nothing wrong with lists that are effective, and there's nothing wrong with marines.
Space Marines are, by themselves, not the problem with 40k. It's the oversaturation of Space Marines. Space Marines get books for every conceivable minor tiny variation in battle doctrine or wargear. "zOMG these Red/Green/Grey/Black Space Marines uses unit X or Special Rule Y or Tactic Z way more than Blue Space Marines, THEY **NEED** THEIR OWN BOOK!" while other armies sit around and see this and think "well, our faction does stuff like that too, but we don't get special distinct books for it". Then of course the other SM armies want those same abilities because they can point to instances where they did it too. Between Blood Angels and C:SM, they share outright 80% of their units, weapons and wargear, and almost all the remainder is variations of common items/units.
The Space Marines are featured in absolutely everything 40k related, they are everywhere.The problem is, not only does this overshadow an strangle off access to other races, it takes away from what should be special about the Space Marines and makes them generic, it makes them average, it makes them common. I never look at Space Marines and think "that's a dangerous elite unit", I think "it's the average that everything else is centered around".
They end up being overhyped and oversaturated, they lose their appeal and become the default, the common standard. They're the thing that everyone has seen a billion times and no longer cares, but gets featured over and over to the point where people just don't want to see it anymore.
While the above attitude isn't necessarily universal, it's also by no means an opinion that's confined to a tiny hidden minority either.
Oh SHUT UP! Space Marines are the center of the game. They're awesome, and the company THAT MAKES THE GAME loves them. Deal, or go play something else. Either way, SHUT UP!
(by the way, I play everything except Orks and Dark Eldar - and yes, I love all the armies I play. I don't bitch about Space Marines because NO ONE IS TWISTING MY ARM to play them!)
Oh, and SHUT UP.
PLEASE DO NOT YELL AT OTHER POSTERS TO "SHUT UP". IT'S RUDE, A VIOLATION OF DAKKA RULES: <----then why are you yelling at me? *sniff* My widdle feewings are hurt now....
posting in a thread only to scream "shut up" is about as helpful, and contributes about as much to the discussion, as flapping your arms to pretend you're puff the magic dragon, and probably less mature.
Seriously? I can't use the occasional caps for emphasis? Who knew...?
Yeah, OK (oops, sorry) "SHUT UP" (posted for referential purposes only) probably isn't the greatest argumentative stratagem. But really - complaining about Space Marine-o-centricity in 40K is like saying that Space Invaders was annoyingly focused on the little gun at the bottom of the screen. Yes, there were several different kinds of aliens, and bunkers, and UFOs and they're all integral to the game...but, um, yeah.
Seriously, if you so hate them that you can't stand to see another book come out about them, or another rule written for 'em - this is not the game for you.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
DorianGray wrote:People who play unique Marine Armies like Ravenwing, or Deathwing or fluffy armies get a pass.
WAAC Space Wolves players who spam IMBA long fangs, Thunderwolves, and Blood Angels running Mephiston, lord of cheese don't. Note this also applies to IG running leafblower lists with 10 Chimeras, Vendettas, etc. (aka. a@@holes)
I wish 95% of kids didn't start 40k with Space Marines. They aren't cool , they're over-done, and being drawn to "THIS IS SPARTAAA" wearing power-armor is really immature.
OK, taking this at face value, there are some elements of it that I don't understand.
What is the complaint? Is it that the army configurations mentioned don't fit the (your) perceived character of the army? To that I'd have to say, well...if the rules only allowed such configurations, people would get bored very quickly. Pick a major world power. Now look at its army (just the army, mind you) - is it composed of just a handful of units, with just a couple of weapons, that fights the same in all circumstances? No? Then why would Space Marines only have one standard load-out and tactical doctrine?
Is it that those configurations are hard (for you) to beat? They're legal me bucko...so you have a few choices: a) don't play against them; (people always forget that one) b) change your tactics. Learn, adapt. I love fighting those tuned and perfected lists - they usually can't take much tweaking, so I know almost exactly what I am walking into. Or, c) Tell your mate that you don't enjoy that configuration and he's proven he can trounce you with it, could he please change things up a bit to make it fun for both of you. This is commonly called, "sportsmanship."
Honestly, if a guy shows up with 10 Chimeras...I know what he paid for those and how long it took him to paint and assemble them. He gets to beat on me, because hell - it's fun seeing that many tanks in a regular game. He's going to have a blast, and I'm going to have a heck of a challenge. I don't have to win, I just have to have fun. I don't have to play that army 10 times. Same goes for the guy that shows up with a titan, or a VDR critter he lovingly converted and wrote reasonable rules for. Bring it! It's a game, have FUN!
Lastly, being drawn to Space Marines is immature? OK... There's just no defending that. I guess space elves are so much more urbane?
Space Marines (being a SM player) are only boring if you take the same generic stuff over and over again.
There are two types of SM army, the fluffy fun army that has stuff in it cause the guy (or girl) loves the model and it fits the "background" of the army. It may not win as much as it loses but it will always be a fun challenge to play.
And then there's the ultra tweaked, ultra slimline, every unit has a specific purpose no nonsense army everyone on here seems to lean towards. When that loses, it loses big time, and the guy who created it is mortified and spends hours if not days poring over the tactics he used.
Vanilla SM are fun to use if you don't go mad about making them PERFECT. Not even a SM army can take on all comers.
Actually, Corennus - both types of army are fun. The fluff type is fun almost all the time (if you are not of the "it's not fun unless I'm winning" type of player). The 'perfected' army is fun for...a while. It stops being fun when you bring it out to play, and your mates groan. At that point, you should come up with something else. That's what I do, and it's always worked for me.
"Yep, OK, I made a nigh unbeatable Eldar list...and now it's time to switch gears. Yay me. Now where did I put those Black Templars...? I could never get those suckers to work..."
this game surrounds humanity's last stand against the oncoming hordes of doom that could destroy it. Who else would they turn to be super heroes? Who else other than the Space Marines, The imperial guard? Well if they are all dead then what? The Adeptus Artibutes, by the time you get here you are freaking doomed. The Space Marines are humanity's basically the heroes of the Imperium and they are the individuals.
Well, that goes back to the player's attitude and not what army he uses.
I have fun even when losing, for example, my last Necromunda game was doomed for me, so i had fun running with my gang onto an advantage place so I could make one big last stand alla 300, where everybody died but hey, I maimed most of my friend's gang as well.
Corennus wrote:Space Marines (being a SM player) are only boring if you take the same generic stuff over and over again.
There are two types of SM army, the fluffy fun army that has stuff in it cause the guy (or girl) loves the model and it fits the "background" of the army. It may not win as much as it loses but it will always be a fun challenge to play.
And then there's the ultra tweaked, ultra slimline, every unit has a specific purpose no nonsense army everyone on here seems to lean towards. When that loses, it loses big time, and the guy who created it is mortified and spends hours if not days poring over the tactics he used.
Vanilla SM are fun to use if you don't go mad about making them PERFECT. Not even a SM army can take on all comers.
Isn't this basically true for all armies though? Every army book has units that are less than effective, units that are brutally effective and units that are middle ground. Space Marines are no exception, nor are they the only example of this. Look at Orks. You have units like Killa Kans or Lootas that are excellent, you have units like Tankbustas or Mega-Armor Nobz which are much less common and you have units like Flash Gitz that almost never see use.
I agree there's an oversaturation of marines. I agree that GW doesn't need to do a back-and-forth Imperial/Xenos release schedule. None of that really separates them from any other army though.
I do like how my sisters boyfriend plays his army. He plays a loyalist world eaters army. (we constantly joke that hes actually chaos in disguise lol) You can keep things unique if you want. It all depends on how you want to play your army. You shouldn't group SM chapters into the same category. people play SM because they like their fluff and their armament. you can't change what they play so just let them play. all it matters is that they have fun.
Corennus wrote:The problem people have with space marines is there's not enough difference between chapters.
What? Maybe if you don't actually play two different Space Marine armies.... Can you play two different chapters in a similar fashion? Yes. But you have to work at it, and ignore the very things that make each chapter different. I can play Blood Angels without jump troops. I [/i]can play Dark Angels without Terminators or Land Speeders. I can[i] play Void Angels (Ultramarines) without Legion of the Damned or Thunderfire cannons. Yes, in those cases where I deliberately strip away what makes one Marine army different from another, yes - you get a bunch of guys in similar tanks in power armor with bolters. Congratulations. You have to work to do that, and you have to ignore the very things that make them different.
It's like saying that basketball players are the same a baseball players because both sets of athletes run, throw a ball, and wear uniforms. Yep. Way too similar.
What? Maybe if you don't actually play two different Space Marine armies.... Can you play two different chapters in a similar fashion? Yes. But you have to work at it, and ignore the very things that make each chapter different. I can play Blood Angels without jump troops. I [/i]can play Dark Angels without Terminators or Land Speeders. I can[i] play Void Angels (Ultramarines) without Legion of the Damned or Thunderfire cannons. Yes, in those cases where I deliberately strip away what makes one Marine army different from another, yes - you get a bunch of guys in similar tanks in power armor with bolters. Congratulations. You have to work to do that, and you have to ignore the very things that make them different.
It's like saying that basketball players are the same a baseball players because both sets of athletes run, throw a ball, and wear uniforms. Yep. Way too similar.
It's not hard at all to play many marine armies identically.
Personally, I could play my Chaos Space Marines as Space Wolves, and the *only* model I think I'd have to change would be my Daemon Prince to something like a Wolf Lord. I'd also have more than 100 extra points to play with and get Counterattack/ATSKF/Acute Senses and lose basically only the ability to reroll failed morale tests (which is more than compensated by ATSKNF).
Between Codex: Dark Angels and Codex: Space Marines, if you aren't running a Deathwing army, in most cases it's not only possible to run the same army, but very often probably better to use C:SM instead from a competitive standpoint. There isn't anything Dark Angels have that C:SM doesn't in terms of units (though this has always been true even back in 2E) except the ability to run termi's and troops and run Land Speeders in units with Bikes.
Even between C:BA and C:SM, 80% of their non-SC units are identical, and most of the rest are variations on common units. Before their latest book, in 2E, 3E and 4E, even this gap was significantly smaller.
It's very, very easy to make identical armies with different marine books, or at the very least armies and lists that are close enough that it won't make a difference in 95%+ of games played.
Most of the differences between marine books quite honestly are not all that big. Many of them are smaller than the differences between simple codex changes. You see much more radical changes with codex updates than between armies.
BA's do double-melta Assault Marines in rhino's, that's their most common troop. Guess what? 4E C:SM allowed you to do that. 4E C:SM could in fact field more "assault" marines in that sense than BA's can now, as it could field 6 Tac squads that swapped their bolter for BP/CCW, and then take Assault Marines as Fast Attack *AND* elites.
Seriously go look at the wargear list of two different SM books. Now tell me how much is 100%, absolutely, precisely identical.
The difference between one SM codex and the next is a few rules, a few special characters, a literal handful of weapons and most times a variation of the same vehicles every other one gets. There's not that much justifying separate books.
You're both missing the point. They WOULD be similar - in terms of equipment, stats, etc. It's those 'little' differences that make huge play differences *if you don't work to strip them out*. You're not meant to ignore those little things, you're meant to build the force around them so that they ARE different.
All that said, I, personally, would not mind a giant SM codex with all the main Chapters AND rules for building your own variation (like the previous one - but not sucktacular).
Vaktathi wrote:posting in a thread only to scream "shut up" is about as helpful, and contributes about as much to the discussion, as flapping your arms to pretend you're puff the magic dragon, and probably less mature.
How would you put that into text form, because I want to try this.
In a way i actually have to thank Space Marines and their multitudes of players. Without them i would have never realized that the Imperial Guard had so much more to offer and were so much cooler then the warrior monk Marines. I was able to find that its fun to actually play with tactics and not rely on a far superior unit/units and use little to no skill whatsoever. I thank all those space marine players for taking "the" army and saturating it to a point where even to this day i refuse to field a space marine army for that and the reasons above. Hell its why i decided to go as Chaos (they do not count as space marines) because A) they are everything the Marines are not (Sadly however it means that we get a crap book while they get an amazing book thats updated every year it seems ) and B) their fluff is so much cooler, love the idea of extending my middle digit at all the emperor worshipers (when not playing guard anyways ).
Really however what sets me over the edge is, as i briefly mentioned above) how the marine codex's are constantly updated, i mean the FAQ even updated the Marine Codex's first so they could ALL get the benefits. I know people have mentioned the marketing argument and yeah thats all well and good, however i think as an overall hobby it is very frustrating to see one army get all the benefits and for the most part the others are ignored. Maybe instead of coming out with yet ANOTHER marine codex in the GK couldnt we perhaps focus on a book like the Necrons? Sales and the armies popularity will never improve if it never gets updated. But will never happen because the GK are going to be SO out of this universe good that everyone will forget about it for a few months. Looking forward to another (if not better) version of the OP Blood Angels Codex.
Corennus wrote:The problem people have with space marines is there's not enough difference between chapters.
What?
So you are saying that Space Wolves and Blood Angels have similarities in almost every way
My ass they are. SMs don't get half the cool cheap stuff BA and SW get. They get... OOOOHHH! A THUNDERFIRE CANNON! and if they don't prefer that to landraiders who can fly, psyker dreadnoughts, dedicated transport land raiders, baal predators, thunderwolves, cheap missile spam, they still have something even cooler than thunderfires! They have the ability to proxy the rules from some of the infinitely better codex if they want because all power armor looks the same.
I see way more SW and BA lists than actual SM lists, and I wouldn't be surprised to see more DA counts as creeping around soon too. Actually I see more Ork, CSM, IG and DE lists than SM too. Maybe they are the favorite of the company, but definitely not of the players.
DorianGray wrote:People who play unique Marine Armies like Ravenwing, or Deathwing or fluffy armies get a pass.
WAAC Space Wolves players who spam IMBA long fangs, Thunderwolves, and Blood Angels running Mephiston, lord of cheese don't. Note this also applies to IG running leafblower lists with 10 Chimeras, Vendettas, etc. (aka. a@@holes)
I wish 95% of kids didn't start 40k with Space Marines. They aren't cool , they're over-done, and being drawn to "THIS IS SPARTAAA" wearing power-armor is really immature.
You piss me off so much, I can't even begin. I bet you're just mad that people who actually make competitive lists destroyed your gakky-ass "fluffy" footdar army. There's nothing wrong with lists that are effective, and there's nothing wrong with marines.
Oh, space wolves and blood angels are not OPbtw.
hahaha, I run competitive Mech'dar with duel Jetseer councils. Ask anyone who is the most cheese: Space Wolves and Blood Angels. (and IG sometimes)
You gotta love that kid who played codex space marines then switched to Space Wolves when that codex came out (despite his minis all painted blue) and then decided to switch to blood angels when they came out using his ultramarines terminators as "count-as" sanguinary guard.
The amount of Space Marine players switching to the latest "hot" SM codex is pathetic.
I haven't seen a single person switch. The people who play Space Wolves have spent their time building up a Space Wolves army, complete with awesome miniatures. We have one guy whose started up Blood Angels, and he's started from scratch. I really think that the type of WAAC player you're describing isn't really all that common.
In fact, I propose a poll! How many dakkaites have seen someone switch a vanilla Marines army to Space Wolves/Blood Angels? Not just as a temporary 'counts as' but full out just switched?
ChrisWWII wrote:In fact, I propose a poll! How many dakkaites have seen someone switch a vanilla Marines army to Space Wolves/Blood Angels? Not just as a temporary 'counts as' but full out just switched?
I haven't seen it personally, but I like to repeat things that I hear on the internet.
'In fact, I propose a poll! How many dakkaites have seen someone switch a vanilla Marines army to Space Wolves/Blood Angels? Not just as a temporary 'counts as' but full out just switched?'
About a dozen players down our way, mainly newish to the game, or old hands that must win and take the cheesiest lists you can imagine.
I did tournaments about the time the new SM codex came out, and had no problem with there being lots (and i mean all but 2 people at a 22 person tournament) os SM players, as EVERYONE apparently plays marines
Then Space Wolves came out, and guess what: all those unpainted AOBR marine armies suddenly became SW armies, with multi-jaws spam and missile spam.
then Blood Angels came out, and the grey hordes became BA with massive death companies and counts-as Mephistons all over the place...
When they release Grey Knights i fully expect the Grey Hordes to actually be the right colour for once, as everyone switches up again ;0)
These are full on switches, with just the new army game after game after game until the next new shiny codex hits the street and they nerdgasm and switch again...
Xenos really, REALLY need some love, and not the tainted love substitute that the NIds got. The DE got a measure of it, and some awesome models, but thats more down to it being a personal project than it being GW policy. They're nasty, but not nasty enough. If the other Xeno factions got the same sculpting and codex love the DE got i'd be a fairly happy grot
That is the worst, in my opinion. I'd seriously question playing anyone who in the YEARS since the C:SM release has not painted any Marines, and has shown time and time again they'll just switch? Yeah, I wouldn't play them. I can't go too hard on the new players, just cause they're starting out, so it's fair enough for them to switch.
