I collect SW's but they are in my top 5 favourite armies, but is anyone else feeling like their army is changing into something that no longer resembles SM's anymore. They new models look amazing and they offer great flexibility but they ain't SM's. I've kinda fallen out of love with SM's now, which is why I collect Custodes now more than SW's.
Comment further down the thread that further explains my reasons:
"I mean the whole aesthetic/nostalgia. They even got rid of Indomitus pattern as Clagar is sporting that fat bellied Gravis suit. Its exciting to get new models and units and they look awesome, but its far worse to lose models that you love and that got you into playing the game. They've pretty much gotten rid of jump packs which were one of my favourite looking units. Its a thing to do with taste, I'm not being ungrateful to GW, its just what they have created is not my taste. Can you honestly look at all those Primaris models and think, this is my army that I've grown to love throughout the decades? I mean its not much of an issue for me as Chaos is my main army and I've gone bonkers on how good all the new CSM releases have been, but I've gone off my Space Wolves, I don't have the desire to model/paint them."
Primaris are the reason when I came back to playing 40K after an 8 year break I started a Guard army instead of trying to update my Blood Angels / Codex Marines.
Carnikang wrote: So, question. I see this reasoning a lot, that the new Primaris aren't space Marines.
What does that mean? What is a Space Marine and why do they not qualify?
I ask as an outsider to the whole Power Armor family. You're all the same to me, aside from some bling, or with additional pointy bits.
Space marines held the the line against the Traitors, Xenos, and Heretics for 10,000 year.s Their reward was to be replaced with "space marines MKII", the Primaris. None of their equipment is compatible. You can't take any space marine transports with Primaris. The most iconic SM units, like Land Raiders, Terminators, and Assault Marines, are absolutely terrible in this game, while Primaris keep getting new models and buffs. It's very disheartening if you were a fan of marines.
Carnikang wrote: So, question. I see this reasoning a lot, that the new Primaris aren't space Marines.
What does that mean? What is a Space Marine and why do they not qualify?
I ask as an outsider to the whole Power Armor family. You're all the same to me, aside from some bling, or with additional pointy bits.
I mean the whole aesthetic/nostalgia. They even got rid of Indomitus pattern as Clagar is sporting that fat bellied Gravis suit. Its exciting to get new models and units and they look awesome, but its far worse to lose models that you love and that got you into playing the game. They've pretty much gotten rid of jump packs which were one of my favourite looking units. Its a thing to do with taste, I'm not being ungrateful to GW, its just what they have created is not my taste. Can you honestly look at all those Primaris models and think, this is my army that I've grown to love throughout the decades? I mean its not much of an issue for me as Chaos is my main army and I've gone bonkers on how good all the new CSM releases have been, but I've gone off my Space Wolves, I don't have the desire to model/paint them.
I'm kind of on the opposite side of this. I've never had a marine army before cause I don't like the models, but now with the Primaris I have a deathwatch army (no vets or other tiny marines).
I guess you win some you lose some. In either case, marines of both varieties have more stuff each than my main faction has total.
Space marines held the the line against the Traitors, Xenos, and Heretics for 10,000 year.s Their reward was to be replaced with "space marines MKII", the Primaris. .
Which is exactly what the 'Emperor' did to the Thunder Warriors when he was done with them, too.
Space marines held the the line against the Traitors, Xenos, and Heretics for 10,000 year.s Their reward was to be replaced with "space marines MKII", the Primaris. .
Which is exactly what the 'Emperor' did to the Thunder Warriors when he was done with them, too.
What he did to the Thunder-warriors was appalling, one of his greatest crimes.
Carnikang wrote: So, question. I see this reasoning a lot, that the new Primaris aren't space Marines.
What does that mean? What is a Space Marine and why do they not qualify?
I ask as an outsider to the whole Power Armor family. You're all the same to me, aside from some bling, or with additional pointy bits.
Space marines held the the line against the Traitors, Xenos, and Heretics for 10,000 year.s Their reward was to be replaced with "space marines MKII", the Primaris. None of their equipment is compatible. You can't take any space marine transports with Primaris. The most iconic SM units, like Land Raiders, Terminators, and Assault Marines, are absolutely terrible in this game, while Primaris keep getting new models and buffs. It's very disheartening if you were a fan of marines.
Especially with the new plastic tech, they look great but they don't have that old metal casted look. But that's a minor annoyance, its the whole style and feel now that is so different. I look at the new CSM models and then look at the Primaris and its like two different armies. Obviously they are different but SM's and CSM's have always been brothers against brothers, now they are strangers against strangers.
Space marines held the the line against the Traitors, Xenos, and Heretics for 10,000 year.s Their reward was to be replaced with "space marines MKII", the Primaris. .
Which is exactly what the 'Emperor' did to the Thunder Warriors when he was done with them, too.
Nobody played an army of Thunder Warriors when that happened, and they werent GWs biggest selling miniature line, as they didn't exist. There's that one "Thunder Armor" model and that's it afaik.
I'm salty, because by the looks of it everything from Vigilus and Shadow Spear Cannot be used on standard marines. They are supposedly in the same codex, yet there is an arbitrary divide that is there ONLY to sell models. There are going to be no formations that buff standard marines while some formations give others some very significant bonuses.
Rhinos losing fire points for no reason, drop pods getting relegated to uselessness. Landraiders being made of slightly tougher paper mache. The list of grievances go on.
Instead of making marines have the Primaris statline they had to crowd the design space so that marines can't really exist as they should. I mean 1 attack? Poxwalkers get 2.
In terms of Game mechanics, I actually prefer the use of embedded special weapons in generalist squads, Primaris are the exact opposite of that concept and go with the specialist-only squads.
With the way GW has been treating mini-marines its very clear that they're going to get squat-ed eventually, and at that point its time for to me to leave.
Can you honestly look at all those Primaris models and think, this is my army that I've grown to love throughout the decades?
Yes. Yes i can, and most people do. New update to the existing, while the old models still have rules and can be used beside their new brothers. New armor and toys help the older guys, while keeping the entire range fresh, and it even fits into the fluff. Not everything lasts forever anyway, but the whole " not my space marines " is rubbish to most of the world. They wear cool armor, use new bolters, still love the emperor, and still kill xenos trash I think some people are just afraid of change. Embrace it
Here is a helpful tip to the Primaris haters, this is not supposed to be snarky, though it may come across as such. The Primaris are here to stay; it is your choice to how to deal with that fact. Whilst I think that overall the Primaris are a massive aesthetic elements, I too miss some aspects of the old range. The Primaris are too pristine and uniform for my liking. But I can either whine about it on the internet, or I can do something about it. And I chose the latter. I have had an absolute blast with personalising the Primaris models, kitbashing them with old parts, creating the perfect Space Marine look that I've always wanted. Currently I'm fitting studded shoulderpads and beaky helmets on the new Infiltrators, and I have to say it works really well.
Crimson wrote: Here is a helpful tip to the Primaris haters, this is not supposed to be snarky, though it may come across as such. The Primaris are here to stay; it is your choice to how to deal with that fact. Whilst I think that overall the Primaris are a massive aesthetic elements, I too miss some aspects of the old range. The Primaris are too pristine and uniform for my liking. But I can either whine about it on the internet, or I can do something about it. And I chose the latter. I have had an absolute blast with personalising the Primaris models, kitbashing them with old parts, creating the perfect Space Marine look that I've always wanted. Currently I'm fitting studded shoulderpads and beaky helmets on the new Infiltrators, and I have to say it works really well.
I don't hate them, they look amazing model wise, they just aren't my thing. I've painted up an army of Primaris, but that was amid the new groovy stage that was the release, but I've quickly fallen out of love with marines. In time I'll probably come back to them and maybe even like them more, but as of just now I'm taking a break from them. I mean aesthetic-wise they are a totally different army, its not surprising that, that new aesthetic isn't going to please everyone as aesthetics are subjective.
I love the primaries look. other than the start painting box that came with the 2 piece SM when I was a kid I never bought SM. Im buying them now though and as soon as i finish my current project in the next 2 months ill be kicking off my new SM army because they just look too good not to. The SM line needed an update and the only unfortunate part is them being "primaris" and not just the new SM models but i understand GW doing this as people would have wailed about their 20-year-old sculpts being obsolete
I don't think they really are aesthetically radically different than the old marines. The basic MKVII is also just a scifi power suit. The gothicness comes from extra details one can add.
I didn't go with 'knightly' with my Primaris, as I want them to be more 'feral' like the Space wolves, but a knightly look would be pretty easy to achieve too.
The number of folks who dont seem to know that primaris torsos and legs are nearly fully compatible with baby-marine weapon, pauldron, and head bits is endlessly amusing.
I don't know. While I still don't own any primaris for my own Space Wolves [though that'll change tomorrow, hopefully!], I do like them.
They absolutely seem to bear the same space marine aesthetic, and as for wolfiness and deficiency of helmetless heads, I'm going to solve that with a large number of stockpiled Grey Hunter leftovers and they should fit in perfectly.
That said, I've never actually liked the lines of Space Marine infantry, and I wouldn't call them "the models that got me into the game" [that title goes to a picture of a Baneblade in the 5e rulebook]. How would I feel if we had new guardsmen, or new guard tanks? I might be momentarily irritated if they didn't match my current guardsmen, or if they were as dead-on-arrival as Primaris [sans hellblasters] were, but I'd probably be buying them anyway.
And they're going to release new Sisters of Battle soon. I don't feel like they're replacing my old models, though they are doing so in a much more literal way than the Primaris are, and will almost certainly be buying and playing with them.
Sterling191 wrote: The number of folks who dont seem to know that primaris torsos and legs are nearly fully compatible with baby-marine weapon, pauldron, and head bits is endlessly amusing.
Sorry, while I don't have plans to buy or use any primaris units other than a Redemptor dread atm, I also don't share your dislike of them either (except the ugly as gak jump pack ones).
I imagine that once the line gets more fleshed out that I'll eventually make an all primaris army - but that project is a few years away.
Nor do primaris units render my existing marine models useless, make me not want to play them, etc. My own SW continue to play just fine - though this editions f'd up deepstrike rules are a pain in the ass.
Crimson wrote: Delvarus, your Primaris look great and certainly aesthetically congruent with the old style. I really don't see what's the problem is.
Cheers, when I get new models I'll oldify them, but there are so many units that you can't proxy and upgrades you can't give them and still its not the same army. I just wish they made true scale marines, there is no need for all this; new units great, but its completely taken over the old armies.
The primaris knee pads disguist me more than nurgle. On a serious note though i think the reason I cant dig primaris marines is the size. They dont feel like proper miniatures. They feel like action figures to me. The size on the board looks off. It's not about how it compares to other minis, they in them selves look too big.
I mean i never where that impressed by the huge inquisitor minis either, even if they packed more detail than a 40k marine. 28mm or go home.
Gitdakka wrote: The primaris knee pads disguist me more than nurgle. On a serious note though i think the reason I cant dig primaris marines is the size. They dont feel like proper miniatures. They feel like action figures to me. The size on the board looks off. It's not about how it compares to other minis, they in them selves look too big.
I mean i never where that impressed by the huge inquisitor minis either, even if they packed more detail than a 40k marine. 28mm or go home.
Yeah the size is brilliant, I'm not bashing that at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post: People are getting too caught up in whether you like them or not. That's not the issue, I like them they look great but they aren't SM's. If you suggest you don't see them as another army all together you are just being dishonest.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: If you suggest you don't see them as another army all together you are just being dishonest.
They might be a different Army, but they are still Space Marines and a Space Marine Army, in the same way that 30k Marine Armies are still Marine Armies.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: If you suggest you don't see them as another army all together you are just being dishonest.
They might be a different Army, but they are still Space Marines and a Space Marine Army, in the same way that 30k Marine Armies are still Marine Armies.
I know but we didn't all start collecting 30k legions for them to be replaced decades later.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: If you suggest you don't see them as another army all together you are just being dishonest.
They might be a different Army, but they are still Space Marines and a Space Marine Army, in the same way that 30k Marine Armies are still Marine Armies.
I know but we didn't all start collecting 30k legions for them to be replaced decades later.
No we started collecting them for the game to be dying out in quite a few places with fewer and fewer releases in less than a decade.
Its a game, a unfortunate as it is to invest in minis and have them eventually replaced it happens. Particularly when the company is admitted as a Miniatures Company first and a Game Company second.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: If you suggest you don't see them as another army all together you are just being dishonest.
They might be a different Army, but they are still Space Marines and a Space Marine Army, in the same way that 30k Marine Armies are still Marine Armies.
I know but we didn't all start collecting 30k legions for them to be replaced decades later.
No we started collecting them for the game to be dying out in quite a few places with fewer and fewer releases in less than a decade.
Its a game, a unfortunate as it is to invest in minis and have them eventually replaced it happens. Particularly when the company is admitted as a Miniatures Company first and a Game Company second.
I understand that, but I don't have to like it. In any event I've vented my moaning so I'll leave it at that.
For me it's mostly a gameplay distinction. It's like if GW replaced Orks with an army that was essentially Necrons with an ork-themed skin. Primaris marines play like Necrons, Admech, or Tau more than they play like Marines or Guard.The only thing that after all these years got me to play some space marines was the appeal of "each of your guys can be a custom character with the wargear you want him to have and the little tweaks you put on each model are reflected on the tabletop."
Primaris don't play like that. They play like Necrons: you buy a unit for a specialized purpose and they're all uniformly armed.
It's just not what I signed up for when I bought the army. If they take craftworld eldar and replace them with a new Ynnari range, exchanging the Eldar "squads of basic-armed guardian units backed by specialist aspect warriors" playstyle with some new Ynnari suicide-cult ruleset...I will probably stop playing Eldar.
the_scotsman wrote: For me it's mostly a gameplay distinction. It's like if GW replaced Orks with an army that was essentially Necrons with an ork-themed skin. Primaris marines play like Necrons, Admech, or Tau more than they play like Marines or Guard.The only thing that after all these years got me to play some space marines was the appeal of "each of your guys can be a custom character with the wargear you want him to have and the little tweaks you put on each model are reflected on the tabletop."
Except that in a Tactical Squad, other than 3 models, everyone has the exact same load out, same for Assault Marines. VGV and SGV were able to mix and match more, but how often did you see that? Usually everyone in a SGV squad had the same weapons, or in VGV everyone to Weapon X and a SS.
For HQs thats absolutely true though, and my one gripe with Primaris HQs, I want them to be able to take what I want them to. Basic Squads though? What ever. Sure the Special Weapon would be nice, but eh.
For HQs thats absolutely true though, and my one gripe with Primaris HQs, I want them to be able to take what I want them to. Basic Squads though? What ever.
Yeah, same. I'm fine with the Legion style squads, but the lack of character customisation is absolutely infuriating.
the_scotsman wrote: For me it's mostly a gameplay distinction. It's like if GW replaced Orks with an army that was essentially Necrons with an ork-themed skin. Primaris marines play like Necrons, Admech, or Tau more than they play like Marines or Guard.The only thing that after all these years got me to play some space marines was the appeal of "each of your guys can be a custom character with the wargear you want him to have and the little tweaks you put on each model are reflected on the tabletop."
Except that in a Tactical Squad, other than 3 models, everyone has the exact same load out, same for Assault Marines. VGV and SGV were able to mix and match more, but how often did you see that? Usually everyone in a SGV squad had the same weapons, or in VGV everyone to Weapon X and a SS.
Except that I never said anything about what all marines are like, I said why I started collecting my loyalist marine army, which is deathwatch.
The reason I started collecting deathwatch was the appeal of every model being customizable. Which I do, and enjoy, because it basically allows my deathwatch to just be a collection of human characters I paint individually rather than faceless mooks.
If I were suddenly limited to faceless mooks all carrying the same gun, I wouldn't want to play them. It's just my own personal opinion on it and I don't require anyone to share it, but I do find it a little gakky that this army that came out so recently already seems to be obsolete and being replaced by what is essentially a totally different product.
Aren't DW primaris all armed with the same weapons though? Or do they intercessors and hellblasters have options to take more guns then loyalist marines?
the_scotsman wrote: For me it's mostly a gameplay distinction. It's like if GW replaced Orks with an army that was essentially Necrons with an ork-themed skin. Primaris marines play like Necrons, Admech, or Tau more than they play like Marines or Guard.The only thing that after all these years got me to play some space marines was the appeal of "each of your guys can be a custom character with the wargear you want him to have and the little tweaks you put on each model are reflected on the tabletop."
Except that in a Tactical Squad, other than 3 models, everyone has the exact same load out, same for Assault Marines. VGV and SGV were able to mix and match more, but how often did you see that? Usually everyone in a SGV squad had the same weapons, or in VGV everyone to Weapon X and a SS.
Except that I never said anything about what all marines are like, I said why I started collecting my loyalist marine army, which is deathwatch.
The reason I started collecting deathwatch was the appeal of every model being customizable. Which I do, and enjoy, because it basically allows my deathwatch to just be a collection of human characters I paint individually rather than faceless mooks.
If I were suddenly limited to faceless mooks all carrying the same gun, I wouldn't want to play them. It's just my own personal opinion on it and I don't require anyone to share it, but I do find it a little gakky that this army that came out so recently already seems to be obsolete and being replaced by what is essentially a totally different product.
Perhaps when making an argument put out all of where you stand rather than just saying "Loyalist Marines." We arent mind readers. And your Deathwatch Vets clearly arent going anywhere in a hurry.
For HQs thats absolutely true though, and my one gripe with Primaris HQs, I want them to be able to take what I want them to. Basic Squads though? What ever.
Yeah, same. I'm fine with the Legion style squads, but the lack of character customisation is absolutely infuriating.
Lack of Customization and charging us 35 bucks for a monopose, when they used to have the $35 USD Captain/Force Commander Box which was loaded with options.
And let's be honest here, you aren't taking these "highly customizable characters" unless you like losing. There's an optimal choice of weapons for these "customizable" squads and it's almost always spamming the best weapon on as many models as possible. So no, not much is lost with the move to primaris marines.
Granted, their fluff is sheer idiocy in every way, but if GW had just replaced the rules/kits and kept the old marine fluff it would have been fine.
Peregrine wrote: And let's be honest here, you aren't taking these "highly customizable characters" unless you like losing. There's an optimal choice of weapons for these "customizable" squads and it's almost always spamming the best weapon on as many models as possible. So no, not much is lost with the move to primaris marines.
Granted, their fluff is sheer idiocy in every way, but if GW had just replaced the rules/kits and kept the old marine fluff it would have been fine.
Amazingly, with a minimal amount of squad focus, I've been having a perfectly fine winrate with my deathwatch. Honestly, I think I made too many of them with storm shields, as I've only lost a game with them once.
Daily reminder to you that casual metas do actually exist in the world and are not just wild fantastical legends. There are plenty of people out there who just play what they've collected for 10+ years and don't slavishly update every model to meet every twist and turn in the competitive meta.
Also, you just have to look at current primaris' rules to see what's lost with the loss of customizable models.
If you take away the choice from players, who will optimize the rules on offer to make squads that work, you put the choice of how competitive a unit is directly into the hands of the genius games designers at GW.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: Aren't DW primaris all armed with the same weapons though? Or do they intercessors and hellblasters have options to take more guns then loyalist marines?
They are all armed with the same weapon. The only distinction is that you can take a deathwatch squad with 5 intercessors, 1 hellblaster, 1 aggressor, etc. But those models have their loadouts totally fixed like all primaris stuff.
the_scotsman wrote: For me it's mostly a gameplay distinction. It's like if GW replaced Orks with an army that was essentially Necrons with an ork-themed skin. Primaris marines play like Necrons, Admech, or Tau more than they play like Marines or Guard.The only thing that after all these years got me to play some space marines was the appeal of "each of your guys can be a custom character with the wargear you want him to have and the little tweaks you put on each model are reflected on the tabletop."
Except that in a Tactical Squad, other than 3 models, everyone has the exact same load out, same for Assault Marines. VGV and SGV were able to mix and match more, but how often did you see that? Usually everyone in a SGV squad had the same weapons, or in VGV everyone to Weapon X and a SS.
Except that I never said anything about what all marines are like, I said why I started collecting my loyalist marine army, which is deathwatch.
The reason I started collecting deathwatch was the appeal of every model being customizable. Which I do, and enjoy, because it basically allows my deathwatch to just be a collection of human characters I paint individually rather than faceless mooks.
If I were suddenly limited to faceless mooks all carrying the same gun, I wouldn't want to play them. It's just my own personal opinion on it and I don't require anyone to share it, but I do find it a little gakky that this army that came out so recently already seems to be obsolete and being replaced by what is essentially a totally different product.
Perhaps when making an argument put out all of where you stand rather than just saying "Loyalist Marines." We arent mind readers. And your Deathwatch Vets clearly arent going anywhere in a hurry.
Again, an opinion, not an argument.
