The unpopular opinion thread. Share what is true in your head or table that you think other players would not agree with.

Mine.

I've always thought all the Titan Models look dumb and I'd never want to own one. Same goes for the Imperial Knights.

8th edition is a load of junk.

8th Edition is tons of fun

Xmas is a fraud.

I've got one!

The two missing Primarchs were women, and they were purged because they could breed more space marines. That would be a catastrophic loss of control for the Emperor, so a purging happened.

Btw I know this is nonsense but that's what my head canon is.

The Codex Astartes is Guilliman's poor attempt to replicate the Alpha Legion's efficiency-through-decentralization doctrine after losing to it and would have been far better if Omegon or Alpharius had written it.

I'm not Alpharius.

The Emperor made Horus Warmaster just to set him up to fail. The entire 40k universe is going just as planned by the Emperor, he could walk off that throne at any time.

He's a cruel, uncaring God Emperor of Mankind.

Primaris are fantastic.

The HH series should have never been written.
Primarchs have no place in 40k
AoS will be a mistake in the long run
Primaris are terrible and out of scale. Cadians are the problem- not marines. This whole "bigger is better" paradigm just seems like small knob syndrome to me.
40k is a setting, not a storyline- no matter what Reddit says.
Titans have no place in 40k
I think painting guides are bad and homogenising an art form. They have their place, but they're guidelines- not rules.
Tau should be a republic of loads of minor alien races and not big battlesuits all the time. Both can exist in their background (and they do) but only one gets proper representation.
Memes killed people's correct appreciation of 40k's fluff.
Metal is not the devil incarnate
Plastic is not the saviour
Parts should be made out the material that is most appropriate. PP gets this yet GW wants to go plastic all the way at the expense of easily breakable spindly bits that by rights should be metal.

 Grimtuff wrote:
The HH series should have never been written.

Honestly I just ignore it. It's fine for those that want it but I prefer my HH as 10000 year old legends. I treat anything I hear about it as an interesting story that may have happened, not some sort of "official canon". 40k doesn't really do canon in the way most things do anyway.

Based on these initial posts, I imagine this thread is gonna end up like every popular opinion puffin meme, where you say something that's actually NOT terribly unpopular so that way you don't get a lot of hate being thrown your direction.

I wanna see some actual unpopular opinions.

Here's an actual one I have: Black Templars lost nothing of value that cannot be represented in the regular Vanilla codex outside the Vows, where everyone only ever took the same one anyway so who cares?

The Militarum Tempestus deserve a proper codex or codex supplement this time around.

 Apple Peel wrote:
The Militarum Tempestus deserve a proper codex or codex supplement this time around.

That'd be dope.

I think Orks aren't a fun faction. I don't like melee combat.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:
The HH series should have never been written.

Honestly I just ignore it. It's fine for those that want it but I prefer my HH as 10000 year old legends. I treat anything I hear about it as an interesting story that may have happened, not some sort of "official canon". 40k doesn't really do canon in the way most things do anyway.

I'm particularly saltly about it as it's ripping apart the legends and background and giving them tangential form which is bleeding into 40k. I've said this before but I loved when you didn't know the fates of some of the main movers and shakers and they left it up you. One personal example for me is Garro whose fate was left up to the reader to decide in IA DG. I chose him falling to Chaos like the final paragraph describes and he lead my DG for a time (I converted a new version of him recently and he's to the left of me now waiting to be painted). Then BL comes along and goes "No ackshulllay....." and gaks all over this intriguing piece of fluff by removing all of the mystery.

The Emperor is actually a completely selfless (if ruthlessly Utilitarian) individual; he really was the only person who could have saved humanity; he really did have a workable plan to do just that; and he ultimately failed because Chaos outplayed him, rather than due to any real mistakes on his part (the mistakes he did make were due to Chaos manipulating his prescience, not to stupidity, ego or 'being an incompetent parent').

That unpopular enough for you?

(I also agree with everything Grimtuff has said in this thread apart from the bit about AoS.)

Melee troops dying when they try to walk across an open field to try to engage machinegun nests in fisticuffs is a feature, not a bug.

The "Dark Angels are really Chaos" meme is so cliche and overdone I think less of anyone who posts it.

You folks are NOT doing it right.


Try it like this.



The Captain Cortez model was a good model.

 Asmodai wrote:
The "Dark Angels are really Chaos" meme is so cliche and overdone I think less of anyone who posts it.

Is it a meme? I've been doing it for years because my main opponent was Dark Angels and I liked to wind him up. I guess I was doing it before it was cool...

 Duskweaver wrote:


(I also agree with everything Grimtuff has said in this thread apart from the bit about AoS.)

Just living up to the thread. Hence why I don't really bring it up elsewhere and keep that opinion to myself.

To expand on it, I think there will be a point where (in a weird circular way as this was kinda possible before) both 40k and AoS will eventually become so similar that they'll essentially be the same game and you can play them against one another. GW's strength (from their perspective) is the "closed environment" they provide to players. If they want to look to a different game- it's there for them so they don't need to peek outside the GW bubble. AoS (even though it's not my cup of tea and I think everything they're doing for AoS could have been done for WHFB to save it, but I digress...) is different enough from 40k right now that you can flit between the two systems if one gets bored and/or burnt out with one of them.
Taking that away so there's only one mass battle game in your massive catalogue (compared to other companies) of games you risk having players take a peek outside the ecosystem you've created.

Tournaments should only feature stock models and fixed lists provided by the organizer.

Only Dakka thinks Dakka is relevant.

The SM legions aren't different enough to warrant different codices. DA, BA, and SW should be rolled up with UM.

People are too invested in 40K being a tournament game. It’s a side hobby, not the PGA finals

I’m more interested in actually getting a working game from GW’s boxed sets (like Black Fortress and Forgebane) than the actual models that come with the boxed sets.

I think IP laws should go to hell.

The average person viewing this is bad at this game and needs to accept that their personal bias and/or opinion on changes is actually probably not even worth typing.

ITC ruleset is not Warhammer 40,000.

Playing with unpainted mini's isnt that big of a deal. Should be legal for tournaments.

 Frontline989 wrote:
Playing with unpainted mini's isnt that big of a deal. Should be legal for tournaments.

There is a special placemin hell for people like you.

My unpopular opinion: People need to realise when somebody is messing with them.... so many people here are far to easy... It makes me so bored...

Being an “expert” in 40k lore is not something to brag about.

MichaelJacksonPopcorn.gif

 Just Tony wrote:
You folks are NOT doing it right.


Try it like this.



The Captain Cortez model was a good model.

Now THAT is an unpopular opinion. I love this post.

Black Legion will be getting an 8th Edition codex.

Tactical Marines are awesome.

40K should have never made the standard game more than 1250 points, and models bigger than a Leman Russ shouldn’t be in the standard game.

 Stormonu wrote:
40K should have never made the standard game more than 1250 points, and models bigger than a Leman Russ shouldn’t be in the standard game.

RIP land raiders

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
40K should have never made the standard game more than 1250 points, and models bigger than a Leman Russ shouldn’t be in the standard game.

RIP land raiders

They were broken anyway.

A lot of players seem to just ignore GW's lack of balance because they like the models enough to not care that the game is one of the worst designed games ever made.

Mono Grey Knights will be competitive post CA 2018.

 Trickstick wrote:
I've got one!

The two missing Primarchs were women, and they were purged because they could breed more space marines. That would be a catastrophic loss of control for the Emperor, so a purging happened.

Btw I know this is nonsense but that's what my head canon is.

having them come back having completed 10,000 years of selective breeding to create more Primaris than Primaris HH sized Legions would be fun

Wayniac wrote:
A lot of players seem to just ignore GW's lack of balance because they like the models enough to not care that the game is one of the worst designed games ever made.

I just contacted Guinness' Book of World records and they agreed to enshrine this comment as the most hyperbolic ever made. Congrats! *pops open bottle of sham pag nee*

Drukhari is a better name for the faction than Dark Eldar, which was about as lazy as it gets.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
A lot of players seem to just ignore GW's lack of balance because they like the models enough to not care that the game is one of the worst designed games ever made.

I just contacted Guinness' Book of World records and they agreed to enshrine this comment as the most hyperbolic ever made. Congrats! *pops open bottle of sham pag nee*

It's total nonsense! Some of us do it because we like the fluff...

Or at least past fluff.

 Imateria wrote:
Drukhari is a better name for the faction than Dark Eldar, which was about as lazy as it gets.

I never thought I'd hear that.

Melee combat makes perfectly good sense.

Raptors aren't trash, consequently, the new Black Legion Raptor commander is not trash.

Wait, is this unpopular or obviously false opinions? I'm confused.

Onething123456 posts the most interesting threads on Dakka - interesting to read at least

I believe that close-quarters combat should not form the core element of lists. CQC units should provide support in form of skirmishing and interference. If I wanted to play a game about large blocks of soldiers fighting with swords, I'd have played Fantasy or some other medieval-based game.

Space Marine helmets are ugly as f***. At least they're not Terminators: tactical marine bodies look okay; there's nothing good about terminators.

Blu-tac is as good as magnets.

I think Astra Militarum are boring, and unimaginitive, and seem to be for people who take themselves far too seriously.
The game has a plethora of superhumans, aliens and mutants to chose from and some people still chose tanks, and dudes with rifles. May as well just play Bolt Action (a fine game) rather than mess about in a sci-fi universe.

I'd be happy to see the whole tedious faction to go the same way as their dimunitive cousins, the squats. It'd certainly help solve soup.

 r_squared wrote:
I think Astra Militarum are boring...

Gunline? I completely agree. Crazy bayonet wielding religious fanatics? Much more interesting.

Gunline ftw. And you can't have dudes with guns and tanks fighting all those aliens and mutants in power armor in a game like Bolt Action.

Ultramarines are probably one of the better conceived Chapters. Most of the hate against them is just sour grapes about how GW has overexposed the SM model range.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Gunline ftw.

Bah, just what a dkok player would say! I just find ignoring entire phases to be boring.

Metal sisters of battle models are perfect as they are, and plastics are not required.

Primaris models look like a race of three-nosed long-legged xeno scum cosplaying as space marines and getting the details wrong.

Special Characters / Named Characters need to go back to being 'with opponents permission only' in (matched) games.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Gunline ftw.

Bah, just what a dkok player would say! I just find ignoring entire phases to be boring.

Well I do play Scions from time to time, too, so now I just ignore the CC phase

The entire painting/hobby portion of Citadel is a scam, Citadel paint sucks and the officially ordained workflow of "base, shade, layer" is a waste of time that only exists because GW needs an idiot-proof way to show people how to approximate the models on the box art even though their own studio painters don't typically use the same techniques or Citadel brand hobby supplies in many cases.

Non-UM Vanilla Marines need to get over their persecution complex. They are individually much better supported than most factions in this game.

A lot of Dakkanaughts should quit 40k for the benefit of their own mental health. Really all you're doing is stalking your Ex online.

Horus Heresy is done and needs to be let go by GW and the Player base.

Citadel Paints are thick wads of crap that only sell because of the massive amount of painting guides that can't be bothered to use another line of paint names

WHFB deserved what it got

True Line Of Sight needs to be completely purged. Model and Terrain height should be a stat based on base size or general model size and the whole thing should be abstracted like any game created after 2000A.D.

My most unpopular opinion amongst those that I currently play with is: Vehicles need firing arcs. Even simplistic ones would help

ccs wrote:
My most unpopular opinion amongst those that I currently play with is: Vehicles need firing arcs. Even simplistic ones would help

But what about the magical rotating malcador defender? Have you considered how it will suck not being able to fire 5 heavy bolters at a target by break dancing a tank?

 Apple Peel wrote:
The Militarum Tempestus deserve a proper codex or codex supplement this time around.

Seconded, hell I even made my own.

ccs wrote:
My most unpopular opinion amongst those that I currently play with is: Vehicles need firing arcs. Even simplistic ones would help

No thanks - it's ultimately meaningless and obnoxious to legislate during a game.

 r_squared wrote:
I think Astra Militarum are boring, and unimaginitive, and seem to be for people who take themselves far too seriously.
The game has a plethora of superhumans, aliens and mutants to chose from and some people still chose tanks, and dudes with rifles. May as well just play Bolt Action (a fine game) rather than mess about in a sci-fi universe.

My favorite part about Bolt Action is the ability to field entire companies of nuclear-powered multi-turreted tanks with an artificial intelligence and 11-man crew...

...oh wait.

Far too many people take this game seriously, the "rules" have always been stated as guidelines. And only in tournament play should they be ridgedly adhered to.

Orks are better shots than the rules has them. It should not take 100 orks firing to kill 1 space marine. Really irritates me the way everyone thinks of orks as dumb, and all there kit is about to fall to bits.

Agree with the opinions that 40k got too big, I like playing big battles too, but it is meant to be a skirmish game, not Epic, we had a perfectly good game for huge battles.

 Grimtuff wrote:
The HH series should have never been written.
Primarchs have no place in 40k
AoS will be a mistake in the long run
Primaris are terrible and out of scale. Cadians are the problem- not marines. This whole "bigger is better" paradigm just seems like small knob syndrome to me.
40k is a setting, not a storyline- no matter what Reddit says.
Titans have no place in 40k
I think painting guides are bad and homogenising an art form. They have their place, but they're guidelines- not rules.
Tau should be a republic of loads of minor alien races and not big battlesuits all the time. Both can exist in their background (and they do) but only one gets proper representation.
Memes killed people's correct appreciation of 40k's fluff.
Metal is not the devil incarnate
Plastic is not the saviour
Parts should be made out the material that is most appropriate. PP gets this yet GW wants to go plastic all the way at the expense of easily breakable spindly bits that by rights should be metal.

