I had this thought today after reading my DA codex, I'm thinking that the current codex for DA will be the last since they are so much like codex marines as far as build goes, and the only thing they have going for them is Deathwing and ravenwing, which could easily be done using a HQ character, while the thought is kind of depressing, it seems logical since all that really seperates them is the fluff.

It would make sense, yes, as the all-biker army and the all-Terminator army can be done by other codices now, and those, really, are the only things that the Dark Angels had to separate them from the pack.

Seaward wrote:It would make sense, yes, as the all-biker army and the all-Terminator army can be done by other codices now, and those, really, are the only things that the Dark Angels had to separate them from the pack.

Ya, and they lost all their fluff rules in 4e

Seaward wrote:It would make sense, yes, as the all-biker army and the all-Terminator army can be done by other codices now, and those, really, are the only things that the Dark Angels had to separate them from the pack.

And like I've said over and over and over and over and over and over whenever this topic gets brought up:

The whole reason that Dark Angels can be put into Space Marines is because Space Marines came after Dark Angels and the idea of "signature units" like the Sanguinary Guard, Wolf Guard, etc was not considered when creating Dark Angels.

The absolute closest that Dark Angels got was the Company Veterans, which really were just the same as the previous edition veterans. They went with the idea of "signature formations" for DA, but they kind of fethed the pooch with it.

Kanluwen wrote:

Seaward wrote:It would make sense, yes, as the all-biker army and the all-Terminator army can be done by other codices now, and those, really, are the only things that the Dark Angels had to separate them from the pack.

And like I've said over and over and over and over and over and over whenever this topic gets brought up:

The whole reason that Dark Angels can be put into Space Marines is because Space Marines came after Dark Angels and the idea of "signature units" like the Sanguinary Guard, Wolf Guard, etc was not considered when creating Dark Angels.

The absolute closest that Dark Angels got was the Company Veterans, which really were just the same as the previous edition veterans. They went with the idea of "signature formations" for DA, but they kind of fethed the pooch with it.

Huh I did not know they came first.

Should DA be merged with the SM codex? Only if SW, BA, BT, GK are as well.

Can be done quite easily and none of the codex, outside of fluff, truly warrant a unique codex. A few FOC swaps and changes to how units work (allow tacticals to have terminator armor for +XXX pts. Elite GK unit would get termy option as above and if you have a librarian HQ, they are troops just as an idea) would be enough to make any codex work.

The few things that wouldn't work and aren't shared between the marines (or easily transferable to the above mentioned system) really shouldn't exist in the first place as they're quite broken, quite stupid, and just don't make sense for a 40k army. Things like Dreadknights, Thunderwolf cavalry, and priests fall into this category.

Nvs wrote:Should DA be merged with the SM codex? Only if SW, BA, BT, GK are as well.

Can be done quite easily and none of the codex, outside of fluff, truly warrant a unique codex. A few FOC swaps and changes to how units work (allow tacticals to have terminator armor for +XXX pts. Elite GK unit would get termy option as above and if you have a librarian HQ, they are troops just as an idea) would be enough to make any codex work.

The few things that wouldn't work and aren't shared between the marines (or easily transferable to the above mentioned system) really shouldn't exist in the first place as they're quite broken, quite stupid, and just don't make sense for a 40k army. Things like Dreadknights, Thunderwolf cavalry, and priests fall into this category.

Nah. Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Black Templars all have enough significant differences that they'd lose quite a bit if rolled into the SM 'dex. I'm not sure how you'd go about proposing to give every Marine psyker status to represent the Grey Knights using just that book, either.

The seperate codeci are supposed to represent different organisational structures. Only SW and BT actually fall into this catagory.
If you had an overall Marine codex it would have to be pretty big...

Nvs wrote:Should DA be merged with the SM codex? Only if SW, BA, BT, GK are as well.

Can be done quite easily and none of the codex, outside of fluff, truly warrant a unique codex. A few FOC swaps and changes to how units work (allow tacticals to have terminator armor for +XXX pts. Elite GK unit would get termy option as above and if you have a librarian HQ, they are troops just as an idea) would be enough to make any codex work.

The few things that wouldn't work and aren't shared between the marines (or easily transferable to the above mentioned system) really shouldn't exist in the first place as they're quite broken, quite stupid, and just don't make sense for a 40k army. Things like Dreadknights, Thunderwolf cavalry, and priests fall into this category.

Difference is however those factions have both unique rules for them and trully unique units (lone wolves, furioso dread, sword brethren, dreadknight as examples) wherein DA has no unique units, and no unique rules

Wardragoon wrote:

Nvs wrote:Should DA be merged with the SM codex? Only if SW, BA, BT, GK are as well.

Can be done quite easily and none of the codex, outside of fluff, truly warrant a unique codex. A few FOC swaps and changes to how units work (allow tacticals to have terminator armor for +XXX pts. Elite GK unit would get termy option as above and if you have a librarian HQ, they are troops just as an idea) would be enough to make any codex work.

The few things that wouldn't work and aren't shared between the marines (or easily transferable to the above mentioned system) really shouldn't exist in the first place as they're quite broken, quite stupid, and just don't make sense for a 40k army. Things like Dreadknights, Thunderwolf cavalry, and priests fall into this category.

Difference is however those factions have both unique rules for them and trully unique units (lone wolves, furioso dread, sword brethren, dreadknight as examples) wherein DA has no unique units, and no unique rules

Interrogator Chaplains? No? Thats not enough to qualify? Well they had Deathwing and Ravenwing, which my guess is will be beefed up versions of the existing options. In any case, none of the other SM forces really had unique units until their current incarnations. Half the units in the Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Grey Knight books did not exist until this edition. GW could easily create another batch of new units for the DA.

purplefood wrote:The seperate codeci are supposed to represent different organisational structures. Only SW and BT actually fall into this catagory.
If you had an overall Marine codex it would have to be pretty big...

Not that big. Almost all the vehicles are shared, you could combine many of them (e.g. Furioso and Ironclad, Rune Priest and Librarian) and simply do something at the beginning of the list that says "your HQ must declare which chapter it belongs to, in which case it has the following options and the following units will have some different options as described in their entry". It really wouldn't be that hard, and you'd be able to cut out many of the things that are different simply for the sake of being different and have no real reason to be different. The Wolf Guard sergeant thing for example, aside from simply being a really cheap sergeant with really cheap options and an expanded wargear selection, why does it need to be taken from one unit and spread amongst others instead of just having a sergeant upgrade option in the units entry?

As for DA's, you could swap them entirely into C:SM and all you'd really have to do is add in the SC's, and combine Tac & Assault terminator entries, which honestly are a rather artificial difference in the first place.

Well as Kanluwen said, they don't have unique things because their codex was designed with a different mindset. If you compare their codex to the previous wolves, BA, etc then you'll see they have about as much difference as those do.

As for not being able to? As I said, some of the things that are unique shouldn't even exist. Thunderwolf cav, dreadknights, and priests are probably some of the silliest things added to the marines in a long while.

Other things that are unique aren't unique enough to warrant a book. Furioso dreads for example could just be a type of dread you buy. Downgrade them to 2x dccw == furioso even and call it a day.

Devastators likely shouldn't be able to shoot multiple targets regardless so there goes the need for long fangs.

Grey Hunters and BT Brorthers could be done by making elite scouts actually elite as they'd have roughly the same rules and stat lines then.

I mean I know this is going to nerf some things to make it fit, but the game as a whole would be better off with a single Codex: Adeptus Astartes then it would be to try and justify needing a GK, BT, DA, SW, BA, etc book. Especially when the next edition is right around the corner and the change could be done properly and marines actually be balanced against the other armies as a whole instead of some being poor, some being fair, and most being lol.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Wardragoon wrote:

Nvs wrote:Should DA be merged with the SM codex? Only if SW, BA, BT, GK are as well.

Can be done quite easily and none of the codex, outside of fluff, truly warrant a unique codex. A few FOC swaps and changes to how units work (allow tacticals to have terminator armor for +XXX pts. Elite GK unit would get termy option as above and if you have a librarian HQ, they are troops just as an idea) would be enough to make any codex work.

The few things that wouldn't work and aren't shared between the marines (or easily transferable to the above mentioned system) really shouldn't exist in the first place as they're quite broken, quite stupid, and just don't make sense for a 40k army. Things like Dreadknights, Thunderwolf cavalry, and priests fall into this category.

Difference is however those factions have both unique rules for them and trully unique units (lone wolves, furioso dread, sword brethren, dreadknight as examples) wherein DA has no unique units, and no unique rules

Interrogator Chaplains? No? Thats not enough to qualify? Well they had Deathwing and Ravenwing, which my guess is will be beefed up versions of the existing options. In any case, none of the other SM forces really had unique units until their current incarnations. Half the units in the Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Grey Knight books did not exist until this edition. GW could easily create another batch of new units for the DA.

Didn't exist until this edition?
Have you seen the previous SW codex?
They have 1 entirely new unit and that is the TWC.
2 New characters in Arjac and Lukas.
Everything else was in the previous codex and probably older editions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Vaktathi wrote:

purplefood wrote:The seperate codeci are supposed to represent different organisational structures. Only SW and BT actually fall into this catagory.
If you had an overall Marine codex it would have to be pretty big...

Not that big. Almost all the vehicles are shared, you could combine many of them (e.g. Furioso and Ironclad, Rune Priest and Librarian) and simply do something at the beginning of the list that says "your HQ must declare which chapter it belongs to, in which case it has the following options and the following units will have some different options as described in their entry". It really wouldn't be that hard, and you'd be able to cut out many of the things that are different simply for the sake of being different and have no real reason to be different. The Wolf Guard sergeant thing for example, aside from simply being a really cheap sergeant with really cheap options and an expanded wargear selection, why does it need to be taken from one unit and spread amongst others instead of just having a sergeant upgrade option in the units entry?

As for DA's, you could swap them entirely into C:SM and all you'd really have to do is add in the SC's, and combine Tac & Assault terminator entries, which honestly are a rather artificial difference in the first place.

Because that is the way Wolf Guard work.
If you had them as an upgrade entry then IMO you should add in a stipulation that every 1-10 Wolf Guard count as an Elite choice.

purplefood wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Wardragoon wrote:

Nvs wrote:Should DA be merged with the SM codex? Only if SW, BA, BT, GK are as well.

Can be done quite easily and none of the codex, outside of fluff, truly warrant a unique codex. A few FOC swaps and changes to how units work (allow tacticals to have terminator armor for +XXX pts. Elite GK unit would get termy option as above and if you have a librarian HQ, they are troops just as an idea) would be enough to make any codex work.

The few things that wouldn't work and aren't shared between the marines (or easily transferable to the above mentioned system) really shouldn't exist in the first place as they're quite broken, quite stupid, and just don't make sense for a 40k army. Things like Dreadknights, Thunderwolf cavalry, and priests fall into this category.

Difference is however those factions have both unique rules for them and trully unique units (lone wolves, furioso dread, sword brethren, dreadknight as examples) wherein DA has no unique units, and no unique rules

Interrogator Chaplains? No? Thats not enough to qualify? Well they had Deathwing and Ravenwing, which my guess is will be beefed up versions of the existing options. In any case, none of the other SM forces really had unique units until their current incarnations. Half the units in the Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Grey Knight books did not exist until this edition. GW could easily create another batch of new units for the DA.

Didn't exist until this edition?
Have you seen the previous SW codex?
They have 1 entirely new unit and that is the TWC.
2 New characters in Arjac and Lukas.
Everything else was in the previous codex and probably older editions.

Actually no.
The Thunderwolf Cavalry, while a new unit, is not the 'only new unit'.

Many of the newly named units(Skyclaws, Swiftclaws, Stormclaws) are all 'new'.
Wolf Guard exclusively as Terminators is 'new'.
Lone Wolves, as well, are new.
Arjac and Lukas are both new, but slightly irrelevant as they're not really characters but just unit upgrades.

Good point i forgot about the Lone Wolves.
Though Swift Claws and Sky Claws are only new in name.
Wolf Guard have new options but they are not new as a unit.

Swiftclaws and Skyclaws are new in name, but at the same time--they've also got new rules applying to them.

Because that is the way Wolf Guard work.
If you had them as an upgrade entry then IMO you should add in a stipulation that every 1-10 Wolf Guard count as an Elite choice.

At that point however it's being different just for the sake of being different while not really actually changing anything in the army's actual play except currently cutting sergeant costs by up to half in many cases for no good reason. The mechanic is there for its own sake, differences for the sake of differences, they don't actually play any differently. When that's the case, it's easily scrapped.

Fair enough.
Though they reflect the fluff well...
The balance between fluff and things that actually do something seems to be a hard one.

True, and often people get very attached to a minor mechanic, specific stat or statline, or weapon/wargear that's often changed every edition (e.g. Assault Cannons, SM Captain Weapon SKill, etc.) or something that was there just for 3rd ed but wasn't in RT/2nd/4th and think that anything that doesn't include it can't possibly be right. Everyone is guilty of this to some extent, but for many things it makes attempting to redo stuff (or even just discussions on this sort of thing) very difficult.

SW have a different chapter organization, but this isn't really seen in their book, unless by "different" you mean "horrendously undercosted".

Let's not forget the fact that power armour books make a lot of money for GW. That more than anything is the biggest reason they'll remain a separate codex.

To reiterate previous points. Current C:SM is based largely around a lot of things that got playtested using Codex DA. SW/BT/BA in their older incarnations were just as far apart from C:SM as DA currently are.

There are more but as long as the design philosophy doesn't shift radically again expect to see 5ed Codex DA with a at least 4 new options.

Droma wrote:Let's not forget the fact that power armour books make a lot of money for GW. That more than anything is the biggest reason they'll remain a separate codex.

They also cannibalize a lot of sales however and end up reducing resources/interest in other armies, and is a source of endless consumer angst. There may be enough positives to consider it.

Dark Angels have a couple of unique units, though nothing compared to the new unique chapter dex's. For the record, I think its stupid how many terminator armies there can be now. Bikes it makes sense, and wish it had been done in a way to make the top three bike armies seperate from each other (White Scars, Ravenwing, and Blood Angels) while still standing on top of the standard marines.

It's a shame the existing special stuff for the Dark Angels that are different don't actually exist on the tabletop in regular play. Namely the Mortis Dreadnought and the Land Raider Ares (Well, if we got the Achilles... not too op right?) though at least we have our interrogators.

Droma touched on the biggest issue as to why the DA won't be rolled up into a Codex SM.

Up until the last 2-3 years when the SW and BA got their new codexes the best selling SM Chapter specific models were DA and that was true for a very very long time. DA are a big cash cow to GW so you'll see them again without a doubt.

vonjankmon wrote:Droma touched on the biggest issue as to why the DA won't be rolled up into a Codex SM.

Up until the last 2-3 years when the SW and BA got their new codexes the best selling SM Chapter specific models were DA and that was true for a very very long time. DA are a big cash cow to GW so you'll see them again without a doubt.

Considering how great a deal the DA upgrade sprue was, that doesn't mean that people are into DA proper, only that people like great deals.

Vaktathi wrote:

Droma wrote:Let's not forget the fact that power armour books make a lot of money for GW. That more than anything is the biggest reason they'll remain a separate codex.

They also cannibalize a lot of sales however and end up reducing resources/interest in other armies, and is a source of endless consumer angst. There may be enough positives to consider it.

Yes, but that requires logic and foresight to understand. And we're talking about GW here.

Kanluwen wrote:
Wolf Guard exclusively as Terminators is 'new'.

No, it's not.

