25751
Post by: gmaleron
Hello everyone, this is a question that has talked about almost religiously at my local gaming store which came about when a guy walked in looking to start one of the many games we play. When asking what kinds of 40k armies there were he made a comment on how many marine chapters there were and how many pro imperial forces as a whole were in the game and decided that he would be better off playing fantasy since there was more variety. Now IMO I think he has a point and really it is, if not the primary reason why I have not played 40k in a long time as I feel it has turned somewhat into "Marine-Hammer" with each new book getting really ridiculous stuff (Paladins with Draego...  ). When you break it down these are the armies you have at your disposal in the 40k universe:
IMPERIAL:
-Space Marines (Vanilla)
-Blood Angels
-Dark Angels
-Space Wolves
-Grey Knights
-Black Templars
-Imperial Guard
-Sisters of Battle
EVERYONE ELSE:
-Chaos
-Demons
-Eldar
-Dark Eldar
-Nids
-Tau
-Necrons
-Orks
When broken down exactly HALF of the 40k armies in the universe are dedicated to the Imperium (with over 6 of them alone being Space Marines which is 33% or 1/3 of all the armies available). Now I do realize that the Space Marines are the most popular and this is NOT a dig or trash talking post, I am just wanting to know do you guys think there are to many Space Marine and Imperial armies out there? And if so what do you think should be done to change it? Me I kind of thought of something off the last editions Imperial Guard Codex which involved doctrines: Lets say for some of the marine chapters (not all) that to run them as that army they take certain doctrines from the book like if you wanted to run a Black Templar army it would have a list of what you could/could not take and the special rules allowed to not only fit the chapters fluff but not an entirely differnt army. Just an Idea, tell me what you think and thanks mates! 
36015
Post by: Toastedandy
Space Marines are by far the biggest sellers. They're shiny.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
Oh look, it's this thread again. The issue with merging every marine Codex into one is that you'd either have to have a massive book and thus a massive development time or you'd have to axe some Chapters. The notion that it's somehow good for the hobby to try to force people into playing an army they don't want to play seems a tad misguided to me.
25751
Post by: gmaleron
Who said anything about forcing people? It was just an idea for marines and really the topic is do you think there are to many Imperial/Space Marine Chapters in 40k, not just marines. Please stay on topic this was not to be a marine trashing thread, hence why I said it above.
36015
Post by: Toastedandy
I like the idea of a codex having doctrines, and brought it up before. It got shot down ruthlessly. People didn't like the idea of having one marine codex, with the option too make any chapter using traits, and instead thought I meant stapling all the marine codex's together into some sort of giant mess.
48486
Post by: Thranriel
I think its better than having everyone play vanilla marines with different colours painted on them.
With different codexes for each chapter at least you get a variety in marines and they feel much more like seperate armies. I guess what an above poster meant was kind of like maybe the different craftworlds in the 3rd edition eldar codex only on a much larger scale with alot more traits. However doing that might not leave the impression of different armies but somehow just a "type" of marines.
If anyone understands that then happy days!
2304
Post by: Steelmage99
Marines sell, therefore they get more support, therefore they sell, therefore they get more support, therefore they sell, therefore.......
41245
Post by: tarnish
Marines are elite. That's the whole point. When choosing to play a game like 40k most people will think their better off choosing the elite because their cool, have dependable stats and are small superheroes. Besides, their the "good guys" thereby making their victories just and true, and making their proverbial cheese entirely justified because their Supposed to win. the good guys win right? That's what we are told from an early age. Their cheaper to collect and you get done painting faster, they have less complex color schemes and once you done one the next one will be exactly the same.
so, to summarise:
Elite
Easy to paint
Low model count
Good guys, therefore winners allready
Dependable
why would anyone not want them as their first choice?
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
gmaleron wrote:Who said anything about forcing people? It was just an idea for marines and really the topic is do you think there are to many Imperial/Space Marine Chapters in 40k, not just marines. Please stay on topic this was not to be a marine trashing thread, hence why I said it above.
Didn't mean that you said anything like that, but it's a common theme in this kind of thread to suggest that marines be rolled into one Codex so that other teams get more space, thus effectively forcing anyone with a variant Codex to switch army.
I'll say it again: Gathering all marines in one Codex is bad because you'd either end up with:
A) A giant tome of rules that is de facto impossible to playtest properly
B) A giant tome of rules that has so many special rules, exceptions and conditions that it all becomes a mess
C) A giant expensive tome of rules which makes marine players pay for rules they don't intend to ever use
D) A giant tome of rules where most of the fluff is gone and the only differentiating thing between marines is a few doctrines, leading to more complaints of how similar all marines are
E) A normal-sized tome of rules where X of the current Chapters aren't represented
F) A combination of the above.
In any case, Marine players lose while non-marine players get... What exactly?
45116
Post by: bombboy1252
I stick to my guns and say that the SW BA DA BT should NOT have their own codexs and share the same rules with codex marines GK, IG, and sisters are just fine. Automatically Appended Next Post: AlmightyWalrus wrote:gmaleron wrote:Who said anything about forcing people? It was just an idea for marines and really the topic is do you think there are to many Imperial/Space Marine Chapters in 40k, not just marines. Please stay on topic this was not to be a marine trashing thread, hence why I said it above.
Didn't mean that you said anything like that, but it's a common theme in this kind of thread to suggest that marines be rolled into one Codex so that other teams get more space, thus effectively forcing anyone with a variant Codex to switch army.
I'll say it again: Gathering all marines in one Codex is bad because you'd either end up with:
A) A giant tome of rules that is de facto impossible to playtest properly
B) A giant tome of rules that has so many special rules, exceptions and conditions that it all becomes a mess
C) A giant expensive tome of rules which makes marine players pay for rules they don't intend to ever use
D) A giant tome of rules where most of the fluff is gone and the only differentiating thing between marines is a few doctrines, leading to more complaints of how similar all marines are
E) A normal-sized tome of rules where X of the current Chapters aren't represented
F) A combination of the above.
In any case, Marine players lose while non-marine players get... What exactly?
They would get new codexs more frequently........
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
Except they wouldn't, because the Space Marine Codex wold eat just as much resources as the five we have today combined. And even if this theoretical Codex: Astartes (Hurr hurr) somehow sped up Codex creation, it'd be at the expense of Marine players.
Oh, sorry, I forgot that it's OK to throw gak at Marine players because each individual Marine player is worth less than a non-Marine player. Carry on!
45116
Post by: bombboy1252
??? you seem a bit angry, I apologize if I came off rude but I do think its ridiculous how imperium has half of the codexs. I'm not saying "MAHREEEN SUX XENOSSS IZ BETTER" I'm just saying I don't like it, and as far as speeding up codexs, they wouldn't have to cram all the SW fluff with all the SW battles or BA fluff with the BA battles, it could just be the normal Codex: Space marine with a little bit more fluff for the other chapters.
24150
Post by: ChocolateGork
HAHAHA eat more resources.
What resources? It doesn't take long to make a codex. There is only month's between releases because they sell more that way.
45116
Post by: bombboy1252
ChocolateGork wrote:HAHAHA eat more resources.
What resources? It doesn't take long to make a codex. There is only month's between releases because they sell more that way.
ya, theirs no way it would take THIS long for them to make a new crons' codex
1185
Post by: marv335
For all the lack of business acumen GW seem to show, even they are not going to kill their golden goose like that.
As I am given to understand, SM out sell pretty much every other race/army/game combined.
The ease of designing kits (especially since it's done on computer these days) added to the simple construction/painting reduce costs in the studio and time for staff in shops, plus it's easier to sell the concept of a genetically engineered super human warrior to the target demographic.
If they cut down on marine sales, which xenos races do you want them to "squat" because they don't justify the development budget?
24150
Post by: ChocolateGork
All marines in one dex would be fine. The only difference is the points costs getting cheaper and cheaper and the
Blood angels being more bloody
Space wolves being more wolfy
Black Templars being more Crusadery
And the dark angels being exactly the same (except for having termie troops but the wolfy marines have that)
42494
Post by: nomotog
Isn't 8 alien fractions enough? We probably have too much IoM in general (Books games ect), but if it's what people want it's what they want.