1. Agree
2.not sure
3.disagree
4.strongly disagree. Old marines look derpy
5.agree.
6.only disagree in very rare circumstances
7. Agree but handy as a learning tool not a guide. And they give you a good look at a new model.
8.agree. It’s the only thing that’s interesting about them.
9. Memes and the HH series.
10. Kind of is. Kills brushes and don’t like it.
11. But it is.
12. All plastic all the time.

I have a marine chapter with female marines in it and the fluff states that females actually take implants better than male marines and it was covered up because the emperor was a big old Harvey Weinstein.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Camkierhi wrote:
Far too many people take this game seriously, the "rules" have always been stated as guidelines. And only in tournament play should they be ridgedly adhered to.

Orks are better shots than the rules has them. It should not take 100 orks firing to kill 1 space marine. Really irritates me the way everyone thinks of orks as dumb, and all there kit is about to fall to bits.

Agree with the opinions that 40k got too big, I like playing big battles too, but it is meant to be a skirmish game, not Epic, we had a perfectly good game for huge battles.

Agree with a lot of this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Disagree on the paints issue. GW make some great paints. Not all but their reds and yellows are hard to beat and the new metallics are cracking. Their shades are comparable to anyone else’s. And waaagh flesh is just lovely. I use other paints too but hating on GW paints is cutting your nose off to spite your face with certain colours. Use the best paint for the colour unare painting, be it Vallejo or citadel or whoever.

8th edition is a side shift of 7th and just as bad in its own way, people have been convinced by GW marketing that it’s better

 Daedalus81 wrote:

ccs wrote:
My most unpopular opinion amongst those that I currently play with is: Vehicles need firing arcs. Even simplistic ones would help

No thanks - it's ultimately meaningless and obnoxious to legislate during a game.

See what I mean? There's people who can't even handle drawing a straight line down the side of their tank & realizing that it'd indeed be silly to try and claim that the left side sponson could shoot out the right side of the tank.... Or agreeing that a gun in an obviously front only facing mount (ex: a vindicators main gun) can't fire out the rear of the tank.
I mean, I'm not asking you to do rocket science or micro-calculations or anything here.

GW writes rules to sell more miniatures, not to make a good game.

GW's main virtue is it gives people who sell crack to kids on p[playgrounds someone to feel morally superior to...

1. Horus Heresy is a significantly better game than 40k

2. 8th edition is one of the worst 40k editions.

3. I liked the faces in the previews for the new sisters of battle models, I saw a lot of people say they look too manly.

4. Primarchs shouldn't be in 40k.

5. I miss templates and firing arcs

ccs wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

ccs wrote:
My most unpopular opinion amongst those that I currently play with is: Vehicles need firing arcs. Even simplistic ones would help

No thanks - it's ultimately meaningless and obnoxious to legislate during a game.

See what I mean? There's people who can't even handle drawing a straight line down the side of their tank & realizing that it'd indeed be silly to try and claim that the left side sponson could shoot out the right side of the tank.... Or agreeing that a gun in an obviously front only facing mount (ex: a vindicators main gun) can't fire out the rear of the tank.
I mean, I'm not asking you to do rocket science or micro-calculations or anything here.

See what I mean? There's people that can't even handle that the battle is an abstraction and think the tank never moves during the whole game and who can't realize that pointing a model that can't use all of it's weapons all of the time is really difficult.

And yes, it is a micro calculation with a 48" weapon with an unsteady hand when millimeters matter - especially when the tank isn't a box.

Primaris marines were a good idea.

8th is one of the best editions.
Primaris Marines are brilliant.
Horus' fall wasn't THAT bad.
Advancing the storyline was a good move.
Making jokes about Guilliman's name is kinda poor humour.
Primarchs are cool.
The Horus Heresy series is pretty good.
40k does have a defined canon, it's just that people choose to ignore the new canon in favour of old fluff.
The new GW management is the best it's been.

And the kicker:
Power Level is preferable to points.

Every single traitor legion faction needs its own codex. Every single one.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And the kicker:
Power Level is preferable to points.

You're fired. Get out.

Tournament regulars (GT size and up,) tend to be some of the best sportsmen in the game, and are warm and welcoming. They also tend to understand the game from a balance standpoint better thanks to a lot of experience with different armies, opponents, and mission packs. (As well as actually knowing the rules.)

Small shop/garage groups, on the other hand, tend to have a much higher concentration of that-guy behavior. Prejudice based on your army and list choices, vocal lobbying for house rules that buff their army and nerf the rest, and outright cheating in games with nothing on the line, among other things, are common. They also tend to think they understand the game better than others despite a woeful lack of experience and exposure.

ccs wrote:
See what I mean? There's people who can't even handle drawing a straight line down the side of their tank & realizing that it'd indeed be silly to try and claim that the left side sponson could shoot out the right side of the tank.... Or agreeing that a gun in an obviously front only facing mount (ex: a vindicators main gun) can't fire out the rear of the tank.
I mean, I'm not asking you to do rocket science or micro-calculations or anything here.

Let me guess, you also tell your opponent he can't fire his SM at the target right in front of them because they clearly point their guns to the side?

I like how there are people who can't even notice they are OK with 90% of the models on the table being perfectly able to fire out of their butts but suddenly become anal about the remaining 10%...

1) Tau have no place in 40K

2) Close combat should be the main focus of the game

3) Any army that doesn't do assault is lame as feth

4) 40k is not sci fi, it's Fantasy in space.

5) Primaris fluff is garbage

6) The Primarchs shouldn't come back to 40K

7) 8th ed is just as bad as 7th edition, just in the polar opposite direction.

 Formosa wrote:
8th edition is a side shift of 7th and just as bad in its own way, people have been convinced by GW marketing that it’s better

Hold on a second, I'm just phoning up Peachy and Duncan so I can ask them to tell me how to respond to you.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I believe that close-quarters combat should not form the core element of lists. CQC units should provide support in form of skirmishing and interference. If I wanted to play a game about large blocks of soldiers fighting with swords, I'd have played Fantasy or some other medieval-based game.

Space Marine helmets are ugly as f***. At least they're not Terminators: tactical marine bodies look okay; there's nothing good about terminators.

Do you mean MK 6 or MK 7? I have to agree that the helmets of MK V, VII, and VIII all look like gak with that "le darth vader" angry face grille. MK II and mostly MK VI looks like something competently designed.

 Lotus Corgi wrote:
Every single traitor legion faction needs its own codex. Every single one.

Including the members of "Cabal 47"

47 Traitor Primarchs that Lorgar kept hidden from the emperor during the heresy.

 Irbis wrote:

ccs wrote:
See what I mean? There's people who can't even handle drawing a straight line down the side of their tank & realizing that it'd indeed be silly to try and claim that the left side sponson could shoot out the right side of the tank.... Or agreeing that a gun in an obviously front only facing mount (ex: a vindicators main gun) can't fire out the rear of the tank.
I mean, I'm not asking you to do rocket science or micro-calculations or anything here.

Let me guess, you also tell your opponent he can't fire his SM at the target right in front of them because they clearly point their guns to the side?

I like how there are people who can't even notice they are OK with 90% of the models on the table being perfectly able to fire out of their butts but suddenly become anal about the remaining 10%...

Lol I know right! I noticed this too. They don’t seem to have a problem with a biker pulling some crazy flip to fire his front mounted guns behind him, or a stormsurge pulls some John Wick nonsense, but an arbitrary class of models that used to have firing arcs can’t possibly fire while turning!

 Irbis wrote:

ccs wrote:
See what I mean? There's people who can't even handle drawing a straight line down the side of their tank & realizing that it'd indeed be silly to try and claim that the left side sponson could shoot out the right side of the tank.... Or agreeing that a gun in an obviously front only facing mount (ex: a vindicators main gun) can't fire out the rear of the tank.
I mean, I'm not asking you to do rocket science or micro-calculations or anything here.

Let me guess, you also tell your opponent he can't fire his SM at the target right in front of them because they clearly point their guns to the side?

I like how there are people who can't even notice they are OK with 90% of the models on the table being perfectly able to fire out of their butts but suddenly become anal about the remaining 10%...

It takes roughly a second or two for infantry to turn around and fire their weapon, possibly even less. Even a monster could probably whip around and fire off shots easily. A tank however has to either traverse the gun (which can take a while) or physically turn the tank around on its treads into a new facing. Both of which takes a lot longer than to simply turn around on your heel, take aim, and fire. Which also takes long enough that it should justify that it takes to turn around.

There is also no excuse at all for aircraft firing out of their arse. Aircraft should only be able to shoot at anything visible from the front of their initial starting space and their ending space in the movement phase. They shouldn't be able to shoot at infantry that is directly behind them and they never even flew over.

While we're talking about flyers, they shouldn't exist at the scale of 40k, their movement is clumsy and makes no sense.

 Aaranis wrote:
While we're talking about flyers, they shouldn't exist at the scale of 40k, their movement is clumsy and makes no sense.

Yeah they don't really work on the board at all. I love flight sims and I've never gotten over the idea of how the hell a jet is supposed to be on the table for anything longer than a single turn before instantly crossing it. It feels like to me that while maybe there should be something akin to an attack chopper or flying battlesuits, aircraft are more of a special ability or stratagem these days. Pay 3CP, draw a line down the table and everything on either side of the line for 5" gets hit by X amount of hits.

Just did some math, going by marine model height (7 feet to 3.3 cm), the table's roughly 259 feet wide "in scale". Even something as slow as an A-10 warthog (which there isn't, most 40k aircraft are insanely quick) would clear the table width-wise in under a second. In order for aircraft to take 3 turns to fly off the board, they'd have be travelling slower than a car. Or 40k takes place at a "speed" of under 1/3 of a second.

Flyers and Lords of war should never have been made in 40k scale.
The 3rd edition force org chart was better than what we have now.
Tau should not have suits bigger than crisis
Jervis Johnson is a great rules writer

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
1) Tau have no place in 40K

2) Close combat should be the main focus of the game

3) Any army that doesn't do assault is lame as feth

4) 40k is not sci fi, it's Fantasy in space.

5) Primaris fluff is garbage

6) The Primarchs shouldn't come back to 40K

7) 8th ed is just as bad as 7th edition, just in the polar opposite direction.

Question: By assault do you mean strictly melee? I'm building a Tempestus Scions list, and they are masters of close quarters shooting (not in melee, just within 9 inches), which could be construed as assault.

Boardgame plastic is the way forward.

 Aaranis wrote:
ITC ruleset is not Warhammer 40,000.

Thats not an opinion its a fact, ITC is a different game with warhammer models.

Primarchs are terrible for the 40k game

Invulns are too abundant and should have been made into Ward saves with the new edition

The people who believe that there are too many people who "take the game too seriously" are more harmful to the game than WAAC players.

Dark Imperium and Plague War are some of the best fluff I’ve read.

Primaris look much better than mini marines.

 Graysparrow wrote:
Special Characters / Named Characters need to go back to being 'with opponents permission only' in (matched) games.

That's not just fact, it's cold hard opinion.

Zustiur wrote:
Flyers and Lords of war should never have been made in 40k scale.
The 3rd edition force org chart was better than what we have now.
Tau should not have suits bigger than crisis
Jervis Johnson is a great rules writer

Actually I agree with all but the last one.

The Newman wrote:

 Graysparrow wrote:
Special Characters / Named Characters need to go back to being 'with opponents permission only' in (matched) games.

That's not just fact, it's cold hard opinion.

They already are. Unless you live somewhere with some really crazy and quite specific legal ordinances.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And the kicker:
Power Level is preferable to points.

Peregrine should be along any minute now to derail the thread and eat your liver.

Na I got this.

The Emperor should never have been rewritten to be an uncaring force of nature about the fates of his created sons.

In doing so they took a flawed character that was understandably flawed as a human and remolded it into a character that makes the dumbest mistakes a human can make that fly in the face of the logical being he was rewritten as.

You don't get the hubris of a human without the whole package. You don't get a logic driven machine who doesn't see Angron as a liability.

Easy to assemble minitures are 'easy to assemble' and have enhanced my hobby experience ten fold.

I am sorry, I can't even keep a straight face typeing that gak.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And the kicker:
Power Level is preferable to points.

Peregrine should be along any minute now to derail the thread and eat your liver.

Nah, this is the unpopular opinions thread. Posting an opinion here is already enough of a concession that it's an absurd minority.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And the kicker:
Power Level is preferable to points.

Peregrine should be along any minute now to derail the thread and eat your liver.

Nah, this is the unpopular opinions thread. Posting an opinion here is already enough of a concession that it's an absurd minority.

But you are going to eat his liver?

Games-Workshop are better at writing rules than any of the legions of whiny hypocrites who complain incessantly rather than actually going out and writing something better.

Marine players need to stop whining that their models are bad, compared to the utter gak Dark Eldar were forced to put up with for EDITIONS and my own beloved Chaos Daemons being mostly useless for a long time (2 waves, deep striking with no option of being on the board and 5th ed mishap tables being brutal!), what Marines are going through now is paltry in comparison and you marine players need to suck it up and enjoy the hobby and stop complaining you need to really play well to win.

Also Games Workshop make great rules, you all approach them in the wrong mindset.

People who use this thread to be mad about 8th edition are no fun at parties.