Mr Nobody wrote:Well, if you look at the halo franchise, you can count the number of spartans on two hands, yet spartans are everywhere. They are in very game, and almost evry book and graphic novel, even though there are many factions. This is because they are the main characters, the same goes for space marines.
There were hundreds of spartans, counting all the different programs. Not 10.
It is possible to count to more than 10 using two hands. If you use each finger as a digit in a binary number, it is possible to count to 1023 using both hands. Mr. Nobody's statement still stands.
Yes it is possible to count to high numbers with your fingers, but when you reach 1023 you'd still only realize that you were just wasting a lot of time.
I mean, I started out thinking I would play Tau, and got a set of them, and found out I dispised painting them. So I started thinking about 'crons, but thought that I would probably have the same issue. So I thought about CSM, but eventually figured out what I wanted in my army: Bad guys and lots of 'um. So I chose orks over 'nids, because orks are lolz to play and every ork model looks different. And, I mean, I slightly resented space marines because the orks starter army in AOBR was a good 135 points short of the space marines army, and that they got a movie and a video game and a bunch of other junk. But even though I don't like them being the poster boy, there isn't really a reason to spew hate at them. If you want to play them because they are cool, and forgiving, and don't consume so much of you time for painting, then that's fine. I admire you for not quitting on this hobby the moment you saw the ridiculous prices, for not thinking "I wonder how many Xbox games I could buy with that?" and deciding to stick with it, even if you chose to play the generic, poster-boy army.
Vaktathi wrote:Space Marines are, by themselves, not the problem with 40k. It's the oversaturation of Space Marines. Space Marines get books for every conceivable minor tiny variation in battle doctrine or wargear. "zOMG these Red/Green/Grey/Black Space Marines uses unit X or Special Rule Y or Tactic Z way more than Blue Space Marines, THEY **NEED** THEIR OWN BOOK!" while other armies sit around and see this and think "well, our faction does stuff like that too, but we don't get special distinct books for it". Then of course the other SM armies want those same abilities because they can point to instances where they did it too. Between Blood Angels and C:SM, they share outright 80% of their units, weapons and wargear, and almost all the remainder is variations of common items/units.
The Space Marines are featured in absolutely everything 40k related, they are everywhere.The problem is, not only does this overshadow an strangle off access to other races, it takes away from what should be special about the Space Marines and makes them generic, it makes them average, it makes them common. I never look at Space Marines and think "that's a dangerous elite unit", I think "it's the average that everything else is centered around".
They end up being overhyped and oversaturated, they lose their appeal and become the default, the common standard. They're the thing that everyone has seen a billion times and no longer cares, but gets featured over and over to the point where people just don't want to see it anymore.
While the above attitude isn't necessarily universal, it's also by no means an opinion that's confined to a tiny hidden minority either.
This. The Space Marine fluff is good in theory, even if in practice it ends up more in the realm of "atrocious Mary-Sue garbage" (like Alaric, the idealistic young Grey Knight captain who fights Daemons with the powers of Friendship and Imagination! ), though it could stand to lose the more inane things, like the acid drool and eating their enemies to gain their powers. We don't see any of the fluff's redeeming qualities in the game, though: Space Marines are a rare, elite force in the fluff, in the game they're more common than any of the armies that outnumber them billions to one, and despite being mutant space monks that have trained for decades before being allowed to wear their armor in the first place are only marginally better than the "average human" baseline you get in the Guard (while costing three times as many points per model).
How much of the "they get so much focus because they sell the best" is a self-fulfilling prophecy? They're aggressively pushed, ubiquitous, and make up fully half of all the available armies with their superfluous variant codices. They're Space Marines: giant, sterile mutants with a ridiculous number of redundant organs, wrapped in nearly-invulnerable armor with rocket launching machine guns, how many variant rules do you need? Oh, these Marines are sparklepires, and these Marines are half anthropomorphic puppies to rope in the furry crowd, and these are super special too because they have a different paint scheme! They all share one ultimate origin, they all use the same weapons, they are all functionally identical, and meanwhile, the multi-trillion strong Guard (comprised of Actual Humans, by the way, instead of giant mutant space monks), from every conceivable human culture and then some, get a single codex. Sure, it's a nice codex, but if you want to focus on the Imperium, and have to create a ridiculous number of variant codices, why not make them of the army that has actual justification for being different and potential to actually be different (and is actually human, unlike Space Marines)?
Of course it would be nicer still if they'd do an even balance for all the factions, or focus on bringing in more unique ones (including other Imperial factions, like the Adeptus Mechanicus or a dedicated Inquisition army) and keeping everything up to date...
I utterly love the Space Marine fluff in itself, the idea of having an army of superheroes in iron man armour with rocket guns is awesome in the truest sense of the word. The problem begins and ends with the game itself. Because Space Marines are the 'heroes' of 40k, having forged the Imperium through the Great Crusade and being the best fighting force the Galaxy has ever seen, they are far too common a sight in clubs and tournaments. In a galaxy where each world can house 10+Billion people, there is one Space Marine for each million of those worlds, 99.999% of Imperial citizens will never, ever see a Space Marine in their lifetime, but they are the most popular army, hands down. I dislike that, but that's how it is.
Likewise, they are far too weak in comparison to the fluff on the battlefront. Fluffwise, a Tac Squad could take on a hundred Guardsmen. Gamewise, the Tac Squad would be a red stain on the game table if confronted with the same odds. Fluffwise, a small killteam of Marines should be able to take on any other decent sized army (except CSM obv). A fantastic example of this would be the Honour Guard, in the Codex it says that each of the Ultramarine Honour guard have killed more enemies than an entire IG regiment. Yet he has only two attacks and one wound. WTF? This Honour Guard, who they say is a death dealing machine of the highest level, can be killed outright if one wound bypasses its 2+ armour save? How does that make sense? Sternguard tend to live up to their reputations a little bit more though, seeing how they can kill anything. Ever.
I utterly love the Space Marine fluff in itself, the idea of having an army of superheroes in iron man armour with rocket guns is awesome in the truest sense of the word. The problem begins and ends with the game itself. Because Space Marines are the 'heroes' of 40k, having forged the Imperium through the Great Crusade and being the best fighting force the Galaxy has ever seen, they are far too common a sight in clubs and tournaments. In a galaxy where each world can house 10+Billion people, there is one Space Marine for each million of those worlds, 99.999% of Imperial citizens will never, ever see a Space Marine in their lifetime, but they are the most popular army, hands down. I dislike that, but that's how it is.
Likewise, they are far too weak in comparison to the fluff on the battlefront. Fluffwise, a Tac Squad could take on a hundred Guardsmen. Gamewise, the Tac Squad would be a red stain on the game table if confronted with the same odds. Fluffwise, a small killteam of Marines should be able to take on any other decent sized army (except CSM obv). A fantastic example of this would be the Honour Guard, in the Codex it says that each of the Ultramarine Honour guard have killed more enemies than an entire IG regiment. Yet he has only two attacks and one wound. WTF? This Honour Guard, who they say is a death dealing machine of the highest level, can be killed outright if one wound bypasses its 2+ armour save? How does that make sense? Sternguard tend to live up to their reputations a little bit more though, seeing how they can kill anything. Ever.
It depends on which fluff you read.
The standard fluff that has been reprinted over and over since 2nd Edition and in most codecies and rulebooks has always been roughly 1 SM for every 10 or so normal human troops, not indicating whether or not force multipliers such as drop pod capability are included in that equation.
The derpy crap like Brothers of the Snake and C.S. Goto and whatnot of course will have whatever number of enemies mowed down by the Imperium's Finest the author deems fit. Abnett's Brothers of the Snake had a single Tac squad mow down *thousands* of Dark Eldar. He's also had Gaunts Ghosts take down a squad of Chaos Space Marines with half a dozen Ghosts and some hut dwelling natives.
But the rulebook fluff and codecies have always had it roughly at 1 for 10 to accomplish any given objective.
And please, lets not delve too deeply into the stuff Mat Ward has written (e.g. Honor Guard), it's also written with the same style, grace, and realism of a 12 year olds internet fanfic.
This. The Space Marine fluff is good in theory, even if in practice it ends up more in the realm of "atrocious Mary-Sue garbage" (like Alaric, the idealistic young Grey Knight captain who fights Daemons with the powers of Friendship and Imagination! ), though it could stand to lose the more inane things, like the acid drool and eating their enemies to gain their powers. We don't see any of the fluff's redeeming qualities in the game, though: Space Marines are a rare, elite force in the fluff, in the game they're more common than any of the armies that outnumber them billions to one, and despite being mutant space monks that have trained for decades before being allowed to wear their armor in the first place are only marginally better than the "average human" baseline you get in the Guard (while costing three times as many points per model).
How much of the "they get so much focus because they sell the best" is a self-fulfilling prophecy? They're aggressively pushed, ubiquitous, and make up fully half of all the available armies with their superfluous variant codices. They're Space Marines: giant, sterile mutants with a ridiculous number of redundant organs, wrapped in nearly-invulnerable armor with rocket launching machine guns, how many variant rules do you need? Oh, these Marines are sparklepires, and these Marines are half anthropomorphic puppies to rope in the furry crowd, and these are super special too because they have a different paint scheme! They all share one ultimate origin, they all use the same weapons, they are all functionally identical, and meanwhile, the multi-trillion strong Guard (comprised of Actual Humans, by the way, instead of giant mutant space monks), from every conceivable human culture and then some, get a single codex. Sure, it's a nice codex, but if you want to focus on the Imperium, and have to create a ridiculous number of variant codices, why not make them of the army that has actual justification for being different and potential to actually be different (and is actually human, unlike Space Marines)?
Of course it would be nicer still if they'd do an even balance for all the factions, or focus on bringing in more unique ones (including other Imperial factions, like the Adeptus Mechanicus or a dedicated Inquisition army) and keeping everything up to date...
I've been in this hobby since Rogue Trader came out. I have marines in my army older than some of you. I have...probably 3 COMPANIES of Marines, assembled and mostly painted. Unassembled...maybe another company. Seriously.
Not a damn single one of them is painted in ANY Chapter colors or scheme. 1) I always liked my own Chapter names and concepts better. 2) They're mine and I'm painting them - I'll paint them how I darn well please.
So, aside from freedom to engage in the hobby as I choose, why would I do this, and stick with it for so long?
"Hi, these are my Void Angles - they use the Blood Angles rules." I get bored with that 3 months later. "Hi, there are my Void Eagles - they use the Space Marine codex rules." OK, had enough of that after while. "Hi, these are my Death Knights, they use the Black Templars rules - oh, wait, here come Codex: Grey Knights - they use the Grey Knight rules."
And what do you have to say about it? Nothing. They're cohesive, don't look like something else, are WYSIWYG - and follow a published, official rule set. My friends don't care (they like variety too) and I've never been turned away from a tournament when I choose to descend into that particular cesspool.
Refers to Eldar and Dark Eldar quoted from Warseer
"They are a challenge to play. They will be underpowered to most people because most people really aren't that good and as such stick to armies that lend more credence to their lack of ability by being hugely forgiving. Dark Eldar and Eldar are not forgiving. If you make a mistake in your army build or on the table, and your opponent is halfway decent, you will get put back hard and it could cost you the game."
This is why beginners play Space Marines. This is why most people stick with Space Marines. This is why Space Marines are the most popular.
DorianGray wrote:Refers to Eldar and Dark Eldar quoted from Warseer
"They are a challenge to play. They will be underpowered to most people because most people really aren't that good and as such stick to armies that lend more credence to their lack of ability by being hugely forgiving. Dark Eldar and Eldar are not forgiving. If you make a mistake in your army build or on the table, and your opponent is halfway decent, you will get put back hard and it could cost you the game."
This is why beginners play Space Marines. This is why most people stick with Space Marines. This is why Space Marines are the most popular.
If you are implying that I am a "beginner" after reading that I've been playing the game for 23+ years...get some reading glasses, clean the contacts, something...
I have MORE Eldar than I have Space Marines (close in foot models, much, much more in vehicles).
My Tyranids are even more numerous.
As I said, (in one of these recent threads) the only armies I don't play are Orks (HATE them - but love to fight them) and Dark Eldar (too, too evil - can't bring myself to play them).
I have more reasonable sized Thousand Sons and Necrons armies.
Tau are a more recent endeavor, and I'm still well over 4000 points with them.
IG - few infantry models, many, many, many tanks.
So...I can play and win with any of the above - from the most technical to the most 'hugely forgiving'.
Your theory is incomplete and prejudiced. People play Marines primarily because they are COOL! Then, because they are common. And THEN, distantly in third place - because they are 'easier'. My usual Space Marine configuration in any Chapter is not 'easy'. I like a challenge, and I don't read internet army lists for ideas or track what's currently winning tournaments. I come up will all my own lists and own ideas. If it turns out to match something others have figured out (I was playing a Godzilla list before they'd been dubbed that, OK?) it's because it's a good or fun idea. My Black Templars ran 3 squads of 10 Assault Marines with Storm Shields and 2 Power fists, back in the day. They were a bitch to win with - but fun as all get out.
People like Marines because power armored humans are iconic. Read Armor by John Steakley. Read Starship Troopers (it has nothing to do with the movie). You'll begin to get why people LOVE Marines. And that's why they play them.
Yeah the fact that most people play marines because they are COOL!
should be offset by the fact that they are by far the most COMMON! as in everything and their mom plays/has them. That in itself (at least to me) makes them pretty un-cool if everyone has them.
Show up to a game-store ask someone to play: "Hey I have space marines, want to play?" "Yeah man." "Cool, what army do you have?" "Space marines."
>_>
The fact they are easy to play and paint is just icing on the cake. SM = Generic poster-boy army for kidz. (That GW always makes sure gets the best codexes)
No one else has my Marines. There's no compulsion to play them the same way, with the same list, etc. They can be plenty individualized despite being common.
Cool is in the eye of the beholder. You don't like them, we get that. Carry on.
VoidAngel wrote: Your theory is incomplete and prejudiced. People play Marines primarily because they are COOL! Then, because they are common. And THEN, distantly in third place - because they are 'easier'.
You may be confusing the reasons people play Space Marines with the reason why you play Space Marines. I would not put the fact that Space Marines are 'easy' in the distant third place of why people play them. People may even think they're cool subconsciously because they're 'easy' to play with and beat people with. But far too many people play Space Marines. If I hadn't already written detailed fluff and maps for all three of my Chapters and their homeworlds, I might fork the lot off ebay and watch them fight over it until the richer one gives me money. But there we are. My erratic method of collecting means I don't even have a cohesive army yet, and I want to lead my Chapter(s) into a glorious victory for the Emperor at some point dammit!
But I'm also collecting Orks, CSM and Eldar on the side (told you erratic, not to mention the other game systems) and probably concentrating more towards Eldar atm. Unfortunately, their Codex is a bit rubbish by now as the new 5th Ed Codexes take away or emulate the advantages that the Eldar once had as their own.
But yeah, absolutely hate the fact that there are 5 variants of Space Marines. GW website been going on about their Blood Angels and their Turdraven all month, and I'd gotten sick of Blood Angels when their Codex appeared with the Sanguinary Guard. April will be all about Grey Knights (who need an update fair dose) but still... this is one of the reasons why the DE Codex was so long in coming. GW doesn't give the niche armies (or the niche games) enough love, they just pump money at the stuff they know will sell well.
What DorianGray is saying doesn't need to apply universally, as he's speaking of general trends. I'm inclined to agree with his observations for the most part, though I know for a fact that there are exceptions to that trend.
The premise of Space Marines is cool. In practice though, their ubiquity and the absurd levels to which their fluff is taken turn them into more of a walking joke, to the point where I can't manage to read their codex without gagging on all the ridiculous Mary-Suedom, as though their Codex were just a bad piece of fanfiction.
Yeah, that's the problem. Space Marines are cool in theory, have cool visuals, and some of their fluff is very good. Unfortunately some of their fluff is on par with bad internet fanfic (thank you Mr. Ward and even you too Mr.Kelly...), and their commonality undermines their fluff and cool factor. When the rarest, nigh mythical warriors of the god emperor become the default and average joe army that's always featured all the time, and when you see more SM on SM games than almost anything else, it most definitely takes away something.
GoldenKaos wrote:Because Space Marines are the 'heroes' of 40k, having forged the Imperium through the Great Crusade and being the best fighting force the Galaxy has ever seen
LIES! Everyone knows it was the truly more skilled, more driven, better equipped, true saviors of the Imperium of Man, biggest bad asses ever the Imperial Guard that are and remain to be the best fighting force in the GALAXY!
GoldenKaos wrote:Because Space Marines are the 'heroes' of 40k, having forged the Imperium through the Great Crusade and being the best fighting force the Galaxy has ever seen
LIES! Everyone knows it was the truly more skilled, more driven, better equipped, true saviors of the Imperium of Man, biggest bad asses ever the Imperial Guard that are and remain to be the best fighting force in the GALAXY!
True, without the Guard the Imperium would be dead, there aren't enough Space Marines about, but the Guard is a slow, cumbersome and often unwieldy weapon, good for when they've time to prepare, but for lightning strikes into enemy worlds, kicking enough ass to destroy a threat with minimum effort and then leaving to repeat the process again and again? That's what Space Marines do. Apples and oranges, they fulfill different military roles, and without both, mankind would be dead.