And deathwatch vets are "clearly" not going anywhere just like tactical squads are "clearly" not going anywhere. i.e. - gw has said many many times they are sticking around, they're just going to be separate. but equal!
Well, the problem with DW Primaris is that they're not an actual dedicated kits, merely vanilla Primaris Kits ported to DW. I would have certainly preferred had they made a completely new DW Primaris killteam kit for the DW, and that would have allowed having many/some of the options the non-primaris killteams have. But that was not what GW wanted to spend their design resources at this time, and it is understandable. They want to flesh out the basic Primaris line first, before diverging to the chapter specific stuff. This is the reason why GK don't have Primaris, as they would require a completely new kits. I'm sure that this too will happen eventually though. (I have for a while had a desire to convert some GK in Gravis armour, I think it would suit their aesthetic really well.)
Vilehydra wrote: I'm salty, because by the looks of it everything from Vigilus and Shadow Spear Cannot be used on standard marines. They are supposedly in the same codex, yet there is an arbitrary divide that is there ONLY to sell models. There are going to be no formations that buff standard marines while some formations give others some very significant bonuses.
Why can't my Thousand Sons sorcerer heal a Black Legion Defiler? Compartmentalization is an important aspect of controlling rules balance. Just because you can't think of issues doesn't mean there aren't any.
I find Primaris boring, badly written and plain silly in parts. But really the reason I've dropped my SW is GW. Bad models, bad rules and fluff with far too much bad.
Carnikang wrote: So, question. I see this reasoning a lot, that the new Primaris aren't space Marines.
What does that mean? What is a Space Marine and why do they not qualify?
I ask as an outsider to the whole Power Armor family. You're all the same to me, aside from some bling, or with additional pointy bits.
By the logic of the 40k, new things in the IoM are seen with extreme suspicion and modifying existing things is often considered heretical as it breaks from tradition. Cawl and his creations should be condemned as extremely heretical as he not only made up new tech (suspect that primaris dread has tau tech on its guns ) but changing the marine process (a process designed by the god emperor himself) and claiming it to be superior to the established process is heresy beyond belief.
In old 40k all of this should of caused massive uproar and Inquisitors sending armies to put Cawl down for all this nonsense but GW let their new marketing team take the pen and write some horrible fluff to justify this filth without the whole *blamming* response that should be par for the course in the grim dark future of the 41st millennium. Hell the most mind blowing thing is that Gulliman didn't immediately condemn Cawl to execution for primarisiing all 20 of the original legion gene seeds (messing about with traitor gene seeds is bad enough but to also mess with the 2 legions that did something so horrible that they where wiped from Imperial Records). Basically the fluff of the setting is jacked up and honestly its all in the name of selling new products with damage to the fluff being an afterthought.
I love building and painting my Primaris. My only real complaint is that they are too new and rigid. Now when I say rigid I'm talking about characters. Legion loadouts are fine, ever since I've been on this site I've been told 40k rewards specialized forces anyway. The characters are generally lack luster, specifically the new Shadowspear ones (minus the librarian).
Sorry, my second complaint is that there's no dedicated anti tank or specialized melee unit, but that'll come with time. For now I'll build and paint what I have
Vankraken wrote: So, question. I see this reasoning a lot, that the new Primaris aren't space Marines.
By the logic of the 40k, new things in the IoM are seen with extreme suspicion and modifying existing things is often considered heretical as it breaks from tradition. Cawl and his creations should be condemned as extremely heretical as he not only made up new tech (suspect that primaris dread has tau tech on its guns ) but changing the marine process (a process designed by the god emperor himself) and claiming it to be superior to the established process is heresy beyond belief.
But Cawl is viewed as heretical by a large portion of the Adeptus Mechanicus because of his advancements.
Sure, the fluff is stupid, but I'm not gonna let that spoil my enjoyment of the excellent models. And it's not like improving the Space Marines is unheard of anyway, the Cursed Founding was a thing, it just worked better this time.
I think that part of the Primaris angst is that people are not sure on what they mean, and what GW's intentions are.
I think they need to re-release the Space Marine dex, and have it in sections like:
None compliant Chapters (completely old marines, the Imperium will support them as they have and life goes on) This is specific for people who don't want to have Primaris in their forces. And most likely if in the fluff, they won't be getting Primarizied. Still at 1K marines, and all that.
Compliant Chapters: Outfitted with Primaris and increased recruitment, they are increasing back to Legion sizes again, and reincorporating successor chapters, and have some older marines, and lots of Primaris marines. Play what you want. THis is the new normal, Ultramarines, and all the others here.
Primaris only Chapters: Here we go, what it says, all those extra marines, and the ones that G-man carved off to take care of specific problem areas. New Structure. Could be small, 1K - to very large- 200K.
Crimson wrote: I don't think they really are aesthetically radically different than the old marines. The basic MKVII is also just a scifi power suit. The gothicness comes from extra details one can add.
I didn't go with 'knightly' with my Primaris, as I want them to be more 'feral' like the Space wolves, but a knightly look would be pretty easy to achieve too.
Those are nice looking models, man. White paint schemes are hard.
Sterling191 wrote: The number of folks who dont seem to know that primaris torsos and legs are nearly fully compatible with baby-marine weapon, pauldron, and head bits is endlessly amusing.
I've converted enough to know.
It works the other way, too. This is a traditional marine with the Primaris "two-fingers-pointing" bit that I somehow got in a swap.
None compliant Chapters (completely old marines, the Imperium will support them as they have and life goes on) This is specific for people who don't want to have Primaris in their forces. And most likely if in the fluff, they won't be getting Primarizied. Still at 1K marines, and all that.
But the Imperium has already said they wont support them if they dont accept them, and will declare them Traitoris. The Custodes are going out with the initial Deliveries and saying "Take them, it is the will of the Emperor. Do you question the Emperor's will?"
Theres nothing to stop them from using them as cannon fodder, but they will take them.
VictorVonTzeentch wrote:For HQs thats absolutely true though, and my one gripe with Primaris HQs, I want them to be able to take what I want them to. Basic Squads though? What ever. Sure the Special Weapon would be nice, but eh.
Agreed. I'd like a bit more fun with my HQs. I don't mind the Legion style single loadout at all.
the_scotsman wrote:Daily reminder to you that casual metas do actually exist in the world and are not just wild fantastical legends. There are plenty of people out there who just play what they've collected for 10+ years and don't slavishly update every model to meet every twist and turn in the competitive meta.
Hear hear.
And deathwatch vets are "clearly" not going anywhere just like tactical squads are "clearly" not going anywhere. i.e. - gw has said many many times they are sticking around, they're just going to be separate. but equal!
Well, they're still around. GW hasn't gone back on that yet. Maybe they will, in the future, but for now, we've got no reason to think they won't any time soon.
None compliant Chapters (completely old marines, the Imperium will support them as they have and life goes on) This is specific for people who don't want to have Primaris in their forces. And most likely if in the fluff, they won't be getting Primarizied. Still at 1K marines, and all that.
But the Imperium has already said they wont support them if they dont accept them, and will declare them Traitoris. The Custodes are going out with the initial Deliveries and saying "Take them, it is the will of the Emperor. Do you question the Emperor's will?"
Theres nothing to stop them from using them as cannon fodder, but they will take them.
Re-write it. All those chapters without a history they know? Here is the path forward.
I like the new models. I think that the Primaris proportions, size and their having two attacks and two wounds better represent what Space Marines should have always been.
That said, I also like a lot of the old units for nostalgia/fluff reasons. I don't want them to get rid of Land Raiders, Assault Marines, Rhinos, Terminators, etc. I'd rather they just re-made all those units in the new Primaris style.
I doubt that the old units will be gotten rid of anytime soon, and I think they still look decent when they are their own stand-alone are my (as in not a mixed Primaris and old Marine force). I just don't like that they have a worse statline and I worry that they'll get so little rules support going forward that they'll be unplayable.
I don't mind the introduction of new units. I think that it's a good thing. There are two things that bother me a bit about the new Primaris release:
1. They seem to be bolting tons of abilities and weapons onto many of the vehicles and units. They are out-Orking the Orks in some ways.
2. The new stuff, rather than being different to the old stuff is often just the same thing but way better. I don't like that kind of creep.
Dakka Flakka Flame wrote: II doubt that the old units will be gotten rid of anytime soon, and I think they still look decent when they are their own stand-alone are my (as in not a mixed Primaris and old Marine force). I just don't like that they have a worse statline and I worry that they'll get so little rules support going forward that they'll be unplayable.
Well right now that rules support is still there - CA 2018 points adjustments less than 3 months ago and since then the beta bolters rules. GW even included non-Primaris units in their suggested standalone army list for the latest Primaris units from Shadowspear.
Vilehydra wrote: I'm salty, because by the looks of it everything from Vigilus and Shadow Spear Cannot be used on standard marines. They are supposedly in the same codex, yet there is an arbitrary divide that is there ONLY to sell models. There are going to be no formations that buff standard marines while some formations give others some very significant bonuses.
Why can't my Thousand Sons sorcerer heal a Black Legion Defiler? Compartmentalization is an important aspect of controlling rules balance. Just because you can't think of issues doesn't mean there aren't any.
he's also wrong. outside of the Indomatus crusaders and crimson fist liberator force the formation, every formation can take old units.
Mine is that i wish they would give Primaris-specific stuff to BT! I'd love a Primaris Emperors Champion and Sword Brethren.
I also really dislike the Helmets. I played around with some old BT parts and a MKIII Helmet on one of the Conquest Marines and I think the MKIII helmet gives them such a better look. Really gives them a Space-Knights-Templar feel.
That and I wish Primaris could have Drop Pods. i really love the idea of Drop pod assaults so seeing them on the table, played more like PA-Tau, just looks cheap and nasty imo.
100 percent agree. You should write games workshop and complain.
Maybe even make a BBB complaint about it so they take it seriously. Our armies are being phased out were clearly being lied to as consumers. A GW rep told me my armhy isn't invalidated.
Vilehydra wrote: I'm salty, because by the looks of it everything from Vigilus and Shadow Spear Cannot be used on standard marines. They are supposedly in the same codex, yet there is an arbitrary divide that is there ONLY to sell models. There are going to be no formations that buff standard marines while some formations give others some very significant bonuses.
Vilehydra wrote: I'm salty, because by the looks of it everything from Vigilus and Shadow Spear Cannot be used on standard marines. They are supposedly in the same codex, yet there is an arbitrary divide that is there ONLY to sell models. There are going to be no formations that buff standard marines while some formations give others some very significant bonuses.
Rhinos losing fire points for no reason, .
The reason is that vehicles are much tougher now.
Transports (like the Rhino) cost a hell of a lot more and the transport rules are less beneficial for turn 1 move and unload units (it's basically 3 less inches of movement). Dedicated transports with next to no firepower absolutely got worse.
Vilehydra wrote: I'm salty, because by the looks of it everything from Vigilus and Shadow Spear Cannot be used on standard marines. They are supposedly in the same codex, yet there is an arbitrary divide that is there ONLY to sell models. There are going to be no formations that buff standard marines while some formations give others some very significant bonuses.
Rhinos losing fire points for no reason, .
The reason is that vehicles are much tougher now.
If someone wants to spend that many points to cover a squad that has two Lascannons or Grav Cannons, why shouldn't they? Dark Eldar and Harlequins were able to keep their ability to fire, but Marines and Necrons lost that for no good reason.
Heck I think even Guard lost that too. They should be just as upset.
BrianDavion wrote:
he's also wrong. outside of the Indomatus crusaders and crimson fist liberator force the formation, every formation can take old units.
Partially right. I happen to run Salamanders, which means I can only run the Indomitus Crusaders. Should've clarified that point earlier. It feels a bit ridiculous though. Skimming through a few of the other specialist detachments from other factions I didn't see any non-marine detachments limited by their 'CT' (could've missed it though)
Alcibiades wrote:
The reason is that vehicles are much tougher now.
So are trucks(?), raiders, and harlequin transports (whatever they where called). Yet they got to keep the full open-top rule where everyone inside can fire out with squads that can do a lot more damage at further range. So why can't I fire two special weapons out of my rhino?
Daedalus81 wrote:
Why can't my Thousand Sons sorcerer heal a Black Legion Defiler? Compartmentalization is an important aspect of controlling rules balance. Just because you can't think of issues doesn't mean there aren't any.
I agree that compartmentalization is a critical part of balance, 7th ed didn't have enough compartmentalization and it made the game extremely unbalanced. But I would like to point out that this is not a matter of <Thousands sons> and <Legion> keywords as you suggested. Those are two separate codices that can ally together. An equivalent to that point would be that I can't use might of heroes on a knight or Mephistion, which I agree is a good thing. The problem is that now I literally can't use <Chapter Tactic> WLTs or a <Chapter Tactic> Psychic power on units that are supposed to be from the same army, but that restriction only goes one way. I can use all the standard WLTs and Psychic power on <Phobos> models, but Obscurement (the only defensive power from the book IIRC) and WLTs from the book may only be used on <Phobos> models. Again I'm unaware of any other faction that has this sort of silly restriction. (Once again, could be wrong here. Maybe DE have something similar with Cults and Covens). It seems like a marketing ploy to sell more models, but I am definitely biased in this regard.
Standard Marines got a lot of tools taken from them at the start of the edition, and it doesn't look like they're ever going to get them back. That's where my comes from.
I don't like the way Primaris play, homogeneous squads that are specialized at doing one thing. But hey I'm gonna make Tacs work till they're out of the codex.
Peregrine wrote: And let's be honest here, you aren't taking these "highly customizable characters" unless you like losing. There's an optimal choice of weapons for these "customizable" squads and it's almost always spamming the best weapon on as many models as possible. So no, not much is lost with the move to primaris marines.
Granted, their fluff is sheer idiocy in every way, but if GW had just replaced the rules/kits and kept the old marine fluff it would have been fine.
Yes many players, myself included did take those less than bleeding edge best options for a variety of reasons. I don't get how you treat everyone's local scene as if players only take whats good and never considering anything else.
HoundsofDemos wrote: Yes many players, myself included did take those less than bleeding edge best options for a variety of reasons. I don't get how you treat everyone's local scene as if players only take whats good and never considering anything else.
If you don't care about the rules then why do the kits need to have special snowflake rules? I'm not against having multipart kits so you can customize the pose of your models, but I fail to see why they need lots of rules choices when you aren't going to put any thought into which one you take.
My beef with them is that its blatantly apparent GW has no intention to provide decent rules to play with the old models, meaning i'm landed with hundreds of dollars of old, painted plastic I cannot find a decent use for in a game anymore, with the exception of the most casual of games. If you want marines, and you want them to be 'good', you need Primaris. I would have preferred them being able to be added in as needed, to supplement my existing forces.
HoundsofDemos wrote: Yes many players, myself included did take those less than bleeding edge best options for a variety of reasons. I don't get how you treat everyone's local scene as if players only take whats good and never considering anything else.
If you don't care about the rules then why do the kits need to have special snowflake rules? I'm not against having multipart kits so you can customize the pose of your models, but I fail to see why they need lots of rules choices when you aren't going to put any thought into which one you take.
One cause kits have consistently had "special snow flake options" for decades and I am vehement opposed to eliminating or invalidating options, armies or models. If an option is bad it should be fixed not deleted. Two because variety is interesting, just saying count everything as a plus one mega gun is boring. I love that marines have so many combi weapons, melee options, pistol options cause, special and heavy weapon combos cause I can take such a diverse force.
HoundsofDemos wrote: One cause kits have consistently had "special snow flake options" for decades and I am vehement opposed to eliminating or invalidating options, armies or models. If an option is bad it should be fixed not deleted. Two because variety is interesting, just saying count everything as a plus one mega gun is boring. I love that marines have so many combi weapons, melee options, pistol options cause, special and heavy weapon combos cause I can take such a diverse force.
But, again, why does it matter that the weapons have different names if you're paying so little attention to their rules and don't bother to make intelligent choices about how best to execute a strategy for winning the game? You're proposing a weird scenario where the slight mathematical differences in efficiency between various stat lines are really important and must be kept, but you also don't care about slight differences in efficiency and just pick whichever model looks cool. I can understand wanting lots of options if you're obsessed with math optimization, but if it's all about the cool models? the rules bloat, all you need is one stat line for "anti-tank weapon" and lots of diversity in how you build the model to represent it.
That sounds like a very boring game. The main problem is your actually pushing that every unit essentially needs to be unique in both rules and options. Your not wrong that for a tactical squad this edition a MM is not the best choice purely for smashing your opponent, (then again, neither is a tac squad in general, guess they along with any non top 5 army choices should be deleted and smashed to dust). The issue comes with there are units that a MM isn't a terrible option.
At this point this creates an issue with figuring out which model has which gun. I can imagine the game being super fun with my landspeeders and attack bikes having MM and then claiming that my infantry with the same weapon visually are really lascannons.
So you can try to simplify the rules and make everything some dull generic option or we can keep a wide range of weird and wacky things that have defined 40k for years. 40k has never really been a balanced game and just deleting options and removing units isn't going to fix that.
As a final thought, why do you care if GW keeps current options in the game even if they aren't great. If your playing purely to win, your essentially going to ignore 90 plus percent of what GW sells anyway so why are you so focused on killing off a ton of peoples choices and models?
This is a lie GW has sold you on. Genuine gameplay depth does not come from having a bloated mess of rules where you have to calculate which weapon has 5% more point efficiency than the alternative, it comes from having a good system for actions and reactions, scenario design, etc. But it's easier for GW to keep the same zero-depth IGOUGO core mechanics and distract you with tons of rules to learn.
The main problem is your actually pushing that every unit essentially needs to be unique in both rules and options. Your not wrong that for a tactical squad this edition a MM is not the best choice purely for smashing your opponent, (then again, neither is a tac squad in general, guess they along with any non top 5 army choices should be deleted and smashed to dust).
I don't understand what you mean about units having to be unique. A tactical squad can work exactly as it does now except instead of choosing from 2-3 anti-horde weapons or 2-3 anti-tank weapons, some of them slightly more or less point efficient than the others but otherwise nearly identical in function, you just choose "anti-tank" or "anti-infantry" for your heavy weapon. Now the depth comes from how you use the tactical squad, not whether or not you successfully did the math to optimize its upgrade choices.
The issue comes with there are units that a MM isn't a terrible option.
At this point this creates an issue with figuring out which model has which gun. I can imagine the game being super fun with my landspeeders and attack bikes having MM and then claiming that my infantry with the same weapon visually are really lascannons.
But why do they need a MM? They can have the same kind of options: anti-tank land speeder, anti-horde land-speeder, etc. That's how Epic did it, units had a set anti-tank and anti-infantry firepower rating regardless of how you modeled them and nobody had any problems keeping track of it.
40k has never really been a balanced game and just deleting options and removing units isn't going to fix that.
No, simplification alone won't fix everything. But it can sure help, and it can make the rest of the job a lot easier.
Cause if I wanted to play something generic like that I'd play epic or what ever similar game that a company offers today. Generic does this against that unit to me with out options just doesn't appeal to me.
40k for me has been many thing over the years but at it's core when played between like minded people it's a great skirmish or just above that level game with a ton of options, nonsense and fun. Every now and then through in an apoc game and bring in the big models.
We seem to want something fundamentally different from a game of 40k.
I love the little moments when that level of choice made a difference. The time I took a plasma pistol on lark that ended up killing my opponents warlord or when a charge failed so hard at a key moment my guys got eating a live by over watch or back an edition when a blast scattered and did something insane. For me that's what I enjoy in 40k.
If that's why you play 40k then why are you lobbying so hard to keep minor differences between weapons that only really matter if you're doing serious math optimization to give yourself a 5% better chance of winning? I mean, how many memories do you have of how disappointed you were that your 20 point lascannon rolled a 6 for a penetrating hit, a penetrating hit that you could have had for only 15 points with a missile launcher if you'd been better at optimization? Do you obsessively take notes on these events so you can make a better lascannon vs. missile launcher choice in your next game? I get how that kind of thing is satisfying if you're a hardcore tournament player and perfecting your skills at winning games is what drives you, but I don't understand it at all when you claim to be someone who plays the game for the cool moments. That sort of approach wants a simple game, without all the rules bloat and subtle differences in point efficiency, so you can get on with actually playing the game instead of worrying about minor stat line differences.
iGuy91 wrote: My beef with them is that its blatantly apparent GW has no intention to provide decent rules to play with the old models, meaning i'm landed with hundreds of dollars of old, painted plastic I cannot find a decent use for in a game anymore, with the exception of the most casual of games. If you want marines, and you want them to be 'good', you need Primaris. I would have preferred them being able to be added in as needed, to supplement my existing forces.
That's not much unlike someone who bought an army of Warp Spiders during 7th. The rules for units wax and wane. Marines are not really that terrible, either. They even show signs of improving with beta-bolters. It's not like Primaris are great either.
