I own reasonable Dark Angels and Wolves armies (about 3000pts each) and some Blood Angels (about 1500pts).
There has always been alot of discussion of the "unique" units that have been given to the Angels and Wolves to make their codex fuller and boost sales, especially since the "basic" marine range has been complete for years (one of the reasons for Primaris).
However looking at the actual units - how many of them are actually in any way unique, how many would not actually be represented in some form in other Chapters both in terms of Lore and game stats.
The Librarian Dreadnoughts are only in one chapter? Really?
No other Chapter has Sargeants leading squads in Terminator armour? Isn't that an Iron Hands thing too?
No other Chapter has more flexible teminator squads mixing close and ranged combat versons?
No other Chapter has mutations like Wolfen - isn't that a Black Dragons thing
No other Chapter rides beasts (much as I hate Wolves on Wolves) to battle?
Surely the basic unit templates for pretty much every Unique unit could and should be expanded to include these slight variations, with the relevant Chapter Keyword allowing access to a few other special rules /armoury should cover anything else?
What am I missing here. What would be lost by allowing those units be represeted in other Chapters?
It would also remove the problems of trying to cater for fans of these Chapters wanting everything plus their own "unique" units to make them Marines+ or having to have lesser versions of the same unit so that the three Chapters can retain a sense of specialness.
Pretty much agreed. These units shouldn't be removed, they should be opened up to every Chapter to use.
As a matter of interest, for all the people who support Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Dark Angels having unique units, what's your verdict on the Ultramarines now getting Honour Guard exclusive to them?*
*personally, honour guard should be open to everyone, same as Deathwing, Wulfen, and Sanguinary Guard etc etc should be opened up to everyone.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Pretty much agreed. These units shouldn't be removed, they should be opened up to every Chapter to use.
As a matter of interest, for all the people who support Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Dark Angels having unique units, what's your verdict on the Ultramarines now getting Honour Guard exclusive to them?*
*personally, honour guard should be open to everyone, same as Deathwing, Wulfen, and Sanguinary Guard etc etc should be opened up to everyone.
Tbh, I've wondered about this since I got into 40k. I can appreciate people like aspects of their lore, that's just personal preference - I personally don't like SW lore and I'm only mildly interested in the other two. That's why I collect Salamanders and Carcharodons - because their lore appeals to me. But what I can't understand is why those 3 Chapters in particular have been elevated out of 'Astartes' in general, and had whole product lines and codices deveted to them. Obviously, in later editions it's self-perpetuating, because now they're established as different, people will play them as being different - but I can't fathom why they were explicitly picked out of the others.
In terms of lore (which is where I mainly dwell in 40k interests) - there is no in-universe explanation for why all of these Chapters are 'special'. Barring quirks of mutations, the organisation of Chapters varies so much that anything goes. In that regard, there seems little justification for picking SW as 'Non-Codex-Compliant'. Carcharodons are non-Codex. Raven Guard operate in a non-Codex manner. Salamanders are non-Codex. Black Templars are also non-Codex. As for the Dark Angels - their HH thing was just best tech/inner strife. But that could cover literally hundreds of Chapters up to 40k. The Soul Drinkers spring to mind there.
If I'm honest, and obviously it's skewed by a disinterest in any one of those Chapters, I'd rather GW had invested their time and money into producing a number of upgrade sets for the 9 First Founding Chapters, transfers to match, and then had just given us a plethora of other units. I can't think of anyone's comments on Dakka that I've read who seriously thought that 'Father Grimnar' on his magical sledge was actually a worthwhile, needed and well executed model.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Pretty much agreed. These units shouldn't be removed, they should be opened up to every Chapter to use.
As a matter of interest, for all the people who support Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Dark Angels having unique units, what's your verdict on the Ultramarines now getting Honour Guard exclusive to them?*
*personally, honour guard should be open to everyone, same as Deathwing, Wulfen, and Sanguinary Guard etc etc should be opened up to everyone.
Agreed.
I'll kinda disagree on Wulfen.
My ideal would be that Renegades get handled in the main Marine codex, and they lose out on the normally unique units to the Chapter (so Ultramarines lose Vitrix Guard, Blood Angels lose Death Company, etc) and they get replaced with Possessed, Warp Talons, and Spawn to show varying degrees of mutations or corruption in their ranks. Replace keywords so you can ally with Chaos stuff and BAM done.
Regarding of course the Red Corsairs + Huron (who already needs fixing to be Chapter Master status), they can count as a Successor of White Scars for their Tactics.
THEN we can actually focus the CSM codex on Legionnaires like it should've been and the world can be at peace.
Stux wrote: I for one would want to continue having unique stuff for unique chapters. It makes them much more enjoyable to collect and play for me.
I feel the same. While most units should be shared, each major Chapter having a handful of unique units makes them feel special.
I am 100% for BA/DA/SW getting a supplement to the SM DeX to replace their current Codices, but I'd want their supplements to add their current special units.
And with the FAQ not updated thier Chapter Tactics to apply to all unit, nor give them Combat Doctrines, I suspect that's in the works.
Stux wrote: I for one would want to continue having unique stuff for unique chapters. It makes them much more enjoyable to collect and play for me.
Even if they are not unique?
Which do you think are "unique" to the various Chapters and would have no counterpart?
Depends on your standard for 'no counterpart'.
I consider Deathwing Knights unique, though obviously they are very similar to a specific loadout of Assault Terminators. But those small changes help sell that the unit is 'special'. If the only difference was fluff then I wouldn't feel that.
Likewise with Deathwing Terminators mixing regular weapons and melee in the same unit - I never actually do it, but I see it on the datasheet and think "huh, cool. That tells me something unique about the organisation of the chapter" I am intrigued.
There are some somewhat unique units then such as Black Knights and Dark Talons. The base unit exists, but they have equipment that changes how they are used quite a bit.
Truly unique units? We have the Darkshroud of course, which has no analogue in any other chapter. And of course character Landspeeders which again really help sell the unique organisation of the Ravenwing.
For me it's not good enough to say "let the lore do the work". Mechanics make lore feel real.
Stux wrote: I for one would want to continue having unique stuff for unique chapters. It makes them much more enjoyable to collect and play for me.
Even if they are not unique?
Which do you think are "unique" to the various Chapters and would have no counterpart?
Depends on your standard for 'no counterpart'.
I consider Deathwing Knights unique, though obviously they are very similar to a specific loadout of Assault Terminators. But those small changes help sell that the unit is 'special'. If the only difference was fluff then I wouldn't feel that.
Likewise with Deathwing Terminators mixing regular weapons and melee in the same unit - I never actually do it, but I see it on the datasheet and think "huh, cool. That tells me something unique about the organisation of the chapter" I am intrigued.
There are some somewhat unique units then such as Black Knights and Dark Talons. The base unit exists, but they have equipment that changes how they are used quite a bit.
Truly unique units? We have the Darkshroud of course, which has no analogue in any other chapter. And of course character Landspeeders which again really help sell the unique organisation of the Ravenwing.
For me it's not good enough to say "let the lore do the work". Mechanics make lore feel real.
I don't understand - you need the actual unit options (that you never actually take ??) to make you interested in the unit rather than just the lore - why do you need the datasheet to tell you about the organisation when that is the entire point of the lore element of a codex?
I'm saying whether or not I take it is incidental. The fact it is there sells me on the uniqueness of the chapter. For me mechanics sell lore, not the other way around.
Stux wrote:For me it's not good enough to say "let the lore do the work". Mechanics make lore feel real.
I suppose that there is going to be the issue GW will always have. As a company making a hard product (The miniatures), and a non-physical product (The lore), it's always going to have to try and marry the two together to continue generating interest. And there'll be an added complexity of trying to please not only fans of the non-physical lore, casual fans of the collecting aspect (Who just want to model), and then also those who wish to utilise the product in the gaming system.
Not that I play, but I think 'unique' units should be opened up for all Chapters, with the only difference being that certain Chapters may have unique models, but not unique rules. For example, as Sgt. Smudge said, the Honour Guard should be open - but perhaps it's load-out could be a number of things, with provision made to mimic a classic "Sanguinary Guard" version or a classic "Ultramarines" version (EDIT: And I should have said, perhaps GW then makes BA and UM unique models, in the vein of FW Praetors, that are just aesthetically different). Again, I don't play and hence I don't understand the rules, but from a lore perspective it always strikes me as odd that they have whole separate codices devoted to them. Wouldn't it be better just to have a more expanded Chapter Tactics, but the same units?
Stux wrote:For me it's not good enough to say "let the lore do the work". Mechanics make lore feel real.
I suppose that there is going to be the issue GW will always have. As a company making a hard product (The miniatures), and a non-physical product (The lore), it's always going to have to try and marry the two together to continue generating interest. And there'll be an added complexity of trying to please not only fans of the non-physical lore, casual fans of the collecting aspect (Who just want to model), and then also those who wish to utilise the product in the gaming system.
Not that I play, but I think 'unique' units should be opened up for all Chapters, with the only difference being that certain Chapters may have unique models, but not unique rules. For example, as Sgt. Smudge said, the Honour Guard should be open - but perhaps it's load-out could be a number of things, with provision made to mimic a classic "Sanguinary Guard" version or a classic "Ultramarines" version (EDIT: And I should have said, perhaps GW then makes BA and UM unique models, in the vein of FW Praetors, that are just aesthetically different). Again, I don't play and hence I don't understand the rules, but from a lore perspective it always strikes me as odd that they have whole separate codices devoted to them. Wouldn't it be better just to have a more expanded Chapter Tactics, but the same units?
See, I would really hate that. As a rules first thinker, I want my fancy models to have their own fancy rules haha.
Stux wrote: I'm saying whether or not I take it is incidental. The fact it is there sells me on the uniqueness of the chapter. For me mechanics sell lore, not the other way around.
Ok sort of understand - but you feel that the Da (and BA?SW) need ALL the current "unique" units to make them special? Do you steer away from the normal units in favour of the "unique" ones?
Do you buy mainy the unique units?
Would you only play a Chapter with all these trypes of units?
What do you think about All the Chapters that don't get them and yet are actually in the lore as or more diverse than the Dark Angels?
Stux wrote: I'm saying whether or not I take it is incidental. The fact it is there sells me on the uniqueness of the chapter. For me mechanics sell lore, not the other way around.
Ok sort of understand - but you feel that the Da (and BA?SW) need ALL the current "unique" units to make them special? Do you steer away from the normal units in favour of the "unique" ones?
Do you buy mainy the unique units?
Would you only play a Chapter with all these trypes of units?
What do you think about All the Chapters that don't get them and yet are actually in the lore as or more diverse than the Dark Angels?
I don't have hard and fast rules for myself about exactly much is needed, but broadly yes it would mean the chapter loses something for me if they homogenised any existing unique units with stuff from other chapters. In fact I'd like to see at least a couple more.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
snakezenn2 wrote: Ok, go play chess if you want everyone to have the same options.
Sort of this? It's a huge oversimplification of course, but no amount of lore makes chess more interesting for me.
Stux wrote: I'm saying whether or not I take it is incidental. The fact it is there sells me on the uniqueness of the chapter. For me mechanics sell lore, not the other way around.
Ok sort of understand - but you feel that the Da (and BA?SW) need ALL the current "unique" units to make them special? Do you steer away from the normal units in favour of the "unique" ones?
Do you buy mainy the unique units?
Would you only play a Chapter with all these trypes of units?
What do you think about All the Chapters that don't get them and yet are actually in the lore as or more diverse than the Dark Angels?
I don't have hard and fast rules for myself about exactly much is needed, but broadly yes it would mean the chapter loses something for me if they homogenised any existing unique units with stuff from other chapters. In fact I'd like to see at least a couple more.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
snakezenn2 wrote: Ok, go play chess if you want everyone to have the same options.
Sort of this? It's a huge oversimplification of course, but no amount of lore makes chess more interesting for me.
This discussion has been had quite often, why bring it up again?
snakezenn2 wrote: Ok, go play chess if you want everyone to have the same options.
Two Marines armies isn't the same as Marines vs Guard and people need to really stop the chess comparison. Angels share so many units with the main codex it's ridiculous.
Stux wrote: I'm saying whether or not I take it is incidental. The fact it is there sells me on the uniqueness of the chapter. For me mechanics sell lore, not the other way around.
Ok sort of understand - but you feel that the Da (and BA?SW) need ALL the current "unique" units to make them special? Do you steer away from the normal units in favour of the "unique" ones?
Do you buy mainy the unique units?
Would you only play a Chapter with all these trypes of units?
What do you think about All the Chapters that don't get them and yet are actually in the lore as or more diverse than the Dark Angels?
I don't have hard and fast rules for myself about exactly much is needed, but broadly yes it would mean the chapter loses something for me if they homogenised any existing unique units with stuff from other chapters. In fact I'd like to see at least a couple more.
And what do you think about Chapters other than the those that currently receive them?
Personally I hate the way my Wolves and Dark Angels has evolved but thats by the by, am I right in saying you love the more outlandish/flavour units?
For Dark Angels, sure there's nothing I dislike really.
For Wolves - I never really liked Space Wolves anyway. They seem more outlandish too, but I'm not sure if that's what I have an issue with (it just going TOO far), or if I was just never particularly into the theme to begin with.
Stux wrote: I didn't... I responded to other people's comments.
Sorry the OP is bringing it up again
The OP is quite within his rights to ask anything he wants. And you are quite within your rights to answer it constructively, ignore it as being a tedious over asked topic that doesn't interest you, or respond critically and run the risk of coming off as a bit sour. Your call.
Moving on, the chess comparison perhaps less useful because the rules of chess relate solely to manoeuvre, whereas the rules of 40k relate more to attack and ability. So the premise in chess is to out-manoeuvre your opponent, where 40k is about manoeuvring units to where their attacks are best utilised. Furthermore, Chess is strictly limited to 6 types of unit, and all 6 MUST be taken. In 40k Marines, there are dozens of units, of which you can take (up to a point) any combination or number you like. Hence MarinevsMarine isn't 'Just like Chess' - it's still got enough depth of choice and complexity that unique units are not the only thing that makes a match flavourful (Even if the jury is still out in this thread as to whether they are wanted or not).
I think earlier editions that case could be made, but I think the ship has sailed. I don't play BA or SW, but for DA alone you have...
Deathwing Knights
Black Knights
Dark Shroud
LS vengeance
Dark Talon
Nephilim Jetfighter
The Deathwing and Ravenwing are extremely unique and integral to the DA organization.
I don't know how players would feel if we got the entire SM codex, and then a supplement that included all of the above as extra options, plus the associated characters (including Deathwing and Ravenwing), new doctrines (we might need 3 of those too), strategems, WTs, relics etc, etc. I think people would likely cry power creep.
We get access to the above at the expense of not having centurions, thunderfire cannons, the fighters, sternguard, vanguard veterans, etc.
Sure, you could make a supplement with just the extra units plus an addendum at the start that stated what units you don't get. I'm buying the SM codex anyway, so it could be OK but I feel it would be a little messy. I'd rather just buy a DA codex..
I'm going to use the Ravenwing - they're Astartes on bikes. Every Chapter has Astartes on bikes, but the lore wise, the Ravenwing operate differently. So what justifies their getting rules? Lore-wise they operate differently, but are functionally identical, model wise they're just aesthetically different, so it all boils down to giving them a rule just to create a different army because you can. So now you have Ravenwing with new rules - for DA players does it not feel like cheating that you've got an extra rule in your arsenal, for a unit that is functionally identical, whilst others go without just because of a disinterest in the lore?
Obviously, that is avoiding the fact that Ravenwing may be balanced by the fact that DA can't take a different unit, but if that isn't a reality, what is providing the balance? Is it just omissions of units, or do they get certain traits and rules taken away too. I'm just curious is all.
EDIT: Ignore this. @bullyboy basically answered this by pointing out DA can't take stuff like Vanguards. So I understand the balance now
bullyboy wrote: I think earlier editions that case could be made, but I think the ship has sailed. I don't play BA or SW, but for DA alone you have...
Deathwing Knights Black Knights Dark Shroud LS vengeance Dark Talon Nephilim Jetfighter
The Deathwing and Ravenwing are extremely unique and integral to the DA organization.
I don't know how players would feel if we got the entire SM codex, and then a supplement that included all of the above as extra options, plus the associated characters (including Deathwing and Ravenwing), new doctrines (we might need 3 of those too), strategems, WTs, relics etc, etc. I think people would likely cry power creep.
We get access to the above at the expense of not having centurions, thunderfire cannons, the fighters, sternguard, vanguard veterans, etc.
Sure, you could make a supplement with just the extra units plus an addendum at the start that stated what units you don't get. I'm buying the SM codex anyway, so it could be OK but I feel it would be a little messy. I'd rather just buy a DA codex..
Exactly my point of view. Going back to v3 with DA/BA and SW as codex supplement could make sense from a rule perspective (more simplicity / fluidity) but it is just too late considering every units those specific chapters got over the years. GW, on the other side, seems to be doing the exact opposite : for chaos they separated CSM with thousand sons and death guard, to give more flesh to the specificity of all those chapters, and they won't go back.
I'm going to use the Ravenwing - they're Astartes on bikes. Every Chapter has Astartes on bikes, but the lore wise, the Ravenwing operate differently. So what justifies their getting rules? Lore-wise they operate differently, but are functionally identical, model wise they're just aesthetically different, so it all boils down to giving them a rule just to create a different army because you can. So now you have Ravenwing with new rules - for DA players does it not feel like cheating that you've got an extra rule in your arsenal, for a unit that is functionally identical, whilst others go without just because of a disinterest in the lore?
Ravenwings are not using the same units - they have two specific land speeder, a specific bike unit, two specific HQ, and the DA's air units are not pilotted by techmarines but by ravenwing DA, and thus are part of ravenwing (and are specific to DA).
Ravenwings are not using the same units - they have two specific land speeder, a specific bike unit, two specific HQ, and the DA's air units are not pilotted by techmarines but by ravenwing DA, and thus are part of ravenwing (and are specific to DA).
I don;t have the current Codex- how different are they to the baseline units? (Not including HQ's)
Ravenwings are not using the same units - they have two specific land speeder, a specific bike unit, two specific HQ, and the DA's air units are not pilotted by techmarines but by ravenwing DA, and thus are part of ravenwing (and are specific to DA).
I don;t have the current Codex- how different are they to the baseline units? (Not including HQ's)
Black Knights are bikes armed with plasma talon (assault 2 18" plasma weapon) and corvus hammer (+1 Str -1 AP d3 dmg on a 6) and the sergeant can take a melta bomb (plus they all have one extra attack). They are like elite bike. The land speeder vengeance have two huge plasma canons and utterly suck ass, the darkshroud is a land speeder with a heavybolter/assault canon that give a -1 to hit 6" bubble and has a cool lore. As for the dark talon and the nephilim they are very different from the storm talon.
In the 3rd, the ravenwing was just a group of normal bike in black. Nowadays it's not the case imo.
Ravenwings are not using the same units - they have two specific land speeder, a specific bike unit, two specific HQ, and the DA's air units are not pilotted by techmarines but by ravenwing DA, and thus are part of ravenwing (and are specific to DA).
I don;t have the current Codex- how different are they to the baseline units? (Not including HQ's)
Black Knights are bikes armed with plasma talon (assault 2 18" plasma weapon) and corvus hammer (+1 Str -1 AP d3 dmg on a 6) and the sergeant can take a melta bomb. They are like elite bike. The land speeder vengeance have two huge plasma canons and utterly suck ass, the darkshroud is a land speeder with a heavybolter/assault canon that give a -1 to hit 6" bubble and has a cool lore.
As for the dark talon and the nephilim they are very different from the storm talon.
In the 3rd, the ravenwing was just a group of normal bike in black. Nowadays it's not the case imo.
Well seeing as the Bikers are still really the same and the Land Speeders can be consolidated into a single unit entry with the options, and that the Jetfighter behaves the same as the Talon...what's your argument?
Ravenwings are not using the same units - they have two specific land speeder, a specific bike unit, two specific HQ, and the DA's air units are not pilotted by techmarines but by ravenwing DA, and thus are part of ravenwing (and are specific to DA).
I don;t have the current Codex- how different are they to the baseline units? (Not including HQ's)
Black Knights are bikes armed with plasma talon (assault 2 18" plasma weapon) and corvus hammer (+1 Str -1 AP d3 dmg on a 6) and the sergeant can take a melta bomb. They are like elite bike. The land speeder vengeance have two huge plasma canons and utterly suck ass, the darkshroud is a land speeder with a heavybolter/assault canon that give a -1 to hit 6" bubble and has a cool lore. As for the dark talon and the nephilim they are very different from the storm talon.
In the 3rd, the ravenwing was just a group of normal bike in black. Nowadays it's not the case imo.
Well seeing as the Bikers are still really the same and the Land Speeders can be consolidated into a single unit entry with the options, and that the Jetfighter behaves the same as the Talon...what's your argument?
Black Knight have one extra attack (and they all have 8 in Cd), and the land speeder darkshroud/vengeance move up to 12" and not 16 like normal land speeder, but have T6 and not T5, and three more wounds (from 6W to 9).
They are very different and can't be "consolidated" into a single entry.
Not a dark angel player but the bikes are literally not the same, they have a bunch of options that are not in the standard codex.
As for just consolidating the speeders and flyers how does that work when the kits are literally different in both physical size and option. If someone put down a standard landspeeder and said this is a darkshroud at best I consider that a one time proxy and then I'd want them to go out and buy the proper model.
Same with the flyers, they are a different size and have very different armaments.
I just really cannot understand what the point of consolidating everything is though. If this was a time before the models had been made, maybe it would be worth talking about. But now, why not just let people have their toys even if they're only a little different?
Ravenwings are not using the same units - they have two specific land speeder, a specific bike unit, two specific HQ, and the DA's air units are not pilotted by techmarines but by ravenwing DA, and thus are part of ravenwing (and are specific to DA).
I don;t have the current Codex- how different are they to the baseline units? (Not including HQ's)
Black Knights are bikes armed with plasma talon (assault 2 18" plasma weapon) and corvus hammer (+1 Str -1 AP d3 dmg on a 6) and the sergeant can take a melta bomb. They are like elite bike. The land speeder vengeance have two huge plasma canons and utterly suck ass, the darkshroud is a land speeder with a heavybolter/assault canon that give a -1 to hit 6" bubble and has a cool lore.
As for the dark talon and the nephilim they are very different from the storm talon.
In the 3rd, the ravenwing was just a group of normal bike in black. Nowadays it's not the case imo.
Well seeing as the Bikers are still really the same and the Land Speeders can be consolidated into a single unit entry with the options, and that the Jetfighter behaves the same as the Talon...what's your argument?
Black Knight have one extra attack (and they all have 8 in Cd), and the land speeder darkshroud/vengeance move up to 12" and not 16 like normal land speeder, but have T6 and not T5, and three more wounds (from 6W to 9).
They are very different and can't be "consolidated" into a single entry.
So they are veterans on Bikes with a few weapon options?
The Dark Shroud does seem somewhatmore different.
And the Terminators rules wise are different?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stux wrote: I just really cannot understand what the point of consolidating everything is though. If this was a time before the models had been made, maybe it would be worth talking about. But now, why not just let people have their toys even if they're only a little different?
Just comes across as petty in all honesty.
Please read the OP- strangely enough its also about giving people more options rather than just a few codex armies for no real reason.
Ravenwings are not using the same units - they have two specific land speeder, a specific bike unit, two specific HQ, and the DA's air units are not pilotted by techmarines but by ravenwing DA, and thus are part of ravenwing (and are specific to DA).
I don;t have the current Codex- how different are they to the baseline units? (Not including HQ's)
Black Knights are bikes armed with plasma talon (assault 2 18" plasma weapon) and corvus hammer (+1 Str -1 AP d3 dmg on a 6) and the sergeant can take a melta bomb. They are like elite bike. The land speeder vengeance have two huge plasma canons and utterly suck ass, the darkshroud is a land speeder with a heavybolter/assault canon that give a -1 to hit 6" bubble and has a cool lore.
As for the dark talon and the nephilim they are very different from the storm talon.
In the 3rd, the ravenwing was just a group of normal bike in black. Nowadays it's not the case imo.
Well seeing as the Bikers are still really the same and the Land Speeders can be consolidated into a single unit entry with the options, and that the Jetfighter behaves the same as the Talon...what's your argument?
Black Knight have one extra attack (and they all have 8 in Cd), and the land speeder darkshroud/vengeance move up to 12" and not 16 like normal land speeder, but have T6 and not T5, and three more wounds (from 6W to 9).
They are very different and can't be "consolidated" into a single entry.
So they are veterans on Bikes with a few weapon options?
The Dark Shroud does seem somewhatmore different.
And the Terminators rules wise are different?
Deathwing terminators have the inner circle rule (one of the few unit totally immune to moral). They can take both close combat and long range weapons in a unit, they can take a watcher in the dark that gives them some kind of save against psychic powers, and have access to the plasma cannon (DA are huge fans of plasma for lore reasons - they have a tons of old tech). Deathwing Knight are close combat specialists with unique weapons (something like a thunder hammer but with no malus to hit and a flail +2 str -3 AP D2 with no damage lost). There's also a deathwing apothecary, a deathwing ancient and a deathwing champion that have no equivalent in other chapters (and are all elite, not HQ).
You give the ability to mix weapons in all Marine Terminator Squads
Add an option for fearless
Add Plasma Cannon to options
Also add an option in the DA Armoury for "Watcher in the Dark"
Deathwing Knight Option in armoury
Done. Nothing lost, more options for others
The Elite Deathwing - what in the fluff makes them different from Elite (elite) terminators that other Chapters would have. Why would some Chapters not have Ancients in Teminator armour but called something else.
Mr Morden wrote: I own reasonable Dark Angels and Wolves armies (about 3000pts each) and some Blood Angels (about 1500pts).
There has always been alot of discussion of the "unique" units that have been given to the Angels and Wolves to make their codex fuller and boost sales, especially since the "basic" marine range has been complete for years (one of the reasons for Primaris).