Just was trying to inject some humor into this thread mates (and some imperial guard propaganda) , no need to think im trolling And the guard can do lightning strike assaults, its called blow the planet up from orbit!
I like the Space Marine models because I can use them to represent any faction of the SM and still have a similar piece on the board. Makes sense why someone would piece together a SM army first. I bought Orks first, and proxy them out as the good Space Wolves almost every game.
DorianGray wrote:Obviously there are fluffy Space Marine armies that are unique, different and fun to play like a pure Ravenwing or an 9 Dreadnought Blood Angels army.
Those guys get a pass.
really?!
You sir are a bore.
You are so biased towards your own opinions you cant even see why anyone else would play them.
In all reality you are just as likely to scream when Eldar get a new codex and I put down my SM project and start playing my Eldar again because now everyone is playing Eldar. Screaming "OMG it's the end of the world!"
In reality you have no place to judge and always have the right to turn down a game with an SM player. If your tired of playing SM opponents then quite simply stop playing them. In the end it's your own loss.
Furthermore I dont understand how someone running a less generic list gets a pass...
The inherent difference there is once Eldar (supposedly) get a new codex and you play them you will be actually playing AN ELDAR ARMY. You won't be using a pack of grey-plastic-marines and saying 'this month they're Blood Angels, next month they'll be the right color when Grey Knights come out!'.
SumYungGui wrote:You won't be using a pack of grey-plastic-marines and saying 'this month they're Blood Angels, next month they'll be the right color when Grey Knights come out!'.
SumYungGui wrote:You won't be using a pack of grey-plastic-marines and saying 'this month they're Blood Angels, next month they'll be the right color when Grey Knights come out!'.
Because after that it will be black marines, and after that it will be purple marines, and after that it will be another flavor of marines. Meanwhile the Eldar your supposedly playing will still have the same codex they have now. That's how it affects xeno players negatively.
There's also an aesthetic dimension. We know from previous threads and surveys that 96% of players prefer to play painted armies rather than bare plastic.
SumYungGui wrote:Because after that it will be black marines, and after that it will be purple marines, and after that it will be another flavor of marines. Meanwhile the Eldar your supposedly playing will still have the same codex they have now. That's how it affects xeno players negatively.
So, the armies that other people play that you are in no way forced to play against affects you? I really don't understand this.
Also, the Eldar codex really isn't that bad. There are plenty of people on this very forum that do very well with them. Also, as a Necron players I don't have a lot of sympathy for people that are upset about the amount of time between codex updates.
I really don't have a problem with Space Marines, I have a problem with them getting new chapter codeci when another race could have gotten one.
And also, grey knights getting a new codex is not a problem to me - partially since they haven't had an update for many, many years and partially because thay are really different compared to SM, while the other chapters with own codeci just have some differences which could have been in the vanilla codex.
gmaleron wrote:Just was trying to inject some humor into this thread mates (and some imperial guard propaganda) , no need to think im trolling And the guard can do lightning strike assaults, its called blow the planet up from orbit!
Thats not a lightning strike! Thats an ORBITAL strike! lol Seriously man, you should learn the difference. No need to go out hoping to get struck by lightning and then get crushed by an artillery shell...
Also, what happens when your "fluffy" SM army happens to also be able to beat most everyone (mine is no where close...)? Does that get a free pass, or is that a WAAC "waa, you just followed the codex release cycle" army? Just wondering...
I just started playing 40k this year, and I do play Space Marines. I know it's childish to even respond to this, but I'm going to anyway. I'm not accusing, or inciting anything, these are simply my reasons.
1. I picked to play Space Marines because they were recommended to me by experienced players. They told me they had a wide range of tactics available, and were the best all-around army. I don't feel stupid or immature for taking their advice. Why would I choose something more difficult when my understanding of the game was already weak at best? Just to be different? I'd be pissed as hell if I spent $200.00 on an army I decided I hated playing as. With the Space Marines, there is flexibilty. (I'm not saying other factions lack this, but the Space Marines are among the most versatile.)
I started playing 40k this year (at the age of 26), and I started with SM, for many of the reasons you illustrate, Goddard. Especially the one above. I actually d/led the main rulebook & codexes when I was researching the game, and considered for weeks which army to play. I settled on SM because I like power armor, and because they're flexible. If it's a faction I think is cool, and will give me the broadest (though perhaps not the deepest) experience of the game when starting out, well, that seems the best to me. I can play SM & get a taste of shooty and CC and a bit of everything else, and if down the road one of those elements of the game leaps out at me as one I really want to explore more in-depth, I can get another army that specializes in it.
I long ago learned to not pick something "different" just for the sake of it.
And Dorian? Let's talk. Actually, no, you don't have to talk. Just come over here.
See this chart? Could you point to it, please, in the place the Space Marine touched you?
( I'm just playing with ya man, I couldn't resist!)
DorianGray wrote:Grey Knights are not really Space Marines and are unique enough so I have no problems with them getting one esp. since its been so long.
But Necrons better get a codex before ****ing black Templars or Dark Angels. God save us all.
SM players act and pretend like they own the hobby and any Xenos is nothing but sack-boys for the heros of the day stomp and save the day.
Through this post, and the rest of the thread really, I have been tossing up whether you're a troll deliberately throwing out the most incendiary comments you can think of, or simply an over-generalising moron. I am still yet to work out which, but rest assured that I will continue my efforts.
---
Personally, I play Space Marines primarily because I like the fluff (Except for M. Wards fluff). They're an elite force of genetically enhanced super-humans, with an almost crusading knight feel to them, standing against the most horrible foes of humanity and this appeals to me. I like the background for other races, but they simply don't appeal to me on the same level that the Astartes do, perhaps because I come from a 'Sword and Sorcery' background. This, as well as having them recommended to me by a friend as a good race to look at what kind of army I'd like to build coming back in 5th edition, is why I began playing Space Marines and remain doing so nearly a year later, to the point where I'm beginning to build my third fully seperate and painted power-armor army.
The fact that I can build a highly competitive list, while having units I like the look of, and keeping in line with the fluff is simply icing on the cake.
I mean uhhh...I play them because I can switch to whatever codex is best at the time and say it's a successor chapter. Am I doing it right?
obsidianaura wrote:Shift marines save to 4+ and watch everyone switch armys .
I'd rather see them toned down fluff wise rather than game wise. Game wise they can be fun to play, fluff wise they are the most boring army IMHO
While I respect your opinion I would have to say that SM no matter what the chapter have pretty decent fluff. And the fact that you can make your own chapter and give them your own fluff just make things better.
While I like Salamanders(my favorite chapter) I don't think they need their own 'dex. If you want one, make your own. Ends up being more fun, because you will want to play all of the units.
Despite what people say, and not playing Marines, I do think Marines are indeed a great way for new players to start the game.
I am a dirty Eldar player. I started playing 2 years ago at age 21 because I wanted hi-tech aliens, DE hadn't been updated or gotten new models since the cold war, and I heard nothing but horror stories about their learning curve (though that HAS been changed recently ), and tau seemed too one dimensional.
Another part of the reason I picked Eldar was because I wanted to start with a more unforgiving army. When you get punished for making mistakes, you learn to stop making them. I was afraid if I started with a 3+ save army, I'd develop and reinforce bad habits.
That said, not all players feel the same way I did about getting their face ground into the pavement for their first couple of games! For many people if they get curb stomped in their first game... they may not want to play anymore, for them MEQ is a far superior choice, as the forgiveness of that army may encourage them to not give up!
Further now that I have a solid grasp on how my army plays, I'm starting to crave something different, and am about to start building a Khorne Army over the summer in small doses. there is a lot of difference in the chaos marines from loyalist marines (though I agree its kind of silly for Angels, Wolves, and Templars to have thier own codex- how many loyalist close combat marine dexes do we need ffs).
I do love my Eldar, and they will always be my main army. Building up that army has been a labor of love, and I probably wouldn't still be playing today if it wasn't for how much I enjoy the Space Elf army.
That said, it was expensive to make my Mech Eldar list go. Aspect warriors are expensive, wave serpents are expensive, and my favorite unit- guardian jetbikes, are even MORE expensive on a $ to point ratio, all told I've spent easily around 700 dollars to date, and it took at least 500 dollars for my first crappy 1500 list.
I ran the numbers, and the 1500 Chaos list I'm going to build (jump demon weapon lord, zerks + 2 csm in rhinos, raptors, and 2 predators) will cost me 238 dollars (298 if bought straight from GW)- and I'm certain other MEQ armies are even cheaper. Combine this with the higher forgiveness of the Marine Stat line, there is a lot going for a MEQ army for a beginner.
Less frustrating to learn + easier on your wallet = great starting race
sure, I'll agree that the twilight marines (team Edward AND team Jacob) may be a bit OTT, but ridiculous tourney lists are NOT what most players are thinking of when they pick their first army.
If Space Marine players use the Assault on Black reach starter set it gets even cheaper.
The amount of money you need to spend for a 2000 pt SM army vs. a 2000 point Imperial Guard Army is so huge it borders on the ridiculous. (esp. if you play Vostroyans lol)
Also the low amount of models needed to paint vs. a IG army makes for a huge difference in painting time.
SM are the easiest to play and paint and cheapest in $ making them the most popular choice everywhere. Also their fluff is ridiculous.
I can't wait for Grey Knight players go Hey Space Marines guess what? MY ARMY IS EVEN MORE ELITE THAN YOURS muahaha. Space Marines got owned. nice
Very true. I think this is true for 40k in general: it's all about taking the GRIM DARKNESS of a future that's ONLY WAR and believing in it TWO-HUNDRED mother-fething PERCENT. 40k is totally ridiculous, which is why I love it.
I mean, if GW is so in love with space marines, at least they could do a better job hiding it. (130pt gap between them and orks in AOBR, ridiculous amounts of 'dexes, the two most broken armies, a video game, and a movie, which, imho, was probably one of the worst movies ever.)
The price gap is very real. Even using bog standard cadians, no FW conversions, etc. making an IG army is going to cost generally at least 50% as much as a similar cost Space Marine army, often more than twice as much.
Say you have a fairly bog standard IG Infantry platoon, with an autocannon+2 flamer PCS and 2 AC/GL infantry squads. You need a Heavy Weapons platoon box, a command squad box, and two tenman infantry squad boxes. That's $109.5 for 180pts.
If you want a Mechvets unit, you need an infantry squad box, three meltagunners, and a chimera. Lets say we get the meltaguns as bitz instead of buying actual Cadian Meltagunners to save money. That's $67.75 for 155pts.
A Space Marine Tactical Squad with a Missile Launcher and a Meltagun are 175pts for $35. Add in a Rhino and its 210pts for $65
The SM's run about 5pts per $1, 3.23pts per $1 with a Rhino.
The Infantry Platoons runs 1.64pts per $1 and the Mechvets run 2.287pts per $1.
That's a very real and very powerful income gap between those two armies.
EDIT: lets look at my current CSM list and my original mech IG list I built a while back before I began building one around an additional platoon and Hydras (even more expensive)
Mech IG:
CCS, 4x Melta, officer of the Fleet (made with spare bitz instead of official metal model), chimera
Platoons
PCS, 4x Melta, chimera
IS, AC/GL, Chimera
IS, AC/GL, Chimera
IS, AC/GL, Chimera
PCS, 4x Melta, chimera
IS, AC/GL, Chimera
IS, AC/GL, Chimera
IS, AC/GL, Chimera
FA:
Vendetta (made with spare bitz)
Vendetta (made with spare bitz)
Vendetta (made with spare bitz)
HS:
Leman Russ BT Leman Russ BT Leman Russ BT
Total: ~$1,000
CSM's
DP+Wings
6 Terminators+buying extra weapon bitz
6 Terminators+buying extra weapon bitz
The IG list, much of it using extra leftover bitz and not having to go to FW to buy any models for stuff like Hydras or Medusas or Vendetta Conversion Kits, costs about 50% more than the CSM list that had to buy additional bitz.
The main issue that I have with Space Marines is the over-saturation not only of players, but also of codex variants. I play out of Codex: Dark Angels, and honestly there is no excuse for that chapter to have a unique codex. The army could have been just as easy recreated by throwing two more special characters in Codex: Space Marines (Belial and Sammuael). As for Grey Hordes, I'm fortunate enough that there aren't any at my FLGS; all space marines are painted as a primary chapter except for mine, which is a DIY chapter that is mostly terminators (and so essentially has to play using the DA codex.)
The problem is all the unnecessary variant list. I can't remember where I saw it, but someone made a single A4 sheet 'mod' for Vanilla Marines to use to make Space Wolves apart from SCs.
And they are the biggest variation, albeit that was the old Space Wolf list.
All the marine variants do is eat each other's sales (and not in a growth way where a new game would cannibalise the old game for instance).
If the other armies were made as 'main' as Marines and offered as alternatives, the entire game would be much more appealing to a newcomer who could choose a faction to fit his 'style' without feeling sidelined.
It felt less of this 'Marine-this, Marine-that' in 2nd edition, even if they were quite central. When did this start?
ONe thing that i have recently come across in our game store that me and a few friends touched on was not the difference between types of marine armies but in paricular one item that is available to them. Storm Shields, probably one of the more ridiculous things to come across and i can say i have played alot of armies that have particulary every guy with one of these things.
What we discussed (in detail) was the fact that is it fair to have the option for a 3+ 3+ or even a 2+ 3+ save? In my own opinion i feel that the lowest ANY invunerable save should be is 4+ . I know the argument of "How Expensive" these things are is supposed to counter it, but when this expensive item is attatched to nearly every, if not all model in your army then even then chances are your going to win. I think the Storm Shields should be moved to a 4+ and cheapen the points cost on it making it much more fair and balanced item. Cant wait to get the flak on this one
Alphapod wrote:The main issue that I have with Space Marines is the over-saturation not only of players, but also of codex variants. I play out of Codex: Dark Angels, and honestly there is no excuse for that chapter to have a unique codex. The army could have been just as easy recreated by throwing two more special characters in Codex: Space Marines (Belial and Sammuael). As for Grey Hordes, I'm fortunate enough that there aren't any at my FLGS; all space marines are painted as a primary chapter except for mine, which is a DIY chapter that is mostly terminators (and so essentially has to play using the DA codex.)
Your last statement is completely wrong and tells me you're here to whine about the Dark Angels having their own book.
If you want a "mostly Terminator" army, you've got a better option available to you than the Deathwing in the form of the Space Wolves Codex and its "Loganwing".
As for Dark Angels having their own codex...
Yeah. Clearly there's no reason for a Founding Legion that has traditionally had its own book, distinct from the standard C: SM.
And clearly the blandness of it has nothing whatsoever to do with the halfassed job they did on the book.
What puzzles me is, with the half-assedness of the books...what keeps them from catching them all up roughly at once? No one would complain if a new codex a month came out one a new edition went into effect. Xenos wouldn't be far behind anything else, and everyone would be happy. So...what's the hold up? You *can't* tell it's play testing with anything resembling a straight face.
Little as I like Warmachine...I have to say the, "You can't cry 'broken!' 'cause its ALL broken!!" system has its appeal. I think that is where they are going anyway, with all this "every army gets its 'remove from play' power."
Granted, most of the latest codices are quite good, IMO - but every other person on here disagrees about this or that *particular* codex. Given that no one seems to think they are all on some sort of level field...why bother. Calvatore said as much in an interview a while back. Something to the effect that "balance" is an ideal to work toward, but rarely achieved or lasting.
Just write fun rules. Let the ridiculousness bounce off each other.
Is that fact, or theory? Because I'd think GW would be decent at assigning the right folks, and vetting their work by now. But then again...I think alot of things.
Dark Angels had Jervis Johnson and Andy Hoare working(with the rest of the studio having feedback and insights also, as per norm) on what was to be the 'first of the character driven books'.
In that regard, it was successful. But unlike the Space Marines/Blood Angels Codex from Ward and Kelly's Space Wolves, they were(at least according to Hoare+Thorpe) slightly restricted in how they could do the book in terms of wargear, characters, etc. They couldn't add any units to 'flesh out' aspects of the army that were lacking, and they basically had to use the layout of the old Codex: Space Wolves to work from(which is why we had stupidity such as Elite Scouts...that really weren't).
gmaleron wrote:ONe thing that i have recently come across in our game store that me and a few friends touched on was not the difference between types of marine armies but in paricular one item that is available to them. Storm Shields, probably one of the more ridiculous things to come across and i can say i have played alot of armies that have particulary every guy with one of these things.
What we discussed (in detail) was the fact that is it fair to have the option for a 3+ 3+ or even a 2+ 3+ save? In my own opinion i feel that the lowest ANY invunerable save should be is 4+ . I know the argument of "How Expensive" these things are is supposed to counter it, but when this expensive item is attatched to nearly every, if not all model in your army then even then chances are your going to win. I think the Storm Shields should be moved to a 4+ and cheapen the points cost on it making it much more fair and balanced item. Cant wait to get the flak on this one
VoidAngel wrote:What puzzles me is, with the half-assedness of the books...what keeps them from catching them all up roughly at once? No one would complain if a new codex a month came out one a new edition went into effect. Xenos wouldn't be far behind anything else, and everyone would be happy. So...what's the hold up?