45116
Post by: bombboy1252
I'm not saying it's a financially sound idea for GW, I was just saying what I thought would be "better"
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
ChocolateGork wrote:HAHAHA eat more resources.
What resources? It doesn't take long to make a codex. There is only month's between releases because they sell more that way.
If it doesn't take that much effort or time, how come we need to drop any Marine Codeci?
And yes, I'm a bit upset because it's the same thing in every single one of these threads: people assuming that every marine codex plays the same and thus treating every marine player as some sort of second-class citizen. I guess I might be overly zealous, but I've had enough of people treating every marine release as being of the same army.
Sorry if I come off as rude, my social skills are truly atrocious, and the Internet doesn't exactly help. 
24150
Post by: ChocolateGork
We need to merge the codexes because it would allow for more frequent updates of the codex's. If 6 marine codexes didn't need updating then Necrons wouldnt be 10 years old and dark eldar wouldn't of gotten so old and Tau wouldn't suck.
And actually all the marine codex's play the same with one major difference in each one.
BA-Fast AND FNP
BT-Terminators and abusing a really GOOD FAQ. A kind of FAQ NO ONE ELSE GOT.
DA-Terminators and abusing a really GOOD FAQ. A kind of FAQ NO ONE ELSE GOT.
Wolves-Wolves and Cheap troops and Devastators.
If all the marines were in a single codex then they would have balanced points and you could use a trait/chapter system like from 4th ed to make them unique and give them special rules. You could have special characters and Special options for each chapter.
38630
Post by: starraptor
ChocolateGork wrote:We need to merge the codexes because it would allow for more frequent updates of the codex's. If 6 marine codexes didn't need updating then Necrons wouldnt be 10 years old and dark eldar wouldn't of gotten so old and Tau wouldn't suck.
And actually all the marine codex's play the same with one major difference in each one.
BA-Fast AND FNP
BT-Terminators and abusing a really GOOD FAQ. A kind of FAQ NO ONE ELSE GOT.
DA-Terminators and abusing a really GOOD FAQ. A kind of FAQ NO ONE ELSE GOT.
Wolves-Wolves and Cheap troops and Devastators.
If all the marines were in a single codex then they would have balanced points and you could use a trait/chapter system like from 4th ed to make them unique and give them special rules. You could have special characters and Special options for each chapter.
Actually all marine army's don't play the same even army's in the same codex can play radically differnt. Thats like me saying all zenos army's play the same totally untrue and rediculos to even say.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
ChocolateGork wrote:We need to merge the codexes because it would allow for more frequent updates of the codex's. If 6 marine codexes didn't need updating then Necrons wouldnt be 10 years old and dark eldar wouldn't of gotten so old and Tau wouldn't suck.
And who's going to pay for those updates? As it is now, the extra marine codices pay for the updating of some of the other armies because the marines are more popular. Remove the spread of marine book releases and you won't have the funds to fuel the other armies. I can agree with updating all old Codices with FAQ/Errata updates similar to the ones that DA and BT received though.
ChocolateGork wrote:
BT-Terminators and abusing a really GOOD FAQ. A kind of FAQ NO ONE ELSE GOT.
DA-Terminators and abusing a really GOOD FAQ. A kind of FAQ NO ONE ELSE GOT.
These two are mutually exclusive, you can't say that no one else got it if there's someone else who got it. Also, how the hell is playing by the rules abusing? I mean really, how in any feasible way can you, with a straight face, claim that playing according to the rulebook is abusing??
ChocolateGork wrote:If all the marines were in a single codex then they would have balanced points and you could use a trait/chapter system like from 4th ed to make them unique and give them special rules. You could have special characters and Special options for each chapter.
And all you'd end up with is people taking the same two or three traits over and over and over, just like in 4th. Again, doesn't help diversity at all.
46636
Post by: English Assassin
Nice as it would be, speaking as a player, to have all of the Astartes chapters in a single hefty hardback, I don't see Games Workshop changing their business model to one which would suit that. Perhaps those who affect to despise them should, given that Space Marines (according to figures which are doubtless out of date, but which are the only ones we have) make up more than 50% of Warhammer 40,000's sales, be glad they haven't correspondingly received more than half of the codices.
The Space Marines are the iconic toy soldiers of the Warhammer 40,000 universe, you're just going to have to have to live with that. Now you can, as some in this thread have, argue that support breeds popularity, but there's more to it than that. As a concept, the Marines are distinctive, (relatively) original and appealing in look and background to the teenagers Games Workshop want as new customers; they are what make the fast, reliable profits which allow the company to accept lower, longer-term returns on other model ranges.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
It would help if GW could get away from the release pattern of two codexes a year, one of which is SM.
This could be achieved by releasing codexes more frequently and releasing two non-SM codexes for each SM book.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
Kilkrazy wrote:It would help if GW could get away from the release pattern of two codexes a year, one of which is SM.
This could be achieved by releasing codexes more frequently and releasing two non-SM codexes for each SM book.
This I can agree with. The only issue would be that GW would have to release stuff for both Fantasy and 40k very close to each other, something I'm not sure they'd consider.
13220
Post by: Commisar Wolfie
It sorta makes sense for the Imperium to have half of the armies when from the story perspective it is the Imperium against everything else.
18698
Post by: kronk
gmaleron wrote:
When broken down exactly HALF of the 40k armies in the universe are dedicated to the Imperium (with over 6 of them alone being Space Marines which is 33% or 1/3 of all the armies available).
Is it time for this thread again? Yep...
*Sets watch*
They make them because they sell and make GW a ton of money. Full stop on the discussion of why 50% are space marines.
Kilkrazy wrote:It would help if GW could get away from the release pattern of two codexes a year, one of which is SM.
This could be achieved by releasing codexes more frequently and releasing two non-SM codexes for each SM book.
If only KK, if only.
Variety is better than limitations. For each release of a new edition of 40k, there should be a PDF update of every army's codex until a new codex comes out.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
From another perspective, that creates a great and mainly unexploited opportunity to explore the potentially massive non-IoM side of the story.
I don't know if more 40K books per year would clash with Fantasy. I suppose it depends on the amount of cross-over (number of players who buy both).
29110
Post by: AustonT
40k is a game that centers on Space Marines, it's always best if you reconcile yourself to that fact. Sales is a big part of that, but so is psychology. This is a game played by humans, the less imaginative and flexible players will tend to gravitate towards IoM armies.
I like variety as much as the next guy but SM armies will ALWAYS dominate 40k
39868
Post by: iproxtaco
Too much of the Imperium? No, not really. There's too little of everything. More xenos would be great, but so would a new Sisters, AdmMech and Inquisition codex. The Imperium is the protagonist of the setting, It's right that there should be a greater concentration on them.
Too much Space Marines? From a player perspective perhaps there are a few too many Marine codices. From a setting perspective then no, absolutely no, see above. From GW's perspective, I'd have thought that they don't have enough Marine Chapters. They make money, they bring people into the hobby as good advertising figure heads and as good starting armies. Sure, they should speed up the codex process and release more Xenos stuff, but it wouldn't likely make them as much money as doing more Space Marines. Cutting down on the number of SM books wouldn't solve the problem as Walrus has detailed.
41750
Post by: SSsilverskullSS
I agree in that there are too many Imperial supporting codex's, but i don't agree that they should be rolled into one codex.
I think they should make more codex's for other races such as a whole kroot codex for the tau
45116
Post by: bombboy1252
If dem marine boyz get more codexs, da boyz want a codex: speed freeks
42494
Post by: nomotog
You know this is not a codex problem. Sure we have half a dozen SM codexs (Can we axe one or two and replace them with guard codexs maybe?), but that is just a symptom of the larger problem. The start of focus for everything is on the IoM. Apart from the codexs nothing really digs too deep. That means most books, most side games, most videos. They all start at the IoM, but they never really venture farther the IoM. Thats a big problem because it's in these side events that a side can really be flushed out.