However looking at the actual units - how many of them are actually in any way unique, how many would not actually be represented in some form in other Chapters both in terms of Lore and game stats.
The Librarian Dreadnoughts are only in one chapter? Really?
No other Chapter has Sargeants leading squads in Terminator armour? Isn't that an Iron Hands thing too?
No other Chapter has more flexible teminator squads mixing close and ranged combat versons?
No other Chapter has mutations like Wolfen - isn't that a Black Dragons thing
No other Chapter rides beasts (much as I hate Wolves on Wolves) to battle?
Surely the basic unit templates for pretty much every Unique unit could and should be expanded to include these slight variations, with the relevant Chapter Keyword allowing access to a few other special rules /armoury should cover anything else?
What am I missing here. What would be lost by allowing those units be represeted in other Chapters?
It would also remove the problems of trying to cater for fans of these Chapters wanting everything plus their own "unique" units to make them Marines+ or having to have lesser versions of the same unit so that the three Chapters can retain a sense of specialness.
thanks
the horse is dead, stop beating it.
seriously, this argument has been had how many times now? give it a rest.
Mr Morden wrote: I own reasonable Dark Angels and Wolves armies (about 3000pts each) and some Blood Angels (about 1500pts).
There has always been alot of discussion of the "unique" units that have been given to the Angels and Wolves to make their codex fuller and boost sales, especially since the "basic" marine range has been complete for years (one of the reasons for Primaris).
However looking at the actual units - how many of them are actually in any way unique, how many would not actually be represented in some form in other Chapters both in terms of Lore and game stats.
The Librarian Dreadnoughts are only in one chapter? Really?
No other Chapter has Sargeants leading squads in Terminator armour? Isn't that an Iron Hands thing too?
No other Chapter has more flexible teminator squads mixing close and ranged combat versons?
No other Chapter has mutations like Wolfen - isn't that a Black Dragons thing
No other Chapter rides beasts (much as I hate Wolves on Wolves) to battle?
Surely the basic unit templates for pretty much every Unique unit could and should be expanded to include these slight variations, with the relevant Chapter Keyword allowing access to a few other special rules /armoury should cover anything else?
What am I missing here. What would be lost by allowing those units be represeted in other Chapters?
It would also remove the problems of trying to cater for fans of these Chapters wanting everything plus their own "unique" units to make them Marines+ or having to have lesser versions of the same unit so that the three Chapters can retain a sense of specialness.
thanks
the horse is dead, stop beating it.
seriously, this argument has been had how many times now? give it a rest.
Well in the words of facvourite tv character -
your not my supervisor!
So I can, I believe discuss whatever I like on this forum as long as it stays on topic and no rules are broken?
Given we are once again being drowned in Marine stuff I think its reaonable topical.
Once upon a time (2nd ed), this basically wasn't much of a thing - Ultramarines could take terminator veteran sergeants (Chaos could do it too) and most of the unique units we see today were pretty much unique in name only. The only truly unique stuff other than named characters was pretty much:
1. Ultramarines had a veteran tac squad (proto sternguard)
2. Blood Angels had a veteran assault squad (proto vanguard), and the Death Company
3. Dark Angels had 3 colour schemes and a slightly different weapon load out on the landspeeder model
4. Space Wolves got the very first standalone codex and have always been the odd one out
20+ years of the big four being poster boys for the entire franchise has led to minor differences becoming a bit exaggerated; for example originally all terminator squads had the option to be mixed load out - but only DA/SW ever had a mixed load box set so you rarely saw anything else.
Stux wrote: I just really cannot understand what the point of consolidating everything is though. If this was a time before the models had been made, maybe it would be worth talking about. But now, why not just let people have their toys even if they're only a little different?
Just comes across as petty in all honesty.
A big problem is that “consolidate the marines” means different things to different people.
Some think it means to be rid of chapter unique units/options and put it all in one book.
Some think it means to take units that are not “unique” enough and give them to everyone, but still bring everything into one book.
Some think it means to take all the data sheets and rules with (or maybe without) some minor tweaks and make a light brick of a book.
Some think it means to do what GW is currently doing with the Codex Space Marines and supplements.
The Deathwing situation is a little different. I feel that all chapters should be able to mix and match heavy/close combat weapons, that shouldn't be a DW only thing.
However, Deathwing Knights are a thing and no other army has them. Since we don't have non terminator infantry in the First Company, I think this is a good thing.
Stux wrote: I just really cannot understand what the point of consolidating everything is though. If this was a time before the models had been made, maybe it would be worth talking about. But now, why not just let people have their toys even if they're only a little different?
Just comes across as petty in all honesty.
A big problem is that “consolidate the marines” means different things to different people.
Some think it means to be rid of chapter unique units/options and put it all in one book.
Some think it means to take units that are not “unique” enough and give them to everyone, but still bring everything into one book.
Some think it means to take all the data sheets and rules with (or maybe without) some minor tweaks and make a light brick of a book.
Some think it means to do what GW is currently doing with the Codex Space Marines and supplements.
It should be clarified
It can't be clarified - because everyone wants different things. That has been and will continue to be the case.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: The Deathwing situation is a little different. I feel that all chapters should be able to mix and match heavy/close combat weapons, that shouldn't be a DW only thing.
Oh sure, it doesn't HAVE to be that. What I like is that the differences in their lore lead to some kind of mechanical difference in the datasheet. I love that stuff, it makes interacting with the game a richer experience for me. I don't really care if it's this mechanic specifically in this instance, I would obviously prefer it to be something I would use more.
I'm certainly of the opinion that most of the options added to the snowflake codexes were done solely to justify themselves and are often ridiculously (Space wolves being the most egregious example) and I don't think I (or the two you mentioned) am the only one who think something like Murderfang detracts from those armies rather than adds to them.The options might not even be taken by the players using that codex, and seem to only care about them when a topic like this shows up in which case they will defend them to the hilt!
Whats worse is that the existence of the unique options seem to result in similar options being precluded from other chapters. it makes sense for White Scars to have biker veterans and the supplement would have been a good place to make them. But apparently only Dark Angels are allowed to have them in order to protect that uniqueness. Something like heavy flamers for Salamanders Tacticals makes since considering their association with the forge and close combat, but only Blood Angels have access to. I get that "No model, no rules" is part of that, but as I said in my first point these models were only added to justify that uniqueness.
Mr. Morden isn't arguing to remove all these options, it's possible to still have an element of loreful differences, and my problem has been a pursuit of uniqueness for a smaller group at the expense of others. It is not "pettiness", as people try to characterize it as.
Supposedly the primaris stuff fixed the defects in the geneseeds. So Wulfen and Blackrage and whatever are just gone once everyone has either been replaced with primaris recruits or been upgraded to a primaris.
Then you have the wolf riders. Which is neat but now the primaris space marines are half again as big as their regular marine cousins. Unless there are new bigger wolves thats going to come to an end.
Everything else is just stuff everyone should have. Or won't even be an issue anymore. Terminator armor won't exist, it will be gravis or whatever other thing they come up with. Paint them bone colored and now they are Deathwing. Paint the inevitable Primaris Bikes black and you have Ravenwing.
it's strongly implied that Crawl perhaps over promised re Primaris. remember Primaris Marines are maybe 2? 3 hundred years old tops (stasis doesn't count) we didn't see a TON of these geneseed flaws cropping up until the heresy or later with regular Marines, it could be Cawl's added stability just means he bought the chapters with sevre geneseed issues another few centuries.
Stux wrote: I just really cannot understand what the point of consolidating everything is though. If this was a time before the models had been made, maybe it would be worth talking about. But now, why not just let people have their toys even if they're only a little different?
Just comes across as petty in all honesty.
it generally is petty.
It's also the same group, bringing it up over and over.
Stux wrote: I just really cannot understand what the point of consolidating everything is though. If this was a time before the models had been made, maybe it would be worth talking about. But now, why not just let people have their toys even if they're only a little different?
Just comes across as petty in all honesty.
it generally is petty.
It's also the same group, bringing it up over and over.
in Mrr Morden's case his reason for it is obvious, he seems to think if marines are consolidated we'll see less releases and more "deserving (read as his prefered factions) will get more releases
Luke_Prowler wrote: Whats worse is that the existence of the unique options seem to result in similar options being precluded from other chapters. it makes sense for White Scars to have biker veterans and the supplement would have been a good place to make them. But apparently only Dark Angels are allowed to have them in order to protect that uniqueness. Something like heavy flamers for Salamanders Tacticals makes since considering their association with the forge and close combat, but only Blood Angels have access to. I get that "No model, no rules" is part of that, but as I said in my first point these models were only added to justify that uniqueness.
This. It's kind of dumb. And 8th edition isn't even that bad in this regard, speshul snowflakes were really comical in 7th edition (like that DA banner somehow conjuring more bullets out of thin air, or DA snowflake termies somehow touching their tiny storm shields ogether to somehow create perfect surround barrier granting better invulnerable save all around because only special snowflake training lets you touch two bits of metal that in fluff vaporize anything they touch, eh?). You basically felt they had nonsense rules that had nothing to do with fluff, rules, or even models, they were just terribad attempts at justification why new box had Termies +3, please buy them now. There is literally no reason why White Scars can't mount two plasma pistols instead of bolters on bike, or why Fist/Hands termies wouldn't be able to do shieldwall formation when both literally do that in fluff already anyway, the rules were just one gigantic middle finger shown to players of all other SM...
Martel732 wrote: Cawl should just use super-future-CRISPR to fix flaws in real time. Problem solved.
Except Cawl explicitly left alone stuff he couldn't understand and the bits he felt were the original intent of the Emperor. So, he tried to deal with black rage but the red thirst and canis helix were apparently WAD so were left as is. Sure, he could go and fix flaws every few centuries but he was working with Heresy era stock, sooner or later he is bound to run out.
Stux wrote: I just really cannot understand what the point of consolidating everything is though. If this was a time before the models had been made, maybe it would be worth talking about. But now, why not just let people have their toys even if they're only a little different?
Just comes across as petty in all honesty.
it generally is petty.
It's also the same group, bringing it up over and over.
in Mrr Morden's case his reason for it is obvious, he seems to think if marines are consolidated we'll see less releases and more "deserving (read as his prefered factions) will get more releases
Yup. Not that having a consolidation of unlike units would ever actually accomplish that.
Stux wrote: I just really cannot understand what the point of consolidating everything is though. If this was a time before the models had been made, maybe it would be worth talking about. But now, why not just let people have their toys even if they're only a little different?
Just comes across as petty in all honesty.
it generally is petty.
It's also the same group, bringing it up over and over.
in Mrr Morden's case his reason for it is obvious, he seems to think if marines are consolidated we'll see less releases and more "deserving (read as his prefered factions) will get more releases
Yup. Not that having a consolidation of unlike units would ever actually accomplish that.
hell the priamris stuff, which I'll note has been ALL the space marine releases in 8uth edition (excluding like 3 leuiteants) is pretty much universal to all space marine codices.
Stux wrote: I for one would want to continue having unique stuff for unique chapters. It makes them much more enjoyable to collect and play for me.
Even if they are not unique?
Which do you think are "unique" to the various Chapters and would have no counterpart?
Depends on your standard for 'no counterpart'.
I consider Deathwing Knights unique, though obviously they are very similar to a specific loadout of Assault Terminators. But those small changes help sell that the unit is 'special'. If the only difference was fluff then I wouldn't feel that.
Likewise with Deathwing Terminators mixing regular weapons and melee in the same unit - I never actually do it, but I see it on the datasheet and think "huh, cool. That tells me something unique about the organisation of the chapter" I am intrigued.
There are some somewhat unique units then such as Black Knights and Dark Talons. The base unit exists, but they have equipment that changes how they are used quite a bit.
Truly unique units? We have the Darkshroud of course, which has no analogue in any other chapter. And of course character Landspeeders which again really help sell the unique organisation of the Ravenwing.
For me it's not good enough to say "let the lore do the work". Mechanics make lore feel real.
I don't understand - you need the actual unit options (that you never actually take ??) to make you interested in the unit rather than just the lore - why do you need the datasheet to tell you about the organisation when that is the entire point of the lore element of a codex?
Ummm yeah.
The lore gives back story to the models. I pick the models cause they are cool the lore tells me why they look that way.
The lore gives back story to the models. I pick the models cause they are cool the lore tells me why they look that way.
Lovely, no-one's saying that there can't be unique sculpts for those models. But why can't other Chapters, who's lore also suggests that they might also have access to a unit like that, not get to take a similar unit?
No-one's saying "you don't get to have any specially sculpted Deathwing models" or suchlike, it's more of a "great, you can have some cool models, with rules that cover them, and I'll also be able to use them with a different Chapter, and I'll convert them to look more like the elite unit from my Chapter!"
The lore gives back story to the models. I pick the models cause they are cool the lore tells me why they look that way.
Lovely, no-one's saying that there can't be unique sculpts for those models. But why can't other Chapters, who's lore also suggests that they might also have access to a unit like that, not get to take a similar unit?
No-one's saying "you don't get to have any specially sculpted Deathwing models" or suchlike, it's more of a "great, you can have some cool models, with rules that cover them, and I'll also be able to use them with a different Chapter, and I'll convert them to look more like the elite unit from my Chapter!"
The lore gives back story to the models. I pick the models cause they are cool the lore tells me why they look that way.
Lovely, no-one's saying that there can't be unique sculpts for those models. But why can't other Chapters, who's lore also suggests that they might also have access to a unit like that, not get to take a similar unit?
No-one's saying "you don't get to have any specially sculpted Deathwing models" or suchlike, it's more of a "great, you can have some cool models, with rules that cover them, and I'll also be able to use them with a different Chapter, and I'll convert them to look more like the elite unit from my Chapter!"
Then those models likely wouldn't sell. It's an argument about wanting to have everything. Allies fixed a lot of wanting the things. In theory. Just use whatever book and write your own army fluff it's just as easy. Also if you combine the lists I'm putting dark angels on lions and blood angels on giant Honey Badgers.
If you want to run say, black dragons with dragon wulfen, you can, just use the space wolf rules with dragon based upgrades and lizard like wulfen types, boom, jobs done.
You want the BA goodies, run a different chapter and use the BA rules, there you go.
Want the special units for DA ? I think you get what I'm going to say, get the book, make up the models and do it.
The power is yours, you don't need GW to tell you its ok to do so.
Stux wrote: I just really cannot understand what the point of consolidating everything is though. If this was a time before the models had been made, maybe it would be worth talking about. But now, why not just let people have their toys even if they're only a little different?
Just comes across as petty in all honesty.
Look at 30k. One big core book with all the units available to all the Space Marines. Eighteen 'supplements' containing Legion-specific rules, unique units, named characters, etc., fifteen of which (to date) have been helpfully consolidated into another big red compilation book.
The problem with 40k's approach is that there's so much redundancy between books that GW starts deleting things to justify printing extra books (back in 4e two-special-weapon Tacticals were a thing anyone could have, now it's Space Wolves only, for instance). The second problem is that it requires GW to place certain First Founding chapters on a pedestal above others where if you're a Blood Angel, Dark Angel, or Space Wolf you get a whole range of models and an entire Codex, while if you're an Imperial Fist, Salamander, etc. you get one model and a paragraph in the Ultramarines book about how you also exist. If there was one central Codex and a body of supplements for everyone more people would get rules because GW wouldn't have to justify writing an entire extra Space Marine Codex to throw (Chapter (X)) a bone.
As a matter of interest, for all the people who support Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Dark Angels having unique units, what's your verdict on the Ultramarines now getting Honour Guard exclusive to them?*
Its where they started. I'm not going to complain too loudly if they finally tell people to stop taking my unique stuff and stop using it in counts-as.
As for opening up Wulfen, and Sanguinary Guard for everyone - maybe not so much. I wouldn't mind a system like they set up for Design Your Own Vehicle or Special Character in the Chapter Approved for narrative missions. Even a more organized one - Start with this unit/stat line, pick this many divergences from these lists in that ratio. These are worth X points, those are worth Y, and Some Others are Z - While other chapters may have some sort of animal hybrid were-wolf crossover thing going on, nothing says their animal hybrid crossover would affect the same stats on the stat-line. Werebears might have more Toughness/Wounds while a werewolf might have more Attacks and movement.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AnomanderRake wrote: The second problem is that it requires GW to place certain First Founding chapters on a pedestal above others where if you're a Blood Angel, Dark Angel, or Space Wolf you get a whole range of models and an entire Codex, while if you're an Imperial Fist, Salamander, etc. you get one model and a paragraph in the Ultramarines book about how you also exist.
I haven't seen one yet, but my impression is the White Scars book is still one model, but at least you get two paragraphs saying you exist - and had to shell out for your own book.
I haven't seen one yet, but my impression is the White Scars book is still one model, but at least you get two paragraphs saying you exist - and had to shell out for your own book.
actually white scars get 30 pages of fluff. if you love white scars for the background, the supplement is a pretty big treat.
I haven't seen one yet, but my impression is the White Scars book is still one model, but at least you get two paragraphs saying you exist - and had to shell out for your own book.
actually white scars get 30 pages of fluff. if you love white scars for the background, the supplement is a pretty big treat.
Lets assume for now, I was being facetious/sarcastic. How many models? Still just the one?
I haven't seen one yet, but my impression is the White Scars book is still one model, but at least you get two paragraphs saying you exist - and had to shell out for your own book.
actually white scars get 30 pages of fluff. if you love white scars for the background, the supplement is a pretty big treat.
Lets assume for now, I was being facetious/sarcastic. How many models? Still just the one?
2 actually, but the khan on a bike is honestly reaching it a little, it's just a bike captain with a power spear.
IMHO for MOST chapters the supplements aren't worth buying for just the characters, but the additional goodies (relics, psykic powers etc) certainly are fun, and the fluff, if you're into that is more fluff then most get. that said if I was to judge a winner of the two supplements out right now, it'd be the Ultramarines by a mile. The White Scars is good, IF you wanna play a certain style of armor (rapid moving assault focus) but the Ultramarines have just such an amazingly flexable toolkit and hoenstly, I hope this is the trend, where the other supplements are great for an army that excells at ONE thing, but Ultramarines just have flexability
Stux wrote: I just really cannot understand what the point of consolidating everything is though. If this was a time before the models had been made, maybe it would be worth talking about. But now, why not just let people have their toys even if they're only a little different?
Just comes across as petty in all honesty.
Look at 30k. One big core book with all the units available to all the Space Marines. Eighteen 'supplements' containing Legion-specific rules, unique units, named characters, etc., fifteen of which (to date) have been helpfully consolidated into another big red compilation book.
The problem with 40k's approach is that there's so much redundancy between books that GW starts deleting things to justify printing extra books (back in 4e two-special-weapon Tacticals were a thing anyone could have, now it's Space Wolves only, for instance). The second problem is that it requires GW to place certain First Founding chapters on a pedestal above others where if you're a Blood Angel, Dark Angel, or Space Wolf you get a whole range of models and an entire Codex, while if you're an Imperial Fist, Salamander, etc. you get one model and a paragraph in the Ultramarines book about how you also exist. If there was one central Codex and a body of supplements for everyone more people would get rules because GW wouldn't have to justify writing an entire extra Space Marine Codex to throw (Chapter (X)) a bone.
I wholeheartedly agree, I'm down for the "special" chapters having unique models and fluff for specific units. But they should also be available as an upgrade for the rest of the Astartes. Primaris will give unique fluffy units for legions, just not in a timely manner. 30k is a good way to execute and maybe this is the start of it in 40k. Hell we have a legion support squad in the form of Hellblasters.
BrianDavion wrote:
I haven't seen one yet, but my impression is the White Scars book is still one model, but at least you get two paragraphs saying you exist - and had to shell out for your own book.
actually white scars get 30 pages of fluff. if you love white scars for the background, the supplement is a pretty big treat.
My sentiments exactly. the pskyer discipline for the 18th should be appropriately fiery, so I'm prepping for saying "toasty" like the dude in Mortal Kombat!
I'm looking forward to the Salamanders supplement, itll be the first "codex" I've ever bought.
Mr Morden wrote: I own reasonable Dark Angels and Wolves armies (about 3000pts each) and some Blood Angels (about 1500pts).
There has always been alot of discussion of the "unique" units that have been given to the Angels and Wolves to make their codex fuller and boost sales, especially since the "basic" marine range has been complete for years (one of the reasons for Primaris).
However looking at the actual units - how many of them are actually in any way unique, how many would not actually be represented in some form in other Chapters both in terms of Lore and game stats.
The Librarian Dreadnoughts are only in one chapter? Really? No other Chapter has Sargeants leading squads in Terminator armour? Isn't that an Iron Hands thing too? No other Chapter has more flexible teminator squads mixing close and ranged combat versons? No other Chapter has mutations like Wolfen - isn't that a Black Dragons thing No other Chapter rides beasts (much as I hate Wolves on Wolves) to battle?
Surely the basic unit templates for pretty much every Unique unit could and should be expanded to include these slight variations, with the relevant Chapter Keyword allowing access to a few other special rules /armoury should cover anything else?
What am I missing here. What would be lost by allowing those units be represeted in other Chapters?
It would also remove the problems of trying to cater for fans of these Chapters wanting everything plus their own "unique" units to make them Marines+ or having to have lesser versions of the same unit so that the three Chapters can retain a sense of specialness.
thanks
Perfect post.
WhiteDog wrote: Black Knights are bikes armed with plasma talon (assault 2 18" plasma weapon) and corvus hammer (+1 Str -1 AP d3 dmg on a 6) and the sergeant can take a melta bomb (plus they all have one extra attack). They are like elite bike.
Why should elite bike be exclusive to DA? WHY SHOULD DA HAVE ELITE BIKE BUT WHITE SCARS SHOULD NOT????
WhiteDog wrote: The land speeder vengeance have two huge plasma canons and utterly suck ass, the darkshroud is a land speeder with a heavybolter/assault canon that give a -1 to hit 6" bubble and has a cool lore. As for the dark talon and the nephilim they are very different from the storm talon.
Why should those vehicles be exclusive to 1 chapter??? Chapters don't even make their own wargear!!
Mr Morden wrote: I own reasonable Dark Angels and Wolves armies (about 3000pts each) and some Blood Angels (about 1500pts).
There has always been alot of discussion of the "unique" units that have been given to the Angels and Wolves to make their codex fuller and boost sales, especially since the "basic" marine range has been complete for years (one of the reasons for Primaris).
However looking at the actual units - how many of them are actually in any way unique, how many would not actually be represented in some form in other Chapters both in terms of Lore and game stats.
The Librarian Dreadnoughts are only in one chapter? Really? No other Chapter has Sargeants leading squads in Terminator armour? Isn't that an Iron Hands thing too? No other Chapter has more flexible teminator squads mixing close and ranged combat versons? No other Chapter has mutations like Wolfen - isn't that a Black Dragons thing No other Chapter rides beasts (much as I hate Wolves on Wolves) to battle?
Surely the basic unit templates for pretty much every Unique unit could and should be expanded to include these slight variations, with the relevant Chapter Keyword allowing access to a few other special rules /armoury should cover anything else?
What am I missing here. What would be lost by allowing those units be represeted in other Chapters?
It would also remove the problems of trying to cater for fans of these Chapters wanting everything plus their own "unique" units to make them Marines+ or having to have lesser versions of the same unit so that the three Chapters can retain a sense of specialness.
thanks
Perfect post.
WhiteDog wrote: Black Knights are bikes armed with plasma talon (assault 2 18" plasma weapon) and corvus hammer (+1 Str -1 AP d3 dmg on a 6) and the sergeant can take a melta bomb (plus they all have one extra attack). They are like elite bike.
Why should elite bike be exclusive to DA? WHY SHOULD DA HAVE ELITE BIKE BUT WHITE SCARS SHOULD NOT????
WhiteDog wrote: The land speeder vengeance have two huge plasma canons and utterly suck ass, the darkshroud is a land speeder with a heavybolter/assault canon that give a -1 to hit 6" bubble and has a cool lore. As for the dark talon and the nephilim they are very different from the storm talon.
Why should those vehicles be exclusive to 1 chapter??? Chapters don't even make their own wargear!!
Like your pals you have very little knowledge on the topic you wish to talk about and it's a bit aggravating. You should, maybe, read some DA fluff to understand why they have what they have. The first legion have specific tools because unlike other legions they were crusading beore the agreement between mars and terra and their armory is in the Rock. Wishing to protect their secrets, they also keep mars and all mechanicum at distance, which is why their techmarine don't pilot their flyers - if you will they are the exact opposite of the IH in this regard. This is why they have tons of plasma weapon (that are rare for other chapters because most STC are lost and only a few planets can make them), some anti-grav bikes, a lot of terminator armors (enough not only to completly stuff out their own first compagny, but also all of their successor chapters first compagny). The land speeder vengeance/darkshroud is a bigger landspeeder that only the DA have because they are the one who retreived the STC and those land speeder are mounted with relics that no one can build anyway ... The darkshroud is mounted with a statue from caliban that has been somewhat corrupted by the warp after the fall of the planet.
As for the "elite" bikes and the white scars, those two are totally different. The white scars are a fast attack army : they should have more bike variant than ravenwing, but truthfully there are not enough white scars players to push GW into creating more units to them. The ravenwing black knight on the other side are bikes that have a specific role (hunting fallen) and are equiped in order to accomplish this task with ... wait for it ... plasma weapons because the DA have more plasma than anyone else. Maybe you're starting to get the trend.
I haven't seen one yet, but my impression is the White Scars book is still one model, but at least you get two paragraphs saying you exist - and had to shell out for your own book.
actually white scars get 30 pages of fluff. if you love white scars for the background, the supplement is a pretty big treat.
Lets assume for now, I was being facetious/sarcastic. How many models? Still just the one?
2 actually, but the khan on a bike is honestly reaching it a little, it's just a bike captain with a power spear.