Yeah, I REALLY don't get why it takes 6 months to release a codex. GW is (by their own definition) the biggest thing in miniature wargaming by far, with millions of models sold and stores across the globe. You can't tell me they can't hold enough staff to produce a Codex a month.
As for Dark Angels having their own codex...
Yeah. Clearly there's no reason for a Founding Legion that has traditionally had its own book, distinct from the standard C: SM.
And clearly the blandness of it has nothing whatsoever to do with the halfassed job they did on the book.
The DA book is as distinct now from C:SM than as it *ever* has been in the past, and still shares **ALL** of its non-SC units and all of its non-SC weapons and wargear with C:SM, same as it has since 1996 when Angels of Death came out. When you share that much with another army book, you probably don't need your own codex.
They also didn't really half-ass anything, when the book came out, it was a big metagame change, with lavishly equipped troops relative to others at the time (*free* bolt pistols and grenades? how awesome was that in 2007?), and fleshed out the characters more than they had before. It's not like Dark Angels were really any more differentiated or unique relative to C:SM before their current book.
Just because they didn't make them wildly different from C:SM as a playable army (which they *never* have been) covering all the minutae of every fluff tidbit ever mentioned about them no matter how apocryphal, trivial, or from something not in the current timeline doesn't mean they half-assed the book or that they even need their own book. The problems that DA's have as a competitive army was the wargear bloat and cost decreases that came eighteen months later in Codex: Space Marines 5E, and that other books also replicated their simple FoC swap mechanic, but was not a result of the book being bad at the time of its release, and its certainly not any less bland than the Dark Angels previous two army lists. The fact that they didn't create a slew of new things out of thin air that never were mentioned or existed before, or significantly exaggerated minute aspects from previous incarnations, as they did with Blood Angels, doesn't meant it was half assed. It sticks doggedly to the two previous incarnations of the Dark Angels and the Dark Angels previously established fluff.
But the fact of the matter is that DA's *have never* been all that distinct from C:SM. Ever. In 2E all they really had different was Characters. After that, it was simply FoC swaps. Just because they are a first founding legion and have had their own army book in the past doesn't mean that it's actually *needed* to accurately portray them. Their big thing is that they sometimes field their first and second company equivalents in en-masse more than other chapters. This doesn't mean other chapters don't do this, it doesn't mean that these formations are *only* or even *mostly* fielded in that manner or that they are fielded on their own without any supporting elements from other companies (something that the DA codecies have plainly pointed out), it just means the do it more than other chapters. That's not really something that needs its own book, especially for a chapter that, as its own books have said, is rather codex-adherent in organization and battle strategy otherwise.
People harp on DA now for some good reasons, primarily not being very competitive relative to newer marine books. But as a representation of the Dark Angels? It does everything it needs to do, and the means to do that can and have been done in other books. The current book does a very good job of portraying the Dark Angels as well as they ever have been. It's chief problem is not that it does a bad job of representing Dark Angels, but that all that is required to achieve this is relatively simple swap mechanics and a couple characters. In that light, given that other books contain the exact same mechanics and they are easily ported, what *real* need have Dark Angels of their own book to accurately portray their forces that could be done if rolled into another book? None. Unless one wants them to get the BA treatment and have their previous fluff exaggerated to bad internet fanfic levels and have tons of random, rather extreme stuff just pulled out of thin air that was never even hinted at before, or simply insist that they need their own book just because they have always had one, no matter how pointless it really is.
I think I can probably guess the response to this from multiple angles. I will apparently "have no idea what I'm talking about", or "ignorant" or be "deluded" and simply be "wrong" on everything, or just "irrationally hate dark angels and/or space marines", etc. Despite the fact that I have the Angels of Death book, and the 3E and 4E C: DA books in front of me.
They put out a Dark Angles book to...(get this) sell books! Oh, and a few new very expensive special characters, and some repackaged existing models in an Army box. That's why.
I liked the codex when it came out, for the record, though I've yet to try playing them.
The reason I got into 40k was because of the Gaunt's Ghosts omnibus(es). 9 books total and I think a few short stories. They center around the stories of the imperial guard. I found it riveting and exciting, and it seemed that since the books were focusing on regular joes that everything was a lot more intense.
Gamewise I believe everything is indeed measured against MEQs. This isn't a bad thing, but it creates a standard that other armies need to address. I don't find them too horribly bad to have as a focal point. It creates a bit of organization and concensus on what the best of each army is.
Yeah, I REALLY don't get why it takes 6 months to release a codex. GW is (by their own definition) the biggest thing in miniature wargaming by far, with millions of models sold and stores across the globe. You can't tell me they can't hold enough staff to produce a Codex a month.
But really, do you think us as the players would want 1 a month, i wouldn't. Once one comes out, I purchase it, read it, and become acquainted. I don't have a Dark Eldar army, nor do I have an intention of getting one, but I do have the 5th edition codex in case they get used against me. In that respect, I need time to look though as see what they could do from a players point of view, to make tactics and strategies for them, and see how my army would need to deal with them. Also, it takes alot of time to balance that stuff out, they have to test it against other sets and see if it will work properly. So yes, I agree, they could pump out one a month, but I think they would lack quality and balance, plus it would just be too fast. I would much prefer them to release the codices simultaneously and then work on the next edition, rather than one at a time.
Kanluwen wrote:Your last statement is completely wrong and tells me you're here to whine about the Dark Angels having their own book.
If you want a "mostly Terminator" army, you've got a better option available to you than the Deathwing in the form of the Space Wolves Codex and its "Loganwing".
As for Dark Angels having their own codex...
Yeah. Clearly there's no reason for a Founding Legion that has traditionally had its own book, distinct from the standard C: SM.
And clearly the blandness of it has nothing whatsoever to do with the halfassed job they did on the book.
I am not here 'whining' about the Dark Angels having their own book. I am stating my opinion that they have no need of their own book. The only unique trait that separates Dark Angels from Vanilla Marines are FOC swaps, and they don't justify a whole separate book. As I said before, just throw two new characters into C:SM, and voila, Dark Angels. Just because they historically have had their own book is not sufficient justification for continuation when it is just not necessary and diverting GW resources away from other codices.
As for the Loganwing: You are correct in this regard; however, I actually prefer the Deathwing because of the cheaper HQ and Deathwing Assault rules. The Dark Angels FAQ/Update definitely helps as well. While the Loganwing has better support, I play pure or nearly-pure Deathwing anyway. My opinions regarding the Dark Angels book are not based off a personal distaste, but rather because the Dark Angels codex is IMO unnecessary.
streamdragon wrote: The hyperbole is strong with this one...
Not intending to exaggerate , i just happen to play a total of x3 terminator armies at my store and each army is literally festooned with these things, not to mention a thunderwolf cavalry army running around with them, i should have worded it a bit better to say a GOOD PORTION of armies units can take them, in my case though they are everywhere
streamdragon wrote: The hyperbole is strong with this one...
Not intending to exaggerate , i just happen to play a total of x3 terminator armies at my store and each army is literally festooned with these things, not to mention a thunderwolf cavalry army running around with them, i should have worded it a bit better to say a GOOD PORTION of armies units can take them, in my case though they are everywhere
Aegis1650 wrote:
But really, do you think us as the players would want 1 a month, i wouldn't.
I'm pretty sure those people who have to wait 10 years for a codex update would like one a month.
Seriously, GW's model of updating their game makes no sense, and no one else does it like they do. When I first got into 40k I was like, what? They released an edition of the game without releasing rules for each army in the game before moving onto a new edition? It just doesn't make sense, and it doesn't seem like it should take so long to release each codex. IMO, balancing the armies and such and writing rules for each codex should be happening while you're writing the new ruleset, so each army is inherently tied to it. How can you playtest a new edition using army rules from the previous edition? I don't get it.
Maybe it wouldn't be such a problem if GW weren't so tight-lipped. I see them as the biggest company in this sector of gaming, so it's hard to believe they can't produce a quality codex a month (or so). Wizards of the Coast produces multiple quality, thick books every month, and I'm sure they're smaller than GW.
" How can you playtest a new edition using army rules from the previous edition? I don't get it. "
Simple. You can't.
They try to say they tailor the new game to leave the old codices valid, but that's rarely true.
As to wanting a new codex a month until they were all out - you're right, I wouldn't actually want that. It was a compromise suggestion. What I'd rather have is ALL the codices out at once with the new edition of the game! But, for various good and valid business reasons, that would never happen. Not without vastly reducing the size and cost of the books. I like the new-style books, I really do - but they ought to be able to churn them out faster. Game balance is mostly an art that consists of experience, depth of knowledge, and good scripts. It's not impossible (and shouldn't even be difficult) for company the size of GW to adequately test new rules on at *least* a quarterly basis. Use structured and trusted "crowdsources" - and you can easily do it twice as fast.
VoidAngel wrote:What I'd rather have is ALL the codices out at once with the new edition of the game! But, for various good and valid business reasons, that would never happen.
Yup yup. I do agree that one a month is not at all unreasonable. For those of us who play armies like the Sisters that haven't had a new Codex (a real Codex, not some tie-in to promote the Inquisitor game) for a decade, each f'ing MEQ chapter book is like a roundhouse kick to the face. Then, for those of us who play Inquisition, roll Xeno, or at the very least, play CSM, we're basically enabling all of the MEQ by providing them just enough enemies per FLG to avoid total Marine saturation. It's a vicious cycle.
They could easily boost model and book sales - and improve the game(!) by putting out books more often. How? How could this miracle be achieved? Through what sorcery, you ask?
"Sir, we've got these nifty Shining Spears...nice models, $30 a box - but they don't sell at all."
"Smithers, don't bring me problems - bring me reasons!"
"Well Sir, um, we did some market analysis...and...er..."
"Well, spit it out Smithers!"
"Ah, no Sir, never! I mean...uh... well, it's the Eldar rules Sir. These units suck, and not in the good way."
"Ah. Thank you Smithers. This is what I want you to do. Get to work on Codex: Eldar. Make Shining Spears the new "uuuubar" unit, as the kids say."
"Brilliant Sir! That will immediately pump up sales for these things!"
"Yessssss. Oh, and Smithers - raise the price to $45 a box."
So, in effect - investments in models you've already cast and produced can always be recovered by rules tweaks. Two extremely nice side effects are a) increased book sales, and b) a game that becomes more and more optimized (both for sales and game play) over time - provided you leave the basic rules alone, and don't get crazy with the rules tweaks.
The problem is codex releases are tied to model range releases for business reasons.
They could very well have a codex done in a month and just need playtest tweaking. But GW like the huge influx of money that comes from a codex being released with the new hot gak on the shelves.
They are a business afterall. Releasing a model range without a codex will get sales, as will a codex without a model range. Releasing both, and hyping the army up, gets a lot more sales.
It's funny, they keep saying they're a model company first, game company second. They're both - not many people would buy their models without a game. As such, not many people would buy their game if they didn't have a model range to carry it.
I had a feeling it might be something like that. Unfortunately, this means the game suffers a lot in comparison to its competitors. I think if 40k as a game system and release model doesn't change, it's going to continue having a diminished market share.
-Loki- wrote:... not many people would buy their models without a game. As such, not many people would buy their game if they didn't have a model range to carry it.
" not many people would buy their models without a game."
Reaper
"not many people would buy their game if they didn't have a model range to carry it"
40K
Wave serpents for the first, what, 15 years? Tervigons, Terranofexes, there's...many more examples.
They'd make more money from happier, more loyal players. That means codices on a decent schedule, edition updates far enough apart, and rules that work and keep things fun. It means stewardship of the game, not just cranking pieces of it out haphazardly and hoping they sell well enough to keep you profitable.
Yes, they will continue to lose market share - because other companies are doing a better job, and anyone with $40,000 can buy a 3D printer set-up and start a miniatures company.
Yes, they will continue to lose market share - because other companies are doing a better job, and anyone with $40,000 can buy a 3D printer set-up and start a miniatures company.
To this last point: It will be really interesting to see what happens with 40k and GW in general in the next 5-10 years as 3D printing becomes mainstream.
Not gonna lie, as soon as there's decent competition for the type of game play 40k offers I'm off this sinking boat so fast greased lightning will be like 'wow that was fast'. I've been abused by GW's marketing decisions as a Xeno player for far too long to enjoy anything outside of the game itself and the people I play with. It's already squashed my desire to buy an entire Dark Eldar army because I don't want even more money to go to waste when I leave.
@Hans - the technology is coming along in leaps and bounds. These things were $100K apiece 5 years ago. $40K 2 years ago. $5-10K (for some models) now. That's getting into "serious hobbyist" money. The resolution isn't where in needs to be for GW-level 28mm minis, and I'm not sure about the durability of current materials (but it seems like it would stand up, at least some formulations, anyway). In 10 years? Yeah, the technology will more than be there, and it will be so cheap that GW might as well just sell the CAD drawings to players to print themselves (right!).
@Hans and Sum - What GW does have, is the richest game background in the known universe, and the best miniatures. They can save themselves, but their leadership needs to revamp itself, how they do business , and take a fresh look at what they think their core principles should be. Profit first, sure, absolutely. But customer satisfaction should be viewed as the prerequisite for that - not a vaguely hoped for side-effect.
They could take a lesson from Apple at it's best. People love them and are fanatical about whatever latest over-priced ding dong they put out - because Apple thinks first about what will blow people's minds and send them off into new paroxysms of user-phoria. You can get that with a really great codex. You can get that with really well-designed model kits (put a gundam kit together sometime). You can get that with a game that is just a blast to play every time.
All the pieces are there...they just seem to willfully refuse to put them together.
I know diddly about the tech involved, but theoretically, combined with the really good 3d scanning technology, couldn't you just take a rhino sprue, copy it, and print it? or is that a little ahead of where this tech is at?
It's a bit advanced of "serious hobbyist" level tech, not at all advanced of industrial tech. For $100K - you could do that easy. Maybe even half that, at a slower pace.
Legalities aside, this is what will happen in the next 7 or so years. GW will be selling real STCs, or just getting pirated into oblivion.
-Loki- wrote:The problem is codex releases are tied to model range releases for business reasons.
They could very well have a codex done in a month and just need playtest tweaking. But GW like the huge influx of money that comes from a codex being released with the new hot gak on the shelves..
Hans Chung-Otterson wrote:Yeah, I REALLY don't get why it takes 6 months to release a codex. GW is (by their own definition) the biggest thing in miniature wargaming by far, with millions of models sold and stores across the globe. You can't tell me they can't hold enough staff to produce a Codex a month.
And 12months later, when they're all released, there's no more new rules for three years?
Or would you rather have a new codex and be changing your army every year?
VoidAngel wrote:What I'd rather have is ALL the codices out at once with the new edition of the game! But, for various good and valid business reasons, that would never happen.
Yup yup. I do agree that one a month is not at all unreasonable. For those of us who play armies like the Sisters that haven't had a new Codex (a real Codex, not some tie-in to promote the Inquisitor game) for a decade, each f'ing MEQ chapter book is like a roundhouse kick to the face. Then, for those of us who play Inquisition, roll Xeno, or at the very least, play CSM, we're basically enabling all of the MEQ by providing them just enough enemies per FLG to avoid total Marine saturation. It's a vicious cycle.
Whereas it would be great if GW was faster to update really badly outdated books, all books being renewed every year would be far more disastrous. It was that gak which drove me out from MtG, entire metagame changed every 4 months. No thanks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vaktathi wrote:
People harp on DA now for some good reasons, primarily not being very competitive relative to newer marine books. But as a representation of the Dark Angels? It does everything it needs to do, and the means to do that can and have been done in other books. The current book does a very good job of portraying the Dark Angels as well as they ever have been. It's chief problem is not that it does a bad job of representing Dark Angels, but that all that is required to achieve this is relatively simple swap mechanics and a couple characters. In that light, given that other books contain the exact same mechanics and they are easily ported, what *real* need have Dark Angels of their own book to accurately portray their forces that could be done if rolled into another book? None. Unless one wants them to get the BA treatment and have their previous fluff exaggerated to bad internet fanfic levels and have tons of random, rather extreme stuff just pulled out of thin air that was never even hinted at before, or simply insist that they need their own book just because they have always had one, no matter how pointless it really is.
When the next book rolls out, I think I am going to equip Belial with Twin Dark Claws, and build myself an Angelic Dreadnought...
Hans Chung-Otterson wrote:Yeah, I REALLY don't get why it takes 6 months to release a codex. GW is (by their own definition) the biggest thing in miniature wargaming by far, with millions of models sold and stores across the globe. You can't tell me they can't hold enough staff to produce a Codex a month.
And 12months later, when they're all released, there's no more new rules for three years?
Or would you rather have a new codex and be changing your army every year?