And now that we've got the facts out of the way, time for an opinion: the Zerg are a better demonstration of the concept than the Tyranids.

Space Marines are competitive. Always have been and always will be. Many SM players just want to auto-win with no efforts their games.

LoWs shouldn't be legal in games under 3000 points game.

Factions with just a few entries (Harlequins...) or basically just the repetition of the same model (Imperial Knights...) shouldn't be independent armies but part of other codexes.

OK got one more to add..

GW are amazing, wonderful and have given me years of fun in my life.

People bitch on about them and there are other alternatives out there, but when it comes down to it, GW have been on the top of the game for a long time, their products are generally all bloody good. I have models and even paints that are over 20 years old and still going strong. Not a lot in life can say the same.

1. 8th edition is boring, far too bare bones, and a major step in the wrong direction for the hobby.

2. 7th edition despite all its horrible balance issues was at its core a much better game and GW did a major diservice by scrapping all the good qualities of the edition.

3. 8th edition is going to go down the same path as past editions where GW throws in more rules bloat (not depth of mechanics but just layering on bonuses on top of bonuses) resulting in the game becoming more unwieldy.

4. Primaris are a marketing ploy to invalidate old models and get the large space marine player base to eventually rebuy their entire army again.

5. The lore of the Tau is good for the 40k setting

6. The core gameplay style of Tau is bad for 40k

7. The entire Gathering Storm plot was a dumpster fire of horrible writing decisions and 40k has been permanently worsened by its publication.

8. The years of GW being pants on head stupid about community interaction and zero marketing has made a lot of the user base extremely susceptible to actual marketing and hype.

9. The 40k meme focused lore is better than the actual lore because GW takes whats suppose to be a semi satirical and silly setting way too seriously.

10. Duncan seems like a nice enough person but his notoriety and the whole two thin coats meme is a overdone at this point.

 Irbis wrote:

ccs wrote:
See what I mean? There's people who can't even handle drawing a straight line down the side of their tank & realizing that it'd indeed be silly to try and claim that the left side sponson could shoot out the right side of the tank.... Or agreeing that a gun in an obviously front only facing mount (ex: a vindicators main gun) can't fire out the rear of the tank.
I mean, I'm not asking you to do rocket science or micro-calculations or anything here.

Let me guess, you also tell your opponent he can't fire his SM at the target right in front of them because they clearly point their guns to the side?

I like how there are people who can't even notice they are OK with 90% of the models on the table being perfectly able to fire out of their butts but suddenly become anal about the remaining 10%...

Actually no.
I admit that I'd like facing rules for all models. But I know the majority of current players (including 3/5 that I play with) wouldn't be able to handle that, so that's not what I'm wishing for. Just the most simplistic of fire arcs for vehicles, 1 baby step above this current lv of absurd abstraction.

There's nothing inherently wrong with soup, either from a game balance or fluff perspective. Fluff-accurate Imperial armies should usually be soup armies. The Imperium should have more options than any other faction, with Chaos as a close second. The game should be balanced around that assumption. In other words, xenos factions should have access to more powerful units to balance their relative lack of options and synergy. If that means that Imperial armies that limit themselves to a single 'subfaction' end up uncompetitive, then that's a feature, not a bug.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Games-Workshop are better at writing rules than any of the legions of whiny hypocrites who complain incessantly rather than actually going out and writing something better.

One does not need to eat dog gak to know it tastes bad.
Fwiw I'm a fan of 8th, but this fallacy needs to be put to rest. I don't need to write rules to complain about them.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Games-Workshop are better at writing rules than any of the legions of whiny hypocrites who complain incessantly rather than actually going out and writing something better.

One does not need to eat dog gak to know it tastes bad.
Fwiw I'm a fan of 8th, but this fallacy needs to be put to rest. I don't need to write rules to complain about them.

No. But for those people who complain unceasingly to the extent that they can seemingly find no redeeming value whatsoever in the rules that Games-Workshop produce, then perhaps those rules aren't for them. And if they put as much time and effort into creating an alternative as they do complaining, then I'll happily eat the metaphorical dog gak that is my own words if it means I get to play a better game.

GW writes good rules? Damn, now that’s a hot take.

You may like GW rules, but that doesn’t mean they’re good, so we should really drop the act here.

At the bare minimum rules for a game should be clear, concise and organized in a logistical manner making it easy for people to find and use correctly.

8th Ed. Fails all of these parameters. Have you guys even tried to read the core rule book? Only someone with schizophrenia would organize a book like that.

Don't get me wrong: I don't love Games-Workshop's rules. In fact, at one point in time, I thought they had such shortcomings, that I had a stab at writing a set myself. It turned out to be much harder than I had anticipated. I just wonder if any of the chronic moaners out there have at least attempted to write some rules like I did. An exercise like that can really put these things into perspective and give one the opportunity to realize that their miniature plastic toy soldiers are no less valuable regardless of the amount of strength points the dudes who sell them say they have.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:


You may like GW rules, but that doesn’t mean they’re good, so we should really drop the act here.

Well you may don't like GW rules but that doesn't mean they're bad.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Don't get me wrong: I don't love Games-Workshop's rules. In fact, at one point in time, I thought they had such shortcomings, that I had a stab at writing a set myself. It turned out to be much harder than I had anticipated. I just wonder if any of the chronic moaners out there have at least attempted to write some rules like I did. An exercise like that can really put these things into perspective and give one the opportunity to realize that their miniature plastic toy soldiers are no less valuable regardless of the amount of strength points the dudes who sell them say they have.

Which isn't an excuse because you're just an unprofessional individual with ridiculously limited resources. GW is a company, a company with a lot of resources. They have precisely zero excuse to put forth anything but well balanced and well refined rules. The only reason they don't is due to a mixture of greed, laziness, and incompetence.

4++ should be rare, and 3++super rare!

Both Tau and Tyranids are examples of bad writing by GW. Sure they work in settings, but not in a business that GW wants to continue.

Tau is too small to continue forever, they're already split down the middle, how long does GW want us to believe they can survive? How much plot armour can one empire have?
Also, the focus on huge suits is really uncool, GW should really focus on the idea of a union of race, and more small suits. The Tau dont counter titans with their own suits, they use mantas.

Tyranids are also bad but on the opposite side. An unending threat that's going to eventually wipe out the galaxy? The current forces are only scouts? Yeah, so now they have to give plot armour to everyone else to avoid Tyranids nomming everything, bad writing.

To be clear, I like both Tau and Tyranids, I simply wish they were better written.

Oh, another unpopular opinion maybe?: GW is ruining Chaos. Undivided daemons and undivided Marks should make a return, undivided should be more of its own thing than worshipping all the gods.

And finally, bring back Malice. As much as people like to meme about it, I actually think Malice was a cool story point (Even if it has to be done under another name for copyright shiz). Malice could be something akin to the Tau's warp entity they accidently made.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Don't get me wrong: I don't love Games-Workshop's rules. In fact, at one point in time, I thought they had such shortcomings, that I had a stab at writing a set myself. It turned out to be much harder than I had anticipated. I just wonder if any of the chronic moaners out there have at least attempted to write some rules like I did. An exercise like that can really put these things into perspective and give one the opportunity to realize that their miniature plastic toy soldiers are no less valuable regardless of the amount of strength points the dudes who sell them say they have.

I can say I am attempting to make my own ruleset, and I completely agree. I've spent a good chunk of time on it, and the balance is definitely worse than GW's, but its a work in progress.

Scatter dice should be applied to all shots fired by ranged weapons in the game.

The current detatchment system is completely broken.
We were better off with the old CAD
Knights as their own army is a huge mistake, and very unbalanced.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

ccs wrote:
See what I mean? There's people who can't even handle drawing a straight line down the side of their tank & realizing that it'd indeed be silly to try and claim that the left side sponson could shoot out the right side of the tank.... Or agreeing that a gun in an obviously front only facing mount (ex: a vindicators main gun) can't fire out the rear of the tank.
I mean, I'm not asking you to do rocket science or micro-calculations or anything here.

Let me guess, you also tell your opponent he can't fire his SM at the target right in front of them because they clearly point their guns to the side?

I like how there are people who can't even notice they are OK with 90% of the models on the table being perfectly able to fire out of their butts but suddenly become anal about the remaining 10%...

It takes roughly a second or two for infantry to turn around and fire their weapon, possibly even less. Even a monster could probably whip around and fire off shots easily. A tank however has to either traverse the gun (which can take a while) or physically turn the tank around on its treads into a new facing. Both of which takes a lot longer than to simply turn around on your heel, take aim, and fire. Which also takes long enough that it should justify that it takes to turn around.

There is also no excuse at all for aircraft firing out of their arse. Aircraft should only be able to shoot at anything visible from the front of their initial starting space and their ending space in the movement phase. They shouldn't be able to shoot at infantry that is directly behind them and they never even flew over.

Which is why they're shooting while they move. And while some might stay still on the table it doesn't mean that they model wasn't moving around to shoot it's guns "in real life".

Do you envision Blood Angels that move, shoot, and then charge to say, "Alright lads! Stand perfectly still while you shoot those guns and no pivoting!"? Or might they actually be all one fluid motion and we just break it up for game purposes?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Aaranis wrote:
ITC ruleset is not Warhammer 40,000.

Thats not an opinion its a fact, ITC is a different game with warhammer models.

So if I came up with a different mission I'm no longer playing Warhammer even though the book encourages that? Cool.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Aaranis wrote:
ITC ruleset is not Warhammer 40,000.

Thats not an opinion its a fact, ITC is a different game with warhammer models.

So if I came up with a different mission I'm no longer playing Warhammer even though the book encourages that? Cool.

The fact ITC changes the game so much that it has its own completely different meta to non-ITC missions indicates that it's a completely deviated game.

Okay, this goes very against the grain for me but good "therapy":


Boys before toys! (troop choices before the other stuff in case you have any different ideas...)

Space marines suck in all things (I play them and it "hurts" to use them)

Mastery in airbrush is FAR superior to hairy brush skills (I am far more skilled in brush than airbrush but that gap is closing fast).

40k models are "embarrassing". (My Bolt Action stuff seems to be much better received as "awesome looking" by the uninitiated than my better painted 40k stuff).

The vast majority of wargamers are social misfits (I cannot seem to find a single person that is not on mental corrective meds, has strong personal body odour / halitosis, no concept of persona space or has the entirety of their social circle within the gaming group... I cannot fully exclude myself from this)

Magic the Gathering seems more "respectable" than wargaming. (Seems well organized and the community is still thriving).

Vehicles in 40k seem to be the "odd man out" when it comes to painting them to a good finish. (Historical models can be the finest examples of model painting out there (airplanes, tanks) yet we always see some 40k model with the clear cockpit painted over, lighting glow effects, ugly flyiing bases, very little photo-etch parts (none standard for sure), the vehicles feel more like an "icon" of the vehicle than anything realistically realized "making a silk purse out of a sow's ear".)

Miniatures generally as gaming pieces are garbage. (Pick up a chess piece. Feel the heft, the feel of it. We play with plastic. It is as heavy as plastic. I put fender washers in the base of every single miniature I own because they feel "cheap" otherwise. You would think they would put out a line of weighted bases)

Gaming rule books suck. (I write procedures for part of my living. Logical flow and having ALL the information available for each element of a process is "standard". Squirreling away tidbits along margins and tables in the back of a book leads to needless page flipping and "process" delays).

I actually dislike that Chapterhouse sued GW, now every codex is made with the rule "if we do not have the model, we are not making the rules for one".

I think psychic phase is unnecessary.


Thare.

That is out of my system.

The chain of my tank can see the chain of your tank and so I can shoot you - rubbish!

40k models are "embarrassing". (My Bolt Action stuff seems to be much better received as "awesome looking" by the uninitiated than my better painted 40k stuff).

I think that's your own psyche imposing on other people's expectations.

The vast majority of wargamers are social misfits (I cannot seem to find a single person that is not on mental corrective meds, has strong personal body odour / halitosis, no concept of persona space or has the entirety of their social circle within the gaming group... I cannot fully exclude myself from this)

For those aged 12 to 25, probably. This is more pronounced for MTG in my area and less for Warhammer.

Magic the Gathering seems more "respectable" than wargaming. (Seems well organized and the community is still thriving).

Easier to get into - that's about it. The odor when MTG tournaments are on are unbearable. Again, I think this is your psyche imposing the belief that playing with toy soldiers is less respectable than a card game.

Vehicles in 40k seem to be the "odd man out" when it comes to painting them to a good finish. (Historical models can be the finest examples of model painting out there (airplanes, tanks) yet we always see some 40k model with the clear cockpit painted over, lighting glow effects, ugly flyiing bases, very little photo-etch parts (none standard for sure), the vehicles feel more like an "icon" of the vehicle than anything realistically realized "making a silk purse out of a sow's ear".)

Historical players have an older age bracket who are more patient and experienced.

Casual gamers are ruining this game.

Aura's are bad for the game, I agree. At least big buff auras.

Players who are not very good at tactics and maneuver and the intricacies of a model vs model game seem to love lots of dice. The more dice rolling the better. If they see a stat with lots of dice they go all fangirl. And it seems GW is trying to draw more of those players with 8th.

One the one hand this is easily one of the fastest growing threads. On the other hand, a thread in which we are supposed to post our unpopular opinions without reproach is full of people telling each other that their unpopular opinions are wrong.

*HeadDesk*

Oh well.

One more:

Blizzard's idea of 'TrueId' in which all forum and game related content was tagged by the real name of the content creator/poster was brilliant and should be implemented on anything miniatures related.