This is a lie GW has sold you on. Genuine gameplay depth does not come from having a bloated mess of rules where you have to calculate which weapon has 5% more point efficiency than the alternative, it comes from having a good system for actions and reactions, scenario design, etc. But it's easier for GW to keep the same zero-depth IGOUGO core mechanics and distract you with tons of rules to learn.
That depends tremendously on the "depth" you are after. If it's depth in storytelling, atmosphere and background, lots of choices, even overlapping ones, with character, add depth to the world. Also adds more models, so depth to the miniature line. Adds more decisions for army building and possibly play, so more depth to list-building. All of which are part of the "game".
iGuy91 wrote: My beef with them is that its blatantly apparent GW has no intention to provide decent rules to play with the old models, meaning i'm landed with hundreds of dollars of old, painted plastic I cannot find a decent use for in a game anymore, with the exception of the most casual of games. If you want marines, and you want them to be 'good', you need Primaris. I would have preferred them being able to be added in as needed, to supplement my existing forces.
That's not much unlike someone who bought an army of Warp Spiders during 7th. The rules for units wax and wane. Marines are not really that terrible, either. They even show signs of improving with beta-bolters. It's not like Primaris are great either.
Your right in the fact that marines aren't as bad as many make them out to be, but it gets frustrating when marines get new rules that are focused almost entirely on primaris marines while standard marines get nothing.
iGuy91 wrote: My beef with them is that its blatantly apparent GW has no intention to provide decent rules to play with the old models, meaning i'm landed with hundreds of dollars of old, painted plastic I cannot find a decent use for in a game anymore, with the exception of the most casual of games. If you want marines, and you want them to be 'good', you need Primaris. I would have preferred them being able to be added in as needed, to supplement my existing forces.
That's not much unlike someone who bought an army of Warp Spiders during 7th. The rules for units wax and wane. Marines are not really that terrible, either. They even show signs of improving with beta-bolters. It's not like Primaris are great either.
Your right in the fact that marines aren't as bad as many make them out to be, but it gets frustrating when marines get new rules that are focused almost entirely on primaris marines while standard marines get nothing.
We got some sweet point drops, though. As excited as we're supposed to be about the new primaris units, from what I've heard, the costs aren't very compelling. Meanwhile Rhinos can drive around firing 8 shots at 24" now, Dreds are cheaper, Plasma Cannons are only 16 points, and Primaris can't even use the criminally costed 2 pt Storm Shields. Things are pretty good.
This is a lie GW has sold you on. Genuine gameplay depth does not come from having a bloated mess of rules where you have to calculate which weapon has 5% more point efficiency than the alternative, it comes from having a good system for actions and reactions, scenario design, etc. But it's easier for GW to keep the same zero-depth IGOUGO core mechanics and distract you with tons of rules to learn.
You seem to really hate GW and 40k. I'm genuinely interested to know if it's specifically 8th edition that's made you feel this way and also why you still play if you hate it that much.
This is a lie GW has sold you on. Genuine gameplay depth does not come from having a bloated mess of rules where you have to calculate which weapon has 5% more point efficiency than the alternative, it comes from having a good system for actions and reactions, scenario design, etc. But it's easier for GW to keep the same zero-depth IGOUGO core mechanics and distract you with tons of rules to learn.
You seem to really hate GW and 40k. I'm genuinely interested to know if it's specifically 8th edition that's made you feel this way and also why you still play if you hate it that much.
Peregrine's ALWAYS been like this. People keep telling him he needs to just walk away from the game. for his health if nothing else. all this hate can't be good for him
This is a lie GW has sold you on. Genuine gameplay depth does not come from having a bloated mess of rules where you have to calculate which weapon has 5% more point efficiency than the alternative, it comes from having a good system for actions and reactions, scenario design, etc. But it's easier for GW to keep the same zero-depth IGOUGO core mechanics and distract you with tons of rules to learn.
You seem to really hate GW and 40k. I'm genuinely interested to know if it's specifically 8th edition that's made you feel this way and also why you still play if you hate it that much.
Peregrine's ALWAYS been like this. People keep telling him he needs to just walk away from the game. for his health if nothing else. all this hate can't be good for him
I understand that people are always going to have criticisms of the hobby (whether that be GW or 40K itself), but not why someone would join and contribute to a forum for a hobby they fundamentally don't like. I doubt most people want to come on Dakka to read how their hobby is 'a bloated mess of rules' and has 'zero depth' (any more that they want to hear that the army they enjoy playing regularly is 'unplayable' because it wouldn't win a tournament).
I have RT Marines as a second army, and feel the OP’s dissatisfaction. However, mine is more tuned to the seeming constant Codex releases. As such, I run mine with the CSM Codex. Still have Tac, Dev, Ass and HQ options, but no need to buy a Codex as often. Also let’s you add interesting Chaos units as ‘allies’.
Man I started way back in 2e, when Marines were dudes in armor carrying a gun. Over the years they just kept adding more and More and MORE bling to them all until they became walking piles of flanderized junk. I vastly prefer the new Primaris sculpts and their back to basics approach. I would like it if they had more weapon options, yes, but the aesthetics are definitely superior over the current non-Primaris imho.
Insectum7 wrote: That depends tremendously on the "depth" you are after. If it's depth in storytelling, atmosphere and background, lots of choices, even overlapping ones, with character, add depth to the world. Also adds more models, so depth to the miniature line.
Again, this is a lie GW has sold you: the idea that if something doesn't have explicit rules it doesn't exist. Story, atmosphere, etc, don't depend on a lascannon and a krak missile rolling slightly different dice. You can still have the exact same story if both need a 3+ on a D6. You can still have fluff about how your chapter prefers lascannons over krak missiles because they're often used on extended deployments where recharging batteries is easier than getting shipments of new missiles. If you aren't doing these things because GW hasn't given you a special rule on the datasheet that's a problem with your lack of imagination, not with simplified rules.
Adds more decisions for army building and possibly play, so more depth to list-building. All of which are part of the "game".
The problem is that they don't really add more decisions. The rules bloat adds an illusion of depth by increasing complexity to the point that a new player has to work hard to find the correct answer, but once you overcome that initial learning curve there's generally a single obvious choice with better math than the alternatives and you always take it. And so the only choice becomes "do I want to build my list based on maximizing my chances of winning", and once you answer "yes" there are no more choices to make. Simplifying the rules would leave virtually all of the depth of strategic decisions, and even enhance them by removing the clutter of math optimization in favor of deciding what you want your units to be doing.
The 2nd edition wargear book is a fantastic piece of world building, even though it describes loads of weapons with overlapping design roles. I'm sorry you dont see any value in that.
It's only a "lie" from an extremely purist game design perspective, which 40k operates far beyond.
I don't see what the fantastic world building of fluff descriptions for loads of different weapons has to do with whether those weapons wound on a 3+ or 2+ or 3+ with re-rolling 1s or whatever. Does the fluff of how two weapons work magically disappear if both of them require the same 3+ on a D6? Or am I misunderstanding what you mean about "fantastic piece of world building", and what the book really contains is a bunch of math problems demonstrating why one weapon is worth 5 points more than the other?
And it absolutely is a lie. GW has sold you the lie that their way of doing things, the way that requires the least talent and substitutes quantity for quality, is the only way to do things. And here you are justifying GW's lazy work, and even trying to claim that 40k is somehow different and operating "far beyond good game design principles" is a good thing!
Insectum7 wrote: Sure. Go out there and do better, popularize it, and take all of GWs market share. Be my guest.
Ah yes, the classic "if you can't build a billion dollar game company you can't criticize GW" argument. Do you also believe that you can't leave a 1-star review for a restaurant unless you first go out and start your own restaurant that takes over their market share?
Peregrine, you don't need to make your own game, but I think that you disagree with the basic design assumptions of 40K on such a fundamental level, that discussing with you is pointless.
Crimson wrote: Peregrine, you don't need to make your own game, but I think that you disagree with the basic design assumptions of 40K on such a fundamental level, that discussing with you is pointless.
There are legit criticisms that people are ignoring though.
Crimson wrote: Peregrine, you don't need to make your own game, but I think that you disagree with the basic design assumptions of 40K on such a fundamental level, that discussing with you is pointless.
Yes, I do disagree with assumptions like "increasing word count is an important design goal" or "balance is irrelevant as long as we're selling models" or "who cares about the fluff that defines our game, the marketing department demands a new release". How you choose to take that disagreement is up to you.
This is a lie GW has sold you on. Genuine gameplay depth does not come from having a bloated mess of rules where you have to calculate which weapon has 5% more point efficiency than the alternative, it comes from having a good system for actions and reactions, scenario design, etc. But it's easier for GW to keep the same zero-depth IGOUGO core mechanics and distract you with tons of rules to learn.
You seem to really hate GW and 40k. I'm genuinely interested to know if it's specifically 8th edition that's made you feel this way and also why you still play if you hate it that much.
Peregrine's ALWAYS been like this. People keep telling him he needs to just walk away from the game. for his health if nothing else. all this hate can't be good for him
I understand that people are always going to have criticisms of the hobby (whether that be GW or 40K itself), but not why someone would join and contribute to a forum for a hobby they fundamentally don't like. I doubt most people want to come on Dakka to read how their hobby is 'a bloated mess of rules' and has 'zero depth' (any more that they want to hear that the army they enjoy playing regularly is 'unplayable' because it wouldn't win a tournament).
This is a disgrace of a mentality. It's not offensive in anyway to dislike change. It's called personal tastes. I'm getting really tired of your censorship happy generation
Who taught you it's okay to belittle people that don't follow the group? Seriously it disturbs the hell out of me you think that proper etiquette to follow without question. Or not allowing people to have taste that's not the norm.
Our society is built on the ability to speak freely. And this hobby weather you like it or not has fans that want to inspire change and are allowed a voice to do so.
I don't know what kind of upbringing you have but this isn't right
Sterling191 wrote:The number of folks who dont seem to know that primaris torsos and legs are nearly fully compatible with baby-marine weapon, pauldron, and head bits is endlessly amusing.
Can I ask how well the torsos of old marines, or specifically Horus Heresy Marine models which I hear are slightly upscale, fit on the legs of say intercessors? Do they look like they have massive legs or does it work smoothly?
This is a lie GW has sold you on. Genuine gameplay depth does not come from having a bloated mess of rules where you have to calculate which weapon has 5% more point efficiency than the alternative, it comes from having a good system for actions and reactions, scenario design, etc. But it's easier for GW to keep the same zero-depth IGOUGO core mechanics and distract you with tons of rules to learn.
You seem to really hate GW and 40k. I'm genuinely interested to know if it's specifically 8th edition that's made you feel this way and also why you still play if you hate it that much.
Peregrine's ALWAYS been like this. People keep telling him he needs to just walk away from the game. for his health if nothing else. all this hate can't be good for him
I understand that people are always going to have criticisms of the hobby (whether that be GW or 40K itself), but not why someone would join and contribute to a forum for a hobby they fundamentally don't like. I doubt most people want to come on Dakka to read how their hobby is 'a bloated mess of rules' and has 'zero depth' (any more that they want to hear that the army they enjoy playing regularly is 'unplayable' because it wouldn't win a tournament).
This is a disgrace of a mentality. It's not offensive in anyway to dislike change. It's called personal tastes. I'm getting really tired of your censorship happy generation
Who taught you it's okay to belittle people that don't follow the group? Seriously it disturbs the hell out of me you think that proper etiquette to follow without question. Or not allowing people to have taste that's not the norm.
Our society is built on the ability to speak freely. And this hobby weather you like it or not has fans that want to inspire change and are allowed a voice to do so.
I don't know what kind of upbringing you have but this isn't right
Here's a little to Peregrine in his first month on this website, declaring how incompetent and lazy GW are at writing tabletop rules.
There is no "dislike of change", Peregrine simply hates 40k. He has spent 7 years on here restating and reinforcing that whenever possible. This isn't me hating on him with this post either, I'm simply posting some facts to get you up to speed because the situation is not as you interpret it.
This is a lie GW has sold you on. Genuine gameplay depth does not come from having a bloated mess of rules where you have to calculate which weapon has 5% more point efficiency than the alternative, it comes from having a good system for actions and reactions, scenario design, etc. But it's easier for GW to keep the same zero-depth IGOUGO core mechanics and distract you with tons of rules to learn.
You seem to really hate GW and 40k. I'm genuinely interested to know if it's specifically 8th edition that's made you feel this way and also why you still play if you hate it that much.
Peregrine's ALWAYS been like this. People keep telling him he needs to just walk away from the game. for his health if nothing else. all this hate can't be good for him
I understand that people are always going to have criticisms of the hobby (whether that be GW or 40K itself), but not why someone would join and contribute to a forum for a hobby they fundamentally don't like. I doubt most people want to come on Dakka to read how their hobby is 'a bloated mess of rules' and has 'zero depth' (any more that they want to hear that the army they enjoy playing regularly is 'unplayable' because it wouldn't win a tournament).
This is a disgrace of a mentality. It's not offensive in anyway to dislike change. It's called personal tastes. I'm getting really tired of your censorship happy generation
Who taught you it's okay to belittle people that don't follow the group? Seriously it disturbs the hell out of me you think that proper etiquette to follow without question. Or not allowing people to have taste that's not the norm.
Our society is built on the ability to speak freely. And this hobby weather you like it or not has fans that want to inspire change and are allowed a voice to do so.
I don't know what kind of upbringing you have but this isn't right
Considering that the question was specifically whether it was 8th edition changes that were disliked so much, and that it was accepted that there would always be criticisms of GW and 40K that seems a rather over the top response. Still, if I caused any offense then I apologise.
This is a lie GW has sold you on. Genuine gameplay depth does not come from having a bloated mess of rules where you have to calculate which weapon has 5% more point efficiency than the alternative, it comes from having a good system for actions and reactions, scenario design, etc. But it's easier for GW to keep the same zero-depth IGOUGO core mechanics and distract you with tons of rules to learn.
You seem to really hate GW and 40k. I'm genuinely interested to know if it's specifically 8th edition that's made you feel this way and also why you still play if you hate it that much.
Peregrine's ALWAYS been like this. People keep telling him he needs to just walk away from the game. for his health if nothing else. all this hate can't be good for him
I understand that people are always going to have criticisms of the hobby (whether that be GW or 40K itself), but not why someone would join and contribute to a forum for a hobby they fundamentally don't like. I doubt most people want to come on Dakka to read how their hobby is 'a bloated mess of rules' and has 'zero depth' (any more that they want to hear that the army they enjoy playing regularly is 'unplayable' because it wouldn't win a tournament).
This is a disgrace of a mentality. It's not offensive in anyway to dislike change. It's called personal tastes. I'm getting really tired of your censorship happy generation
Who taught you it's okay to belittle people that don't follow the group? Seriously it disturbs the hell out of me you think that proper etiquette to follow without question. Or not allowing people to have taste that's not the norm.
Our society is built on the ability to speak freely. And this hobby weather you like it or not has fans that want to inspire change and are allowed a voice to do so.
I don't know what kind of upbringing you have but this isn't right
Here's a little to Peregrine in his first month on this website, declaring how incompetent and lazy GW are at writing tabletop rules.
There is no "dislike of change", Peregrine simply hates 40k. He has spent 7 years on here restating and reinforcing that whenever possible. This isn't me hating on him with this post either, I'm simply posting some facts to get you up to speed because the situation is not as you interpret it.
Considering that the question was specifically whether it was 8th edition changes that were disliked so much, and that it was accepted that there would always be criticisms of GW and 40K that seems a rather over the top response. Still, if I caused any offense then I apologise.
Yeah. I'm guessing you meant to quote the guy who quoted you, because to be clear it was him I was disagreeing with
Brother Castor wrote: Considering that the question was specifically whether it was 8th edition changes that were disliked so much, and that it was accepted that there would always be criticisms of GW and 40K that seems a rather over the top response. Still, if I caused any offense then I apologise.
Yeah. I'm guessing you meant to quote the guy who quoted you, because to be clear it was him I was disagreeing with
Yep, sorry, post edited. In case it wasn't obvious, it was the bit about being a disgrace, part of a censorship-happy generation and having my upbringing questioned that I thought was a bit over the top
This is a disgrace of a mentality. It's not offensive in anyway to dislike change. It's called personal tastes. I'm getting really tired of your censorship happy generation
Who taught you it's okay to belittle people that don't follow the group? Seriously it disturbs the hell out of me you think that proper etiquette to follow without question. Or not allowing people to have taste that's not the norm.
Our society is built on the ability to speak freely. And this hobby weather you like it or not has fans that want to inspire change and are allowed a voice to do so.
I don't know what kind of upbringing you have but this isn't right
Freedom of speach doesn't mean freedom to say what you want without being disagreed with dude. Peregrine does nothing but complain about 40k, and has done nothing but complain about it. I've nothing against him saying this stuff, I'm simply telling him that if he dislikes 40k this much he should proably find a new hobby. this is hardly canceling his freedom of speach. No one has called on the admins to ban him for what he's said for example
Insectum7 wrote: Sure. Go out there and do better, popularize it, and take all of GWs market share. Be my guest.
Ah yes, the classic "if you can't build a billion dollar game company you can't criticize GW" argument. Do you also believe that you can't leave a 1-star review for a restaurant unless you first go out and start your own restaurant that takes over their market share?
I believe, based on your reasoning, that you are not qualified to rate the restaraunt in question. Your criticisms appear to come from a strictly design mechanics viewpoint, which while in itself is a valid lens, the fact that you can't seem to expand your perspective beyond that narrow framework renders discussion pointless. 40k as a game has more dimensionality than you appear to be capable of accepting.
In this case, you are rating the restaraunt one star because they put the forks in the wrong order in the table setting.
Insectum7 wrote: I believe, based on your reasoning, that you are not qualified to rate the restaraunt in question. Your criticisms appear to come from a strictly design mechanics viewpoint, which while in itself is a valid lens, the fact that you can't seem to expand your perspective beyond that narrow framework renders discussion pointless. 40k as a game has more dimensionality than you appear to be capable of accepting.
In this case, you are rating the restaraunt one star because they put the forks in the wrong order in the table setting.
Sorry, but that's a nonsense argument. We're talking about mechanics, not fluff, so of course we're talking about a strictly mechanical viewpoint. You can have all the opinions you like about things like the merits of being able to pose a model as you like vs. the superior detail of monopose kits and how those choices impact your enjoyment of the hobby. You can spend all the hours you can find on painting your miniatures and I'll be happy to look at your gallery images. But none of that has anything to do with how the rules should be designed.
Insectum7 wrote: I believe, based on your reasoning, that you are not qualified to rate the restaraunt in question. Your criticisms appear to come from a strictly design mechanics viewpoint, which while in itself is a valid lens, the fact that you can't seem to expand your perspective beyond that narrow framework renders discussion pointless. 40k as a game has more dimensionality than you appear to be capable of accepting.
In this case, you are rating the restaraunt one star because they put the forks in the wrong order in the table setting.
Sorry, but that's a nonsense argument. We're talking about mechanics, not fluff, so of course we're talking about a strictly mechanical viewpoint. You can have all the opinions you like about things like the merits of being able to pose a model as you like vs. the superior detail of monopose kits and how those choices impact your enjoyment of the hobby. You can spend all the hours you can find on painting your miniatures and I'll be happy to look at your gallery images. But none of that has anything to do with how the rules should be designed.
Fluff would be the equivalent of the person finally accomplishing their dream of opening the restaurant because that was their father's dying wish.
JohnnyHell wrote: Came in rightly expecting salt. Found yet another Peregrine vs 40K thread. Yawn. Think I’ve seen this one already.
We've all seen it, any one who's been on Dakka for longer than a week has seen it.
Peregrine hates 40k BaconCatBug hates 40k yet they keep putting up the same post again and again
JohnnyHell wrote: Came in rightly expecting salt. Found yet another Peregrine vs 40K thread. Yawn. Think I’ve seen this one already.
We all have.
You know, it wouldn't be so bad if he had anything at all insightful to say, but unfortunately he does not have an exceptionally strong grasp of the game, and as such is as limited by his understanding as he is by his blinkered one-sided perspective on the game design. Casual players with so much to say about a ruleset competitively generally boil down to having encountered hurdles elsewhere and needing a scapegoat.
Why do you guys have to make this so personal? Peregrine has brought up some very valid points on game design regarding 40k. Yet you have collectively wrote 1 page now how much you think he personally hates or does not "understand" 40k. That gak is off topic and honestly seems kinda rude.
Insectum7 wrote: I believe, based on your reasoning, that you are not qualified to rate the restaraunt in question. Your criticisms appear to come from a strictly design mechanics viewpoint, which while in itself is a valid lens, the fact that you can't seem to expand your perspective beyond that narrow framework renders discussion pointless. 40k as a game has more dimensionality than you appear to be capable of accepting.
In this case, you are rating the restaraunt one star because they put the forks in the wrong order in the table setting.