IMHO for MOST chapters the supplements aren't worth buying for just the characters, but the additional goodies (relics, psykic powers etc) certainly are fun, and the fluff, if you're into that is more fluff then most get. that said if I was to judge a winner of the two supplements out right now, it'd be the Ultramarines by a mile. The White Scars is good, IF you wanna play a certain style of armor (rapid moving assault focus) but the Ultramarines have just such an amazingly flexable toolkit and hoenstly, I hope this is the trend, where the other supplements are great for an army that excells at ONE thing, but Ultramarines just have flexability
UM are going to get about the same number of Stratagems, Psychic Powers, Fluff, etc.And a dozen or better datasheets. I don't play WS, I play UM, and I want them to have a roughly equal number of datasheets. I think I'd feel pretty ripped off if I paid the same $50-60 for 6 powers, 18 Stratagems, 6 Obj, 30 pages of fluff and 2 data sheets as someone else paid for 6 powers, 18 stratagems, 6 objectives, 30 pages of fluff, and 12 data sheets.
I'm not one of the people who thinks GW shouldn't charge for their product, but I do think their product should earn what they charge.
I haven't seen one yet, but my impression is the White Scars book is still one model, but at least you get two paragraphs saying you exist - and had to shell out for your own book.
actually white scars get 30 pages of fluff. if you love white scars for the background, the supplement is a pretty big treat.
Lets assume for now, I was being facetious/sarcastic. How many models? Still just the one?
2 actually, but the khan on a bike is honestly reaching it a little, it's just a bike captain with a power spear.
IMHO for MOST chapters the supplements aren't worth buying for just the characters, but the additional goodies (relics, psykic powers etc) certainly are fun, and the fluff, if you're into that is more fluff then most get. that said if I was to judge a winner of the two supplements out right now, it'd be the Ultramarines by a mile. The White Scars is good, IF you wanna play a certain style of armor (rapid moving assault focus) but the Ultramarines have just such an amazingly flexable toolkit and hoenstly, I hope this is the trend, where the other supplements are great for an army that excells at ONE thing, but Ultramarines just have flexability
UM are going to get about the same number of Stratagems, Psychic Powers, Fluff, etc.And a dozen or better datasheets. I don't play WS, I play UM, and I want them to have a roughly equal number of datasheets. I think I'd feel pretty ripped off if I paid the same $50-60 for 6 powers, 18 Stratagems, 6 Obj, 30 pages of fluff and 2 data sheets as someone else paid for 6 powers, 18 stratagems, 6 objectives, 30 pages of fluff, and 12 data sheets.
I'm not one of the people who thinks GW shouldn't charge for their product, but I do think their product should earn what they charge.
Sure... But the Codexes have never been fair. I'm one of the chumps that paid £25 for Codex Adeptus Custodes. That thing is tiny!
WhiteDog wrote: You should, maybe, read some DA fluff to understand why they have what they have. SNIP....The ravenwing black knight on the other side are bikes that have a specific role (hunting fallen) and are equiped in order to accomplish this task with ... wait for it ... plasma weapons because the DA have more plasma than anyone else. Maybe you're starting to get the trend.
You're referring to the fluff for the DA that changes every edition? The ones where GW created units out of wholecloth (ravenwing black knight, uparmored landspeeders, even their use of plasma), that fluff?
The DA, in the Angels of Death Codex (2nd ed), makes no mention of plasma, the uparmored speeders, or special deathwing knights. The only difference between their gear was the Ravenwing Landspeeder which had assault cannon and heavy bolter. Which eventually was retconned so everyone could upgrade to it. And their Terminators got to mix close combat weapons. That's about it. Otherwise, they look just like Ultramarines aside from the color of their armor and the robes. In Rogue Trader, the Dark Angels were the same as the Blood Angels, Blood Drinkers, Rainbow Warriors, and White Scars. Just a paint job.
So I'd be a little leery about those fluff justifications, since GW could turn around tomorrow and say that Guilliman has decided to share all those unique pieces of equipment across all of the Space Marine chapters - Baal Preds, plasma, etc.
I think that moving list building to a 30k type set up is probably the best way they could go about it. Then everyone starts out with basic units and strats, psychics, etc. Then each expansion book offers a couple of new units (the unique ones that we see now), or maybe just slightly altered unit profiles, and strats, psychics, etc. for the other chapters. Then they can expand the Marine lines with a unit or three unique to a particular chapter, but have all of the basic stuff codified and standardized across all armies.
The need for bespoke rules for everything and every weapon for every fluff army is one of the major contributors to the rules bloat and confusion we have now.
Why should elite bike be exclusive to DA? WHY SHOULD DA HAVE ELITE BIKE BUT WHITE SCARS SHOULD NOT????
WhiteDog wrote: The land speeder vengeance have two huge plasma canons and utterly suck ass, the darkshroud is a land speeder with a heavybolter/assault canon that give a -1 to hit 6" bubble and has a cool lore.
As for the dark talon and the nephilim they are very different from the storm talon.
Why should those vehicles be exclusive to 1 chapter???
Chapters don't even make their own wargear!!
So, everybody could have their own elite Bike unit - or at least they could last dex. You could take Company Veterans on Bikes and equip them however you liked. Giving them all storm shields was ridiculously cheap. So yeah, DAs have the Ravenwing Knights, but they didn't get the Company Veterans on Bikes. So, we DA players did not get that uber-customizable unit to play with, which made sense thematically because veteran Bikers were becoming Black Knights.
Similarly, there were and have been since the 4th ed DA dex dropped Codex: Space Marines units that were not in Codex: Space Marines. They weren't always such a straight equivalency as with RWBKs and Biker Vets, but they were there. Regular SM players don't get the Dark Shroud? DA players didn't get the Ironclad Dread. Regular SM players don't get the Nephilim and Dark Talon? DA players don't get the Stormtalon and the Stormhawk. And so on. Codex: SM players have not been losing out by not having Codex: DA's toys, at least not more so than the other way around. And, quite frankly, since 4th ed Codex: Dark Angels has tended to be underpowered compared to Codex: Space Marines.
WhiteDog wrote: You should, maybe, read some DA fluff to understand why they have what they have. SNIP....The ravenwing black knight on the other side are bikes that have a specific role (hunting fallen) and are equiped in order to accomplish this task with ... wait for it ... plasma weapons because the DA have more plasma than anyone else. Maybe you're starting to get the trend.
You're referring to the fluff for the DA that changes every edition? The ones where GW created units out of wholecloth (ravenwing black knight, uparmored landspeeders, even their use of plasma), that fluff?
The DA, in the Angels of Death Codex (2nd ed), makes no mention of plasma, the uparmored speeders, or special deathwing knights. The only difference between their gear was the Ravenwing Landspeeder which had assault cannon and heavy bolter. Which eventually was retconned so everyone could upgrade to it. And their Terminators got to mix close combat weapons. That's about it. Otherwise, they look just like Ultramarines aside from the color of their armor and the robes. In Rogue Trader, the Dark Angels were the same as the Blood Angels, Blood Drinkers, Rainbow Warriors, and White Scars. Just a paint job.
So I'd be a little leery about those fluff justifications, since GW could turn around tomorrow and say that Guilliman has decided to share all those unique pieces of equipment across all of the Space Marine chapters - Baal Preds, plasma, etc.
I think that moving list building to a 30k type set up is probably the best way they could go about it. Then everyone starts out with basic units and strats, psychics, etc. Then each expansion book offers a couple of new units (the unique ones that we see now), or maybe just slightly altered unit profiles, and strats, psychics, etc. for the other chapters. Then they can expand the Marine lines with a unit or three unique to a particular chapter, but have all of the basic stuff codified and standardized across all armies.
The need for bespoke rules for everything and every weapon for every fluff army is one of the major contributors to the rules bloat and confusion we have now.
If you go back to the 2nd edition, then the white scars are basically a few pictures here and there with no substance more or less. At this point, don't use the fluff to justify that white scars or any chapter have something and we go back to the 2nd ed where everybody have the same things.
I can see the merit in a 30k type list building tho, but if this solution is realized by taking DA units away, like many are suggesting here, it is a piss poor solution.
If you want to run say, black dragons with dragon wulfen, you can, just use the space wolf rules with dragon based upgrades and lizard like wulfen types, boom, jobs done.
You want the BA goodies, run a different chapter and use the BA rules, there you go.
Want the special units for DA ? I think you get what I'm going to say, get the book, make up the models and do it.
The power is yours, you don't need GW to tell you its ok to do so.
That's not what they want though. They want to run DW knights, Sanguinary Guard, ect with Guilliman giving the full benefits.
If you want to run say, black dragons with dragon wulfen, you can, just use the space wolf rules with dragon based upgrades and lizard like wulfen types, boom, jobs done.
You want the BA goodies, run a different chapter and use the BA rules, there you go.
Want the special units for DA ? I think you get what I'm going to say, get the book, make up the models and do it.
The power is yours, you don't need GW to tell you its ok to do so.
That's not what they want though. They want to run DW knights, Sanguinary Guard, ect with Guilliman giving the full benefits.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: No-one's saying "you don't get to have any specially sculpted Deathwing models" or suchlike, it's more of a "great, you can have some cool models, with rules that cover them, and I'll also be able to use them with a different Chapter, and I'll convert them to look more like the elite unit from my Chapter!"
Then those models likely wouldn't sell. It's an argument about wanting to have everything. Allies fixed a lot of wanting the things. In theory. Just use whatever book and write your own army fluff it's just as easy. Also if you combine the lists I'm putting dark angels on lions and blood angels on giant Honey Badgers.
Why on earth wouldn't those models sell? If anything, MORE people would buy them.
Dark Angels players would still want them, because they have the Dark Angels aesthetic, and some non-Dark Angels players might want them, because they have cooler looking shields, or perhaps they love the mauls, or perhaps they love the hoods. So for their Chapter (maybe Black Templars, or a homebrew one, which might not be a Dark Angels successor), they might want an elite Terminator unit.
Hell, I don't play Blood Angels, but I do want to pick up some Sanguinary Guard to use as count-as Locutarii for my 30k Ultramarines.
Dark Angels on lions would look no worse than the Space Wolves on wolves. Why can't that be a thing? Why *shouldn't* all Space Marines share units?
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:So, everybody could have their own elite Bike unit - or at least they could last dex. You could take Company Veterans on Bikes and equip them however you liked. Giving them all storm shields was ridiculously cheap. So yeah, DAs have the Ravenwing Knights, but they didn't get the Company Veterans on Bikes. So, we DA players did not get that uber-customizable unit to play with, which made sense thematically because veteran Bikers were becoming Black Knights.
Exactly - that company veterans on bikes entry should be expanded so that it would also encompass all the options of the Black Knights, because they're functionally the same unit. That way, you could have Black Knights with storm shields, because there's nothing that really suggests that Black Knights shouldn't have them.
Similarly, there were and have been since the 4th ed DA dex dropped Codex: Space Marines units that were not in Codex: Space Marines. They weren't always such a straight equivalency as with RWBKs and Biker Vets, but they were there. Regular SM players don't get the Dark Shroud? DA players didn't get the Ironclad Dread. Regular SM players don't get the Nephilim and Dark Talon? DA players don't get the Stormtalon and the Stormhawk. And so on. Codex: SM players have not been losing out by not having Codex: DA's toys, at least not more so than the other way around. And, quite frankly, since 4th ed Codex: Dark Angels has tended to be underpowered compared to Codex: Space Marines.
Good thing that the Dark Angels would then be gaining access to all normal Space Marine units too in this approach.
Dark Angels get access to all "normal" units, and every other Chapter gets access to Dark Angels goodies. The only difference becomes chapter tactics and characters/relics/stratagems.
WhiteDog wrote:I can see the merit in a 30k type list building tho, but if this solution is realized by taking DA units away, like many are suggesting here, it is a piss poor solution.
People aren't advocating removing those units. They're advocating that EVERYONE gets them, and Dark Angels would also then have access to every other unit, because that's fair.
Essentially, the only thing that would make Dark Angels unique is their chapter tactic, their lore, and their stratagems/relics/traits/characters - like every other first founding Chapter.
If you want to run say, black dragons with dragon wulfen, you can, just use the space wolf rules with dragon based upgrades and lizard like wulfen types, boom, jobs done.
You want the BA goodies, run a different chapter and use the BA rules, there you go.
Want the special units for DA ? I think you get what I'm going to say, get the book, make up the models and do it.
The power is yours, you don't need GW to tell you its ok to do so.
That's not what they want though. They want to run DW knights, Sanguinary Guard, ect with Guilliman giving the full benefits.
And what about people who don't play with Guilliman? Or don't play Ultramarines?
Why can't my homebrew successor Chapter not have Terminators who can mix weapons within the squad and an honour guard with jump packs, and be able to ride their native cavalry into battle?
"Why can't my homebrew successor Chapter not have Terminators who can mix weapons within the squad and an honour guard with jump packs, and be able to ride their native cavalry into battle? "
They can. Put the terminators in one detachment using the DA book, and the Thunderwolf riders in another using the SW book.
You give the ability to mix weapons in all Marine Terminator Squads
Add an option for fearless
Add Plasma Cannon to options
Also add an option in the DA Armoury for "Watcher in the Dark"
Deathwing Knight Option in armoury
Done. Nothing lost, more options for others
The Elite Deathwing - what in the fluff makes them different from Elite (elite) terminators that other Chapters would have. Why would some Chapters not have Ancients in Teminator armour but called something else.
On top of that, Dark Angels are already basically Fearless for their Tactic, so pretending that unique is kinda silly. Plus nobody is mixing the melee and range because it creates a squad that doesn't do anything but sit pretty on a shelf and only gets busted out for Space Hulk.
The only real unique units that Dark Angels have are the Deathwing Knights, Deathwing Champ, the Land Speeder thing (which can be a single entry where you buy one option or the other, but I guess a better question is if Dark Angels should be the only Chapter ever that slapped Plasma Cannons on one. Seeing as they could all do it during the Heresy, I wager NO) and the Dark Talon.
If you want to run say, black dragons with dragon wulfen, you can, just use the space wolf rules with dragon based upgrades and lizard like wulfen types, boom, jobs done.
You want the BA goodies, run a different chapter and use the BA rules, there you go.
Want the special units for DA ? I think you get what I'm going to say, get the book, make up the models and do it.
The power is yours, you don't need GW to tell you its ok to do so.
That's not what they want though. They want to run DW knights, Sanguinary Guard, ect with Guilliman giving the full benefits.
No, people know that certain units being exclusive for no good reason is stupid and always has been.
WhiteDog wrote: The land speeder vengeance have two huge plasma canons and utterly suck ass, the darkshroud is a land speeder with a heavybolter/assault canon that give a -1 to hit 6" bubble and has a cool lore.
As for the dark talon and the nephilim they are very different from the storm talon.
Why should those vehicles be exclusive to 1 chapter???
Chapters don't even make their own wargear!!
The Dark Angels always have cause somehow we maintain over a hundred suits if Terminator armor and feth knows how many bikes and land speeders also a jetbike. So it would seem your argument is based on rulebook fluff which should be taken as propaganda for your faction as truth is a three edged sword
WhiteDog wrote: Like your pals you have very little knowledge on the topic you wish to talk about and it's a bit aggravating. You should, maybe, read some DA fluff to understand why they have what they have. The first legion have specific tools because unlike other legions they were crusading beore the agreement between mars and terra and their armory is in the Rock. Wishing to protect their secrets, they also keep mars and all mechanicum at distance, which is why their techmarine don't pilot their flyers - if you will they are the exact opposite of the IH in this regard. This is why they have tons of plasma weapon (that are rare for other chapters because most STC are lost and only a few planets can make them), some anti-grav bikes, a lot of terminator armors (enough not only to completly stuff out their own first compagny, but also all of their successor chapters first compagny). The land speeder vengeance/darkshroud is a bigger landspeeder that only the DA have because they are the one who retreived the STC and those land speeder are mounted with relics that no one can build anyway ... The darkshroud is mounted with a statue from caliban that has been somewhat corrupted by the warp after the fall of the planet.
As for the "elite" bikes and the white scars, those two are totally different. The white scars are a fast attack army : they should have more bike variant than ravenwing, but truthfully there are not enough white scars players to push GW into creating more units to them. The ravenwing black knight on the other side are bikes that have a specific role (hunting fallen) and are equiped in order to accomplish this task with ... wait for it ... plasma weapons because the DA have more plasma than anyone else. Maybe you're starting to get the trend.
Blah blah blah.
That's just bad ad hoc fluff to justify the unique units. Marines aren't running tank factories White Dog, it's not their role, they get standardized gear from the mechanicum. And a ten years head start on 10000 years? As a justification for DA having all the plasma? It's just silly dude. Random Astra Militarum guys get plasma, get real.
I love how to catch people, your best weapon is… plasma, LOLOLOL.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: So, everybody could have their own elite Bike unit - or at least they could last dex. You could take Company Veterans on Bikes and equip them however you liked. Giving them all storm shields was ridiculously cheap. So yeah, DAs have the Ravenwing Knights, but they didn't get the Company Veterans on Bikes. So, we DA players did not get that uber-customizable unit to play with, which made sense thematically because veteran Bikers were becoming Black Knights.
Great, let's get back to having Company Veterans on Bikes and if you want to play fluffy DA you give them all plasma weapons and you use the stratagems from the supplement that represent how they are adept at catching fallen.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: Regular SM players don't get the Dark Shroud? DA players didn't get the Ironclad Dread. Regular SM players don't get the Nephilim and Dark Talon? DA players don't get the Stormtalon and the Stormhawk. And so on.
Let's have everyone have both, and remove the annoying inconsistencies from having different version of the exact same things at the same time!
If you want to run say, black dragons with dragon wulfen, you can, just use the space wolf rules with dragon based upgrades and lizard like wulfen types, boom, jobs done.
You want the BA goodies, run a different chapter and use the BA rules, there you go.
Want the special units for DA ? I think you get what I'm going to say, get the book, make up the models and do it.
The power is yours, you don't need GW to tell you its ok to do so.
That's not what they want though. They want to run DW knights, Sanguinary Guard, ect with Guilliman giving the full benefits.
No, people know that certain units being exclusive for no good reason is stupid and always has been.
No, some people think that certain units being exclusive is stupid and always has been.
It's an opinion, not an objective fact, and it is obviously not one shared by everyone (source: this thread) - please stop trying to present it as a fact.
Why do SW, BA, DA & Ultras get more stuff? Well, that's a question for the guys who were in the Design Studio during second edition, and created Codex: Space Wolves, Codex: Ultramarines and Codex: Angels of Death. Forging them into distinct factions - and SW, at least, were even distinct during Rogue Trader - happened then, and the Studio have continued to have ideas for each that has generated new units and new characters over time.
Maybe there was originally a plan to get back to the other five FF chapters eventually, maybe they just didn't have ideas for them back then. Salamanders did briefly have a distinct army list in Codex: Armageddon, though I don't remember how different they were then compared to a standard Codex chapter.
WhiteDog wrote: You should, maybe, read some DA fluff to understand why they have what they have. SNIP....The ravenwing black knight on the other side are bikes that have a specific role (hunting fallen) and are equiped in order to accomplish this task with ... wait for it ... plasma weapons because the DA have more plasma than anyone else. Maybe you're starting to get the trend.
You're referring to the fluff for the DA that changes every edition? The ones where GW created units out of wholecloth (ravenwing black knight, uparmored landspeeders, even their use of plasma), that fluff?
The DA, in the Angels of Death Codex (2nd ed), makes no mention of plasma, the uparmored speeders, or special deathwing knights. The only difference between their gear was the Ravenwing Landspeeder which had assault cannon and heavy bolter. Which eventually was retconned so everyone could upgrade to it. And their Terminators got to mix close combat weapons. That's about it. Otherwise, they look just like Ultramarines aside from the color of their armor and the robes. In Rogue Trader, the Dark Angels were the same as the Blood Angels, Blood Drinkers, Rainbow Warriors, and White Scars. Just a paint job.
So I'd be a little leery about those fluff justifications, since GW could turn around tomorrow and say that Guilliman has decided to share all those unique pieces of equipment across all of the Space Marine chapters - Baal Preds, plasma, etc.
I think that moving list building to a 30k type set up is probably the best way they could go about it. Then everyone starts out with basic units and strats, psychics, etc. Then each expansion book offers a couple of new units (the unique ones that we see now), or maybe just slightly altered unit profiles, and strats, psychics, etc. for the other chapters. Then they can expand the Marine lines with a unit or three unique to a particular chapter, but have all of the basic stuff codified and standardized across all armies.
The need for bespoke rules for everything and every weapon for every fluff army is one of the major contributors to the rules bloat and confusion we have now.
Angels of death is 23 years old things have changed
One I would love to see the Dark Angels give guilliman the finger and go about doing what they do.
Two love the way my army is setup and I don't need Libby dreads or sanguinary guard, or thunder wolf cav. The real problem is if you created 9 codexes for the first founders (and you would then produce nine spiky codexes) they would hopefully hit the balance goal where in we'd like to be playable but compelling to draw people into new armies.
In this scenario you would have 5 elite units to come up with. That's 5 kits that need to pay for themselves. Is there enough interest? Is there enough new ideas? I'd argue if they could they would have by now. Also if you made a combined Marines book that covers all the factions all the kits to sell them the book would be enormous and unwieldy.
Do the deserve a book. Probably. Is it financially viable.... I don't think so.
WhiteDog wrote: You should, maybe, read some DA fluff to understand why they have what they have. SNIP....The ravenwing black knight on the other side are bikes that have a specific role (hunting fallen) and are equiped in order to accomplish this task with ... wait for it ... plasma weapons because the DA have more plasma than anyone else. Maybe you're starting to get the trend.
You're referring to the fluff for the DA that changes every edition? The ones where GW created units out of wholecloth (ravenwing black knight, uparmored landspeeders, even their use of plasma), that fluff?
The DA, in the Angels of Death Codex (2nd ed), makes no mention of plasma, the uparmored speeders, or special deathwing knights. The only difference between their gear was the Ravenwing Landspeeder which had assault cannon and heavy bolter. Which eventually was retconned so everyone could upgrade to it. And their Terminators got to mix close combat weapons. That's about it. Otherwise, they look just like Ultramarines aside from the color of their armor and the robes. In Rogue Trader, the Dark Angels were the same as the Blood Angels, Blood Drinkers, Rainbow Warriors, and White Scars. Just a paint job.
So I'd be a little leery about those fluff justifications, since GW could turn around tomorrow and say that Guilliman has decided to share all those unique pieces of equipment across all of the Space Marine chapters - Baal Preds, plasma, etc.
I think that moving list building to a 30k type set up is probably the best way they could go about it. Then everyone starts out with basic units and strats, psychics, etc. Then each expansion book offers a couple of new units (the unique ones that we see now), or maybe just slightly altered unit profiles, and strats, psychics, etc. for the other chapters. Then they can expand the Marine lines with a unit or three unique to a particular chapter, but have all of the basic stuff codified and standardized across all armies.
The need for bespoke rules for everything and every weapon for every fluff army is one of the major contributors to the rules bloat and confusion we have now. [/qut]
One I would love to see the Dark Angels give guilliman the finger and go about doing what they do.
Twoi love the way my army is setup and I don't need Libby dreads or sanguinary guard, or thunder wolf cav. The real problem is if you created 9 codexes for the first founders (and you would then produce nine spiky codexes) they would hopefully hit the balance goal where in we'd like to be playable but compelling to draw people into new armies.
In this scenario you would have 5 elite units to come up with. That's 5 kits that need to pay for themselves. Is there enough interest? Is there enough new ideas? I'd argue if they could they would have by now. Also if you made a combined Marines book that covers all the factions all the kits to sell them the book would be enormous and unwieldy.
Do the deserve a book. Probably. Is it financially viable.... I don't think so.
And we have discussed already in this thread ways of keeping all the "unique" units that mostly involve adding a line or two to unit templates.....
Remember none of these super special units existed that long ago - I still contend that one of the reasons for them AND Primaris was that the base marine range was pretty much complete.
If you want to consolidate everything in one codex you will eventually make some units disappear that's called normal logic. Let's say GW give the dark talon and the nephilim to all space marine : why would they keep the dark talon and the nephilim, AND the storm talon and the storm hawk ? Those units have the same exact tactical role and are thought as substitutes... It's the same for the storm hawk and the stormwolf.
So yes, giving all SM chapters the same units without any forms of differences will result in the disappearance of some units.
WhiteDog wrote: Like your pals you have very little knowledge on the topic you wish to talk about and it's a bit aggravating. You should, maybe, read some DA fluff to understand why they have what they have. The first legion have specific tools because unlike other legions they were crusading beore the agreement between mars and terra and their armory is in the Rock. Wishing to protect their secrets, they also keep mars and all mechanicum at distance, which is why their techmarine don't pilot their flyers - if you will they are the exact opposite of the IH in this regard. This is why they have tons of plasma weapon (that are rare for other chapters because most STC are lost and only a few planets can make them), some anti-grav bikes, a lot of terminator armors (enough not only to completly stuff out their own first compagny, but also all of their successor chapters first compagny). The land speeder vengeance/darkshroud is a bigger landspeeder that only the DA have because they are the one who retreived the STC and those land speeder are mounted with relics that no one can build anyway ... The darkshroud is mounted with a statue from caliban that has been somewhat corrupted by the warp after the fall of the planet.
As for the "elite" bikes and the white scars, those two are totally different. The white scars are a fast attack army : they should have more bike variant than ravenwing, but truthfully there are not enough white scars players to push GW into creating more units to them. The ravenwing black knight on the other side are bikes that have a specific role (hunting fallen) and are equiped in order to accomplish this task with ... wait for it ... plasma weapons because the DA have more plasma than anyone else. Maybe you're starting to get the trend.