Grimtuff wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Wolf Guard exclusively as Terminators is 'new'.

No, it's not.

Yes, it is.

The Space Wolf minidex had Wolf Guard with the option for Terminator Armor.
They were not the Space Wolf Terminator Squads.

You could always field squads of Wolf Guard in terminator armor. You're playing with semantics.

Nothing is genuinely new in the Wolves codex except them riding mutated aspirants into battle.

Lone Wolves are new as Kan pointed out...

Kanluwen wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Wolf Guard exclusively as Terminators is 'new'.

No, it's not.

Yes, it is.

The Space Wolf minidex had Wolf Guard with the option for Terminator Armor.
They were not the Space Wolf Terminator Squads.

Ummmmmm? Have you seen the current SW dex? Just in case you have not, turn to page 86 of it. You'll see ALL Wolf Guard begin the game in Power Armour, and have the option for Terminator armour. JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER INCARNATION OF THEM.

You. Are. Wrong.

Omegus wrote: You could always field squads of Wolf Guard in terminator armor. You're playing with semantics.

"Playing with semantics" is saying that Wolf Guard in Terminator Armor is new.

That's not actually what I said, if you'd actually read my post. My statement was that "Wolf Guard exclusively as Terminators are new".

Which, by my measure, it is new. They are effectively the "Space Wolf Terminator Squad"--even though they still have the 'option' for Terminator armor.

Nothing is genuinely new in the Wolves codex except them riding mutated aspirants into battle.

Or Lone Wolves.
Or Thunderwolves (which really aren't new as they've been mentioned in fluff before).
Or the two 'unit upgrade' characters.

There's plenty of new stuff, the problem is you're focusing on clearly 'new units' rather than looking at what has been revamped and made to be 'Space Wolf Exclusives'.

Kanluwen wrote:
"Playing with semantics" is saying that Wolf Guard in Terminator Armor is new.

That's not actually what I said, if you'd actually read my post. My statement was that "Wolf Guard exclusively as Terminators are new".

Which, by my measure, it is new. They are effectively the "Space Wolf Terminator Squad"--even though they still have the 'option' for Terminator armor.

What on earth are you babbling about?

WG have always been fieldable as 100% Terminators. I should know, i've been playing SW since 2nd edition.

>>Lion'el jonson
>>Lion blade
>>Lion helm
>>the Lion
>>Lions everywhere
>>yfw matt ward gets his hands on this

http://www.freewebs.com/kylecoffman/disillusioned.jpg

Grimtuff wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Wolf Guard exclusively as Terminators is 'new'.

No, it's not.

Yes, it is.

The Space Wolf minidex had Wolf Guard with the option for Terminator Armor.
They were not the Space Wolf Terminator Squads.

Ummmmmm? Have you seen the current SW dex? Just in case you have not, turn to page 86 of it. You'll see ALL Wolf Guard begin the game in Power Armour, and have the option for Terminator armour. JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER INCARNATION OF THEM.

You. Are. Wrong.

You.Are.Correct.

I forgot to finish my thought.
However, I'm looking for my minidex so that I can do a better comparison. I'm remembering Space Wolves having 'standard' Terminator Squads but that might be a mistaken thought.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grimtuff wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
"Playing with semantics" is saying that Wolf Guard in Terminator Armor is new.

That's not actually what I said, if you'd actually read my post. My statement was that "Wolf Guard exclusively as Terminators are new".

Which, by my measure, it is new. They are effectively the "Space Wolf Terminator Squad"--even though they still have the 'option' for Terminator armor.

What on earth are you babbling about?

WG have always been fieldable as 100% Terminators. I should know, i've been playing SW since 2nd edition.

Read my below post.

Wolf Guard, while 100% fieldable as Terminators, also have not been the only option for Terminators "since 2nd edition".

But having played SW for that long you should know that right?

I think SM need to be cut to two codeci. Roll DA into C:SM and BA, SW, BT, and GK into another book. Maybe three books, but they really really need to be condensed, for the good of the game.

I've posted it before but we can easily retain the 4 book system while tripling or even quadrupling the unique Chapters and archetypes in them.

purplefood wrote:The seperate codeci are supposed to represent different organisational structures. Only SW and BT actually fall into this catagory.
If you had an overall Marine codex it would have to be pretty big...

It worked for Chaos 3.5 pretty well, actually...

Vaktathi wrote:

Droma wrote:Let's not forget the fact that power armour books make a lot of money for GW. That more than anything is the biggest reason they'll remain a separate codex.

They also cannibalize a lot of sales however and end up reducing resources/interest in other armies, and is a source of endless consumer angst. There may be enough positives to consider it.

Not...really? If the SM codices get condensed down into one book, I doubt all that many people are going to start up a 'nid army. The majority of 40K players don't post on these or any other forums. The majority also play Space Marines. They don't seem all that angsty as consumers. GW sells to the demand that exists, like most businesses, and that demand is clearly quite capable of supporting multiple SM books.

Space Marines are the college football of 40K. They're the big sellers. Lacrosse may not like it that football gets all the attention and all the scholarship money, but the school knows who's paying the bills.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

vonjankmon wrote:Droma touched on the biggest issue as to why the DA won't be rolled up into a Codex SM.

Up until the last 2-3 years when the SW and BA got their new codexes the best selling SM Chapter specific models were DA and that was true for a very very long time. DA are a big cash cow to GW so you'll see them again without a doubt.

Considering how great a deal the DA upgrade sprue was, that doesn't mean that people are into DA proper, only that people like great deals.

Only problem is that DA was the number one selling marine army literally YEARS before the DA accessory sprue existed. I'm not talking about the DA being the best selling for a couple years, we're talking like 6-10. I know for sure it was at least 6 but I don't know how long after that they remained there but the accessory sprue did come out after that so they may have remained the top selling marines.

motorhead1945 wrote:

purplefood wrote:The seperate codeci are supposed to represent different organisational structures. Only SW and BT actually fall into this catagory.
If you had an overall Marine codex it would have to be pretty big...

It worked for Chaos 3.5 pretty well, actually...

I didn't say it was bad, just big.
If it was done i would like to see it done in the manner that Just Dave did his CSM Fandex.

vonjankmon wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

vonjankmon wrote:Droma touched on the biggest issue as to why the DA won't be rolled up into a Codex SM.

Up until the last 2-3 years when the SW and BA got their new codexes the best selling SM Chapter specific models were DA and that was true for a very very long time. DA are a big cash cow to GW so you'll see them again without a doubt.

Considering how great a deal the DA upgrade sprue was, that doesn't mean that people are into DA proper, only that people like great deals.

Only problem is that DA was the number one selling marine army literally YEARS before the DA accessory sprue existed. I'm not talking about the DA being the best selling for a couple years, we're talking like 6-10. I know for sure it was at least 6 but I don't know how long after that they remained there but the accessory sprue did come out after that so they may have remained the top selling marines.

How can a specific Chapter be said to sell the best if they're indistinguishable from generic marines?

For a long while DA battle boxes, Deathwing Terminators, DA special characters, etc (all the specifically DA models) were the best selling specific marine models.

So they sold more than the BT specific models, BA, SW, etc. It's actually interesting to see how certain models selling really well got rolled into what is now considered "normal" rules. Raider Crusader is a good example. For a while it was BT only, but it sold SO well that GW began including it in every marine codex after to make more cash off it. Ever wondered why the DA had so many special models for so long prior to the influx in the last 2-3 years of the SW and BA since they recieved new codexes? They sold really well.

Seaward wrote:
Not...really? If the SM codices get condensed down into one book, I doubt all that many people are going to start up a 'nid army.

I'm not saying they'll go out and buy one right then, however if other armies get updated more than once every 5-12 years, with plastic kits for all or most of their units, or at least actually have kits for all of their units, they might be more popular, rather than Marines which many players already treat as one book that gets an expansion/update every 6-12 months.

The majority of 40K players don't post on these or any other forums. The majority also play Space Marines. They don't seem all that angsty as consumers. GW sells to the demand that exists, like most businesses, and that demand is clearly quite capable of supporting multiple SM books.

Space Marines are the college football of 40K. They're the big sellers. Lacrosse may not like it that football gets all the attention and all the scholarship money, but the school knows who's paying the bills.

If one army gets updates and variants at least every year and has (relatively) cheap kits for all its units, of course it's going to be more popular and sell more than the armies that get updates every decade or half decade and are more expensive with incomplete model lines. Not hard to see.

With marine books there's also a desire from some to see each one as a completely different faction in terms of sales, which they just aren't, they very often cannibalize each other. The biggest SM player at my current store plays every single marine army, but doesn't actually have models for 6 different marine armies, 80% of his models are just ported from list to list. And he isn't the only one by any means, this is very common.


I personally know more than one person who has dropped 40k because of the slowness of GW in addressing faction books and the lavish attention given to SM's. It's not just on internet forums that this sort of thing exists.

vonjankmon wrote:For a long while DA battle boxes, Deathwing Terminators, DA special characters, etc (all the specifically DA models) were the best selling specific marine models.

So they sold more than the BT specific models, BA, SW, etc. It's actually interesting to see how certain models selling really well got rolled into what is now considered "normal" rules. Raider Crusader is a good example. For a while it was BT only, but it sold SO well that GW began including it in every marine codex after to make more cash off it. Ever wondered why the DA had so many special models for so long prior to the influx in the last 2-3 years of the SW and BA since they recieved new codexes? They sold really well.

The DA special characters(Asmodai, Ezekiel, Azrael, Naaman) all had very little iconography on them identifying them as Dark Angels.

Naaman, Ezekiel, and Asmodai were regularly fielded in standard Marine armies to add a bit of 'oomph' and uniqueness. The same thing went with the robed models, simply because the robed metals had basically no iconography on them unlike the current plastic ones do.

The "DA battleboxes"(assuming you're referring to the Dark Angels Ravenwing Battleforce and the short-lived Dark Angels Battleforce) were also pretty dang good deals during their release. The Ravenwing Battleforce is still a good deal for anyone who wants bikes(2 squads of them, and an attack bike along with a Land Speeder are in the RW battleforce).
$41.25 x2(cost of Ravenwing biker squads)+$25 for the attack bike, and $30 for the Land Speeder.
That's $137.50 under the recently adjusted prices. The box was just last month moved from its $90 price point to $105.

You do the math on that. Even if you're not going to field a Ravenwing force, there's a lot in there you can sell or trade off.

People that really lobby for Blood Angels, Space Wolves, Black Templars and Grey Knights to be folded into Codex: Space Marines speak without any actual grasp of what they're saying. Go through and count out the number of units that you would have to drop in order to facilitate that sort of change, the amount of characterful rules that you would have to strip away and model kits that you would invalidate.

On the other hand, pushing the current incarnation of Dark Angels into Codex Space Marines would be easy and pretty painless. This is why the approach to Dark Angels that GW has taken lately will change. Most likely, Dark Angels will receive a proper cadre of rules and units to make them stand out from Codex Space Marines when their Codex is re-written.

SkaerKrow wrote:People that really lobby for Blood Angels, Space Wolves, Black Templars and Grey Knights to be folded into Codex: Space Marines speak without any actual grasp of what they're saying. Go through and count out the number of units that you would have to drop

Few, if any? You'd end up with a huge SC section, but you'd be able to combine like 80%+ of the units since they're either damn near identical (Furioso vs Ironclad) or literally identical (a Rhino is a Rhino) and you could still keep the truly unique ones (e.g. Death Company) and just add in a restriction via sublisting or HQ types (note: doesn't need to be SC's).

in order to facilitate that sort of change, the amount of characterful rules that you would have to strip away and model kits that you would invalidate.

Depends on what you see as "characterful". Stuff like the SW's Wolf Guard Sergeant mechanic is one thing that, on paper looks "characterful", but really only matters in army construction and has 0 effect on how the army plays, and thus really doesn't do anything except give SW's humongous discounts on Sergeants.

Vaktathi wrote: Few, if any? You'd end up with a huge SC section, but you'd be able to combine like 80%+ of the units since they're either damn near identical (Furioso vs Ironclad) or literally identical (a Rhino is a Rhino) and you could still keep the truly unique ones (e.g. Death Company) and just add in a restriction via sublisting or HQ types (note: doesn't need to be SC's).

Depends on what you see as "characterful". Stuff like the SW's Wolf Guard Sergeant mechanic is one thing that, on paper looks "characterful", but really only matters in army construction and has 0 effect on how the army plays, and thus really doesn't do anything except give SW's humongous discounts on Sergeants.

Lets see your "space marine codex" ( and if you can make it worse than M.W. did, if your not an UM ). Just for once, i'd like to see these
claims be proven on the "proposed rules forum". Just once. But I'd bet against you.

Since youre ignoring the amount of units ( models ), this idea of yours is "condensing to 0 ".
Space marines provide a basical model that may become a lot of things, with only a few added symbols, redone sculpts, more heads, etc.
What could challenge the easy access to a multitude of kits like a army clad in standardized power-armor can?
Marines provide GW with a source of interchangable models. Thus keep the investment in "new kits" controllable.
Why should a company give up such a ressource?

I am sure most of us see the issue of SC's. Characters who may have 1 or 2 USR's. Codex space marines and the missing IH show just nicely how much SC's a codex may have and if it was unpossible to put less UM in and allow each first founding legion at least one SC
of their own, it does not need the emperors tarot to foresee what the DA would get....

IMO Just Dave's CSM Fandex is a good example of how things could be done...
Have the Captains/Wolf Lord/Marshals etc buy wargear of some sort that unlocks certain units.
E.g. An SM Captain buys the Wolf Lord upgrade for x points. With this upgrade he recieves boosts to certain Stats and gains the ability to unlock GH (Or tactical marines have acute senses since they really should have the CCW+Bolt pistol and Boltgun as standard anyway) and BC in the troop section. He also unlocks Wolf Scouts and Lone Wolves in the Elite section.

1hadhq wrote:
Lets see your "space marine codex" ( and if you can make it worse than M.W. did, if your not an UM ). Just for once, i'd like to see these
claims be proven on the "proposed rules forum". Just once. But I'd bet against you.

If I had the time to do so I would. However, for a brief synposis, you'd pick which subvariant marines you're going to play at army construction, and each unit entry says which chapters it's available to, and how the unit is changed by the choice of chapter. E.G. Predators are available to everyone, but BA predators automatically gain fast and cost +X points more and have extra turret/sponson options. Tac marines are available to everyone, if taken for SW's, they gain A, B, and C special rules and wargear for +X points, whereas if taken for BT's they can include a mix of Scouts and Tac marines, with various options.


lets be honest, if the far more varied Traitor Legions of Chaos can and always have shared one book, surely the Loyalists can too without too much difficulty.

Since youre ignoring the amount of units ( models ), this idea of yours is "condensing to 0 ".

?

Space marines provide a basical model that may become a lot of things, with only a few added symbols, redone sculpts, more heads, etc.

And often end up simply being treated as all the same thing instead of actually different things.

What could challenge the easy access to a multitude of kits like a army clad in standardized power-armor can?

other armies can generate lots of kits just as easily, look at IG, how many different basic guardsmen models are out there?

Marines provide GW with a source of interchangable models. Thus keep the investment in "new kits" controllable.
Why should a company give up such a ressource?

Because again, they often cannibalize each other in terms of sales since, as you don't need to buy new kits to swap between armies.

I am sure most of us see the issue of SC's. Characters who may have 1 or 2 USR's. Codex space marines and the missing IH show just nicely how much SC's a codex may have and if it was unpossible to put less UM in and allow each first founding legion at least one SC
of their own, it does not need the emperors tarot to foresee what the DA would get....