No that's when GW decides to join the modern age and learns how this crazy thing called, umm, what is it, internet? Yeah that thing, that's when GW learns how all that whacky stuff works and updates each army's codex for the little stuff with mini-releases and rules tweaks. Ya know to fix blatantly broken and ridiculously outdated problems in each one. The technology exists. It can be done. It's got to be mustache-twirling evil or sheer incompetence that lets armies sit around with no fixes to the things they need for longer than some of the people playing the hobby HAVE BEEN ALIVE.
Whereas it would be great if GW was faster to update really badly outdated books, all books being renewed every year would be far more disastrous. It was that gak which drove me out from MtG, entire metagame changed every 4 months. No thanks.
No, you misunderstand me. You don't renew all the books every year - just in the year following the release of a new edition.
THEN (so that things don't get stale, as Starship Captain suggests they might) - you release codex list and unit updates every few months via that internet thing (as SumYungGui suggests). These could not only be fixes to problems, but added units, configurations, or rules that let you build an alternate army. A perfect example is the old "Chapter Approved" type articles. Anyone remember those? They were all that kept me buying White Dwarf for years (then I realized that 2 pages, with a low chance it was even an army I played, for $6, then $7, then $8 - is a total waste of money, and I stopped).
VoidAngel wrote:THEN (so that things don't get stale, as Starship Captain suggests they might) - you release codex list and unit updates every few months via that internet thing (as SumYungGui suggests). These could not only be fixes to problems, but added units, configurations, or rules that let you build an alternate army.
And you're now in the MtG cycle where your army list is changing every few months.
No thanks.
We're currently in a situation where you can expect an army to last for four years but, at the same time, there is an army getting updated every few months to keep things fresh. That's a pretty nice balance, in my opinion.
I think it is basically unfair to make players of a specific army wait many years for an update to their codex.
Yes, you can have more than one army. Even so, GW should ensure that all codexes are brought up to the latest edition of rules within two years of release, and have three years of playability in them.
In effect I am promoting a new edition at the most every five years, so there would be three years of stability to allow every army to explore the game on an even playing field.
This would be best for players, though clearly it may not suit GW's business needs.
Scott-S6 wrote:
And you're now in the MtG cycle where your army list is changing every few months.
No thanks.
We're currently in a situation where you can expect an army to last for four years but, at the same time, there is an army getting updated every few months to keep things fresh. That's a pretty nice balance, in my opinion.
No, it's nothing like as sweeping a change as MtG, where single overpowered card can change the whole game. I'm not suggesting that Space Wolves suddenly get jet bikes or something. Small changes and fixes that make things interesting, not that upset the whole applecart.
Black Templars can now use the Emperor's Champion as their HQ, and take Storm Shields that work and cost the same as other Marine armies. Obviously, this has not broken the game.
You release a new codex, and it has unintended effects. You won't know that until it gets out into the wild and millions of people start screwing around with it. So, once it's clear that other codices need to be tweaked to bring things back in line...you do that. No big deal, and no one waits years for their list to be as viable as it once was.
MTG also has rotation on what cards are legal in the most popular format standard. Yes there is legacy and vintage which doesn't have rotation. I dont perceive having semi regular faq updates breaking armys if its limited to making things in older codexs work the same as thet do in the current rules.
I agree with the OP. Frankly, the Xenos are what drew me to 40k. I own 5 Xenos armies (Daemon, Necron, Ork, Nid, and Tau) and I find all of them more interesting than SM.
All the factions of SM are similar enough to put in one codex. It may be as thick as 2, but it could be done.
I hear the call of some 40kers for another Chapter of SM. Please. Another Xeno would be much more interesting.
And as far as sales? People convert from one faction to another more than buying new models. A codex, new paint job, shoulder pad and emblem and you have a "new" army. Alien armies can't be swapped like that. So GW should think about that before another chapter.
Its a game... most people like playing humans in a game. See WoW, Oblivion, etc. People like seeing people blow crap up.
That being said some people go to the extreme of space marinedom. Some people (like myself) love marines, but like all the other races as well. Plus, writing a book from a nid or orks perspective would be... uh... interesting. Its just easier to write from a "humans" eyes (marines/imperials) or the humanesque xenos (eldar)
Sure it's 'easier' but since when is good writing easy?
Which of course begs the follow on question, how would anyone writing 40k stories know? (yes I'm aware there are exceptions. take the entity as a whole)
Zid wrote:Its a game... most people like playing humans in a game. See WoW, Oblivion, etc. People like seeing people blow crap up.
That being said some people go to the extreme of space marinedom. Some people (like myself) love marines, but like all the other races as well. Plus, writing a book from a nid or orks perspective would be... uh... interesting. Its just easier to write from a "humans" eyes (marines/imperials) or the humanesque xenos (eldar)
Remember that Space Marines aren't humans. They're insane mutant space monks who live for the sole purpose of killing things. The only human faction is the Guard and I suppose the non-mutant-space-monk parts of the Inquisition codices.
Scott-S6 wrote:
We're currently in a situation where you can expect an army to last for four years but, at the same time, there is an army getting updated every few months to keep things fresh. That's a pretty nice balance, in my opinion.
Not really, maybe some of the top tier armies can keep the same build for years, but other factions have to contend with a new win button that wipes out existing builds when a new codex is released. IE, Nidzilla builds after DE came around.
I'd like to add that I see nothing wrong with space marines, the problem lays entirely with the half dozen space marine variants. Cut it down to two or three codices (SM, CSM, and maybe one other if it can be justified in gameplay and fluff), and the problem mostly goes away.
obsidianaura wrote:Shift marines save to 4+ and watch everyone switch armys .
Until 3rd edition they basically were. In RT they were a 4+, in 2nd ed. they were a 3+ but nearly everything had a -1 save modifier so it was an effective 4+.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Requia wrote:I'd like to add that I see nothing wrong with space marines, the problem lays entirely with the half dozen space marine variants. Cut it down to two or three codices (SM, CSM, and maybe one other if it can be justified in gameplay and fluff), and the problem mostly goes away.
There should basically be two books: Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines, with Codex Space Marines containing all the rules and special characters for ALL major Space Marine chapters, and rules for making your own, and Codex Chaos Space Marines comprising ALL major CSM Legions AND Chaos Daemons.
Charge more for each book. Don't really care, just release them all at the same time so the rotation gets pinched a bit.
Its not Space Marines themselves, but theres not enough attempts to get people to try non-Human armies.
Yes, Space Marines have to be the poster boys. Yes, fiction has to be focused from the point of view of the Imperium. But...wheres the incentive to play alot of the Xenos armies, when alot of these armies haven't nearly as much fluff as the human armies (and most of it coming from the point of the view of the Imperium)
I play Imperium races exclusively, but even I can see that it isn't surprising that there isn't more Xeno players; Its GW's fault entirely.
The fluff isn't the only disincentive. Why buy a Xeno army knowing you have a fair chance of going more years than fingers one one hand without any sort of update, FAQ, internet update, model release, sideways look or second thought from GW when you can buy another pack of dudes with power armor, bolters and chain swords and get your rules fixed every few months for the cost of a new codex? It's really not a balanced decision and many people just take the path of least resistance to the goal of winning all the time.
The thing is, I fail to see why, if Space Marines get 6 Codicies for every color of their Power-Armored Freak rainbow, that other armies shouldn't get similar amounts of literature.
My beloved Guard, for example, could see a 'dex specific to Light Infantry and Jungle Fighters (Tanith or Belladon, and possibly Tallaran as well). Another one specific to Mechanized armies (Steel Legion, or other flavors of Tallaran, maybe Valhallan). A third for Drop Troops and other airmoble units (Elysians or Harkoni, or perhaps the Elysian/Catachan "Prosan" units). Since this current 'dex essentially builds Cadian units, that one is covered.
But hey! What about Penal Legions? I don't mean, "take 6 Penal Troop Squads and call it a day", I mean actual Penal Legions. What about Death Corps of Krieg? What about a Rough Rider army? What about Skitaari?
I'm aware that some of these already kinda exist, but the ones that do (Death Corps of Krieg and Elysians) are, to my knowledge, based on the last Guard 'dex, so I don't think they count.
Now, of the existing Space Marines codicies, the bulk of them should be, as others have stated, combined into one. Honestly, the Dark Angels and Blood Angels are both Codex Astartes chapters, and should thus be folded into Codex: Space Marines. Have a few pages to detail the handful of differences and you're good.
I would also say that Black Templars belong there too, but I would be content with the Black Templars and Space Wolves being in the same codex along with the other divergent chapters.
Nevertheless, I fail to see how the lavish treatment granted to one army cannot be extended to other armies, and I also do not see WHY such treatment shouldn't be extended to other armies.
I've wondered that for many years. If books sell models, and books are cheaper to print than new models are to sculpt or produce...why are there not codices bursting from the shelves? It's not like they play test them. ;-D
SumYungGui wrote:The fluff isn't the only disincentive. Why buy a Xeno army knowing you have a fair chance of going more years than fingers one one hand without any sort of update, FAQ, internet update, model release, sideways look or second thought from GW when you can buy another pack of dudes with power armor, bolters and chain swords and get your rules fixed every few months for the cost of a new codex? It's really not a balanced decision and many people just take the path of least resistance to the goal of winning all the time.
This.
My buddy has a rather extensive, fully painted Marine collection that have seen a lot of play as C:SM and SW. If he wanted, he could go BT or BA easily.
No change in paint scheme required, maybe a swap in wargear, but as long as you've got Marines, you've got the baseline off of which to play whatever you want.
Tau can't do that. Nor Necrons, nor any other xenos race unless you're willing to do extensive modifications or counts-as work.
Ogiwan wrote:The thing is, I fail to see why, if Space Marines get 6 Codicies....
QFT.
I mean, GW fluff itself states that there is an infinite variety of the nearly infinite number of guard regiments, so why only one list option for them, while a super-secret, super-elite genetically-enhanced horde of semi-humans that supposedly number under one million AND have a very specific order they're supposed to organize along, have a near-infinite number of options provided them?
Ogiwan wrote:The thing is, I fail to see why, if Space Marines get 6 Codicies....
QFT.
I mean, GW fluff itself states that there is an infinite variety of the nearly infinite number of guard regiments, so why only one list option for them, while a super-secret, super-elite genetically-enhanced horde of semi-humans that supposedly number under one million AND have a very specific order they're supposed to organize along, have a near-infinite number of options provided them?
Probably because, despite what you seem to think, very few Guard Regiments actually vary wildly from the Codex form?
The ones that do are in a little series of books called "Imperial Armour"...
As opposed to the giant mutant space monks, who all originate from the same single person, who all use identical equipment that they've used for ten thousand years, and who all fight in exactly the same way that they've fought for ten thousand years (that is to say, with all the tactical acumen of a brick)?
Space Marines are all identical. Guard regiments vary radically from planet to planet, due to variations in resources and culture. And Imperial Armor isn't generally considered usable, or at least much less so than the main codices. Guard are possibly the only faction with much justification to have multiple codices, while Space Marines have exactly no justification to do so.
Edit: obviously with the exception of Chaos Marines, being insane, twisted version of the bland base marines, with some token daemons and whatnot. Traitor Guard, or another human chaos faction would be interesting, but eh...
If anything, I'd like to see, not a Codex Catachans, Codex Cadians, etc. etc. but either a doctrinal thing, or a special character that lets you choose special rules to make your army ACT more like the army you're supposed to be. Kinda like with Space Marines and chapter tactics...
Space Marines get more codices because they are COOLER! Period. You can prove it scientifically to a billion decimal places.
/snark off
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:As opposed to the giant mutant space monks, who all originate from the same single person, who all use identical equipment that they've used for ten thousand years, and who all fight in exactly the same way that they've fought for ten thousand years (that is to say, with all the tactical acumen of a brick)?
Space Marines are all identical. Guard regiments vary radically from planet to planet, due to variations in resources and culture. And Imperial Armor isn't generally considered usable, or at least much less so than the main codices. Guard are possibly the only faction with much justification to have multiple codices, while Space Marines have exactly no justification to do so.
Edit: obviously with the exception of Chaos Marines, being insane, twisted version of the bland base marines, with some token daemons and whatnot. Traitor Guard, or another human chaos faction would be interesting, but eh...
Obviously you know nothing about the game from a background perspective. Nothing. Do I bother listing the main differences for you? Nah, you're sure you're right.
Yes, there should be many more codices for many more factions, but you don't need to take away Marine options and books or models to do so. Personally, I'd LOVE to see Chaos Tau. Exodites. More variability in Guard. You name it, I want the book. If I like the rules enough, I'll buy/field/convert the models.
SumYungGui wrote:The fluff isn't the only disincentive. Why buy a Xeno army knowing you have a fair chance of going more years than fingers one one hand without any sort of update, FAQ, internet update, model release, sideways look or second thought from GW when you can buy another pack of dudes with power armor, bolters and chain swords and get your rules fixed every few months for the cost of a new codex? It's really not a balanced decision and many people just take the path of least resistance to the goal of winning all the time.
Perhaps, if you play generic Marines as "counts as <insert latest cheese here>", but if you faithfully stick with your favourite non- Codex Marine chapter, they if anything are slower at getting upgrades than Xeno books.
The real problem. The real underlying issue here, is the method in which codices are released.
When Dungeons and Dragons releases a new edition, they release ALL of the core books together.
When Games Workshop releases new editions, they release.... a rulebook. Shortly followed by what!? Vanilla Marines.
Codices are CORE and REQUIRED rule books. Without them, we are all playing 4th edition against 5th edition rule utilizing armies.
The problem is not Space Marines, the problem is the preferential way in which new codices are released. If Games Workshop spent the time and effort to create the new rulebook, and then create ALL of the codices for that rulebook, and then released them together, you wouldn't have rampant "flavor of the month"-ism and some codices being overpowered as all ki'lkn and others being semi-competetive and still others being nigh-useless in the face of overwhelming fan-wankery.
Effectively.... don't hate the player, hate the game. (but please, continue playing, I've spent too much money for this hobby to go tits-up.)
Releasing all the codices at once would be impractical for a publicly traded company. GW needs to show an increase in profits every quarter, if there's only a codex related rush of buying every few years when they do a new set of books, then they get screwed on the market.
Come to think, I have to wonder why the variant SM codices are so popular at GW, as mentioned above, anybody with a space marine army that has a custom paint job and insignia can play pretty much any SM variant for a minimal cost. Those can't produce nearly as much in the way of sales as say, the most recent DE release.
SumYungGui wrote:The fluff isn't the only disincentive. Why buy a Xeno army knowing you have a fair chance of going more years than fingers one one hand without any sort of update, FAQ, internet update, model release, sideways look or second thought from GW when you can buy another pack of dudes with power armor, bolters and chain swords and get your rules fixed every few months for the cost of a new codex? It's really not a balanced decision and many people just take the path of least resistance to the goal of winning all the time.
This.
My buddy has a rather extensive, fully painted Marine collection that have seen a lot of play as C:SM and SW. If he wanted, he could go BT or BA easily.
No change in paint scheme required, maybe a swap in wargear, but as long as you've got Marines, you've got the baseline off of which to play whatever you want.
Tau can't do that. Nor Necrons, nor any other xenos race unless you're willing to do extensive modifications or counts-as work.
GW don't make lots of SM codexes to accommodate players in not buying new armies.
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:As opposed to the giant mutant space monks, who all originate from the same single person, who all use identical equipment that they've used for ten thousand years, and who all fight in exactly the same way that they've fought for ten thousand years (that is to say, with all the tactical acumen of a brick)?
Space Marines are all identical. Guard regiments vary radically from planet to planet, due to variations in resources and culture.
Shows how little you actually know regarding the Guard.
The appearance of the equipment used by Guard regiments will "vary radically from planet to planet".
Their training, organization, and basic equipment make-up will not vary.
In rare circumstances, such as the Death Korps of Krieg you'll find different vehicles like the Centaurs in lieu of Chimeras or you'll find a regiment like the Elysian Drop Troops and the Tanith First & Only.
But they are actually rare and due to their specialist nature, highly valued and split amongst various commands. At most, an Imperial 'army' will have access to a few platoons worth of those regiments. They're not necessarily fielded en masse, but are fielded as a kind of 'leveler' when their skills are necessitated by the situation at hand.
An Imperial Crusade, however, might be able to request the full Regiment--but it's not going to happen often.
And Imperial Armor isn't generally considered usable, or at least much less so than the main codices.
Actually, Imperial Armour is 100% legal for pick-up games et all. It's considered common courtesy to inform your opponent you plan on using it, and having the book and related FAQs on hand so they can reference it whenever an issue arises.
Tournament Organizers, however, have the final say so as to whether something is or isn't 'legal' for that tournament. A TO could ban the use of Codex: Space Wolves, Tyranids, etc if they so chose.
Guard are possibly the only faction with much justification to have multiple codices, while Space Marines have exactly no justification to do so
Yeah...this again seems like you're actually completely unfamiliar with fluff or the fact that some of the 'multiple codices' are halfassed jobs done early on for this edition or done late in previous editions.
The intent of Dark Angels was to, originally, be the only way to field large quantities of Terminators/Bikers and having troops that excelled in firebases. Which is, frankly, what the Unforgiven are all about. They're stubborn and unyielding defenders who will fight to the last man pouring on disciplined bolter fire and fielding large quantities of Plasma weaponry, with the additional point of they don't usually field 'assault' troops outside of Terminator Armour.