Sorry, but that's a nonsense argument. We're talking about mechanics, not fluff, so of course we're talking about a strictly mechanical viewpoint. You can have all the opinions you like about things like the merits of being able to pose a model as you like vs. the superior detail of monopose kits and how those choices impact your enjoyment of the hobby. You can spend all the hours you can find on painting your miniatures and I'll be happy to look at your gallery images. But none of that has anything to do with how the rules should be designed.
The experience of the game encompasses more than mechanics. Thus, judging the merits of semi-redundant choices strictly by mechanics is erroneous.
First, I agree with the topic, sucks old marines are being all kinda discarded for primaris that feel kinda dull and meh. Sure the models look clean and pretty but I still love my old marines as well.
As for the 40k hate, any long term vet has plenty of reason to dislike 40k. I had plenty of dislike for 40k in 6th and 7th edition to be sure. 8th at least felt like a better step at first. However that said, if you just fundamentally hate something is there any gain to making sure everyone knows that hate at all times ? The game has glaring problems but it really isn't even the topic of the thread is it ?
Edit: Yeah on re reading the beginning bashing GWs design choice in rules design really is totally off topic of disliking marines transition towards Primaris power. Though I guess the hate is on topic with being salty ?
The experience of the game encompasses more than mechanics. Thus, judging the merits of semi-redundant choices strictly by mechanics is erroneous.
But the game is the mechanics. Without the mechanics the game does not exist, unless someone makes it his trade to paint or convert, or someone works for a company like GW, then it may have a monetary aspect and becomes a job.
Insectum7 wrote: The experience of the game encompasses more than mechanics. Thus, judging the merits of semi-redundant choices strictly by mechanics is erroneous.
But, again, we're talking about mechanics here. I'm sure you did a great job with the NMM on your most recent space marine model, and I'm sure that your amazing painting work adds a lot to the experience of the game, but that has nothing to do with the question of whether it's vitally important that lascannons and krak missiles have a 5% difference in point efficiency.
Peregrine wrote: but that has nothing to do with the question of whether it's vitally important that lascannons and krak missiles have a 5% difference in point efficiency.
JohnnyHell wrote: Came in rightly expecting salt. Found yet another Peregrine vs 40K thread. Yawn. Think I’ve seen this one already.
We've all seen it, any one who's been on Dakka for longer than a week has seen it.
Peregrine hates 40k BaconCatBug hates 40k yet they keep putting up the same post again and again
No. They are allowed to continually spam the same post, 25,000 times, because they are 'faces'. I have been here less than a year and it could not be more obvious that certain posters are utterly exempt from rules that are strictly and subjectively applied to others.
Opening three or four threads about movies gets your threads locked even though they're active and only tangentially related to each other. Posting "40k sucks reeeeeeeee" 25,000 times is fine.
Excommunicatus wrote: No. They are allowed to continually spam the same post, 25,000 times, because they are 'faces'. I have been here less than a year and it could not be more obvious that certain posters are utterly exempt from rules that are strictly and subjectively applied to others.
Opening three or four threads about movies gets your threads locked even though they're active and only tangentially related to each other. Posting "40k sucks reeeeeeeee" 25,000 times is fine.
And I'm sure you are equally insistent that people who always like 40k should be banned for being excessively positive. Or is it only people that you disagree with that you want to ban?
The experience of the game encompasses more than mechanics. Thus, judging the merits of semi-redundant choices strictly by mechanics is erroneous.
But the game is the mechanics. Without the mechanics the game does not exist, unless someone makes it his trade to paint or convert, or someone works for a company like GW, then it may have a monetary aspect and becomes a job.
The game is the experience of the game, which encompasses mechanics, imagery, tabletop and model presentation, listbuilding and planning, social negotiation etc.
Minor differences in weapons even if they have similar or overlapping roles, provide reinforcement accross imagery, narrative, listbuilding and planning, in addition to the "table-time" decision making. I pay a few fewer points for the Mtimelta over a Lascannon, I want to make sure I can deploy it effectively, so I plan my unit-use differently, and I imagine a steady, invisible heat ray that cooks my target when I fire it. All of which add more to my experience of the game as a whole, even if it has thr same anti-armor role as a lascannon.
The experience of the game encompasses more than mechanics. Thus, judging the merits of semi-redundant choices strictly by mechanics is erroneous.
But the game is the mechanics. Without the mechanics the game does not exist, unless someone makes it his trade to paint or convert, or someone works for a company like GW, then it may have a monetary aspect and becomes a job.
The game is the experience of the game, which encompasses mechanics, imagery, tabletop and model presentation, listbuilding and planning, social negotiation etc.
Minor differences in weapons even if they have similar or overlapping roles, provide reinforcement accross imagery, narrative, listbuilding and planning, in addition to the "table-time" decision making. I pay a few fewer points for the Mtimelta over a Lascannon, I want to make sure I can deploy it effectively, so I plan my unit-use differently, and I imagine a steady, invisible heat ray that cooks my target when I fire it. All of which add more to my experience of the game as a whole, even if it has thr same anti-armor role as a lascannon.
I am not understanding the argument. everything after game mechanics is a secondary thing. You could play w40k with wine corks or pices of paper, and the game result and expiriance would be identical to the one where one uses imagination. Planing and list building are the result of rules existing. If there were no rules on how to build an army, how one will builds, or more important, how one can not build his army would not matter.
I also don't understand the Mtimelta and Lascannon example given. One is a weapon no one will ever take, so it may as well not exist and the other is kind of a bad, but some armies don't have other options for anti tank so they use lascannon on something like astral aim dreadnought. The result of using one of the other would have different results, lascannons have better range, damage, chance to wound. To imagine that using a mtimelta over it would have the same result, would require a very strong imagination.
I actually like the new models, for the most part.
I was playing guard until Primaris marines came out, and honestly...that's what got me back into Space Marines.
I don't like that the new Shadowspear stuff isn't usable with Deathwatch. Though, I think when multi-part kits come out later, they will make some REALLY awesome kitbash material to fold into the Deathwatch.
I am also kinda salty now about the whole "Phobos Armor Special Rules"... because I had schemed on making an entire Chapter of guys that used Phobos armor exclusively, when there was nothing that set it apart.
The experience of the game encompasses more than mechanics. Thus, judging the merits of semi-redundant choices strictly by mechanics is erroneous.
But the game is the mechanics. Without the mechanics the game does not exist, unless someone makes it his trade to paint or convert, or someone works for a company like GW, then it may have a monetary aspect and becomes a job.
The game is the experience of the game, which encompasses mechanics, imagery, tabletop and model presentation, listbuilding and planning, social negotiation etc.
Minor differences in weapons even if they have similar or overlapping roles, provide reinforcement accross imagery, narrative, listbuilding and planning, in addition to the "table-time" decision making. I pay a few fewer points for the Mtimelta over a Lascannon, I want to make sure I can deploy it effectively, so I plan my unit-use differently, and I imagine a steady, invisible heat ray that cooks my target when I fire it. All of which add more to my experience of the game as a whole, even if it has thr same anti-armor role as a lascannon.
I am not understanding the argument. everything after game mechanics is a secondary thing. You could play w40k with wine corks or pices of paper, and the game result and expiriance would be identical to the one where one uses imagination. Planing and list building are the result of rules existing. If there were no rules on how to build an army, how one will builds, or more important, how one can not build his army would not matter.
I also don't understand the Mtimelta and Lascannon example given. One is a weapon no one will ever take, so it may as well not exist and the other is kind of a bad, but some armies don't have other options for anti tank so they use lascannon on something like astral aim dreadnought. The result of using one of the other would have different results, lascannons have better range, damage, chance to wound. To imagine that using a mtimelta over it would have the same result, would require a very strong imagination.
Karol,
I think that we are playing different games, or at least playing them completely differently. How you play or enjoy the game does not bother or effect me, but based on your posts it is fairly clear that you are not enjoying yourself. Game mechanics are important, but the point of a tabletop miniatures wargame is utterly lost if you focus only on mechanics. If your experience is the same using miniatures as if you used wine corks or pieces of paper then perhaps you should focus on boardgames or role playing games? You might be happier?
I've played 40K for over twenty years now. The closest I have seen to paper and corks in games was the 2nd Edition box-set cardboard Ork Dreadnought. Magnificent death-machine that it was as it terrorized my Marines on the kitchen table - and I only saw that in open gaming at the FLGS once. Rules and mechanics change over time, but the immersive experience of tabletop gaming remains fairly constant. Its a visual and mental experience. I enjoy the competitive side and go to a tourney each quarter. I still make "zap, boom, zorch and aaaaah!!!! and the odd "run away!!!!" noises when I play.
Cheers
T2B
p.s. I take Multi-meltas with my Ravenwing all the time. But let's not go there.
If your experience is the same using miniatures as if you used wine corks or pieces of paper then perhaps you should focus on boardgames or role playing games? You might be happier?
no one would let anyone play with such stuff at my store. But every day I hear people talk about different stuff, I have never seen. my point was that the looks of models does not matter, as far as effecting the rules goes. It is like football no one cares if the players or coachs are good people, how they look etc Some are and some are real not nice people, but as long as they win for the team no body cares. Rules are what makes the game exist. No rules, no game. I mean AoS is a good example of this. The game was dead with the rule set it had. No point system, rules that require you to wear or look in specific way, including specific gender. first thing people did was make points for the game. And the game really started to grow when it got a real point system. In the end it is cost >rules>looks. If you can't afford to play you wont play, if you can afford to play you will want to a working set of rules, after that everything else may matter. But I have seen enough people who would play with bricks, if they were allowed to, as long as there was competition in the game.
Carnikang wrote: So, question. I see this reasoning a lot, that the new Primaris aren't space Marines.
What does that mean? What is a Space Marine and why do they not qualify?
I ask as an outsider to the whole Power Armor family. You're all the same to me, aside from some bling, or with additional pointy bits.
By the logic of the 40k, new things in the IoM are seen with extreme suspicion and modifying existing things is often considered heretical as it breaks from tradition. Cawl and his creations should be condemned as extremely heretical as he not only made up new tech (suspect that primaris dread has tau tech on its guns ) but changing the marine process (a process designed by the god emperor himself) and claiming it to be superior to the established process is heresy beyond belief.
In old 40k all of this should of caused massive uproar and Inquisitors sending armies to put Cawl down for all this nonsense but GW let their new marketing team take the pen and write some horrible fluff to justify this filth without the whole *blamming* response that should be par for the course in the grim dark future of the 41st millennium. Hell the most mind blowing thing is that Gulliman didn't immediately condemn Cawl to execution for primarisiing all 20 of the original legion gene seeds (messing about with traitor gene seeds is bad enough but to also mess with the 2 legions that did something so horrible that they where wiped from Imperial Records). Basically the fluff of the setting is jacked up and honestly its all in the name of selling new products with damage to the fluff being an afterthought.
No thats not quite correct though is it? Guilliman comes from a time before all the crazy religious witch burning cult stuff happened, when the Imperial truth, science, INNOVATION and reason were literally law. So while he may still be suspicious of alien technology and out right opposed with anything to do with true AI, he is actually best suited for cawl to introduce his new marines too, and it is perfectly reasonable for him to actually not be as you described. He is actively disturbed by what the Imperium has had to become to survive for crying out loud! Guilliman is the primarch thats renowned for his empire building/politician, logistical and tactical/strategic ability [or in less words his balanced, logical approach to things], and not so much his close combat fighting prowess. Only thing he may have an issue with is that cawl did meddal with gene seed without permission from big E which could of had potential chaos corruption etc. Lastly since he is a primarch, even the inquisition wouldn't dare feth with a Primarchs ot his orders, not to mention he is the highest ranking person in the entire imperium except the emperor!
I dont think the lore is that bad on that front. No worse than some others bits anyways.
Carnikang wrote: So, question. I see this reasoning a lot, that the new Primaris aren't space Marines.
What does that mean? What is a Space Marine and why do they not qualify?
I ask as an outsider to the whole Power Armor family. You're all the same to me, aside from some bling, or with additional pointy bits.
By the logic of the 40k, new things in the IoM are seen with extreme suspicion and modifying existing things is often considered heretical as it breaks from tradition. Cawl and his creations should be condemned as extremely heretical as he not only made up new tech (suspect that primaris dread has tau tech on its guns ) but changing the marine process (a process designed by the god emperor himself) and claiming it to be superior to the established process is heresy beyond belief.
In old 40k all of this should of caused massive uproar and Inquisitors sending armies to put Cawl down for all this nonsense but GW let their new marketing team take the pen and write some horrible fluff to justify this filth without the whole *blamming* response that should be par for the course in the grim dark future of the 41st millennium. Hell the most mind blowing thing is that Gulliman didn't immediately condemn Cawl to execution for primarisiing all 20 of the original legion gene seeds (messing about with traitor gene seeds is bad enough but to also mess with the 2 legions that did something so horrible that they where wiped from Imperial Records). Basically the fluff of the setting is jacked up and honestly its all in the name of selling new products with damage to the fluff being an afterthought.
No thats not quite correct though is it? Guilliman comes from a time before all the crazy religious witch burning cult stuff happened, when the Imperial truth, science, INNOVATION and reason were literally law.
That's not true. Genuine innovation was very frowned upon/heresy. You developed by using the advances of senior mechanicum priests and things that were recorded. You didn't fiddle with things independantly. Cawl was yelled at for that even in 30k.
I wish I could mix up weapons in Intercessor squads - otherwise I spent a year or two hating them... now I sort of like the larger marines. It was a hard sell until I built a few
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Please outline for Karol all the HQ selections that Grey Knights have available to them. The answer may surprise you.
Also LOL at talking about GK relics like they're any good.
Can we skip another round of this, just assume that they reply to you with the literal number of HQ choices and relics that the GK have, assume you reply back with Underpowered Faction Indignance (tm) and assume Karol regaled us with another story about how in his meta people are allowed to kick you in the nuts and steal your wallet if you lose and he can't do anything about it because the government of poland just made that legal?
Everyone could save a whole lot of time that way and this thread might save a couple pages.
As a non-marine player, I have my opinions as well.
1) Models are (mostly) amazing. They look way better than the smolmarines. True, there are some exceptions, such as Suppressors, Aggressors, Inceptors and the Captain from Know no Fear box that look silly/awful in my opinion. Models like Eliminators are just and when I saw them, I was tempted to start a Raptors chapter kill team.
2) Variability worries me a bit. Smolmarines used to have tons of wargear options, unlike the Bigmarines that have plasmas and bolt-weapons of various kinds. Pity.
3) Fluff behind them is VERY weak and seem forced.
Conclusion: I won't collect them, but I'll be happy to look at them and shoot them on the table.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: I collect SW's but they are in my top 5 favourite armies, but is anyone else feeling like their army is changing into something that no longer resembles SM's anymore. They new models look amazing and they offer great flexibility but they ain't SM's.
For me, it’s the opposite. When I see how model ranges ‘change’ over the years, I’m reminded of stuff I learned in school about genetic ‘drift’ and genetic ‘shift’. Briefly, in the case in the former, it is a slow, gradual accumulation of changes in a population that over a certain period of time (or even geographical distance) result in an entirely different species. In the case of the latter, it is generally a sudden sharp, (typically environmental in nature) pressure that forces a sudden change in a population (typically in terms of ‘attractive’ traits, that were up to this point marginal, or irrelevant, but all of a sudden, are now suddenly useful – an example most people are familiar with being the black and white moths and the industrial revolution).
I use the terms ‘drift’ and ‘shift’ loosely with regard to 40k, with the slow, gradual accumulations in the SM line as ‘drift’ and the sudden change/introduction of Primaris as a ‘shift’.
I remember as a kid being intrigued by 40k for years before I was finally able to get into it properly. This was 3rd ed 40k by the way. When I did, it was with Space Wolves. Back then, it was the ‘classic’ SM tactical box, and the ‘classic’ Space Wolves pack box. Both felt to me to be no-nonsense kits. Nothing over the top. Space Wolves felt like Marines with a Viking/barbarian flavour. Marines were marines. And then, over the years, things started to change, and the new SM models were slowly, but subtly blinged up. More and more so with every new release. First time I noted it was thr 4th ed tyrannic war veterans, and veteran SM. With robes and greebles. Still felt more ‘marine’ than ‘ornament’ though. But over time, for me, the sense of ‘ornament’ began to eclipse the ‘marine’. Sternguard and vanguard were the 'this is getting over the top' point for me. It got ridiculous by the time 5th ed was around, with Space Wolves changing from Marines with a Viking/barbarian flavour to becoming a barbarian/wolf cartoon, with a tiny amount of Space Marine flavour. Blood Angels were ‘blood-nouns’. And for me, the high (or rather low point of this) was Marneus Calgar and his honour guard. Specifically, the model I refer to as ‘wing-face’. For me, by this point Marines had ‘drifted’ to the point where they had gotten silly. Very silly. There was nothing that said 'marine' about them. It was all about the bling. And the ornaments. They stopped being Marines and started being walking chalices. There was nothing 'no-nonsense' about them. They were a cartoon parody of what they’d been.
It became all too clear to me when I came across an awesome model company called Anvil Industry and their sublime ‘Exo-lord’ range. Specifically, the black ops ‘totally-not-marines’ range. Here were no-nonsense 'marines'. No bling. No ornaments. No faff. No silly crap. Just pouches, grenades, knives, spare magazines. Thry felt and looked like geared up badasses ready to go and crack some skulls. They were Maybe a tiny bit ‘tacti-cool’ but all of a sudden I had the ‘look’ that I wanted. And as I saw them, I knew gw marines had completely lost that 'look' and I wished gw marines were more like anvil exo-lords.
So then a wee bit later and GW releases Primaris, and the long genetic ‘drift’ that had, for me, defined and undermined marines for too long suddenly ended with a decisive ‘shift’ to a model that was, again, no-nonsense marines. No bling. No ornaments. No faffs. Just perfectly, what id always wanted marines to be.
Truth be told, marines had stopped being marines for me a long time ago. Primaris ended the foolishness and brought them back in line with what id always wanted them to be.
Deadnight wrote: Truth be told, marines had stopped being marines for me a long time ago.
That was a really interesting read - everyone's view is so subjective. I used to play RT with RTB01 marines, and 25 years later when I came back to the game in 8th edition I went straight for the latest TAC marines. To me they're every bit the marines I used to love. I don't deny that the Primaris models are nice (and I do own some), they're just not the iconic marines I remember.
Deadnight wrote: Truth be told, marines had stopped being marines for me a long time ago.
That was a really interesting read - everyone's view is so subjective. I used to play RT with RTB01 marines, and 25 years later when I came back to the game in 8th edition I went straight for the latest TAC marines. To me they're every bit the marines I used to love. I don't deny that the Primaris models are nice (and I do own some), they're just not the iconic marines I remember.
100% IMO the Tactical box never got over-fancy. To me the iconic marines are the Tactical Squad with their Rhino. As long as I can field that image, I'll be happy.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: I collect SW's but they are in my top 5 favourite armies, but is anyone else feeling like their army is changing into something that no longer resembles SM's anymore. They new models look amazing and they offer great flexibility but they ain't SM's.
For me, it’s the opposite. When I see how model ranges ‘change’ over the years, I’m reminded of stuff I learned in school about genetic ‘drift’ and genetic ‘shift’. Briefly, in the case in the former, it is a slow, gradual accumulation of changes in a population that over a certain period of time (or even geographical distance) result in an entirely different species. In the case of the latter, it is generally a sudden sharp, (typically environmental in nature) pressure that forces a sudden change in a population (typically in terms of ‘attractive’ traits, that were up to this point marginal, or irrelevant, but all of a sudden, are now suddenly useful – an example most people are familiar with being the black and white moths and the industrial revolution).
I use the terms ‘drift’ and ‘shift’ loosely with regard to 40k, with the slow, gradual accumulations in the SM line as ‘drift’ and the sudden change/introduction of Primaris as a ‘shift’.
I remember as a kid being intrigued by 40k for years before I was finally able to get into it properly. This was 3rd ed 40k by the way. When I did, it was with Space Wolves. Back then, it was the ‘classic’ SM tactical box, and the ‘classic’ Space Wolves pack box. Both felt to me to be no-nonsense kits. Nothing over the top. Space Wolves felt like Marines with a Viking/barbarian flavour. Marines were marines. And then, over the years, things started to change, and the new SM models were slowly, but subtly blinged up. More and more so with every new release. First time I noted it was thr 4th ed tyrannic war veterans, and veteran SM. With robes and greebles. Still felt more ‘marine’ than ‘ornament’ though. But over time, for me, the sense of ‘ornament’ began to eclipse the ‘marine’. Sternguard and vanguard were the 'this is getting over the top' point for me. It got ridiculous by the time 5th ed was around, with Space Wolves changing from Marines with a Viking/barbarian flavour to becoming a barbarian/wolf cartoon, with a tiny amount of Space Marine flavour. Blood Angels were ‘blood-nouns’. And for me, the high (or rather low point of this) was Marneus Calgar and his honour guard. Specifically, the model I refer to as ‘wing-face’. For me, by this point Marines had ‘drifted’ to the point where they had gotten silly. Very silly. There was nothing that said 'marine' about them. It was all about the bling. And the ornaments. They stopped being Marines and started being walking chalices. There was nothing 'no-nonsense' about them. They were a cartoon parody of what they’d been.