 ChargerIIC wrote:
One the one hand this is easily one of the fastest growing threads. On the other hand, a thread in which we are supposed to post our unpopular opinions without reproach is full of people telling each other that their unpopular opinions are wrong.

*HeadDesk*

Oh well.

One more:

Blizzard's idea of 'TrueId' in which all forum and game related content was tagged by the real name of the content creator/poster was brilliant and should be implemented on anything miniatures related.

Well, they wouldn't be unpopular if we didn't have someone to argue them, right?

Here's mine - a shockingly large percentage of posters are unable to step back and process new information before coming to a rational conclusion. An even larger portion of that are unable to handle incomplete information in a reasonable manner.

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Easy to assemble minitures are 'easy to assemble' and have enhanced my hobby experience ten fold.

I am sorry, I can't even keep a straight face typeing that gak.

I can say this and it’s totally true for me. Love the easy to assemble models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
GW are casual players who attempted to appease a tournament crowd with 8E.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

40k models are "embarrassing". (My Bolt Action stuff seems to be much better received as "awesome looking" by the uninitiated than my better painted 40k stuff).

I think that's your own psyche imposing on other people's expectations.

The vast majority of wargamers are social misfits (I cannot seem to find a single person that is not on mental corrective meds, has strong personal body odour / halitosis, no concept of persona space or has the entirety of their social circle within the gaming group... I cannot fully exclude myself from this)

For those aged 12 to 25, probably. This is more pronounced for MTG in my area and less for Warhammer.

Magic the Gathering seems more "respectable" than wargaming. (Seems well organized and the community is still thriving).

Easier to get into - that's about it. The odor when MTG tournaments are on are unbearable. Again, I think this is your psyche imposing the belief that playing with toy soldiers is less respectable than a card game.

Vehicles in 40k seem to be the "odd man out" when it comes to painting them to a good finish. (Historical models can be the finest examples of model painting out there (airplanes, tanks) yet we always see some 40k model with the clear cockpit painted over, lighting glow effects, ugly flyiing bases, very little photo-etch parts (none standard for sure), the vehicles feel more like an "icon" of the vehicle than anything realistically realized "making a silk purse out of a sow's ear".)

Historical players have an older age bracket who are more patient and experienced.

I believe your line by line reply defeats the purpose of this thread.
These are a "feeling" an "opinion", I believe the intent was not to "impose" on anyone.
These opinions are based on decades of experiences playing within the hobby and explaining to others about the hobby.
I am unsure how the "facts" you present are to change that, or what the intent is other than to say "you are wrong for reasons..."
I would suggest you could say your own personal experiences seem to prove the opposite, which is perfectly fine.

I am one of those "older age bracket" types, I am almost 50, some days I feel my patience is less than it was, as this thread is proving.

Crowd sourcing rules from front line gaming is the key for the health and longevity of 40k.

Orks can never have good shooting because it would break the game. This opinion is currently being tested.

Proxies are ugly, and my conversions are better.

Re-rolls are handed out so much to appease the younger generation of players, who simply can't understand basic statistics, and don't posses the mental ability to process failure well enough.
Most of them (rerolls) should go, they slow the game down and skew the output of so many things towards success.

Cost effectiveness is an incredibly poor measurement on how to determind whether something is good or not.
A) It assumes costs are based relative power of a single stat/group of stats. Unit X should not be 2x as good at everything as unit Y even if it is twice as expensive, because power compounds with flexibility.
B) it assumes units fighting an equal number of points, which is not how things work in any particular battle. If you can't win mono-to-mono, then that should be an incentive to put your units is advantage possitions rather than complain that you can't automaticly win in a fair fight.
C) There's a lot of situations that happen in math that aren't going to happen on the table. You can't, for example, kill 1.5 of a unit with a single weapon. Or have units be able to be everywhere buffing everything. 30 leadership boys from Mob Rule sounds amazing until turn 3-4 when all of youe boy mobz are mostly dead now and you're loosing guys left and right to morale (Morale as a whole is a mechanic ignored a lot)

This is not an endorsement of the "guts" school of unit effectiveness, which is much worse. Mathhammer is a tool, but it's not the only tool we should be using.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
Cost effectiveness is an incredibly poor measurement on how to determind whether something is good or not.
A) It assumes costs are based relative power of a single stat/group of stats. Unit X should not be 2x as good at everything as unit Y even if it is twice as expensive, because power compounds with flexibility.
B) it assumes units fighting an equal number of points, which is not how things work in any particular battle. If you can't win mono-to-mono, then that should be an incentive to put your units is advantage possitions rather than complain that you can't automaticly win in a fair fight.
C) There's a lot of situations that happen in math that aren't going to happen on the table. You can't, for example, kill 1.5 of a unit with a single weapon. Or have units be able to be everywhere buffing everything. 30 leadership boys from Mob Rule sounds amazing until turn 3-4 when all of youe boy mobz are mostly dead now and you're loosing guys left and right to morale (Morale as a whole is a mechanic ignored a lot)

This is not an endorsement of the "guts" school of unit effectiveness, which is much worse. Mathhammer is a tool, but it's not the only tool we should be using.

Will you marry me?

metal miniatures are great. they stand the test of time and hold there value. wash pin and primer them and you will never have a problem.
primaris look better but fluff is dumb
the lore takes itself too seriously now
true line of sight is terrible
primarchs are bad
the horus heresy was dumb
soup is cool and good
itc style missions are better even for casual play
6th/7th edition were a mess that drove people away
templates are bad but could be a good way to get around minus's to hit
bring back chaos undivided in a meaningful way

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Will you marry me?

Already called for by a wonderful woman I also believe elite armies are not AS bad as people think and that competitive players are good for the game, so I don't think we're as compatible as you think

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Will you marry me?

Already called for by a wonderful woman I also believe elite armies are not AS bad as people think and that competitive players are good for the game, so I don't think we're as compatible as you think

No - you may have misinterpreted my other posts, because I think those things, too.

I'm married, too, but she doesn't like Warhammer sometimes so our wives could live together and we could have our own house and play Warhammer all day!

Wait, you being married is an unpopular opinion?

Mortal wound is a terrible mechanic as-is.

The morale system is bad.

Vehicle facings and firing arcs were a mechanic that was wreaking havoc on point-balance. It’s already challenging for them to get statlines correctly costed, but then you had some vehicles that may still suck to use because the model sculptor decided they want the main weapon on top pointing skyward or some nonsense where it can’t see most of what it would want to shoot. Making all facings abstract like how they were with monsters and smaller models puts them back on relatively even ground for balance purposes.

Combat support characters like chaplains face a ton of challenge trying to do their job effectively because of how the rules work.

8e, despite its flaws, is probably the best edition yet. Without a comprehensive large scale poll, I’m unsure if this opinion is unpopular or not.

Seeing a lot of moans about TLOS.

You do know it's been in the game since at least 2nd ed, guys? TLOS is not a new thing.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Will you marry me?

Already called for by a wonderful woman I also believe elite armies are not AS bad as people think and that competitive players are good for the game, so I don't think we're as compatible as you think

No - you may have misinterpreted my other posts, because I think those things, too.

I'm married, too, but she doesn't like Warhammer sometimes so our wives could live together and we could have our own house and play Warhammer all day!

*Shrug* That might be the case. My girlfriend is also into warhammer, so that might make it complicated.

On topic: I think Dakkadakka is a swell place.

 Grimtuff wrote:
Seeing a lot of moans about TLOS.

You do know it's been in the game since at least 2nd ed, guys? TLOS is not a new thing.

I think that there was always a level of abstraction and an understanding that the tip of a whip antennae isn't enough to justify the shot. Back then, we had a "If you would hate having it done to you, don't try to pull it on someone else." sort of mentality. Just a better batch of gaming all around. 5th destroyed that.

That people who ferociously argue that multivariate phase space of sandbox miniature game interactions can be reasonably approximated by projection onto linear dimension of point cost should finally publish all their brilliant math papers, because they are seriously missing out on guaranteed Fields Medal for revolutionizing dynamical systems theory.

 Just Tony wrote:
5th destroyed that.

5th had exceptions for banners, wings etc.

Power level is the best because taking upgrades is fun.

You shouldn't be able to field an unpainted army at events or tournaments

One of the top reasons I ditched Warmachine. Flat terrain, junk minis, non-hobby related crowd

Guardsmen are balanced at 4ppm and conscripts after the nerfs were balanced at 3ppm

Unpopular opinion: Way too many 40K gamers are beholden to the gospel that is GW's rulebooks and are unwilling to make subtle or drastic changes to enhance their gaming experience.

 Grimtuff wrote:
Seeing a lot of moans about TLOS.

You do know it's been in the game since at least 2nd ed, guys? TLOS is not a new thing.

It was TLOS with a number of very important asterisks on top. Like forests blocked LOS, despite you being able to physically see between trees. Models in 4th had a "height class", and there were LOS blocking mechanics surrounding that.

This is some elitism that I'm trying to work through and correct, but I think this belongs here:

I'm disheartened when I see a ForgeWorld model that has been poorly painted. It seems like a waste.

 Jpogfreak886 wrote:
I'm disheartened when I see a ForgeWorld model that has been poorly painted. It seems like a waste.

That's unpopular? It's even worse when the barrels are all bendy.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Jpogfreak886 wrote:
I'm disheartened when I see a ForgeWorld model that has been poorly painted. It seems like a waste.

That's unpopular? It's even worse when the barrels are all bendy.

Haha ok, maybe not unpopular, but I feel like a dick when my first reaction is "You don't deserve expensive models if you're going to paint them like that"

 Jpogfreak886 wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

 Jpogfreak886 wrote:
I'm disheartened when I see a ForgeWorld model that has been poorly painted. It seems like a waste.

That's unpopular? It's even worse when the barrels are all bendy.

Haha ok, maybe not unpopular, but I feel like a dick when my first reaction is "You don't deserve expensive models if you're going to paint them like that"

Sometimes the right reaction is the dick one.

I think too many people defend GW especially when GW is in the moral wrong.

 lolman1c wrote:
I think too many people defend GW especially when GW is in the moral wrong.

What is the moral wrong in this case? Running a luxury goods manufacturing company that produces plastic models and game systems is pretty morally agnostic. You could argue that their pricing, sales structure or customer service are bad business but it's not like they're hurting anyone.

 Luciferian wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
I think too many people defend GW especially when GW is in the moral wrong.

What is the moral wrong in this case? Running a luxury goods manufacturing company that produces plastic models and game systems is pretty morally agnostic. You could argue that their pricing, sales structure or customer service are bad business but it's not like they're hurting anyone.

I'm trying to think of a moral wrong they have done, they seem pretty amoral to me. Maybe some of their legal stuff was a bit weird, like the "Spots the Space Marine" thing, but I would call that more stupid than immoral. Have they screwed over staff at some point? That's the only thing I can think of.

Here's mine:

Space Marines are perfectly fine as they are. For an introductory, common faction, I'd want an army that's somewhere middle-tier tournament-wise with many (MANY) options for customization. I think all the whining is either from people who are (a) misinformed or (b) just biased because they want their personal armies to be stronger.

There we go, knew one of mine w8uld get a reaction eventually. Especially from people so eager to stand up for GW. ; )

Round 2:

Either Tempestus Scions should go down by 1 ppm, or Hot-Shot Lasguns should not cost anything. Or, Hot-Shot lasguns should get an increase in range so they can be used in rapid fire range out of Aerial Drop.

 lolman1c wrote:
I think too many people defend GW especially when GW is in the moral wrong.

This almost elicited a laugh from me...I'd love to see some immoral things they've done.

 Apple Peel wrote:
Round 2:

Either Tempestus Scions should go down by 1 ppm, or Hot-Shot Lasguns should not cost anything. Or, Hot-Shot lasguns should get an increase in range so they can be used in rapid fire range out of Aerial Drop.

I'm honestly for Assault 2 as long as they go up a point or two.

 Elbows wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
I think too many people defend GW especially when GW is in the moral wrong.

This almost elicited a laugh from me...I'd love to see some immoral things they've done.

I'm sure it's more along the lines of "prices I don't like" or "balance decisions I don't agree with" than the actual immoral things large corporations do. Like, say what you want about GW, but at least their models aren't produced in far eastern sweatshops.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
Round 2:

Either Tempestus Scions should go down by 1 ppm, or Hot-Shot Lasguns should not cost anything. Or, Hot-Shot lasguns should get an increase in range so they can be used in rapid fire range out of Aerial Drop.

I'm honestly for Assault 2 as long as they go up a point or two.

And then bump the Volleyguns by a few points and let them be assault as well.

My unpopular opinion:

-1 to hit as a mechanic, is not only fine, but actually beneficial to the game - INCLUDING stacking. This game is overly dominated by shooting armies even WITH it's presence, and the game needs simply defense against shooting mechanics like this.

95% or more of instances of -1 are not just units that aren't OP or top tier, they are units that would likely be crippled without it. You know Tyranids can stack a -4 between two units? Space Marines I believe can get up to -5? This stuff is handed out sensibly and in controlled instances, so it's not a problem.