Codex: Space Marines was supposed to cover the 'Big 6' Chapters that are supposedly the most common Codex Chapters(Salamanders, Raven Guard, White Scars, Ultramarines, and the Imperial/Crimson Fists). These Chapters follow the 'standard organizational make-up' in that they have 10 Companies, are the basis for many Successor Chapters,etc. However, a few of them have minor divergences that are easily represented within that book's framework. Matt Ward, however, took it to an extreme that pretty much 'broke' the rest of the Marine archetypes.
Codex: Space Wolves was supposed to cover the, traditionally, most divergent of the Chapters/Legions. The Wolves have never subscribed to the standard make-up, with each Company effectively operating as its own Chapter. Kelly went overboard and made it the de facto 'Terminator army' list with the Loganwing.
Codex: Black Templars is an old one, which was supposed to be representative of a very pious Chapter that fields no Librarians. The Templars, while a Successor Chapter, have always been pretty divergent from the fact that they're mainly an 'assault' Chapter which opts to get into combat as fast as possible. Why? Because that's what Sigismund did.
Codex: Blood Angels was just poorly done. The drawback of Death Company in prior editions wasn't kept(namely: they could be anything. Death Company Devastators/Scouts anyone?) and moreover, tons of stupid previously unknown units/vehicles were added.
Basically: with proper design direction and reigning in some of the jackasses working on the books, it would be easy to effectively make the Astartes suitably different in playstyles.
Much as I am utterly unqualified to make this analogy, I think it will hold up:
Think of Space Marines like (American) Football players. Yes, they all wear and use the same gear (painted different colors) - but each Chapter (team) has it's own special characters, history, tactical emphases, etc.
If you don't like football, that's why there's hockey, basketball, soccer, etc.
Xenos are like the other sports. Mostly football players are going to crush hockey players...on grass. Basketball players are going to out shoot soccer players, but will be outrun by them. You get the idea.
VoidAngel wrote:Much as I am utterly unqualified to make this analogy, I think it will hold up:
Think of Space Marines like (American) Football players. Yes, they all wear and use the same gear (painted different colors) - but each Chapter (team) has it's own special characters, history, tactical emphases, etc.
If you don't like football, that's why there's hockey, basketball, soccer, etc.
Xenos are like the other sports. Mostly football players are going to crush hockey players...on grass. Basketball players are going to out shoot soccer players, but will be outrun by them. You get the idea.
An interesting comparison. It would be more realistic if you added that Football gets 75% of all the air time (assume only one network exists), and all the other sports get to share the remaining 25% percent. That's how GW is currently rolling. When was the last time anyone saw a Tau, Necron, Sisters or Eldar update on their website? OK, Eldar got a little love with the Fire Prism/ Night Spinner, but that was still a while back. And we're not counting LotR and WHFB for the purposes of this metaphor.
No one counts LotR (because there are no players - they are mythological, like Bigfoot).
WHFB isn't as popular in the States, but yeah - it does render yet more pages of WD totally useless. For that matter, why wouldn't GW print 3 magazines? Make fans of all the games (both of them) buy all three. Give the rest of us something worth half what they charge for that rag now.
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:As opposed to the giant mutant space monks, who all originate from the same single person, who all use identical equipment that they've used for ten thousand years, and who all fight in exactly the same way that they've fought for ten thousand years (that is to say, with all the tactical acumen of a brick)?
Space Marines are all identical. Guard regiments vary radically from planet to planet, due to variations in resources and culture.
Shows how little you actually know regarding the Guard.
The appearance of the equipment used by Guard regiments will "vary radically from planet to planet".
Their training, organization, and basic equipment make-up will not vary.
In rare circumstances, such as the Death Korps of Krieg you'll find different vehicles like the Centaurs in lieu of Chimeras or you'll find a regiment like the Elysian Drop Troops and the Tanith First & Only.
But they are actually rare and due to their specialist nature, highly valued and split amongst various commands. At most, an Imperial 'army' will have access to a few platoons worth of those regiments. They're not necessarily fielded en masse, but are fielded as a kind of 'leveler' when their skills are necessitated by the situation at hand.
An Imperial Crusade, however, might be able to request the full Regiment--but it's not going to happen often.
That's... really kind of the opposite of what the fluff implies. Gameplay suggests that, because every guard army, excluding those rare ones with variant rules (like the death korps) follows the exact same rules, but all the fluff I've read that involved Guardsmen to any extent beyond "and there were totally guardsmen there and stuff, now moving on..." suggests a radical difference in the loadout and general training of different regiments, since they are all equipped and initially trained on their own worlds, after all.
And Imperial Armor isn't generally considered usable, or at least much less so than the main codices.
Actually, Imperial Armour is 100% legal for pick-up games et all. It's considered common courtesy to inform your opponent you plan on using it, and having the book and related FAQs on hand so they can reference it whenever an issue arises.
Tournament Organizers, however, have the final say so as to whether something is or isn't 'legal' for that tournament. A TO could ban the use of Codex: Space Wolves, Tyranids, etc if they so chose.
Nothing and everything is legal for pickup games. From reading here, I get the impression that they're generally not accepted in either casual pickup games or tournaments.
Guard are possibly the only faction with much justification to have multiple codices, while Space Marines have exactly no justification to do so
Yeah...this again seems like you're actually completely unfamiliar with fluff or the fact that some of the 'multiple codices' are halfassed jobs done early on for this edition or done late in previous editions.
The intent of Dark Angels was to, originally, be the only way to field large quantities of Terminators/Bikers and having troops that excelled in firebases. Which is, frankly, what the Unforgiven are all about. They're stubborn and unyielding defenders who will fight to the last man pouring on disciplined bolter fire and fielding large quantities of Plasma weaponry, with the additional point of they don't usually field 'assault' troops outside of Terminator Armour.
Codex: Space Marines was supposed to cover the 'Big 6' Chapters that are supposedly the most common Codex Chapters(Salamanders, Raven Guard, White Scars, Ultramarines, and the Imperial/Crimson Fists). These Chapters follow the 'standard organizational make-up' in that they have 10 Companies, are the basis for many Successor Chapters,etc. However, a few of them have minor divergences that are easily represented within that book's framework. Matt Ward, however, took it to an extreme that pretty much 'broke' the rest of the Marine archetypes.
Codex: Space Wolves was supposed to cover the, traditionally, most divergent of the Chapters/Legions. The Wolves have never subscribed to the standard make-up, with each Company effectively operating as its own Chapter. Kelly went overboard and made it the de facto 'Terminator army' list with the Loganwing.
Codex: Black Templars is an old one, which was supposed to be representative of a very pious Chapter that fields no Librarians. The Templars, while a Successor Chapter, have always been pretty divergent from the fact that they're mainly an 'assault' Chapter which opts to get into combat as fast as possible. Why? Because that's what Sigismund did.
Codex: Blood Angels was just poorly done. The drawback of Death Company in prior editions wasn't kept(namely: they could be anything. Death Company Devastators/Scouts anyone?) and moreover, tons of stupid previously unknown units/vehicles were added.
Basically: with proper design direction and reigning in some of the jackasses working on the books, it would be easy to effectively make the Astartes suitably different in playstyles.
Yeah, Space Marines are so different. These ones use blue paint on their otherwise identical power armor, and these ones use red paint on their... identical power armor, and these over here use bolters... wait... but I mean these over here, they're even bigger Mary Sues than the rest, that makes them unique little snowflakes, doesn't it? It doesn't? It just makes them even more ridiculous and generic? Huh...
VoidAngel wrote:
No, you misunderstand me. You don't renew all the books every year - just in the year following the release of a new edition.
THEN (so that things don't get stale, as Starship Captain suggests they might) - you release codex list and unit updates every few months via that internet thing (as SumYungGui suggests). These could not only be fixes to problems, but added units, configurations, or rules that let you build an alternate army.
Whilst it would be very much advantageous that all the books were brought up-to-date together (preferably right after when new core rules are released), there are several problems:
First of all, GW playerbase have been spoiled by through, elaborate armybooks with tons of fluff, wargear, pretty pics, etc. All the attempts by GW to simplify the books so they can be produced quicker have been met with disapproval. Even if you (rightfully) mock the lack of playtesting, merely writing all the fluff, unit entries, wargear descriptions etc. is a major undertaking. You could, of course, just release barebone codices, but people would whine, just like they did before when GW tried it.
Second, GW tends to coincide release of new figs with the new armybooks which contain said units, which is an excellent way to promote them. If they were all released together, they would be just a giant mass with no standouts.
Third, the idea of "constant upgrading" is quite frankly a terrible one. Most players don't constantly press Refresh on their browsers to stay up-to-date with latest developments. Many are away months/years, then dust off the figs and start again, and check if the armybook is changed and which of their favourite units and figs are still usable. Most likely little has changed. They do NOT want to hear that they will have to go to GW website and read up half a dozen little addendum PDF's which contain not only new stuff to their own army, but also new stuff to their regular opponents. "Just what the Hades is that?" "-Oh, that's just the new Storm Eagle mk3 which contains triple-linked Assault gun with cover-ignoring Heckfire rounds. Oh, you didn't know that all the Marines have FNP nowadays? It was added 2 months ago."
PP managed to pull off all of the things which you are stating is impossible/stupid/less than ideal with their Mk2 re-tooling and their sales, by all accounts, appear to be soaring.
They are big enough that it could be done. There's less in a codex than there is in an issue of White Dwarf - yet they manage to put that out every month. Personally, I would LIKE them to stop writing fluff - it all exists already, and they've totally forgotten how to do it properly.
Regarding the second: no, you drive sales for existing models with books. It works better, and is cheaper. You release new models when they are ready. They will still sell.
Regarding the third: Tournament players will be up to date, causal players will be up to date or won't care. Either way, little harm done. There won't be a "half dozen PDFs for each army". You're exaggerating.
Kanluwen wrote:Basically: with proper design direction and reigning in some of the jackasses working on the books, it would be easy to effectively make the Astartes suitably different in playstyles.
A-freaking-men.
However, I think your understanding of the Guard is somewhat flawed. Be advised, this is a long post.
Sure, their basic equipment may be similar....if by "basic" you mean "lasgun." Even those lasguns have multiple different models and configurations. Granted, the difference between the Cadian's M36 Lasgun and the Catachan's Mk. 4 Lascarbine is, in game terms, very limited. Well, it can be; a carbine would be far more handy in the close-quarters firefights that Catachans engage in. Anyways. The Guard codex also speaks of the, "much sought after variable power setting Triplex pattern," and my memories of the Inquisitor/Dark Heresy books has a third Lasgun variant with in-game (for Inquisitor/Dark Heresy) differences. So, not all Lasguns are the same. As for the other equipment, well....their may not be variants in heavy and special weapons, but the old Guard Codex did lay out which regiments had a predilection for which special and heavy weapons. Soooo....not all Guard armies will be equipped the same.
Organization is somewhat more fickle. Guard regiments are organized by their planet of origin's war-making culture. Sure, Cadian units have company command squads commanding the company, and platoon command squads leading platoons. However, the Catachans, in their codex, specifically did not have platoon command squads. Above the company level (i.e. in the battalion or regimental range), there can be other differences in organization; number of companies to the battalion or regiment, heavy weapons companies, other specialist companies, whether or not there is organic armor or heavy artillery, and so on and so forth.
As for their training and operation, you can't be more wrong. Like, literally, cannot be more wrong.
First of all, Guard specialists are not, I say again, not, penny-packaged in platoons. They are deployed as regiments. There is absolutely no mention in the Imperial Guard codex about specialists being deployed in anything less than company strength. The one possible exception addresses remnants, i.e. combining battle-depleted units together to get a unit into fighting shape.
Second, your statement that specialists are rare is exceedingly questionable. Catachans are a specialist unit type, and there are numerous Catachan regiments. Furthermore, in the Catachan codex, it addressed at least half a dozen other worlds which boast jungle fighters. Seeing as the Imperium of Man has a crapton of worlds, there is very little reason to believe that there are only a handful of jungle deathworlds out there. Hell, what about the Armageddon Ork Fighters? They were pretty proficient in jungle warfare as well, and jungle only covers a part of Armageddon.
Third, your supposition that all Guard regiments fight alike (your exact words were, "their training....will not vary") demonstrates shocking ignorance. How does a unit of jungle fighters or light infantry, whose entire job revolves around patrols, ambushes, infiltration, and raids, have similar training to mechanized infantry, who can deliver an incredible amount of combat power very quickly? Are you saying Basic Rifle Marksmanship is the extant of all Guard training?
Developing this further, I can tell you from experience that not all infantry divisions are the same. I wrote my Master's thesis on the Logistics of the 101st Airborne Division in the First Gulf War. As a part of it, I had to address the capabilities of the Air Assault Division. Simply put, an Air Assault unit fights drastically different from a Mechanized, Airborne, or Light division. They all have their strengths and weaknesses, and thus, their own doctrine. An Air Assault division, for example, has an incredible amount of mobility; in the First Gulf War, for example, within 38 hours of the commencement of the ground war the 101st moved one brigade 90 miles into Iraq and set up a forward operating/refueling base for its helicopters, and positioned another brigade 155 miles into Iraq, astride the Iraqi main east-west Highway 8. The cost of that mobility, though, is high fuel consumption, a greater vulnerability to weather factors (a massive sandstorm shut down helicopter operations, for example). The 24th Infantry, 1st Infantry, and 1st and 2nd Marines all fought in the Gulf War, and each of them fought in their own manner; 24th Mech covered the left (west) flank of VII Corps, the Big Red One breached the Iraqi fortifications and attacked with their tanks and Bradleys, and the Marines carried out a far slower breach of the Iraqi lines.
Thinking about it, I'd like to relate another story told to me by a vet. He had spent the bulk of his time in Ranger regiments. He transferred to another unit (it might have been the 101st) eventually, though. He was on an exercise, and tasked to "attack" an objective. He drew on his extensive experience with the Rangers, figured that "Attack" and "Raid" were the same thing (they are, right? They both involve doing great amounts of violence to people at a certain spot), and planned and launched an offensive, "like they had never seen." His word, by the way. After capturing the objective, he then began to carry out the remainder of his plan. His commander came over to him and asked him what he was doing. He responded with, "We captured the objective, now we have to get the hell off it!" His commander then calmly explained the difference between, "Attack" and "Raid." Well, calmly compared to a Commissar.
Summary: Attack and Raid are not the same thing, and experience in one unit type will not necessarily translate well to another, because units operate in different manners.
Now, bringing it back to 40k, the various kinds of Guard infantry are in no way, shape, or form the same. The Death Korps of Krieg are known for their attrition tactics. The Steel Legion are known for their swift mechanized assaults. The Tallaran are known for their hit-and-run raids, both with infantry and with vehicles. Elysians practice DEATH FROM ABOVE! The disciplined Cadian regiments are in stark contrast with the Salvar Chem Dogs. If nothing else, please try to explain to me how the rank-and-file, volley-firing Moridian Iron Guard are in any way, shape, or form similar in fighting method to the renowned light infantry of the Tanith First-and-Only.
Just because the Guard players in your area play similar kinds of armies does NOT mean that all of the Imperial Guard is the same. They effectively gave us a Cadian codex, when there are several other armies/fighting styles/doctrines/whatever that are available, but Games Workshop will not do because a.) Their lack of knowledge of military affairs is nauseating, and b.) They are too busy cramming Space Marines down our throats. Honestly. Last year, how many months featured the release of a Space Marine model of some kind? I'd be willing to bet quite a few.
Now, to address your points about the Dark Angels, how are Dark Angels NOT Codex Astartes? Their First Company is filled with Terminators, rather than veterans, and their Tenth Company scouts are mounted on bikes, rather than walking. Massive changes, surely. So large they can be summed up in a paragraph. Something along the lines of, "If you play a Dark Angles Deathwing army, you may take Terminators as troops, but cannot take [whatever]. If you play a Dark Angels Ravenwing army, you may take bikes as troops, but may not take [whatever]. If you play a Dark Angles army that is not Deathwing or Ravenwing, follow Codex: Space Marines, but the following units have the Stubborn special rule at 1 point per model: [list units here]." If I missed something, well, I apologize for not knowing the fluff that GW adds so that all of the Marine units look like they can be different.
However, I do agree with your assessments about the other Space Marines codicies. Especially the Blood Angels one. I saw red quite frequently when I saw the multitude of stupid special rules, gimmicks, and vehicles. Freakin' Loyalist Khornates. Out of curiosity, how did you feel about the last Space Marine 'dex? The one where you could choose divergences and whatnot? I liked that; it allowed someone to...make a chapter that tailored to their tastes. Like the Guard codex of that time. Except that both the Marine and Guard codicies had choices that were stupidly over- or under-powered or -costed.
edit:
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:Yeah, Space Marines are so different. These ones use blue paint on their otherwise identical power armor, and these ones use red paint on their... identical power armor, and these over here use bolters... wait... but I mean these over here, they're even bigger Mary Sues than the rest, that makes them unique little snowflakes, doesn't it? It doesn't? It just makes them even more ridiculous and generic? Huh...