Blah blah blah. That's just bad ad hoc fluff to justify the unique units. Marines aren't running tank factories White Dog, it's not their role, they get standardized gear from the mechanicum. And a ten years head start on 10000 years? As a justification for DA having all the plasma? It's just silly dude. Random Astra Militarum guys get plasma, get real. I love how to catch people, your best weapon is… plasma, LOLOLOL.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: So, everybody could have their own elite Bike unit - or at least they could last dex. You could take Company Veterans on Bikes and equip them however you liked. Giving them all storm shields was ridiculously cheap. So yeah, DAs have the Ravenwing Knights, but they didn't get the Company Veterans on Bikes. So, we DA players did not get that uber-customizable unit to play with, which made sense thematically because veteran Bikers were becoming Black Knights.
Great, let's get back to having Company Veterans on Bikes and if you want to play fluffy DA you give them all plasma weapons and you use the stratagems from the supplement that represent how they are adept at catching fallen.
Grand.Master.Raziel wrote: Regular SM players don't get the Dark Shroud? DA players didn't get the Ironclad Dread. Regular SM players don't get the Nephilim and Dark Talon? DA players don't get the Stormtalon and the Stormhawk. And so on.
Let's have everyone have both, and remove the annoying inconsistencies from having different version of the exact same things at the same time!
You should play chess, there's no annoying inconsistencies, and no "ad hoc" fluff to justify unit design.
WhiteDog wrote: Like your pals you have very little knowledge on the topic you wish to talk about and it's a bit aggravating. You should, maybe, read some DA fluff to understand why they have what they have. The first legion have specific tools because unlike other legions they were crusading beore the agreement between mars and terra and their armory is in the Rock. Wishing to protect their secrets, they also keep mars and all mechanicum at distance, which is why their techmarine don't pilot their flyers - if you will they are the exact opposite of the IH in this regard. This is why they have tons of plasma weapon (that are rare for other chapters because most STC are lost and only a few planets can make them), some anti-grav bikes, a lot of terminator armors (enough not only to completly stuff out their own first compagny, but also all of their successor chapters first compagny). The land speeder vengeance/darkshroud is a bigger landspeeder that only the DA have because they are the one who retreived the STC and those land speeder are mounted with relics that no one can build anyway ... The darkshroud is mounted with a statue from caliban that has been somewhat corrupted by the warp after the fall of the planet.
As for the "elite" bikes and the white scars, those two are totally different. The white scars are a fast attack army : they should have more bike variant than ravenwing, but truthfully there are not enough white scars players to push GW into creating more units to them. The ravenwing black knight on the other side are bikes that have a specific role (hunting fallen) and are equiped in order to accomplish this task with ... wait for it ... plasma weapons because the DA have more plasma than anyone else. Maybe you're starting to get the trend.
Blah blah blah.
That's just bad ad hoc fluff to justify the unique units. Marines aren't running tank factories White Dog, it's not their role, they get standardized gear from the mechanicum. !
Black Templars are noted as having a bunch of Forge Ships in their fleet, and I'm sure there's a bunch of other chapters that do too.
captain collius wrote:Mr. Morden and Sgt. Smudge the problem is marine soup is considered to be fairly annoying as Marines have no weaknesses.
Really? Where do we get our bubblewrap from, other Marines?
The thing that makes soup annoying isn't the Marines. It's the Marines, PLUS everything else. Giving all Chapter the same toolbox would not change this.
Also "Marines have no weaknesses" - I'm sure someone else will debunk that, but suffice to say, no. Not true at all.
As for Dark Angels on lions there is absolutely zero justification for it in world. Not that it would stop me.
There's also zero justification as to why Dark Angels can have mixed weapon Terminator squads, but no other Chapter can. Or why only Blood Angels have honour guard with jump packs. And honestly, that's great. You can make your own fluff - maybe your guys are making use of native beasts that have been gifted to them by the locals. Perhaps they just look cool. I can't see why Chapters shouldn't have access to mounts. My solution would actually be to treat mounts like Bikes, and then just merge Bikes and TWC into one unit - of course, we still let the TWC/Bikes take all their old wargear, just with an expanded unit entry.
Also the unit that would sell would be base marine units as everyone using their homebrew would use the most broken units from each.
Solution: balance them correctly, and then there's no "most broken unit".
WhiteDog wrote:If you want to consolidate everything in one codex you will eventually make some units disappear that's called normal logic. Let's say GW give the dark talon and the nephilim to all space marine : why would they keep the dark talon and the nephilim, AND the storm talon and the storm hawk ? Those units have the same exact tactical role and are thought as substitutes... It's the same for the storm hawk and the stormwolf.
So, you basically admit that they're basically the same unit - so why shouldn't they be treated as one? Yes, they would all be kept with their respective wargear and such, but why couldn't they be rolled into basic unit packages together?
Why is it a logical inevitability that units would be cut? When all the units were in Index Imperium 1 together, were any cut?
They are not the same units, they have the same role and are substitutes. Knights and Wraith Knights also have the same role and the lnly thing that prevent us from switching one from the other is that they come from two different factions. It is the same for those flyers.
WhiteDog wrote: They are not the same units, they have the same role and are substitutes. Knights and Wraith Knights also have the same role and the lnly thing that prevent us from switching one from the other is that they come from two different factions. It is the same for those flyers.
Well lemme know how many units are shared between Eldar and Imperial Knights compared to Dark/Blood Angels and Space Marines and we can consolidate them like you helpfully suggested.
Oh wait they're basically the same army! Job well done!
WhiteDog wrote: They are not the same units, they have the same role and are substitutes. Knights and Wraith Knights also have the same role and the lnly thing that prevent us from switching one from the other is that they come from two different factions. It is the same for those flyers.
Well lemme know how many units are shared between Eldar and Imperial Knights compared to Dark/Blood Angels and Space Marines and we can consolidate them like you helpfully suggested.
Oh wait they're basically the same army! Job well done!
It's debattable since they have different codexes. GW is clearly using a lot of ressources to make more differences between faction than what used to be. The CSM back in the 3rd edition were very close to the loyalist space marines in many ways, aside for a small number of units. Now even within the CSM faction there are three space marine codexes with different entries. As I said before : from a rule perspective, I understand that having unique entry to those faction could make sense and give fluidity to the game, but this vision is long gone.
WhiteDog wrote: You should play chess, there's no annoying inconsistencies, and no "ad hoc" fluff to justify unit design.
You should stop using stupid, bad faith arguments.
I'm adapting to the arguments presented to me, which are ignorant, stupid and phrased in an obnoxious manner as showed by your last comment.
You haven't been able to refute the arguments based on the whole "go play chess" thing, considering that three frickin armies are the same and there needs to be order.
WhiteDog wrote: I'm adapting to the arguments presented to me
You aren't, and this is the crux of the issue. Adapt to the argument presented to you.
Which are ? You reject the fluff presented to you for no apparent reason beside the fact that marine are not supposed to build their own weapons, while many SM actually have direct or indirect ways to build their own weapons ? You argue that white scars should have bikes on what ground ? Because that's their fluff. I.E. you just nitpick the fluff you wish to argue your case, and thus the discussion has no sense.
Super-fan just above argued that the land speeder and the land speeder vengeance variant can be consolidated into a single unit, while the two units are hugely different in proportions but somehow I'm the one that should give arguments ? I shouldn't have to feed you the lore of the game for us to have a good conversation is what I mean.
The point is that Cawl just built a brand new marine and a brand new suit and a bunch of new weapons and strapped a bunch of old weapons onto all new platforms. If you think other SM couldn't get some plasma strapped onto a bike your ignoring the very fluff you are trying to use to defend your position.
And all of this is moot. Every regular marine unit is heading towards getting squatted. Do you think they are going to make a special new primaris on wolves? New special deathwing primaris unit that are not just a paint scheme?
Which are that each chapter is unique in its own way and yet mostly similar to other chapters, and that the best way to represent this is to allow maximum flexibility for everyone to make their own space marines army, over flanderizing a few chapters and creating weird situations where the same weapons have different profile in different SM chapters.
WhiteDog wrote: You reject the fluff presented to you for no apparent reason beside the fact that marine are not supposed to build their own weapons, while many SM actually have direct or indirect ways to build their own weapons ?
Yeah, sure, they have been the sole people able to make this kind of tank in the whole imperium for literally a dozen thousand years! Make total sense, right? And no other chapters than 3 among a thousand happen to be in that situation, which just by coincidence happens to be only FFC and the one that get all the other unique stuff! Totally legit!
Do you think they are going to make a special new primaris on wolves? New special deathwing primaris unit that are not just a paint scheme?
'
eventually... yes
Yeah, whats your fluff justification for that? What does it matter if the 1rst legion has a massive stockpile of heresy era tech when nobody can fit inside it anymore? Is Cawl going to invent a way to primarisize Thunder Wolves so that they get big enough to carry Primaris? Or will SW just get a new box or upgrade sprue that adds wolfy bits to the obviously incoming Primaris biker kit?
Your justification for having all these snowflake units is fluff. And yet fluff is exactly why this gak won't carry over and the leaps they would have to make in the fluff so it would are so ridiculous, it would be worse then Cawl mastering every tech he touches instantly.
I'm pretty sure the Salamanders make their own wargear, hence the whole Master Artisans thingy.
Let me reiterate that NO ONE IS SAYING TAKE ANYTHING AWAY from the snowflakes. But unfortunately this is the only reaction we get when this subject is discussed.
Because you end up with 5 or so units fighting for the same space. At that point, from both a models and rules standpoint you have to continue to remove more things. You want everyone to have the equipment of the Deathwing terminators, then you end up removing the Deathwing box from sale and making a generic box that has ... maybe all the options but that's not likely.
Or you have 4 flyers in the same role, so at least 2 of them get removed. Will that be the DA specific kits or the generic kits? Probably the DA specific kits as so few people would want those extra bits, since they do t do anything in game except cause a disadvantage due to true LoS.
Now when you suggest removing options so everyone can have them you're still suggesting removal of models people obviously want to buy, otherwise they'd not have been made.
Can you see that side of this, or are you so stuck in calling things 'snowflakes' so you dont have to consider the other side to your argument?
Do you think they are going to make a special new primaris on wolves? New special deathwing primaris unit that are not just a paint scheme?
'
eventually... yes
Yeah, whats your fluff justification for that? What does it matter if the 1rst legion has a massive stockpile of heresy era tech when nobody can fit inside it anymore? Is Cawl going to invent a way to primarisize Thunder Wolves so that they get big enough to carry Primaris? Or will SW just get a new box or upgrade sprue that adds wolfy bits to the obviously incoming Primaris biker kit?
Your justification for having all these snowflake units is fluff. And yet fluff is exactly why this gak won't carry over and the leaps they would have to make in the fluff so it would are so ridiculous, it would be worse then Cawl mastering every tech he touches instantly.
I will not be surprised if GW will just release primaris cavalry with their casual "oh, but the doggos always was big enouth for primaris".
They clearly don't care about fluff, I mean look, ever carcharodons become primaris, and those guys are super stealthy and live in outer space.
Why would some Chapters not have Ancients in Teminator armour but called something else.
someone, BTW hasn't read the new SM codex.
And it took a whole new codex to add that, hence the point that the inconsistencies are terrible for Marines in general, along with treating CSM like Loyalists too.
BroodSpawn wrote: Because you end up with 5 or so units fighting for the same space. At that point, from both a models and rules standpoint you have to continue to remove more things. You want everyone to have the equipment of the Deathwing terminators, then you end up removing the Deathwing box from sale and making a generic box that has ... maybe all the options but that's not likely.
Or you have 4 flyers in the same role, so at least 2 of them get removed. Will that be the DA specific kits or the generic kits? Probably the DA specific kits as so few people would want those extra bits, since they do t do anything in game except cause a disadvantage due to true LoS.
Now when you suggest removing options so everyone can have them you're still suggesting removal of models people obviously want to buy, otherwise they'd not have been made.
Can you see that side of this, or are you so stuck in calling things 'snowflakes' so you dont have to consider the other side to your argument?
If it's a choice between a better cleaner game or some kits because you like them I choose the game. Sorry.
Later they’ll add flavoured versions to sell new/repacked kits.
Primaris is largely a reboot so GW can escape 30-odd years of people already having the kits. Everyone gets to buy new models. Then the multiparty ones that add a new better alternate build. They know what to do when everyone has the new core stuff... release specialised/Chapter versions! (cf Forge World’s entire business model)
All this has happened before, all this has happened again. Maybe this will give them an excuse to rationalise the ranges somewhat and remove some of the flanderisation e.g. Wolfe Murder Death Frost Wolfson type things. Who knows. But Chapter variant stuff will come down the line when they need to sell more stuff. S’how we got Deathwing in the first place.
And that's the thing, you dont have any proof it will make the game cleaner by removing models from it. You have no proof that the issues in the game are caused by Deathwing terminators just existing as more than a paint job being the problem. You dont like it, fine. But removing those models and options under some perceived balancing act (let's ignore the fact you want you're also ignoring or removing 30+ years of stories at the same time, which is a big selling point for 40k) does not guarantee you will get the balance you demand
BroodSpawn wrote: And that's the thing, you dont have any proof it will make the game cleaner by removing models from it. You have no proof that the issues in the game are caused by Deathwing terminators just existing as more than a paint job being the problem. You dont like it, fine. But removing those models and options under some perceived balancing act (let's ignore the fact you want you're also ignoring or removing 30+ years of stories at the same time, which is a big selling point for 40k) does not guarantee you will get the balance you demand
We have plenty of proof that adding bespoke rules for the sake of it does add clutter and makes the game unbalanced that can be fixed by a more streamlined prosess, and we call that "7th's deluge of supplements that basically broke the game"
WhiteDog wrote: You argue that white scars should have bikes on what ground ?
Source, https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/White_Scars wrote:Evoking the mounted warriors of their heritage, each Brotherhood maintains a high proportion of Assault Bikes, Attack Bikes and Land Speeders, and their infantry squads are almost always borne to battle by fast moving vehicles or gunships. Indeed, it is often said that the White Scars are born in the saddle and are not at ease unless fighting on, in or from an armoured mount of some kind.
A White Scar Brotherhood is equivalent to a chapter's company, including their 1st company (aka the veteran squad)
BroodSpawn wrote: And that's the thing, you dont have any proof it will make the game cleaner by removing models from it. You have no proof that the issues in the game are caused by Deathwing terminators just existing as more than a paint job being the problem. You dont like it, fine. But removing those models and options under some perceived balancing act (let's ignore the fact you want you're also ignoring or removing 30+ years of stories at the same time, which is a big selling point for 40k) does not guarantee you will get the balance you demand
This is just plain wrong. Less is more. Bloat is bloat. The game inherently gets cleaner by removing units from it. Not kits. Not fluff. Units. You can have unique models with interesting stories but there is no reason those things need their own datasheet or special rules to exist. Upgrade sprues exist for different factions for exactly this purpose. Those heads, shoulder pads, weapons, and special bits don't make the "tac marines" a different datasheet. They just make them uniquely that chapter.
No, it doesn't guarantee the game will instantly become balanced and nobody is saying that this is the magic bullet that would suddenly fix everything. This is a PART of the problem and fixing it is a solid step in the right direction.
What you deem as bloat and therefore unwanted, others see as options to play with. Less is not more, less is well.. less. The game is only clean in the respect that there are less options, everything ends up being the same and nothing matters. That's what you're pushing towards, not some deep tactical clean game where choices matter because you've removed all choices you deem as 'bad'.
If you want fewer options why not push all the Eldar into 1 book? Or remove the Deathwatch and Greg Knights and push them I to Codex Space Marines. In fact why not just have a codex power armour that has 15 total units in, since the rest are all arguably fighting for the same spots.
And remember, clean gameplay is the goal so if a model has no rules it shouldn't be sold as that will just confuse the game and make it less clean. Or is my understanding of clean gameplay somehow also 'wrong'.
Your opinion is that removing options makes things better for everyone. That is not true, its only true for a small sub group on this forum. There are many, many players of this game that are perfectly happy with the range of options and dont see how Deathwing terminators muddg up the game as much as say souping together a bane blade into a Nid list can
List building is not tactical clean choices. Too many options fighting for the same design space is more is less.
Your next couple paragraphs of catastrophising nonesense is exactly that. Complete crap. Space marines are 1 army like tau are 1 army and nids are 1 army. Craftworlds and dark eldar are like astra militarum vs space marines. They are different armys.
Your understanding is wrong. Rules are not model is not fluff. The rules are bloated. The models are fine.
The people whos opinion is they like options, the game be damned, are more interested in fluff and models then the game. And thats fine. It also means their opinion matters less when talking about the rules and the game. They just dont actually care about it as a priority. You can have fluff and models that are not the game and thats fine. Meanwhile the game has problems.
And again, the new fex varients are the same problem. Thornbacks and screamer killers dont need to be theirs own datasheets. Its dumb that they are.
BroodSpawn wrote: And that's the thing, you dont have any proof it will make the game cleaner by removing models from it. You have no proof that the issues in the game are caused by Deathwing terminators just existing as more than a paint job being the problem. You dont like it, fine. But removing those models and options under some perceived balancing act (let's ignore the fact you want you're also ignoring or removing 30+ years of stories at the same time, which is a big selling point for 40k) does not guarantee you will get the balance you demand
This is just plain wrong. Less is more. Bloat is bloat. The game inherently gets cleaner by removing units from it. Not kits. Not fluff. Units. You can have unique models with interesting stories but there is no reason those things need their own datasheet or special rules to exist. Upgrade sprues exist for different factions for exactly this purpose. Those heads, shoulder pads, weapons, and special bits don't make the "tac marines" a different datasheet. They just make them uniquely that chapter.
No, it doesn't guarantee the game will instantly become balanced and nobody is saying that this is the magic bullet that would suddenly fix everything. This is a PART of the problem and fixing it is a solid step in the right direction.
let's remove Tyranids, hell let's remove all factions and just have space marines vs space marines, we can call it "warhammer 40k Heresy edition!" we can reduce the models to space marines (that can be kitted as tac devestator or assault squads) a razorback and call it a day! it's simplier and less bloated the game'll be better! wait player base were you goiong!?
BroodSpawn wrote: And that's the thing, you dont have any proof it will make the game cleaner by removing models from it. You have no proof that the issues in the game are caused by Deathwing terminators just existing as more than a paint job being the problem. You dont like it, fine. But removing those models and options under some perceived balancing act (let's ignore the fact you want you're also ignoring or removing 30+ years of stories at the same time, which is a big selling point for 40k) does not guarantee you will get the balance you demand
This is just plain wrong. Less is more. Bloat is bloat. The game inherently gets cleaner by removing units from it. Not kits. Not fluff. Units. You can have unique models with interesting stories but there is no reason those things need their own datasheet or special rules to exist. Upgrade sprues exist for different factions for exactly this purpose. Those heads, shoulder pads, weapons, and special bits don't make the "tac marines" a different datasheet. They just make them uniquely that chapter.
No, it doesn't guarantee the game will instantly become balanced and nobody is saying that this is the magic bullet that would suddenly fix everything. This is a PART of the problem and fixing it is a solid step in the right direction.
let's remove Tyranids, hell let's remove all factions and just have space marines vs space marines, we can call it "warhammer 40k Heresy edition!" we can reduce the models to space marines (that can be kitted as tac devestator or assault squads) a razorback and call it a day! it's simplier and less bloated the game'll be better! wait player base were you goiong!?
Oh look, more catastrophizing nonsense. This statement is totally valid and not at all a straw man that has no grounding in reality and doesn't address the actual things I said. Removing a entire unique faction is not the same as condensing say... terminators (again, not that they need to be condensed. They will all be squatted soon enough). A better analogy would be condensing thornback and screamer killers into the regular carnifex. At which point, yes. Please. Those datasheets are a waste of space. Just make normal bioplasma the SC version and cost it appropriately. Then I could just BUILD a screamer killer off the regular datasheet and everything would be fine.
BroodSpawn wrote: And that's the thing, you dont have any proof it will make the game cleaner by removing models from it. You have no proof that the issues in the game are caused by Deathwing terminators just existing as more than a paint job being the problem. You dont like it, fine. But removing those models and options under some perceived balancing act (let's ignore the fact you want you're also ignoring or removing 30+ years of stories at the same time, which is a big selling point for 40k) does not guarantee you will get the balance you demand
This is just plain wrong. Less is more. Bloat is bloat. The game inherently gets cleaner by removing units from it. Not kits. Not fluff. Units. You can have unique models with interesting stories but there is no reason those things need their own datasheet or special rules to exist. Upgrade sprues exist for different factions for exactly this purpose. Those heads, shoulder pads, weapons, and special bits don't make the "tac marines" a different datasheet. They just make them uniquely that chapter.
No, it doesn't guarantee the game will instantly become balanced and nobody is saying that this is the magic bullet that would suddenly fix everything. This is a PART of the problem and fixing it is a solid step in the right direction.
let's remove Tyranids, hell let's remove all factions and just have space marines vs space marines, we can call it "warhammer 40k Heresy edition!" we can reduce the models to space marines (that can be kitted as tac devestator or assault squads) a razorback and call it a day! it's simplier and less bloated the game'll be better! wait player base were you goiong!?
Oh look, more catastrophizing nonsense. This statement is totally valid and not at all a straw man that has no grounding in reality and doesn't address the actual things I said. Removing a entire unique faction is not the same as condensing say... terminators (again, not that they need to be condensed. They will all be squatted soon enough). A better analogy would be condensing thornback and screamer killers into the regular carnifex. At which point, yes. Please. Those datasheets are a waste of space. Just make normal bioplasma the SC version and cost it appropriately. Then I could just BUILD a screamer killer off the regular datasheet and everything would be fine.
I'm in mixed agreement. On one hand having data for "Armored Boyz" or "Skar Boyz" or "Bully Boyz" would be cool and neat. But on the other hand it is unneeded bloat.
But I honestly don't have a problem with "bloat", I find the rules in this game over-simplistic and easy to understand, which lets there be more "bloat" in the form of additional data sheets.
The ONLY personal requirement I have is that those data sheets follow a set of core "rules" per faction, ie guard always T3, Orks always bad saves lots of attacks or Marines always complaining on forums.
The fact that DA have a specific unit of terminator does not contribute at all negatively to the fluidity of the game or anything, this argument is just silly. If bloat is the problem, a fusion of all SM in one codex could be a solution, but the end of the less popular xenos factions could also be one. Why having Tau, necron, dark eldar and eldar when one xenos faction could do the same as all those three ? What's the benefit from a gameplay standpoint ? And after all didn't they all had the same index ? The answer is obvious to anyone actually playing the game : there is a value in this diversity in itself, from a lore and a gameplay perspective, and the various flavors of space marine (DA/BA/SW) are valuable as such by giving more depth to the lore and the gaming experience, by giving more possibilities to players.
BroodSpawn wrote: And that's the thing, you dont have any proof it will make the game cleaner by removing models from it. You have no proof that the issues in the game are caused by Deathwing terminators just existing as more than a paint job being the problem. You dont like it, fine. But removing those models and options under some perceived balancing act (let's ignore the fact you want you're also ignoring or removing 30+ years of stories at the same time, which is a big selling point for 40k) does not guarantee you will get the balance you demand
We have plenty of proof that adding bespoke rules for the sake of it does add clutter and makes the game unbalanced that can be fixed by a more streamlined prosess, and we call that "7th's deluge of supplements that basically broke the game"
WhiteDog wrote: You argue that white scars should have bikes on what ground ?
Source, https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/White_Scars wrote:Evoking the mounted warriors of their heritage, each Brotherhood maintains a high proportion of Assault Bikes, Attack Bikes and Land Speeders, and their infantry squads are almost always borne to battle by fast moving vehicles or gunships. Indeed, it is often said that the White Scars are born in the saddle and are not at ease unless fighting on, in or from an armoured mount of some kind.
A White Scar Brotherhood is equivalent to a chapter's company, including their 1st company (aka the veteran squad)
There's a difference in degree between "Terminators with set options" and "Terminators with mixed options" as compared to "Ancient Egyptian Robo Space Mummies" and "Blue Space Fish Communists with Tons Of Dakka".
JNAProductions wrote: There's a difference in degree between "Terminators with set options" and "Terminators with mixed options" as compared to "Ancient Egyptian Robo Space Mummies" and "Blue Space Fish Communists with Tons Of Dakka".
Oh, I know! The first two sell well and the last two sit on the shelf.
JNAProductions wrote: There's a difference in degree between "Terminators with set options" and "Terminators with mixed options" as compared to "Ancient Egyptian Robo Space Mummies" and "Blue Space Fish Communists with Tons Of Dakka".
Oh, I know! The first two sell well and the last two sit on the shelf.
And yet, not so poorly that their entire line is currently in the process of being squatted.
If SM were selling so well they would have never bothered with the complete overhaul of their line into Numarines. Clearly SM had hit a massive slump and every release over the last 2 years has been on the single trajectory of removing every unit you are currently fighting for in favor of the new units they are replacing them with.
JNAProductions wrote: There's a difference in degree between "Terminators with set options" and "Terminators with mixed options" as compared to "Ancient Egyptian Robo Space Mummies" and "Blue Space Fish Communists with Tons Of Dakka".
Oh, I know! The first two sell well and the last two sit on the shelf.
And yet, not so poorly that their entire line is currently in the process of being squatted.
If SM were selling so well they would have never bothered with the complete overhaul of their line into Numarines. Clearly SM had hit a massive slump and every release over the last 2 years has been on the single trajectory of removing every unit you are currently fighting for in favor of the new units they are replacing them with.
or GW just needs to sell new things and realized the old marine line is pretty much complete. I'd be willing to bet tac marine squads still outsell the entire range of some xenos armies
Doubtful. If they did they wouldn't be squatting them. Too many tacs exist on the market. You can get them off ebay for nothing. You can buy them in massive lots from other players. And Intercessors are the ones in every new box.
Well, we are having our weekly thread on this subject.
The unique units for the Dark Angels, Space Wolves and Blood Angels allow for choice and variety in the game at a relatively low cost in game design. You get four factions with a sort-of unit "Venn Diagram" : an established common core of units and then the special stuff. For the player, choosing to play Dark Angels grants access to those DA unique units while losing access to others. Its a choice with benefits and drawbacks. I emphasize that its a choice. Giving players options has been central to the success of 40K over the years.