The response to this is always "b-b-b-buh ALAITOC!!1!", and if this IS the case, that there's a single instance of a mechanic being overpowered then, *gasp* nerf Alaitoc, not the mechanic. The same way you don't try to nerf every T8 unit in the game because the Castellan is unbalanced. (Not that Alaitoc is either in the broader scheme of things, but if it's a balanced army that gets free wins against certain lists without making severe trade offs to do so, yeah that should probably be looked into)



My underlying belief is that the whining mostly stems from the fact that most players of this game play shooty lists, and most shooty lists are not used to dealing with any sort of counterplay. I don't see the same pushback about units with fly, some of the fastest units in the game, being able to fallback for free out of assault when they are finally caught. I don't see the same pushback around ignores LoS that completely counters melee units only other real defensive mechanic. -1 to hit is not a problem. In fact it's an important mechanic.

I think 40k as a game just sucks by design. Too many special rules and stuff going on. When every single unit in the army has special rules its a bit much. And then your opponent has auras and debuffs and everything counteracts each other. Its enough to make steam billow out of my ears. It takes a while to play but has less fun value than is worth the effort. I prefer a more concise and structured game like blood bowl or necromunda but especially blood bowl. Easy to learn, takes time to master. And I don't have to rebuy the rules every year or two. 40k is and imo always has been a hot mess. Love the setting though...especially before cawl and guillimans return.

If -1 to hit was more easily accessible to every faction rather than just a select few it would be less of an issue - that's where the problem is.

Some factions get the buff army wide, some factions only get it on select units, most other factions don't even get the option.

Bring back "Go to Ground" - declare when a unit is targeted in the shooting phase, for the rest of the phase any units targeting this unit are at -1 to all hit rolls. As a cost that unit can only hit on 6's the following turn and can not charge a unit in the Charge phase.

 NurglesR0T wrote:
If -1 to hit was more easily accessible to every faction rather than just a select few it would be less of an issue - that's where the problem is.

Some factions get the buff army wide, some factions only get it on select units, most other factions don't even get the option.

Bring back "Go to Ground" - declare when a unit is targeted in the shooting phase, for the rest of the phase any units targeting this unit are at -1 to all hit rolls. As a cost that unit can only hit on 6's the following turn and can not charge a unit in the Charge phase.

Absolutely not. Knights, Drukhari, Guard, etc, these sorts of armies do not need -1 to hit. Completely unnecessary they have other mechanics which means they don't need it. You've completely missed the point of my post which is that this way of trying to "blanket change" everything is silly. Every faction should get a Knight! Every faction should get a Shining Spears! Every faction should have Hive Guard!

no, not every faction needs -1 to hit, only... the ones that do.

 SHUPPET wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:
If -1 to hit was more easily accessible to every faction rather than just a select few it would be less of an issue - that's where the problem is.

Some factions get the buff army wide, some factions only get it on select units, most other factions don't even get the option.

Bring back "Go to Ground" - declare when a unit is targeted in the shooting phase, for the rest of the phase any units targeting this unit are at -1 to all hit rolls. As a cost that unit can only hit on 6's the following turn and can not charge a unit in the Charge phase.

Absolutely not. Knights, Drukhari, Guard, etc, these sorts of armies do not need -1 to hit. Completely unnecessary they have other mechanics which means they don't need it. You've completely missed the point of my post which is that this way of trying to "blanket change" everything is silly. Every faction should get a Knight! Every faction should get a Shining Spears! Every faction should have Hive Guard!

no, not every faction needs -1 to hit, only... the ones that do.

You need to chill. That's not what I was saying and you know it.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:
If -1 to hit was more easily accessible to every faction rather than just a select few it would be less of an issue - that's where the problem is.

Some factions get the buff army wide, some factions only get it on select units, most other factions don't even get the option.

Bring back "Go to Ground" - declare when a unit is targeted in the shooting phase, for the rest of the phase any units targeting this unit are at -1 to all hit rolls. As a cost that unit can only hit on 6's the following turn and can not charge a unit in the Charge phase.

Absolutely not. Knights, Drukhari, Guard, etc, these sorts of armies do not need -1 to hit. Completely unnecessary they have other mechanics which means they don't need it. You've completely missed the point of my post which is that this way of trying to "blanket change" everything is silly. Every faction should get a Knight! Every faction should get a Shining Spears! Every faction should have Hive Guard!

no, not every faction needs -1 to hit, only... the ones that do.

You need to chill. That's not what I was saying and you know it.

Huh?

You literally said "If -1 to hit was more easily accessible to every faction rather than just a select few it would be less of an issue - that's where the problem is."

In fact you literally suggested a universal mechanic for giving it to every single army.

I'm struggling to understand how I've taken what you were saying the wrong way.

You need to chill. This is just discussion, and I disagree with you.

You advocated that -1 to hit is a good defensive mechanic in a game that is dominated by shooting.

I agree and suggest that the problem is most factions don't get the option and by effect causes balance issues.

I suggest a way for armies to get it at a cost that neuters them next turn for the chance to increase defense - in a thread that's all about bringing forward unpopular opinions no less.

You then, to use your words, literally "Every faction should get a Knight! Every faction should get a Shining Spears! Every faction should have Hive Guard!"

Where did I say such thing?

You need to chill.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

You then, to use your words, literally "Every faction should get a Knight! Every faction should get a Shining Spears! Every faction should have Hive Guard!"

Where did I say such thing?

You need to chill.

When did I say you said such a thing? I don't see them anywhere in your post? I didn't put them in quotation marks? Those are my words. I'm using them as a device to highlight the issue with the concept of blanket balancing a mechanic like that, or this idea that every race should have the same tool - the idea that you put forth concerning the -1 mechanic, in the post immediately preceding my own.


and you need to chill and stop gaslighting

Here's a popular opinion;

Both of you take it to PM!

I remember a time when you could disagree with someone's statements on this forum without getting lit up for twisting their words and needing to chill / being upset / whatever other buzzword is trending for gaslighting that day.

Sometimes I wonder if people even know what a forum is for. You have your opinion, I have mine. Thread is literally called unpopular opinions. Learn to deal with a single dissenting voice with some measure of class. Not entirely directed to you NurglesROT, but over the past few months its feeling kinda impossible on this place.

I like Primaris Space Marines. Their stats and models fit the scale I envision Space Marines possessing better. Also, their models are much cleaner looking and not bogged down with loads of pointless details (read: Skulls Everywhere). They are so much easier to paint as a result. The only model in their line I hate is the Repulsor.

I also think the Dark Angels are Traitors has gotten old.

Edit: I agree with TheCustomLime below. Primaris Space Marines are not going to replace regular Marines any time soon, if at all.

I think clear-basing is tacky-looking.

Primaris Space Marines won't replace normal space marines for the forseeable future.

Citadel paints are better than P3 paints.

Tau are an excellent looking line and have a place in 40k. Melee focused armies should suffer in a futuristic setting.

Catachans are actually kind of cool models and I'd like to collect them.


Custodes should not have been their own army.

Overly airbrushed models look bad and unrealistic. An airbrush is a tool in a painter's toolbox not the focus.

Edit accident

Castellan Knight should have never existed. Releasing stronger and stronger units is a good way to ruin the game.

 Lotus Corgi wrote:
Every single traitor legion faction needs its own codex. Every single one.

I can agree with this one, on the condition that the remaining five loyalist First Founding Chapters get their own books (and special releases) as well. Black Templars and Crimson Fists can be rolled into the Imperial Fist book, then, rather than the core SM book.

Zustiur wrote:
Tau should not have suits bigger than crisis
Jervis Johnson is a great rules writer

Can't argue with these two.

Sir Heckington wrote:
And finally, bring back Malice. As much as people like to meme about it, I actually think Malice was a cool story point (Even if it has to be done under another name for copyright shiz). Malice could be something akin to the Tau's warp entity they accidently made.

Do you mean Malal here? The god who was referenced with the Sons of Malice CSM army in one of the CSM books?

 Talizvar wrote:
I actually dislike that Chapterhouse sued GW, now every codex is made with the rule "if we do not have the model, we are not making the rules for one".

Can we stick to unpopular opinions which are based on facts? GW sued Chapterhouse, not the other way around...

 Kommisar wrote:
the horus heresy was dumb

Out of interest, which bit (or bits) do you think is dumb? The miniature line, the game, the board game, the CCG, the novels, or the concept of the HH itself?

 Crimson Devil wrote:
Here's a popular opinion;

Both of you take it to PM!

Have an exalt

 SHUPPET wrote:
I remember a time when you could disagree with someone's statements on this forum without getting lit up for twisting their words and needing to chill / being upset / whatever other buzzword is trending for gaslighting that day.

Sometimes I wonder if people even know what a forum is for. You have your opinion, I have mine. Thread is literally called unpopular opinions. Learn to deal with a single dissenting voice with some measure of class. Not entirely directed to you NurglesROT, but over the past few months its feeling kinda impossible on this place.

People disagreeing with you is not gaslighting. Asking/suggesting you chill out is not gaslighting.

Gaslighting is a form of mental abuse, and should not be taken lightly.

And if you keep thinking that you're running into issues when you post, may I suggest that you look at the single common factor that all these posts you think are "gaslighting" are responding to - your posting style. As a neutral party reading through the thread, you seemed to jump down NurglesROT's throat, with a hyperbolic comparison, rather than taking a post to ensure you were both on the same wavelength, and not talking past each other (which it looks like you were).

***

Not sure if it is an unpopular opinion, but the KEYWORD system should've been used on weapons as well, as it would allow for clarity of interactions - for example, if weapons had keywords such as Flamer, Melta and Plasma (regardless of race), the Avatar of Khaine could easily keep the rule from older editions which gave enhanced survivability against suitable types of weapon.

Also, Universal Special Rules weren't a bad thing - after all, you should really have your core rulebook with you when you're playing anyway. If you want to combine them with distinct names on a datasheet, that's fine, but it makes more sense to have a rule in the core book which you can reference with variables. For example, the to-hit aura ability a lot of characters have could be a USR, with variables for range and faction. That way, if you need to update the wording for how the rule works, you do it once, rather than potentially missing an example squirrelled away in an Index or a minor Codex.

Finally, people should be suspended from forums for comparing rules to cancer, easily defeating their opponents to rape, and other such distasteful verbiage - there are accurate words for what you're trying to express which won't risk bringing up traumatic experiences for other users, so use those words or face appropriate consequences.

Judging a rules set by restrictions placed upon it by an outside body is daft.

Yes, I mean, ‘BUT ITC SAID’ stuff.

 SHUPPET wrote:
My unpopular opinion:

-1 to hit as a mechanic, is not only fine, but actually beneficial to the game - INCLUDING stacking. This game is overly dominated by shooting armies even WITH it's presence, and the game needs simply defense against shooting mechanics like this.

95% or more of instances of -1 are not just units that aren't OP or top tier, they are units that would likely be crippled without it. You know Tyranids can stack a -4 between two units? Space Marines I believe can get up to -5? This stuff is handed out sensibly and in controlled instances, so it's not a problem.

The response to this is always "b-b-b-buh ALAITOC!!1!", and if this IS the case, that there's a single instance of a mechanic being overpowered then, *gasp* nerf Alaitoc, not the mechanic. The same way you don't try to nerf every T8 unit in the game because the Castellan is unbalanced. (Not that Alaitoc is either in the broader scheme of things, but if it's a balanced army that gets free wins against certain lists without making severe trade offs to do so, yeah that should probably be looked into)



My underlying belief is that the whining mostly stems from the fact that most players of this game play shooty lists, and most shooty lists are not used to dealing with any sort of counterplay. I don't see the same pushback about units with fly, some of the fastest units in the game, being able to fallback for free out of assault when they are finally caught. I don't see the same pushback around ignores LoS that completely counters melee units only other real defensive mechanic. -1 to hit is not a problem. In fact it's an important mechanic.

I keep saying it's an important mechanic to keep gunlines in check.

 Dysartes wrote:

People disagreeing with you is not gaslighting. Asking/suggesting you chill out is not gaslighting.

Gaslighting is a form of mental abuse, and should not be taken lightly.

And if you keep thinking that you're running into issues when you post, may I suggest that you look at the single common factor that all these posts you think are "gaslighting" are responding to - your posting style. As a neutral party reading through the thread, you seemed to jump down NurglesROT's throat, with a hyperbolic comparison, rather than taking a post to ensure you were both on the same wavelength, and not talking past each other (which it looks like you were).

If gaslighting isn't the right word for it, it's the closest one I've got for describing this form of gak posting where someone disagrees with an opinion, and the person being disagreed with responds "lol you so mad" "chill out" "dont get upset" etc, when there is literally nothing to indicate any sort of anger, just a discussion and you not being able to handle dissenting voice.

I didn't at any point say it's just me, or that I'm the one common factor in this phenomena. I see it happening all the time on here, and I often jump in when I see others doing it to others, when I have the energy. I expressed exasperation in how this forum seems to have devolved to currently doing it at every turn as though it gives you some sort of rational high ground, and its beyond transparent whenever I see it.

I didn't "jump down anyone's throat". He said something I disagreed with and I gave relevant examples as to why that sort of reasoning or approach is completely flawed to the core. Its the thin skinned individuals on here who take that as some sort of personal affront nowadays, if you are going to post an opinion be prepared that people may disagree with it.



or, in other words:

tl;dr: calm down bro you're obviously reading too far into into my post, what did I say to make you so upset lolol?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:
My unpopular opinion:

-1 to hit as a mechanic, is not only fine, but actually beneficial to the game - INCLUDING stacking. This game is overly dominated by shooting armies even WITH it's presence, and the game needs simply defense against shooting mechanics like this.

95% or more of instances of -1 are not just units that aren't OP or top tier, they are units that would likely be crippled without it. You know Tyranids can stack a -4 between two units? Space Marines I believe can get up to -5? This stuff is handed out sensibly and in controlled instances, so it's not a problem.