We have three 40k rpgs. RT, DH, DW. You would think that they could have slipped a ork RPG in there. Orks are fun and from experience most RPG players act like Orks. Same with books. I scoured the border book shelf (can you believe they are closed now. boy that happened fast.) for anything on the tau or the orks, or well anything that wasn't IoM. only one I found was mark of the xeno.
I don't know how to fix this. The IoM is the natural starting point for exporting the setting, but we have the starting point well covered get moving on some of other fractions.
37755
Post by: Harriticus
Way too much Space Marines, not so much Imperial though. No Adeptus Mechanicus/Arbites/etc. armies or attention. We don't even know who the High Lords are in the closing years of the 41st Millennia.
I would like to see some more alien races though expanded upon. The Ulumeathic League, Draxian Hegemony, and Noisome Reek were stated as being 3 emerging Xenos Empires along with the Tau who were threatening the Imperium.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
24892
Post by: Byte
Are you saying we need more xenos or less Imperial?
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
47146
Post by: The Monk
All of the above.....
If I can take one thing, from all of the above staments ,that repeat the same sentiment over and over in a different manner: GW aint gonna change what they precieve as a winning fourmula, as it is, well,.. Winning as far as they are concerned.
It all follows the basic formula for most si-fi stories and games; protagonast must have the same traits as present day humanity, but be different enough, that the customer feels they are not of this world... and whallah you have space marines.
done and done, it aint gonna change. So I think we should stop wishing it to.
That is the awnser to all of the above staments, questions and the OP.
37821
Post by: Zalmout
I enjoy the different play style marines, it really allows for the variety they wouldn't have otherwise...
45116
Post by: bombboy1252
It's sad the GW just focuses on imperial forces, sure it makes them money but over the 20- something years they had the IP they created this wonderful world and they only focus on 1/2 of it. Sure it makes them money, but it gets boring after a while, "ah cool a big fight scene.......space marines win" "ah cool a huge space battle, "although completely outnumbered, the space marine fleet wins a crushing victory" oh" It's getting "used"
45703
Post by: Lynata
It's a difficult topic. Whilst I do agree that the number of Marine codices is very much disproportionate and not truly necessary (the Astartes had "combi-codices" before - anyone remember the Codex : Angels of Death?), the Marines are arguably GW's biggest seller, so from a business perspective it does make sense to focus on them, even if this means that other factions will be neglected.
In an ideal world, we would probably have many more codices with more regular updates and expansions. Just look at the Imperial Guard - you could easily make a Codex for the individual regiments as well, strengthening the differences between the various units based on their homeworld and different tactica. From a player's perspective, there is absolutely no reason for why the IG has to put up with a single book for all the regiments when the Astartes do not.
Alas, we do not live in that world, so the first paragraph remains true.
On the other hand, it might even be that GW could earn more profit by producing a single but bigger and slightly more pricy book ...
24892
Post by: Byte
Lynata wrote:It's a difficult topic. Whilst I do agree that the number of Marine codices is very much disproportionate and not truly necessary (the Astartes had "combi-codices" before - anyone remember the Codex : Angels of Death?), the Marines are arguably GW's biggest seller, so from a business perspective it does make sense to focus on them, even if this means that other factions will be neglected.
In an ideal world, we would probably have many more codices with more regular updates and expansions. Just look at the Imperial Guard - you could easily make a Codex for the individual regiments as well, strengthening the differences between the various units based on their homeworld and different tactica. From a player's perspective, there is absolutely no reason for why the IG has to put up with a single book for all the regiments when the Astartes do not.
Alas, we do not live in that world, so the first paragraph remains true.
On the other hand, it might even be that GW could earn more profit by producing a single but bigger and slightly more pricy book ...
Aye, I still have the one I used to stomp face with in 2nd edition.
29408
Post by: Melissia
Chaos Space Marines are still Space Marines. So be sure to count them under Space Marines.
25484
Post by: Jollydevil
They should just do what chaos does. Add in the special units to the troops, and just combine them all into one army.
44326
Post by: DeffDred
IMHO I'd like to see 2 massive codecii,
1) Codex: Adeptus Astartes. This would be a few hundred pages and have a special character for each of the Loyalist Legions and several other charaters that would have 2 page entries each with the rules that explain their chapter. The Codex would simply layout the standard units as normal. The regular Commander choice (An Utrasmarine Company Commander) would be a fraction of the other Special characters' cost to encourage people (that want to use the widest choices) to use a vanilla army. The Elite section of the Codex would include all the unique and interesting units (except those that clearly need to be FA or HS). Those Elites would be explained under the Special Character entry (ie Thunderwolf Calvary would simply be Bikes with additional rules and an added points cost, Death Company would be Veterans with additional rules and added points cost, ect.). I would not, however, include the Gray Knights. IMHO they have absolutly no right to a codex and should be in a seperate codex that covers the forces of the Inquisition.
2) Codex: Taitor Astartes. This would be an exact copy of the C:AA, except using all the Chaos Special charaters. The differences between the two (marketing-wise) would be that the C:AA would obviously focus more on the new units and vehicles (created by the Adeptus Mechanicus) while C:TA would focus on the monsters and slaves of the Eye of Terror.
Now I understand that people believe that rolling the codecii into one would slow the rate of releases from GW and such, but I think it would be a great way for GW to focus on the hobbying aspect of the game. Rather than trying to keep new books pumping out they could focus on more models being pumped out.
I felt that the Black Templar upgrade kits were the ultimate idea. Why not simply make new upgrades every few months as opposed a full fledged army release?
48706
Post by: Viersche
AustonT wrote:40k is a game that centers on Space Marines, it's always best if you reconcile yourself to that fact. Sales is a big part of that, but so is psychology. This is a game played by humans, the less imaginative and flexible players will tend to gravitate towards IoM armies.
I like variety as much as the next guy but SM armies will ALWAYS dominate 40k
This. I totally agree with 
45376
Post by: Justy
Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
429
Post by: Ogiwan
Well, why can't there be a Codex: Astartes that covers all of the Marine chapters that follow that doctrine?
Obviously, that would include Ultramarines, which, if memory serves me correctly, are responsible for something like 3/5 of the Chapters in service.
But, such a book could also include more of the major chapters, which currently (for whatever reason) have their own book.
The Blood Angels, for example, were originally a Codex Astartes chapter that fought against their curse. The fact that Games Workshop turned them into loyalist Khornates is just another strike in the 'oh god GW is fething dumb' category.
The Dark Angels are, to my knowledge, also a Codex Astartes chapter, with the exception being their 1st and 10th companies (right? Deathwing and Ravenwing?). The rest of their 8 chapters, again to my knowledge, follow the doctrine espoused by Guillimen.
So, Ultramarines, Blood Angles, and Dark Angels could all be collected in one volume with the necessary special rules to differentiate them. I think even Black Templars could be stuck in there too, but that statement always results in teeth-gnashing and whatnot. But, nevertheless, why not have a book for Codex Astartes chapters, and a book for non-Codex Astartes chapters? That's where Space Wolves would be.
Actually, thinking about this, lets look at three established Chapters: the Ultramarines, the Dark Angels, and the White Scars. Despite drastic tactical and strategic doctrinal differences, the White Scars are in the same book as the Ultramarines (Codex: Space Marines), whereas the Dark Angles, who are still a Codex: Astartes chapter, have their own book? Extending this further, the Blood Angels, who really just have a very angry interpretation of the Codex Astartes, also have their own book.
Of course, it really doesn't help when Matt "Hurrrr Spaez Marens are AWSUM!" Ward writes their codicies.