Regarding fluff/lore, there is plenty of justification for the Dark Angels to have unique bikes, vehicles and equipment. Its true that they can just write new lore, but the Ravenwing/Deathwing are well established over the real-time history of 40K as is the Dark Angels' penchant for secrecy. You don't have to like it, nor do you have to buy the models or the codex. That's cool.
Well, it would stand to reason that if Gman being in a codex, forces certain design choices because you " can " take him..it makes sense, having all these units for every marine group would lead to other such nightmares in balance yes ?
Which, would probably mean a lot of them would be tossed, and there wouldn't be really any special units anymore.
Now, ignoring the fact GW do this practice because they want to sell marine players different armies by making them different yet also the same, ignore that as I'm sure them making money didn't factor into the reasons at all.
Why does it bother people some armies are different than theirs ? If I'm that envious of a factions special toys, I may start that faction, if not, I won't.
This whole talk feels like keeping up with the neighbors.." But..Jimmy has werewolves !..I want werewolves ! " but Fred, you have different centurion mans.." But I don't want stupid centurions mans, I want Plasma Knight Riders instead ! " but Fred, you have " insert a few units " .." but but...they are stinky poo I want what they got ! "
Obviously GW does this for marketing reasons, but even if they didn't. Marines all being the same makes them extra boring, for one. For two, why can't each army, even marines have some special units ? For three, why can't we be happy with what we have and not want what everyone else does ? Sounds more like a problem with being content with what you have and always instead wanting what you don't.
So why should marines armies be different ? Because people like to feel different and have different clans, groups, gangs, etc. We're a herd and a tribal lot. We do lots of stuff to feel special, and different even in army choice. Some enjoy feeling special with their DW knights, and Black knights, death company, etc, etc. Why shouldn't they ? Just because someone else doesn't like them having a toy they don't ? Sounds petty to me.
Enjoy what you have, and don't covet what you don't, we'd all be happier in life if we did that in all things, not just in toy soldiers.
As well, if you really can't live without it, then just start those armies and mix detachments, ta da !
AngryAngel80 wrote: Well, it would stand to reason that if Gman being in a codex, forces certain design choices because you " can " take him..it makes sense, having all these units for every marine group would lead to other such nightmares in balance yes ?
Which, would probably mean a lot of them would be tossed, and there wouldn't be really any special units anymore.
Now, ignoring the fact GW do this practice because they want to sell marine players different armies by making them different yet also the same, ignore that as I'm sure them making money didn't factor into the reasons at all.
Why does it bother people some armies are different than theirs ? If I'm that envious of a factions special toys, I may start that faction, if not, I won't.
This whole talk feels like keeping up with the neighbors.." But..Jimmy has werewolves !..I want werewolves ! " but Fred, you have different centurion mans.." But I don't want stupid centurions mans, I want Plasma Knight Riders instead ! " but Fred, you have " insert a few units " .." but but...they are stinky poo I want what they got ! "
Obviously GW does this for marketing reasons, but even if they didn't. Marines all being the same makes them extra boring, for one. For two, why can't each army, even marines have some special units ? For three, why can't we be happy with what we have and not want what everyone else does ? Sounds more like a problem with being content with what you have and always instead wanting what you don't.
So why should marines armies be different ? Because people like to feel different and have different clans, groups, gangs, etc. We're a herd and a tribal lot. We do lots of stuff to feel special, and different even in army choice. Some enjoy feeling special with their DW knights, and Black knights, death company, etc, etc. Why shouldn't they ? Just because someone else doesn't like them having a toy they don't ? Sounds petty to me.
Enjoy what you have, and don't covet what you don't, we'd all be happier in life if we did that in all things, not just in toy soldiers.
As well, if you really can't live without it, then just start those armies and mix detachments, ta da !
I enjoy having my regret that I chose an army that can't do either of those things, and watches from the sidelines as poster boys get new toys.
Hey, play long enough we all have armies that languish and suck for long stretches. I think some other armies have cool stuff but I'm content with the forces I have and what they can do, even if they do it poorly lol.
AngryAngel80 wrote: Well, it would stand to reason that if Gman being in a codex, forces certain design choices because you " can " take him..it makes sense, having all these units for every marine group would lead to other such nightmares in balance yes ?
Which, would probably mean a lot of them would be tossed, and there wouldn't be really any special units anymore.
Now, ignoring the fact GW do this practice because they want to sell marine players different armies by making them different yet also the same, ignore that as I'm sure them making money didn't factor into the reasons at all.
Why does it bother people some armies are different than theirs ? If I'm that envious of a factions special toys, I may start that faction, if not, I won't.
This whole talk feels like keeping up with the neighbors.." But..Jimmy has werewolves !..I want werewolves ! " but Fred, you have different centurion mans.." But I don't want stupid centurions mans, I want Plasma Knight Riders instead ! " but Fred, you have " insert a few units " .." but but...they are stinky poo I want what they got ! "
Obviously GW does this for marketing reasons, but even if they didn't. Marines all being the same makes them extra boring, for one. For two, why can't each army, even marines have some special units ? For three, why can't we be happy with what we have and not want what everyone else does ? Sounds more like a problem with being content with what you have and always instead wanting what you don't.
So why should marines armies be different ? Because people like to feel different and have different clans, groups, gangs, etc. We're a herd and a tribal lot. We do lots of stuff to feel special, and different even in army choice. Some enjoy feeling special with their DW knights, and Black knights, death company, etc, etc. Why shouldn't they ? Just because someone else doesn't like them having a toy they don't ? Sounds petty to me.
Enjoy what you have, and don't covet what you don't, we'd all be happier in life if we did that in all things, not just in toy soldiers.
As well, if you really can't live without it, then just start those armies and mix detachments, ta da !
I enjoy having my regret that I chose an army that can't do either of those things, and watches from the sidelines as poster boys get new toys.
, outside of a whopping 3 leuitenants every release for space marines in 8th edition has been for all space marines (shut up death watch and grey knight players ) so even if the BA/SW/DA where consolidated the impact on the release scheudle would be pretty minimal your army won't magicly get more stuff because another army was removed
If GW really cared about reason, they'd cease to be GW, sales dictate books, and marines sell so marines shall have a ton of books. Looking deeper than that I feel is just setting yourself up for madness. It's all about the money.
Hell, even the core book now is having how many supplement books ? So only more, and not less marine books are coming.
AngryAngel80 wrote: If GW really cared about reason, they'd cease to be GW, sales dictate books, and marines sell so marines shall have a ton of books. Looking deeper than that I feel is just setting yourself up for madness. It's all about the money.
Hell, even the core book now is having how many supplement books ? So only more, and not less marine books are coming.
Which is why I started the thread stating "Bloat for the Bloat God! Rules for the Rule Throne"
It's honestly unnecessary stuff that could've been taken care of in a simpler manner. NO we don't need separate entries for Tactical Terminators, Assault Terminators, Cata Terminators, and Tart Terminators.
I actually like the different marks of terminator armor having slightly different rules. The non imdomintus pattern have slightly different rules that reflect a variance in tech and unit priority. Plus if you think that having five terminator entries is what's causing 40k to be a mess, I disagree with you.
It's not units entries or number of options but it's scale being way out of wack. If I wanted a game with far less unit options and granularity I would play Apoc. A game that is trying to have viable rules for a Grot, a Space Marine, a Knight and a Titan is never going to work properly.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I actually like the different marks of terminator armor having slightly different rules. The non imdomintus pattern have slightly different rules that reflect a variance in tech and unit priority. Plus if you think that having five terminator entries is what's causing 40k to be a mess, I disagree with you.
It's not units entries or number of options but it's scale being way out of wack. If I wanted a game with far less unit options and granularity I would play Apoc. A game that is trying to have viable rules for a Grot, a Space Marine, a Knight and a Titan is never going to work properly.
So do different Power Armor Mks. Do all those need separate rules? After all they have kits!
AngryAngel80 wrote: If GW really cared about reason, they'd cease to be GW, sales dictate books, and marines sell so marines shall have a ton of books. Looking deeper than that I feel is just setting yourself up for madness. It's all about the money.
Hell, even the core book now is having how many supplement books ? So only more, and not less marine books are coming.
Which is why I started the thread stating "Bloat for the Bloat God! Rules for the Rule Throne"
It's honestly unnecessary stuff that could've been taken care of in a simpler manner. NO we don't need separate entries for Tactical Terminators, Assault Terminators, Cata Terminators, and Tart Terminators.
Seriously, defend that kind of crap.
Easy, the almighty dollar, there, defended. They want the bloat to sell more power armor books, and they sell. That is the only defense they need. Do you like it ? No. Do I ? Not really but we don't matter all we can do is stop playing, and stop buying that is our only voice to them and we wouldn't be a drop in the bucket to the many thousands of those books they will sell.
I was one of the few who knew the bloat wouldn't be gone but as long as they make our army stronger we'll keep buying all the bloat books and it won't ever change.
Depends on the game I'm playing. In a RPG like the FFG books, absolutely, and I wouldn't be opposed in for some variation for something kill team sized. In something like Apoc, no you shouldn't have that level of granularity.
This is my main point, i'm not trying to argue over individual entries, I'm simply trying to state that GW can't fix anything until it comes down on one side of the coin of what 40k is supposed to be. Is it supposed to lean more towards kill team or FFG of individual models and units having a ton of options and choices or do you want the main game to be apoc light were units are just generic blocks.
I take much more issues with the shoehorning of super heavies and flyers disrupting balance (along with an ever increasing emphasis on combo hammer) being the core issue with 40k, than giving a unique version of a bad unit to one faction of space marines.
Eonfuzz wrote: Disagree, the first models I collected as a young lad were Tau.
.. So? you are not the entire player base. GW sells what makes them money, the sheer amount of Space Marines suggests heavily that Marines are their top selling minis
Eonfuzz wrote: Disagree, the first models I collected as a young lad were Tau.
.. So? you are not the entire player base. GW sells what makes them money, the sheer amount of Space Marines suggests heavily that Marines are their top selling minis
I play with about 7 people regularly. 3 of them have some degreee of SM (one a VERY small force as a second army. 1 DA 1 SW). I have Tau and Nids and used to have necrons. 1 has orks. 1 has eldar. 1 has Astra Militarum and nids. 1 has deamons. We all want variety. When i go to my FLGS we have a pretty even mix of all kinds of stuff. Not mostly SM. Same reason. Bolters and 3+ everywhere is boring.
There is also a direct correlation to number of releases and number of sales. SM sell because SM get releases. When other armies get releases they also get sales. Fortunately SM are currently being replaced with a new line so they have lots of new releases and lots of sales atm.
Eonfuzz wrote: Disagree, the first models I collected as a young lad were Tau.
.. So? you are not the entire player base. GW sells what makes them money, the sheer amount of Space Marines suggests heavily that Marines are their top selling minis
Sure, it's an anecdote. But no mehrines and I would still be collecting
WhiteDog wrote: You should, maybe, read some DA fluff to understand why they have what they have. SNIP....The ravenwing black knight on the other side are bikes that have a specific role (hunting fallen) and are equiped in order to accomplish this task with ... wait for it ... plasma weapons because the DA have more plasma than anyone else. Maybe you're starting to get the trend.
You're referring to the fluff for the DA that changes every edition?
Pretty sure it did mention the stuff that plasma and those landspeeders are based on. They being one of the chapters with the weirdest/most dark age of technology stuff in their armory.
Sure... But the Codexes have never been fair. I'm one of the chumps that paid £25 for Codex Adeptus Custodes. That thing is tiny!
Well it's one thing to compare numbers of datasheets in a horde to an elite, or an elite to a REALLY elite. Or the supplement from one branch of an old codex to the supplement for a different branch from the old merged codex - When they could take a ton of the stuff from the other supplement either outright or in a counts-as scenario.
I feel pretty bad for White Scars - and probably Raven Guard, IF/CF/BT, Salamanders, etc. They're going to lose all the "shared" units and not get many or any, if White Scars is any indication.
There is also a direct correlation to number of releases and number of sales. SM sell because SM get releases.
Chicken meet Egg.
There is also a direct correlation to number of releases and number of sales. SM get releases because SM get sales.
Correlation is not causation.
I too have a lot of different armies. I've got UM, Nids, Orks, DA, Eldar, Chaos, and DG. Most of my different armies initially came from different boxed sets. Battle for Armageddon, Battle for Blackreach, Battle for Macragge Dark Imperium, Dark Millenium I'm really looking forward to Dark Battle for the Imperium Millenium.
There is also a direct correlation to number of releases and number of sales. SM get releases because SM get sales.
Correlation is not causation.
Dark Eldar would like a word. Their release in 5th was a complete overhaul of their entire line in one go. None of the old models were kept as far as I can recall.
How often do you think anyone bought Dark Eldar before that release? How many Dark Eldar armies do people see with the old pre-5th metal models? If your sales performance dictated your releases, there is no way that they would have gotten a full line release.
There is also a direct correlation to number of releases and number of sales. SM get releases because SM get sales.
Correlation is not causation.
Dark Eldar would like a word. Their release in 5th was a complete overhaul of their entire line in one go. None of the old models were kept as far as I can recall.
How often do you think anyone bought Dark Eldar before that release? How many Dark Eldar armies do people see with the old pre-5th metal models? If your sales performance dictated your releases, there is no way that they would have gotten a full line release.
About the same number of people who see me play with my old metal Marneus Calgar. I replaced him with Finecast/Plastic super fast. Even pinned metal models break super often at the superglue joints and end up looking bad the more often it happens. Also you're making the case about Correlation and Causation.
Yes, GW have to keep releasing kits to keep making money.
Yes, Marine sales specifically are helped by the number of kits they get.
Yes, other armies would get a sales boost if they had as many releases as marines.
HOWEVER Marines have the best potential sales due to what kind of faction they are. They are the heroic human faction - the personal power fantasy. This faction is ALWAYS the most popular when all other things are equal in any game. So it absolutely makes total logical sense to put the most attention into marines, because it will have the best return on investment.
There will demonising returns eventually with too much focus, which is why the periodically need to break away and do things for other factions.
I'd also argue, as I have in the past, that Marine sales help allow GW to do other things. "well thanks to the space marine release we're looking good this quarter, we can proably afford to drop codex: obscure xenos, even if it doesn't sell that well we've already made our needed profit for the year" In fact if I was going to introduce a brand new xenos army I'd proably start by bundling it with marines in a starter box.
BrianDavion wrote: I'd also argue, as I have in the past, that Marine sales help allow GW to do other things. "well thanks to the space marine release we're looking good this quarter, we can proably afford to drop codex: obscure xenos, even if it doesn't sell that well we've already made our needed profit for the year" In fact if I was going to introduce a brand new xenos army I'd proably start by bundling it with marines in a starter box.
Absolutely. Marines and their appeal is what the whole IP is built on.
If you want to run say, black dragons with dragon wulfen, you can, just use the space wolf rules with dragon based upgrades and lizard like wulfen types, boom, jobs done.
You want the BA goodies, run a different chapter and use the BA rules, there you go.
Want the special units for DA ? I think you get what I'm going to say, get the book, make up the models and do it.
The power is yours, you don't need GW to tell you its ok to do so.
That's not what they want though. They want to run DW knights, Sanguinary Guard, ect with Guilliman giving the full benefits.
No, people know that certain units being exclusive for no good reason is stupid and always has been.
No, some people think that certain units being exclusive for reasons they don't like is stupid. Don't mistake your position as being the dominant one.
WhiteDog wrote: You should play chess, there's no annoying inconsistencies, and no "ad hoc" fluff to justify unit design.
You should stop using stupid, bad faith arguments.
I'm adapting to the arguments presented to me, which are ignorant, stupid and phrased in an obnoxious manner as showed by your last comment.
You haven't been able to refute the arguments based on the whole "go play chess" thing, considering that three frickin armies are the same and there needs to be order.
Let me know when having 27% different units (before special characters) is the same.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lance845 wrote: The point is that Cawl just built a brand new marine and a brand new suit and a bunch of new weapons and strapped a bunch of old weapons onto all new platforms. If you think other SM couldn't get some plasma strapped onto a bike your ignoring the very fluff you are trying to use to defend your position.
And all of this is moot. Every regular marine unit is heading towards getting squatted. Do you think they are going to make a special new primaris on wolves? New special deathwing primaris unit that are not just a paint scheme?
Clocks ticking on all these units.
So you say. As have others for over 10 years.
You guys are as bad as all the people thinking the world is going to end. "This has to be the year, it's divisible by five..."
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Racerguy180 wrote: I'm pretty sure the Salamanders make their own wargear, hence the whole Master Artisans thingy.
Let me reiterate that NO ONE IS SAYING TAKE ANYTHING AWAY from the snowflakes. But unfortunately this is the only reaction we get when this subject is discussed.
Except their codex, and any uniqueness for being separate armies...
BroodSpawn wrote: Because you end up with 5 or so units fighting for the same space. At that point, from both a models and rules standpoint you have to continue to remove more things. You want everyone to have the equipment of the Deathwing terminators, then you end up removing the Deathwing box from sale and making a generic box that has ... maybe all the options but that's not likely.
Or you have 4 flyers in the same role, so at least 2 of them get removed. Will that be the DA specific kits or the generic kits? Probably the DA specific kits as so few people would want those extra bits, since they do t do anything in game except cause a disadvantage due to true LoS.
Now when you suggest removing options so everyone can have them you're still suggesting removal of models people obviously want to buy, otherwise they'd not have been made.
Can you see that side of this, or are you so stuck in calling things 'snowflakes' so you dont have to consider the other side to your argument?
If it's a choice between a better cleaner game or some kits because you like them I choose the game. Sorry.
Too bad having those kids makes it a better cleaner game, because it means someone didn't try to sandwich four units into one.
BroodSpawn wrote: And that's the thing, you dont have any proof it will make the game cleaner by removing models from it. You have no proof that the issues in the game are caused by Deathwing terminators just existing as more than a paint job being the problem. You dont like it, fine. But removing those models and options under some perceived balancing act (let's ignore the fact you want you're also ignoring or removing 30+ years of stories at the same time, which is a big selling point for 40k) does not guarantee you will get the balance you demand
This is just plain wrong. Less is more. Bloat is bloat. The game inherently gets cleaner by removing units from it. Not kits. Not fluff. Units. You can have unique models with interesting stories but there is no reason those things need their own datasheet or special rules to exist. Upgrade sprues exist for different factions for exactly this purpose. Those heads, shoulder pads, weapons, and special bits don't make the "tac marines" a different datasheet. They just make them uniquely that chapter.
No, it doesn't guarantee the game will instantly become balanced and nobody is saying that this is the magic bullet that would suddenly fix everything. This is a PART of the problem and fixing it is a solid step in the right direction.
You know we've seen less not be more. Chaos players have been bitching about it since 3rd end ended. The game does not inherently get cleaner by removing units. It just gets smaller. And if it's being done by smooshing units together, then it's actually becoming more complicated. There are more to these armies than 'just a few shoulderpads"
@Racerguy180
Lancer here just talked about removing units, and he's on your side. So it's more than just "Us guys hating on your arguments".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lance845 wrote: List building is not tactical clean choices. Too many options fighting for the same design space is more is less.
Your next couple paragraphs of catastrophising nonesense is exactly that. Complete crap. Space marines are 1 army like tau are 1 army and nids are 1 army. Craftworlds and dark eldar are like astra militarum vs space marines. They are different armys.
Your understanding is wrong. Rules are not model is not fluff. The rules are bloated. The models are fine.
The people whos opinion is they like options, the game be damned, are more interested in fluff and models then the game. And thats fine. It also means their opinion matters less when talking about the rules and the game. They just dont actually care about it as a priority. You can have fluff and models that are not the game and thats fine. Meanwhile the game has problems.
And again, the new fex varients are the same problem. Thornbacks and screamer killers dont need to be theirs own datasheets. Its dumb that they are.
I put the reason to stop listening to you in bold above.
Everything else is just wrong. We've talked before about the difference between opinion and right/wrong, but you're still doing it. Stop.
Later they’ll add flavoured versions to sell new/repacked kits.
Then let's have the core things available to all in a common book, and the flavored special units in the supplement.
Then, because we have space in the supplement, we might as well reprint all the relative common units, so people don't have to buy two books to use their separate army.
JNAProductions wrote: There's a difference in degree between "Terminators with set options" and "Terminators with mixed options" as compared to "Ancient Egyptian Robo Space Mummies" and "Blue Space Fish Communists with Tons Of Dakka".
yeah, the first comparison apparently causes knee-jerk allergic reactions.
JNAProductions wrote: There's a difference in degree between "Terminators with set options" and "Terminators with mixed options" as compared to "Ancient Egyptian Robo Space Mummies" and "Blue Space Fish Communists with Tons Of Dakka".
Oh, I know! The first two sell well and the last two sit on the shelf.
And yet, not so poorly that their entire line is currently in the process of being squatted.
If SM were selling so well they would have never bothered with the complete overhaul of their line into Numarines. Clearly SM had hit a massive slump and every release over the last 2 years has been on the single trajectory of removing every unit you are currently fighting for in favor of the new units they are replacing them with.
Got any proof for this? Or are you just giving your opinion as fact again?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lance845 wrote: Doubtful. If they did they wouldn't be squatting them. Too many tacs exist on the market. You can get them off ebay for nothing. You can buy them in massive lots from other players. And Intercessors are the ones in every new box.
Terminators with maces and shields, in any reasonable world would use the same rules as Terminators with hammers and shields.
Tartarus and Cataphracti armour could each be a single line option for any Terminator model/unit.
Assault and Tactical Terminator squads could easily me merged into a single unit (like Blood Angels used to have).
Mixed weapon loadouts aren't unique to Dark Angels (everyone until 3rd edition., Blood Angels in Space Hulk, Salamanders in Codex Armageddon).
Neither are Terminator Command units.
But no - we totally need like sixteen different Terminator Squad entries.
Lord Damocles wrote: Terminators with maces and shields, in any reasonable world would use the same rules as Terminators with hammers and shields.
Tartarus and Cataphracti armour could each be a single line option for any Terminator model/unit.
Assault and Tactical Terminator squads could easily me merged into a single unit (like Blood Angels used to have).
Mixed weapon loadouts aren't unique to Dark Angels (everyone until 3rd edition., Blood Angels in Space Hulk, Salamanders in Codex Armageddon).
Neither are Terminator Command units.
But no - we totally need like sixteen different Terminator Squad entries.
You just don't seem to grasp though - some of us get a lot more out of the game for them having different rules. That in itself is something I think is cool and makes me feel more invested in my faction. They're my guys that can do their unique thing. Lore alone doesn't cut it for me, it needs a reflection in the mechanics.
I'm going to use the Ravenwing - they're Astartes on bikes. Every Chapter has Astartes on bikes, but the lore wise, the Ravenwing operate differently. So what justifies their getting rules? Lore-wise they operate differently, but are functionally identical, model wise they're just aesthetically different, so it all boils down to giving them a rule just to create a different army because you can. So now you have Ravenwing with new rules - for DA players does it not feel like cheating that you've got an extra rule in your arsenal, for a unit that is functionally identical, whilst others go without just because of a disinterest in the lore?
Obviously, that is avoiding the fact that Ravenwing may be balanced by the fact that DA can't take a different unit, but if that isn't a reality, what is providing the balance? Is it just omissions of units, or do they get certain traits and rules taken away too. I'm just curious is all.
EDIT: Ignore this. @bullyboy basically answered this by pointing out DA can't take stuff like Vanguards. So I understand the balance now
Right now? The fact that those new rules aren't that potent. Before? The Force Org magic Sammael and Belial could work making them Troops for a full fluffy army. Do you think it's cheating that Adeptus Custodes or Knights get to have a more elite lower model count army?
I have no problems with DA being able to do a -Wing army. I have no problems with Saim-Hann being able to do a -Riders army. Right now they can't which is a problem, but neither here nor there on the current discussion. Normal Astartes bike troops don't have Teleport Homers, and Terminators do. Deathwing don't have Teleport homers (I think) but Ravenwing Bikes do. (this worked better fluff/story -wise in the past when a Ravenwing bike WAS the Teleport Homer) Normal Astartes don't have Plasma bikes, Darkshrouds or Vengeances.
The Jetfighter and the Talon do not behave the same. One has Hoverjet and Stasis Bomb, one does not.
Mmmpi wrote: Then, because we have space in the supplement, we might as well reprint all the relative common units, so people don't have to buy two books to use their separate army.
No, because if we do, when we update the common core units, the version in the supplement will be out of date, and two books are fine!
Stux wrote: You just don't seem to grasp though - some of us get a lot more out of the game for them having different rules. That in itself is something I think is cool and makes me feel more invested in my faction. They're my guys that can do their unique thing. Lore alone doesn't cut it for me, it needs a reflection in the mechanics.
The supplement for your faction includes specific stratagem that affect your units, making them "your guys that can do their unique thing, that only every one else who chose the same faction can do!", i.e. what you are asking for.
Those bikers are ravenwing whatsthename bikers rather than simple veteran bikers because they have access to the "Capture the fallen" stratagem, not because they have a different datasheet.
Done.
Mmmpi wrote: Then, because we have space in the supplement, we might as well reprint all the relative common units, so people don't have to buy two books to use their separate army.
No, because if we do, when we update the common core units, the version in the supplement will be out of date, and two books are fine!
Or they release a small update pdf and life goes on.
If two books are fine, having them be separate codexes is also fine.
I must admit, when I thumbed through the new SM Codex this weekend I did actually think "there is a crapton of datasheets here....too many in fact" . i think inevitably that will have to be reduced.
I felt like I was in a Captain Morgan commercial reading it...Primaris Captain, Captain in Gravis, Captain in Phobos, Captain in Terminator Armour, Captain in Cataphracti Armour, Captain, Captain on bike. 7 different captains.
23 different Elite entries, Yikes.