My apologies, but I'm not entirely certain what you're trying to say here.

Almarine wrote:>>Lion'el jonson
>>Lion blade
>>Lion helm
>>the Lion
>>Lions everywhere
>>yfw matt ward gets his hands on this

http://www.freewebs.com/kylecoffman/disillusioned.jpg

QFT, I legitamately loled

purplefood wrote:IMO Just Dave's CSM Fandex is a good example of how things could be done...
Have the Captains/Wolf Lord/Marshals etc buy wargear of some sort that unlocks certain units.
E.g. An SM Captain buys the Wolf Lord upgrade for x points. With this upgrade he recieves boosts to certain Stats and gains the ability to unlock GH (Or tactical marines have acute senses since they really should have the CCW+Bolt pistol and Boltgun as standard anyway) and BC in the troop section. He also unlocks Wolf Scouts and Lone Wolves in the Elite section.

But Just Dave hasn't the upper echelons of GW at his neck, just us dakkanauts to critize his work.
So youre volunteering to give us all an example ?
Maybe a general layout of neccessary pages, amount of units and characters, wargear, background etc...?

Vaktathi wrote: If I had the time to do so I would.

Unavailable it seems..
Gathered the data at another of these threads, and rest assured without cuts it becomes a tome like the "real" codex astartes.
Surely, things like dedicated transports are similar. Until codex specific vehicle upgrades come in.
It would be a complete design change from 5th. Remembering the threads how the 5th ed SM dex had to be read ( unit entry, and/or ),
a readable and understandable codex isn't easy to achieve. Fans are forgiving to authors of fandices ( dexes? ), but "the company" itself?

Vaktathi wrote:
However, for a brief synposis, you'd pick which subvariant marines you're going to play at army construction, and each unit entry says which chapters it's available to, and how the unit is changed by the choice of chapter. E.G. Predators are available to everyone, but BA predators automatically gain fast and cost +X points more and have extra turret/sponson options. Tac marines are available to everyone, if taken for SW's, they gain A, B, and C special rules and wargear for +X points, whereas if taken for BT's they can include a mix of Scouts and Tac marines, with various options.

The chance has been wasted when IA was around. Now, codices are selfcontaining ( except USR ).
BA turbo? BT vows? SW saga? SM chapter tactics? Explain that all in every units entry? Cover it all with the limited range of USR's?

Vaktathi wrote:
lets be honest, if the far more varied Traitor Legions of Chaos can and always have shared one book, surely the Loyalists can too without too much difficulty.

Legions no longer exist. They didn't survive GW's retaliation from the EoT campaign....
Those following 5th ed fluff know who is the man ( of chaos. )
Traitor legions get no fluff ( except beeing eaten by nids...). Renegades do. The time of the old ones is possibly over.
Otoh, condensing the loyalists could harm the chances on legion/cult specific codices... You know, it worked for these and the others had always one dex so why change it .....

Vaktathi wrote:
other armies can generate lots of kits just as easily, look at IG, how many different basic guardsmen models are out there?

2. cadians and catachans. Until youre saying lets go FW, can't be worse or more expansive than fine-cast.
IG has lots of different uniforms. Millions of worlds to recrut from. Even the best effort of the munitorum won't standardize them like
the PA/TDA etc already is.
Minimum would be 3 kits per style ( command, basic infantry, heavy weapons ), plus all the missing vehicles....

Vaktathi wrote: they often cannibalize each other in terms of sales since, as you don't need to buy new kits to swap between armies.

Actual trend disagrees. SW, BA, GK, etc reduce the model count for options. And keep the price high.
Thunderwolves, stormravens, dreadedknights, etc aren't usable in every list.
Plus counts as may allow for greenskinned SM or palefaced necrons....

Vaktathi wrote: I'm not entirely certain what you're trying to say here.

ahemmm ...was trying to say:
codex SM = lots of UM.( 11+ ) and a few non UM. ( 5 )
Any roll in would be done by GW.
DA would share the fate of the IH.

Definately. Doesn't even make sense that they got a dex in the first place.

im2randomghgh wrote:Definately. Doesn't even make sense that they got a dex in the first place.

Unlike the Tau?

Vaktathi wrote: If I had the time to do so I would. However, for a brief synposis, you'd pick which subvariant marines you're going to play at army construction, and each unit entry says which chapters it's available to, and how the unit is changed by the choice of chapter. E.G. Predators are available to everyone, but BA predators automatically gain fast and cost +X points more and have extra turret/sponson options. Tac marines are available to everyone, if taken for SW's, they gain A, B, and C special rules and wargear for +X points, whereas if taken for BT's they can include a mix of Scouts and Tac marines, with various options.

And why would this suddenly lead to less time being spent on developing marine rules? All it'd do would be either make Marine players pay for stuff they'll never use or destroy the gameplay of some of the variant chapters, probably both. You've still got the same amount of rules requiring design and playtesting, you'd still need the time to fix fluff for every represented army etc. You'd end up with a 200+ pages hard-cover book forcing Marine players to pay for armies they don't want to play.

We might as well roll Orks and Eldar together, call it the Codex: Servants of the Old Ones and have your HQ selections unlock the rest of the army, with Eldar and Ork units being mutually exclusive. That way we'd be able to cut another Codex, giving more time for others! Add in DE in the 'dex and it's even better! If we then merge WH and DH with IG we'd have reduced the army count to 8! If we then fold Chaos Marines into C:SM and give them back their daemons, we're down to 6! Then GW could totally update everything each edition, because it's not as if there's still the same amount of rules or anything!

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:Definately. Doesn't even make sense that they got a dex in the first place.

Unlike the Tau?

Yes unlike the Tau. Dark Angels are Space Marines. There are 1000 of them. They use regular units=Space Marines codex.

Tau have next to no similarities with other races (fluff and crunch) and have the hyper-kick-ass XV8 suits. And railguns=better than SM.

Also Tau, unlike Spess Mehreens, actually require a strategy to win=the whole point of wargaming. Tau and DE (both of which I play) are the only armies I feel that GW made with tactics in mind.

im2randomghgh wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:Definately. Doesn't even make sense that they got a dex in the first place.

Unlike the Tau?

Yes unlike the Tau. Dark Angels are Space Marines. There are 1000 of them. They use regular units=Space Marines codex.

Tau have next to no similarities with other races (fluff and crunch) and have the hyper-kick-ass XV8 suits. And railguns=better than SM.

Also Tau, unlike Spess Mehreens, actually require a strategy to win=the whole point of wargaming. Tau and DE (both of which I play) are the only armies I feel that GW made with tactics in mind.

Please, more ad hominem attacks, I enjoy being taunted. The point I was trying to make, which you apparently missed, was that GW pulled the Tau out of their behinds during third edition, thus the DA, being older, have just as much reason to have a Codex as the Tau who are, after all, just as insignificant as the Dark Angels in the grand scheme of things. As for why I think it's a bad idea to merge the marine books, see my above post.

1. Wasn't an attack on you, was an attack on DA.

2. Merging them together IS a good idea. They have a ridiculous amount codex for space marines when they only need 3: Codex Space Marines, Codex Chaos Space Marines, and Codex Space Wolves (since their differences are about 10x bigger than any other seperate-codex marine book are).

This is tying up GW writers from updating older codex (See: Necrons, Tau) that are REALLY out-dated , as in 5+ years old.

At this rate, there are likely going to be 4ed Tau armies in 6ed.

im2randomghgh wrote:1. Wasn't an attack on you, was an attack on DA.

2. Merging them together IS a good idea. They have a ridiculous amount codex for space marines when they only need 3: Codex Space Marines, Codex Chaos Space Marines, and Codex Space Wolves (since their differences are about 10x bigger than any other seperate-codex marine book are).

This is tying up GW writers from updating older codex (See: Necrons, Tau) that are REALLY out-dated , as in 5+ years old.

At this rate, there are likely going to be 4ed Tau armies in 6ed.

1: I play marines. Your comment was aimed at marines in general. Not to mention hyperbolic to the point of lying.

2: While I'm going to sound incredibly biased, Templars are way more out there than the Puppies. As for the fallacy that merging marine books would save time while not reducing the "soul" of the army, you end up with either a bastardised version of the army (kinda like 4th ed Chaos), which is bad, or you keep the same level of special rules, options, wargear etc. as before and end up taking just as long, forcing Marine players to pay for an extra 5 Chapters in the process, which is also bad. As for the updates of older books, I think we can both agree that it'd be smart of GW to give the remaining armies who are in need an errata like the BT/DA one. That way armies wouldn't end up behind quite as badly as some have while allowing GW to take their time making a solid Codex for every army.

HQ:
Space Marine Commander
-May become a captain/librarian/chaplain for +XX points
-May become a dreadnaught for +XX additional points.
--If a dreadnaught, you may take dreadnaughts as troops.

Special Character 1 - you may elect to make a unit of veterans scoring.
Special Character 2 - you may elect to make a unit of veterans disband into seperate units of equal size (min size 1).
Special Character 3 - any dreadnaughts you take that are considered troops gain additional armor and additional weapon skill.



Elites:
Veteran Squad
-If your army contains a librarian, your veterans become grey knights and may choose a lesser power for +XX points.
-If your army contains a chaplain, your veteran squad grants FNP to all units within 12".
-If your army is lead by a HQ in terminator armor, your veterans get terminator armor for free.


Troops:
Tactical Space Marine XX points (Grey Hunter, Tacticals, etc covered)
-The whole unit can be upgraded to termiantor armor for +xx points (deathwing covered) or...
-The entire unit may be given jump packs for +xx points (blood angels covered).

Scouts
-for every unit of tactical marines you may choose a unit of scouts that do not take up a FOC slot. These scouts are attached to the tactical units (Black Templar Covered).

Bikers (Ravenwing, Space Wolves, White Scars covered).

You get the idea... and that took only a couple minutes of effort and I've effectively merged every codex into one, didn't invalidate anything because players can choose to make an army based off fiction or designed to win at their leisure.

If you honestly feel you can think of a unit that can't be fit into the model like the above, post it and I'm sure someone can figure a way. And if they can't, it should be a sign that the unit likely shouldn't exist in the first place (hello knights, priests, cavalry).

I'll keep saying that there's no point in it until someone adresses the point that it won't cut down on time without cutting down on quality.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:1. Wasn't an attack on you, was an attack on DA.

2. Merging them together IS a good idea. They have a ridiculous amount codex for space marines when they only need 3: Codex Space Marines, Codex Chaos Space Marines, and Codex Space Wolves (since their differences are about 10x bigger than any other seperate-codex marine book are).

This is tying up GW writers from updating older codex (See: Necrons, Tau) that are REALLY out-dated , as in 5+ years old.

At this rate, there are likely going to be 4ed Tau armies in 6ed.

1: I play marines. Your comment was aimed at marines in general. Not to mention hyperbolic to the point of lying.

2: While I'm going to sound incredibly biased, Templars are way more out there than the Puppies. As for the fallacy that merging marine books would save time while not reducing the "soul" of the army, you end up with either a bastardised version of the army (kinda like 4th ed Chaos), which is bad, or you keep the same level of special rules, options, wargear etc. as before and end up taking just as long, forcing Marine players to pay for an extra 5 Chapters in the process, which is also bad. As for the updates of older books, I think we can both agree that it'd be smart of GW to give the remaining armies who are in need an errata like the BT/DA one. That way armies wouldn't end up behind quite as badly as some have while allowing GW to take their time making a solid Codex for every army.

1. While there was SOME exaggeration, my statement was not as far out there as you seem to think. Yes, you need a brain to create an army list and yes, you have to choose which weapons to put in squad A to complement squad B, but that's where the tactics end. Once they're on the table, just let the marines do their thing.

With Tau/DE, you need to plan where this unit will go two turns from now to help support this unit and predict your enemy's moves etc.

2. SW are 100x more differenter (sry 4 grmr) Than the black templars. They are ~legion strength, have literally no marine rank/function 100% identical to C:VM and have VASTLY different psychic powers. The similarities end at bolters, power armour and being astartes.

Next to them in divergence from the standard marine dex is BA. Melee-tastic.

Then BT.

Than DA.

Not including GK, of course. Getting assassins=awesome sauce (dislike everything else though)

You guys are laughable...

Sure, from a fluff perspective the armies are different and warrant their own books. This could be said for everyone. Hell, we should get a Codex Dark Angels and a Codex Watchers in the Dark. I mean I don't see any other marine chapter with their own little army of robed iwoks. Do you?

Do you see how stupid that sounds? The fluff, while amazing for each chapter in their own way, can be expanded upon through web postings, articles in WD, imperial armor etc.

None of this matters... what matters are the rules, and when we talk about rules there's not enough different between the books to warrant them existing. The few things that may feel unique aren't unique enough that a little toying with rules couldn't come up with the exact same thing.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:I'll keep saying that there's no point in it until someone adresses the point that it won't cut down on time without cutting down on quality.

Quality for who? Marine players? Or 40k?

Do you honestly think this game is better served with 5 marine books with a single page's difference between them outside of fluff? Do you honestly think that new players enjoy having to figure out what random marine chapter the guy across the table is playing today because he was stomped last week using a different one?

Do you honestly think it would take GW 2-3 years to balance the single space marine book if it were done right the first time compared to the 2-3 years we're waiting for each marine book to get released while the designers try and ensure their marine book outshines the marine book before it?

What does a single book solve?

No more codex creep.
No more learning several sets of rules for the same unit.
No more trying to make some random nonsense unit every iteration 5x a revision.

im2randomghgh wrote:
2. SW are 100x more differenter (sry 4 grmr) Than the black templars. They are ~legion strength, have literally no marine rank/function 100% identical to C:VM and have VASTLY different psychic powers. The similarities end at bolters, power armour and being astartes.

Next to them in divergence from the standard marine dex is BA. Melee-tastic.

Then BT.

Than DA.

Not including GK, of course. Getting assassins=awesome sauce (dislike everything else though)

The bolded part, minus the psyker part, describes the Black Templars better than the Space Wolves (and TBH BT psychic powers, being non-existant, are more different anyway). Ranking the BA as more divergent from the Codex Astartes than the Black Templars makes it seem as if you truly don't know what you're talking about. I'd also really like to have a source for the SW being Legion-sized.

The idea space wolves are an intact legion is a fluff point.

They don't have successors like other chapters do. Instead they have companies. And unlike other chapters who make their successors move away and build their own base of operations, all of the companies are located on Fenris.

So when all is said and done, Space Wolves don't have successors and second/third/etc foundings... they have companies.

It's the same thing with the Dark Angels. They have successor chapters when looked at from the outside. On the inside, each successor is lead by a single individual who has a seat on the council and answers directly to Azrael.

Oh, it makes sense then.

Still, one has to consider that the SW was one of the smallest Legions and that it takes a lot of time for them to recover from losses due to the fact that they have one recruiting world. By that standard the Black Templars can be said to be "legion-sized" too. They don't have any successors either and recruit from all over the place.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:
2. SW are 100x more differenter (sry 4 grmr) Than the black templars. They are ~legion strength, have literally no marine rank/function 100% identical to C:VM and have VASTLY different psychic powers. The similarities end at bolters, power armour and being astartes.

Next to them in divergence from the standard marine dex is BA. Melee-tastic.

Then BT.

Than DA.

Not including GK, of course. Getting assassins=awesome sauce (dislike everything else though)

The bolded part, minus the psyker part, describes the Black Templars better than the Space Wolves (and TBH BT psychic powers, being non-existant, are more different anyway). Ranking the BA as more divergent from the Codex Astartes than the Black Templars makes it seem as if you truly don't know what you're talking about. I'd also really like to have a source for the SW being Legion-sized.