23534
Post by: Macok
Justy wrote:Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
So? WHFB is also about human struggle in their world. They too must struggle against chaos, skaven (tyranid?), orks, undead (necrons). Humans are the main here there also. Somehow there is no problem with this much imbalance in armies.
bombboy1252 wrote:It's sad the GW just focuses on imperial forces, sure it makes them money but over the 20- something years they had the IP they created this wonderful world and they only focus on 1/2 of it. Sure it makes them money, but it gets boring after a while, "ah cool a big fight scene.......space marines win" "ah cool a huge space battle, "although completely outnumbered, the space marine fleet wins a crushing victory" oh" It's getting "used"
Exactly, but I'll go a bit further. Many here say that IoM is the main protagonist. It's their struggle against evil forces that is the main theme in wh40k. But what do you actually see on the table? Most of the time it's some strange situation where IoM is fighting itself, which is just stupid. Developing other armies will actually help to enforce this idea because IoM can finally fight some enemies, not only itself.
Again, somehow in human centred WHFB world there is no problem with more variety and balance. Why shouldn't there be in wh40k? I'm not even dreaming about equal treatment of xeno <-> IoM armies. But at least some move toward balance would help the game imho.
38919
Post by: The_Stormrider
AustonT wrote:40k is a game that centers on Space Marines, it's always best if you reconcile yourself to that fact. Sales is a big part of that, but so is psychology. This is a game played by humans, the less imaginative and flexible players will tend to gravitate towards IoM armies.
I like variety as much as the next guy but SM armies will ALWAYS dominate 40k
This is a post that could only be made in jest or in the attempt to draw an angry response. Less flexible and imaginative minds are the prerequisite of enjoying a human army? That is pure comedy. If we had the opposite of Exalt on this forum I would use it. Especially considering your gallery features Blood Angels, Flesh Tearers and Crimson Fists.
24267
Post by: akaean
I dunno, I feel like the huge market focus on SM has made SM less elite.
What it comes down to is the quote from the Incredibles (aren't I classy), where the villain says that "once everybody is super, then nobody will be super!" or something to that effect.
Its why we see the blood Angels more obsessed with blood than the Khorne Berserkers of the World Eaters.
Its why we see the Space Wolves of the wolfy wolf focusing entirely on wolves and frost.
Its why the Grey Knights even exist- because everybody else is so elite that you need to play an elite elite army to feel elite. jeeze.
Its one of the primary reasons I could never myself play a Space Marine army. The whole concept of having an elite army of super soldiers battle hordes of vile Xenos and Heretics is kind of lost when you look at other players and see almost nothing but other super soldiers. I mean your dudes suddenly stop feeling elite when more than half of the available codexes have 4s as a stat line, and 3+ saves.
As an Eldar player I often feel that people feel "refreshed" after playing with me, having something on the table besides opposing Marines makes their marines easier to identify with. Instead of just dealing with another Marine army spamming Razor Backs with maybe an caveat here or there (ooh cheap devastators which can split fire and weird wolf carvery or ooh fast vehicles, fnp troops, and discounted razors) at the end of the day its still a bunch of 3+ models with 4s across the statline in las plas razors or something similar.
I understand the market reasons for this, and nobody can deny that Marines are romantic and that they sell. But they don't feel elite at all, because everybody else plays Marines.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
Ogiwan wrote:
So, Ultramarines, Blood Angles, and Dark Angels could all be collected in one volume with the necessary special rules to differentiate them. I think even Black Templars could be stuck in there too, but that statement always results in teeth-gnashing and whatnot. But, nevertheless, why not have a book for Codex Astartes chapters, and a book for non-Codex Astartes chapters? That's where Space Wolves would be.
Obligatory teeth-gnashing comment. Templars are at least as divergent as the Space Wolves. Why people pretend otherwise is beyond me.
31733
Post by: Brother Coa
That's because all people like Imperium's atmosphere. I mean just see Space Marines, the verity of cultures, myths, legends and symbols used in lore. Then different real life army themes used in the Imperial Guard and religious and righteous theme used for Sisters of Battle.
And the whole idea of Imperium, as one of the last great Human empires in the galaxy that is fighting ( for now ) losing battle against everything that universe and beyond can throw at them with both courage and sacrifice is just firing legendary and epic in every way...
But to be honest, other non-Imperial army's are adding a LOT of good things into the 40k to. But the story is more generated around the Imperium because:
a ) They are Human.
b ) They have awesome heroes and endless army's of both manpower and armor
c ) And beside all that - they are losing war for survival.
d ) The verity of cultures used for the Imperium is bigger then in any other sci-fi setting.
25484
Post by: Jollydevil
The_Stormrider wrote:AustonT wrote:40k is a game that centers on Space Marines, it's always best if you reconcile yourself to that fact. Sales is a big part of that, but so is psychology. This is a game played by humans, the less imaginative and flexible players will tend to gravitate towards IoM armies.
I like variety as much as the next guy but SM armies will ALWAYS dominate 40k
This is a post that could only be made in jest or in the attempt to draw an angry response. Less flexible and imaginative minds are the prerequisite of enjoying a human army? That is pure comedy. If we had the opposite of Exalt on this forum I would use it. Especially considering your gallery features Blood Angels, Flesh Tearers and Crimson Fists.
What he said makes perfect sense. Because the space marines are the humans and therfor the good guys, as well as the fact that theyre bosses, means that theyre going to sell the most. And what do you do to a product that sells well? Make more and upgrade.
28383
Post by: Mahtamori
Why do we even need the non-conforming Space Marines? I look at them from the outside and I think "well, that's obviously a tactical marine and that's obviously devastators" and I just can't find all that much justification for the other chapters. Except people who WANTS their marines to have the official Wolfy McWolf stamp.
Che-Vito wrote:gmaleron wrote:Who said anything about forcing people? It was just an idea for marines and really the topic is do you think there are to many Imperial/Space Marine Chapters in 40k, not just marines. Please stay on topic this was not to be a marine trashing thread, hence why I said it above.
I think that armies of the Imperium are 50%, because people can more closely identify with things that are human. Even the Space Marines are more human (and akin to us) than any other race.
Tau - closest bet to us being able to understand their thinking
Eldar/Dark Eldar - they experience reality differently than us, live significantly longer, and generally have a different focus towards the future.
Tyranids - No explanation needed, they don't think beyond tactical decisions and strategy
Necrons - No explanation needed, we are not soulless robots
Chaos - No explanation needed, we are not driven to what we (as humans) consider insanity, by the presence of the Empyrean
Orks - A very alien mindset, with genetic programming that is just not in us (humans.)
Before someone decides to be contrary for whatever reason, let's just be honest. We all identify better with humanity than anyone else.
(And I still am waiting for the person, who inevitably will post, "I tink like one of d'em boyz!")
With the exception of Craftworld Eldar being overall more bloodthirsty and psychotic, I find reading the fluff that I can relate to them and identify their society - from the perspective of 21st century western culture and ideology - than I can for Space Marines or even Imperium of Man. I mean, one fights for liberty, honour, respect, and mutual prosperity and the other fights for the ideal that human life is worthless. And it's not Eldar who think humanity's only good for sacrificing for a corpse in a throne.
44290
Post by: LoneLictor
I think Loyalist Space Marines should have 1 or 2 codexs at the most. There's far too much of a focus on them. Also, the Lost and the Damned and Genestealer Cults should get codexs again. Also, Chaos Space Marines should be more distinguished from Space Marines; they need to be stronger and more melee oriented, but less technology and equipment. But as long as Vanilla Space Marines continue to sell like crack, that won't happen.
38919
Post by: The_Stormrider
@jolly Space marines may always dominate 40k, but its the idea that it's a deficiency in "flexibility or imagination" that drives that fact I take issue with. People will always play the faction that is most interesting to them. I happen to think that an alien race that devours planets and their biomass, or an ancient race of formerly biological but now robotic conquerers bent on the utter extermination of all life requires less imagination to play. That being said I love seeing the armies on the tabletop, and even have a 2k necron army.
Someone might make the same argument that playing chaos daemons, or even dark eldar takes little imagination as they are by their nature fairly single minded in their purpose. The fact is I think most 12 year olds playing space marines or orks or any other army have a more vivid and lively imagination about it than most adults. It's silly to assume the bulk of marine/imperial players play them simply because they don't have sufficient imagination. Someone's choice of army isn't linked to their creativity but rather their inspiration.