Maybe we're looking at this wrong. Primaris probably should have been a complete separate Codex supplement by itself. Even the non codex chapters would use this book as all Primaris are the same.
bullyboy wrote: I must admit, when I thumbed through the new SM Codex this weekend I did actually think "there is a crapton of datasheets here....too many in fact" . i think inevitably that will have to be reduced.
I felt like I was in a Captain Morgan commercial reading it...Primaris Captain, Captain in Gravis, Captain in Phobos, Captain in Terminator Armour, Captain in Cataphracti Armour, Captain, Captain on bike. 7 different captains.
23 different Elite entries, Yikes.
Maybe we're looking at this wrong. Primaris probably should have been a complete separate Codex supplement by itself. Even the non codex chapters would use this book as all Primaris are the same.
This is what I expected them to do in all honesty.
We will have to wait and see what the plan is with future Primaris though - perhaps we will see some Chapter specific units down the line.
It's worse because it means selling books with outdated information, and the pdf updates won't carry all the information in a practical format, just the changes, which is very unpractical if there are a lot of changes.
(If the pdf carries all the information in a practical format, it's like giving away the Space Marines codex for free...)
Warpig1815 wrote: But what I can't understand is why those 3 Chapters in particular have been elevated out of 'Astartes' in general, and had whole product lines and codices deveted to them.
Because it generates an arse load of cash for GW. Only a few years back they released a list of their top ten selling items (presumably in raw value terms, not so much units). One of the top ten was the SM tactical squad. Another - a little higher up - was the BA tactical squad. The unique tac squad box sold better than the generic tac squad box used by virtually every other SM Chapter combined. That's insane and from GW's perspective, totally justifies it.
In part the special snowflake marines allow you to combine the awesome of the overall SM aesthetic with something a little more tweaked to your taste, e.g. having more or less skulls/vampire/Grail lore themes, more or less dudes in cloaks and hoods, more or less of a roman influence on your SM, more or less wolfy wolfness. There's an argument that these chapters would add additional flavour if they were a little more limited in their wargear choices, creating a somewhat unique feel to each of them, but that would doubtless bring about even more complaining than there is now about SM.
Why would some Chapters not have Ancients in Teminator armour but called something else.
someone, BTW hasn't read the new SM codex.
Wierd - I was told these are "Unique" DA units that would dilute their reason for existance if they were not the only ones to have that option.
Racerguy180 wrote: I'm pretty sure the Salamanders make their own wargear, hence the whole Master Artisans thingy.
Let me reiterate that NO ONE IS SAYING TAKE ANYTHING AWAY from the snowflakes. But unfortunately this is the only reaction we get when this subject is discussed.
Wierd is it not that people are so busy screaming and throwing things to ensure that they keep the units that no one is trying to take away If only people read the actual post and did not post "the world is ending" crap like:
If you want fewer options why not push all the Eldar into 1 book? Or remove the Deathwatch and Greg Knights and push them I to Codex Space Marines. In fact why not just have a codex power armour that has 15 total units in, since the rest are all arguably fighting for the same spots.
Let's remove Tyranids, hell let's remove all factions and just have space marines vs space marines, we can call it "warhammer 40k Heresy edition!" we can reduce the models to space marines (that can be kitted as tac devestator or assault squads) a razorback and call it a day! it's simplier and less bloated the game'll be better! wait player base were you goiong!?
. Why having Tau, necron, dark eldar and eldar when one xenos faction could do the same as all those three ?
Seriously its scary how stupid these posts are and compleely at odds with the OP or indeed the actual points raised.
So why should marines armies be different ? Because people like to feel different and have different clans, groups, gangs, etc
Is missing the entire point = again - why do we not allow anything other than colour difference in 996 Chapters but we do for 4? Why should we not provide the ability to represent the varied Chapters that are not currently able to be "different" - what makes them inferior to these 4?
HoundsofDemos wrote: I actually like the different marks of terminator armor having slightly different rules. The non imdomintus pattern have slightly different rules that reflect a variance in tech and unit priority. Plus if you think that having five terminator entries is what's causing 40k to be a mess, I disagree with you.
It's not units entries or number of options but it's scale being way out of wack. If I wanted a game with far less unit options and granularity I would play Apoc. A game that is trying to have viable rules for a Grot, a Space Marine, a Knight and a Titan is never going to work properly.
So do different Power Armor Mks. Do all those need separate rules? After all they have kits!
The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities. So why would they be consolidated? that would literally be removing options, which I am against. I do think that marines could be covered by main codex and then any changes applied to the supplements. Kinda like how it works in 30k.
oh BTW I am specifically not on anyone's side, just the side of ASTARTES.
I am not advocating that anyone "special" or otherwise losing stuff. it just boggles the mind that anybody is wanting to remove stuff from the game. If it doesnt effect your army comp, how is it a problem? But...but, balance, unfortunately that ship sailed a while ago. GW obviously don't want to so just deal with it or bounce.
If someone is upset that another faction gets something and whine/bitch/moan about it, its gotta suck to be you. People need to get off their high horse and realize that wanting to remove stuff from ones collection/army is a bad idea. It may seem like a good one, but it seems like if it doesnt effect them, they dont care.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I actually like the different marks of terminator armor having slightly different rules. The non imdomintus pattern have slightly different rules that reflect a variance in tech and unit priority. Plus if you think that having five terminator entries is what's causing 40k to be a mess, I disagree with you.
It's not units entries or number of options but it's scale being way out of wack. If I wanted a game with far less unit options and granularity I would play Apoc. A game that is trying to have viable rules for a Grot, a Space Marine, a Knight and a Titan is never going to work properly.
So do different Power Armor Mks. Do all those need separate rules? After all they have kits!
The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities. So why would they be consolidated? that would literally be removing options, which I am against. I do think that marines could be covered by main codex and then any changes applied to the supplements. Kinda like how it works in 30k.
oh BTW I am specifically not on anyone's side, just the side of ASTARTES.
I am not advocating that anyone "special" or otherwise losing stuff. it just boggles the mind that anybody is wanting to remove stuff from the game. If it doesnt effect your army comp, how is it a problem? But...but, balance, unfortunately that ship sailed a while ago. GW obviously don't want to so just deal with it or bounce.
If someone is upset that another faction gets something and whine/bitch/moan about it, its gotta suck to be you. People need to get off their high horse and realize that wanting to remove stuff from ones collection/army is a bad idea. It may seem like a good one, but it seems like if it doesnt effect them, they dont care.
Oh so you just want an answer to the op question of what would be lost. Simple: the flavour of the game that has been built for over 30yrs.
Now before you dismiss it or find a way to way 'but they can just retcon/rewrite it all so no one cares'.. a lot of people care about that flavour. And those people spend money to have that flavour. Dismissing that to favour cutting things down so theres no flavour or differences for people within your biggest selling product line is probably a bad idea.
Is missing the entire point = again - why do we not allow anything other than colour difference in 996 Chapters but we do for 4? Why should we not provide the ability to represent the varied Chapters that are not currently able to be "different" - what makes them inferior to these 4?
It is not our choice maybe? GW....
We had Grey Knights as a Squad to support existing Armies against Demons. ( Termies ). GW said: lets have a codex and a multiple Units. So it is now. Who asked for this? We?
I remember the first Space Marine codex I have bought had supplements ( 3 ) and GW stopped right at the IG codex ( 1 supplement ) with that idea. The split into 4 publications for loyalist chapters seems consistent from 1998 - 2018+ .
If you want to provide the ability to represent more than different paint-jobs , you can't make the "build them right out of the box scheme" of GW ( paint by numbers and obey the datasheets ) work or you have to offer thousands of kits. Sure, today the people who collect faction A are satisfied with Boxes 1-100, but tomorrow the other people would expect the same for their faction too. How many years do you think this could go on without trouble? Thats why it made sense to pick a theme, make some general kits and a few special ones like we had. The Problem is WH40k isn't a game lasting for 1-10 years with a few updates. We are past the third decade IIRC?
The only way to give almost endless Options to everyone is: - buy a scout. Equip him with gear available to scouts. - or upgrade that scout to space marine in Power Armor. Equip with gear available for PA. - or upgrade to veteran. Equip with more gear ( complete access ) and allow a branch of your list to offer TDA and limit to TDA options there. - plus, vehicles and dreads etc pp are just equipment you get access to if you buy the crew first. - maybe a promotion system to represent the specialists and officers. ( plus access to relics for example right there ) - just limit the unit size to 1 -10 scouts. Thus you can't run into "creative people" generating giant blobs. - you will need an Armoury, yes. And maybe a basic layout like the FOC was to keep things within lines. - Heavy weapons and anything you don't want spammed could be tied to squad size. Or you say variety is key and we have to endure whatever you made possible.
But, these "build your won space marine" thing isn't very protectable ( IP ) so my guess is we see more "ready to run" stuff with names attached to it.
The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities.
But those differnces are completely made up and don't need to exist.
So why would they be consolidated?
So that people can use whichever type they find visually most appealing without harming the performance of their army.
Why would some Chapters not have Ancients in Teminator armour but called something else.
someone, BTW hasn't read the new SM codex.
Wierd - I was told these are "Unique" DA units that would dilute their reason for existance if they were not the only ones to have that option.
Racerguy180 wrote: I'm pretty sure the Salamanders make their own wargear, hence the whole Master Artisans thingy.
Let me reiterate that NO ONE IS SAYING TAKE ANYTHING AWAY from the snowflakes. But unfortunately this is the only reaction we get when this subject is discussed.
Wierd is it not that people are so busy screaming and throwing things to ensure that they keep the units that no one is trying to take away If only people read the actual post and did not post "the world is ending" crap like:
If you want fewer options why not push all the Eldar into 1 book? Or remove the Deathwatch and Greg Knights and push them I to Codex Space Marines. In fact why not just have a codex power armour that has 15 total units in, since the rest are all arguably fighting for the same spots.
Let's remove Tyranids, hell let's remove all factions and just have space marines vs space marines, we can call it "warhammer 40k Heresy edition!" we can reduce the models to space marines (that can be kitted as tac devestator or assault squads) a razorback and call it a day! it's simplier and less bloated the game'll be better! wait player base were you goiong!?
. Why having Tau, necron, dark eldar and eldar when one xenos faction could do the same as all those three ?
Seriously its scary how stupid these posts are and compleely at odds with the OP or indeed the actual points raised.
So why should marines armies be different ? Because people like to feel different and have different clans, groups, gangs, etc
Is missing the entire point = again - why do we not allow anything other than colour difference in 996 Chapters but we do for 4? Why should we not provide the ability to represent the varied Chapters that are not currently able to be "different" - what makes them inferior to these 4?
You do like to point fingers and call names. However, you can't seem to wrap your head around the fact. The special marine factions aren't better or worse than the marines who don't have the special units. They get the special units just to give them flavor and uniqueness and...AND..now this is the big part. They sell more books, and more reason for different colored marines selling the same models over again, with these special models to give them a reason to buy more units.
You keep acting like GW just doesn't get it. They get it just fine. If all armies could have the same units in marines, that would be a few less books they'd sell. As well many less models. As you'd never need to double up on tac squads, primaris troops, etc. As you just sell the special units, and they keep all the exisiting models with the same paint job.
It benefits them most to spread them out as you want to play vanilla marines ? Ok, two HQ and three troops and extras. Oh now you want DA ? Ok, best buy 3 MORE troops and 2 HQ and then the special units. Oh now BA you say ? Sure, just another 2 HQs and 3 troops, etc, etc. You play all three you've Now picked up 90 troops squads, and 6 HQs, when all you'd have before was the same 2 HQs and the same 3 troop squads. Now multiply that over all the players who want all the flavor , that is a lot of money GW would otherwise leave on the table to people who just can't miss out on all the special.
Also, and again, just because these other marine factions have things the core one doesn't, doesn't make them better than or worse than each other. It makes them different than, and difference sells. If you think not having all the options of everyone else makes your marines worse, you need to rethink how you view the game. Just my opinion though, the fact GW does this to make more money is fact however.
Mr Morden wrote: I own reasonable Dark Angels and Wolves armies (about 3000pts each) and some Blood Angels (about 1500pts).
There has always been alot of discussion of the "unique" units that have been given to the Angels and Wolves to make their codex fuller and boost sales, especially since the "basic" marine range has been complete for years (one of the reasons for Primaris).
However looking at the actual units - how many of them are actually in any way unique, how many would not actually be represented in some form in other Chapters both in terms of Lore and game stats.
The Librarian Dreadnoughts are only in one chapter? Really?
No other Chapter has Sargeants leading squads in Terminator armour? Isn't that an Iron Hands thing too?
No other Chapter has more flexible teminator squads mixing close and ranged combat versons?
No other Chapter has mutations like Wolfen - isn't that a Black Dragons thing
No other Chapter rides beasts (much as I hate Wolves on Wolves) to battle?
I would say Wulfen, cyberwolves, the Darkshroud and the Vengeance landspeeders are truly unique units. I don't agree that Wulfen are the same as Dragon Claws as Dragon Claws still wear power armour.
Surely the basic unit templates for pretty much every Unique unit could and should be expanded to include these slight variations, with the relevant Chapter Keyword allowing access to a few other special rules /armoury should cover anything else?
This is true I suppose. Even in the case of Wulfen/Dragon Claws, you could add, "If your army is Black Dragons, this unit can take power armour for x points giving it..." But I'm curious, what would you call these units? Wulfen/Dragon Claws?
What am I missing here. What would be lost by allowing those units be represeted in other Chapters?
That depends on each player. For me, while freedom of choice is great, it's important to have limitations and boundaries on those choices. While that may seem counterintuitive, let's expand the logic so that instead of getting rid of unique subfactions, let's get rid of unique factions. "Are your Craftworld Eldar really such special snowflakes that you really won't enjoy them if my Tyranids can't also have Aspect Warriors?" OK, so obviously this is not something that anyone is likely to say and mean, but by stretching the logic like this, perhaps you can see that for some people, the existence of unique subfactions are just as important as unique factions
It would also remove the problems of trying to cater for fans of these Chapters wanting everything plus their own "unique" units to make them Marines+ or having to have lesser versions of the same unit so that the three Chapters can retain a sense of specialness.
While obviously, I can't speak for all non-codex compliant chapter fans, I would like to say that I've never wanted everything that other chapters have. For me, having unique units that no one else can take works both ways. I never wanted Centurions and what not for my Dark Angels. Heck, I don't even run any Primaris yet, because they go against everything I know about the lore of my chapter.
In summary, while many people here are trying to use logic and reason to argue for or against subfactions, there really isn't much reason and logic behind why many people like or dislike them. Either you do, or you don't. It just boils down to personal preference.
It's worse because it means selling books with outdated information, and the pdf updates won't carry all the information in a practical format, just the changes, which is very unpractical if there are a lot of changes.
(If the pdf carries all the information in a practical format, it's like giving away the Space Marines codex for free...)
It's no different then codex + supplement. You have to wait for the supplement to get updated anyway. Sure the six new ones are getting released right now, all at once, but that's not the usual way GW operates.
The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities.
But those differnces are completely made up and don't need to exist.
So why would they be consolidated?
So that people can use whichever type they find visually most appealing without harming the performance of their army.
but maybe it should hurt their army? Commanders have to make decisions like these quite often, like all the time, and they all have pros & cons.
Deciding on which specific terminator plate, really depends on what you would use them for. So a TH/SS Indom would be used differently than a CF/SB dude and further a PS/PB Tartaros would be diff than the preceding. That's not even taking into account deathwing.
I mean hell, how many variants of special termies are there in 30k? Palantines, Pyroclasts, Justerian, I could go on. They work out of the same book right, but with specific things added supplementary to that section. Kinda like a base codex that everyone can use with added special stuff. Unfortunately since certain people only want stuff that others cant have. Then complain that they dont get access to stuff others have and flip out when the thought of it happening occurs.
They have different uses, tartaros are as fast as an infantry squad, Indom 1" less and Cataphrachtii even less. Their invulns are different as well. GW would say they'd have different specific uses and they do, so I'd believe them rather than....
once again, the only people that are removing anything from the game would do so irrespective of how it might effect another's enjoyment. Either by contrarian tendencies or tinfoil headgear.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I actually like the different marks of terminator armor having slightly different rules. The non imdomintus pattern have slightly different rules that reflect a variance in tech and unit priority. Plus if you think that having five terminator entries is what's causing 40k to be a mess, I disagree with you.
It's not units entries or number of options but it's scale being way out of wack. If I wanted a game with far less unit options and granularity I would play Apoc. A game that is trying to have viable rules for a Grot, a Space Marine, a Knight and a Titan is never going to work properly.
So do different Power Armor Mks. Do all those need separate rules? After all they have kits!
The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities. So why would they be consolidated? that would literally be removing options, which I am against. I do think that marines could be covered by main codex and then any changes applied to the supplements. Kinda like how it works in 30k.
oh BTW I am specifically not on anyone's side, just the side of ASTARTES.
I am not advocating that anyone "special" or otherwise losing stuff. it just boggles the mind that anybody is wanting to remove stuff from the game. If it doesnt effect your army comp, how is it a problem? But...but, balance, unfortunately that ship sailed a while ago. GW obviously don't want to so just deal with it or bounce.
If someone is upset that another faction gets something and whine/bitch/moan about it, its gotta suck to be you. People need to get off their high horse and realize that wanting to remove stuff from ones collection/army is a bad idea. It may seem like a good one, but it seems like if it doesnt effect them, they dont care.
but maybe it should hurt their army? Commanders have to make decisions like these quite often, like all the time, and they all have pros & cons.
It should hurt someone's army that they happen to like the look of the wrong terminator armour type?
Deciding on which specific terminator plate, really depends on what you would use them for. So a TH/SS Indom would be used differently than a CF/SB dude and further a PS/PB Tartaros would be diff than the preceding. That's not even taking into account deathwing.
I'd prefer if it dependent on which look I like the best.
I mean hell, how many variants of special termies are there in 30k?
but maybe it should hurt their army? Commanders have to make decisions like these quite often, like all the time, and they all have pros & cons.
It should hurt someone's army that they happen to like the look of the wrong terminator armour type?
but if it has different rules then you just have to deal with it. I prefer the look of tartaros, but I wouldnt expect them to behave the same way. why on earth would the mini which looks physically bulkier/heavier have the same rules as the lighter/faster one. a dodge hellcat and a mclaren 720s have approximately the same power, but one is significantly lighter, so in Gran Turismo, by your logic, should behave in the same way. damn I get that suspension of disbelief is a mutable thing but...
Deciding on which specific terminator plate, really depends on what you would use them for. So a TH/SS Indom would be used differently than a CF/SB dude and further a PS/PB Tartaros would be diff than the preceding. That's not even taking into account deathwing.
I'd prefer if it dependent on which look I like the best.
nothing is stopping you from using the one you like the look of best.
I mean hell, how many variants of special termies are there in 30k?
When all the options suck, why even have them? They all play the same right now which is they play badly. You are just punishing one look more than the other. And it is quite unlikely GW will make the 3 different terminator armors and the different equipments balanced if they even were to try so at best one of the armors would be superior and if you were unlucky and chose wrong you are punished,
People are for some reason discussing all the datasheets as if they are all both well balanced between each other, other elite choices, other units in the book and even between other books. They arent and will never be as long its GW who writes the rules.
Isnt it better to just have 1 unit with lots of different options both with equipment and look and then have it almost good than 5+ that all suck?
I think even those that advocate removing datasheets and consolidating units wish that it wasnt needed. Think most would love to have each unit be more unique and have different mechanics and be meaningful choices in list building. But the game is too big in scope and GW sucks at writing good and well balanced rules. I rather have 50 datasheets that are balanced and do different things well than 150 with just 10-15 of them being well written. Use all those other models for different looks and asthetics, you can still play them as they are still marines just that their "unique" sheet isnt there anymore.
I think if you feel that just because there are less choices GW will somehow find the magic touch to make the smaller number of choices good, you're living in a dream world I'd love to experience once. All that would happen is there would be less options and still most of them would be considered not competitive or worth while.
I don't think its a matter of number of options its either a matter of lack of understanding of their own game, or they just don't want to do so.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I think if you feel that just because there are less choices GW will somehow find the magic touch to make the smaller number of choices good, you're living in a dream world I'd love to experience once. All that would happen is there would be less options and still most of them would be considered not competitive or worth while.
I don't think its a matter of number of options its either a matter of lack of understanding of their own game, or they just don't want to do so.
indeed. if that idea had merit a codex like Custodes with minimal choices woudl consist of complete contenders
bullyboy wrote: I must admit, when I thumbed through the new SM Codex this weekend I did actually think "there is a crapton of datasheets here....too many in fact" . i think inevitably that will have to be reduced.
I felt like I was in a Captain Morgan commercial reading it...Primaris Captain, Captain in Gravis, Captain in Phobos, Captain in Terminator Armour, Captain in Cataphracti Armour, Captain, Captain on bike. 7 different captains.
23 different Elite entries, Yikes.
Maybe we're looking at this wrong. Primaris probably should have been a complete separate Codex supplement by itself. Even the non codex chapters would use this book as all Primaris are the same.
The problem is organization not number. I get they want to seperate the stat lines for things like bikes, gravis, terminator, and so on. The real problem with the codex is they started bouncing around the lieutenants, Libbys and such.
Ginjitzu wrote: But I'm curious, what would you call these units? Wulfen/Dragon Claws?
Something like mutated marines or abnormal marines I guess? Could include death company as well.
Mmmpi wrote: It's no different then codex + supplement. You have to wait for the supplement to get updated anyway.
If and only if the new SM codex is not compatible with the old supplement, and if it's the case they can just release a free pdf mini-supplement with the bare minimum in the meantime.
Klickor wrote: When all the options suck, why even have them? They all play the same right now which is they play badly. You are just punishing one look more than the other. And it is quite unlikely GW will make the 3 different terminator armors and the different equipments balanced if they even were to try so at best one of the armors would be superior and if you were unlucky and chose wrong you are punished,
People are for some reason discussing all the datasheets as if they are all both well balanced between each other, other elite choices, other units in the book and even between other books. They arent and will never be as long its GW who writes the rules.
Isnt it better to just have 1 unit with lots of different options both with equipment and look and then have it almost good than 5+ that all suck?
Not everybody play units because they are good from a competitive standpoint... Deathwing Knight are not a great unit frankly but, like most deathwing units, they have charism and thus some people play them even if they know that those will not make them win games. You guys are constantly thinking warhammer 40k is or should be something closer to chess and that's absurd.
Plus this arguments makes no sense whatsoever : the current weakness of terminator armies does not play negatively on the overall balance/playability of the game, and saying the contrary is absurd. If you're really interested in making this game more balanced, then ask GW to remove Knights and the like out of competitive 40k. DA/SW/BA is not even a subject.
I think even those that advocate removing datasheets and consolidating units wish that it wasnt needed. Think most would love to have each unit be more unique and have different mechanics and be meaningful choices in list building. But the game is too big in scope and GW sucks at writing good and well balanced rules. I rather have 50 datasheets that are balanced and do different things well than 150 with just 10-15 of them being well written. Use all those other models for different looks and asthetics, you can still play them as they are still marines just that their "unique" sheet isnt there anymore.
That's just false : some people in here just feel some frustration that some army have some original units.
I must add that the game has never been balanced (it was even arguably worst a few edition ago) and the number of units was way less back then. So the causality you make between the number of datasheets and the balance of the game is unproven. 40 datasheets with the same statlines are way easier to balance than ten datasheets with different statlines and abilities. The source of the lack of balance in 40k is linked with all the faction specific rules, the synergies between units, the imbalance in stratagems between one codex to another and the ability to take allied detachment - it has nothing to do with DA/BA/SW having a few original units.
If you want to seriously improve the game, there are a lot of things that must be done way before even putting the question of the number of units on the table. For exemple : why is there no actual template for strategems and relics ? Why the number of relic and stratagem from one codex to another is vastly different ? Why is it that only a few codex get the vect while it is such a massive strategic advantage ? Those are the actual topic that matter.
That's just false : some people in here just feel some frustration that some army have some original units.
I must add that the game has never been balanced (it was even arguably worst a few edition ago) and the number of units was way less back then. So the causality you make between the number of datasheets and the balance of the game is unproven. 40 datasheets with the same statlines are way easier to balance than ten datasheets with different statlines and abilities. The source of the lack of balance in 40k is linked with all the faction specific rules, the synergies between units, the imbalance in stratagems between one codex to another and the ability to take allied detachment - it has nothing to do with DA/BA/SW having a few original units.
Sure it is easier to balance when you have almost the same stat line but how fun is that? I thought we wanted different options so they actually felt different. When you have 5 units that do basically the same thing and you still dont know how to balance them after 20 years perhaps the effort should be on how to make the unit viable and not feel like you are punishing yourself instead of trying to make tiny differences between the units. If you let all terminators have the same options then you could still have your terminator squads do and look however you want and maybe they will also be a better unit. GW spends a minimum amount of effort in writing rules so if anything is good it is more of a lucky coincidence. I do feel like there are more obvious balance misses in the game now than a decade ago in the marine books. No wonder when you have many times more units and options that some will be complete gak with GWs efforts. They obviously have too many different datasheets they try to make unique and dont know how to do it for Space Marines. I get the feeling that for a certain book they look at some things and "fix" them but they don't even try doing every unit and every option. Terminators still look like the worst unit in the marine book to me and feel completely glossed over when almost everything else got buffed.
Ginjitzu wrote: But I'm curious, what would you call these units? Wulfen/Dragon Claws?
Something like mutated marines or abnormal marines I guess? Could include death company as well.
Mmmpi wrote: It's no different then codex + supplement. You have to wait for the supplement to get updated anyway.
If and only if the new SM codex is not compatible with the old supplement, and if it's the case they can just release a free pdf mini-supplement with the bare minimum in the meantime.
Ginjitzu wrote: But I'm curious, what would you call these units? Wulfen/Dragon Claws?
Something like mutated marines or abnormal marines I guess? Could include death company as well.
Mmmpi wrote: It's no different then codex + supplement. You have to wait for the supplement to get updated anyway.