It became all too clear to me when I came across an awesome model company called Anvil Industry and their sublime ‘Exo-lord’ range. Specifically, the black ops ‘totally-not-marines’ range. Here were no-nonsense 'marines'. No bling. No ornaments. No faff. No silly crap. Just pouches, grenades, knives, spare magazines. Thry felt and looked like geared up badasses ready to go and crack some skulls. They were Maybe a tiny bit ‘tacti-cool’ but all of a sudden I had the ‘look’ that I wanted. And as I saw them, I knew gw marines had completely lost that 'look' and I wished gw marines were more like anvil exo-lords.
So then a wee bit later and GW releases Primaris, and the long genetic ‘drift’ that had, for me, defined and undermined marines for too long suddenly ended with a decisive ‘shift’ to a model that was, again, no-nonsense marines. No bling. No ornaments. No faffs. Just perfectly, what id always wanted marines to be.
Truth be told, marines had stopped being marines for me a long time ago. Primaris ended the foolishness and brought them back in line with what id always wanted them to be.
This is a really cool perspective and written really well and I appreciate you sharing it
Stevefamine wrote: I wish I could mix up weapons in Intercessor squads - otherwise I spent a year or two hating them... now I sort of like the larger marines. It was a hard sell until I built a few
Brother, I see a lot of guys using the Primaris bodies with the Mk 6/7 Helmets and backpacks, the arms and everything else are compatable. And there's never been any difficulty telling which strain they are.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: I collect SW's but they are in my top 5 favourite armies, but is anyone else feeling like their army is changing into something that no longer resembles SM's anymore. They new models look amazing and they offer great flexibility but they ain't SM's.
For me, it’s the opposite. When I see how model ranges ‘change’ over the years, I’m reminded of stuff I learned in school about genetic ‘drift’ and genetic ‘shift’. Briefly, in the case in the former, it is a slow, gradual accumulation of changes in a population that over a certain period of time (or even geographical distance) result in an entirely different species. In the case of the latter, it is generally a sudden sharp, (typically environmental in nature) pressure that forces a sudden change in a population (typically in terms of ‘attractive’ traits, that were up to this point marginal, or irrelevant, but all of a sudden, are now suddenly useful – an example most people are familiar with being the black and white moths and the industrial revolution).
I use the terms ‘drift’ and ‘shift’ loosely with regard to 40k, with the slow, gradual accumulations in the SM line as ‘drift’ and the sudden change/introduction of Primaris as a ‘shift’.
I remember as a kid being intrigued by 40k for years before I was finally able to get into it properly. This was 3rd ed 40k by the way. When I did, it was with Space Wolves. Back then, it was the ‘classic’ SM tactical box, and the ‘classic’ Space Wolves pack box. Both felt to me to be no-nonsense kits. Nothing over the top. Space Wolves felt like Marines with a Viking/barbarian flavour. Marines were marines. And then, over the years, things started to change, and the new SM models were slowly, but subtly blinged up. More and more so with every new release. First time I noted it was thr 4th ed tyrannic war veterans, and veteran SM. With robes and greebles. Still felt more ‘marine’ than ‘ornament’ though. But over time, for me, the sense of ‘ornament’ began to eclipse the ‘marine’. Sternguard and vanguard were the 'this is getting over the top' point for me. It got ridiculous by the time 5th ed was around, with Space Wolves changing from Marines with a Viking/barbarian flavour to becoming a barbarian/wolf cartoon, with a tiny amount of Space Marine flavour. Blood Angels were ‘blood-nouns’. And for me, the high (or rather low point of this) was Marneus Calgar and his honour guard. Specifically, the model I refer to as ‘wing-face’. For me, by this point Marines had ‘drifted’ to the point where they had gotten silly. Very silly. There was nothing that said 'marine' about them. It was all about the bling. And the ornaments. They stopped being Marines and started being walking chalices. There was nothing 'no-nonsense' about them. They were a cartoon parody of what they’d been.
It became all too clear to me when I came across an awesome model company called Anvil Industry and their sublime ‘Exo-lord’ range. Specifically, the black ops ‘totally-not-marines’ range. Here were no-nonsense 'marines'. No bling. No ornaments. No faff. No silly crap. Just pouches, grenades, knives, spare magazines. Thry felt and looked like geared up badasses ready to go and crack some skulls. They were Maybe a tiny bit ‘tacti-cool’ but all of a sudden I had the ‘look’ that I wanted. And as I saw them, I knew gw marines had completely lost that 'look' and I wished gw marines were more like anvil exo-lords.
So then a wee bit later and GW releases Primaris, and the long genetic ‘drift’ that had, for me, defined and undermined marines for too long suddenly ended with a decisive ‘shift’ to a model that was, again, no-nonsense marines. No bling. No ornaments. No faffs. Just perfectly, what id always wanted marines to be.
Truth be told, marines had stopped being marines for me a long time ago. Primaris ended the foolishness and brought them back in line with what id always wanted them to be.
This is a really cool perspective and written really well and I appreciate you sharing it
Yeah, is well put, and a absolutely valid opinion.
One I disagree with, of course, but expected being myself an huge fan of ornaments and a Dark Angel player with an over abundance of winged helmets and religious iconography in literally everything. One that thinks Sisters's of battle Exorcist is the most warhammer model ever made, and that believes the more baroque and less tacti-cool the Empire looks, the better (I have Tau to scrach that thing for me).
Ironically Sternguard Veterans are one of my favourite SM kit of all time and that winged helmeted Marneus Calgar Honor Guard? Those are literally my all time favourite Space Marine Helmet.
I'm saying this to try and show that tastes can be as different as they could and at the end of the day GW is trying to earn all our money so they are gonna try and catter to everybody in some way or another. Some people should try and take GW design changes in a less personal and emotional way. Thats a problem I see made a lot of times in this forum.
Spoiler:
I mean, just look at these beauties. Its a crime that helmet and style of unit is reserved for Ultramarines.
I honestly think it's Chapter dependant. That sort of embellishment would look ridiculous in a Raven Guard, Iron Hands or Raptors army. It's perfectly suited to like Ultramarine, BA and even Fists, however.
IMO the problem is that it's badly done embellishment and comes across as more "cheesy cartoon superhero" and less "roman ceremonial guard". Something more like this would have looked a lot better than the bird-face helmets:
Same thing with the rest of the model. Cloak? Not a bad idea, but the way it hangs around the shoulder pads and backpack looks really awkward. And TBH now that primaris marines are out the poor proportions of the old marines just stand out way too much.
LOL . Looks like a guy who had an accident here on his bike. He was going really fast through a crossing here and there is a pond near by. He got a duck jam itself in to his front visor. Dude broke both his arms and legs, cracked his skull and the girl with him died.
Yeah the one of the captain is worse because he looks like he has a giant moustache
For me the worst part of the primaris chapter sprue is that the helmets couldnt be more generic. Theres no crested Ultramarine one or feathered DA one like in the old chapter sprues.
I don't think cawl was thinking about personalizing every single Primaris he made. Which everyone seems to forget. Primaris were mass produced then put on a shelf (kinda like half our models am i right?) so of course they're missing iconic chapter embellishments
The winged Captain helmet isn't so bad - the only think I'd change would be that mouth grille - cover that with the chest of the eagle, and it looks great to me.
I'll also second that the older upgrade packs are better by miles than the Primaris exclusive ones. So much more actual specific things to those Chapters rather than minor sigils.
I mean. Just look at this. Fancy and beautifull helmets, chapter looking swords. Even the head, that I normally don't like, is actually one of the best ones, with that beard, and you can see it and say "Ok this is an ultramarine"
Spoiler:
And then you have... an auspex. An auspex?! What the feth GW?!
Spoiler:
I suppose some people can like the second one more because it is much mire "clean" and with less bling but... personally I don't think thats what an "upgrade" should looks like.
I think there has always been a bit of tension between those who like some of the grimdark techno-barbarian aspects of the space marines and those who just wish marines could be something more akin to an ultra-badass self insert character. Ever since 30k started coming out and fleshing out the story of the emperor and the primarchs, I think the single most common "custom chapter fluff" I have come across is "my space marines are super loyal to the emperor but they don't like the imperium and they know the emperor wasn't a god, they disavowed all forms of religious ignorance and struck out on their own!"
I can see where there would be a lot of appeal in space marines that abandon the religious trappings in favor of the modern military commando look so many find appealing. Do I personally find it pretty cringe-inducing? Yes. But your stuff is your stuff.
I honestly expect a codex primaris to come out next edition. I doube GW will drop classic marines in the next few editions (read a decade or more after 9th comes out) I think they will have a faction keyword to plug in as space wolves, blood angels, ultramarines etc.
as for the aesthetic. I like them, I also like classic marines and have no problem running them or seeing them side by side on the table. given how many recent sculpts the space wolves in particular have gotten (wulfin, flyer thing, thunderwolf cavalry etc.) I doubt GW does not want to keep getting money on these awesome kits.
as for the uniformity of primaris armament I think this just fits the Primaris being the starter army theme. no remembering mixed weapon profiles for the squads, they are more durable and forgiving to mistakes than normal marines. as a player grows they can get more mixed weapon profile units of classic marines or units and boom we have a army.
the_scotsman wrote: I think there has always been a bit of tension between those who like some of the grimdark techno-barbarian aspects of the space marines and those who just wish marines could be something more akin to an ultra-badass self insert character. Ever since 30k started coming out and fleshing out the story of the emperor and the primarchs, I think the single most common "custom chapter fluff" I have come across is "my space marines are super loyal to the emperor but they don't like the imperium and they know the emperor wasn't a god, they disavowed all forms of religious ignorance and struck out on their own!"
I can see where there would be a lot of appeal in space marines that abandon the religious trappings in favor of the modern military commando look so many find appealing. Do I personally find it pretty cringe-inducing? Yes. But your stuff is your stuff.
what about the canon chapters that actually are like that?
To be honest I have seen more people asking for things like Dark Angels having less religious bling and decorations (When thats their thing), and much less people asking for Ravenguard or Raptors to receive a ton of ornaments into their models or upgrade kits instead of their more canon tactical and simple look.
And I'll edit to add that I can absolutely understand when people like Space Wolves ask for a little less wolf and a little more viking, because as everything, even if I like bling , I can recognise when sometimes GW goes off the mark. Is just that have a higher tolerance and even liking for over decorations than some other player that thinks Tactical Marines are the epitome of a space marine.
And I like my tacticals, very much so, but if I can have a robed terminator with an hooded helmet and armed with one Cathedral-Shield and a Censer-Power Mace, I'll take that any day over a simple stormtrooper like marine.
No doubt, no doubt. But if someone was playing Raptors, or like, loyalist Alpha Legion or something, I think the new Primaris kits in Shadowspear fit that perfectly right, while Vanguard Marines (but primaris) would look absolutely absurd for that aesthetic, no? Would you agree with that?
My point isn't that one aesthetic is better than the other, I'm saying the opposite - that I think both of them have their place.
Yeah, and I also like the more clean looks of primaris, specially because I think they match well with Ravenwing colours and iconography.
But to be honest is very hard for me to actively dislike something GW does. It can not extice me but in general I like every model they put out. The ugliest the better. Specially because I have found, even models that in photos are meh, in hand are much better
Yeah, I like Fantasy Minotaurs and Centurions. I have said it.
I think GW can make marines to catter to all tastes. Even with chaos marines you have the corrupted and mutated ones but if you prefer you can mix with horus heresy plastics
TBH my main hangup with primaris is how boring a list of them was when I tried writing one.
A unit of bolter guys.
A unit of plasma guys.
When before you could have a unit of 6, comprising 4 different miniature trypes, a cc sargeant, standard bolters, a heavy weapon, and a special weapon.
Additionally they dont include some of the best looking SM minis- terminators, and assualt marines, and replace them with far worse looking options. The intercessors look better, but the agressors and jumpy guys...really put me off.
To top it off, the fluff could have been handled better...impracticlly huge, novice, but immediatly replacing marines just seems so odd (along with the literally giant primarchs?) but GW did what they had to do.
Its just a bunch of little things. I would love to have tactical squads of primaris though even if I think they are a shade too big for the game in general.
I just wish GW would make melee Primaris that actually do something worthwhile (same goes for Marine melee in general TBH). I love how Primaris look, but they're just awful unless you want to build a shooting-focussed list, in which case why play Black Templars in the first place?
NotVaughan wrote: TBH my main hangup with primaris is how boring a list of them was when I tried writing one.
A unit of bolter guys.
A unit of plasma guys.
When before you could have a unit of 6, comprising 4 different miniature trypes, a cc sargeant, standard bolters, a heavy weapon, and a special weapon.
Additionally they dont include some of the best looking SM minis- terminators, and assualt marines, and replace them with far worse looking options. The intercessors look better, but the agressors and jumpy guys...really put me off.
To top it off, the fluff could have been handled better...impracticlly huge, novice, but immediatly replacing marines just seems so odd (along with the literally giant primarchs?) but GW did what they had to do.
Its just a bunch of little things. I would love to have tactical squads of primaris though even if I think they are a shade too big for the game in general.
Except you need a unit of 10 to do that, and the specialization for each squad is better for unit performance.
NotVaughan wrote: TBH my main hangup with primaris is how boring a list of them was when I tried writing one.
A unit of bolter guys.
A unit of plasma guys.
When before you could have a unit of 6, comprising 4 different miniature trypes, a cc sargeant, standard bolters, a heavy weapon, and a special weapon.
Additionally they dont include some of the best looking SM minis- terminators, and assualt marines, and replace them with far worse looking options. The intercessors look better, but the agressors and jumpy guys...really put me off.
To top it off, the fluff could have been handled better...impracticlly huge, novice, but immediatly replacing marines just seems so odd (along with the literally giant primarchs?) but GW did what they had to do.
Its just a bunch of little things. I would love to have tactical squads of primaris though even if I think they are a shade too big for the game in general.
Except you need a unit of 10 to do that, and the specialization for each squad is better for unit performance.
You used to be able to.
In any case, I can still have one squad with 4 different model types though. And then across 2 tactical squads I would have up to 7 different minature types. Rather than maybe 2.
Yes, specialisation is better for unit performance...but I'd rather have the option more variety in my toy soldiers?
the_scotsman wrote: I can see where there would be a lot of appeal in space marines that abandon the religious trappings in favor of the modern military commando look so many find appealing. Do I personally find it pretty cringe-inducing? Yes. But your stuff is your stuff.
I like having a bit of the more tactical appeal, but within certain boundaries. Raptors are about what I would consider as 'reasonable' as Marines need to be. They're zealots in their own way, their way of 'reverence' is a stoic dedication to mission accomplishment in a sort of pragmatic manner. Sort of fanatical in a way that is almost as weird as the Black Templars' religious zeal, but they're just obsessed with camo and kit more than purity seals and banners. Same sort of fanatic with different iconography and ritual gear- hell, I know people in real life that are like that.
Now, again- there's a limit. Space Marines running around with berets, combat knives and ammo pouches strapped to impractical parts of the armor, full ghillie suits on Intercessors, and third-party bits to make bolters look like suppressed M4's? No, I dislike this- just my preference, I think that's a bit too much. Deathwatch or Reiver styled harness straps with some grenades and mag pouches? Sure, that's cool.... but not to the point where it looks like a big pile of tactical gear strapped over a VW Bug with red eyes.
I can tolerate this a bit more on something like Raptors, but I admit to getting a bit irked when I see something like a bright yellow Imperial Fist wearing a Camo-Cloak cape with shiny gold cording, covered in combat webbing/harnesses and pouches, with a big glowing power sword. The Codex Astartes even says they can repaint their armor for their environment as long as they preserve their heraldry as much as possible (and even then, I guess they could probably subdue it with more subtle shades for the color).
It irks me that some people think "Covert Ops = Solid Snake Sneaking Mission". No, that's not how it should be for Space Marines (Except stuff like Scouts, and Phobos-Armor dudes)- in fact, that's rarely how actual covert ops work. They're usually loud, overwhelmingly violent, and fast- simply because the key is not to take the enemy completely unaware, but to take them when they are aware too late to react effectively- AKA, 'catch them with their pants down' rather than 'sneak in while he's sleeping'. The element of surprise doesn't require invisibility as often as it does speed and intensity.
It's like the difference between a hitman spending hours sneaking up on someone to shoot them in the back of the head with a silenced pistol in a dark alley, versus a hitman rushing out of an alleyway on New Year's day at Times Square to pop him twice in the chest and running like hell before anyone can figure out who did it and where they went. For the former, it'd work but it'd take a lot of work and a lot of luck with a lot of risk involved... the latter is still pretty risky, but with everything happening so fast and so sudden in a chaotic environment, no one had time to spot that one guy with everything happening, nor did they have time to see who it was once everyone started running and screaming.
There's just as much 'covert' advantage in sudden and unexpected mayhem as there is being silent and unseen and waiting for the right moment (which might not happen). My idea of 'covert operations with Space Marines' would involve them dropping in with guns blazing where they would be least expected to show up away from the main battle lines, or waiting for a week in an ambush to absolutely shred a convoy of heretic militia, or just outright wreaking obscene amounts of havoc on their enemy by outflanking them on a larger battlefield... all of this, and then bailing out before the enemy command can figure out what happened and call for reinforcements.
As far as the 'practical and tactical' Space Marines in homebrew chapters goes... I can tolerate them being "Kinda like the Raptors". But once someone tells me things like "they are allies with Tau and Eldar", "They hate the Inquisition/Ecclesiarchy/Imperium with a passion", or "They prefer to negotiate if possible"- then, I cringe. Yeah, I'm not gonna be a jerk and be rude or ridicule you in front of people, or ridicule you at all- your property, your money, you do what you want. But... let's just say I'm probably not gonna invite you to the narrative campaign. But, you know... I'll play a game against you, and maybe we'll have a little talk one day about your interpretation of the fluff and see if we can't... polish things up, while keeping elements you like.
I start to worry if the person is familiar enough with the lore to understand the fundamental truth behind Warhammer 40k: That by our standards, these people may all seem to be sociopaths that just ignorantly refuse to be reasonable- but once you consider the setting and the hard truth about everything the human race has to contend with just to survive in the Galaxy: 'Peace' is only an option if every side wants it, without a one-sided caveat favoring one and screwing the other. 'Reasonable' people would use 'reason', and that 'reason' makes it very clear that the Imperium MUST be what it is in order to keep our species alive, and the only hope the human race has is to annihilate every single threat or potential threat and once the smoke clears, perhaps sort civilization out and get back to where we were before the Age of Strife with enough knowledge to prevent it from happening again.
Others have said it better than I can, but yeah- I don't be a jerk to people about how they want to play their toys... but it's kinda like seeing a bright-eyed young man walk into a seedy house of ill repute and trying to start a sweet romance with the used-up hooker that just did a line of cocaine off a Smith & Wesson.
God knows I've seen worse things done with Space Marines -
"My Marines found out about Master Chief and emulate him!" -Guy with Master Chief third-party helmets on his Marines
"My Chapter is actually the lost second legion, and their Primarch was assassinated because the Emperor thought he was too powerful!" - Guy that claimed he played since 3rd edition even thoughhis army looked like someone sat down a pile of random bits from every single Space Marine/Chaos Marine kit, and had Michael J. Fox assemble them with sealing caulk and paint them with a toilet scrubber
"These guys used to be Chaos, but turned and joined the Imperium, that's why I'm using Chaos Marine models with White Scars tactics." - Guy that showed up to a tournament with the wrong Codex
"This company used to be Ultramarines, but they hated Bobby G when he came back and defected to join up with Deathwatch!" - Guy that put Deathwatch shoulderpads on the wrong shoulder of a bunch of Ultramarines that were still Blue.
"These are Dark Angels." - guy that played Dark Angels
Again, your toys- so you do whatever you want and just shine on, you shiny diamonds. I'm not gonna tell you what you can and can't do with them outside of rules, but I will tell you... probably a reason you're not playing the narrative campaigns.
They look completely ridiculous in the best way, especially the guy with the goggles and the binoculars. They've got collapsing stocks, and what looks like a suppressor and a muzzle brake mounted simultaneously.
Like, the excessively tacticool aesthetic fits hand in hand with the whole genetically-engineering-superhuman thing. And like anything properly 40k, it's done beyond the point of reason [though they clearly need knives with attached bipods]
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote: Like, the excessively tacticool aesthetic fits hand in hand with the whole genetically-engineering-superhuman thing. And like anything properly 40k, it's done beyond the point of reason [though they clearly need knives with attached bipods]
Don't forget that you need a forward grip with an offset bayonet, and on that bayonet you need a taclight and a red dot laser. Also, just paint the whole damned Chapter in Kryptek camo.