The response to this is always "b-b-b-buh ALAITOC!!1!", and if this IS the case, that there's a single instance of a mechanic being overpowered then, *gasp* nerf Alaitoc, not the mechanic. The same way you don't try to nerf every T8 unit in the game because the Castellan is unbalanced. (Not that Alaitoc is either in the broader scheme of things, but if it's a balanced army that gets free wins against certain lists without making severe trade offs to do so, yeah that should probably be looked into)



My underlying belief is that the whining mostly stems from the fact that most players of this game play shooty lists, and most shooty lists are not used to dealing with any sort of counterplay. I don't see the same pushback about units with fly, some of the fastest units in the game, being able to fallback for free out of assault when they are finally caught. I don't see the same pushback around ignores LoS that completely counters melee units only other real defensive mechanic. -1 to hit is not a problem. In fact it's an important mechanic.

I keep saying it's an important mechanic to keep gunlines in check.

I'm right here with you, and it's certainly not the most "unpopular" opinion, but it's definitely not in agreement with the majority on this one!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Judging a rules set by restrictions placed upon it by an outside body is daft.

Yes, I mean, ‘BUT ITC SAID’ stuff.

Hmmm, a couple of points on this one:

ITC restrictions are pretty mild nowadays, and serve mostly to gently shape the game into what most feel is a balanced set of missions. There's not many people who think that the issues with 40k lie in ITC's rulings, and I don't think it's an unpopular opinion at all to say that most would disagree with them.


In the past, ITC was a lot more of a dictatorship, and people that felt their race was hard done by may have had this complaint. However, the fact that the game needed ITC rules and these were still an improved for competitive play than the base rules, suggests that the ruleset itself DOES have a problem, for ITC to be so necessary to begin with.

Chopping, changing, ignoring or straight up homebrewing rules to make your games more fun for the players involved should be the norm at every table.

The old metal Valhallan/Tallarn/Cadian/Mordian guard models are the best line GW ever produced.

Kitbashing requires very little skill and a lot of people I know still seem to suck at it. Kitbashes are rarely interesting or impressive and I don't understand why some people are so proud of their jarring, ill-proportioned results.

In a similar vein, while I lament the removal of weapons options from some newer models/codex datasheets, it doesn't really discourage converting. Wysiwyg weapon swaps are not what cool conversions are about.

Brad Gamma wrote:
Kitbashing requires very little skill and a lot of people I know still seem to suck at it. Kitbashes are rarely interesting or impressive and I don't understand why some people are so proud of their jarring, ill-proportioned results.

In a similar vein, while I lament the removal of weapons options from some newer models/codex datasheets, it doesn't really discourage converting. Wysiwyg weapon swaps are not what cool conversions are about.

oh god this first one so much. People "converting" because they can not because they should. So many terrible "kitbashes" that are random pieces stuck together with no real vision, and yet they still feel the need to share because they "created" something

I don't know if qualifies:

When people have crap conversions. I honestly will tell them, but I will say: "Mate it was a good try and I see what going for but it looks pretty crap atm tbh, you could try this & this..."

No need to sugar coat stuff.

EDIT: many before feel the same. I always make sure to tell them and give them suggestions (seems like it might be universal). I would expect the same.

People confusing their Hobby, with the Hobby.

No right or wrong way to do any of these things. You're not the gatekeeper. GW aren't the gatekeeper. There is in fact, no gate.

People who slavishly follow the really old, original background are a bit weird. Times change, man. Gotta move with them sometime (revering and enjoying it is different. It was very, very good. But it's not current. What Realms of Chaos says does not trump a Heresy novel in terms of canon)

Recasters. Are. Parasites.

People who forget this is ultimately a social game. You need a pool of opponents. So be nice, or at the very least tolerant for the duration of that game. Didn't enjoy them as an opponent? Work on them. but don't throw teddy from the pram.

Brad Gamma wrote:
Kitbashing requires very little skill and a lot of people I know still seem to suck at it. Kitbashes are rarely interesting or impressive and I don't understand why some people are so proud of their jarring, ill-proportioned results.

In a similar vein, while I lament the removal of weapons options from some newer models/codex datasheets, it doesn't really discourage converting. Wysiwyg weapon swaps are not what cool conversions are about.

GOOD, kit bashing requires skill, good use of green stuff etc. I always find good kitbashes awesome.

If it is crap I say as much (not that my opinion matters above them, if they like it, I will always go "awesome, if you love it all that matters". I loved the old GW system of lots of parts/options. In this day and age I love seeing a stock click together (pretty much) model converted to look different (pose etc).

Long time lurker, infrequent poster. Here are my thoughts:

- 8th edition is great and has done more to draw me into the game than any previous edition.

- Soup can be fun but should be restricted to open and narrative. You should have to deal with your factions short-comings.

- Primaris are great looking, but he fluff is bad. They will slowly replace the old marines.

- Daemon Primarchs are a great addition. Loyalist ones not so much.

- Many stronger models need a clause to prevent them from being taken in smaller games.

- Characters should be used rarely.

- Current detachment system is bloated and complicated.

- This is a game. It's about having fun. It's fun to win but it can be fun to lose too. If you're not playing for fun, why are you playing?

Spectral Ceramite wrote:
I don't know if qualifies:

When people have crap conversions. I honestly will tell them, but I will say: "Mate it was a good try and I see what going for but it looks pretty crap atm tbh, you could try this & this..."

No need to sugar coat stuff.

EDIT: many before feel the same. I always make sure to tell them and give them suggestions (seems like it might be universal). I would expect the same.

Gotta agree here. The internet has really brought out how dishonest this hobby truly is at times, with Reddit being the most egregious example. Someone posts a junk conversion there and you will hard pressed to find any honest criticism, only generic compliments which add nothing.

I have an unpopular opinion. People need to stop acting like donkey-caves just because they can. Really whats the point.

There should be rules about people excessively farting at game tables....

"snowflake" factions should never have gotten stand alone codexes. Looking at you Harlequins/Custodes and Knights because they shouldn't be in a 2000 point games.

Warhammer 40,000 is a casual game that has been invaded by competitive gamers.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Warhammer 40,000 is a casual game that has been invaded by competitive gamers.

And it's lore has been invaded by people who take it seriously.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
There should be rules about people excessively farting at game tables....

If this is unpopular I'm not sure I want to hang around. Or is this another one of those competitive strats where you assert board control using non-conventional tactics?

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Warhammer 40,000 is a casual game that has been invaded by competitive gamers.

It really isn't. GW themselves are the ones that set the standards for tournaments and encouraged their games to be played at the same level. Where do you think the common pts levels of games of 1500 (originally) for 40k and 2000 for whfb came from? GW's own Grand Tournaments.

Do you mean Malal here? The god who was referenced with the Sons of Malice CSM army in one of the CSM books?

I do, but that also was a while ago IIRC, and I don't remember seeing them in my CSM book, though I could be wrong on that account.

But the important part is GW will never do anything with them, so they may as well not exist, as they are so utterly unimportant to the setting.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Warhammer 40,000 is a casual game that has been invaded by competitive gamers.

It really isn't. GW themselves are the ones that set the standards for tournaments and encouraged their games to be played at the same level. Where do you think the common pts levels of games of 1500 (originally) for 40k and 2000 for whfb came from? GW's own Grand Tournaments.

It was a way different time back then, though. You didn't see half as many cheese lists as you do today, most of th time you saw lists that were strong but still at least cared a bit for the background.

To stick to the topic here's another unpopular opinion: 40k tournaments need to bring back Sportsmanship (i.e. how much of a jerk your opponent was) and Army Comp (i.e. did they bring a list with no thought to the background/theme of the army) again and have them be major factors in determining the winner of the event such that if you turn up with some ridiculous soup list that's just taking the most optimal choices there's a good chance the hit you take on Comp will eliminate your chance of winning even if you won all of your games. To offset this, bring back the varying awards for Best General and the like, so you throw those people a bone but they can't be the overall winner without solid Sportsmanship and Comp scores.

 TheCustomLime wrote:



Overly airbrushed models look bad and unrealistic. An airbrush is a tool in a painter's toolbox not the focus.

I really like this one.

The fluff is bad and written by d-list authors.

Martel732 wrote:
The fluff is bad and written by d-list authors.

This is the unpopular opinion thread

Ohhhhh.... good burn.

Most of the Space Marine recruitment methods make no sense. With the number of casualties they suffer and drawing from a single chapter world they would not be able to keep up with the attrition.

Edit: Additiionally the length of time some of the Space Marine Chapter Masters have lived is ludicrously long in a setting of constant warfare agaisnst such excessively dangerous foes.

Martel732 wrote:
Ohhhhh.... good burn.

Burn? I was just saying that's not an unpopular opinion, that's all.

Another Unpopular Opinion: Custodes shouldn't be an army.

I thought you were further burning the fluff.

Ah. Misread you. I got ya.

Another potentially? unpopular opinion: The number of codices should be reduced. BA, SW, and DA need to be folded into regular SM, DW/GK need to be folded into Inquisition, and TS/DG need to be folded into CSM.

Soup is good for you.

Sir Heckington wrote:
Ah. Misread you. I got ya.

Another potentially? unpopular opinion: The number of codices should be reduced. BA, SW, and DA need to be folded into regular SM, DW/GK need to be folded into Inquisition, and TS/DG need to be folded into CSM.

I'm in agreement with the Loyalist Scum needing to be rolled into the Vanilla codex (I've even proposed how for the Angels but Wolves need more work), but it would be significantly harder to bring Thousand Sons and Death Guard into the fold, especially when we have supposed new books for the other Cult legions AND Black Legion.

1. There is nothing duller than when my favorite 40k podcasts stop talking about armies or tactics or whatever, to recite the top three players of every faction in the game, as they stand at that exact second in time. Did you know that Bill Caulwell is the third best Tyranid player in May? Did you need to?

2. The grossly complicated detachments/formations/command points/command abilities malarkey has not made 40k better, and is at best suitable for narrative play.

3. Trying to balance 40k as a competitive game? Here's what everyone builds their army to:

1 Codex. 1-2 HQs, 0-3 Elite, 2-6 Troop, 0-3 Fast Attack, 0-3 Heavy Support.

Nothing else - no list of ten relics of which only two are good, no four pages of stratagems that require exploiting army build to maximize CPs to use, no picking and choosing the best of five Imperial Codexes. You get to pick one codex, you get one force org chart.

Guard orders should have been rolled into Stratagems, all the unique resource driven stuff should have.

3rd Edition was the best edition. Fairly sure this is unpopular for the most part.

YeOldSaltPotato wrote:
Guard orders should have been rolled into Stratagems, all the unique resource driven stuff should have.

Character auras should be rolled into Stratagems, since they're the equivalent of Guard orders for non-Guard armies.

 Just Tony wrote:
3rd Edition was the best edition. Fairly sure this is unpopular for the most part.

3rd and 4th are the real golden age

See, for me 3rd and 4th are why I quit playing 40K...but that's the beauty of opinions and options.

Unpopular opinion:

GW should stop tailoring 40k towards 1500pt and below armies, and start rewarding people who want to field larger games. 40k is a battle game, if you want small skirmishes, play killteam or a small skirmish game.

Another: Imperial Knights are a cool compromise for the large number of us who love titan type models, and want to find a way to practically field them. People who want them nerf batted or eliminated need to think about how they would feel if their favorite armies suddenly got axed because IK players don't like them.

Oh, and re-casters should be seen as the winds of change. Either forgeworld is going to pull it's head out and release models people can afford, or they will go out of business.

txaggieof08 wrote:
Unpopular opinion:

GW should stop tailoring 40k towards 1500pt and below armies, and start rewarding people who want to field larger games. 40k is a battle game, if you want small skirmishes, play killteam or a small skirmish game.

That's an extremely unpopular opinion, considering GW has said themselves that they are tailoring the game for 2k point armies, and every decision they make has reflected this.

I love narrative-based games. (though I tend to play matched play; what's the difference anyhow?) In fact I love the game regardless of whether or not I win. I've seen some people 'disbelieve' that people like me are genuine about that, and MAN does that bother me. I should know how I like to spend my evening.

I also enjoy AoS, both crunch and fluff. The flat-worlds can be a bit tongue-in-cheek but I believe they help in capturing the sense of scale 40k has, which I think GW was trying to accomplish.

The Gladius formation was well balanced.

Matt Ward was the best thing to ever happen to 40k.



Ok, now I'm just trolling...

Sir Heckington wrote:
Another potentially? unpopular opinion: The number of codices should be reduced. BA, SW, and DA need to be folded into regular SM, DW/GK need to be folded into Inquisition, and TS/DG need to be folded into CSM.

As a Dark Angels player, I argued strongly against this proposal when I first encountered it, but since then, I think I'm actually slowly starting to come around to the idea.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
The Gladius formation was well balanced.

Matt Ward was the best thing to ever happen to 40k.



Ok, now I'm just trolling...

Sir Heckington wrote:
Another potentially? unpopular opinion: The number of codices should be reduced. BA, SW, and DA need to be folded into regular SM, DW/GK need to be folded into Inquisition, and TS/DG need to be folded into CSM.

As a Dark Angels player, I argued strongly against this proposal when I first encountered it, but since then, I think I'm actually slowly starting to come around to the idea.

To be fair, nobody will miss the flyers. The only real unique units to keep would be the Ravenwing and Deathwing Knights, and the Speeder variants. Oh and the characters of course.