If and only if the new SM codex is not compatible with the old supplement, and if it's the case they can just release a free pdf mini-supplement with the bare minimum in the meantime.
Yeah, but GW almost never does that.
it's worth noting thery did put out a supplement with the datasheets removed from codex space marines
Lord Damocles wrote: Terminators with maces and shields, in any reasonable world would use the same rules as Terminators with hammers and shields.
Tartarus and Cataphracti armour could each be a single line option for any Terminator model/unit.
Assault and Tactical Terminator squads could easily me merged into a single unit (like Blood Angels used to have).
Mixed weapon loadouts aren't unique to Dark Angels (everyone until 3rd edition., Blood Angels in Space Hulk, Salamanders in Codex Armageddon).
Neither are Terminator Command units.
But no - we totally need like sixteen different Terminator Squad entries.
You just don't seem to grasp though - some of us get a lot more out of the game for them having different rules. That in itself is something I think is cool and makes me feel more invested in my faction. They're my guys that can do their unique thing. Lore alone doesn't cut it for me, it needs a reflection in the mechanics.
But you can do that by electing to have them as assault termies or cataprachts, you can fit that all in one one profile, yeah it would be long but the only difference is movement speed and the invulnerable speed for the marks of termies.
Lord Damocles wrote: Terminators with maces and shields, in any reasonable world would use the same rules as Terminators with hammers and shields.
Tartarus and Cataphracti armour could each be a single line option for any Terminator model/unit.
Assault and Tactical Terminator squads could easily me merged into a single unit (like Blood Angels used to have).
Mixed weapon loadouts aren't unique to Dark Angels (everyone until 3rd edition., Blood Angels in Space Hulk, Salamanders in Codex Armageddon).
Neither are Terminator Command units.
But no - we totally need like sixteen different Terminator Squad entries.
You just don't seem to grasp though - some of us get a lot more out of the game for them having different rules. That in itself is something I think is cool and makes me feel more invested in my faction. They're my guys that can do their unique thing. Lore alone doesn't cut it for me, it needs a reflection in the mechanics.
But you can do that by electing to have them as assault termies or cataprachts, you can fit that all in one one profile, yeah it would be long but the only difference is movement speed and the invulnerable speed for the marks of termies.
So long as Deathwing Knights get something unique, sure I don't care too much if that is a shared datasheet or separate Datasheets.
I don't really see any advantage to a huge unwieldy shared datasheet though, seems worse than what we have now to me.
Lord Damocles wrote: Terminators with maces and shields, in any reasonable world would use the same rules as Terminators with hammers and shields.
Tartarus and Cataphracti armour could each be a single line option for any Terminator model/unit.
Assault and Tactical Terminator squads could easily me merged into a single unit (like Blood Angels used to have).
Mixed weapon loadouts aren't unique to Dark Angels (everyone until 3rd edition., Blood Angels in Space Hulk, Salamanders in Codex Armageddon).
Neither are Terminator Command units.
But no - we totally need like sixteen different Terminator Squad entries.
You just don't seem to grasp though - some of us get a lot more out of the game for them having different rules. That in itself is something I think is cool and makes me feel more invested in my faction. They're my guys that can do their unique thing. Lore alone doesn't cut it for me, it needs a reflection in the mechanics.
But you can do that by electing to have them as assault termies or cataprachts, you can fit that all in one one profile, yeah it would be long but the only difference is movement speed and the invulnerable speed for the marks of termies.
So long as Deathwing Knights get something unique, sure I don't care too much if that is a shared datasheet or separate Datasheets.
I don't really see any advantage to a huge unwieldy shared datasheet though, seems worse than what we have now to me.
Save the trees, man. Use that paper on more stuff in the book.
Heck, join all the captain profiles (sans primaris) into one where armor choices are upgrades. Same with lieutenants, ancients, librarians all down the line. Less data sheets and paper for them, conceivably more paper to use for other goodies.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I actually like the different marks of terminator armor having slightly different rules. The non imdomintus pattern have slightly different rules that reflect a variance in tech and unit priority. Plus if you think that having five terminator entries is what's causing 40k to be a mess, I disagree with you.
It's not units entries or number of options but it's scale being way out of wack. If I wanted a game with far less unit options and granularity I would play Apoc. A game that is trying to have viable rules for a Grot, a Space Marine, a Knight and a Titan is never going to work properly.
So do different Power Armor Mks. Do all those need separate rules? After all they have kits!
The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities. So why would they be consolidated? that would literally be removing options, which I am against. I do think that marines could be covered by main codex and then any changes applied to the supplements. Kinda like how it works in 30k.
oh BTW I am specifically not on anyone's side, just the side of ASTARTES.
I am not advocating that anyone "special" or otherwise losing stuff. it just boggles the mind that anybody is wanting to remove stuff from the game. If it doesnt effect your army comp, how is it a problem? But...but, balance, unfortunately that ship sailed a while ago. GW obviously don't want to so just deal with it or bounce.
If someone is upset that another faction gets something and whine/bitch/moan about it, its gotta suck to be you. People need to get off their high horse and realize that wanting to remove stuff from ones collection/army is a bad idea. It may seem like a good one, but it seems like if it doesnt effect them, they dont care.
Not whats suggested in the OP - AT ALL.
Also all the Marks of armour used to have rules.
Within 40k, not the 40kRPGs? Citation required.
In White Dwarf IIRC - but would need some digging to find it. it was based around a lore article with optional rules
GW never put the snowflake marine chapters into supplement for the main SM codex, yes.
But GW regularly release free/inexpensive rule placeholders to allow to play existing models. More often on the fantasy side of things, I remember Ravening Hordes (which wasn't free download because it's too old for that but was iirc in white dwarf or something): https://fr.scribd.com/doc/165569943/Warhammer-6th-Edition-Ravening-Hordes-pdf , the WFB armies at the beginning of AOS, …
For 40k they released the Index not that cheap, but that would have happened the same no matter if the BA were in a supplement or in their own codex.
Lord Damocles wrote: Terminators with maces and shields, in any reasonable world would use the same rules as Terminators with hammers and shields.
Tartarus and Cataphracti armour could each be a single line option for any Terminator model/unit.
Assault and Tactical Terminator squads could easily me merged into a single unit (like Blood Angels used to have).
Mixed weapon loadouts aren't unique to Dark Angels (everyone until 3rd edition., Blood Angels in Space Hulk, Salamanders in Codex Armageddon).
Neither are Terminator Command units.
But no - we totally need like sixteen different Terminator Squad entries.
You just don't seem to grasp though - some of us get a lot more out of the game for them having different rules. That in itself is something I think is cool and makes me feel more invested in my faction. They're my guys that can do their unique thing. Lore alone doesn't cut it for me, it needs a reflection in the mechanics.
But you can do that by electing to have them as assault termies or cataprachts, you can fit that all in one one profile, yeah it would be long but the only difference is movement speed and the invulnerable speed for the marks of termies.
So long as Deathwing Knights get something unique, sure I don't care too much if that is a shared datasheet or separate Datasheets.
I don't really see any advantage to a huge unwieldy shared datasheet though, seems worse than what we have now to me.
IMO the advantages is that as I said at the beginning, that these type of units that are likely to be present in other Chapters can be represented.
They would also all be in one place.
Im using my ba as successors now, and all special units are on the bench. Im not gonna miss them. SW have meaningful special units though. Wulfen are nuts.
Martel732 wrote: Im using my ba as successors now, and all special units are on the bench. Im not gonna miss them. SW have meaningful special units though. Wulfen are nuts.
You (and everyone else) would still have them - if you wanted them and they fitted your playstyle etc.
Space Wolf "unique" units are rarely that and many other Chapters have similar minor idosyncracies for their versions of tactical, devestator or sergeants etc.
Fewer (like Black Dragons) would tolerate (or be allowed) to have mutated monsters like Wulfen but I could see some having modified aspirants or similar which would have similar game stats....
Martel732 wrote: Im using my ba as successors now, and all special units are on the bench. Im not gonna miss them. SW have meaningful special units though. Wulfen are nuts.
some people tend to see the special units as being more a matter of the identity of the faction not simply "whats most powerful" that said I'd agree Wulven aren't exactly something that can just be slotted into a space marine armyy, whereas at least death company is something you could make a stratigium
Martel732 wrote: I used to care more, but the drought since 5th has made me willing to forget about dc and sg. They really dont eork in 8th anyway. Not really.
BA identity was gone when people quit fearing them.
some people don't judge a faction entirely on how powerful it is on table top.
Mr Morden wrote: I own reasonable Dark Angels and Wolves armies (about 3000pts each) and some Blood Angels (about 1500pts).
There has always been alot of discussion of the "unique" units that have been given to the Angels and Wolves to make their codex fuller and boost sales, especially since the "basic" marine range has been complete for years (one of the reasons for Primaris).
However looking at the actual units - how many of them are actually in any way unique, how many would not actually be represented in some form in other Chapters both in terms of Lore and game stats.
The Librarian Dreadnoughts are only in one chapter? Really?
No other Chapter has Sargeants leading squads in Terminator armour? Isn't that an Iron Hands thing too?
No other Chapter has more flexible teminator squads mixing close and ranged combat versons?
No other Chapter has mutations like Wolfen - isn't that a Black Dragons thing
No other Chapter rides beasts (much as I hate Wolves on Wolves) to battle?
Surely the basic unit templates for pretty much every Unique unit could and should be expanded to include these slight variations, with the relevant Chapter Keyword allowing access to a few other special rules /armoury should cover anything else?
What am I missing here. What would be lost by allowing those units be represeted in other Chapters?
It would also remove the problems of trying to cater for fans of these Chapters wanting everything plus their own "unique" units to make them Marines+ or having to have lesser versions of the same unit so that the three Chapters can retain a sense of specialness.
thanks
Personally I cannot fathom why BA have actual Librarian Dreads and GK do not (other than the wonky FW variant). Seems like a huge oversight imo.
Sergeants in Term - It's always been an IH thing, though I could see Salamaders doing this too.
Codex Terminators are just bleh. Kind of ironic that the term "codex" is associated with tactical flexibility but non-SW Term squads can only be armed for shooting or CC.
Wulfen supposedly have spent more time in the EoT than any other "Imperial" space marine, hard to argue with that.
I liked how powerful Thunderwolves were in 7th edition, not so much in 8th; That being said 8-9 ft tall marines in powered armor riding beasts the size of a Voltswagon Beetle never felt "right" to me. Tough to believe any other chapters being that crazy.
Martel732 wrote: Have you feared ba since 5th? Im guessing no. Thats the very definition of failure. How else do you judge 10 years of power armor turkey shoot?
I dont see the fluff players balking at easy wins over a bad army.
So the only time BA had identity was when they were considered really strong? And even then if you wanted feared you would've gone back to 4th or 3rd Rhino Rush era.
Codex Terminators are just bleh. Kind of ironic that the term "codex" is associated with tactical flexibility but non-SW Term squads can only be armed for shooting or CC.
Unless they wear Tartaros or Cataphracti armour, then they're mixing weapons with no problems!
Martel732 wrote: Have you feared ba since 5th? Im guessing no. Thats the very definition of failure. How else do you judge 10 years of power armor turkey shoot?
I dont see the fluff players balking at easy wins over a bad army.
So the only time BA had identity was when they were considered really strong? And even then if you wanted feared you would've gone back to 4th or 3rd Rhino Rush era.
They were half-feared in 5th. I'll round up. And yes, identity as an easy win isnt really fluff-compatible at all.
I like SW, and their wolves on wolves action. In their defense I have not read of other chapters using wolves, dogs, or any beasts to the extent of SW. There is also Bran Redmaw, who turns in to a large werewolf.
Spoiler:
I also like chapter unique units, gives flavor. other then that this thread reminds me of
Martel732 wrote: Have you feared ba since 5th? Im guessing no. Thats the very definition of failure. How else do you judge 10 years of power armor turkey shoot?
I dont see the fluff players balking at easy wins over a bad army.
So the only time BA had identity was when they were considered really strong? And even then if you wanted feared you would've gone back to 4th or 3rd Rhino Rush era.
I think Martel doesn't pay much mind to table top lore, for him faction identity isn't the fluff etc so much as their abilities.
The flavour stays exactly the same by the way if you read the OP - its just that we can represent other chapters have unusual stuff as well rather than just a "special" 4 (including the UM's now)
Looking bakc through the thread I can only see somewhat compelling arguments for the uniqueness of:
Named "Relic" vehicles, characters and maybe the Wolves on Wolves.
All the rest still seem to be generic unit upgrades or single line options in Codexes?
at the end of the day GW is going to have to choose some marine chapters to focus more on, thats just the name of the game, and given GW's actions over all it's clear that GW has concluded the main focus of player intreast is on the first founding chapters
BrianDavion wrote: at the end of the day GW is going to have to choose some marine chapters to focus more on, thats just the name of the game, and given GW's actions over all it's clear that GW has concluded the main focus of player intreast is on the first founding chapters
Those First Founding Chapters include White Scars, Iron Hands, Salamanders, Raven Guard - not seeing many special units for them. Just picked up the White Scars supplement as its always been an intersting lore chapter for me - I'll have to see what opportunities were missed......apart from of course only one character.... Ah well.
I will admit the issue is massively compounded by the no model no rules - well unless its a Grandmaster baby carrier..........
Mmmpi wrote: No, I mean when GW releases a supplemental codex it almost never comes out at the same time as the parent codex, and thus needs a pdf to update.
Yes but often the SM codex with a pdf is/would be better than the old codex...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jimbobbyish wrote: I also like chapter unique units, gives flavor. other then that this thread reminds me of
Spoiler:
What you want is for the user to have a choice between set, uniform options.
What we want is for the user to have the choice to build their army, with their personality, with as much options as possible.
Don't pretend we want uniformisation...
But to get to that level of choice you have to water down and make uniform all forms of chapter unique unit so they're generic enough for everyone. There would be no Deathwing Knights as they'd be just a different colour of a melee terminator unit used by everyone else. At that point you're still removing flavour even if you say 'but they still exist they're now just a variant of this basic thing now instead of being uniquely interesting '
Let's take a more interesting example, the famed Bestial marines entry.
They would still be very unique, by fluff and models! The Death Comparny would still be very different from the Wulfen and from the Black Dragons! Because both are genuinely different and flavorful. They would then be made different rulewise because of different CT, and in the case of wulfen and DC, by the extra stratagems and other stuff from the supplement.
As for the Deathwatch Knights, if they are just "terminator but more elite", then they aren't very characterful in the first place. If they are more than this, explain how, I'm sure it would still set them apart.
I like my BA having Death Company and I suppose Sang Guard. Love the Libby Dread. Space Wolves are a little OTT for me, but it's cool they got their own stuff. I like a lot of the DA special stuff. Haven't read the full 7 pages of what's probably whinging over semantics and arguing with people who're talking about completely different things, so forgive me if this has been suggested:
Make the unique units for each chapter part of their Chapter Tactics. Upgrade x number of units from the main Codex with chapter specific rules. That way anyone making a successor chapter can be a bit different than just the paintjob and someone coming up with a whole new homebrew fluff for their force can play with something thematic to them, whilst the min/maxers can field the most broke combo they can come up with.
I'm sure Blood Angels can't be the only chapter in the Imperium who flipped over the pistol requisitions form and saw that Mars makes meltas in pistol form. If Khorne Berzerkers can be aware enough to theoretically take 2 plasma pistols in a squad, you'd think some other guys might as well. There must be plenty of ways to justify Death Company rules across other chapters as well. Wolf Rage, Charged Bionics, Imperial Bravado, whatever. It'd be a nice easy excuse to make new models, or sell more kits for kitbashing purposes too, but unless Primaris get some actual options that's kinda moot.
I could easily see my Cursed Founding chapter having Wulfen style mutated psycho marines.
This debate reminds me of discussion about class vs point based character building in RPGs. Some people prefer things to come in neat pre-chosen packages, whilst others want a smorgasbord of options from which they can freely mix and match.
Crimson wrote: I could easily see my Cursed Founding chapter having Wulfen style mutated psycho marines.
This debate reminds me of discussion about class vs point based character building in RPGs. Some people prefer things to come in neat pre-chosen packages, whilst others want a smorgasbord of options from which they can freely mix and match.
I feel like the Chaos Knights boons and flaws table mightv be a good way to go about this kind of customisation. Wouldn't be a bad thing to see as a White Dwarf article or Chapter Approved extra. Of course, only for open or narrative play.
Crimson wrote: I could easily see my Cursed Founding chapter having Wulfen style mutated psycho marines.
This debate reminds me of discussion about class vs point based character building in RPGs. Some people prefer things to come in neat pre-chosen packages, whilst others want a smorgasbord of options from which they can freely mix and match.
as a GM I find class based to be infinatly easier to manage to write a balanced adventure around
Crimson wrote: I could easily see my Cursed Founding chapter having Wulfen style mutated psycho marines.
This debate reminds me of discussion about class vs point based character building in RPGs. Some people prefer things to come in neat pre-chosen packages, whilst others want a smorgasbord of options from which they can freely mix and match.
That's exactly it! Except for one meaningful difference. RPG have a number of classes. But they don't have things like “the Bard class, the Cleric class, the Fighter-and-Barbarian-and-Monk-and-Sorcerer-and… class” like we have with the Space Marine codex who is supposed to represent thousands of extremely different chapters. That's basically why the current system is flawed. At the very least, we should have “class” marine codex, with all the “fighter” chapters in one book and all the “shooter” chapters in the other book and you can decide to build your own fighter chapter or your own “shooter” chapter. Here it's “Your own chapter” or “the Dark Angel, or a descendant that is so close to them it might as well be the very same chapter”…
Crimson wrote: I could easily see my Cursed Founding chapter having Wulfen style mutated psycho marines.
This debate reminds me of discussion about class vs point based character building in RPGs. Some people prefer things to come in neat pre-chosen packages, whilst others want a smorgasbord of options from which they can freely mix and match.
as a GM I find class based to be infinatly easier to manage to write a balanced adventure around
By extension, do you think a series of books with a smaller, defined list of units - rather than a giant mass of units from 4 books - might be easier to balance?
Assuming, of course, that the studio writing the rules was good at such things - and even if they weren't, would you think it should be easier for them that way?
BroodSpawn wrote: But to get to that level of choice you have to water down and make uniform all forms of chapter unique unit so they're generic enough for everyone. There would be no Deathwing Knights as they'd be just a different colour of a melee terminator unit used by everyone else. At that point you're still removing flavour even if you say 'but they still exist they're now just a variant of this basic thing now instead of being uniquely interesting '
Dark Angel special rules:
All models in terminator armor gain the DEATHWING and INNER CIRCLE keywords
Models in DEATHWING TERMINATOR SQUAD may exchange its storm bolter and power fist for two lightning claws or Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield. Alternatively, the entire unit may exchange their weapons for Mace of Absolution and Storm Shield and gain the DEATHWING KNIGHT keyword. Terminator sergeants in DEATHWING KNIGHT units are equipped with Flail of the Unforgiven and Stormshield.
BroodSpawn wrote: But to get to that level of choice you have to water down and make uniform all forms of chapter unique unit so they're generic enough for everyone. There would be no Deathwing Knights as they'd be just a different colour of a melee terminator unit used by everyone else. At that point you're still removing flavour even if you say 'but they still exist they're now just a variant of this basic thing now instead of being uniquely interesting '
Dark Angel special rules:
All models in terminator armor gain the DEATHWING and INNER CIRCLE keywords
Models in DEATHWING TERMINATOR SQUAD may exchange its storm bolter and power fist for two lightning claws or Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield. Alternatively, the entire unit may exchange their weapons for Mace of Absolution and Storm Shield and gain the DEATHWING KNIGHT keyword. Terminator sergeants in DEATHWING KNIGHT units are equipped with Flail of the Unforgiven and Stormshield.
On a purely technical level with no context, not much. You get what you want, I get what I want. I assume however that you've restricted that option to only Dark Angels armies, so why would you have it in a generic SM list since everyone outside of the DA wouldn't be able to use it. But considering that's not explicitly stated I have to assume that now the Space Wolves have access to 'Deathwing Knights'.
Or have you decided that gaining the Deathwing keywords should be accessible to non-DA armies. And if that's the case you have, again, lost in the flavour and theme of the units and armies it's related to. Ultramarines should not have Deathwing Knights just because you want to condense options into a single datasheet that players will then decide has only one way of being built.
Or are you going to ignore the flavour problem again, which you consistently do because it doesn't fit in your narrative that evre Marine unit should be available to every Marine army, ignoring the 30yrs+ of stories and theme that has been developed
he doesn't care. if GW ditches the varient marine armies that means GW will magicly give other "more worthy" armies new stuff. nevermind that the example of Primaris Marines suggests this wouldn't be the case. AT ALL
BroodSpawn wrote: But to get to that level of choice you have to water down and make uniform all forms of chapter unique unit so they're generic enough for everyone. There would be no Deathwing Knights as they'd be just a different colour of a melee terminator unit used by everyone else. At that point you're still removing flavour even if you say 'but they still exist they're now just a variant of this basic thing now instead of being uniquely interesting '
Dark Angel special rules:
All models in terminator armor gain the DEATHWING and INNER CIRCLE keywords
Models in DEATHWING TERMINATOR SQUAD may exchange its storm bolter and power fist for two lightning claws or Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield. Alternatively, the entire unit may exchange their weapons for Mace of Absolution and Storm Shield and gain the DEATHWING KNIGHT keyword. Terminator sergeants in DEATHWING KNIGHT units are equipped with Flail of the Unforgiven and Stormshield.
done.
Seems legit - what is lost?
The feeling that it is a different unit that is organised differently by the Chapter. It just feels like they picked up a different weapon that day, which isn't reflective of the lore.
To some people that won't matter, to others it matters a lot.
In that they have maces instead of hammers, sure. But other than that they're currently rules-wise just the same as other Terminator units.
Even under their previous rules when they were more different, that basically translated into +1WS and them being the only Terminators who could form a shieldwall for some reason (as though these guys couldn't do the exact same thing).
Lord Damocles wrote: In that they have maces instead of hammers, sure. But other than that they're currently rules-wise just the same as other Terminator units.
Even under their previous rules when they were more different, that basically translated into +1WS and them being the only Terminators who could form a shieldwall for some reason (as though these guys couldn't do the exact same thing).
No, I mean they are different guys in the chapter, in the lore. Combining the Datasheets diminishes the feeling of uniqueness - that they are this other special unit within the Deathwing.
As I say, that won't bother everyone but it's important to some people.
Lord Damocles wrote: [Indomitus-armoured] Deathwing being able to mix weapons while nobody else can is an arbitrary gameplay mechanic, and nothing to do with any lore.
I'm fairly sure that the Terminator squads in the more Codex-adherent Chapters being split into Assault and Tactical units is a thing in the lore. The Unforgiven are the primary exception, with the Wolf Guard being a lesser one (given that the Space Wolves don't actually have a 1st Company). I would need to go back through some books to get references, though.
Lord Damocles wrote: [Indomitus-armoured] Deathwing being able to mix weapons while nobody else can is an arbitrary gameplay mechanic, and nothing to do with any lore.
I'm fairly sure that the Terminator squads in the more Codex-adherent Chapters being split into Assault and Tactical units is a thing in the lore. The Unforgiven are the primary exception, with the Wolf Guard being a lesser one (given that the Space Wolves don't actually have a 1st Company). I would need to go back through some books to get references, though.
I think it's muddier than that. If you go back to the early days, Terminators are often mixed teams with different specialists. Look at Space Hulk etc.
I dark Angels and I would be in favour of consolidation IF gw stops to expand the miniatures cross-chapter without restraint.
My issue isn't the fact that other Chapters may have "my" units (honestly, why White Scars shouldn't have a Land Speeder Lieutenants?), but instead the availability of all units where before those chapters didn't have many specific choices.
DA for example didn't have Veterans: their veterans where always in Terminator. It was a neat and characterful oddity. Same with Bike Scout, etcetera.
I hate the fact that DA now have veterans, or bike scouts, or additional configurations of Land Speeder: because restrictions foster creativity.
So, as long as any extra choice will require a sacrifice, I would agree with a more consistent consolidation.
Cybtroll wrote: I dark Angels and I would be in favour of consolidation IF gw stops to expand the miniatures cross-chapter without restraint.
My issue isn't the fact that other Chapters may have "my" units (honestly, why White Scars shouldn't have a Land Speeder Lieutenants?), but instead the availability of all units where before those chapters didn't have many specific choices.
DA for example didn't have Veterans: their veterans where always in Terminator. It was a neat and characterful oddity. Same with Bike Scout, etcetera.
I hate the fact that DA now have veterans, or bike scouts, or additional configurations of Land Speeder: because restrictions foster creativity.
So, as long as any extra choice will require a sacrifice, I would agree with a more consistent consolidation.
Personally i would like DA to be kept separate, however the trend has been taking away their uniqueness lately, especially with the primaris line homogenizing the chapters and them gaining more and more units from codex astartes. Honestly with the current codex there is no reason DA couldn't be consolidated into a few extra pages of rules by a savvy rules writer.
Cybtroll wrote: I dark Angels and I would be in favour of consolidation IF gw stops to expand the miniatures cross-chapter without restraint.
My issue isn't the fact that other Chapters may have "my" units (honestly, why White Scars shouldn't have a Land Speeder Lieutenants?), but instead the availability of all units where before those chapters didn't have many specific choices.
DA for example didn't have Veterans: their veterans where always in Terminator. It was a neat and characterful oddity. Same with Bike Scout, etcetera.
I hate the fact that DA now have veterans, or bike scouts, or additional configurations of Land Speeder: because restrictions foster creativity.
.
DA vets should absolutely exist. It doesn't mean they come from the Veteran 1st company (in the DA case, the Deathwing), they represent parts of the Command Squad from each Company that also form the Champion and standard bearer.
Lord Damocles wrote: [Indomitus-armoured] Deathwing being able to mix weapons while nobody else can is an arbitrary gameplay mechanic, and nothing to do with any lore.