Well said.
edit2: If you REALLY dispute the whole, "different kinds of infantry fight in different ways" thing, I would advise you to find some Field Manuals on the topic. You can see for yourself. Might even learn something.
edit3: You could also read some military history. Check out World War II. German, Soviet, Japanese, British, American, Italian armies, all fought differently. Sometimes even differences between units of the same type. Flames of War is quite tasty in this regard.
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:Yeah, Space Marines are so different. These ones use blue paint on their otherwise identical power armor, and these ones use red paint on their... identical power armor, and these over here use bolters... wait... but I mean these over here, they're even bigger Mary Sues than the rest, that makes them unique little snowflakes, doesn't it? It doesn't? It just makes them even more ridiculous and generic? Huh...
Well said.
No, it's not well said, it's totally ignorant of the core background of the game. The OP OBVIOUSLY only has an interest in the rules and models. This does not make him right.
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:As opposed to the giant mutant space monks, who all originate from the same single person, who all use identical equipment that they've used for ten thousand years, and who all fight in exactly the same way that they've fought for ten thousand years (that is to say, with all the tactical acumen of a brick)?
Space Marines are all identical. Guard regiments vary radically from planet to planet, due to variations in resources and culture.
Shows how little you actually know regarding the Guard.
The appearance of the equipment used by Guard regiments will "vary radically from planet to planet".
Their training, organization, and basic equipment make-up will not vary.
In rare circumstances, such as the Death Korps of Krieg you'll find different vehicles like the Centaurs in lieu of Chimeras or you'll find a regiment like the Elysian Drop Troops and the Tanith First & Only.
But they are actually rare and due to their specialist nature, highly valued and split amongst various commands. At most, an Imperial 'army' will have access to a few platoons worth of those regiments. They're not necessarily fielded en masse, but are fielded as a kind of 'leveler' when their skills are necessitated by the situation at hand.
An Imperial Crusade, however, might be able to request the full Regiment--but it's not going to happen often.
That's... really kind of the opposite of what the fluff implies. Gameplay suggests that, because every guard army, excluding those rare ones with variant rules (like the death korps) follows the exact same rules, but all the fluff I've read that involved Guardsmen to any extent beyond "and there were totally guardsmen there and stuff, now moving on..." suggests a radical difference in the loadout and general training of different regiments, since they are all equipped and initially trained on their own worlds, after all.
No, actually it doesn't.
Because the Imperial Guard, no matter where they're raised, all fall under the provision of the Munitorum. The Munitorum supplies them with the equipment and training personnel, usually drawn up from existing Imperial Guard regiments' pool of wounded or 'retired' personnel.
At the absolute most, you see different lasgun patterns with different sized power packs, uniforms that are cut differently, etc.
It doesn't, however, mean that the regiment is effectively 'unique'--unless the Munitorum explicitly allows the Regiment to be raised as a specialist Regiment.
And Imperial Armor isn't generally considered usable, or at least much less so than the main codices.
Actually, Imperial Armour is 100% legal for pick-up games et all. It's considered common courtesy to inform your opponent you plan on using it, and having the book and related FAQs on hand so they can reference it whenever an issue arises.
Tournament Organizers, however, have the final say so as to whether something is or isn't 'legal' for that tournament. A TO could ban the use of Codex: Space Wolves, Tyranids, etc if they so chose.
Nothing and everything is legal for pickup games. From reading here, I get the impression that they're generally not accepted in either casual pickup games or tournaments.
As I said:
Suddenly springing it on someone is seen as bad form. Tournaments can allow or disallow whatever they feel like, and there's a stigma amongst TOs that it's all "overpowered and unbalancing" when that couldn't be further from the truth in most cases.
Yeah, Space Marines are so different. These ones use blue paint on their otherwise identical power armor, and these ones use red paint on their... identical power armor, and these over here use bolters... wait... but I mean these over here, they're even bigger Mary Sues than the rest, that makes them unique little snowflakes, doesn't it? It doesn't? It just makes them even more ridiculous and generic? Huh...
'Yeah, Imperial Guard are so different. These ones use green paint on their otherwise identical flak armor, and these ones use grey paint on their identical flak armor, and these over here use lots of tanks...wait...but I mean these over here, they're even bigger Mary Sues than the rest, that makes them unique little snowflakes, doesn't it? It doesn't? It just makes them even more ridiculous and generic? Huh...'
Speaking as a Guard player: I can make pretty much any existing regiment using the standard Codex. The only thing that sets the Elysians and Death Korps apart from the standard Codex is that they've had their background fully explored and realized by Forge World.
If the other Marine books had it done properly, you would see a very different game. As it is: the half-assed job done by the studio design team shows.
Kanluwen wrote:
The appearance of the equipment used by Guard regiments will "vary radically from planet to planet".
Their training, organization, and basic equipment make-up will not vary.
Um, have you read any of the Codex: Imperial Guard books?
They *very specifically* go out of their way to state there are huge differences in equipment and training, some going to war as highly trained elite infantry and some going to war with little better than some draft papers and being hastily trained on-ship while en-route to a warzone. The only piece of wargear even close to being universal is the Lasgun.
To quote C:IG 3.5E "within the Imperium, the sheer diversity of ancient cultures breeds countless types of soldier within the Imperial Guard"
Pretty much every C:IG has gone to great lengths to explain that the training and organization of the IG varies tremendously. There are conscript horde regiments of many tens or hundreds of thousands of troops and elite infantry regiments of only a couple thousand, armored regiments which may consist of a few hundred, etc. All with different background, training, equipment, and organization.
In rare circumstances, such as the Death Korps of Krieg you'll find different vehicles like the Centaurs in lieu of Chimeras or you'll find a regiment like the Elysian Drop Troops and the Tanith First & Only.
But they are actually rare and due to their specialist nature, highly valued and split amongst various commands. At most, an Imperial 'army' will have access to a few platoons worth of those regiments. They're not necessarily fielded en masse, but are fielded as a kind of 'leveler' when their skills are necessitated by the situation at hand.
An Imperial Crusade, however, might be able to request the full Regiment--but it's not going to happen often.
Krieg's entire purpose is to turn out soldiers for the Imperial Guard, such regiments may be "rare" next to say, Infantry Regiments trained to the Cadian standard, but they're going to be a damn sight more common than the Astartes as a whole and certainly more than any singular chapter.
The intent of Dark Angels was to, originally, be the only way to field large quantities of Terminators/Bikers and having troops that excelled in firebases.
This only became part of the Dark Angels thing with their 3E book. That's not what the Dark Angels faction was created for.
Which is, frankly, what the Unforgiven are all about. They're stubborn and unyielding defenders who will fight to the last man pouring on disciplined bolter fire and fielding large quantities of Plasma weaponry, with the additional point of they don't usually field 'assault' troops outside of Terminator Armour.
Where is the fluff that they so favor huge quantities of plasma weaponry?
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:As opposed to the giant mutant space monks, who all originate from the same single person, who all use identical equipment that they've used for ten thousand years, and who all fight in exactly the same way that they've fought for ten thousand years (that is to say, with all the tactical acumen of a brick)?
Space Marines are all identical. Guard regiments vary radically from planet to planet, due to variations in resources and culture.
Shows how little you actually know regarding the Guard.
The appearance of the equipment used by Guard regiments will "vary radically from planet to planet".
Their training, organization, and basic equipment make-up will not vary.
In rare circumstances, such as the Death Korps of Krieg you'll find different vehicles like the Centaurs in lieu of Chimeras or you'll find a regiment like the Elysian Drop Troops and the Tanith First & Only.
Thats substantially wrong on both fluff and gaming levels. Respectfully, re-read the codexes, you'll note the fluff showing a plethora of varied regiment types, makeup, and tactics. The whole point of doctrines was to codify a sampling of the many differences in organization, makeup, and training.
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:As opposed to the giant mutant space monks, who all originate from the same single person, who all use identical equipment that they've used for ten thousand years, and who all fight in exactly the same way that they've fought for ten thousand years (that is to say, with all the tactical acumen of a brick)?
Space Marines are all identical. Guard regiments vary radically from planet to planet, due to variations in resources and culture.
Shows how little you actually know regarding the Guard.
The appearance of the equipment used by Guard regiments will "vary radically from planet to planet".
Their training, organization, and basic equipment make-up will not vary.
In rare circumstances, such as the Death Korps of Krieg you'll find different vehicles like the Centaurs in lieu of Chimeras or you'll find a regiment like the Elysian Drop Troops and the Tanith First & Only.
Thats substantially wrong on both fluff and gaming levels. Respectfully, re-read the codexes, you'll note the fluff showing a plethora of varied regiment types, makeup, and tactics. The whole point of doctrines was to codify a sampling of the many differences in organization, makeup, and training.
Yep, the Codex even makes a point in certain areas to express that certain regiments are noted for certain tactics and specializations they use.
Kanluwen wrote:Basically: with proper design direction and reigning in some of the jackasses working on the books, it would be easy to effectively make the Astartes suitably different in playstyles.
A-freaking-men.
However, I think your understanding of the Guard is somewhat flawed. Be advised, this is a long post.
Sure, their basic equipment may be similar....if by "basic" you mean "lasgun." Even those lasguns have multiple different models and configurations. Granted, the difference between the Cadian's M36 Lasgun and the Catachan's Mk. 4 Lascarbine is, in game terms, very limited. Well, it can be; a carbine would be far more handy in the close-quarters firefights that Catachans engage in. Anyways. The Guard codex also speaks of the, "much sought after variable power setting Triplex pattern," and my memories of the Inquisitor/Dark Heresy books has a third Lasgun variant with in-game (for Inquisitor/Dark Heresy) differences. So, not all Lasguns are the same. As for the other equipment, well....their may not be variants in heavy and special weapons, but the old Guard Codex did lay out which regiments had a predilection for which special and heavy weapons. Soooo....not all Guard armies will be equipped the same.
Actually yes. All lasguns are the same. The 'Triplex pattern' was basically a joke. Every pattern of lasgun has 'variable fire settings'.
Organization is somewhat more fickle. Guard regiments are organized by their planet of origin's war-making culture. Sure, Cadian units have company command squads commanding the company, and platoon command squads leading platoons. However, the Catachans, in their codex, specifically did not have platoon command squads. Above the company level (i.e. in the battalion or regimental range), there can be other differences in organization; number of companies to the battalion or regiment, heavy weapons companies, other specialist companies, whether or not there is organic armor or heavy artillery, and so on and so forth.
You're talking about Catachans in their little tiny Codex.
That was replaced when we saw the next IG book. And it's still not applicable in that regard.
As for "organic armor or heavy artillery"--no. That's not how it works. The Krieg "Siege" regiments are one of the few that actively have artillery rolled within their organization. Most Regiments will have a complimentary Regiment founded at the same time that will commonly be fielded with them.
As for their training and operation, you can't be more wrong. Like, literally, cannot be more wrong.
First of all, Guard specialists are not, I say again, not, penny-packaged in platoons. They are deployed as regiments. There is absolutely no mention in the Imperial Guard codex about specialists being deployed in anything less than company strength. The one possible exception addresses remnants, i.e. combining battle-depleted units together to get a unit into fighting shape.
Yeah...maybe you should try reading something other than simply the Codex before trying to call me wrong. Specifically: Imperial Armour 8 makes mention of the Raven Guard having to fight to get an entire regiment of Elysian Drop Troops for a surgical raid that could decapitate the potential warmaking ability of a Waagh!. In the end, they had to essentially 'trade' the services of the Raven Guard for the Elysians.
Second, your statement that specialists are rare is exceedingly questionable. Catachans are a specialist unit type, and there are numerous Catachan regiments. Furthermore, in the Catachan codex, it addressed at least half a dozen other worlds which boast jungle fighters. Seeing as the Imperium of Man has a crapton of worlds, there is very little reason to believe that there are only a handful of jungle deathworlds out there. Hell, what about the Armageddon Ork Fighters? They were pretty proficient in jungle warfare as well, and jungle only covers a part of Armageddon.
The Armageddon Ork Fighters were an example of a rare exception. Was the entire Steel Legion dropping down into the jungle?
No?
Huh. How about that. Rare exception.
And once again: Catachan Codex is inapplicable.
Third, your supposition that all Guard regiments fight alike (your exact words were, "their training....will not vary") demonstrates shocking ignorance. How does a unit of jungle fighters or light infantry, whose entire job revolves around patrols, ambushes, infiltration, and raids, have similar training to mechanized infantry, who can deliver an incredible amount of combat power very quickly? Are you saying Basic Rifle Marksmanship is the extant of all Guard training?
You really are just looking to pick a fight, huh?
"Units of jungle fighters or light infantry" are considered specialist regiments. They're deployed piecemeal to the front as needed, not all at once.
Summary: Attack and Raid are not the same thing, and experience in one unit type will not necessarily translate well to another, because units operate in different manners.
Good thing I said nothing whatsoever about that huh?
The 'basic' Guard regiment is the Cadian example--which is what the Imperial Guard Codex represents. It's made up of hardened line infantry, who
Now, bringing it back to 40k, the various kinds of Guard infantry are in no way, shape, or form the same. The Death Korps of Krieg are known for their attrition tactics. The Steel Legion are known for their swift mechanized assaults. The Tallarn are known for their hit-and-run raids, both with infantry and with vehicles. Elysians practice DEATH FROM ABOVE! The disciplined Cadian regiments are in stark contrast with the Salvar Chem Dogs. If nothing else, please try to explain to me how the rank-and-file, volley-firing Mordian Iron Guard are in any way, shape, or form similar in fighting method to the renowned light infantry of the Tanith First-and-Only.
You do know that you didn't even get those things right, yeah?
Death Korps of Krieg are principally known for their siege warfare tactics. Attrition is a part of it, but not for the reason you think. The Death Korps are for all intents and purposes a 'penitent' force. They're actively trying to atone for sins committed by their planet; namely it rebelled against the Imperium.
The Steel Legion, while known for 'mechanized assaults' are more known for the fact that they're a mechanized force.
The Tallarn are known for guerilla tactics, but more specifically, their ability to adapt to desert worlds.
Elysians are actually not primarily "DEATH FROM ABOVE!" in the style of the 101st Airborne in WWII. They are more the Air Cavalry circa Vietnam or the modern Army Air Mobile forces. They're known for the fact that they have large amounts of Valkyries and Vultures actually crewed by their own people, and within their direct chain of command. Anything else they still have to get from the Imperial Navy.
Cadians and Savlar Chem Dogs are, you're right, as far from each other as you can get in terms of the overall discipline. However Cadian Regiments do still have the 'trophy' mentality going on, with many troopers packing weaponry that they scavenged from the field and had rededicated and blessed. The Cadians are, if nothing else, practical.
The last example is a perfect example of it seems like you entirely missed the point of Specialist Regiments.
The Tanith, while called 'light infantry' by the playerbase...really aren't. They wear the same flak jackets as the rest of the Guard and they have the same overall weaponry(although eschewing the heavier emplaced weapons in favor of missile launchers so that they have something more portable--but again: this isn't uncommon. Many regiments, even in the fluff, will use weaponry that they feel is complimentary to their abilities) as the rest of the Guard. The only real difference in the Tanith is the situation that they found themselves in. They, originally, were to be the first full Founding(3 Regiments) from Tanith, and they were to be fielded as line infantry who also had a predilection towards stealth and insurgency.
Only one Regiment made it off world, and the Tanith were pretty much left out to dry afterwards.
Just because the Guard players in your area play similar kinds of armies does NOT mean that all of the Imperial Guard is the same. They effectively gave us a Cadian codex, when there are several other armies/fighting styles/doctrines/whatever that are available, but Games Workshop will not do because a.) Their lack of knowledge of military affairs is nauseating, and b.) They are too busy cramming Space Marines down our throats. Honestly. Last year, how many months featured the release of a Space Marine model of some kind? I'd be willing to bet quite a few.
If you want to play something with "knowledge of military affairs", I suggest historicals.
And where did I ever say anything about the "Guard players in my area"?
Fun fact: I have more Dark Eldar and Xenos players in my area than Marine/Guard. I am, at last count, the only regular Guard player.
As for "they effectively gave us a Cadian codex"...no, they didn't.
A Cadian Codex would have the Kasrkin and Whiteshield platoons in it.
Kasrkin, as an example, are far better trained and equipped Stormtroopers who have genetic modifications that put them on par with the Halo universe's Spartans.
Whiteshield platoons are groups of Cadian Youth organized into platoons, supervised by fully 'shielded' Guardsmen who oversee their training outside of combat and ensure that they don't break in combat.
Now, to address your points about the Dark Angels, how are Dark Angels NOT Codex Astartes? Their First Company is filled with Terminators, rather than veterans, and their Tenth Company scouts are mounted on bikes, rather than walking.Massive changes, surely. So large they can be summed up in a paragraph. Something along the lines of, "If you play a Dark Angels Deathwing army, you may take Terminators as troops, but cannot take [whatever]. If you play a Dark Angels Ravenwing army, you may take bikes as troops, but may not take [whatever]. If you play a Dark Angels army that is not Deathwing or Ravenwing, follow Codex: Space Marines, but the following units have the Stubborn special rule at 1 point per model: [list units here]." If I missed something, well, I apologize for not knowing the fluff that GW adds so that all of the Marine units look like they can be different.