To be honest I have seen more people asking for things like Dark Angels having less religious bling and decorations (When thats their thing), and much less people asking for Ravenguard or Raptors to receive a ton of ornaments into their models or upgrade kits instead of their more canon tactical and simple look.
I want all the robes and cowls for my Dark Angels. I personally really like their somewhat religious/catholic imagery which I also find fitting as they have their own internal inquisition getting people to repent.
To be honest, asking for less religious imagery on the Dark Angels is... extremely dumb. Like, the flowing robe armor is the only thing that meaningfully differentiates them from the main book Marines, what the hell else are you picking the army for if not for that aesthetic?
I can understand that things like the flyng plane with the cathedral decorations can look silly for some even if they like the core dark Angels aesthetic, but I have seen many people that basically wants every marine to be a tactical.
Is the same as the "chaos" players that dont actually want to play chaos but heresy era marines.
You can recognise them because if something is not just a imperial marine with the aquila scrached is "too silly/ornate", and because they want access to all the loyalist armory.
Deadnight wrote: Truth be told, marines had stopped being marines for me a long time ago.
That was a really interesting read - everyone's view is so subjective. I used to play RT with RTB01 marines, and 25 years later when I came back to the game in 8th edition I went straight for the latest TAC marines. To me they're every bit the marines I used to love. I don't deny that the Primaris models are nice (and I do own some), they're just not the iconic marines I remember.
That’s fair. Here’s the thing though. When, like you, I think of the ‘iconic’ marines, I think of these guys.
Classic marines.
Spoiler:
Classic space wolves.
3rd ed tac marines.
Your rtb01 marines?
Spoiler:
When you compare these guys to the RTB01 guys, you can see the lineage and the heritage there, though the RTB01 marines really do show their age at this point. They’re all still pretty no-nonsense (bright OTT pastel colour schemes notwithstanding of course!). Lots of gear, not much in the way of faff. By the time you have 7th edition rolling around and you have the likes of
Ultramarine honour guard, and the despised 'wing-face'.
Spoiler:
Santa Grimnar.
Spoiler:
Rolling around, and as far as I’m concerned, the shark has been jumped. Those guys are more ‘ornament’ than ‘marine’. Hell, there is more of a Space Marine aesthetic in Lumiere or Cogsworth from the Beauty and the Beast movie than those ornaments – its like Where’s Wally, but for Space Marines.
Now, compared to the likes of these guys?
Black Ops.
Spoiler:
I know who I want in my army.
SHUPPET wrote:
This is a really cool perspective and written really well and I appreciate you sharing it
Appreciated, thank you!
Galas wrote:
yeah, is well put, and a absolutely valid opinion.
One I disagree with, of course, but expected being myself an huge fan of ornaments and a Dark Angel player with an over abundance of winged helmets and religious iconography in literally everything. One that thinks Sisters's of battle Exorcist is the most warhammer model ever made, and that believes the more baroque and less tacti-cool the Empire looks, the better (I have Tau to scrach that thing for me).
You spelled 'traitor' incorrectly!
I appreciate what you say Galas, and for what its worth, consider it merely ‘my’ opinion. Its ‘correct’ for me, but I’m certainly not arrogant enough to try to claim this objectively – everybody will have their own opinions on this. You demonstrate this perfectly and I genuinely hope there is stuff there in the game for you to enjoy – though I will be rolling my eyes at it while you will look at what I like and regard it as 'boring'. Totally fair!
Tbf I have seen some beautifully modelled DA deathwimg vehicles that looked like tracked churches, with all the side armour removed and in the recesses that were forme, were modelled statues and all manner of ornamentation depicting various scenes and things that would likely appeal to your average traitor. Silly, but stunning.
Galas wrote:
I mean, just look at these beauties. Its a crime that helmet and style of unit is reserved for Ultramarines.
Spoiler:
Nah, guy looks like a preening peacock, and has no business on a battlefield. A church tabernacle, maybe, or a ceremonial parade at a pinch, but in the mud, dirt and blood of an actual campaign? Nah, no way. Though, to be fair, this guy is far from the worst offender in my eyes.
SHUPPET wrote:I honestly think it's Chapter dependant. That sort of embellishment would look ridiculous in a Raven Guard, Iron Hands or Raptors army. It's perfectly suited to like Ultramarine, BA and even Fists, however.
I am probably more on the extreme end – that peacock Galas showed earlier looks ridiculous anywhere. When I got back into 40k with primaris (and death guard), I went with Raptors for their pragmatic, practical, utterly no-nonsense approach to things.
I actively avoid anything even remotely looking like an embellishment on my guys armour. It annoys me to have lieutenants with the greebled up legs and fancy ornate shoulder pads – I even refuse to paint gold or any ‘fancy’ coulours on my guys. The most I’ll accept on my guys is a Primaris head or shoulder pad with a wee skull on it to denote rank, for the sergeants. Lieutetnants might get a tiny bit extra, but frankly, that’s it. No bling. Loads of 3rd party anvil bits - every one gets loaded up with grenades, pouches, spare clips of ammo on their belts, thighs and chest/torso. And everyone gets a holstered sidearm. It’s a war, not a damned fashion show.
For the death guard, I actively avoid any embellishments. Dusk Raiders and pre-heresy Death Guard were notorious for the utterly crude functionality of their armour and complete and utter disregard for any embellishments or fanciness. Most of my Mk3 ‘undersuits’ are unpainted metallic, with only the main plate ‘slabs’ being ivory, and accents (knee, elbow and shoulder pads) being green. Tentacles are fine. Horns are fine. Any OTT greebles or silly bug heads just get filed off.
Galas wrote:
For me the best part of the primaris chapter sprue is that the helmets couldnt be more generic. Theres no crested Ultramarine one or feathered DA one like in the old chapter sprues.
Eldarsif wrote: I want all the robes and cowls for my Dark Angels. I personally really like their somewhat religious/catholic imagery which I also find fitting as they have their own internal inquisition getting people to repent.
While they are my least favorite Chapter, I like the Religious/Knightly Monk aesthetic that they bring with them, I'm just not particularly fond of that green color. Which is, oddly enough- the same reason I dislike Ultramarines- the color irks me, but I can get behind the Roman Empire theme and I think it's one of the better ones.
The reason I hate both of those colors? It's silly.
But EVERY. SINGLE. YEAR. I got shirts in those two colors- that blue and that dark green, because "it brings out your eyes"- which made me want to bring theirs out with a cocktail fork, because I had an issue when I was young where bright light really made my eyes go bloodshot and get watery and I couldn't see a damned thing- I had to wear sunglasses and caps A LOT, so it wasn't like people saw my eyes or saw me in bright lighting without them shielded.
Interesting discussion. I like both, actually. I like the silly exaggerated ornaments on 40K Marines, but then I add a lot of "useful" bits from Anvil and other producers. And with that I think they did it just fine on the new Plague Marines. They have a lot of Nurgle-stuff but also spare magazines and weapon parts hanging on their backpack. I like that.
Galas wrote: Is the same as the "chaos" players that dont actually want to play chaos but heresy era marines.
Wait, whats your beef with this one? The heresy era miniatures are beautiful and chapters like Iron Warriors and Night Lords hate warp mutations and remove them, and especially in the case of Iron Warriors the aesthetic of the heresy era mini's is just perfect. Renegade bands in this vein as well seem like a perfectly fine choice.
Galas wrote: Is the same as the "chaos" players that dont actually want to play chaos but heresy era marines.
Wait, whats your beef with this one? The heresy era miniatures are beautiful and chapters like Iron Warriors and Night Lords hate warp mutations and remove them, and especially in the case of Iron Warriors the aesthetic of the heresy era mini's is just perfect. Renegade bands in this vein as well seem like a perfectly fine choice.
If you hate the warp mutations, then perhaps you shouldn't have betrayed the Emperor and joined the Chaos!
Sgt. Cortez wrote: Interesting discussion. I like both, actually. I like the silly exaggerated ornaments on 40K Marines, but then I add a lot of "useful" bits from Anvil and other producers. And with that I think they did it just fine on the new Plague Marines. They have a lot of Nurgle-stuff but also spare magazines and weapon parts hanging on their backpack. I like that.
If all Space Marines had the same 'style', we'd just have "different colored Ultramarines". I think they should always be able to be as distinct and odd as people want them to be, even if I dislike the aesthetic they choose.
I think our armies are like an RPG character, in a way. Sometimes you want the noble shining knight, boldly charging into the fray and bellowing out praises to his deity. Other times, you want the cunning stealth ninja pulling an omae wa mou shindeiru on some fool. Sometimes you wanna be the sleek super-spy, other times it's fun just to kick the door in and go bananners with a belt-fed machine gun.
"Different strokes for different folks", I suppose. There's a reason all of my Space Marines have different aesthetics- Black Templars, Alpha Legion, and Raptors. My big project is to get my entire Deathwatch army to be aesthetically diverse, in relation to the parent chapter of those marines- Black Templars with tabards and crusader helmets, Raptors with tactical gear, Space Wolves with Viking iconography, Ultramarines with sticks up their asses- all while sharing the color scheme of the Deathwatch.
Galas wrote: Is the same as the "chaos" players that dont actually want to play chaos but heresy era marines.
Wait, whats your beef with this one? The heresy era miniatures are beautiful and chapters like Iron Warriors and Night Lords hate warp mutations and remove them, and especially in the case of Iron Warriors the aesthetic of the heresy era mini's is just perfect. Renegade bands in this vein as well seem like a perfectly fine choice.
Oh no, I dont have any problems. I actually have a small force of heresy style iron warriors for my mixed chaos warband with 20 mk3 marines, two vindicators and one warpsmith.
I just find a little boring when they react to any chaos release asking for less "chaos" when its is obvious they shouldnt want chaos kits but more horus heresy units in plastic. I dont know if Im explaining myself well enough.
Clearly they arent the target of those kits.
As I have said previously, even having preferences I normally like everything. Both the ornamented, the non nonsense, the tacticool, etc...
I only started in 5th ed, but I've always looked in WDs before that and were a bit in aw of all the miniatures and landscapes/battlefields, so "my" marines are the small ones. I like their OTT stuff and their older cleaner look. I love the robed minis, and the Honour Guards' wingfaces iss my absolute favourite helmet of the bunch. I see the Primaris as kinda not really Marines. They're their own separate entity to me. I do think they look really good, but they aren't really Space Marines.They look like a really good interpretation of SM. And that's fine.
My problem with them (and most new GW stuff) is that they're basically monopose. I started DG when they were new, and the models look great, but again -monopose. In that sense the old minis are vastly superior. I'm not slouch when it comes to a saw, scalpel and GS, but I feel something as basic as a Marine shouldn't require it. Even heads have tabs on them, damn it. WHY?!
Just let primaris marines ride in oldmarine transports.
And, make a 3 ppm upgrade available for all old-marine models. "Primaris Implants," they get +1a +1w, and a fancy bolt rifle.
Boom, done. Now people who like the primaris aesthetic can play them in any capacity they want, and also, you've got everyone still buying and playing oldmarine stuff. You can still release new squads that are primaris only. Everyone is happy.
And people buy primaris intercessors specifically for upgrade and conversion.
fraser1191 wrote: I don't think cawl was thinking about personalizing every single Primaris he made. Which everyone seems to forget. Primaris were mass produced then put on a shelf (kinda like half our models am i right?) so of course they're missing iconic chapter embellishments
Also the winged helmet is the best helmet
Some people just don't get space marines man. What is more arrogant than putting a golden Eagle on your freaking facemask? Literally nothing. Que Ultramarines captain whos been fighting for literally 100 consecutive years. Saying stuff like "I am the emperors will made manifest". This is exactly what I expect. I kind of like this model. I did change his helmet though - I really just liked his stance + cape.
Galas wrote: Is the same as the "chaos" players that dont actually want to play chaos but heresy era marines.
Wait, whats your beef with this one? The heresy era miniatures are beautiful and chapters like Iron Warriors and Night Lords hate warp mutations and remove them, and especially in the case of Iron Warriors the aesthetic of the heresy era mini's is just perfect. Renegade bands in this vein as well seem like a perfectly fine choice.
Man, I keep seeing this claim and it still sounds super fake. Maybe the Night Lords, sure, whatever, but the Iron Warriors are the guys who are famous for the use of Obliterators. That's about as much chaos mutation as you can possibly get.
Marmatag wrote: Just let primaris marines ride in oldmarine transports.
And, make a 3 ppm upgrade available for all old-marine models. "Primaris Implants," they get +1a +1w, and a fancy bolt rifle.
Boom, done. Now people who like the primaris aesthetic can play them in any capacity they want, and also, you've got everyone still buying and playing oldmarine stuff. You can still release new squads that are primaris only. Everyone is happy.
And people buy primaris intercessors specifically for upgrade and conversion.
Galas wrote: Is the same as the "chaos" players that dont actually want to play chaos but heresy era marines.
Wait, whats your beef with this one? The heresy era miniatures are beautiful and chapters like Iron Warriors and Night Lords hate warp mutations and remove them, and especially in the case of Iron Warriors the aesthetic of the heresy era mini's is just perfect. Renegade bands in this vein as well seem like a perfectly fine choice.
Man, I keep seeing this claim and it still sounds super fake. Maybe the Night Lords, sure, whatever, but the Iron Warriors are the guys who are famous for the use of Obliterators. That's about as much chaos mutation as you can possibly get.
The problem with Chaos is that in the lore and in the novels they are several distinct flavors of chaos space marines, flavors that are as distinct if not more distinct from basic CSM as the Non-codex loyalist chapters. Now if you tried really hard you could try and represent Blood Angels with the basic SM codex, short of it being a codex within a codex, you would always be missing a bit of the flavor that makes them distinctive.
The CSM rules fail to adequately represent Renegade loyalist chapters or Legions... they represent some vague ambiguous notion of CSM that is a step removed from a meaningful distinction and somewhere in between. If a loyalist chapter goes renegade they hold on to the most easily maintained equipment for sometime, even if it becomes scarcer.
One of the 2 big Renegade chapters used as poster boys for Renegade CSM are described and depicted as masters of drop pod assaults. You can't represent that. No one is saying "we want everything loyalists have"... they just want to play the army that's described to them instead of the forced generic version of it.
When CSM players say they want to play legions, it isn't about using Heresy minis. Its about having more of a direct link to the fact that these are Heresy Era Veterans. Look at the Death Guard, and the Thousand Sons... those armies depart greatly from their Heresy Era form and equipment and yet there are hints of it throughout the army. Sell your soul for power, fight wars for 10,000 years, and some how you're less of a Veteran than the freshly indoctrinated tactical Marine? -This is what the CSM codex teaches us. The statistical power difference between tactical squads and CSM squads means in general you need 15 CSM to equal a 10 model tactical squad over the course of a whole game. GW just keeps making them cheaper, and cultists pricier, but CSM squads need to be almost as cheap as Sisters of Battle to begin to be viable... again this is how out of whack basic CSM are.
The 3.5 codex CSM players loved provided ways to represent Legionaries, with veteran skills and specific signature weapons. While it had some broken options and may have gone crazy with the volume of options, by today standards those veteran skills aren't extreme.
When it comes to Iron Warriors, in the lore there is a schism that splits their legion in to a number of groups, and it all comes down to those who accept mutations, the obliterator virus, and the use daemon engines, daemons, and possessed... and those that continue the old ways of rejecting mutations and prefer using traditional artillery and hordes of fodder. One group headed by a conclave of the their forge masters and sorcerers and the other lead by the various Siege Masters. In the lore Perturabo forces reunification of his legion, but those groups continue to exist and keep a distance from each other.
Night Lords and Alpha Legion have similarly tried to keep the gooey parts of chaos out of their Legions. An Alpha Legion legionary can't exactly infiltrate other groups of marines, as they do in the lore, if they look like a possessed marine. The Night Lords are interesting because their relationship with chaos is kinda ambivalent. They attract a lot of things like Furies and feral heldrakes the roost on the bottoms of their ships... but its relatively passive.
Yeah, is well put, and a absolutely valid opinion.
One I disagree with, of course, but expected being myself an huge fan of ornaments and a Dark Angel player with an over abundance of winged helmets and religious iconography in literally everything. One that thinks Sisters's of battle Exorcist is the most warhammer model ever made, and that believes the more baroque and less tacti-cool the Empire looks, the better (I have Tau to scrach that thing for me).
I love the Excorcist, Throne of Judgement, Imperator Titan and the like as "the most warhammer models". . . I just want my marines to be a bit more pragmatic and no-nonsense, personally. No purity seals, and every guy has extra pouches, bolt pistol, grenades, and other bits of kit. It's just an army aesthetic rather than a 'global' one.
Galas wrote: I just find a little boring when they react to any chaos release asking for less "chaos" when its is obvious they shouldnt want chaos kits but more horus heresy units in plastic.
The issue is that Astartes come in many flavors- the knightly, the 'pretty normal', and the 'tacticool' to some degree. And there's a massive array of little components that work well with a few common torsos and just give the entire model a different 'theme'. You can go and grab some Forge World or third party helmets, shoulderpads, backpacks, and other bits and just make nearly any kind of loyalist you want.
With Chaos, you get "Satan Armor" and you're more limited to "Satan Helmets". Not a lot goes with the armor style of the new marines, as far as I can tell. I might tinker around with them and see if I can find something a little 'toned down but distinctively Alpha Legion Chaos Marines'.
I mean, I can see how people would get annoyed- brand new Chaos Marines come out, great scale and proportions compared to older stuff- but using them is going to make every Chaos Legion look the same with a different paint job slapped onto them.
GW has said the new CSM kit is totally compatible with , at minimun, other marines arms, helmets and shoulderpads. Thats a lot because head, shoulderpads and weapons are the most distinct part of a miniature specially when its on the table.
I admit using the same models with different paintjobs can become a little samey, specially because unlike loyalist marines , with Chaos you literally have two plastic power armoured kits that are not rubrics or plague marines: Raptors and the basic CSM (And I assume, new Havocs), unlike Loyalist and their dozen power armoured marines kits. The solution to that of course is for GW to start doing legion upgrade sprues and sets of plastic heads, etc...
EDIT: Lol I forgot khorne berzerkers but really who would use those?
Galas wrote: Is the same as the "chaos" players that dont actually want to play chaos but heresy era marines.
Wait, whats your beef with this one? The heresy era miniatures are beautiful and chapters like Iron Warriors and Night Lords hate warp mutations and remove them, and especially in the case of Iron Warriors the aesthetic of the heresy era mini's is just perfect. Renegade bands in this vein as well seem like a perfectly fine choice.
Man, I keep seeing this claim and it still sounds super fake. Maybe the Night Lords, sure, whatever, but the Iron Warriors are the guys who are famous for the use of Obliterators. That's about as much chaos mutation as you can possibly get.
Hold up, wasn't the reason that they had the largest association with Obliterators because of the Technovirus, which infected metal constructs as well, and because Iron Warriors with metal replacements are so common (due to severing mutated parts) the reason it had such profound effect on them?
It's outright stated multiple times on all the wiki's that this is their relationship with mutations, and I recall reading it somewhere in official GW text, so I'm fairly sure it's not as fake as you suspect.
Galas wrote: GW has said the new CSM kit is totally compatible with , at minimun, other marines arms, helmets and shoulderpads. Thats a lot because head, shoulderpads and weapons are the most distinct part of a miniature specially when its on the table.
They fit. That's what they mean, you can glue them to the models.
The issue I'm talking about is, well... I can wear a tube top, it's just as wearable by me as it is a woman- but when I'm wearing a baseball cap, jeans, and work boots it looks out of place, but it fits.
Galas wrote: The Obliterator Virus wasn't designed by Perturabo alongside Mortarion?
I'm fairly certain it's origin is unknown, there's speculation it COULD be Fabius's handiwork as he expiremented on some of the warp virus's, but it could just as likely not be as there's no ties there.
I'm the opposite, I've always had some SM in a cupboard never getting painted because I view Space Marines of most chapters to be cartoons with toddler strategies, but now Shadowspear has with its Phobos marines thrown me into a Space Marine painting frenzy. I am all about the tacticool, it's why Tau Stealth suits and the old Storm Troopers and Kasrkin and even Eldar Warp Spiders are/ were some of my favourite units and the reason I keep coming back. Now they've ruined the Storm Troopers with idiot-looking Scions but Phobos is newfound success on the Imperium's side in my book.
Unfortunately I have to make my marines largely Dark Angels (second cartooniest chapter of all after Wolves) because a big chunk of my stuff is from Dark Vengeance, but hey. I've got a Black Templars detachment to balance them out.