22882
Post by: Ail-Shan
a return of the different Guard builds allowed (4 ed Doctrines, etc. allowed an insane degree of variety)
The issue with that is either: why not make different guard codices, or why can't you do the same to have the varieties of marines?
a ) They are Human.
b ) They have awesome heroes and endless army's of both manpower and armor
c ) And beside all that - they are losing war for survival.
d ) The verity of cultures used for the Imperium is bigger then in any other sci-fi setting.
a) Fantasy was pointed out earlier, but I don't play it nor have read the lore so I don't know how human-centric it is.
b) Why can't other armies have that? Eldar have awesome heroes (Phoenix Lords, the old Exarchs) and Orks & nids have endless manpower. Armor is the guard's thing though.
c) But why can't a xeno army have a variety of cultures? Eldar craftworlds are pretty well varied (I hate Saim-Hann's culture because it's counter productive), and chaos could probably get a book for each different god, plus one for undivided.
It's circular: The IoM should get more attention because it's varied, and it's varied because it gets more attention.
32484
Post by: zman111
Ogiwan wrote:Of course, it really doesn't help when Matt "Hurrrr Spaez Marens are AWSUM!" Ward writes their codicies.
true that
11892
Post by: Shadowbrand
I think it's because humanity to the masses can be easier to sell then Aliens.
Personally i'm a Dwarf kinda guy.
25484
Post by: Jollydevil
Shadowbrand wrote:
Personally i'm a Dwarf kinda guy.
Whats height got to do with this?
*snicker*
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
47372
Post by: Vindicare-Obsession
One marine build is unealistic. The chapters have gotten way too out of control and have developed a life of their own. It's like once their released there's no taking them back without pissing alot of people off. I would not mind seeing GK and Sisters reduced to just, The Inquisition. That is both an acceptable and realistic change.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
47449
Post by: Blobpie
I see where your coming from, and to an extent i agree but i'm personally happy that there are different space marine codex's.
Look, vanilla marines are very good for a starter race (Less models, easy to paint, ect) But we can all agree They're EXTREMELY boring ( I would say the most boring race in warhammer 40k)
So when a marine player (like myself) Gets bored of vanilla, there are other (Much more interesting) chapters to go to.
That's my thought on it anyways.
34242
Post by: -Loki-
Brother Coa wrote:But the story is more generated around the Imperium because:
a ) They are Human.
b ) They have awesome heroes and endless army's of both manpower and armor
c ) And beside all that - they are losing war for survival.
d ) The verity of cultures used for the Imperium is bigger then in any other sci-fi setting.
If they had endless manpower and armour they most certainly would not be losing a war for survival.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
34242
Post by: -Loki-
Che-Vito wrote:I don't see why the fluff can't be kept as is, with an additional story or two added. Similar units pooled together, and bam, you've got yourself one big old codex that doesn't need an update until the next edition.
There's no real reason outside of how GW like to release armies in each edition. One big release with an army book and several new plastic kits and (now) finecase models, followed by a month or two of backup waves to keep interest high.
One big codex wouldn't let them do this. They'd have to keep releasing kits without a book to back them up, which doesn't generate as many sales.
31733
Post by: Brother Coa
-Loki- wrote:Brother Coa wrote:But the story is more generated around the Imperium because:
a ) They are Human.
b ) They have awesome heroes and endless army's of both manpower and armor
c ) And beside all that - they are losing war for survival.
d ) The verity of cultures used for the Imperium is bigger then in any other sci-fi setting.
If they had endless manpower and armour they most certainly would not be losing a war for survival.
Rulebook 5' th edition - "The Imperium is slowly losing war for survival."
Imperial Guard 5' th edition - "There are billions of Imperial Guard Regiments in the galaxy."
Something doesn't add up here...
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Justy wrote:Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
People who think there are too many SMs and IoM armies don't want the IoM to be the protagonist of the story.
29110
Post by: AustonT
Kilkrazy wrote:Justy wrote:Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
People who think there are too many SMs and IoM armies don't want the IoM to be the protagonist of the story.
These are generally also people who attend furry conventions and live in thier parents basement dreaming of thier next LARP adventure as a half ogre.
31733
Post by: Brother Coa
AustonT wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:Justy wrote:Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
People who think there are too many SMs and IoM armies don't want the IoM to be the protagonist of the story.
These are generally also people who attend furry conventions and live in thier parents basement dreaming of thier next LARP adventure as a half ogre.
This will offend so many people...
42494
Post by: nomotog
Brother Coa wrote:AustonT wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:Justy wrote:Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
People who think there are too many SMs and IoM armies don't want the IoM to be the protagonist of the story.
These are generally also people who attend furry conventions and live in thier parents basement dreaming of thier next LARP adventure as a half ogre.
This will offend so many people...
I am offended. There is nothing furry in 40k except the monkeys. 
34242
Post by: -Loki-
Kilkrazy wrote:Justy wrote:Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
People who think there are too many SMs and IoM armies don't want the IoM to be the protagonist of the story.
The Imperium being the protagonist of the story doesn't mean half of the army books need to be Imperial armies. Having the entirety of the fluff being from their point of view gets that point across rather nicely. Having half of the books not only Imperial forces, but most of them being for slight variations of the same faction just kills opponent diversity. You're more likely, as a Space Marine player, to still be playing other Space Marine opponents than opponenst they'd actually be fighting in the fluff.
29408
Post by: Melissia
Brother Coa wrote:a ) They are Human.
b ) They have awesome heroes and endless army's of both manpower and armor
c ) And beside all that - they are losing war for survival.
d ) The verity of cultures used for the Imperium is bigger then in any other sci-fi setting.
Yeah, but that's the Imperial Guard, not Space Marines. Space Marines only have the latter two apply.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
18698
Post by: kronk
My Black Templars could use an update.
46155
Post by: Eldrad40k
The rate at which they put out new codexs is bit slow and frustrating...
29408
Post by: Melissia
Che-Vito wrote:-Loki- wrote:Che-Vito wrote:I don't see why the fluff can't be kept as is, with an additional story or two added. Similar units pooled together, and bam, you've got yourself one big old codex that doesn't need an update until the next edition.
There's no real reason outside of how GW like to release armies in each edition. One big release with an army book and several new plastic kits and (now) finecase models, followed by a month or two of backup waves to keep interest high. One big codex wouldn't let them do this. They'd have to keep releasing kits without a book to back them up, which doesn't generate as many sales.
Interest would stay high if they released roughly 3 of these large codex(es) per year. Heaven forbid, there might be a lot of excitement over a more equal spread of armies!
I would certainly like to see variant Ork and Eldar armies, and a Lost and the Damned army... Don't just expand Marines, expand everyone!
18698
Post by: kronk
I'm cool with more codecies.
Split Chaos Marines into Renegade/Traitor Marines + Guard (Lost and the Damned style), Chaos Marines.
Ork: Not really sure that they need more than 1. Perhaps more special characters that screw with org chart.
Dark Eldar: ? Fine as 1 codex
Eldar: ? Fine as 1 codex (Needs a new one, IMHO).
Tau: Tau + Kroot in one book, tau empire that would combine or allow Humans, Tau, and other minor races.
Necrons: ? Fine as 1 codex.
Adeptus Mechanicus.
Nids: ? Fine as 1 codex.
So, that would add a Lost and the Damned (Xenos or Non-loyalists) along with a tau Empire (Xenos), and an Adeptus Mechanicus (quasi-loyalist). Not overwhelming to keep up with, I'd hope. I really wish GW would add more writers so that they could pound out all of the codecies with each new 40k edition.
As for Space Marines, there really isn't a need for Space Wolves, Black Templar, Dark Angels, Codex Marines, Blood Angels all having different codecies other than that's what we're accustomed too and you'd piss off the fan boys and lose a ton of sales if you did. I'm all for GW remaining open for business and making more models, so I guess it's ok.
39004
Post by: biccat
I sometimes wonder if a lot of this is simply due to GW not having a lot of creative ideas.
They have a schedule where they release 2 codices a year, which means a lot of work on the rules and fluff (ok, maybe less work for the fluff).