1. Numbers: even on the wiki it states that the SW are organised into twelve great companies (still) and that each is apprx. the size of a regular chapter=legion.

2. And no, it describes SW WAAAY better. The BT do not have talismans hanging from their necks, do not have 3 kinds of priests in their ranks, do not turn into werewolves, have organised squads rather than packs (see:tribes), do not strip all their armour, fast, then hunt 4 ton prey with their bare hands and do not have a specific arch-enemy (SW-TS, DA-Fallen).

3. Blood Angels DO have more noticeable differences than BT. Black Templars have units with name changes and very, very slight stat changes, whereas the Sanguinary Guard and Death Company have no equivalents. Plus assault marines as troops is SWEET.

The ONLY aspect of divergence of theirs that is more stand-out than that of the blood angels is numbers, which isn't even represented in-game.

Hardly.

The Black Templar are a second founding chapter themselves. So right off the bat they're miniscule compared to the Space Wolves and Dark Angels.

They are also very poorly organized. For starters, they are divided themselves into several smaller fleets (crusades) all of which act independently of each other. But they also compete with each other as well.

Man the Space Marine hate in this thread is awesome.

This comes down to a slippery slope argument. Someone could keep expanding to include Sisters of Battle, because hey they're just marines with some lower stats. Toss Necrons in there, they're all marines with some funny weapons. Combine DE and Eldar. Heck I think we can get the 40K universe down to about 6 codexes.

People like Space Marines, they're super human space soldiers in badass power armor. Some people like the Space Marines with a dark past (DA), some the tragic chapter (BA), some the norse warriors (SW), etc. They've got different backgrounds, different fluff, and different structures. Maybe they aren't super different but people like to play armies that are not the same as the person across the table from them.

GW tried the whole combining thing. The specific chapters got pamphlet sized codexes that just said refer to SM codex for most of the entries. It was a low point because it made them all boring and cookie cutter. Personally I endorse anything that makes the game more diverse and interesting.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Oh, it makes sense then.

Still, one has to consider that the SW was one of the smallest Legions and that it takes a lot of time for them to recover from losses due to the fact that they have one recruiting world. By that standard the Black Templars can be said to be "legion-sized" too. They don't have any successors either and recruit from all over the place.

And BT aren't legion sized, since 6,000 is about half a small legion, or 1/3 of a big one.

And that is not why it takes them so long to recover from losses. It is because they have what is arguably the most selective initiation of any chapter, other than the GK.

And the fact that they have one recruitment world is moot, since most chapters go down to the surface of a planet and recruit one or two children, whereas the SW have a constant supply, since I would expect it is the dream of every male youth on fenris to fight in the Great Wolf's name.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

vonjankmon wrote:Man the Space Marine hate in this thread is awesome.

This comes down to a slippery slope argument. Someone could keep expanding to include Sisters of Battle, because hey they're just marines with some lower stats. Toss Necrons in there, they're all marines with some funny weapons. Combine DE and Eldar. Heck I think we can get the 40K universe down to about 6 codexes.

People like Space Marines, they're super human space soldiers in badass power armor. Some people like the Space Marines with a dark past (DA), some the tragic chapter (BA), some the norse warriors (SW), etc. They've got different backgrounds, different fluff, and different structures. Maybe they aren't super different but people like to play armies that are not the same as the person across the table from them.

GW tried the whole combining thing. The specific chapters got pamphlet sized codexes that just said refer to SM codex for most of the entries. It was a low point because it made them all boring and cookie cutter. Personally I endorse anything that makes the game more diverse and interesting.

Making 7 space marine codexes adds diversity? Hardly. The only reason I have a SM army (IF) is that sometimes I don't want to think and kind of just want to push models across the table without thinking about how it affects the game. If a tac squad gets fired at it's not the end of the world. If someone has a clear shot at my XV8s, however, I have done something wrong.

They are poster boys that require little-no skill to play. That's why six year olds who aren't even paying attention can sometimes beat seasoned players with their itty bitty toys.

Having this many ends up making the rules astartes-tailored.

Also, it prevents them from updating the xenos [also known as the armies that require skill, foresight, and are actually fun to play] codexes (who need it badly).

Vaktathi wrote: I'm not saying they'll go out and buy one right then, however if other armies get updated more than once every 5-12 years, with plastic kits for all or most of their units, or at least actually have kits for all of their units, they might be more popular, rather than Marines which many players already treat as one book that gets an expansion/update every 6-12 months.

The number of SM players who merrily hop from PA codex to PA codex is a little hard to quantify. Acting like it's the majority has no basis of support. The folks in my area stick to one army, for the most part; those that play more than one don't play two Marine variants. Is that representative of everybody? No idea. But neither do you. What's my point? That, if you're a DA player, it really does not, in fact, seem like you get an update every 6-12 months.

If one army gets updates and variants at least every year and has (relatively) cheap kits for all its units, of course it's going to be more popular and sell more than the armies that get updates every decade or half decade and are more expensive with incomplete model lines. Not hard to see.

Again, you're making assumptions about what motivates people to pick a given faction. In your case, it sounds like the answer is how often they're updated. That had nothing at all to do with mine.

With marine books there's also a desire from some to see each one as a completely different faction in terms of sales, which they just aren't, they very often cannibalize each other. The biggest SM player at my current store plays every single marine army, but doesn't actually have models for 6 different marine armies, 80% of his models are just ported from list to list. And he isn't the only one by any means, this is very common.


I personally know more than one person who has dropped 40k because of the slowness of GW in addressing faction books and the lavish attention given to SM's. It's not just on internet forums that this sort of thing exists.

And I suspect we all know what faction most new players start with, no? Let me put it to you this way: GW has been in business for quite a while, and their business is selling hideously over-priced plastic toy soldiers. Like it or not, agree with them or not, they know what they're doing when it comes to maximizing their profits. All the armchair CEOs on the interwebz can rant about their brilliant plan to overhaul 40K, but perfecting the game isn't GW's goal. Making money is.

You run an ice cream parlor. You have six tubs of chocolate and a half-tub of vanilla. The vast majority of your customers order chocolate. If your honest, bottom-line reaction to that is to try to get them to order more vanilla instead, when there's no limit to the amount of chocolate you can supply, remind me never to give you a start-up loan. GW would reinvent the wheel if they thought it made fiscal sense. It obviously doesn't.

im2randomghgh wrote:
They are poster boys that require little-no skill to play. That's why six year olds who aren't even paying attention can sometimes beat seasoned players with their itty bitty toys.

Having this many ends up making the rules astartes-tailored.

Also, it prevents them from updating the xenos [also known as the armies that require skill, foresight, and are actually fun to play] codexes (who need it badly).

This cracked me up, I literally lol'ed for a second. Any T4 3+ save army is forgiving, it's the nature of the beast, and been that way since at least 2nd Ed when I started playing. Takes a truly talented player to make it excellent though. If marines were as good as you make them out to be every power gamer there was would play them. Frankly right now other than SW Razor/Long Fang spam any Marine army is my least feared opponent right now.

Seems like I've been saying this a lot recently but your opinion is not the truth, it could be close but no one is always right and sometimes when everyone disagrees with you it might be time to take a step back and reconsider, everyone else might not be right but never hurts to do a little bit of thinking and questioning of what you assume to be the truth, because you know what they say about assuming.

vonjankmon wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:
They are poster boys that require little-no skill to play. That's why six year olds who aren't even paying attention can sometimes beat seasoned players with their itty bitty toys.

Having this many ends up making the rules astartes-tailored.

Also, it prevents them from updating the xenos [also known as the armies that require skill, foresight, and are actually fun to play] codexes (who need it badly).

This cracked me up, I literally lol'ed for a second. Any T4 3+ save army is forgiving, it's the nature of the beast, and been that way since at least 2nd Ed when I started playing. Takes a truly talented player to make it excellent though. If marines were as good as you make them out to be every power gamer there was would play them. Frankly right now other than SW Razor/Long Fang spam any Marine army is my least feared opponent right now.

Seems like I've been saying this a lot recently but your opinion is not the truth, it could be close but no one is always right and sometimes when everyone disagrees with you it might be time to take a step back and reconsider, everyone else might not be right but never hurts to do a little bit of thinking and questioning of what you assume to be the truth, because you know what they say about assuming.

Armies that require more tactics than SM:

DE
Eldar
Tau
Necrons
SoB
Tyranids
CD

Yeah, that's just about all except for IG who just form a gunline and...shoot.

But generally, what do YOU think requires more tactics: an army that can destroy in just about every area, or an army that can only shoot but suck in melee (or vice versa)

im2randomghgh wrote:

vonjankmon wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:
They are poster boys that require little-no skill to play. That's why six year olds who aren't even paying attention can sometimes beat seasoned players with their itty bitty toys.

Having this many ends up making the rules astartes-tailored.

Also, it prevents them from updating the xenos [also known as the armies that require skill, foresight, and are actually fun to play] codexes (who need it badly).

This cracked me up, I literally lol'ed for a second. Any T4 3+ save army is forgiving, it's the nature of the beast, and been that way since at least 2nd Ed when I started playing. Takes a truly talented player to make it excellent though. If marines were as good as you make them out to be every power gamer there was would play them. Frankly right now other than SW Razor/Long Fang spam any Marine army is my least feared opponent right now.

Seems like I've been saying this a lot recently but your opinion is not the truth, it could be close but no one is always right and sometimes when everyone disagrees with you it might be time to take a step back and reconsider, everyone else might not be right but never hurts to do a little bit of thinking and questioning of what you assume to be the truth, because you know what they say about assuming.

Armies that require more tactics than SM:

DE
Eldar
Tau
Necrons
SoB
Tyranids
CD

Yeah, that's just about all except for IG who just form a gunline and...shoot.

But generally, what do YOU think requires more tactics: an army that can destroy in just about every area, or an army that can only shoot but suck in melee (or vice versa)

....Necrons don't require much in way of tactics, and if you are not power gaming you can make an SM list that does require tactics and use of your head(drop pods can get interesting), and Nids can pretty much just run across the board and do what the orks do, what it comes down to quite frankly is the player, if the player is waac, then of course they will go as cheesey as possible, and since majority(at least around here) of players around here are SM players then it would only make sense that the same ratio would apply to waac players.

im2randomghgh wrote:
And BT aren't legion sized, since 6,000 is about half a small legion, or 1/3 of a big one.

And guess which Legion is stated to be one of the smallest?

im2randomghgh wrote:1. Numbers: even on the wiki it states that the SW are organised into twelve great companies (still) and that each is apprx. the size of a regular chapter=legion.

The same wiki that stated that Imperator Titans are 150m high?

im2randomghgh wrote:2. And no, it describes SW WAAAY better. The BT do not have talismans hanging from their necks, do not have 3 kinds of priests in their ranks, do not turn into werewolves, have organised squads rather than packs (see:tribes), do not strip all their armour, fast, then hunt 4 ton prey with their bare hands and do not have a specific arch-enemy (SW-TS, DA-Fallen).

They do have talismans, they just don't hang from the neck all the time. Tabards, Templar crosses, incense burners, prayer scrolls etc. They do NOT have "organised squads" any more than the SW do. They form squads in an ad hoc fashion, fighting with those they deem worthy of their respect, rather than in any structured squad. Besides, when you've been busy crusading all over the Galaxy since the Heresy you don't have time for silly stuff like hunting. They do fast pretty often though. As for a nemesis, psykers in general anyone?

im2randomghgh wrote:3. Blood Angels DO have more noticeable differences than BT. Black Templars have units with name changes and very, very slight stat changes, whereas the Sanguinary Guard and Death Company have no equivalents. Plus assault marines as troops is SWEET.

The ONLY aspect of divergence of theirs that is more stand-out than that of the blood angels is numbers, which isn't even represented in-game.

No Devastators*. No librarians*. No organized squads. Too many marines. No companies. No Codex squad markings. No sergeants*. Balls-to-the-walls crazy, without having to go all wulfen or death company to be so*. I marked the ones represented in-game with a *. As for the Sanguinary Guard, they were hand-waved out of thin air for 5th edition, just wait until the Templars get updated in some fashion and I'm sure there'll be Landsknechts or something that smite the unbelievers with their three-handed maces.

I love the "this army requires more skill to play" discussions.

But I'll quickly address your list.

DE - Raider spam...really this requires more skill? I've yet to see a non vehicle spam DE list.
Eldar - I'll agree with you here but honestly only because of how outdated the codex was. In the hey day all you saw was skimmer spam with crazy seer councils that honestly took less skill than ANY other unit in the game to use.
Tau - Gun line same as the IG. The Tau just have to move around a bit more to make it work. I have my Tau army up in my attic because they were to boring, my IG require more skill to use on a high level.
Necrons - SERIOUSLY? I mean really, Necrons? This wasn't a typo right? COME ON.... they're more vanilla than the most Vanilla SM list. I'm assuming this was a typo.
SoB - I'll give you this one, but again more because of the age of the codex, having said that though rhino spam sisters can be really mean and is not the most tactically challenging list ever.
Tyranids - Wardragoon addressed this one, it ain't that hard to hope your Tervi's crap out a boat load of guants and just charge across the board providing living cover for your non LOS requiring Str8 harpoon guns. Nids used to require a lot of skill to play, now the builds that are even reasonably competitive are kind of boring.
CD - Again wow...the army that dominated by basically being able to skip the entire having to cross the board for assault thing? I actually felt bad for Deamon armies once GW realized they made them to powerful and basically began putting a "murder daemons" unit in most of the new codexes. As for tactics... maybe a little but really you drop near what you want to murder and charge in.

Now having said all of that, are there variations of those armies that require a lot of skill to use? Yep there are, just as there are variations of SM that do. Honestly it requires skill to make ANY army play at a high level. You could give a newbie an exact copy of my army and I would take them apart with it because I know all of the ins and out, how to play against an army similar (or in this case the same) and SM aren't any different. If a newbie with an SM army is beating you and your dice didn't take a crap all over the table you may need to rethink how you're playing the game.

Vonjankmon, have you played as/against DE? Because if you did you wouldn't have said what you did.

Have you played as/against Eldar since 2nd edition? Because if you have, you would have said that in 3rd they were o/p because of cannon spam, but since have been a waste of time.

Have you played as/against Necrons since 4th? Because they don't work at all under 1000pts, and they've never been difficult due to just forcing a phase out for all of 5th edition.

SoB, more then most other books, have stood up to the test of time. Of all books out there, theirs likely needs to be updated the least.

Now back on topic... you 2 need to recognize that the game isn't, should not, and can't be balanced around fluff. As soon as they write fluff to try and dictate rules choices they end up ruining the game as is evident with things like Thunderwolf cavalry, priests, and knights.

The rules are what matter, and from a rules perspective the armies just aren't that different.

If we removed silly psycic powers, insanely overpowered long fangs, dreadknights, thunderwolf cavalry, priests, and allowed tactical marines as troops to be upgraded to have terminator armor or jetpacks you're effectively left with SW, BT, DA, GK, and BA all in the same codex from a rules standpoint.

Then just give 1 or 2 special characters to each of the above, 10 pages of fluff dedicated to each of the above, and slap it all in a hardcover book with an additional couple pages of hobby related articles to show all the color options for the main/successors of the above, and you've just solved half of the problems 40k has.

I like Dark Angels, like the Dark Angel fluff, love the Dark Angels model, am actually building a Dark Angel army, but am using the Space Marine codex to do so.