LoftyS wrote: I'm the opposite, I've always had some SM in a cupboard never getting painted because I view Space Marines of most chapters to be cartoons with toddler strategies, but now Shadowspear has with its Phobos marines thrown me into a Space Marine painting frenzy. I am all about the tacticool, it's why Tau Stealth suits and the old Storm Troopers and Kasrkin and even Eldar Warp Spiders are/ were some of my favourite units and the reason I keep coming back. Now they've ruined the Storm Troopers with idiot-looking Scions but Phobos is newfound success on the Imperium's side in my book.
Unfortunately I have to make my marines largely Dark Angels (second cartooniest chapter of all after Wolves) because a big chunk of my stuff is from Dark Vengeance, but hey. I've got a Black Templars detachment to balance them out.
the dark angels are only cartoonyif you go full on the bling, a line company could be pretty basic in apperance
LoftyS wrote: I'm the opposite, I've always had some SM in a cupboard never getting painted because I view Space Marines of most chapters to be cartoons with toddler strategies, but now Shadowspear has with its Phobos marines thrown me into a Space Marine painting frenzy. I am all about the tacticool, it's why Tau Stealth suits and the old Storm Troopers and Kasrkin and even Eldar Warp Spiders are/ were some of my favourite units and the reason I keep coming back. Now they've ruined the Storm Troopers with idiot-looking Scions but Phobos is newfound success on the Imperium's side in my book.
Unfortunately I have to make my marines largely Dark Angels (second cartooniest chapter of all after Wolves) because a big chunk of my stuff is from Dark Vengeance, but hey. I've got a Black Templars detachment to balance them out.
the dark angels are only cartoonyif you go full on the bling, a line company could be pretty basic in apperance
Visually sure, but there's always the emo tween backstory to them lurking in the background. It's one of those chapters where the grimderp was painted on extra thick.
LoftyS wrote: I'm the opposite, I've always had some SM in a cupboard never getting painted because I view Space Marines of most chapters to be cartoons with toddler strategies, but now Shadowspear has with its Phobos marines thrown me into a Space Marine painting frenzy. I am all about the tacticool, it's why Tau Stealth suits and the old Storm Troopers and Kasrkin and even Eldar Warp Spiders are/ were some of my favourite units and the reason I keep coming back. Now they've ruined the Storm Troopers with idiot-looking Scions but Phobos is newfound success on the Imperium's side in my book.
Unfortunately I have to make my marines largely Dark Angels (second cartooniest chapter of all after Wolves) because a big chunk of my stuff is from Dark Vengeance, but hey. I've got a Black Templars detachment to balance them out.
the dark angels are only cartoonyif you go full on the bling, a line company could be pretty basic in apperance
Visually sure, but there's always the emo tween backstory to them lurking in the background. It's one of those chapters where the grimderp was painted on extra thick.
SHUPPET wrote: Very true, but you could always just leave behind the DV models or scratch off their insignia. They will sell easily if you don't too.
No because then my Black Templars (which have hardsculpted insignias too) will outnumber the vanilla/ DA marines and then I'll feel like I'll have to make Phobos Black Templars and that feels kind of icky.
LoftyS wrote: I'm the opposite, I've always had some SM in a cupboard never getting painted because I view Space Marines of most chapters to be cartoons with toddler strategies, but now Shadowspear has with its Phobos marines thrown me into a Space Marine painting frenzy. I am all about the tacticool, it's why Tau Stealth suits and the old Storm Troopers and Kasrkin and even Eldar Warp Spiders are/ were some of my favourite units and the reason I keep coming back. Now they've ruined the Storm Troopers with idiot-looking Scions but Phobos is newfound success on the Imperium's side in my book.
Unfortunately I have to make my marines largely Dark Angels (second cartooniest chapter of all after Wolves) because a big chunk of my stuff is from Dark Vengeance, but hey. I've got a Black Templars detachment to balance them out.
the dark angels are only cartoonyif you go full on the bling, a line company could be pretty basic in apperance
Visually sure, but there's always the emo tween backstory to them lurking in the background. It's one of those chapters where the grimderp was painted on extra thick.
You can paint them however you want. I have dark vengence marines mixed in with assault on blackreach marines alongside blood angel tac marines and space wolves. Most people never even ask about it, but those who do my personal fluff for the chapter is multiple small forces sent off to get compliance of a small system of planets, This mix of ships being the closest and expected easy compliance of the system durring the heresey. they remained cut off and only recently made contact with the imperium again. all the chapters at this point while they keep thier original iconography to correspond to geneseed which was kept fairly pure, they wear the same blue/green/white armor (snow planets mostly) to symbolize thier unity. Prospects to join their ranks are tested and assigned to the training for which they are most genetically compatible.
boom I have avoided emo dark angels, and get to use whatever models I like.
Galas wrote: Is the same as the "chaos" players that dont actually want to play chaos but heresy era marines.
Wait, whats your beef with this one? The heresy era miniatures are beautiful and chapters like Iron Warriors and Night Lords hate warp mutations and remove them, and especially in the case of Iron Warriors the aesthetic of the heresy era mini's is just perfect. Renegade bands in this vein as well seem like a perfectly fine choice.
Man, I keep seeing this claim and it still sounds super fake. Maybe the Night Lords, sure, whatever, but the Iron Warriors are the guys who are famous for the use of Obliterators. That's about as much chaos mutation as you can possibly get.
They have obliterator cults. They're still known for cutting off warp mutations and replacing them with metal as well as wearing HH armour and being less spikey than other marines.
When CSM players say they want to play legions, it isn't about using Heresy minis. Its about having more of a direct link to the fact that these are Heresy Era Veterans. Look at the Death Guard, and the Thousand Sons... those armies depart greatly from their Heresy Era form and equipment and yet there are hints of it throughout the army. Sell your soul for power, fight wars for 10,000 years, and some how you're less of a Veteran than the freshly indoctrinated tactical Marine? -This is what the CSM codex teaches us. The statistical power difference between tactical squads and CSM squads means in general you need 15 CSM to equal a 10 model tactical squad over the course of a whole game. GW just keeps making them cheaper, and cultists pricier, but CSM squads need to be almost as cheap as Sisters of Battle to begin to be viable... again this is how out of whack basic CSM are.
The idea that there are veterans of the Horus Heresy still running around and fighting as regular squaddies is farcical. Ten thousand years is more than twice the total of recorded human history to date. Each and every one of the Traitor Legions has no doubt had over 100% casualties countless times over ten millennium.
There may well still be some Horus Heresy veterans running around, but I would expect them to be Daemon Princes, Lords, Sorcerers, maybe some Helbrutes or Spawn. I will not accept that guys with bolters sitting on objectives have been doing so since the Legions originally broke with the Imperium. Unless you're talking about weird time-warp shenanigans keeping them in stasis, but that is not an effective argument for Chaos Marines being any more elite or veteran than their loyalist counterparts.
When CSM players say they want to play legions, it isn't about using Heresy minis. Its about having more of a direct link to the fact that these are Heresy Era Veterans. Look at the Death Guard, and the Thousand Sons... those armies depart greatly from their Heresy Era form and equipment and yet there are hints of it throughout the army. Sell your soul for power, fight wars for 10,000 years, and some how you're less of a Veteran than the freshly indoctrinated tactical Marine? -This is what the CSM codex teaches us. The statistical power difference between tactical squads and CSM squads means in general you need 15 CSM to equal a 10 model tactical squad over the course of a whole game. GW just keeps making them cheaper, and cultists pricier, but CSM squads need to be almost as cheap as Sisters of Battle to begin to be viable... again this is how out of whack basic CSM are.
The idea that there are veterans of the Horus Heresy still running around and fighting as regular squaddies is farcical. Ten thousand years is more than twice the total of recorded human history to date. Each and every one of the Traitor Legions has no doubt had over 100% casualties countless times over ten millennium.
There may well still be some Horus Heresy veterans running around, but I would expect them to be Daemon Princes, Lords, Sorcerers, maybe some Helbrutes or Spawn. I will not accept that guys with bolters sitting on objectives have been doing so since the Legions originally broke with the Imperium. Unless you're talking about weird time-warp shenanigans keeping them in stasis, but that is not an effective argument for Chaos Marines being any more elite or veteran than their loyalist counterparts.
Thing is that some of these Horus Heresy veterans are like, a few months removed from the Horus Heresy still.
Time is weird in the warp.
...Which you already addressed. Shouldn't be so quick to post when I just woke up derp
When CSM players say they want to play legions, it isn't about using Heresy minis. Its about having more of a direct link to the fact that these are Heresy Era Veterans. Look at the Death Guard, and the Thousand Sons... those armies depart greatly from their Heresy Era form and equipment and yet there are hints of it throughout the army. Sell your soul for power, fight wars for 10,000 years, and some how you're less of a Veteran than the freshly indoctrinated tactical Marine? -This is what the CSM codex teaches us. The statistical power difference between tactical squads and CSM squads means in general you need 15 CSM to equal a 10 model tactical squad over the course of a whole game. GW just keeps making them cheaper, and cultists pricier, but CSM squads need to be almost as cheap as Sisters of Battle to begin to be viable... again this is how out of whack basic CSM are.
The idea that there are veterans of the Horus Heresy still running around and fighting as regular squaddies is farcical. Ten thousand years is more than twice the total of recorded human history to date. Each and every one of the Traitor Legions has no doubt had over 100% casualties countless times over ten millennium.
There may well still be some Horus Heresy veterans running around, but I would expect them to be Daemon Princes, Lords, Sorcerers, maybe some Helbrutes or Spawn. I will not accept that guys with bolters sitting on objectives have been doing so since the Legions originally broke with the Imperium. Unless you're talking about weird time-warp shenanigans keeping them in stasis, but that is not an effective argument for Chaos Marines being any more elite or veteran than their loyalist counterparts.
Which in turn keeps them as a run of the mill MEQ army. They should be a small count army outside Cultists, which is why the Chaos Marine entry needs to be removed and replaced entirely with Chosen, with everyone having Vet stats at minimum.
When CSM players say they want to play legions, it isn't about using Heresy minis. Its about having more of a direct link to the fact that these are Heresy Era Veterans. Look at the Death Guard, and the Thousand Sons... those armies depart greatly from their Heresy Era form and equipment and yet there are hints of it throughout the army. Sell your soul for power, fight wars for 10,000 years, and some how you're less of a Veteran than the freshly indoctrinated tactical Marine? -This is what the CSM codex teaches us. The statistical power difference between tactical squads and CSM squads means in general you need 15 CSM to equal a 10 model tactical squad over the course of a whole game. GW just keeps making them cheaper, and cultists pricier, but CSM squads need to be almost as cheap as Sisters of Battle to begin to be viable... again this is how out of whack basic CSM are.
The idea that there are veterans of the Horus Heresy still running around and fighting as regular squaddies is farcical. Ten thousand years is more than twice the total of recorded human history to date. Each and every one of the Traitor Legions has no doubt had over 100% casualties countless times over ten millennium.
There may well still be some Horus Heresy veterans running around, but I would expect them to be Daemon Princes, Lords, Sorcerers, maybe some Helbrutes or Spawn. I will not accept that guys with bolters sitting on objectives have been doing so since the Legions originally broke with the Imperium. Unless you're talking about weird time-warp shenanigans keeping them in stasis, but that is not an effective argument for Chaos Marines being any more elite or veteran than their loyalist counterparts.
Which in turn keeps them as a run of the mill MEQ army. They should be a small count army outside Cultists, which is why the Chaos Marine entry needs to be removed and replaced entirely with Chosen, with everyone having Vet stats at minimum.
...Which everyone will be super duper in favor of until the meta shifts and veteran units suck again. Then everyone will go "why do we have to pay all these extra points for worthless stats when loyalists can just get basic marine bodies so cheap!!?!?"
The deletion of options within codexes just leads to you not having that option when a meta shift would have made them good. Who would give a flying feth about losing storm bolters as special weapon options in 5-7th edition? Now it gets brought up as some massive "sister of battle privilege" that they have access to them.
Remember when Chaos players whined and whined about not having the grav weapons despite them being retconned in as being around since the heresy in 7th?
If you listen closely, you can hear the crickets where those complaints used to be now that there is a new CSM kit and there's still no grav weapons.
Bet you a shiny nickel if the edition shifts and grav is the best special again, "where's my grav" and "the bits are compatible!" will be once again in vogue.
Kall3m0n wrote: I only started in 5th ed, but I've always looked in WDs before that and were a bit in aw of all the miniatures and landscapes/battlefields, so "my" marines are the small ones. I like their OTT stuff and their older cleaner look. I love the robed minis, and the Honour Guards' wingfaces iss my absolute favourite helmet of the bunch. I see the Primaris as kinda not really Marines. They're their own separate entity to me. I do think they look really good, but they aren't really Space Marines.They look like a really good interpretation of SM. And that's fine.
My problem with them (and most new GW stuff) is that they're basically monopose. I started DG when they were new, and the models look great, but again -monopose. In that sense the old minis are vastly superior. I'm not slouch when it comes to a saw, scalpel and GS, but I feel something as basic as a Marine shouldn't require it. Even heads have tabs on them, damn it. WHY?!
There's varying degrees of mono-pose. Intercessors have nubs for the arm mounts but they're really easy to trim off with the right clippers. Can't do much with the legs, but at least you can vary up the arm and head positions. The contents of the Shadow Spear box have zero wiggle room without performing major surgery. Most of them have the shoulder pads molded into the front or back of the torso and the hands/arms divided in different places for each model. You'd have to assemble them most of the way and then cut the arms off to switch the poses at all.
When CSM players say they want to play legions, it isn't about using Heresy minis. Its about having more of a direct link to the fact that these are Heresy Era Veterans. Look at the Death Guard, and the Thousand Sons... those armies depart greatly from their Heresy Era form and equipment and yet there are hints of it throughout the army. Sell your soul for power, fight wars for 10,000 years, and some how you're less of a Veteran than the freshly indoctrinated tactical Marine? -This is what the CSM codex teaches us. The statistical power difference between tactical squads and CSM squads means in general you need 15 CSM to equal a 10 model tactical squad over the course of a whole game. GW just keeps making them cheaper, and cultists pricier, but CSM squads need to be almost as cheap as Sisters of Battle to begin to be viable... again this is how out of whack basic CSM are.
The idea that there are veterans of the Horus Heresy still running around and fighting as regular squaddies is farcical. Ten thousand years is more than twice the total of recorded human history to date. Each and every one of the Traitor Legions has no doubt had over 100% casualties countless times over ten millennium.
There may well still be some Horus Heresy veterans running around, but I would expect them to be Daemon Princes, Lords, Sorcerers, maybe some Helbrutes or Spawn. I will not accept that guys with bolters sitting on objectives have been doing so since the Legions originally broke with the Imperium. Unless you're talking about weird time-warp shenanigans keeping them in stasis, but that is not an effective argument for Chaos Marines being any more elite or veteran than their loyalist counterparts.
Which in turn keeps them as a run of the mill MEQ army. They should be a small count army outside Cultists, which is why the Chaos Marine entry needs to be removed and replaced entirely with Chosen, with everyone having Vet stats at minimum.
...Which everyone will be super duper in favor of until the meta shifts and veteran units suck again. Then everyone will go "why do we have to pay all these extra points for worthless stats when loyalists can just get basic marine bodies so cheap!!?!?"
The deletion of options within codexes just leads to you not having that option when a meta shift would have made them good. Who would give a flying feth about losing storm bolters as special weapon options in 5-7th edition? Now it gets brought up as some massive "sister of battle privilege" that they have access to them.
Remember when Chaos players whined and whined about not having the grav weapons despite them being retconned in as being around since the heresy in 7th?
If you listen closely, you can hear the crickets where those complaints used to be now that there is a new CSM kit and there's still no grav weapons.
Bet you a shiny nickel if the edition shifts and grav is the best special again, "where's my grav" and "the bits are compatible!" will be once again in vogue.
Chaos Players would not have cared about not having access to Grav weaponry outside Renegades (which as you know I'm in favor of making the main Marine codex handle), and the fact Grav Cannons were broken. Nobody complained about Grav Guns, even on Bikers (which was a particularly strong option).
Also that's not deleting an option. They're both Marine models. It's about proper representation of Legions, the supposed Vets of the Long War that are supposed to be dangerous.
When CSM players say they want to play legions, it isn't about using Heresy minis. Its about having more of a direct link to the fact that these are Heresy Era Veterans. Look at the Death Guard, and the Thousand Sons... those armies depart greatly from their Heresy Era form and equipment and yet there are hints of it throughout the army. Sell your soul for power, fight wars for 10,000 years, and some how you're less of a Veteran than the freshly indoctrinated tactical Marine? -This is what the CSM codex teaches us. The statistical power difference between tactical squads and CSM squads means in general you need 15 CSM to equal a 10 model tactical squad over the course of a whole game. GW just keeps making them cheaper, and cultists pricier, but CSM squads need to be almost as cheap as Sisters of Battle to begin to be viable... again this is how out of whack basic CSM are.
The idea that there are veterans of the Horus Heresy still running around and fighting as regular squaddies is farcical. Ten thousand years is more than twice the total of recorded human history to date. Each and every one of the Traitor Legions has no doubt had over 100% casualties countless times over ten millennium.
There may well still be some Horus Heresy veterans running around, but I would expect them to be Daemon Princes, Lords, Sorcerers, maybe some Helbrutes or Spawn. I will not accept that guys with bolters sitting on objectives have been doing so since the Legions originally broke with the Imperium. Unless you're talking about weird time-warp shenanigans keeping them in stasis, but that is not an effective argument for Chaos Marines being any more elite or veteran than their loyalist counterparts.
Which in turn keeps them as a run of the mill MEQ army. They should be a small count army outside Cultists, which is why the Chaos Marine entry needs to be removed and replaced entirely with Chosen, with everyone having Vet stats at minimum.
Nahh. Chaos Marines aren't all going to suddenly achieve veteran status. There are those individuals who will progress with the lack of structure, and other individuals that will stagnate or flounder. The basic CSM entry should stay.
The Chosen entry should improve though. I don't like the limitation on specials for example. They should really be the mirror of Sternguard/Vanguard in terms of equipment options, I don't know why they're capped as they are.
There is no reason a Marine who served in the Great Crusade must be a Vet by now. In 40k, that could have been only a few days ago for him.
I should point out that I'm not being sarcastic - almost every Marine that was alive during the Great Crusade has not experienced 10k years of time since then. Not even Bobby G has.
There is no reason a Marine who served in the Great Crusade must be a Vet by now. In 40k, that could have been only a few days ago for him.
I should point out that I'm not being sarcastic - almost every Marine that was alive during the Great Crusade has not experienced 10k years of time since then. Not even Bobby G has.
When CSM players say they want to play legions, it isn't about using Heresy minis. Its about having more of a direct link to the fact that these are Heresy Era Veterans. Look at the Death Guard, and the Thousand Sons... those armies depart greatly from their Heresy Era form and equipment and yet there are hints of it throughout the army. Sell your soul for power, fight wars for 10,000 years, and some how you're less of a Veteran than the freshly indoctrinated tactical Marine? -This is what the CSM codex teaches us. The statistical power difference between tactical squads and CSM squads means in general you need 15 CSM to equal a 10 model tactical squad over the course of a whole game. GW just keeps making them cheaper, and cultists pricier, but CSM squads need to be almost as cheap as Sisters of Battle to begin to be viable... again this is how out of whack basic CSM are.
The idea that there are veterans of the Horus Heresy still running around and fighting as regular squaddies is farcical. Ten thousand years is more than twice the total of recorded human history to date. Each and every one of the Traitor Legions has no doubt had over 100% casualties countless times over ten millennium.
There may well still be some Horus Heresy veterans running around, but I would expect them to be Daemon Princes, Lords, Sorcerers, maybe some Helbrutes or Spawn. I will not accept that guys with bolters sitting on objectives have been doing so since the Legions originally broke with the Imperium. Unless you're talking about weird time-warp shenanigans keeping them in stasis, but that is not an effective argument for Chaos Marines being any more elite or veteran than their loyalist counterparts.
Which in turn keeps them as a run of the mill MEQ army. They should be a small count army outside Cultists, which is why the Chaos Marine entry needs to be removed and replaced entirely with Chosen, with everyone having Vet stats at minimum.
Nahh. Chaos Marines aren't all going to suddenly achieve veteran status. There are those individuals who will progress with the lack of structure, and other individuals that will stagnate or flounder. The basic CSM entry should stay.
The Chosen entry should improve though. I don't like the limitation on specials for example. They should really be the mirror of Sternguard/Vanguard in terms of equipment options, I don't know why they're capped as they are.
Those floundering are probably already dead, and I made my justification via that Renegades should be covered in the regular Marine codex via switching of keywords, and that can take care of plausible new recruits as well.
"That's at minimum a few hundred years though."