It's quite difficult to come up with a whole new race: You need backstory, models, motivations, artwork, etc. It's a lot easier to simply take the known backstory of the IoM, flesh out some parts (they're uh...vikings, but in SPACE! and they hate those magic guys), throw some bits on a generic Space Marine model, and copy large amounts of stats and artwork into the new book. Voila, new codex and models for the fans to geek out over.
GW only has two unique armies, Tau and Skaven. I think they've really stretched their creative juices to get that far.
Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing 2-4 codices disappear entirely from the release schedule. At a release rate 2 codices/year (and in a perfect universe), a number of armies find themselves at least an edition out of date. Sometimes even two.
Consider that of the 8 5th edition codices (counting SoB) released, only 2 are xenos. 5th edition has been out for 3 years, and with 6th edition already on the horizon (2013-14 maybe) a lot of armies are going to find themselves 2 editions out of date.
37912
Post by: black templar
Space marines def. But i rarely see any Black Templar players im the only one in my local area 
18698
Post by: kronk
black templar wrote:Space marines def. But i rarely see any Black Templar players im the only one in my local area
That makes you special, then.
42649
Post by: EnormousName
''One thing I've noticed about using the army over all these years is that it doesn't perform all that differently no matter wich set of army lists I use. Not really.''
-Jervis Johnson talking about his marine army in WD341, may 2008... so he kinda agrees with the OP? O.o
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
TBH I think the solution to the Space Marine oversaturation is to stop giving every single marine Codex Razorbacks for the same amount of points (minus Blood Angels, but theirs are fast anyway). Have the Chapter's favoured tactics be reflected in the cost of stuff. Take Black Templars for example: Lower the cost of Land Raiders and Drop Pods, increase the cost of Rhinoes and Razorbacks. Grey Knights? Increase price of PA Transports, most of the Chapter is in Terminator Armour anyway. Blood Angels? Increase transport costs across the board, give players a reason to go jump packs.
In other words; STOP THE GODDAMN RAZORSPAM MECH-FEST ALREADY! That's the single greatest reason people grow tired of Marines, at least in my experience.
44326
Post by: DeffDred
IMHO there are just too many marine armies. It allows for way too many marine armies in the field. My friend just called me from the Carolinas to tell me he brought his Death Guard to a tourney. He walked in and saw 10 players: Ork, Chaos Daemons, Tyranids, Grey Knights, Grey Knights, Grey Knights, Marines, Marines, Marines and Marines. He promptly walked out of the store. And I don't disagree with his actions. Space marines are fun to collect and fun to play, but there comes a point where they just aren't fun to fight... over and over and over. A different color sceme or variety of bits doesn't change the fact that it's just more of the same thing. Don't get me wrong I played Ultras for years and had a vast fully painted collection. Then I practically gave it away mid-4th ed. because the marine numbers were on the rise and it simply became a clash of power armour. This wan't the sole reason for my diparture from 40k but certainly one of the biggest.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
And forcing those that want to play Marines into another Codex would help because...?
39004
Post by: biccat
AlmightyWalrus wrote:And forcing those that want to play Marines into another Codex would help because...?
I'm pretty sure no one said anything about forcing others to play Marines.
If you eliminate the inherent benefits SM armies confer on people they will tend to move away from marine armies.
Maybe design the game structure so that Marines aren't the best codices. Just a suggestion.
23534
Post by: Macok
AlmightyWalrus wrote:And forcing those that want to play Marines into another Codex would help because...?
Maybe giving some variety and not making top 5 (or 5 in top 6) codexes IoM would change something in the future at least. Now every new player is a IoM player because they are shiny, powerful and all the focus is on them. Hell, people create multiple SM armies because other codexes are (or feel) so inferior..
The focus should shift in time; not be forced right now.. Nobody in their right mind will dare to say that SM should not get multiple codexes or not be treated as kings. But wh40k is really turning into Space Marine civil war, not Space Marines vs xenos like it should be.
29110
Post by: AustonT
Brother Coa wrote:AustonT wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:Justy wrote:Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
People who think there are too many SMs and IoM armies don't want the IoM to be the protagonist of the story.
These are generally also people who attend furry conventions and live in thier parents basement dreaming of thier next LARP adventure as a half ogre.
This will offend so many people...
Surprisingly not, I have to admit I'm a little befuddled.
28383
Post by: Mahtamori
Kilkrazy wrote:Justy wrote:Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
People who think there are too many SMs and IoM armies don't want the IoM to be the protagonist of the story.
I'm perfectly fine with IoM being the protagonists, it's the power-armoured monkeys I've got a problem with. I'd prefer for the Imperial Guard to be the big thing, with the other factions being side-tracks.
Why? Because Imperial Guard are the real thing. They're the ones dying. They're the heroes. From a game-table perspective it makes sense.
But... In a universe where there's stuff that can gut you with a thought (and they're marginally the good guys) Space Marines just provide the stuff you need to make a James Bond (if Q was less into cars and more into power armour and MI6 had a strict celibacy policy). I.e. they make models for the novels, with the game as a clever sales trick.
-Loki- wrote:Che-Vito wrote:I don't see why the fluff can't be kept as is, with an additional story or two added. Similar units pooled together, and bam, you've got yourself one big old codex that doesn't need an update until the next edition.
There's no real reason outside of how GW like to release armies in each edition. One big release with an army book and several new plastic kits and (now) finecase models, followed by a month or two of backup waves to keep interest high.
One big codex wouldn't let them do this. They'd have to keep releasing kits without a book to back them up, which doesn't generate as many sales.
Bunch them together in a logical rules book, presenting Space Marines, and mostly eliminate specific chapter rules. The rules can be designed so the majority of the different chapters can be represented - allowing terminators as troops with only a minor alteration, for instance, or having assault marines as one of the standard troop choices.
Then, when it comes time to release Blood Angels special kit, you release a Blood Angels book. Not a codex, but a supplement. In there you add in Dante and the others as well as cram it with "how to paint red" and the odd battle report showing a Blood Angels themed army in it's glory. This eliminates playtesting need for each chapter (which some holds they allegedly do, although it's up for debate) and prevents codex creep to some extent.
6838
Post by: 1hadhq
biccat wrote:AlmightyWalrus wrote:And forcing those that want to play Marines into another Codex would help because...?
I'm pretty sure no one said anything about forcing others to play Marines.
If you eliminate the inherent benefits SM armies confer on people they will tend to move away from marine armies.
Maybe design the game structure so that Marines aren't the best codices. Just a suggestion.
Maybe design the game to reduce the chances of armies?
Cool, one needs no balance at all.... 
You didn't think that through, I hope. Because if that was serious, let me say everyone following this line of thinking should have to play with a handycap himself.
Kilkrazy wrote:Justy wrote:Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
People who think there are too many SMs and IoM armies don't want the IoM to be the protagonist of the story.
So if the rumors are true and chaos gets the spotlight in 6th, let us pray chaos also gets multiple codices and the bestest so the same
xeno-support-group here can then move their whining on to "too many CSM" , "too much chaos", etc.
If not, who want a different protagonist can go play something else. 
Mahtamori wrote:
I'm perfectly fine with IoM being the protagonists, it's the power-armoured monkeys I've got a problem with. I'd prefer for the Imperial Guard to be the big thing, with the other factions being side-tracks.
Why? Because Imperial Guard are the real thing. They're the ones dying. They're the heroes. From a game-table perspective it makes sense.
From a hobby perspective the IG takes more time and effort than many other possible choices.
- skin and clothing to paint, and camo too . IMO a bigger challenge to paint.
- higher headcount than most of the rest if not mechanized. More work.
- nigh endless recruting sources, different looks, thus unlikely to be plastic except 1-2 lines. Thus old metal and new finecost for variety.
- player has to accept his models get less time on the table and may die so fast it isn't funny. Consider the time spent on the models vs the time in play they get.
Mahtamori wrote:-Loki- wrote:Che-Vito wrote:I don't see why the fluff can't be kept as is, with an additional story or two added. Similar units pooled together, and bam, you've got yourself one big old codex that doesn't need an update until the next edition.