YeOldSaltPotato wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Warhammer 40,000 is a casual game that has been invaded by competitive gamers.

And it's lore has been invaded by people who take it seriously.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
There should be rules about people excessively farting at game tables....

If this is unpopular I'm not sure I want to hang around. Or is this another one of those competitive strats where you assert board control using non-conventional tactics?

Some people consider it a victory if they go to an all you can eat Mexican restaurant before the game then let one that drops the other guy.

There's this version too

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:

Sir Heckington wrote:
Another potentially? unpopular opinion: The number of codices should be reduced. BA, SW, and DA need to be folded into regular SM, DW/GK need to be folded into Inquisition, and TS/DG need to be folded into CSM.

As a Dark Angels player, I argued strongly against this proposal when I first encountered it, but since then, I think I'm actually slowly starting to come around to the idea.

To be fair, nobody will miss the flyers. The only real unique units to keep would be the Ravenwing and Deathwing Knights, and the Speeder variants. Oh and the characters of course.

Potentially unpopular opinion: Dark Angels and Blood Angels are Codex-Compliant Chapters. It was a bad decision to give them their own books and then try to justify the books’ existence by padding them with contrived units nobody asked for, which ultimately strangled the life out of a potential updated book for a fan-favourite non-Codex-Compliant Chapter that actually had the potential to be substantially distinct from the core Marine Codex.


Imperial Knights are the worst thing to happen to the ‘feel’ of 40k in the history of the game, by normalising superhero models in everyday games rather than once-in-a-blue-moon megabattles. They ultimately turned the game from a skirmish-level game into ‘who can spend the most money on the biggest model and win?’. By letting a whole army of them be legal, the cat has been let out of the bag and we will never again see skirmish-style 40k because people would have their Gundam-bots invalidated.


The Big One:

If you could not play a game with templates, scatter die, facings and firing arcs like a mature adult without squabbling over toy soldiers rather than just getting on with having fun, you are the lowest common denominator.

Most Ork players are riding the reputation of a small and friendly community. The rest are just as annoying as the race they play.

kombatwombat wrote:

Potentially unpopular opinion: Dark Angels and Blood Angels are Codex-Compliant Chapters. It was a bad decision to give them their own books and then try to justify the books’ existence by padding them with contrived units nobody asked for, which ultimately strangled the life out of a potential updated book for a fan-favourite non-Codex-Compliant Chapter that actually had the potential to be substantially distinct from the core Marine Codex.

Is there a particular chapter you're hinting at here? Templars maybe?

kombatwombat wrote:

Imperial Knights are the worst thing to happen to the ‘feel’ of 40k in the history of the game, by normalising superhero models in everyday games rather than once-in-a-blue-moon megabattles. They ultimately turned the game from a skirmish-level game into ‘who can spend the most money on the biggest model and win?’. By letting a whole army of them be legal, the cat has been let out of the bag and we will never again see skirmish-style 40k because people would have their Gundam-bots invalidated.

Yes.

kombatwombat wrote:

The Big One:

If you could not play a game with templates, scatter die, facings and firing arcs like a mature adult without squabbling over toy soldiers rather than just getting on with having fun, you are the lowest common denominator.

I actually prefer the game without those things, but you're 100% right about there being no excuse for squabbling. People often ridicule the "most important rule" as simply Games-Workshop's get-out-of-jail-free card for lazy rules writing, but it really is the single most important factor to consider in any game. Regardless of one's opinion on whether competitive or casual is the "right" way to play, if everyone's not having fun, then the purpose of the game is defeated.

 Frontline989 wrote:
Most of the Space Marine recruitment methods make no sense. With the number of casualties they suffer and drawing from a single chapter world they would not be able to keep up with the attrition.

Edit: Additiionally the length of time some of the Space Marine Chapter Masters have lived is ludicrously long in a setting of constant warfare agaisnst such excessively dangerous foes.

Most campaigns a Chapter is involved in will only incur a minor amount of casualties and maybe a couple fatalities at most. Where are you getting the idea that they're constantly bogged down in attrition?

I've got another opinion that makes me sound like a hobby snob (which I guess I am)

Peoples inability to control their plastic purchases is a serious problem and not funny or cute or a good meme.

People not finishing stuff is rarely people enjoying the hobby their way, its more often them struggling to manage their hobby. I'm actually fine with people who say 'screw painting' and never even bother, they are actually enjoying the hobby the way they want. But a large chunk of people I know buy everything with every intention to finish it, with ideas in their head for colour schemes, army builds etc. and just never finish it before moving onto the next thing. And so almost every battle I EVER see is armies of 50% grey, 25% primed and 25% half painted stuff. Deep down a lot of people are actually deeply unsatisfied with that situation too, they just cannot control their purchases.

kombatwombat wrote:
The Big One:

If you could not play a game with templates, scatter die, facings and firing arcs like a mature adult without squabbling over toy soldiers rather than just getting on with having fun, you are the lowest common denominator.

Here's the kicker with that argument: if two people disagree on firing arcs, then who's the "mature adult" and who's "squabbling over toy soldiers"? I'm sure you're not going to relent every time someone tells you that you set up your template improperly.

Brad Gamma wrote:
I've got another opinion that makes me sound like a hobby snob (which I guess I am)

Peoples inability to control their plastic purchases is a serious problem and not funny or cute or a good meme.

People not finishing stuff is rarely people enjoying the hobby their way, its more often them struggling to manage their hobby. I'm actually fine with people who say 'screw painting' and never even bother, they are actually enjoying the hobby the way they want. But a large chunk of people I know buy everything with every intention to finish it, with ideas in their head for colour schemes, army builds etc. and just never finish it before moving onto the next thing. And so almost every battle I EVER see is armies of 50% grey, 25% primed and 25% half painted stuff. Deep down a lot of people are actually deeply unsatisfied with that situation too, they just cannot control their purchases.

Speaking as someone whose army is generally around 90% painted, I think you just have a very different definition of “serious problem” than most people who spend their free time and money playing with little army men.

HuskyWarhammer wrote:

Brad Gamma wrote:
I've got another opinion that makes me sound like a hobby snob (which I guess I am)

Peoples inability to control their plastic purchases is a serious problem and not funny or cute or a good meme.

People not finishing stuff is rarely people enjoying the hobby their way, its more often them struggling to manage their hobby. I'm actually fine with people who say 'screw painting' and never even bother, they are actually enjoying the hobby the way they want. But a large chunk of people I know buy everything with every intention to finish it, with ideas in their head for colour schemes, army builds etc. and just never finish it before moving onto the next thing. And so almost every battle I EVER see is armies of 50% grey, 25% primed and 25% half painted stuff. Deep down a lot of people are actually deeply unsatisfied with that situation too, they just cannot control their purchases.

Speaking as someone whose army is generally around 90% painted, I think you just have a very different definition of “serious problem” than most people who spend their free time and money playing with little army men.

I mean in the context of the hobby, probably could have worded it better. Like if I said that true line of sight was a serious problem, I don't mean its more serious than climate change or something.

However it is one of the few ways in which this hobby can stop being about little army men and becomes a financial issue for some people. This stuff is not cheap when you are addicted to the rush of purchasing something new, especially with the drip feed of new releases. I know several people who spend hundreds if not thousands of pounds on stuff that never gets finished or sees the table. Is that not a far bigger problem than something like, whether soup is good for balance?

Plus, as has been stated several times in this thread, posting here is acknowledgement that your opinion is unpopular.

kombatwombat wrote:
...normalising superhero models in everyday games rather than once-in-a-blue-moon megabattles.

Well, RE-normalising anyway. 2nd edition is called herohammer for a reason. It was pretty much Calgar/Ghaz/Abaddon or whatever with a couple of squads helping them out.

Two progenoids per marine doesn't work. Given the casualties and failure rates 2 per marine period would not work.

Also, the angry marines should be released by gw as an official chapter using their established history and characters.

If we assume Progenoids can only be harvested the once

Not sure if the background is clear either way on that one. Would make sense if it's something that's harvested periodically throughout a Marine's service. Also means Apothecaries are more emergency surgery for it, rather than the standard means.

We know that places keep stores of geneseed to create new chapters or backup current ones. I think that these "stores" may be a bit more grimdark than people are assuming.

Ginjitzu wrote:Is there a particular chapter you're hinting at here? Templars maybe?

I actually prefer the game without those things, but you're 100% right about there being no excuse for squabbling. People often ridicule the "most important rule" as simply Games-Workshop's get-out-of-jail-free card for lazy rules writing, but it really is the single most important factor to consider in any game. Regardless of one's opinion on whether competitive or casual is the "right" way to play, if everyone's not having fun, then the purpose of the game is defeated.

It should be obvious I’m referring to Templars, otherwise I didn’t say it with enough ZEAL!

If you prefer it because you prefer a more abstract but faster game to a more cinematic but slower one (though the speed difference has been cut dramatically by screening for 9” Deep Strike), I think you’re wrong but respect your opinion. If you prefer it because it saves you having arguments in a game that’s supposed to be fun, I think less of you as a person.

Arachnofiend wrote:Here's the kicker with that argument: if two people disagree on firing arcs, then who's the "mature adult" and who's "squabbling over toy soldiers"? I'm sure you're not going to relent every time someone tells you that you set up your template improperly.

The mature one is the first to say either ‘yeah go on mate, you have it’ or ‘how about we just roll a 4+ for it?’. The other person meets their level of maturity by saying ‘thank you, that’s most gracious of you’ and giving them the benefit of the doubt next time there’s a conflict, or ‘sure thing, keeps the game moving’ respectively. This stuff isn’t hard.

kombatwombat wrote:

Arachnofiend wrote:Here's the kicker with that argument: if two people disagree on firing arcs, then who's the "mature adult" and who's "squabbling over toy soldiers"? I'm sure you're not going to relent every time someone tells you that you set up your template improperly.

The mature one is the first to say either ‘yeah go on mate, you have it’ or ‘how about we just roll a 4+ for it?’. The other person meets their level of maturity by saying ‘thank you, that’s most gracious of you’ and giving them the benefit of the doubt next time there’s a conflict, or ‘sure thing, keeps the game moving’ respectively. This stuff isn’t hard.

What if they decline to 4+ over it? Whatever. I'd say the immature person in this scenario is the person who thinks attempting to resolving a measurement dispute accurately and fairly is some crime.

HuskyWarhammer wrote:

Brad Gamma wrote:
I've got another opinion that makes me sound like a hobby snob (which I guess I am)

Peoples inability to control their plastic purchases is a serious problem and not funny or cute or a good meme.

People not finishing stuff is rarely people enjoying the hobby their way, its more often them struggling to manage their hobby. I'm actually fine with people who say 'screw painting' and never even bother, they are actually enjoying the hobby the way they want. But a large chunk of people I know buy everything with every intention to finish it, with ideas in their head for colour schemes, army builds etc. and just never finish it before moving onto the next thing. And so almost every battle I EVER see is armies of 50% grey, 25% primed and 25% half painted stuff. Deep down a lot of people are actually deeply unsatisfied with that situation too, they just cannot control their purchases.

Speaking as someone whose army is generally around 90% painted, I think you just have a very different definition of “serious problem” than most people who spend their free time and money playing with little army men.

No, honestly, I've had to interact with a lot of people for whom addiction to buying miniatures is a serious problem that affects their lives. There's a poor guy who comes in every once in a while who's completely addicted to ebay, spends thousands of dollars on minis that he believes to be "a great deal, can't pass it up!" then when his wife basically tells him that they have to go, he comes in to the local shop and gives them to people. Then he just goes and buys it all up again. It's the most extreme case, but you can always tell the guys who have a problem, buying armies 1000 points at a time, having 60,000 points of one faction for no reason at all, buying things basically just to get that "new thing" feeling with no plan to even build the stuff.

Here's my unpopular opinion I guess:

If you spend the time to build and paint your miniatures as well as play games with them, 40k is a highly financially efficient hobby compared to most other hobbies pursued by adults, and its "super-expensive" reputation is largely based on its appeal to younger players who are used to getting things like video games/toys for free from their parents. If they understood how much the giant bin of legos they played with as a younger kid actually cost their parents over the years, they would not be complaining about a 40$ box of miniatures.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Sir Heckington wrote:
Ah. Misread you. I got ya.

Another potentially? unpopular opinion: The number of codices should be reduced. BA, SW, and DA need to be folded into regular SM, DW/GK need to be folded into Inquisition, and TS/DG need to be folded into CSM.

I'm in agreement with the Loyalist Scum needing to be rolled into the Vanilla codex (I've even proposed how for the Angels but Wolves need more work), but it would be significantly harder to bring Thousand Sons and Death Guard into the fold, especially when we have supposed new books for the other Cult legions AND Black Legion.

Easy. Every Chapter/Legion should get a few unique units. Iron Hands should have Gorgon Terminators, Medusan Immortals and Iron Fathers ect. The marks should do enough to make up for the lost of the codex, and beastmen should be rolled into the Lost and the damned dex, with TS giving them the option to borrow some.

Brad Gamma wrote:
I've got another opinion that makes me sound like a hobby snob (which I guess I am)

Peoples inability to control their plastic purchases is a serious problem and not funny or cute or a good meme.