My reasons are more to do with lack of options/overpriced units in the DA 'dex rather than anything else though. If they had a new book with new units/special rules/relatively priced equipment I would switch to the DA book in a heartbeat. As it is, C:SM is just...better than C: DA at the moment.

L. Wrex

If you think Marines are the biggest problem 40K I envy you.

And how would combining all the marine chapters into one fix anything? You wouldn't see more codexes or anything. The limiting factor on new codexes are the models, not the books. They could churn out every book in a year if they wanted, GW just made the decision to release new models with each codex release.

Combining them wouldn't reduce the amount of SM players at all either.

It wouldn't make the game require any more or less skill to play.

I just don't understand what you think it will accomplish other than making you feel good and pissing off a lot of players who enjoy the fluff of different marine armies.

I've played against 4 different DE players now and have played plenty of Eldar armies in 5th. And I'm talking about the armies in 5th Ed, not 3rd, 2nd etc. I mean going all the way back to 3rd edition to try and prove some point about eldar?

*EDIT* This topic falls into the it doesn't affect you so why do you feel the need to ruin everyone elses fun? If you're upset at the rules/armies in 40K take it up with GW, don't take it out on those of us that enjoy a different aspect of the hobby than you happen to.

Nvs wrote:
Have you played as/against Eldar since 2nd edition? Because if you have, you would have said that in 3rd they were o/p because of cannon spam, but since have been a waste of time.

Last time I looked Eldar were top of the pile along with Tau in 4th ed due to how SMF worked.

I've already said what I think it will accomplish...

It will remove a lot of the codex creep problems we see because we won't have developers designing random marine codex 2 in a way so it can outshine random marine codex 1.

It will help focus the rules in a way that doesn't require players to remember a handful of different rules for effectively the same unit while also ensuring that the marines as a whole still feel like marines.

It will ensure that other armies get more regular attention and aren't left entire editions without a codex like DE, who went through 2 editions. Eldar, Tau, and Necrons which are about to go through 1. Black Templars who are about to go through 1. SOB who effectively have gone 2.5 etc.

The idea that the models are what holds up progression on these things is also not true because we had DE released before 75% of the units were available. We have nids that 2 years later still don't have a large number of units. Several of which are considered mainstays in the force. It was said on the news forum that GW will no longer be holding up rules releases for models.

I'm also not here just to piss in your cheerios like you're implying. There is less to gain by keeping marines seperate then there is merging them into a single book. The only thing you suffer losing are a few of the newer things that most people mock marines over (cavalry, knights, priests).

It has already been shown that the majority of identity where rules are concerned either a.) doesn't exist at all in reality, or b.) can be carried over with very little effort.

It would be impossible for GW to lose any identity/character as far as the fluff is concerned simply because the marines are 20 years old.

Now as for you alleging to have played against DE and Eldar in 5th, I can't help but wonder why you tried to say they were thoughtless no-talent armies? You can't run straight ahead with these things and expect anything to come of it. While you can't with marines either (which was alledged by someone else, and not me) it is fair to say that marines would get further blindly running forward then pretty much any other faction in 40k.

Nvs wrote:
It has already been shown that the majority of identity where rules are concerned either a.) doesn't exist at all in reality, or b.) can be carried over with very little effort.

And suppose you wanted to play Grey Knights with your proposed ruleset? Then what? You're stuck with them as an elites choice, forcing you to take stuff that isn't part of the Grey Knights at all. If you attempt to circumvent this there's more rules to fix, more fluff to write in and more development time. You still haven't told us how you'll make sure that the rules don't turn into something like the dreaded CSM 4th ed codex. The only real advantage out of the stuff you've mentioned is that there won't be as much Codex creep. People will still have to remember differences between stuff because there's going to be different rules depending on what Chapter you play, no? Thus you're back to the problem that I posted before: with all the different rules that would be in a merged Codex you're either going to have too few destroying the "soul" of some of the armies or you're going to have the same amount of rules that exist today, which would negate the advantage in development time.

No different rules depending on what chapter you play. There is one set of rules that encompesses everything and it's up to the player to decide if he wants to play his list to win, or wants to play it toward a specific chapter.

Now how do you handle Grey Knights as troops you ask? You take special character 1 which makes a unit of veterans troops and a librarian HQ to make your veterans GK.

And keep in mind that this was done on the fly without any money, motivation, or time on the topic. It was merely to illustrate how easy it could be done.

Nvs wrote:No different rules depending on what chapter you play. There is one set of rules that encompesses everything and it's up to the player to decide if he wants to play his list to win, or wants to play it toward a specific chapter.

Now how do you handle Grey Knights as troops you ask? You take special character 1 which makes a unit of veterans troops and a librarian HQ to make your veterans GK.

And keep in mind that this was done on the fly without any money, motivation, or time on the topic. It was merely to illustrate how easy it could be done.

So in other words: If your Chapter isn't competetive it sucks to be you! Yeah, that's OBVIOUSLY just as good as what we have now...

Well my point is when you look at the Dark Angels Codex compared to Space Marines Codex there is nil for difference aside from interrogator chaplains(since deathwing are just termies with fearless, and ravenwing are just bikers) which tbh aren't worth it to me, now I wouldnt mind if matt ward did the troops in one as long as he stays the feth away from the badass fluff, however the difference between them and a standard codex chapter are pretty much nonexistent at this point.

Wardragoon wrote:Well my point is when you look at the Dark Angels Codex compared to Space Marines Codex there is nil for difference aside from interrogator chaplains(since deathwing are just termies with fearless, and ravenwing are just bikers) which tbh aren't worth it to me, now I wouldnt mind if matt ward did the troops in one as long as he stays the feth away from the badass fluff, however the difference between them and a standard codex chapter are pretty much nonexistent at this point.

As has been repeated several times, that's because the Dark Angels Codex was the testbed for the ideas that would become Codex: Space Marines. If Dark Angels were to be released tomorrow, I have no doubt we'd see a great deal of variance.

Seaward wrote:

Wardragoon wrote:Well my point is when you look at the Dark Angels Codex compared to Space Marines Codex there is nil for difference aside from interrogator chaplains(since deathwing are just termies with fearless, and ravenwing are just bikers) which tbh aren't worth it to me, now I wouldnt mind if matt ward did the troops in one as long as he stays the feth away from the badass fluff, however the difference between them and a standard codex chapter are pretty much nonexistent at this point.

As has been repeated several times, that's because the Dark Angels Codex was the testbed for the ideas that would become Codex: Space Marines. If Dark Angels were to be released tomorrow, I have no doubt we'd see a great deal of variance.

Originally thats fine, but 4e was an opportunity for changing them up which GW did not take, hopefully they do so. But realistically idk how much DA earns GW now so it may not be as proffitable as they like to make a new codex+units as opposed to just throwing them into Codex SM, especially when you look at how people are just using the SM Codex for Dark Angels

vonjankmon wrote:I love the "this army requires more skill to play" discussions.

But I'll quickly address your list.

DE - Raider spam...really this requires more skill? I've yet to see a non vehicle spam DE list.

Eldar - I'll agree with you here but honestly only because of how outdated the codex was. In the hey day all you saw was skimmer spam with crazy seer councils that honestly took less skill than ANY other unit in the game to use.

Tau - Gun line same as the IG. The Tau just have to move around a bit more to make it work. I have my Tau army up in my attic because they were to boring, my IG require more skill to use on a high level.

Necrons - SERIOUSLY? I mean really, Necrons? This wasn't a typo right? COME ON.... they're more vanilla than the most Vanilla SM list. I'm assuming this was a typo.

SoB - I'll give you this one, but again more because of the age of the codex, having said that though rhino spam sisters can be really mean and is not the most tactically challenging list ever.

Tyranids - Wardragoon addressed this one, it ain't that hard to hope your Tervi's crap out a boat load of guants and just charge across the board providing living cover for your non LOS requiring Str8 harpoon guns. Nids used to require a lot of skill to play, now the builds that are even reasonably competitive are kind of boring.

CD - Again wow...the army that dominated by basically being able to skip the entire having to cross the board for assault thing? I actually felt bad for Deamon armies once GW realized they made them to powerful and basically began putting a "murder daemons" unit in most of the new codexes. As for tactics... maybe a little but really you drop near what you want to murder and charge in.

.

DE-Hit-and-run specialized army=tactics. You need to have your heavy units in place to finish off units that were attacked by faster units that have moved on to other units *i know I said units a bunch of times*

Eldar- at least we agree on this

Tau-Gunline? Are you INSANE?!? in a tau army not moving=instant death! a 4+ Sv army may sound vaguely durable, but they aren't. They are basically firing while running away from melee units=never standing still. You need to plan every turn based on which cover is where, where your opponent might move etc.

Necrons-Yes, the most drastically underpowered army in all of WH40K DOES need tactics, how great of you to agree with me. When to teleport, where to teleport etc.

I have won GTs with them, and people are like "WHAT? A necron player just won!" You should see DashofPepper's thing on cron tactics. The march of death just isn't feasible anymore.

SoB-Either way, SM can rhino spam too...

Tyranids-No. They are too weak an army to simply "charge" anymore. If you charge a green blob army, you're going to lose. If you charge a SM (any SM) army, you are going to lose. If you charge Tau, you just wasted a turn on overkill.

CD-They were only ever over-powered in WHFB.

Also, knowing when to use (insert slaaneshi daemon type here) rather than (insert nurgle daemon type here) despite the awesome near-immunity to shooting that nurgle daemons have is harder than most people think. The daemons complement each other well, and learning to use them is an acquired skill.

Since when do Space Wolves number about 12,000?

iproxtaco wrote:Since when do Space Wolves number about 12,000?

Since a looooong time ago. 12 Great Companies x approximately 1,000 Marines per company= around 12,000

iproxtaco wrote:Since when do Space Wolves number about 12,000?

I don't agree with it but apparently each SW great companies number the same as an average chapter.
I don't believe it but hey... go figure...

Since when has a Great Company numbered 1000?

vonjankmon wrote:If you think Marines are the biggest problem 40K I envy you.

And how would combining all the marine chapters into one fix anything? You wouldn't see more codexes or anything. The limiting factor on new codexes are the models, not the books. They could churn out every book in a year if they wanted, GW just made the decision to release new models with each codex release.

Combining them wouldn't reduce the amount of SM players at all either.

It wouldn't make the game require any more or less skill to play.

I just don't understand what you think it will accomplish other than making you feel good and pissing off a lot of players who enjoy the fluff of different marine armies.

I've played against 4 different DE players now and have played plenty of Eldar armies in 5th. And I'm talking about the armies in 5th Ed, not 3rd, 2nd etc. I mean going all the way back to 3rd edition to try and prove some point about eldar?

*EDIT* This topic falls into the it doesn't affect you so why do you feel the need to ruin everyone elses fun? If you're upset at the rules/armies in 40K take it up with GW, don't take it out on those of us that enjoy a different aspect of the hobby than you happen to.

You have some of the most simple (and horribly mistaken) views I have encountered in awhile...

You think It takes them years to figure out how to change the aesthetic of a model? They could work on models for every army at the same time, as they DO have more than 1 sculptor. It is simply the way GW works that makes them not do it, as the board of directors is horribly, horribly tainted by chaos.

And the fact that they've spent almost all of 5ed updating marines means that sisters of battle prbly won't get updated till ~6ed. Imagine that. THREE EDITIONS BEHIND.

I would be like using warmahordes rules for 40k.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Nvs wrote:No different rules depending on what chapter you play. There is one set of rules that encompesses everything and it's up to the player to decide if he wants to play his list to win, or wants to play it toward a specific chapter.

Now how do you handle Grey Knights as troops you ask? You take special character 1 which makes a unit of veterans troops and a librarian HQ to make your veterans GK.

And keep in mind that this was done on the fly without any money, motivation, or time on the topic. It was merely to illustrate how easy it could be done.

So in other words: If your Chapter isn't competetive it sucks to be you! Yeah, that's OBVIOUSLY just as good as what we have now...

I've posed the question numerous times now... name me a unit you don't think could be transferred over to this system and I'll show you a unit that either a.) can in fact fit into the sytem or b.) shouldn't exist.

Khan beats Sammiel to the point of stupidity.
Deathwing is the only viable option.
Ravenwing landspeeders are too overpriced to make use of.

That said:

Now they could discard DA codex (which would not make me too happy) but I think they have an opportunity to not make a skull smasher SM chapter.(ala Ravenwing, Salamanders, Black Templars, Space Wolves and Blood Angels)Also I think part of the differentiation could be Ravenwing is a hybrid of biker squads and vanguard vets.

That would be my challenge to them to not make an OP codex but base it on firepower rather than CC prowess.

... Nevermind they could never do that.

DAaddict wrote:

... Nevermind they could never do that.

Isn't that what was said about flying land raiders?

And flying librarian dreadnoughts -_-"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I would just like to point out that BT and DA are so marginally different that they have sub-tabs under "space marines" on the GW website, whereas Space Wolves and BA are unique enough to warrant their own tabs.

To be fair Space Wolves and Blood Angels were under the same tab till they got their 5th edition books

Nvs wrote:

I've posed the question numerous times now... name me a unit you don't think could be transferred over to this system and I'll show you a unit that either a.) can in fact fit into the sytem or b.) shouldn't exist.

Everything in fast assault and heavy support. You left those out.....
OtoH, your reply will consist of a) I'll edit this in afterwards or b) SM shall not have any FA or HS choices...

1hadhq wrote:

Nvs wrote:

I've posed the question numerous times now... name me a unit you don't think could be transferred over to this system and I'll show you a unit that either a.) can in fact fit into the sytem or b.) shouldn't exist.

Everything in fast assault and heavy support. You left those out.....
OtoH, your reply will consist of a) I'll edit this in afterwards or b) SM shall not have any FA or HS choices...

I've already done the heavy and fast attacks...

You know how I've done them? They're virtually the same in every codex. The few things that aren't I've already touched on...

Dreadknights, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.
Thunderwolves and Thunderwolf Cavalry, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed (to be fair, maybe a space wolf special character should come with a unit of wolves)
Stormravens, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.
Dreadknights, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.

Baal can be an upgrade.
Crusader, an as yet unamed plasma variant, redeemer, all upgrades.

Now anything specific we should touch base on?

Nvs wrote:To be fair Space Wolves and Blood Angels were under the same tab till they got their 5th edition books

+1

I'd laugh if DA didn't get their own custom termie sculpts, some jetbike honor guard for sammy, or some sort of knightly CC oriented group. Not to mention their own set of special rules with titles like "sons of the lion" or "knights of caliban". Or making more use of watchers as some sort of upgrade for HQ's. There is tons of stuff that could set them apart from C:SM while still being fluffy whether or not people want to admit it.

Bottom line is GW will not alienate a portion of their player base that is larger than that of most/all xenos armies by cutting their codex. It just wont happen. It'd be a bigger mistake than the current price increases coinciding with the finecast release. Not to mention 4th was the age of simplifying rules and condensing so if they were going to cut codexes at any point in time it would have been then. Finally, look at all the people who never played BA/SW/GK/DE/IG that hopped on the bandwagon. Do you honestly think GW wouldn't want to keep riding that wave with another SM release? I trust GW to go where the money is and in that belief I feel pretty darn safe as a DA player.

Oh I don't think for an instant they'll ever condense them into a single book

It's just threads like these are highly polarizing and I, personally, don't like dealing with the kiddies who play Loganwing one week, deathwing the next, and grey knights the following.

I also pisses me off to no end seeing things like Dreadknights, Stormravens, and Thunderwolf cavalry getting dreamed up when Eldar don't have a titan, super heavy, flyer, etc in the works.