There's no real reason outside of how GW like to release armies in each edition. One big release with an army book and several new plastic kits and (now) finecase models, followed by a month or two of backup waves to keep interest high.
One big codex wouldn't let them do this. They'd have to keep releasing kits without a book to back them up, which doesn't generate as many sales.
Bunch them together in a logical rules book, presenting Space Marines, and mostly eliminate specific chapter rules. The rules can be designed so the majority of the different chapters can be represented - allowing terminators as troops with only a minor alteration, for instance, or having assault marines as one of the standard troop choices.
Then, when it comes time to release Blood Angels special kit, you release a Blood Angels book. Not a codex, but a supplement. In there you add in Dante and the others as well as cram it with "how to paint red" and the odd battle report showing a Blood Angels themed army in it's glory. This eliminates playtesting need for each chapter (which some holds they allegedly do, although it's up for debate) and prevents codex creep to some extent.
The main codex + subcodices was 3rd ed. There was enough shared with CSM too, so while were at it, Can't we just cramp everything into 1 codex? Oh wait, if we take it further we could have it all right there in the rulebook itself.
Maybe its time to realize there is more than just a few specific rules. More than just a few specific units and equipment.
But....
we can't have THIS THREAD over and over again if we venture there.
GW runs 3 games and they share time and effort. Consider a expensive license on their top list and another game just had a new edition.
40k isn't set on a complicated course. It runs on full auto yet, with minimal risk and least resistance as its primary motive for navigation.
1870
Post by: Red
Well here's my two cents I've been playing for 19 years and I love pretty much all the armies out there. While I see both sides of the argument I've gotta say that the one book to rule them all sounds good in principle but sucks on the table top.
I have played ultramarines, they were my first love and I love them still today (although they haven't seen the table top in many years). I have played thousand sons I just love their storyline but what I play today and have quit a large collection of is guard. I have played all the armies at one point or another and for a time I worked at GW (don't hate me I was young).
Every time this conversation rocks around the point I have is look at those codexs that are all in one they suck if you want to specialize your army. My Guard for instance, why cant I do an all cavalry army? I cant even mount my command squad on horseback and that makes guard the only force that can't. I also cannot do an all storm trooper army. I can just do an air cav army which is cool ill admit (but only in a very narrow points band). but lets talk about chaos for a minute they suck because you can't really do a legion specific force yes I realize you can take "thousand sons" troops but what about elite and heavy support?
Now that's just a few examples but what about craftworld eldar and orks these armies too suffer from the fact that they are trying to sqease a lot of fluff and diverse armies into single books. when I see any of these books actually allow you to take fully customized forces then lets talk about rolling the space marine codexs together but until then I think its a totally backwards thing to do to make fully half the armies that a played suck more instead of making the other armies better.
In closing I think GW needs to release more codexs a year. I know they are a lot of work (if done properly) but I think a greater range of armies to choose from can only be a good thing. this of coarse has to be balanced against how profitable they releases would be and atm the profits are in the marines and while this stays the same nothing will change.
39004
Post by: biccat
1hadhq wrote:Maybe design the game to reduce the chances of armies?
Cool, one needs no balance at all....
You didn't think that through, I hope. Because if that was serious, let me say everyone following this line of thinking should have to play with a handycap himself.
I do play with a handicap. It's called the Chaos Codex and it's horribly unbalanced in light of 5th edition.
And if you don't think that GW designs the game to eliminate the advantage some armies have over others, you obviously don't recall much of 4th edition. The changes to assault weapons, assaulting out of vehicles, fast vehicles, etc. were specific responses to perceived imbalances in the metagame.
However, I was more commenting on the design of specific codices. For example, there's no reason that BA and SW should be the best armies available. Why not Tau? Eldar? Orks?
11892
Post by: Shadowbrand
@ Jollydevil. You a lady irl? I'll show you i'm not so short lass. If your a lad...Carry on and keep calm. 
@ Che-Vito.
I survived High School because of Dwarf Fortress and Folk Metal.
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
biccat wrote:AlmightyWalrus wrote:And forcing those that want to play Marines into another Codex would help because...?
I'm pretty sure no one said anything about forcing others to play Marines.
If you eliminate the inherent benefits SM armies confer on people they will tend to move away from marine armies.
Maybe design the game structure so that Marines aren't the best codices. Just a suggestion.
Why nerf Marines though? Wouldn't it be better to buff everyone else to the same level?
37912
Post by: black templar
kronk wrote:black templar wrote:Space marines def. But i rarely see any Black Templar players im the only one in my local area
That makes you special, then.
That makes me alone
18698
Post by: kronk
I'm no psychologist, but your signature may provide some clues as to why...
Khorne + Slaanesh =kinky sex
Nurgle + Slaanesh = AIDS
Tzeentch + Slaanesh = a lot of different positions
46487
Post by: Crusher050
honestly it seems to be balanced exactly around the fact that imperium players ARE half the forces you face. It seems to make sense 8 'good guys' vs 8 'bad guys' ... i still dont see why this is a problem or how it detracts from ANY of the other codexes? updates would not be faster and if they were, you would be shelling over more money to buy the new dex + minis and complain about that...
23534
Post by: Macok
Crusher050 wrote:honestly it seems to be balanced exactly around the fact that imperium players ARE half the forces you face. It seems to make sense 8 'good guys' vs 8 'bad guys' ... i still dont see why this is a problem or how it detracts from ANY of the other codexes? updates would not be faster and if they were, you would be shelling over more money to buy the new dex + minis and complain about that...
I think it's safe to say that IoM forces ARE NOT 50% of the population. It's definitely more.
I think you can go here and see for yourself that IoM is currently so imbalanced towards other races it hurts. I do not mind SM being powerful, but going to my FLGS and having to choose only between Space Marines to play against is  boring. That is one of the reasons why I play only with friends. I don't mind 8 'bad' vs 8 'good'. (no matter how subjective and wrong this classification of codexes is) I do however mind that 8 of them are boringly similar. I do not want any race to be this much dominant because it kills variety. This is not: ' SM should be worse' post but 'everything should be equally appealing'. Currently it's not and it's not even close.
37912
Post by: black templar
kronk wrote:I'm no psychologist, but your signature may provide some clues as to why...
Khorne + Slaanesh =kinky sex
Nurgle + Slaanesh = AIDS
Tzeentch + Slaanesh = a lot of different positions
Ive been told im strange but what the hell i like me
6838
Post by: 1hadhq
biccat wrote:
However, I was more commenting on the design of specific codices. For example, there's no reason that BA and SW should be the best armies available. Why not Tau? Eldar? Orks?
There is always a reason. You ask for Tau, Eldar, orks. The reasoning behind this?
Tau = CC? Go make them "the best". Then CC becomes unimportant and not only SM will suffer from this.
Eldar = had this position as "the best" once.. But somehow in the same boat as Tau. Go enable them to the escape any harm. Like above, SM won't suffer alone...
orks = ask the ork-player if his army is "the best". He agrees and you can close this case.
Go pimp da orks. Let them bury anyone beneath bodies and dice. Oh wait, not so good. Now every non- SM is buried too.
See, I do agree GW needs to get balance right and it should be the aim of the design team to write codices on a similar level.
A 50/50 chance is good enough. I doubt a "best army" should exist.
Back in the day of chapter approved, GW published a list of chances to win a game ratios there.
Nids got 60%, Marines 40%. Do you believe everyone played nids? Or marines players decreased in numbers?
But I may point to 5th focused on one side, could mean 6th moves to another. Patience is key.
31733
Post by: Brother Coa
black templar wrote:kronk wrote:I'm no psychologist, but your signature may provide some clues as to why...
Khorne + Slaanesh =kinky sex
Nurgle + Slaanesh = AIDS
Tzeentch + Slaanesh = a lot of different positions
Ive been told im strange but what the hell i like me
We art all strange in our own way so it's ok.