People not finishing stuff is rarely people enjoying the hobby their way, its more often them struggling to manage their hobby. I'm actually fine with people who say 'screw painting' and never even bother, they are actually enjoying the hobby the way they want. But a large chunk of people I know buy everything with every intention to finish it, with ideas in their head for colour schemes, army builds etc. and just never finish it before moving onto the next thing. And so almost every battle I EVER see is armies of 50% grey, 25% primed and 25% half painted stuff. Deep down a lot of people are actually deeply unsatisfied with that situation too, they just cannot control their purchases.

In my gaming group we now started a series of 1000point tournaments every 3-4 months, where you are supposed to bring a fully painted army. It really helps, everybody is busy painting their stuff. It's really important to set doable goals, especially when you reached a point where you have a pile of grey plastic where you don't know with what to start.

Unpopular opinion?

With their measly 1000 Marines per chapter and 1Mio. Marines in the whole galaxy Space Marines are actually a more irrelevant faction fluffwise than even Tau. Yet 90% of the fluff is about them.

Unpopular Opinion:

I like 8th edition.

The return of Primarchs was inevitable and necessary.

You cannot up the stakes without these big boys returning to the fray. They're too iconic, and they suit an End Times vibe of the 'Old Gods' returning to the fray.

Also? It's clear that The Heresy Never Ended. Terra was pivotal, sure. But the Traitors never gave up. Only withdrew and came up with new plans.

ITC missions might be balanced but are arguably the least fun way to play the game I've come across.

Sir Heckington wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Sir Heckington wrote:
Ah. Misread you. I got ya.

Another potentially? unpopular opinion: The number of codices should be reduced. BA, SW, and DA need to be folded into regular SM, DW/GK need to be folded into Inquisition, and TS/DG need to be folded into CSM.

I'm in agreement with the Loyalist Scum needing to be rolled into the Vanilla codex (I've even proposed how for the Angels but Wolves need more work), but it would be significantly harder to bring Thousand Sons and Death Guard into the fold, especially when we have supposed new books for the other Cult legions AND Black Legion.

Easy. Every Chapter/Legion should get a few unique units. Iron Hands should have Gorgon Terminators, Medusan Immortals and Iron Fathers ect. The marks should do enough to make up for the lost of the codex, and beastmen should be rolled into the Lost and the damned dex, with TS giving them the option to borrow some.

Excellent idea. CSM chapters should too. Give Iron Warriors their conjoined Rhinos and Vindicator patterns for example

 SHUPPET wrote:

Sir Heckington wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Sir Heckington wrote:
Ah. Misread you. I got ya.

Another potentially? unpopular opinion: The number of codices should be reduced. BA, SW, and DA need to be folded into regular SM, DW/GK need to be folded into Inquisition, and TS/DG need to be folded into CSM.

I'm in agreement with the Loyalist Scum needing to be rolled into the Vanilla codex (I've even proposed how for the Angels but Wolves need more work), but it would be significantly harder to bring Thousand Sons and Death Guard into the fold, especially when we have supposed new books for the other Cult legions AND Black Legion.

Easy. Every Chapter/Legion should get a few unique units. Iron Hands should have Gorgon Terminators, Medusan Immortals and Iron Fathers ect. The marks should do enough to make up for the lost of the codex, and beastmen should be rolled into the Lost and the damned dex, with TS giving them the option to borrow some.

Excellent idea. CSM chapters should too. Give Iron Warriors their conjoined Rhinos and Vindicator patterns for example

Yep yep. Meant that by legions. Though It'd be harder, I'd like to see this for all faction traits if possible. It'd take alot more work, as many subfactions arent as different than others, but I think it can be done.

Chapter Approved should come every month and we should be paying a LOT more for it.

Pancakey wrote:
Chapter Approved should come every month and we should be paying a LOT more for it.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Frontline989 wrote:
Most of the Space Marine recruitment methods make no sense. With the number of casualties they suffer and drawing from a single chapter world they would not be able to keep up with the attrition.

Edit: Additiionally the length of time some of the Space Marine Chapter Masters have lived is ludicrously long in a setting of constant warfare agaisnst such excessively dangerous foes.

Most campaigns a Chapter is involved in will only incur a minor amount of casualties and maybe a couple fatalities at most. Where are you getting the idea that they're constantly bogged down in attrition?

Its war. People die, even genetically enhanced super heroes. If all their missions are against pacifying human insurgents sure I could see a couple casualties but against a Tyrannid swarm, Ork Waaagh!, or Chaos Warband each side is going to suffer casualties and the scale of the conflict is going to see an equal increase in the number of casualties.

People often forget the scale of time. Like, theres often massive gaps in years and decades or even much more, between the big events you read about.

 SHUPPET wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Chapter Approved should come every month and we should be paying a LOT more for it.

In fact, I cannot wait until we have an offical “point subscription” service where I can pay every single day for points updates!!!! The golden age is almost here !!!

Pancakey wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
Chapter Approved should come every month and we should be paying a LOT more for it.

In fact, I cannot wait until we have an offical “point subscription” service where I can pay every single day for points updates!!!! The golden age is almost here !!!

Alright im on board with that, but CA is currently $55. You want people to pay a LOT more than that, monthly? That's absurd. Even if I could afford it, plenty of others cannot. You'd immediately price people out of the hobby and rules. Points updates need to be cheaper not more expensive.

 Frontline989 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Frontline989 wrote:
Most of the Space Marine recruitment methods make no sense. With the number of casualties they suffer and drawing from a single chapter world they would not be able to keep up with the attrition.

Edit: Additiionally the length of time some of the Space Marine Chapter Masters have lived is ludicrously long in a setting of constant warfare agaisnst such excessively dangerous foes.

Most campaigns a Chapter is involved in will only incur a minor amount of casualties and maybe a couple fatalities at most. Where are you getting the idea that they're constantly bogged down in attrition?

Its war. People die, even genetically enhanced super heroes. If all their missions are against pacifying human insurgents sure I could see a couple casualties but against a Tyrannid swarm, Ork Waaagh!, or Chaos Warband each side is going to suffer casualties and the scale of the conflict is going to see an equal increase in the number of casualties.

It's almost like not every single battle is an epic setpiece against super rare factions that hardly ever fight.

 techsoldaten wrote:
Mono Grey Knights will be competitive post CA 2018.

Guess you were wrong.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Frontline989 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Frontline989 wrote:
Most of the Space Marine recruitment methods make no sense. With the number of casualties they suffer and drawing from a single chapter world they would not be able to keep up with the attrition.

Edit: Additiionally the length of time some of the Space Marine Chapter Masters have lived is ludicrously long in a setting of constant warfare agaisnst such excessively dangerous foes.

Most campaigns a Chapter is involved in will only incur a minor amount of casualties and maybe a couple fatalities at most. Where are you getting the idea that they're constantly bogged down in attrition?

Its war. People die, even genetically enhanced super heroes. If all their missions are against pacifying human insurgents sure I could see a couple casualties but against a Tyrannid swarm, Ork Waaagh!, or Chaos Warband each side is going to suffer casualties and the scale of the conflict is going to see an equal increase in the number of casualties.

It's almost like not every single battle is an epic setpiece against super rare factions that hardly ever fight.

Kind of echoing what I said already but sarcasm notwithstanding when they do occur which is often SM will suffer casualties and the number will be higher the greater the threat. Reading the fluff as someone once said the end is extremely nigh so those types of engaguements happen quite regularly.

 Frontline989 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Frontline989 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Frontline989 wrote:
Most of the Space Marine recruitment methods make no sense. With the number of casualties they suffer and drawing from a single chapter world they would not be able to keep up with the attrition.

Edit: Additiionally the length of time some of the Space Marine Chapter Masters have lived is ludicrously long in a setting of constant warfare agaisnst such excessively dangerous foes.

Most campaigns a Chapter is involved in will only incur a minor amount of casualties and maybe a couple fatalities at most. Where are you getting the idea that they're constantly bogged down in attrition?

Its war. People die, even genetically enhanced super heroes. If all their missions are against pacifying human insurgents sure I could see a couple casualties but against a Tyrannid swarm, Ork Waaagh!, or Chaos Warband each side is going to suffer casualties and the scale of the conflict is going to see an equal increase in the number of casualties.

It's almost like not every single battle is an epic setpiece against super rare factions that hardly ever fight.

Kind of echoing what I said already but sarcasm notwithstanding when they do occur which is often SM will suffer casualties and the number will be higher the greater the threat. Reading the fluff as someone once said the end is extremely nigh so those types of engaguements happen quite regularly.

They aren't common up until now They're incredibly rare and only became common in the wake of the 13th Black Crusade, which is why Primaris Marines are also becoming more common as they replace those lost to the constant attrition.

Here’s mine!

The fluff as a whole takes it self way too seriously now and is way too complex. It takes a lot of the fun out of coming up with self made chapters and sub factions etc. Especially with how neckbeardy some fans get.

4th edition is the best edition and this is 100% definitely not a nostalgic view.


The Horus Heresy should never have been fleshed this much but the miniatures look amazing.

Imperial knights and models their size are an abomination and way too common to be interesting now, the baneblade kit started us on a dark path.

Templarted wrote:
4th edition is the best edition and this is 100% definitely not a nostalgic view.

I might agree with that, actually. 4th Ed was excellent.

I'd rather play against a pure Tau gun line with foot slogging index orks than pit anything against a guard army. I find them, boring, flat and with absolutely no satisfaction when you inevitably shred them.
Definutely not a fan of the faction, I feel that it could evaporate and no one would either notice, or care, apart from competitive soup players. In the sci-fi fantasy buffet of 40k, Guard are the rice cake, or bread stick, maybe with a plain chick-pea dip.

They must be soul destroying to have to paint as well.

 r_squared wrote:
I'd rather play against a pure Tau gun line with foot slogging index orks than pit anything against a guard army. I find them, boring, flat and with absolutely no satisfaction when you inevitably shred them.
Definutely not a fan of the faction, I feel that it could evaporate and no one would either notice, or care, apart from competitive soup players. In the sci-fi fantasy buffet of 40k, Guard are the rice cake, or bread stick, maybe with a plain chick-pea dip.

They must be soul destroying to have to paint as well.

How about my crazy armoured assault style? Demolishers, valkyries, advancing infantry, outflanking veterans?

"Thin your paints"

Can be good advice, but I've literally seen it used when someone has posted a picture of a model painted with only washes. I'm pretty sure it wasn't said ironically.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad confirmed double post:

"Consistency of milk"

Like who has really pushed milk around on their palette?

And which milk?

I'm guessing it depends on what you want to paint:

Skimmed for glazes/washes

semi for layers

full for base

cream for drybrush

double for texture painting bases.

Templarted wrote:
...Imperial knights and models their size are an abomination and way too common to be interesting now, the baneblade kit started us on a dark path.

Don't forget the upturned trashcan that is the Stompa. Too big, crap rules, and one pointless, unweildly and unecessarily ugly model. If they ever cost it to reflect it's actual worth and we see more appear on the table, it'll be a dark day.

 Sir Heckington wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Sir Heckington wrote:
Ah. Misread you. I got ya.

Another potentially? unpopular opinion: The number of codices should be reduced. BA, SW, and DA need to be folded into regular SM, DW/GK need to be folded into Inquisition, and TS/DG need to be folded into CSM.

I'm in agreement with the Loyalist Scum needing to be rolled into the Vanilla codex (I've even proposed how for the Angels but Wolves need more work), but it would be significantly harder to bring Thousand Sons and Death Guard into the fold, especially when we have supposed new books for the other Cult legions AND Black Legion.

Easy. Every Chapter/Legion should get a few unique units. Iron Hands should have Gorgon Terminators, Medusan Immortals and Iron Fathers ect. The marks should do enough to make up for the lost of the codex, and beastmen should be rolled into the Lost and the damned dex, with TS giving them the option to borrow some.

I mean I AM in agreement with you. I'm just saying CSM is more a fickle situation as they added a LOT to both those books, moreso than even Space Wolves.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Sir Heckington wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Sir Heckington wrote:
Ah. Misread you. I got ya.

Another potentially? unpopular opinion: The number of codices should be reduced. BA, SW, and DA need to be folded into regular SM, DW/GK need to be folded into Inquisition, and TS/DG need to be folded into CSM.

I'm in agreement with the Loyalist Scum needing to be rolled into the Vanilla codex (I've even proposed how for the Angels but Wolves need more work), but it would be significantly harder to bring Thousand Sons and Death Guard into the fold, especially when we have supposed new books for the other Cult legions AND Black Legion.

Easy. Every Chapter/Legion should get a few unique units. Iron Hands should have Gorgon Terminators, Medusan Immortals and Iron Fathers ect. The marks should do enough to make up for the lost of the codex, and beastmen should be rolled into the Lost and the damned dex, with TS giving them the option to borrow some.

I mean I AM in agreement with you. I'm just saying CSM is more a fickle situation as they added a LOT to both those books, moreso than even Space Wolves.

Oh for sure, and GW isn't good with fickle, I think it can be done though.

Maybbbe just not by GW.

 Trickstick wrote:

 r_squared wrote:
I'd rather play against a pure Tau gun line with foot slogging index orks than pit anything against a guard army. I find them, boring, flat and with absolutely no satisfaction when you inevitably shred them.
Definutely not a fan of the faction, I feel that it could evaporate and no one would either notice, or care, apart from competitive soup players. In the sci-fi fantasy buffet of 40k, Guard are the rice cake, or bread stick, maybe with a plain chick-pea dip.

They must be soul destroying to have to paint as well.

How about my crazy armoured assault style? Demolishers, valkyries, advancing infantry, outflanking veterans?

Fine, if you insist. But only if we can ingest mild hallucigens washed down with rip it energy drinks.