If I didn't already spend $500 on DE models I'd probably say to hell with it and pick up Dark Angels. But I don't like playing at a store only to see 75% of the tables made up with marine vs marine, and the remaining tables filled with marine players waiting for their opponent to walk through the door (who will more likely than not at the very least be a MEQ army if not marines also).

But if you were going to choose an army where a marine vs marine conflict would be a legitimate possibility, DA would be the one to do it with.

Nvs wrote:

Dreadknights, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.
Thunderwolves and Thunderwolf Cavalry, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed (to be fair, maybe a space wolf special character should come with a unit of wolves)
Stormravens, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.

Baal can be an upgrade.
Crusader, an as yet unamed plasma variant, redeemer, all upgrades.

Now anything specific we should touch base on?

Dreadknights: Why they are a good selling kit that a lot of people like?
Thunderwolves and Thunderwolf Cavalry: It's a little over the top but I know a ton of SW players love them, Cannis sells well I'm sure and when TWC get released I'm sure they will too.
Stormravens: Why they are a good selling kit that a lot of people like?

I've got a new idea. Lets drop Codex Space Marines all together that way everything will be a lot more unique compared to the other SM codexes. After all we're all about eliminating things that are "the same" and it would free up time for them to work on other books!

Do you see how stupid that sounds? Yet it's the same thing being leveled at everyone that enjoys having their own codex. Sisters are all metal and don't sell well compared to space marines and GK stole the inquisition we may as well phase them out too.

Can we all just accept these arguments are dumb and move on? (although this is always fun as a break from work lol)

Edit: Read your last post Nvs glad to see we are on the same page and I agree with you about the codex hopping. I've got over 5k points of DA so I know what army loyalty is. At the same time though with all of them switching all the time they are having a good time and I don't have to play against C:SM all the time(I get to play against blue BA) but at least the games feel different and it gives the store that nice surprise of oh whats he going to count those as. It's not how I choose to run my army but I'm not against others doing it. Diversity is good for the hobby in my opinion and that includes anyone that hops from codex to codex.

Droma wrote:

Nvs wrote:To be fair Space Wolves and Blood Angels were under the same tab till they got their 5th edition books

+1

I'd laugh if DA didn't get their own custom termie sculpts, some jetbike honor guard for sammy, or some sort of knightly CC oriented group. Not to mention their own set of special rules with titles like "sons of the lion" or "knights of caliban". Or making more use of watchers as some sort of upgrade for HQ's. There is tons of stuff that could set them apart from C:SM while still being fluffy whether or not people want to admit it.

Bottom line is GW will not alienate a portion of their player base that is larger than that of most/all xenos armies by cutting their codex. It just wont happen. It'd be a bigger mistake than the current price increases coinciding with the finecast release. Not to mention 4th was the age of simplifying rules and condensing so if they were going to cut codexes at any point in time it would have been then. Finally, look at all the people who never played BA/SW/GK/DE/IG that hopped on the bandwagon. Do you honestly think GW wouldn't want to keep riding that wave with another SM release? I trust GW to go where the money is and in that belief I feel pretty darn safe as a DA player.

@ your first paragraph, that can apply to just about every single chapter in the entire setting aside from smurfs. Imperial Fists could get "duelists", Salamanders could get squads with three or four flamers/meltas, Raven Guard would have the stealth rule across the board etc.

2. They've already alienated all the xenos players (pun not intended). If you add all the xenos players together, it is roughly equal to the number of SM players=they don't care. They want money. This is why IG are the kinda-but-still-not-as-much-as-SM poster boys, since they are expensive to play.

Droma wrote:

Nvs wrote:

Dreadknights, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.
Thunderwolves and Thunderwolf Cavalry, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed (to be fair, maybe a space wolf special character should come with a unit of wolves)
Stormravens, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.

Baal can be an upgrade.
Crusader, an as yet unamed plasma variant, redeemer, all upgrades.

Now anything specific we should touch base on?

Dreadknights: Why they are a good selling kit that a lot of people like?
Thunderwolves and Thunderwolf Cavalry: It's a little over the top but I know a ton of SW players love them, Cannis sells well I'm sure and when TWC get released I'm sure they will too.
Stormravens: Why they are a good selling kit that a lot of people like?

I've got a new idea. Lets drop Codex Space Marines all together that way everything will be a lot more unique compared to the other SM codexes. After all we're all about eliminating things that are "the same" and it would free up time for them to work on other books!

Do you see how stupid that sounds? Yet it's the same thing being leveled at everyone that enjoys having their own codex. Sisters are all metal and don't sell well compared to space marines and GK stole the inquisition we may as well phase them out too.

Can we all just accept these arguments are dumb and move on? (although this is always fun as a break from work lol)

You're hyperboling a little.

First of all, you haven't a clue if they're a good selling kit or not. Second of all, you're lying because that dreadknight is dreadful. Lastly, these things are all entirely out of place not only in a 40k setting, but certainly in a marine setting. They also don't do anything but say "well if xenos can have flying skimming gun boats, marines deserve them too". Or "if xenox can have cool monsterous creatures, marines deserve them to".

They shouldn't have ever been added. There comes a point where the line as a whole is rather complete and it's time to expand on the things that already exist and make them better, more finely tuned, and more balanced. Look at the fantasy line. Sure, TK got some crazy whacked out stuff. But the HE, DE, Dwarf, etc lines are all quite solid and don't get these random, out-of-place things ruining their game.

I never meant that we should fold all codex's into one, but I was just saying that DA could probably take it just fine, considering the minimal difference between them and the other codex chapters

Wardragoon wrote:I never meant that we should fold all codex's into one, but I was just saying that DA could probably take it just fine, considering the minimal difference between them and the other codex chapters

Look, it's either going to happen to them all, or it's simply not going to happen.

The game would be better off with a single codex.
The marines would be better off with a single codex.
The players would be better off with a single codex.

But I'll be damned if GW decides to shelve DA and allow a second founding chapter remain its own book! I do have some principles, and that my good sir, will not stand!

Nvs wrote:

1hadhq wrote:

Nvs wrote:

I've posed the question numerous times now... name me a unit you don't think could be transferred over to this system and I'll show you a unit that either a.) can in fact fit into the sytem or b.) shouldn't exist.

Everything in fast assault and heavy support. You left those out.....
OtoH, your reply will consist of a) I'll edit this in afterwards or b) SM shall not have any FA or HS choices...

I've already done the heavy and fast attacks...

You know how I've done them? They're virtually the same in every codex. The few things that aren't I've already touched on...

Dreadknights, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.
Thunderwolves and Thunderwolf Cavalry, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed (to be fair, maybe a space wolf special character should come with a unit of wolves)
Stormravens, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.
Dreadknights, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.

Baal can be an upgrade.
Crusader, an as yet unamed plasma variant, redeemer, all upgrades.

Now anything specific we should touch base on?

Your post: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/374069.page#2902879
does not contain anything beyond HQ, Elite or troops. So NO FA or HS at all.

Plus, your SC may do gak about dreads, as dreads are not part of the list. Ok they could become troops if they existed.

Q:Can I have these psyker vehicles with blessed hull and maybe get the old anti-melta armor from C:armageddon too? No?

See, I don't miss you removed the dreaded knight twice just to make sure...
But, GW removing plastic kits from codices? Really?
Could you provide precedence for that to happen?

@Droma, you're crazy.

@im2random
Agreed on all fronts. It still doesn't really change my argument in any way.

#2 If you really think that then why are DE getting so many releases in a row? GW follows the money as I've stated, DE are selling so they get the toys. If it was all about SM don't you think they would have snuck in the release of SW wolf cav already? According to several rumors those sculpts are done and have been for a while but they haven't been released.

I'll go on to state almost everyone I know that's been in the hobby a few years has multiple armies. I'm one of the few I know that doesn't and that's because I chose to collect almost every option available to me from one codex instead. Amongst the people at my store I think I'm actually the only SM player, the rest are tyranids/orks/necrons/DE/Tau. I think you can find just about as much variety from any gaming place that isn't a GW store. GW stores I've noticed do tend to be primarily SM.

That was a jumble of words and I'm sure there is a point in there somewhere lol.

Edit: @NVS My argument was hyperbolic but so are the opposing arguments. I also disagree with you about how they shouldn't have created those kits. I see nothing wrong with them. Are they far fetched? Absolutely. Are they cool? I think so and I don't think I'm in the minority on that one. By the way you also didn't provide qualifications or sales numbers or survey data to suggest your opinion about those kits in particular and the combining of codexes in general is the majority opinion on the subject.

@NVS, Dreadnoughts as troops is just stupid. That would be ridiculously over-powered, imagine if my Tau could take XV8s as both troops and elites?

Methinks a troll is in our midst.

2/10

I'd wager the DE line was set in stone long before GW had any idea how well the line would do.

It's likely GW had planned for the releases to come like this because they wanted to give newer players the impression that the DE were an all new army. I mean unless you went to the website often or played at a GW every day for a month, chances are you'd probably never even seen a Dark Eldar player for the past decade if you haven't been playing as long.

It should also be said that the DE have gotten a grand total of what, 15 releases in the 15 years since they came out? 1 a year really isn't that bad for a non-marine army I suppose. But they kinda skipped 10-15 years in the middle there somewhere

@Droma, I have never, ever seen a gaming store that was dominated by xenos, ever. ever. EVER.

I have seven stores I visit, some regularly, some semi-regularly, and there are four dominated by SM, two by IG, and the last one is crawling with Nurgle players.

@im2

That's fine that you haven't seen it. They still exist(although a minority) but even your sentence proves things aren't dominated by SM. You have almost a 50/50 split between SM/non SM and combined with my experience it makes it 50/50.

Are SM players in the majority? Probably by 60/40 split. That 60 though is split between SM/BA/DA/BT/SW/GK compared to non SM sisters/IG/DE/Eldar/orks/tyranids/crons/tau/demons. CSM falls somewhere in the middle imo. As a whole SM are bigger than any individual non SM but combined they aren't that much bigger. I'd like to see some sales figures totaling revenue from all SM kits compared to all non-SM kits.

im2randomghgh wrote:@NVS, Dreadnoughts as troops is just stupid. That would be ridiculously over-powered, imagine if my Tau could take XV8s as both troops and elites?

Methinks a troll is in our midst.

2/10

*looks in tau rumor thread... spots rumor about a special character making crisis suits troops*
*looks in ork codex... spots that orks can magically make a dreadnaught a troop*

methinks you've lost your argument...

It should also be said that at 500 points, you'd likely be looking at a 3 model army if we take my post at face value, which I have repeatedly said you shouldn't because I took less time coming up with it than I did mocking you in this post...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Droma wrote:@im2

That's fine that you haven't seen it. They still exist(although a minority) but even your sentence proves things aren't dominated by SM. You have almost a 50/50 split between SM/non SM and combined with my experience it makes it 50/50.

Are SM players in the majority? Probably by 60/40 split. That 60 though is split between SM/BA/DA/BT/SW/GK compared to non SM sisters/IG/DE/Eldar/orks/tyranids/crons/tau/demons. CSM falls somewhere in the middle imo. As a whole SM are bigger than any individual non SM but combined they aren't that much bigger. I'd like to see some sales figures totaling revenue from all SM kits compared to all non-SM kits.

More than half of all sales go to SM
Half of the remaing go to IG
Half of the remaining go to Chaos
the remainder is split evenly between Sister, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons, Daemons, Orks.

What % is Eldar?

No seriously... what % is Eldar, I failed math something fierce!

im2randomghgh wrote:

You have some of the most simple (and horribly mistaken) views I have encountered in awhile...

You think It takes them years to figure out how to change the aesthetic of a model? They could work on models for every army at the same time, as they DO have more than 1 sculptor. It is simply the way GW works that makes them not do it, as the board of directors is horribly, horribly tainted by chaos.

And the fact that they've spent almost all of 5ed updating marines means that sisters of battle prbly won't get updated till ~6ed. Imagine that. THREE EDITIONS BEHIND.

I would be like using warmahordes rules for 40k.

Nice of you to go right for the personal attack and no address any of my points.

Again being that model creation is the limiting factor for GW releasing new things how does rolling all the SM into a single codex solve anything being that doing so does nothing to address the limiting factor for GW not tossing out every Xenos faction there is?

Again to me this just seems like a "I don't play SM but do play a bunch of non SM armies so I want my toys and screw everyone else." I can understand wanting your toys, cause hell I do too but it shouldn't be at the cost of other peoples enjoyment.

vonjankmon wrote:

Again to me this just seems like a "I don't play SM but do play a bunch of non SM armies so I want my toys and screw everyone else." I can understand wanting your toys, cause hell I do too but it shouldn't be at the cost of other peoples enjoyment.

that is very much QFT

vonjankmon wrote:

im2randomghgh wrote:

You have some of the most simple (and horribly mistaken) views I have encountered in awhile...

You think It takes them years to figure out how to change the aesthetic of a model? They could work on models for every army at the same time, as they DO have more than 1 sculptor. It is simply the way GW works that makes them not do it, as the board of directors is horribly, horribly tainted by chaos.

And the fact that they've spent almost all of 5ed updating marines means that sisters of battle prbly won't get updated till ~6ed. Imagine that. THREE EDITIONS BEHIND.

I would be like using warmahordes rules for 40k.

Nice of you to go right for the personal attack and no address any of my points.

Again being that model creation is the limiting factor for GW releasing new things how does rolling all the SM into a single codex solve anything being that doing so does nothing to address the limiting factor for GW not tossing out every Xenos faction there is?

Again to me this just seems like a "I don't play SM but do play a bunch of non SM armies so I want my toys and screw everyone else." I can understand wanting your toys, cause hell I do too but it shouldn't be at the cost of other peoples enjoyment.

I actually DO play SM as a secondary army. See the yellow fist in my sig?

And the only reason they don't release everything, and I mean the ONLY reason, is that they like to release stuff individually to give it it's time in the sun. Otherwise they would probably have updated every codex, with associated models, and prbly moved onto the next edition.

Nvs wrote:

1hadhq wrote:

Nvs wrote:

I've posed the question numerous times now... name me a unit you don't think could be transferred over to this system and I'll show you a unit that either a.) can in fact fit into the sytem or b.) shouldn't exist.

Everything in fast assault and heavy support. You left those out.....
OtoH, your reply will consist of a) I'll edit this in afterwards or b) SM shall not have any FA or HS choices...

I've already done the heavy and fast attacks...

You know how I've done them? They're virtually the same in every codex. The few things that aren't I've already touched on...

Dreadknights, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.
Thunderwolves and Thunderwolf Cavalry, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed (to be fair, maybe a space wolf special character should come with a unit of wolves)
Stormravens, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.
Dreadknights, removed from existence and we'll try to forget they ever existed.

Baal can be an upgrade.
Crusader, an as yet unamed plasma variant, redeemer, all upgrades.

Now anything specific we should touch base on?

So essentially, your argument is, "If we remove all of the stuff that wouldn't fit into the SM codex, all the variant chapters would fit into the SM codex!"

That's true. Also a bad idea.

Personally, I think someone running a list with the Emperor's Champion and AACNMO, as well as Sanguinary Priests, Lone Wolves, and Mephiston would be a perfect nightmare, but if it's what you're advocating, I'll be the first to try it.

Nvs wrote:

More than half of all sales go to SM
Half of the remaing go to IG
Half of the remaining go to Chaos
the remainder is split evenly between Sister, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons, Daemons, Orks.

What % is Eldar?

No seriously... what % is Eldar, I failed math something fierce!