37912
Post by: black templar
Brother Coa wrote:black templar wrote:kronk wrote:I'm no psychologist, but your signature may provide some clues as to why...
Khorne + Slaanesh =kinky sex
Nurgle + Slaanesh = AIDS
Tzeentch + Slaanesh = a lot of different positions
Ive been told im strange but what the hell i like me
We art all strange in our own way so it's ok.
Thanks
40509
Post by: G00fySmiley
kronk wrote:I'm cool with more codecies.
Split Chaos Marines into Renegade/Traitor Marines + Guard (Lost and the Damned style), Chaos Marines.
Ork: Not really sure that they need more than 1. Perhaps more special characters that screw with org chart.
Dark Eldar: ? Fine as 1 codex
Eldar: ? Fine as 1 codex (Needs a new one, IMHO).
Tau: Tau + Kroot in one book, tau empire that would combine or allow Humans, Tau, and other minor races.
Necrons: ? Fine as 1 codex.
Adeptus Mechanicus.
Nids: ? Fine as 1 codex.
So, that would add a Lost and the Damned (Xenos or Non-loyalists) along with a tau Empire (Xenos), and an Adeptus Mechanicus (quasi-loyalist). Not overwhelming to keep up with, I'd hope. I really wish GW would add more writers so that they could pound out all of the codecies with each new 40k edition.
As for Space Marines, there really isn't a need for Space Wolves, Black Templar, Dark Angels, Codex Marines, Blood Angels all having different codecies other than that's what we're accustomed too and you'd piss off the fan boys and lose a ton of sales if you did. I'm all for GW remaining open for business and making more models, so I guess it's ok.
i can see the tau and allies codex now "Tau and Friends" and it maeks sence to exict
with orks yea mayeb a primative /foot slogging ork book and a mech ork book
as for nids I'd think genesteeler cult has a place on its own
agreed on eldar/dark eldar
necrons they'd need some fluff changes to warrent 2 codexes so I agree for now but if any are able to rebel that'd be a neat story
429
Post by: Ogiwan
I have to say that I would *love* to have a real Traitor/Chaos Guard list.
Granted, it'd have to be crazy flexible, to capture the range of Chaos "mortal" warriors. You know, going from hordes of rabble to the Sons of Sek (elite Chaos warriors, the equal of the Guard).
Ya know, it should be able to provide as diverse army choices as the 5th ed Guard codex *should* have (instead of making everybody Cadian.)
28383
Post by: Mahtamori
AlmightyWalrus: "Buffing everyone else" doesn't work. If you buff a large portion of the playable field, you are in reality nerfing the sections which aren't buffed, which means that you run an extreme risk of nerfing stuff you had no intention of nerfing. In addition to this, you get closer to the roof in terms of what your gaming system allows, essentially cutting possible variations.
What you need to do is nerf the stuff that's exploited, possibly buffing the stuff that's never used - but most importantly leaving as much as possible alone. Starcraft 2 patches has shown that sometimes buffing can have unforeseen consequences and that an ability which receives only a slight buff may end up being too good. Sadly a good rule set needs maintenance, which translates to a lot of glued-on paper in yon rulebooks.
1hadhq wrote:biccat wrote:
However, I was more commenting on the design of specific codices. For example, there's no reason that BA and SW should be the best armies available. Why not Tau? Eldar? Orks?
Eldar = had this position as "the best" once.. But somehow in the same boat as Tau. Go enable them to the escape any harm. Like above, SM won't suffer alone...
You mean back in 3rd edition where Eldar used craftworld specific lists to tailor the best one? (Or do you possibly mean "clown cars" 4th edition, which, while I didn't play during this period, I am lead to believe wasn't the best army, only the most annoying to face)
At the moment we've got "Codex: Space Marine +2 Vorpal Close Combat". That's pretty much what happened to Eldar in 3rd edition when you got the Craftworld adding to the lists you had rather than rebuilding the armies from scratch to form specific Craftworlds.
In either case, codex creep will happen since GW isn't investing enough in testing the rules they make. In a way that can be seen as down-prioritizing the game in favour of the hobby (or sales if you want to be mean).
31733
Post by: Brother Coa
40509
Post by: G00fySmiley
to be fair another reason for the codex power creep is it sells models. release new codexes alongside new updated prettier models and they spread income over editions
I do however have a theory on space marines... they sell becasue they are the most hyped. get the most attention and have the biggest following.
granted they make a great starter army and I'm glad we get new players in... heck I have 2 armies one of whichh is space marines btu the reason is... money I wanted to play orks and I knew I wanted a second army for something different sometimes... so I got 3 AoBR sets at a pretty good deal ($70 per box) and build em up... now I do liek the marines they are fun as an alternate army and good to teach others with, however I would be curious to see what would happen if GW released a non-imperium starter set if those armies would see a large upswing in numerr of players, my money would be on yes
33125
Post by: Seaward
I feel McDonald's has far too many varieties of burgers. Sure, they sell better than Filet-o-Fish, but some of us really like fish sandwiches, and McDonald's should cut the burgers in favor of more fish sandwiches.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
33125
Post by: Seaward
Che-Vito wrote:Seaward wrote:I feel McDonald's has far too many varieties of burgers. Sure, they sell better than Filet-o-Fish, but some of us really like fish sandwiches, and McDonald's should cut the burgers in favor of more fish sandwiches.
Obvious troll is obvious.
GW hasn't tried going outside of it's box of the Imperium too far. Accordingly, for all it knows, expanding non-Imperium armies could INCREASE sales. Heaven knows they're rolling in enough dough to give it a shot.
Again, that's like saying McDonald's hasn't gone outside of its burger box too far. Why try to fix something that isn't broken? It's broken from your perspective, possibly, but in a dollars and cents sense, it isn't. If, as you say, they are in fact rolling in dough, why mess with a winning formula?
The Imperium sells. GW doesn't make multiple SM codices because they have a hard-on for SM codices, they make multiple SM codices because they have a hard-on for sweet, sweet cash. If the Tyranids range brought in the kind of cash that the SM range did, I guarantee you they'd expand it. It doesn't, so they don't.
48147
Post by: KilroyKiljoy
AustonT wrote:Brother Coa wrote:AustonT wrote:Kilkrazy wrote:Justy wrote:Do you guys realize this game is about the IoM and his struggle in the grimdark future, they are the protagonist of this history, not your tau or necrons or eldar...
People who think there are too many SMs and IoM armies don't want the IoM to be the protagonist of the story.
These are generally also people who attend furry conventions and live in thier parents basement dreaming of thier next LARP adventure as a half ogre.
This will offend so many people...
Surprisingly not, I have to admit I'm a little befuddled.
AustinT just described every thursday night for me, for the past 4 years.
Actually not at all. I find it's usually the SM fan-boys who wish they were genetically altered supersoldiers who are the unadjusted, socially awkward neckbeards, but that's just my experience, and also pretty much unimportant.
That being said, I'd love to see at least a couple more non-Imperium armies/races, but I also consider Space Marines as one whole army.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
33125
Post by: Seaward
Che-Vito wrote:
A winning formula is one that will stand the test of time. Theirs cannot and will not, as they've written themselves into a corner.
Pick up the successive editions worth of rulebooks and read away. The rumors of a very different 6e are signs of exact that the 'winning formula' is starting to show some age.
I'm not sure changing the core rules has anything at all to do with how many Space Marine boxes are sold, but you're free to believe as you like.
As far as time goes...hasn't 40K been around for twenty years or something like that?
48147
Post by: KilroyKiljoy
Seaward wrote:Che-Vito wrote:
A winning formula is one that will stand the test of time. Theirs cannot and will not, as they've written themselves into a corner.
Pick up the successive editions worth of rulebooks and read away. The rumors of a very different 6e are signs of exact that the 'winning formula' is starting to show some age.
I'm not sure changing the core rules has anything at all to do with how many Space Marine boxes are sold, but you're free to believe as you like.
As far as time goes...hasn't 40K been around for twenty years or something like that?
It should be about 25 years or something along those lines
First Edition '87 Space Marines. My, how far we've come...
|
|