Actually, their "10th Company Scouts" aren't the ones mounted on bikes. That's the 2nd Company.
As in the entire Second Company.
Their Scouts, if you go by the fluff, are also commonly operating alongside the 2nd Company or preparing the way for a 1st Company Teleport Assault.
The problem is most of the fluff we have for Dark Angels isn't actually represented within their Codex. It's been more fleshed out in the Deathwatch RPG or the two Horus Heresy novels.
However, I do agree with your assessments about the other Space Marines codicies. Especially the Blood Angels one. I saw red quite frequently when I saw the multitude of stupid special rules, gimmicks, and vehicles. Freakin' Loyalist Khornates. Out of curiosity, how did you feel about the last Space Marine 'dex? The one where you could choose divergences and whatnot? I liked that; it allowed someone to...make a chapter that tailored to their tastes. Like the Guard codex of that time. Except that both the Marine and Guard codicies had choices that were stupidly over- or under-powered or -costed.
The Marine Codex was a good first try...but it allowed too many abuses. Same as the Guard codices. That they opted to just go in a different direction speaks volumes of how badly it was done.
If you REALLY dispute the whole, "different kinds of infantry fight in different ways" thing, I would advise you to find some Field Manuals on the topic. You can see for yourself. Might even learn something.
And I would advise you to realize that the Imperial Guard doesn't really follow field manuals that you'd see in a modern army
Kanluwen wrote:
The appearance of the equipment used by Guard regiments will "vary radically from planet to planet".
Their training, organization, and basic equipment make-up will not vary.
Um, have you read any of the Codex: Imperial Guard books?
Yeah. Have you read anything beyond the Codex?
They *very specifically* go out of their way to state there are huge differences in equipment and training, some going to war as highly trained elite infantry and some going to war with little better than some draft papers and being hastily trained on-ship while en-route to a warzone. The only piece of wargear even close to being universal is the Lasgun.
Not actually true. Flak armor is also universal . The only real 'difference' is how the flak armor is represented. Valhallans' longcoat stuffed with flak plates is just a different 'pattern' than a Cadians' full on body armor.
Very few are the regiments entirely decked out in Carapace Armor or Cameloline. And both are usually specialist regiments formed for a specific purpose.
To quote C:IG 3.5E "within the Imperium, the sheer diversity of ancient cultures breeds countless types of soldier within the Imperial Guard"
So what? Are you going to tell me that the make-up of, say, a culture like the Mordians is different than the Cadians? They're both effectively worlds 'under siege' and breed that warrior mentality.
To think that 'sheer diversity of ancient cultures' won't necessarily breed multiple examples of the same thing is silly.
Pretty much every C:IG has gone to great lengths to explain that the training and organization of the IG varies tremendously. There are conscript horde regiments of many tens or hundreds of thousands of troops and elite infantry regiments of only a couple thousand, armored regiments which may consist of a few hundred, etc. All with different background, training, equipment, and organization.
Except that's BS when you come down to it. The training of the Guard is done by the Munitorum, but almost always are they trained first as those 'conscript horde regiments of many tens or hundreds of thousands of troops'. As time goes on, the regiment may receive more specialized training--or they received it to begin with because they were founded for a specific purpose.
In rare circumstances, such as the Death Korps of Krieg you'll find different vehicles like the Centaurs in lieu of Chimeras or you'll find a regiment like the Elysian Drop Troops and the Tanith First & Only.
But they are actually rare and due to their specialist nature, highly valued and split amongst various commands. At most, an Imperial 'army' will have access to a few platoons worth of those regiments. They're not necessarily fielded en masse, but are fielded as a kind of 'leveler' when their skills are necessitated by the situation at hand.
An Imperial Crusade, however, might be able to request the full Regiment--but it's not going to happen often.
Krieg's entire purpose is to turn out soldiers for the Imperial Guard, such regiments may be "rare" next to say, Infantry Regiments trained to the Cadian standard, but they're going to be a damn sight more common than the Astartes as a whole and certainly more than any singular chapter.
You know, here's the biggest problem I have with that example.
The "Cadian standard" is actually far beyond what the Codex shows. You've got the Kasrkin, they Whiteshields, et all. They were done a grave injustice by not actually being presented in a proper format, and leading to this idea that Cadia is a 'cookie cutter' army.
In reality, many of the infantry regiments(which they even said at one point) use the same pattern of gear to 'imitate' the Cadians and hopefully intimidate their foes.
But yes. You are right that the Guards' specialists are going to be 'a damn sight more common than the Astartes'. However, that doesn't mean that they're just falling out of the skies.
Well, except for the Elysians. That's what they do sometimes, y'know
The intent of Dark Angels was to, originally, be the only way to field large quantities of Terminators/Bikers and having troops that excelled in firebases.
This only became part of the Dark Angels thing with their 3E book. That's not what the Dark Angels faction was created for.
I'm aware of that. But I was meaning with the most recent Dark Angels book; which the intent was to have a way to field the 'Deathwing' and 'Ravenwing', or equivalents of that nature.
Which is, frankly, what the Unforgiven are all about. They're stubborn and unyielding defenders who will fight to the last man pouring on disciplined bolter fire and fielding large quantities of Plasma weaponry, with the additional point of they don't usually field 'assault' troops outside of Terminator Armour.
Where is the fluff that they so favor huge quantities of plasma weaponry?
It's never explicitly been stated, as far as I know. But it's always been a point that they make of "the Dark Angels, unlike many Chapters, can still field examples of Pre-Heresy technology such as large amounts of plasma weaponry".
Automatically Appended Next Post: Apologies for the two big posts. But I felt it had to be clarified a bit.
The biggest problem with the idea that 'Guard could be broken into multiple codices' is simply that Guard are adaptable. They don't get to have the egos of the Astartes when it comes to being told what to do. A Light Infantry Regiment may be told to put on Carapace Armor and go man the trenches, while a Mechanized unit may be told to buck up and foot slog it.
VoidAngel wrote:
They are big enough that it could be done. There's less in a codex than there is in an issue of White Dwarf - yet they manage to put that out every month. Personally, I would LIKE them to stop writing fluff - it all exists already, and they've totally forgotten how to do it properly.
All the fluff which you have read dozens of times in different versions over last 20 years and are sick of, is completely new for someone who starts the game anew. As for quality, all the 3rd edition books I've read have little fluff, and it's generally terrible, compared to newer books.
VoidAngel wrote:
Regarding the second: no, you drive sales for existing models with books. It works better, and is cheaper. You release new models when they are ready. They will still sell.
This makes absolutely no sense at all. Good luck selling models without rules for them.
VoidAngel wrote:
Regarding the third: Tournament players will be up to date, causal players will be up to date or won't care. Either way, little harm done. There won't be a "half dozen PDFs for each army". You're exaggerating.
You are completely underestimating the effort what it takes to stay on top of metagame if everything changes every two months. Contrary to what has been said, releasing a new Codex for some other army is NOT the same. What changes have IG players, for example, made to their lists due to three books released since that? Very little.
Yes, hardcore tournament players will do that. Most players won't. And it does matter, because it makes the whole ruleset environment messy, with players having whatever they printed off GW's website 4 months ago, which is less valid than what was printed last week, but more up-to-date to what year-old rules were. You would have complaints like "I bought these #%¤¤% expensive Vendettas for my army, and they increased points cost to 180 points in the Addendum 2.25 so I have to redo my army again. Gee, thanks a lot, greedy bastads."
However, I do agree with your assessments about the other Space Marines codicies. Especially the Blood Angels one. I saw red quite frequently when I saw the multitude of stupid special rules, gimmicks, and vehicles. Freakin' Loyalist Khornates. Out of curiosity, how did you feel about the last Space Marine 'dex? The one where you could choose divergences and whatnot? I liked that; it allowed someone to...make a chapter that tailored to their tastes. Like the Guard codex of that time. Except that both the Marine and Guard codicies had choices that were stupidly over- or under-powered or -costed.
I wish we could go back to this, rescope and create one Dex. With all of the notable chapters represented in this way.
There is the issue of all that fluff living somewhere I suppose.
Kanluwen wrote:
Yeah. Have you read anything beyond the Codex?\
Yes? Your point? What terribly contradicts the codecies?
Not actually true. Flak armor is also universal . The only real 'difference' is how the flak armor is represented. Valhallans' longcoat stuffed with flak plates is just a different 'pattern' than a Cadians' full on body armor.
Not even then. Some regiments don't even use it, many Catachan's and regiments from primitive worlds like Kanak. When Catachan's *had* their own rules, they had 6+sv's not the Flak 5+.
Very few are the regiments entirely decked out in Carapace Armor or Cameloline. And both are usually specialist regiments formed for a specific purpose.
Which again, given the size of the Imperial Guard, means potentially many tens or hundreds of thousands of regiments consisting of billions of soldiers.
if we're talking about how individual SM chapters get their own books simply for how they field certain troops, that's more than enough difference right there.
So what? Are you going to tell me that the make-up of, say, a culture like the Mordians is different than the Cadians? They're both effectively worlds 'under siege' and breed that warrior mentality.
To think that 'sheer diversity of ancient cultures' won't necessarily breed multiple examples of the same thing is silly.
Certainly not any less so than the loyalist SM books. There could be more than enough between those two worlds to make a book at least as different as C:BA is from C:SM if one wanted to. Not hard to find RL examples of similar technology/industrial base/oppressive military states' armies with significant differences in how their armies work. Look at WW2 with the Red Army versus the Wehrmacht.
Except that's BS when you come down to it. The training of the Guard is done by the Munitorum, but almost always are they trained first as those 'conscript horde regiments of many tens or hundreds of thousands of troops'. As time goes on, the regiment may receive more specialized training--or they received it to begin with because they were founded for a specific purpose.
No, It is the planetary Imperial Commander's responsibility to train and equip troops for the Munitorum to take and use. The Munitorum may provide additional training if required, or sometimes step in and directly do so in special cases, but it's typically the job of the whatever world they come from to train and equip them.
There are many examples of such varied regiments as the hundreds of thousands strong conscript horde. The current book talks about such units when describing the reasons for the variation between regiments.
You know, here's the biggest problem I have with that example.
The "Cadian standard" is actually far beyond what the Codex shows. You've got the Kasrkin, they Whiteshields, et all. They were done a grave injustice by not actually being presented in a proper format, and leading to this idea that Cadia is a 'cookie cutter' army.
The Kasrkin are Stormtroopers trained on Cadia from their ranks instead of through the Schola. Whiteshields are Conscripts/trainees. Not seeing what the problem is, besides the fact that both of those units aren't exactly great given their current rules.
I'm aware of that. But I was meaning with the most recent Dark Angels book; which the intent was to have a way to field the 'Deathwing' and 'Ravenwing', or equivalents of that nature.
Ah ok.
It's never explicitly been stated, as far as I know. But it's always been a point that they make of "the Dark Angels, unlike many Chapters, can still field examples of Pre-Heresy technology such as large amounts of plasma weaponry".
Other than the blurb describing the Plasma Gun in the current DA book wargear section about often taking PG's from armory because of their firepower (not necessarily that this is any more or less so than other chapters), and the fact that with the Index Astartes they could swap a Lascannon for a Plasma Cannon in Tactical squads (before that was a widespread option for SM armies, and no explanation was given) I don't see much that really says much about a preference for plasma weapons in any DA codex or their Index Astartes article.
The biggest problem with the idea that 'Guard could be broken into multiple codices' is simply that Guard are adaptable. They don't get to have the egos of the Astartes when it comes to being told what to do. A Light Infantry Regiment may be told to put on Carapace Armor and go man the trenches, while a Mechanized unit may be told to buck up and foot slog it.
So just because they can be ordered (and thus follow a chain of command and make use of that discipline) to do something else given the circumstances or commanders incapable of taking advantage of their properties, means that they shouldn't have rules where because the SM's won't follow such orders they *need* them?
sourclams wrote:PP managed to pull off all of the things which you are stating is impossible/stupid/less than ideal with their Mk2 re-tooling and their sales, by all accounts, appear to be soaring.
What, they release new rules & models continuously for their existing factions? Seems kinda bizarre to instantly obsolete their elaborate and pricey Force books? As it is, doesn't WM has only like 5 factions?
Generally what PP does, and many other wargames, is they come out with a new edition and a general base army book for each faction or one book containing the basics of all factions, and then they add more stuff as time goes on. When they go to another edition, the stuff that was "expansion" stuff gets incorporated into the base army for the new edition or redone in a different fashion and new things are again added.
Backfire wrote:
All the fluff which you have read dozens of times in different versions over last 20 years and are sick of, is completely new for someone who starts the game anew. As for quality, all the 3rd edition books I've read have little fluff, and it's generally terrible, compared to newer books.
Put it all on the GW site.
Books are for crunch (because paper is a limited and limiting resource in a book), web is for fluff.
That, of course, means that GW will have to acknowledge this "Internet" thing some people have been talking about...
VoidAngel wrote:
They are big enough that it could be done. There's less in a codex than there is in an issue of White Dwarf - yet they manage to put that out every month. Personally, I would LIKE them to stop writing fluff - it all exists already, and they've totally forgotten how to do it properly.
All the fluff which you have read dozens of times in different versions over last 20 years and are sick of, is completely new for someone who starts the game anew. As for quality, all the 3rd edition books I've read have little fluff, and it's generally terrible, compared to newer books.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I'm not saying don't put fluff in the codex, I'm saying you don't need a novella's worth.
VoidAngel wrote:
Regarding the second: no, you drive sales for existing models with books. It works better, and is cheaper. You release new models when they are ready. They will still sell.
This makes absolutely no sense at all. Good luck selling models without rules for them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I'm talking about new models for existing units. You wait to put in totally new units until the next full release (edition of the game). Alternatively, you publish the rules for the unit on the web or *gasp* put them in the box.
VoidAngel wrote:
Regarding the third: Tournament players will be up to date, causal players will be up to date or won't care. Either way, little harm done. There won't be a "half dozen PDFs for each army". You're exaggerating.
You are completely underestimating the effort what it takes to stay on top of metagame if everything changes every two months. Contrary to what has been said, releasing a new Codex for some other army is NOT the same. What changes have IG players, for example, made to their lists due to three books released since that? Very little.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes, I am - because I don't care about the 'metagame'. This is a hobby for crying outloud, not a job! Tournament players I could give a rat's ass about. They tend to do little more than screw up the 'metagame' and piss people off.
Yes, hardcore tournament players will do that. Most players won't. And it does matter, because it makes the whole ruleset environment messy, with players having whatever they printed off GW's website 4 months ago, which is less valid than what was printed last week, but more up-to-date to what year-old rules were. You would have complaints like "I bought these #%¤¤% expensive Vendettas for my army, and they increased points cost to 180 points in the Addendum 2.25 so I have to redo my army again. Gee, thanks a lot, greedy bastads."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>So, if you know you are going down to your FLGS this weekend, how hard is it to consult the website beforehand? *shrug*
Vaktathi wrote:Generally what PP does, and many other wargames, is they come out with a new edition and a general base army book for each faction or one book containing the basics of all factions, and then they add more stuff as time goes on. When they go to another edition, the stuff that was "expansion" stuff gets incorporated into the base army for the new edition or redone in a different fashion and new things are again added.
Yes, but I'm interested on how PP does it in practice since people seem to take them as an example? How often those expansions come, where are they published? Because it seems to me that what PP does is not, in fact, all that much different to what GW does, it's just that their gaming universe is much more compact (so far), with far less all sort of legacy issues.
Books are for crunch (because paper is a limited and limiting resource in a book), web is for fluff.
That, of course, means that GW will have to acknowledge this "Internet" thing some people have been talking about...
I'm sure GW would love to do that, printing books is expensive, but they'd have to re-educate their playerbase first.
If this were 1995, or even 2000 you would be right. But it's 2011 and most people (especially most younger players, the ones who can't recite the fluff backwards and forwards) are well acquainted with the idea of going to a website.
I joke a lot about how technophobic GW is, but there's a grain of truth to it. The re-education would be GW-side, not player-side.
VoidAngel wrote:
You wait to put in totally new units until the next full release (edition of the game). Alternatively, you publish the rules for the unit on the web or *gasp* put them in the box.
And whadda ya know, this is what FW does, and majority of the playerbase ignores it.
VoidAngel wrote:
So, if you know you are going down to your FLGS this weekend, how hard is it to consult the website beforehand? *shrug*
Right, I consult the website, seeing that Land Raider Achilles is now legal for all Marine lists, so I have to put in more anti-tank, except that the latest update changed the points costs, so I have to refigure it all again. No thank you.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Doctor Optimal wrote:
If this were 1995, or even 2000 you would be right. But it's 2011 and most people (especially most younger players, the ones who can't recite the fluff backwards and forwards) are well acquainted with the idea of going to a website.
True. And last thing they do there, is to read lengthy stories from the screen.
.
people play 
) and B) their fluff is so much cooler, love the idea of extending my middle digit at all the emperor worshipers (when not playing guard anyways 
money.