Link to a page containing sales figures? Otherwise this is speculation.

Hell I'll try running Captain Stern with Mephiston, it makes plenty of sense

We have a rare chance to suck even more fluff from Chaos. "Armies led by Abaddon the Despoiler are Chaos Marines. All tactical squads receive a handweapon. Also, you may not take any other upgrades of any sort cuz Chaos has to lose."

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:We have a rare chance to suck even more fluff from Chaos. "Armies led by Abaddon the Despoiler are Chaos Marines. All tactical squads receive a handweapon. Also, you may not take any other upgrades of any sort cuz Chaos has to lose."

well thats if its written by a certain author whose name incites the neckbeards to wrath

Wardragoon wrote:Hell I'll try running Captain Stern with Mephiston, it makes plenty of sense

Mephiston, Tigurius and Njal all together in a mega-deathstar librarian HQ choice squad, plus 3x retinue

o.0
''''''

Super-psyker deathstar!

im2randomghgh wrote:

Wardragoon wrote:Hell I'll try running Captain Stern with Mephiston, it makes plenty of sense

Mephiston, Tigurius and Njal all together in a mega-deathstar librarian HQ choice squad, plus 3x retinue

o.0
'''

I think we call that division by zero

im2randomghgh wrote:
Mephiston, Tigurius and Njal all together in a mega-deathstar librarian HQ choice squad, plus 3x retinue

o.0
''''''

Now who's the crazy one.

Droma wrote:

Link to a page containing sales figures? Otherwise this is speculation.

That was kind of the point...

Seaward wrote:

So essentially, your argument is, "If we remove all of the stuff that wouldn't fit into the SM codex, all the variant chapters would fit into the SM codex!"

That's true. Also a bad idea.

Personally, I think someone running a list with the Emperor's Champion and AACNMO, as well as Sanguinary Priests, Lone Wolves, and Mephiston would be a perfect nightmare, but if it's what you're advocating, I'll be the first to try it.

So you play games with 4 HQs? That's fine... my opponents would call me a cheat, but hey whatever floats your boat?

I honestly don't understand you guys. You cry till the cows come home about how it can't be done. I give you a way to do it, and then you come up with random scenarios (that aren't even legal with normal rules) to shoot it down when I specifically said it was only to put forth a way to make a Codex Adeptus Astartes book feasible.

Since the groupies haven't been able to shoot it down yet I'm just going to presume you're all in agreement that it's feasible.

If it's not, feel free to list a unit you feel can't be replicated and I'll see where it goes.

And the idea that I would simply throw out what wouldn't fit is silly. The few things that wouldn't fit shouldn't exist (Dreadknights and Thunderwolf Cavalry) because they simply don't fit in 40k in general and certainly not for Marines. The other things are excessive currently and should be toned down (thus making the Priests act like the new DW Apoth for example as opposed to the current rules).

And for those of you who want to continue playing with your 4 HQ's, here's how you make it work... black crusade, where all armies partake.

But only for those who typically run 4 HQ's in a single list.

@NVS

I'm not sure what gives you the authority to say something doesn't belong in 40k when its fairly obvious that a good number of players enjoy those particular options. It's a spurious argument to make.

Nvs wrote:
So you play games with 4 HQs? That's fine... my opponents would call me a cheat, but hey whatever floats your boat?

My opponents would call me a Space Wolf player, a codex where four HQs are perfectly legal. And, for what it's worth? I only named two HQs, one of whom doesn't count against force organization in his codex. Are you sure you've actually bothered to look into these codices before dismissing them? It sure doesn't sound like it.

I honestly don't understand you guys. You cry till the cows come home about how it can't be done. I give you a way to do it, and then you come up with random scenarios (that aren't even legal with normal rules) to shoot it down when I specifically said it was only to put forth a way to make a Codex Adeptus Astartes book feasible.

Since the groupies haven't been able to shoot it down yet I'm just going to presume you're all in agreement that it's feasible.

Is it feasible to replicate every variant codex unit and rule in one codex? Sure, it's feasible, in the sense that the pages could be printed. You could staple the variant codices to the back of Codex: Space Marines, if you liked, and charge a little more. That's not the point. You're not advocating that.

And the idea that I would simply throw out what wouldn't fit is silly. The few things that wouldn't fit shouldn't exist (Dreadknights and Thunderwolf Cavalry) because they simply don't fit in 40k in general and certainly not for Marines. The other things are excessive currently and should be toned down (thus making the Priests act like the new DW Apoth for example as opposed to the current rules).

Games Workshop says otherwise. Fortunately, they listen to the sweet, sweet sound of cash going into the register, not to every swingin' Richard with his own plan to revise their game.

Nvs wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Nvs wrote:No different rules depending on what chapter you play. There is one set of rules that encompesses everything and it's up to the player to decide if he wants to play his list to win, or wants to play it toward a specific chapter.

Now how do you handle Grey Knights as troops you ask? You take special character 1 which makes a unit of veterans troops and a librarian HQ to make your veterans GK.

And keep in mind that this was done on the fly without any money, motivation, or time on the topic. It was merely to illustrate how easy it could be done.

So in other words: If your Chapter isn't competetive it sucks to be you! Yeah, that's OBVIOUSLY just as good as what we have now...

I've posed the question numerous times now... name me a unit you don't think could be transferred over to this system and I'll show you a unit that either a.) can in fact fit into the sytem or b.) shouldn't exist.

Sure thing: Grey Knights with Nemesis Force Weapons and Storm Bolters. Purifiers. Grey Knights Terminators as troops. Anything with a Psycannon. You simply won't have enough HQ slots to allow one to play a Grey Knights force without adding a "choose your Chapter" mechanic, in which case you're back to writing specific rules for Chapters and might as well write a separate Codex.

As for the "1000 SW in a Great Company" I'm still waiting for a source. Saying "it is because it is!" isn't a source.

Someone will probably have to correct me here but I think the 1000 SW companies is a kind of fluff hole. So back in the day with the great crusade and all that was true. But then in the current time line they still have the twelve great companies and there are no SW based splitter chapters.

So the reasoning goes that they must still all be 1000 strong and thus 12K drooling marines.

I think a better way to look at it would be that they probably took very, very, very heavy casualties during the Heresy that reduced their numbers greatly and they probably did not rebuild entirely, but that is totally my guess.

The problem with DA isn't the lack of diference with C:sm, its a poor design philosophy, DA could easily gain alot of new units and divert from the Codex astartes, more so than any other chapter and still fit the fluff, they are THE most secretive chapter, and are perfectly willing to "silence" anyone who see's too much.
This allows for a whole new string of units, and is more justifiable than say.. the sanguinor or the space wolf space squirrel

Seaward wrote:

Nvs wrote:
So you play games with 4 HQs? That's fine... my opponents would call me a cheat, but hey whatever floats your boat?

My opponents would call me a Space Wolf player, a codex where four HQs are perfectly legal. And, for what it's worth? I only named two HQs, one of whom doesn't count against force organization in his codex. Are you sure you've actually bothered to look into these codices before dismissing them? It sure doesn't sound like it.

I honestly don't understand you guys. You cry till the cows come home about how it can't be done. I give you a way to do it, and then you come up with random scenarios (that aren't even legal with normal rules) to shoot it down when I specifically said it was only to put forth a way to make a Codex Adeptus Astartes book feasible.

Since the groupies haven't been able to shoot it down yet I'm just going to presume you're all in agreement that it's feasible.

Is it feasible to replicate every variant codex unit and rule in one codex? Sure, it's feasible, in the sense that the pages could be printed. You could staple the variant codices to the back of Codex: Space Marines, if you liked, and charge a little more. That's not the point. You're not advocating that.

And the idea that I would simply throw out what wouldn't fit is silly. The few things that wouldn't fit shouldn't exist (Dreadknights and Thunderwolf Cavalry) because they simply don't fit in 40k in general and certainly not for Marines. The other things are excessive currently and should be toned down (thus making the Priests act like the new DW Apoth for example as opposed to the current rules).

Games Workshop says otherwise. Fortunately, they listen to the sweet, sweet sound of cash going into the register, not to every swingin' Richard with his own plan to revise their game.

For what it's worth you named 2 current HQ's and named 2 game mechanics that require a further 2 HQs based off my original post.

And people posed the question in this thread how to do it and if it can be done. I never once said I was up for the challenge, only that the codex aren't sufficiently different and it can be done quite easily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Nvs wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Nvs wrote:No different rules depending on what chapter you play. There is one set of rules that encompesses everything and it's up to the player to decide if he wants to play his list to win, or wants to play it toward a specific chapter.

Now how do you handle Grey Knights as troops you ask? You take special character 1 which makes a unit of veterans troops and a librarian HQ to make your veterans GK.

And keep in mind that this was done on the fly without any money, motivation, or time on the topic. It was merely to illustrate how easy it could be done.

So in other words: If your Chapter isn't competetive it sucks to be you! Yeah, that's OBVIOUSLY just as good as what we have now...

I've posed the question numerous times now... name me a unit you don't think could be transferred over to this system and I'll show you a unit that either a.) can in fact fit into the sytem or b.) shouldn't exist.

Sure thing: Grey Knights with Nemesis Force Weapons and Storm Bolters. Purifiers. Grey Knights Terminators as troops. Anything with a Psycannon. You simply won't have enough HQ slots to allow one to play a Grey Knights force without adding a "choose your Chapter" mechanic, in which case you're back to writing specific rules for Chapters and might as well write a separate Codex.

As for the "1000 SW in a Great Company" I'm still waiting for a source. Saying "it is because it is!" isn't a source.

So yea...

Grey Knights, check.
Paladins, Check
Terminator Troops, Check.
Grey Knight Terminator Troops, Check.

I already outlined these all in my first post.

Take X to make Y Grey Knights.
Take Z to make Y Troops.

As for purifiers, I'll admit I've forgotten what they are, sorry. Mostly gone through the GK book for the background moreso the rules (since I don't play them etc.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But whatever, it's clear we've all grown tired of this.

I'll just reiterate that I feel DA deserve their own codex, but it would be my preference to see all the SM merged into one simply because it solves a lot of the problems players face

And to be honest, I can't wait to see what GW can do with the army as a whole now that they've given away everything that made the DA, DA. Should be interesting.

Nvs wrote:So yea...

Grey Knights, check.
Paladins, Check
Terminator Troops, Check.
Grey Knight Terminator Troops, Check.

I already outlined these all in my first post.

Take X to make Y Grey Knights.
Take Z to make Y Troops.

As for purifiers, I'll admit I've forgotten what they are, sorry. Mostly gone through the GK book for the background moreso the rules (since I don't play them etc.)

You're missing the point. You wouldn't be able to have both Grey Knight Terminators in the same army as PA Grey Knights in the example you outlined. At this rate you're going to end up with a Codex that takes ages to read and understand what you have to do to unlock stuff and what isn't allowed with that. Not to mention it'd allow for stuff like Black Templars Librarians which shouldn't exist.

I think the rules (and the fluff) are fairly irrelevant to this.

Do Dark Angel offer potential for some unique mini's to sell? Answer: Yes. Robed Marines, Native American Terminators, Robed Bikers, etc.. . There is enough "different" sculpting potential and an exisitng fan-base there to make Dark Angels worthwhile as their "own release".

Rules and Fluff can be changed. If Dark Angels need to be "more different" in the rules, they'll add something unique in the vein of TWC, Sang. Guard or Dreadknight. If not, just as well. The Codex ultimately is there to sell the Minis.

Zweischneid wrote:I think the rules (and the fluff) are fairly irrelevant to this.

Do Dark Angel offer potential for some unique mini's to sell? Answer: Yes. Robed Marines, Native American Terminators, Robed Bikers, etc.. . There is enough "different" sculpting potential and an exisitng fan-base there to make Dark Angels worthwhile as their "own release".

Rules and Fluff can be changed. If Dark Angels need to be "more different" in the rules, they'll add something unique in the vein of TWC, Sang. Guard or Dreadknight. If not, just as well. The Codex ultimately is there to sell the Minis.

Agreed. The point is the current DA codex is so underwhelming it is an afterthought of an army. With the exception of playing a DW army,
you have so much more cost savings and flexibility doing a generic Codex: SM based army. Just buy the robes and say you are playing a regular SM chapter.

But I would like to examine the potential changes to keep the DA unique and playable.

1. No Sternguard or Vanguard Vets. This is at first a detriment but look at it as an opportunity to diverge. Make Ravenwing the equivalent of Vanguard vets the +1 A would help differentiate it from a standard SM bike army also the potential for power weaponing up the unit would be good. No sternguard that is fine, they don't use the specialized ammo but again perhaps this could be added to the Deathwing stormbolter - again it makes for a unique termie. Before you pooh-pooh it as OP think about it, this is a termie with SB and PF under the current system there is no reason not to spam SS + TH termies. This gives a DA the reason to exist.

2. Give them a chapter trait. Up until the last codex, DA were always stubborn with the DW and RW being fearless. Perhaps this is something that should be brought back. Or a new one- again with making the DA the ultimate firepower based marines instead of just another skull crusher - perhaps a "Cool underfire" much like SW counterattack, the DA have the option of firing at an opponent instead of making HTH attacks - the risk is fail the leadership test and you get nothing. To avoid it being OP, limit it to assault, pistol and rapid fireweapons. So the devastator only has the option of firing their pistols.

3. Include the options that other chapters have for vehicles and update the costs. Increase the razorback options and landspeeder options.
Perhaps include all the dreadnought options. Definitely increase a librarians Ld to 10.

4. Another thought on the theme of difference - the old fluff was that the DA had a higher average of special weapons particularly plasma.
Now in the old days, the DA were the ONLY chapter that could take PC on tacticals but like most things, it was added and absorbed into the SM codex. A way to rate this out however exists, reduce plasma pistols and rifles to a cost of 10 and perhaps plasma cannons reduced.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

You're missing the point. You wouldn't be able to have both Grey Knight Terminators in the same army as PA Grey Knights in the example you outlined. At this rate you're going to end up with a Codex that takes ages to read and understand what you have to do to unlock stuff and what isn't allowed with that. Not to mention it'd allow for stuff like Black Templars Librarians which shouldn't exist.

Librarian == Veterans become GK.
SCX == Veterans become troops.
Veterans == Can take terminator armor for +XX.

Grey Knights in pa as troops.
Grey Knights in tda as troops.

And as I said, it's up to the player to decide if they want to play to the fluff (not take a librarian in their BT) or play to the rules. It's roughly the same as the Chaos dex. Sure you could play a Thousand Sons army with a nurgle Demon Prince. Obviously this wouldn't be ideal, but it can/will/does happen. Or you can approach it like the black legion where some conflicts require multiple chapters to work together (armaggeddon for example).

But like I said at the end of the post, it really doesn't matter anymore. It's clear I can come up with a scenario for every unit with little effort, but it doesn't change the fact that GW will never combine the books as the above poster said. They make money. Players like reading the background. Players want their marines to be feel unique (even though they aren't).

The advantages to it being in a single book clearly outweighs the disadvantages. But it doesn't really seem to matter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DAaddict wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:I think the rules (and the fluff) are fairly irrelevant to this.

Do Dark Angel offer potential for some unique mini's to sell? Answer: Yes. Robed Marines, Native American Terminators, Robed Bikers, etc.. . There is enough "different" sculpting potential and an exisitng fan-base there to make Dark Angels worthwhile as their "own release".

Rules and Fluff can be changed. If Dark Angels need to be "more different" in the rules, they'll add something unique in the vein of TWC, Sang. Guard or Dreadknight. If not, just as well. The Codex ultimately is there to sell the Minis.