Source? Because:
1) A *few* hundred years is quite old for most Marines
2) Why would they be more likely to pop out of whatever warp shenanigans they were in from year 30,000 to year 39,799, but never ever pop out between 39,800 and "now"?
Those floundering are probably already dead, and I made my justification via that Renegades should be covered in the regular Marine codex via switching of keywords, and that can take care of plausible new recruits as well.
That would mean that recruitment chaos marines aren't part of the chaos book.
A stagnant or floundering chaos marine is not necessarily a dead one. The champions and lords still need bodies to perform tasks and even 'basic' chaos marines will be more useful than cultists.
I get the reasoning behind a keyword swap, but it just seems unnecessary. We already have CSMs of various tiers in the Chaos book, basic marines, Chosen, and true devotees like Khorne Berzerkers, Plague Marines etc. who already have their special status and rules. It'd be nice if the basic CSMs got both Chainswords and bolters, but otherwise they seem fine.
"Those floundering are probably already dead, and I made my justification via that Renegades should be covered in the regular Marine codex via switching of keywords, and that can take care of plausible new recruits as well."
Unless, of course, a faction might have new recruits *and* veterans.
Or a Warband might include new recruits and a Sorcerer. Or even a Demon.
The basic CSM squad should be a carbon copy of the base Loyalist squad, plus the Chaos trappings.
Bharring wrote: "That's at minimum a few hundred years though."
Source? Because:
1) A *few* hundred years is quite old for most Marines
2) Why would they be more likely to pop out of whatever warp shenanigans they were in from year 30,000 to year 39,799, but never ever pop out between 39,800 and "now"?
Time is finicky in the Warp, so who knows?
However, it IS a fact that these original Vets are gonna be battle hardened. The 4th edition codex, as loathed as it was, even had at minimum a way to give them two attacks as they're more combat able compared to Loyalist Scum, and the codex before that has ways to give them skills on top of that.
Not a single bit of that is present now. The basic Chaos Marine entry has been a bad idea since its 6th edition incarnation. It doesn't capture the Elite Legion feel.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: "Those floundering are probably already dead, and I made my justification via that Renegades should be covered in the regular Marine codex via switching of keywords, and that can take care of plausible new recruits as well."
Unless, of course, a faction might have new recruits *and* veterans.
Or a Warband might include new recruits and a Sorcerer. Or even a Demon.
The basic CSM squad should be a carbon copy of the base Loyalist squad, plus the Chaos trappings.
A new warband is not going to be accepted to the point that they're fighting the same style as the Legions. MAYBE as allies at that, which is why I propose Renegades being covered in the base Vanilla codex with consolidated Angels, as both have Traitorous elements (and would be a way to have Fallen be slightly more organized, but I hadn't thought that part out yet).
Those floundering are probably already dead, and I made my justification via that Renegades should be covered in the regular Marine codex via switching of keywords, and that can take care of plausible new recruits as well.
That would mean that recruitment chaos marines aren't part of the chaos book.
A stagnant or floundering chaos marine is not necessarily a dead one. The champions and lords still need bodies to perform tasks and even 'basic' chaos marines will be more useful than cultists.
I get the reasoning behind a keyword swap, but it just seems unnecessary. We already have CSMs of various tiers in the Chaos book, basic marines, Chosen, and true devotees like Khorne Berzerkers, Plague Marines etc. who already have their special status and rules. It'd be nice if the basic CSMs got both Chainswords and bolters, but otherwise they seem fine.
Except those Cult elements would be more like hired guns, ala the ally system that is already in place. As is, you could make Red Corsairs all Plague Marines + Huron in a Vanguard detachment, and they run fast and charge.
What Elite Legion feel? That is not the default stance of the CSMs. They have the same "elite-ness" of Tac marines, which have that "Elite Chapter feel". Chaos marines are not simply "better marines". They're essentially just 'evil' marines. I think you're headcannoning a bit here. Imo they're just in the process of breaking with the codex and more lacking in discipline.
. . .
And their wargear is that which they can maintain, steal, and be supplied ammunition for, aka, "requisition" from Guardsmen. So Lascannons, Autocannons, etc. Plasma Cannons and Grav arent as plentiful and reliable in universe.
"A new warband is not going to be accepted to the point that they're fighting the same style as the Legions. MAYBE as allies at that, which is why I propose Renegades being covered in the base Vanilla codex with consolidated Angels, as both have Traitorous elements (and would be a way to have Fallen be slightly more organized, but I hadn't thought that part out yet)."
Because no army ever has added recruits after actually fighting in battle?
Do you really think most Warbands never recruit anyone new ever again, once they see combat? Why? What?
I get that Renegades typically won't have demons or even many (if any) visible mutations, if they're just rebelling politically.
But apostates, traitors, and soforth - you'd have "newly turned" Marines, same as loyalists, fighting alongside demons, possessed, Demon Engines, and Sorcerers.
"The basic Chaos Marine entry has been a bad idea since its 6th edition incarnation. It doesn't capture the Elite Legion feel."
And the Guardsman entry doesn't capture super-elite-Assassin's feel - because that's not what it is.
The elite legions are Chosen, Cult Troops and so forth. Yes, there's a technical oddity in that there are no Elite Legion troops, currently (which should be fixed, although you can play without them like pure-Wriath Spirit Hosts, pure-bike Windriders, pure-ASM Assault Companies, or pure-bike Marines). Marks help with that, and two legions have special dexes, but providing an elite Vet Troop option probably should happen.
"Except those Cult elements would be more like hired guns, ala the ally system that is already in place. As is, you could make Red Corsairs all Plague Marines + Huron in a Vanguard detachment, and they run fast and charge."
Depends on the Legion/Warband. In many cases, the Cults can be Aspirants, who wish to become a Chaos Marine. Those are members, not allies.
I get that you want to change the CSM Dex to be Legions Only, but that's not what it is. I'd be on board with making it more amenable to Legions, but not on board with dropping non-Legion Warbands from the game (or gutting their options, such as forcing them to use the Vanilla dex). Legions aren't the only CSM Warbands out there.
"Does that really make sense as is?"
Much more than "No marine after Y30K is a True Chaos Marine!"
(On a related note, I'd like it if they added the option for many of the IoM factions to swap their 'Imperium' keyword with 'Renegade' or 'Chaos'. Some factions certainly shouldn't be able to, and some options in some other specific units shouldn't be able to, of course.
Bonus points if Orkz could take looted Vehicles more readily, even if points-inefficient.
More bonus points for basic Guardsmen units taking 'Tau' to be Gue'Seva.
Corsairs (and maybe Kroot) taking 'Imperium', 'Tau', or 'Ork' to be Mercenaries.
Now I'm just dreaming.)
(PS - Yes, I did remember my parentheses. So you can't tell me my arguments are invalid!)
What Elite Legion feel? That is not the default stance of the CSMs. They have the same "elite-ness" of Tac marines, which have that "Elite Chapter feel". Chaos marines are not simply "better marines". They're essentially just 'evil' marines. I think you're headcannoning a bit here. Imo they're just in the process of breaking with the codex and more lacking in discipline.
. . .
And their wargear is that which they can maintain, steal, and be supplied ammunition for, aka, "requisition" from Guardsmen. So Lascannons, Autocannons, etc. Plasma Cannons and Grav arent as plentiful and reliable in universe.
Did you literally forget that they used to be able to get Vet skills? They were always more elite and GW dumbed the unit entry down ever since. You really can't argue otherwise.
"Did you literally forget that they used to be able to get Vet skills? They were always more elite and GW dumbed the unit entry down ever since. You really can't argue otherwise."
Farseers used to be able to take ML4. Now they're always ML2. Does that mean GW nerfed them? Does that mean there's no argument that they shouldn't be able to cast ML4 powers?
Further, the above argument is that *not all* Chaos Marines are vets. Not that *all* Chaos Marines are *not* vets. Those are very different things.
You can still take the Vet upgrade on Chaos Marines. By taking Chosen.
Bharring wrote: "A new warband is not going to be accepted to the point that they're fighting the same style as the Legions. MAYBE as allies at that, which is why I propose Renegades being covered in the base Vanilla codex with consolidated Angels, as both have Traitorous elements (and would be a way to have Fallen be slightly more organized, but I hadn't thought that part out yet)."
Because no army ever has added recruits after actually fighting in battle?
Do you really think most Warbands never recruit anyone new ever again, once they see combat? Why? What?
I get that Renegades typically won't have demons or even many (if any) visible mutations, if they're just rebelling politically.
But apostates, traitors, and soforth - you'd have "newly turned" Marines, same as loyalists, fighting alongside demons, possessed, Demon Engines, and Sorcerers.
"The basic Chaos Marine entry has been a bad idea since its 6th edition incarnation. It doesn't capture the Elite Legion feel."
And the Guardsman entry doesn't capture super-elite-Assassin's feel - because that's not what it is.
The elite legions are Chosen, Cult Troops and so forth. Yes, there's a technical oddity in that there are no Elite Legion troops, currently (which should be fixed, although you can play without them like pure-Wriath Spirit Hosts, pure-bike Windriders, pure-ASM Assault Companies, or pure-bike Marines). Marks help with that, and two legions have special dexes, but providing an elite Vet Troop option probably should happen.
"Except those Cult elements would be more like hired guns, ala the ally system that is already in place. As is, you could make Red Corsairs all Plague Marines + Huron in a Vanguard detachment, and they run fast and charge."
Depends on the Legion/Warband. In many cases, the Cults can be Aspirants, who wish to become a Chaos Marine. Those are members, not allies.
I get that you want to change the CSM Dex to be Legions Only, but that's not what it is. I'd be on board with making it more amenable to Legions, but not on board with dropping non-Legion Warbands from the game (or gutting their options, such as forcing them to use the Vanilla dex). Legions aren't the only CSM Warbands out there.
"Does that really make sense as is?"
Much more than "No marine after Y30K is a True Chaos Marine!"
(On a related note, I'd like it if they added the option for many of the IoM factions to swap their 'Imperium' keyword with 'Renegade' or 'Chaos'. Some factions certainly shouldn't be able to, and some options in some other specific units shouldn't be able to, of course.
Bonus points if Orkz could take looted Vehicles more readily, even if points-inefficient.
More bonus points for basic Guardsmen units taking 'Tau' to be Gue'Seva.
Corsairs (and maybe Kroot) taking 'Imperium', 'Tau', or 'Ork' to be Mercenaries.
Now I'm just dreaming.)
(PS - Yes, I did remember my parentheses. So you can't tell me my arguments are invalid!)
They're fighting in battle as meatshields. Simple as that.
Any established Daemon Engines aren't something a Renegade Warband should have a great number of without the need of an ally landing them (which can be justified via the current ally system). As is, Crimson Slaughter can run a detachment of ×3 of each Daemon Engine but no Drop Pods, which makes no sense. Rubric Marines can be ran as Red Corsairs, which also makes no sense.
I'm not saying they can't be marked, but they're not going to have significant bonuses like the actual Cult Legions, which would already be representing warbands coming from there, like The Purge represented by Death Guard.
You purposely missed the point with the Assassins, so good job.
The non-Legion Warbands are either going to be fighting exactly like Codex Marines, because they're more organized in that fashion. They aren't losing options that make no sense. They're gaining options that make sense. There's not a reason Red Corsairs gain Autocannons with their Terminators all the sudden, so does it matter they lose the option they shouldn't have had in the first place?
And I'm saying that no Marine after 30k is really part of the Legion. So there shouldn't be options that are that low end.
Also it would make sense to do the same for the Imperial Guard codex.
Bharring wrote: "Did you literally forget that they used to be able to get Vet skills? They were always more elite and GW dumbed the unit entry down ever since. You really can't argue otherwise."
Farseers used to be able to take ML4. Now they're always ML2. Does that mean GW nerfed them? Does that mean there's no argument that they shouldn't be able to cast ML4 powers?
Further, the above argument is that *not all* Chaos Marines are vets. Not that *all* Chaos Marines are *not* vets. Those are very different things.
You can still take the Vet upgrade on Chaos Marines. By taking Chosen.
You can make the argument for Farseers being able to pick and use more powers, yes. Your point?
"Any established Daemon Engines aren't something a Renegade Warband [...]"
Wait, so a traitor warband that's been dealing with demons for a few thousand years isn't a renegade? Or are you saying that, after fighting wars over the course of a few thousand years, the Warband hasn't recruited a single member in the past few centuries and never would?
You're completely missing two things:
1) Not every renegade warband just recently stopped following the Emperor
2) Not every Warband that's actually fought a battle never again recruits a single marine.
(Thousand Son rubrics are the only example I can think of that never recruit - there are new rubrics, but I don't think they're Thousand Sons.)
*Most* warbands will recruit. New Chaos Marines do actually happen in established Warbands.
"You purposely missed the point with the Assassins, so good job."
Fine, I'll spell it out. Your point is that a unit entry that represents non-VOTLW Chaos Marines doesn't represent VOTLW Chaos Marines. That's a feature, not a bug. Now, I'd agree that there should be a better way to do a pure-VOTLW warband. But you're demanding that non-VOTLW Chaos Marines be dropped from the CSM codex.
"The non-Legion Warbands are either going to be fighting exactly like Codex Marines, because they're more organized in that fashion."
Even the ones that aren't? Like, if there's some Khorne cult Warband, are they still adhering to the Codex Astartes? Do they still keep all their Devastator squads intact? There are non-Legion Warbands that do, sure. But not all non-Legion Warbands are Loyalist-wannabes.
"There's not a reason Red Corsairs gain Autocannons with their Terminators all the sudden, so does it matter they lose the option they shouldn't have had in the first place? "
There certainly *should* be rules support for newly-renegaded chapters. And that can be done with the Loyalist codex. But does it make sense that a Tzeenchian cult warband that defected a few thousand years ago can't have a Sorcerer because they didn't join the Cool Kids during the Heresy? Does it make sense that Fabius Bile's newest batch of Marines must either have hundreds of years of experience as a Marine as soon as they're created, or not be allowed to touch half the gear of their Warband?
"And I'm saying that no Marine after 30k is really part of the Legion. So there shouldn't be options that are that low end. "
You keep conflating Codex:CSM with Codex:Legion. That's not what it is.
Automatically Appended Next Post: "You can make the argument for Farseers being able to pick and use more powers, yes. Your point?"
And CSM used to be able to be non-Vet.
What Elite Legion feel? That is not the default stance of the CSMs. They have the same "elite-ness" of Tac marines, which have that "Elite Chapter feel". Chaos marines are not simply "better marines". They're essentially just 'evil' marines. I think you're headcannoning a bit here. Imo they're just in the process of breaking with the codex and more lacking in discipline.
. . .
And their wargear is that which they can maintain, steal, and be supplied ammunition for, aka, "requisition" from Guardsmen. So Lascannons, Autocannons, etc. Plasma Cannons and Grav arent as plentiful and reliable in universe.
Did you literally forget that they used to be able to get Vet skills? They were always more elite and GW dumbed the unit entry down ever since. You really can't argue otherwise.
A: CSMs had the option of taking veteran skills during the same era that loyalists could take many of the same skills as chapter traits. Making them equal.
B: Because it was an option, that also meant that many CSMs at that time could be in fact less "elite" than contemporary loyalists who bought those options.
So in the era that you reference some CSMs were more elite, and some were less. That is if you really want to set the record straight.
I remember way back when I first started playing having this same talk of " Chaos is more skillful, all 10,000 years old !! "
Ok I get the wanting chaos to be all super elite, but has been said they aren't all from back in the heresy. Every space marine is a veteran in their own regard according to selection process and how the weak are weeded out. In all honesty though elite status isn't really shown in many books properly. Like Deathwatch, they are supposed to be like the xeno fighting rainbox six of space marines. Yet for all that, they have higher Leadership and an extra attack ? Pretty bad ass.. What I'm saying is they don't translate elite well for many units. Aside from squad selection due to wargear they really don't come off very elite when they should. So chaos marines being roughly on par with loyalist marines makes sense to me.
Now them having access to be able to take chosen or the like for troops should be there, but the regular chaos marine entry is fine. Though as this argument has lasted since when I started at the beginning of 3rd edition I doubt it's going to stop now.
Not all Marines who consort with Chaos are Veterans of the Long War.
GW really needs to write that Veterans of the Long War nonsense out of the fluff. It could be an upgrade for characters, but for basic units it's just absurd.
"Listen boy, I was there when the Legion broke with the False Emperor! I've been fighting the Imperial scum for ten thousand years?"
"And you're still just a bolter-toting member of a basic squad?"
"Er...yes."
"Kind of an underachiever, aren't you?"
Not all Marines who consort with Chaos are Veterans of the Long War.
GW really needs to write that Veterans of the Long War nonsense out of the fluff. It could be an upgrade for characters, but for basic units it's just absurd.
"Listen boy, I was there when the Legion broke with the False Emperor! I've been fighting the Imperial scum for ten thousand years?"
"And you're still just a bolter-toting member of a basic squad?"
"Er...yes."
"Kind of an underachiever, aren't you?"
He's just playing the long game. You know who gets targeted by assassins? Leaders and special weaponry holders. Who gets ignored? Basic Bolter dudes. Like Dark Eldar Chaos Marines play the long game for surviving.
GW really needs to write that Veterans of the Long War nonsense out of the fluff. It could be an upgrade for characters, but for basic units it's just absurd.
VotLW should be more than that. It seems like it should almost be a unit, sort of like Chosen- but maybe even a mixed squad. Something like a Deathwatch Kill-Team with mixed units, maybe even Cat and Tart terminators.
A lot of posters seem to be glossing over how messed up time is in the Eye of Terror and other warp storms. While yes, in the real world 10k worth of time has passed, for a lot of CSM it's been far far shorter. I recall reading a short story where a group of HH vets went in and out and for them only a decade or two had passed yet out side it had been thousands of years. Between that and various other tech and tricks, it makes sense that there are a lot of HH traitors still knocking about.
GW really needs to write that Veterans of the Long War nonsense out of the fluff. It could be an upgrade for characters, but for basic units it's just absurd.
VotLW should be more than that. It seems like it should almost be a unit, sort of like Chosen- but maybe even a mixed squad. Something like a Deathwatch Kill-Team with mixed units, maybe even Cat and Tart terminators.
I think a vet squad upgrade where you can take all specials or something like that would work and they could have an aura or something.
troops within 3" of VOTLW ignores morale and and 6 to hit cause additional wounding rolls(not MW) @ normal save.
pm713 wrote: He's just playing the long game. You know who gets targeted by assassins? Leaders and special weaponry holders. Who gets ignored? Basic Bolter dudes.
You mean, guys who in game always die first regardless of circumstances?
HoundsofDemos wrote: A lot of posters seem to be glossing over how messed up time is in the Eye of Terror and other warp storms. While yes, in the real world 10k worth of time has passed, for a lot of CSM it's been far far shorter. I recall reading a short story where a group of HH vets went in and out and for them only a decade or two had passed yet out side it had been thousands of years. Between that and various other tech and tricks, it makes sense that there are a lot of HH traitors still knocking about.
Sure but it doesn't make any sense that those traitors be any more competent than Marines that aren't.
HoundsofDemos wrote: A lot of posters seem to be glossing over how messed up time is in the Eye of Terror and other warp storms. While yes, in the real world 10k worth of time has passed, for a lot of CSM it's been far far shorter. I recall reading a short story where a group of HH vets went in and out and for them only a decade or two had passed yet out side it had been thousands of years. Between that and various other tech and tricks, it makes sense that there are a lot of HH traitors still knocking about.
Sure but it doesn't make any sense that those traitors be any more competent than Marines that aren't.
The 40k Mechanicum is way less competent than the 30k Mechanicum, they've forgotten how tracked vehicles work and have abandoned battle-automata in favour of half-baked joke robots that have to be manually directed in the field to not walk off cliffs.
HoundsofDemos wrote: A lot of posters seem to be glossing over how messed up time is in the Eye of Terror and other warp storms. While yes, in the real world 10k worth of time has passed, for a lot of CSM it's been far far shorter. I recall reading a short story where a group of HH vets went in and out and for them only a decade or two had passed yet out side it had been thousands of years. Between that and various other tech and tricks, it makes sense that there are a lot of HH traitors still knocking about.
Sure but it doesn't make any sense that those traitors be any more competent than Marines that aren't.
The 40k Mechanicum is way less competent than the 30k Mechanicum, they've forgotten how tracked vehicles work and have abandoned battle-automata in favour of half-baked joke robots that have to be manually directed in the field to not walk off cliffs.
And given how the more automated something is, the more likely scrap code is going to be a PITA, I'm not sure that this is a sign of them being less competent.
I think some people are just afraid of change. Embrace it
) but changing the marine process (a process designed by the god emperor himself) and claiming it to be superior to the established process is heresy beyond belief.
the rules bloat, all you need is one stat line for "anti-tank weapon" and lots of diversity in how you build the model to represent it.
and when I saw them, I was tempted to start a Raptors chapter kill team.