Agreed. The point is the current DA codex is so underwhelming it is an afterthought of an army. With the exception of playing a DW army,
you have so much more cost savings and flexibility doing a generic Codex: SM based army. Just buy the robes and say you are playing a regular SM chapter.

But I would like to examine the potential changes to keep the DA unique and playable.

1. No Sternguard or Vanguard Vets. This is at first a detriment but look at it as an opportunity to diverge. Make Ravenwing the equivalent of Vanguard vets the +1 A would help differentiate it from a standard SM bike army also the potential for power weaponing up the unit would be good. No sternguard that is fine, they don't use the specialized ammo but again perhaps this could be added to the Deathwing stormbolter - again it makes for a unique termie. Before you pooh-pooh it as OP think about it, this is a termie with SB and PF under the current system there is no reason not to spam SS + TH termies. This gives a DA the reason to exist.

2. Give them a chapter trait. Up until the last codex, DA were always stubborn with the DW and RW being fearless. Perhaps this is something that should be brought back. Or a new one- again with making the DA the ultimate firepower based marines instead of just another skull crusher - perhaps a "Cool underfire" much like SW counterattack, the DA have the option of firing at an opponent instead of making HTH attacks - the risk is fail the leadership test and you get nothing. To avoid it being OP, limit it to assault, pistol and rapid fireweapons. So the devastator only has the option of firing their pistols.

3. Include the options that other chapters have for vehicles and update the costs. Increase the razorback options and landspeeder options.
Perhaps include all the dreadnought options. Definitely increase a librarians Ld to 10.

4. Another thought on the theme of difference - the old fluff was that the DA had a higher average of special weapons particularly plasma.
Now in the old days, the DA were the ONLY chapter that could take PC on tacticals but like most things, it was added and absorbed into the SM codex. A way to rate this out however exists, reduce plasma pistols and rifles to a cost of 10 and perhaps plasma cannons reduced.

1.) I personally hope they keep a vet squad if only for the aesthetics of a fully robed unit rocking killer weapons. A previous poster mentioned they could get 2 handed power weapons for example. I would take this unit even if it failed hard compared to everything else in the elites section just to have fully robed and hooded marines with 2 handed power swords laying into the enemy. As for the specialized ammo for terminators, that seems like a reasonable thing to consider.

2.) A global special rule would be nice. If you wanted to keep them with the ranged specialist type feel you could do some really interesting things. Like all DA get a special rule where they may move and still fire their heavy weapons but they may not move or shoot the following turn, but may still assault. Other small things would be like grenades on terminators.

3.) This is an issue with them having so many marine books. All marine books regardless of when they came out or who they belong to should still have the same stat line for every unit in every book. Do things like have wargear options to modify it higher if a unit needs it (halbreds for GK or example). But this is largely a problem between editions and not so much between books released around the same time.

4.) Was this ever written in the fluff? I thought it was just players assuming this is why they had plasma in tacticals/dev units back in the day; them being the first legion and all. Another option that was discussed earlier was to remove things like the get hot rule for dark angels. This would show them getting first crack at new weapons coming off the assembly line for example.

I just hope we see a robed assault unit with 2handed weapons, a robed plastic terminator pack, a chaplain dreadnaught, plasma landraider, and new fluff.

Nvs wrote: But I would like to examine the potential changes to keep the DA unique and playable.

1. No Sternguard or Vanguard Vets. This is at first a detriment but look at it as an opportunity to diverge. Make Ravenwing the equivalent of Vanguard vets the +1 A would help differentiate it from a standard SM bike army also the potential for power weaponing up the unit would be good. No sternguard that is fine, they don't use the specialized ammo but again perhaps this could be added to the Deathwing stormbolter - again it makes for a unique termie. Before you pooh-pooh it as OP think about it, this is a termie with SB and PF under the current system there is no reason not to spam SS + TH termies. This gives a DA the reason to exist.

2. Give them a chapter trait. Up until the last codex, DA were always stubborn with the DW and RW being fearless. Perhaps this is something that should be brought back. Or a new one- again with making the DA the ultimate firepower based marines instead of just another skull crusher - perhaps a "Cool underfire" much like SW counterattack, the DA have the option of firing at an opponent instead of making HTH attacks - the risk is fail the leadership test and you get nothing. To avoid it being OP, limit it to assault, pistol and rapid fireweapons. So the devastator only has the option of firing their pistols.

3. Include the options that other chapters have for vehicles and update the costs. Increase the razorback options and landspeeder options.
Perhaps include all the dreadnought options. Definitely increase a librarians Ld to 10.

4. Another thought on the theme of difference - the old fluff was that the DA had a higher average of special weapons particularly plasma.
Now in the old days, the DA were the ONLY chapter that could take PC on tacticals but like most things, it was added and absorbed into the SM codex. A way to rate this out however exists, reduce plasma pistols and rifles to a cost of 10 and perhaps plasma cannons reduced.

1.) I personally hope they keep a vet squad if only for the aesthetics of a fully robed unit rocking killer weapons. A previous poster mentioned they could get 2 handed power weapons for example. I would take this unit even if it failed hard compared to everything else in the elites section just to have fully robed and hooded marines with 2 handed power swords laying into the enemy. As for the specialized ammo for terminators, that seems like a reasonable thing to consider.

2.) A global special rule would be nice. If you wanted to keep them with the ranged specialist type feel you could do some really interesting things. Like all DA get a special rule where they may move and still fire their heavy weapons but they may not move or shoot the following turn, but may still assault. Other small things would be like grenades on terminators.

3.) This is an issue with them having so many marine books. All marine books regardless of when they came out or who they belong to should still have the same stat line for every unit in every book. Do things like have wargear options to modify it higher if a unit needs it (halbreds for GK or example). But this is largely a problem between editions and not so much between books released around the same time.

4.) Was this ever written in the fluff? I thought it was just players assuming this is why they had plasma in tacticals/dev units back in the day; them being the first legion and all. Another option that was discussed earlier was to remove things like the get hot rule for dark angels. This would show them getting first crack at new weapons coming off the assembly line for example.

I just hope we see a robed assault unit with 2handed weapons, a robed plastic terminator pack, a chaplain dreadnaught, plasma landraider, and new fluff.

Formosa wrote:The problem with DA isn't the lack of diference with C:sm, its a poor design philosophy, DA could easily gain alot of new units and divert from the Codex astartes, more so than any other chapter and still fit the fluff, they are THE most secretive chapter, and are perfectly willing to "silence" anyone who see's too much.
This allows for a whole new string of units, and is more justifiable than say.. the sanguinor or the space wolf space squirrel

That applies to almost everything.

The Raven Guard, for example, are all stealth based, and love lightning claws, and so should have even their basic tac squads modified to suit this.

Imperial Fists spend all their time duelling, and using the pain glove, so should have +1WS and FNP if we took fluff into account. They'd also be able to build cover, and field more devastators.

Salamanders would have combi-flamers for just about everyone, and all their weapons would be master-crafted and all their armour would be artificer.

Iron Hands would have augmetics across the board, and they would all be able to repair vehicles, not just the TEcH Mehreens!

Blood Angels would occasionally become death company in the middle of battle, and when the Sanguinor shows up, they would all be cured of the BR/RT. Plus Sanguinor would be EVEN MORE powerful. And Mephiston would auto-win.

And White Scars would all have fleet of foot, and would be able to field bikes for WAAAY cheaper.

There is no way they could create codices for every chapter, so WHY ARE THEY TRYING?!?

Also: they are NOT the most secretive space marines. Alpha Legion is WAY more secretive, as are the Legion of the Damned and even Iktinos' Flock are more secretive.

I think we all have a short memory. Codex BA (the download edition and prior) was almost non-existent in play until it got revamped. SW was quite limited in play unitl the new codex came out and now it is probably the most popular. If you recall, Codex: DA when it first came out offered some mild benefits and thus remained playable. However that went out the window with the release of the current Codex: SM and what has followed has made it worse.

Amazingly Codex: BT remains somewhat competitive but look at Codex DA today and it offers about 4 things
1. Special wpns in the first half of a demi-squad.
2. Techmarines outside of the FOC.
3. Buffer Chaplains
4. The deathwing.

All the other "bonuses" have been assimilated into Codex: SM and in most cases enhanced to the point that Codex: DA is non-competitive. (65 a speeder, Sammiel 200pts of uselessness, idiot savant librarians, limited and overcosted predator options, etc.)

You know a codex is bad when you go - "I could build it with codex X but if I build it with codex y I am giving up very little and will field more stuff."

Bottomline, where codex DA is today is it is better to field robed generic marines unless you intend to do a Deathwing. That in and of itself is poor reason to maintain a separate codex. GW is at a decision point, it could add 4 pages to the SM codex and assimilate all that is codex DA or it could breathe new life into it. Definitely the latter option will take more effort but it also offers the benefit of reinvigorating sales of DA stuff as well as the 30+ $$ to buy the new codex.

DAaddict wrote:
Amazingly Codex: BT remains somewhat competitive but look at Codex DA today and it offers about 4 things
1. Special wpns in the first half of a demi-squad.
2. Techmarines outside of the FOC.
3. Buffer Chaplains
4. The deathwing.

So more or less the same thing Templars have going for us. You lose some CC potential and the godly Land Speeder Typhoons in exchange for troop Terminators with FNP, Techmarines outside the FOC (which isn't too amazing TBH) and Librarians (sure, they suck, but still ). It's interesting how the melee parts of the BT is the one thing keeping a Templar gunline above a DA one (and if this sounds sarcastic I apologize, I'm genuinely interested of this).

True Grit.

Yeah. Remember that ability for DA/Death Guard? Where they can fire their bolters in CC?

Yeah. We'll take that back.

Wasn't true grit a space wolf thing?

Honestly don't remember as those things were back in 3rd edition.

Kanluwen wrote:True Grit.

Yeah. Remember that ability for DA/Death Guard? Where they can fire their bolters in CC?

Yeah. We'll take that back.

Well, it wasn't so much firing bolters in CC as allowing a bolter to be used as though it were a 2nd CCW in CC, but not getting bonus charge attacks. It was basically a hamfisted mechanic to get around the old rules about limits on 1H/2H wargear for models. I also don't remember DA's having it, am I missing something? I remember SW's and Death Guard having it, but not Dark Angels.

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:True Grit.

Yeah. Remember that ability for DA/Death Guard? Where they can fire their bolters in CC?

Yeah. We'll take that back.

Well, it wasn't so much firing bolters in CC as allowing a bolter to be used as though it were a 2nd CCW in CC, but not getting bonus charge attacks. It was basically a hamfisted mechanic to get around the old rules about limits on 1H/2H wargear for models. I also don't remember DA's having it, am I missing something? I remember SW's and Death Guard having it, but not Dark Angels.

It was a SW thing. It allowed a non-charging marine to count a bolter as CCW. So a marine would charge with 2 attacks and then get 2 attacks in each succeeding round due to having 2 CCW.

DAaddict wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:True Grit.

Yeah. Remember that ability for DA/Death Guard? Where they can fire their bolters in CC?

Yeah. We'll take that back.

Well, it wasn't so much firing bolters in CC as allowing a bolter to be used as though it were a 2nd CCW in CC, but not getting bonus charge attacks. It was basically a hamfisted mechanic to get around the old rules about limits on 1H/2H wargear for models. I also don't remember DA's having it, am I missing something? I remember SW's and Death Guard having it, but not Dark Angels.

It was a SW thing. It allowed a non-charging marine to count a bolter as CCW. So a marine would charge with 2 attacks and then get 2 attacks in each succeeding round due to having 2 CCW.

Grey Knights had it too.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

DAaddict wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:True Grit.

Yeah. Remember that ability for DA/Death Guard? Where they can fire their bolters in CC?

Yeah. We'll take that back.

Well, it wasn't so much firing bolters in CC as allowing a bolter to be used as though it were a 2nd CCW in CC, but not getting bonus charge attacks. It was basically a hamfisted mechanic to get around the old rules about limits on 1H/2H wargear for models. I also don't remember DA's having it, am I missing something? I remember SW's and Death Guard having it, but not Dark Angels.

It was a SW thing. It allowed a non-charging marine to count a bolter as CCW. So a marine would charge with 2 attacks and then get 2 attacks in each succeeding round due to having 2 CCW.

Grey Knights had it too.

Yeah. I was misremembering, had to find my DA Codex again.

I could have swore they suggested it as some point as a thing for Dark Angels but eh.

Still. I want it. Bolters in CC? Definitely goes alongside the 'intractable' nature of the Unforgiven.

FYI the DA plasma thing was new to 3rd Ed and doesn't have any true fluff supporting it beyond a think a quick blurb in the 3rd Ed codex about them having a lot of it.

The 2nd Ed Angels of Death codex is still where a large portion of where the Dark Angels were established rule and in large part fluff wise. With the exception of the whole Plasma thing they've basically lost fluff, rules, and distictiveness from there.

im2randomghgh wrote:

Formosa wrote:The problem with DA isn't the lack of diference with C:sm, its a poor design philosophy, DA could easily gain alot of new units and divert from the Codex astartes, more so than any other chapter and still fit the fluff, they are THE most secretive chapter, and are perfectly willing to "silence" anyone who see's too much.
This allows for a whole new string of units, and is more justifiable than say.. the sanguinor or the space wolf space squirrel

That applies to almost everything.

The Raven Guard, for example, are all stealth based, and love lightning claws, and so should have even their basic tac squads modified to suit this.

Imperial Fists spend all their time duelling, and using the pain glove, so should have +1WS and FNP if we took fluff into account. They'd also be able to build cover, and field more devastators.

Salamanders would have combi-flamers for just about everyone, and all their weapons would be master-crafted and all their armour would be artificer.

Iron Hands would have augmetics across the board, and they would all be able to repair vehicles, not just the TEcH Mehreens!

Blood Angels would occasionally become death company in the middle of battle, and when the Sanguinor shows up, they would all be cured of the BR/RT. Plus Sanguinor would be EVEN MORE powerful. And Mephiston would auto-win.

And White Scars would all have fleet of foot, and would be able to field bikes for WAAAY cheaper.

There is no way they could create codices for every chapter, so WHY ARE THEY TRYING?!?

Also: they are NOT the most secretive space marines. Alpha Legion is WAY more secretive, as are the Legion of the Damned and even Iktinos' Flock are more secretive.

none of the spheel you have just let off has any bearing on what i said.
Alpha LEGION are not a chapter
LEGION of the dammed are not a chapter
Iktinos flock? you got me there, never hear of them.

Dark Angels are the most secretive CHAPTER, circles within circles

Why don't they just make bikes and terminators core to begin with, make devastator squads with cheap plasma cannons (and twin link all plasma), bring back the SCs and Cypher, get better psychic stuff and maybe a few other things. Just my thoughts.

Formosa wrote:
LEGION of the dammed are not a chapter

Yes they are. Remnants of the Fire Hawks, but still technically a Chapter.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Yes they are. Remnants of the Fire Hawks, but still technically a Chapter.

Probably the remnants of the Fire Hawks.

I know its really off topic but I just want to settle the Space Wolf size matter. The SW codex states that Ragnar´s great company has around or slightly over 200 warriors in it.. and it is one of the largest.

This would mean that there are probably never more than 2500 Space Wolves at any point.

Sarapham wrote:I know its really off topic but I just want to settle the Space Wolf size matter. The SW codex states that Ragnar´s great company has around or slightly over 200 warriors in it.. and it is one of the largest.

This would mean that there are probably never more than 2500 Space Wolves at any point.

Thank you for settling that issue.