I'm fairly sure that the Terminator squads in the more Codex-adherent Chapters being split into Assault and Tactical units is a thing in the lore. The Unforgiven are the primary exception, with the Wolf Guard being a lesser one (given that the Space Wolves don't actually have a 1st Company). I would need to go back through some books to get references, though.
I think it's muddier than that. If you go back to the early days, Terminators are often mixed teams with different specialists. Look at Space Hulk etc.
In 2nd edition Ultramarine/Codex Terminator Squads could mix weapons, too.
BroodSpawn wrote: But to get to that level of choice you have to water down and make uniform all forms of chapter unique unit so they're generic enough for everyone. There would be no Deathwing Knights as they'd be just a different colour of a melee terminator unit used by everyone else. At that point you're still removing flavour even if you say 'but they still exist they're now just a variant of this basic thing now instead of being uniquely interesting '
Dark Angel special rules:
All models in terminator armor gain the DEATHWING and INNER CIRCLE keywords
Models in DEATHWING TERMINATOR SQUAD may exchange its storm bolter and power fist for two lightning claws or Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield. Alternatively, the entire unit may exchange their weapons for Mace of Absolution and Storm Shield and gain the DEATHWING KNIGHT keyword. Terminator sergeants in DEATHWING KNIGHT units are equipped with Flail of the Unforgiven and Stormshield.
done.
Seems legit - what is lost?
Combining datasheets achieves nothing. The Dark Angels Codex has one datasheet for Deathwing Terminator Squad and one datasheet for Deathwing Knights Squad. It doesn't also have a Terminator Squad datasheet and an Assault Terminator Squad datasheet so there is no efficiency but plenty more wordage in the sheet. The Dark Angels book is quite manageable in terms of units.
What you lose is a distinction between Dark Angels and other Chapters. Choosing to collect, paint and play a Dark Angels force means you gain access to some unique things (Deathwing, Ravenwing) and lose access to others. Its part of the enjoyment - the point of a distinct army. If you really want to play with Ravenwing Black Knights then go ahead and play with Ravenwing Black Knights in a Dark Angels detachment or army. Nobody is stopping you, anymore that they are stopping you playing with Tau Commanders or Ork Lootas. It just takes a certain amount of commitment.
But why do 4 Chapters get detailed units and differences, while 996 don't?
Whereas if you had a generic Space Marine codex and the ability to pick bonuses and penalties (or extra units and restrictions) from the whole list, you could represent a lot more chapters.
I do understand it'd make balancing harder, but honestly, given the fact that balance is apparently an 82nd concern for GW instead of #1 or #2 or something like that, they might as well let you have lots of customization.
The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
And, considering that more than 50% of Chapters comes from Ultramarines (or, at least, I remember that from Index Astartes whee they said that more than half of the newly founded chapters derive from Ultramarines alone - but the exact number may be slightly different) and that Ultramarines have their own Codex, the real number should be 4/8.
So, we have a "standard" chapter (UM), and then half are special, half aren't. Much more relevant than you think.
The writers just wrote what they wanted & GW just made models for those. Players liked the uniqueness and wanted more, but rather than helping the other legions buy giving them a special unit, GW just focused on the jerkyboys.
We are now at the point where having them all spread out in their own just increases issues when compared to the regular codex chapters.
A Deathwing termie is only slightly different to any other terminator(gameplay wise). The main difference comes from lore/fluff. so why couldnt they share the same base codex rules and then have a supplemental one with all of the fluff/lore that makes them sooooo special? Kinda like they're doing with the rest of the Astartes.
I mean are people that dense that they cant understand that marines are marines no matter how much they try to differentiate them, they're still marines, right?
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
Removed - Rule #1 please
BrianDavion wrote: he doesn't care. if GW ditches the varient marine armies that means GW will magicly give other "more worthy" armies new stuff. nevermind that the example of Primaris Marines suggests this wouldn't be the case. AT ALL
They shouldn;t Ditch them just not focuss exclusively on them, or pretend stuff is "unique" - or is that too hard of a concerpt for you. There are no fluff changes needed.
Anyone think i am wrong? Its another but related argument - having Forgeworld making almost exclusively marines and then having GW also making two entire marine ranges - yeah that apparently to people like you means that no resources are dedicated to them as GW has infinite time and resources? Thats just stupid
GW brings out a new Codex and new marine Models and immediatly its "BUT WHERE ARE THE DARK ANGELS, BLOOD ANGELS AND WOLVES versions - we want all the special rules too - oh and all our "unique Units" and special rules as well.
Its no secret I despise the flanderisation of my Wolves and Angels armies
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
lol no, they are 4 on 1000.
Being first founding doesn't make a chapter extra special. It just means that they have 10 000 years of history as opposed to having 9 000 years of history, which is just a detail. The “First founding fetish” is quite unsufferable
Firstly, I don't write 'garbage'. Dislike or disagree with me, just don't insult me because of it.
Secondly - to generalise all the unique units so everyone has the same options means you do have to make some changes to the lore, and as has been stated by others: removing the fact that some chapters have options that others do not in favour of giving everyone the same options would be removing flavour, lore, themes and stories from those chapters. No matter how you spin it, you have to make some changes to accommodate generic 'Deathwing', or generic 'Wulfen', especially since they're no both Ultramarine units too under your proposals.
Thirdly, I have answered the OP post a few times now, if you can't grasp that people like there being differences between the loyalist marine factions then this is just going to become an echo chamber where you shout down someone that disagrees with you even though many of them have presented you various reasons for why the unique units should stay as they are.
And fourthly I guess I'm done. I've tried presenting a counterpoint to you over the last few days. It's obvious you wont change my mind, and also that you wont accept said dissenting opinion to your proposal.
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
Removed - Rule #1 please
BrianDavion wrote: he doesn't care. if GW ditches the varient marine armies that means GW will magicly give other "more worthy" armies new stuff. nevermind that the example of Primaris Marines suggests this wouldn't be the case. AT ALL
They shouldn;t Ditch them just not focuss exclusively on them, or pretend stuff is "unique" - or is that too hard of a concerpt for you. There are no fluff changes needed.
Anyone think i am wrong? Its another but related argument - having Forgeworld making almost exclusively marines and then having GW also making two entire marine ranges - yeah that apparently to people like you means that no resources are dedicated to them as GW has infinite time and resources? Thats just stupid
GW brings out a new Codex and new marine Models and immediatly its "BUT WHERE ARE THE DARK ANGELS, BLOOD ANGELS AND WOLVES versions - we want all the special rules too - oh and all our "unique Units" and special rules as well.
Its no secret I despise the flanderisation of my Wolves and Angels armies
I've read your original post a few times, and I think that you are wrong. Your OP would be stronger if it didn't have a strawmen (like your all caps above where you invent your opponent's arguments).
The Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves are distinct armies from the Space Marines in this edition and pretty much every edition before. 3rd Edition had them as smaller codex supplements, but otherwise they've stood on their own. You might not like their aesthetic. That's OK. Don't play them. Other people do like them and indeed play them. You might want to build a bridge and get over it.
What do you want? Do you want access to the Deathwing or do you just want them squatted? Same question for the other unique units. Be clear in your argument, and be prepared for people to disagree with you.
The Dark Angels need only a few SKU to be a distinct army. Those few boxes from a mature army with mature lore/fluff and design are not keeping GW from making a whole new army or adding some wonder unit to another one.
BroodSpawn wrote: No matter how you spin it, you have to make some changes to accommodate generic 'Deathwing', or generic 'Wulfen', especially since they're no both Ultramarine units too under your proposals.
No, not really. Deathwing is terminators, Ultra have plenty of them. Wulfen are “bestial marines”, Ultramarines don't have them (don't give them the corresponding trait that open this option) but many other chapters do, like for instance the Black Dragons.
And it's not the first time we mention it.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
But isn't it kind of a hard to trust that GW will do a supplment for your codex, that the supplement is going to be good and as a separate matter no one wants to buy their codex twice, specialy when you already have to buy CAs each year, want it or not.
Being first founding means that you have successor chapters in an unknown number.
So, whatever your headcanon is, there aren't "4 out of 1000".
They are around 25% of the entire existing Marine, give or take.
The "I don't bother to read properly because I known I'm right" fetish is definitely insufferable.
BroodSpawn wrote: But to get to that level of choice you have to water down and make uniform all forms of chapter unique unit so they're generic enough for everyone. There would be no Deathwing Knights as they'd be just a different colour of a melee terminator unit used by everyone else. At that point you're still removing flavour even if you say 'but they still exist they're now just a variant of this basic thing now instead of being uniquely interesting '
Dark Angel special rules:
All models in terminator armor gain the DEATHWING and INNER CIRCLE keywords
Models in DEATHWING TERMINATOR SQUAD may exchange its storm bolter and power fist for two lightning claws or Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield. Alternatively, the entire unit may exchange their weapons for Mace of Absolution and Storm Shield and gain the DEATHWING KNIGHT keyword. Terminator sergeants in DEATHWING KNIGHT units are equipped with Flail of the Unforgiven and Stormshield.
done.
Seems legit - what is lost?
+1 attack which almost doubles the offensive capability of the unit, and the watcher in the dark which is a very unique DA bit of fluff that gives them some solid psychic defense.
Cybtroll wrote: Being first founding means that you have successor chapters in an unknown number.
So, whatever your headcanon is, there aren't "4 out of 1000".
They are around 25% of the entire existing Marine, give or take.
The "I don't bother to read properly because I known I'm right" fetish is definitely insufferable.
I find it doubtful that's the case. 60% of the sucessor chapters out there are Ultramarine.
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
When a quarter to a third of the units are specialty, then it makes more sense to keep a separate codex.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
But isn't it kind of a hard to trust that GW will do a supplment for your codex, that the supplement is going to be good and as a separate matter no one wants to buy their codex twice, specialy when you already have to buy CAs each year, want it or not.
Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
JNAProductions wrote: But why do 4 Chapters get detailed units and differences, while 996 don't?
Whereas if you had a generic Space Marine codex and the ability to pick bonuses and penalties (or extra units and restrictions) from the whole list, you could represent a lot more chapters.
I do understand it'd make balancing harder, but honestly, given the fact that balance is apparently an 82nd concern for GW instead of #1 or #2 or something like that, they might as well let you have lots of customization.
It is difference are you codex chapter or not. If normal SM codex would got all units, it would be cost more money. But there should be more customization. Maybe no named characters, that way you could do successors more freely. If there would be one basic primarch base unit with options, you could play with returned Vulkan (or Lion is all Space marines would be in one book).
Even Space marine codex have restrictions based which chapter you choose. That brings unbalance. Supplements like Ultramarines would break balance too.But players like supplements which give more power and GW likes to sell supplements.
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
When a quarter to a third of the units are specialty, then it makes more sense to keep a separate codex.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
But isn't it kind of a hard to trust that GW will do a supplment for your codex, that the supplement is going to be good and as a separate matter no one wants to buy their codex twice, specialy when you already have to buy CAs each year, want it or not.
Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
It. Doesn't. Need. To. Be. Two. Books.
Also those "specialty units" aren't really a specialty. I proved as such and you just refuse to accept it because "muh snowflake rules" instead of realizing that the balance (and therefore how your fluff plays out) would be a LOT better.
If anything, Black Templars and Iron Hands are actually divergent compared to Blood Angels (who really just have Death Company as different in their Chapter organization) and Dark Angels (where everyone in 1st Company can get a Terminator suit).
I think that if GW could split it in to 3 or more books they would. Look at vigilus, all the people that bought those book must now feel dumb, that now to use the rules they need to buy the new sm codex and supplement.
In fact, if GW could they would probably be willing to sell books with just one unit rules inside. heck they could do it for a weapon upgrade to a unit. And people would be buying them, because they need rules to legaly play, and if something makes a unit good people are going to be buy it no matter how it looks.
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
Removed - Rule #1 please
BrianDavion wrote: he doesn't care. if GW ditches the varient marine armies that means GW will magicly give other "more worthy" armies new stuff. nevermind that the example of Primaris Marines suggests this wouldn't be the case. AT ALL
They shouldn;t Ditch them just not focuss exclusively on them, or pretend stuff is "unique" - or is that too hard of a concerpt for you. There are no fluff changes needed.
Anyone think i am wrong? Its another but related argument - having Forgeworld making almost exclusively marines and then having GW also making two entire marine ranges - yeah that apparently to people like you means that no resources are dedicated to them as GW has infinite time and resources? Thats just stupid
GW brings out a new Codex and new marine Models and immediatly its "BUT WHERE ARE THE DARK ANGELS, BLOOD ANGELS AND WOLVES versions - we want all the special rules too - oh and all our "unique Units" and special rules as well.
Its no secret I despise the flanderisation of my Wolves and Angels armies
I've read your original post a few times, and I think that you are wrong. Your OP would be stronger if it didn't have a strawmen (like your all caps above where you invent your opponent's arguments).
The Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves are distinct armies from the Space Marines in this edition and pretty much every edition before. 3rd Edition had them as smaller codex supplements, but otherwise they've stood on their own. You might not like their aesthetic. That's OK. Don't play them. Other people do like them and indeed play them. You might want to build a bridge and get over it.
What do you want? Do you want access to the Deathwing or do you just want them squatted? Same question for the other unique units. Be clear in your argument, and be prepared for people to disagree with you.
The Dark Angels need only a few SKU to be a distinct army. Those few boxes from a mature army with mature lore/fluff and design are not keeping GW from making a whole new army or adding some wonder unit to another one.
Right so you read my OP (aledgedly) and MISSED that I have Wolves and Angels armies....................seriously its in the first line!
How many times - No squatting- you just have it as an option, potentially unlocked by Chapter tactics depending on how actually "unique" the units is.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
Cybtroll wrote: Being first founding means that you have successor chapters in an unknown number.
And those successors quite likely aren't using the same codex. Many chapters don't even know their origins. So…
Mmmpi wrote: Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
Codex Marines have to buy two books if they want to use a chapter supplement too atm so not really an argument. If you want to play marines you need one book. If you want to play a specific chapter, you buy two books, one on marines and one on the specificity of your chapter.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
This is not why we want consolidation and we have been over this.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
Granted gw does not make other factions more desirable in any way shape or form.
Their focus cripples armies favour, said army will then get less sold which then leads to even less support.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
"SIGH" I don't have one just faction - I collect pretty much ALL of them including the Wolves and Angels - AS I said about a million fething times.
Still ignoring the question - does GW have infinite resources or does, in fact, making one thing mean you don't do another?????????
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
When a quarter to a third of the units are specialty, then it makes more sense to keep a separate codex.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
But isn't it kind of a hard to trust that GW will do a supplment for your codex, that the supplement is going to be good and as a separate matter no one wants to buy their codex twice, specialy when you already have to buy CAs each year, want it or not.
Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
It. Doesn't. Need. To. Be. Two. Books.
Also those "specialty units" aren't really a specialty. I proved as such and you just refuse to accept it because "muh snowflake rules" instead of realizing that the balance (and therefore how your fluff plays out) would be a LOT better.
If anything, Black Templars and Iron Hands are actually divergent compared to Blood Angels (who really just have Death Company as different in their Chapter organization) and Dark Angels (where everyone in 1st Company can get a Terminator suit).
It isn't justified so don't pretend it is.
There are already far too many differences to be one book, and you're one of the only people saying one book anyway. Almost everyone else is shouting 'supplemental'.
You really didn't prove anything other than that you think they aren't special. Sorry Cupcake.
So yeah, it is justified, no matter how much you pretend.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: I think that if GW could split it in to 3 or more books they would. Look at vigilus, all the people that bought those book must now feel dumb, that now to use the rules they need to buy the new sm codex and supplement.
In fact, if GW could they would probably be willing to sell books with just one unit rules inside. heck they could do it for a weapon upgrade to a unit. And people would be buying them, because they need rules to legaly play, and if something makes a unit good people are going to be buy it no matter how it looks.
Mmmpi wrote: Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
Codex Marines have to buy two books if they want to use a chapter supplement too atm so not really an argument. If you want to play marines you need one book. If you want to play a specific chapter, you buy two books, one on marines and one on the specificity of your chapter.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
This is not why we want consolidation and we have been over this.
No, you want to field all of the broken units in one army, despite the fact that you can already do that.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
"SIGH" I don't have one just faction - I collect pretty much ALL of them including the Wolves and Angels - AS I said about a million fething times.
Still ignoring the question - does GW have infinite resources or does, in fact, making one thing mean you don't do another?????????
You aren't everyone else. There are plenty of others who have argued this.
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
When a quarter to a third of the units are specialty, then it makes more sense to keep a separate codex.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
But isn't it kind of a hard to trust that GW will do a supplment for your codex, that the supplement is going to be good and as a separate matter no one wants to buy their codex twice, specialy when you already have to buy CAs each year, want it or not.
Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
It. Doesn't. Need. To. Be. Two. Books.
Also those "specialty units" aren't really a specialty. I proved as such and you just refuse to accept it because "muh snowflake rules" instead of realizing that the balance (and therefore how your fluff plays out) would be a LOT better.
If anything, Black Templars and Iron Hands are actually divergent compared to Blood Angels (who really just have Death Company as different in their Chapter organization) and Dark Angels (where everyone in 1st Company can get a Terminator suit).
It isn't justified so don't pretend it is.
There are already far too many differences to be one book, and you're one of the only people saying one book anyway. Almost everyone else is shouting 'supplemental'.
You really didn't prove anything other than that you think they aren't special. Sorry Cupcake.
So yeah, it is justified, no matter how much you pretend.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: I think that if GW could split it in to 3 or more books they would. Look at vigilus, all the people that bought those book must now feel dumb, that now to use the rules they need to buy the new sm codex and supplement.
In fact, if GW could they would probably be willing to sell books with just one unit rules inside. heck they could do it for a weapon upgrade to a unit. And people would be buying them, because they need rules to legaly play, and if something makes a unit good people are going to be buy it no matter how it looks.
Mmmpi wrote: Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
Codex Marines have to buy two books if they want to use a chapter supplement too atm so not really an argument. If you want to play marines you need one book. If you want to play a specific chapter, you buy two books, one on marines and one on the specificity of your chapter.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
This is not why we want consolidation and we have been over this.
No, you want to field all of the broken units in one army, despite the fact that you can already do that.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
"SIGH" I don't have one just faction - I collect pretty much ALL of them including the Wolves and Angels - AS I said about a million fething times.
Still ignoring the question - does GW have infinite resources or does, in fact, making one thing mean you don't do another?????????
You aren't everyone else. There are plenty of others who have argued this.
And he answered your question.
"My Terminators can take a SS in their shooting squad" isn't a difference hahahahahaha! Neither is "my apothecaries look different".
Yeah you need to get over it. The circlejerk for the Angels codices is unbelievable, you proving as much thinking they're even close to different.
It would be entirely possible to fold the Wolves and DA/BA stuff into the main SM codex and still get a lower page count than books for many other game systems (looking at the old FFGRPG books, those were 200-300 page books that retailed for what a codex book a third the size cost now). Ive done it as a project a couple of times in previous editons, it's by no means hard to do, especially when many units are simple equipment or rule swaps and when two thirds of the fluff is communal copypasta. With the new keyword system, it'd probably be even easier.
However, GW basically uses these as business cycle tools, keeping the flagship line of the most common high profile products bumped through an entire edition cycle. They're separate because GW wants those marketing/release windows, not because they really need to be.
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
When a quarter to a third of the units are specialty, then it makes more sense to keep a separate codex.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
But isn't it kind of a hard to trust that GW will do a supplment for your codex, that the supplement is going to be good and as a separate matter no one wants to buy their codex twice, specialy when you already have to buy CAs each year, want it or not.
Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
It. Doesn't. Need. To. Be. Two. Books.
Also those "specialty units" aren't really a specialty. I proved as such and you just refuse to accept it because "muh snowflake rules" instead of realizing that the balance (and therefore how your fluff plays out) would be a LOT better.
If anything, Black Templars and Iron Hands are actually divergent compared to Blood Angels (who really just have Death Company as different in their Chapter organization) and Dark Angels (where everyone in 1st Company can get a Terminator suit).
It isn't justified so don't pretend it is.
There are already far too many differences to be one book, and you're one of the only people saying one book anyway. Almost everyone else is shouting 'supplemental'.
You really didn't prove anything other than that you think they aren't special. Sorry Cupcake.
So yeah, it is justified, no matter how much you pretend.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: I think that if GW could split it in to 3 or more books they would. Look at vigilus, all the people that bought those book must now feel dumb, that now to use the rules they need to buy the new sm codex and supplement.
In fact, if GW could they would probably be willing to sell books with just one unit rules inside. heck they could do it for a weapon upgrade to a unit. And people would be buying them, because they need rules to legaly play, and if something makes a unit good people are going to be buy it no matter how it looks.
Mmmpi wrote: Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
Codex Marines have to buy two books if they want to use a chapter supplement too atm so not really an argument. If you want to play marines you need one book. If you want to play a specific chapter, you buy two books, one on marines and one on the specificity of your chapter.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
This is not why we want consolidation and we have been over this.
No, you want to field all of the broken units in one army, despite the fact that you can already do that.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
"SIGH" I don't have one just faction - I collect pretty much ALL of them including the Wolves and Angels - AS I said about a million fething times.
Still ignoring the question - does GW have infinite resources or does, in fact, making one thing mean you don't do another?????????
You aren't everyone else. There are plenty of others who have argued this.
And he answered your question.
"My Terminators can take a SS in their shooting squad" isn't a difference hahahahahaha! Neither is "my apothecaries look different".
Yeah you need to get over it. The circlejerk for the Angels codices is unbelievable, you proving as much thinking they're even close to different.
That is literally a difference. And considering those 'different looking apothicaries' have added rules (which is why they're HQ instead of Elites), they aren't the same unit either.
So you need to get over it. The circle jerk of pushing your opinion as fact is sadly all too common, you're providing no thinking at all.
More of a “weird rule artifact” than a difference.
And by weird artifact, you mean something that's been tweaked occasionally over the last 15 years, showing that GW has been looking at it and chose to leave it in?
Okay, then let me give you some other answer:
Because it makes GW more money!
What, you don't like that answer? Well, GW does like it!
and that is literally the only argument GW needs. I've said again, those chapters merit their own codex because they are profitable as their own codex. Black Templars meanwhile wheren't popular eneugh for their own 'dex
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
When a quarter to a third of the units are specialty, then it makes more sense to keep a separate codex.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
But isn't it kind of a hard to trust that GW will do a supplment for your codex, that the supplement is going to be good and as a separate matter no one wants to buy their codex twice, specialy when you already have to buy CAs each year, want it or not.
Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
It. Doesn't. Need. To. Be. Two. Books.
Also those "specialty units" aren't really a specialty. I proved as such and you just refuse to accept it because "muh snowflake rules" instead of realizing that the balance (and therefore how your fluff plays out) would be a LOT better.
If anything, Black Templars and Iron Hands are actually divergent compared to Blood Angels (who really just have Death Company as different in their Chapter organization) and Dark Angels (where everyone in 1st Company can get a Terminator suit).
It isn't justified so don't pretend it is.
There are already far too many differences to be one book, and you're one of the only people saying one book anyway. Almost everyone else is shouting 'supplemental'.
You really didn't prove anything other than that you think they aren't special. Sorry Cupcake.
So yeah, it is justified, no matter how much you pretend.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: I think that if GW could split it in to 3 or more books they would. Look at vigilus, all the people that bought those book must now feel dumb, that now to use the rules they need to buy the new sm codex and supplement.
In fact, if GW could they would probably be willing to sell books with just one unit rules inside. heck they could do it for a weapon upgrade to a unit. And people would be buying them, because they need rules to legaly play, and if something makes a unit good people are going to be buy it no matter how it looks.
Mmmpi wrote: Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
Codex Marines have to buy two books if they want to use a chapter supplement too atm so not really an argument. If you want to play marines you need one book. If you want to play a specific chapter, you buy two books, one on marines and one on the specificity of your chapter.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
This is not why we want consolidation and we have been over this.
No, you want to field all of the broken units in one army, despite the fact that you can already do that.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
"SIGH" I don't have one just faction - I collect pretty much ALL of them including the Wolves and Angels - AS I said about a million fething times.
Still ignoring the question - does GW have infinite resources or does, in fact, making one thing mean you don't do another?????????
You aren't everyone else. There are plenty of others who have argued this.
And he answered your question.
"My Terminators can take a SS in their shooting squad" isn't a difference hahahahahaha! Neither is "my apothecaries look different".
Yeah you need to get over it. The circlejerk for the Angels codices is unbelievable, you proving as much thinking they're even close to different.
That is literally a difference. And considering those 'different looking apothicaries' have added rules (which is why they're HQ instead of Elites), they aren't the same unit either.
So you need to get over it. The circle jerk of pushing your opinion as fact is sadly all too common, you're providing no thinking at all.
Try again Princess.
I proved in one post how consolidation would work and you chose to ignore it, without actually stating how I impacted ANYTHING worthwhile and "unique".
For someone slinging "princess" as an insult, I'm not the one acting like the entitled princess.
More of a “weird rule artifact” than a difference.
And by weird artifact, you mean something that's been tweaked occasionally over the last 15 years, showing that GW has been looking at it and chose to leave it in?
Why tweak something that's literally NEVER worked? Deathwing Terminators have NEVER worked, and that's a fact. Meanwhile other attempts have gotten at least somewhat below mediocre Terminators. Wonder why that is?
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
When a quarter to a third of the units are specialty, then it makes more sense to keep a separate codex.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
But isn't it kind of a hard to trust that GW will do a supplment for your codex, that the supplement is going to be good and as a separate matter no one wants to buy their codex twice, specialy when you already have to buy CAs each year, want it or not.
Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
It. Doesn't. Need. To. Be. Two. Books.
Also those "specialty units" aren't really a specialty. I proved as such and you just refuse to accept it because "muh snowflake rules" instead of realizing that the balance (and therefore how your fluff plays out) would be a LOT better.
If anything, Black Templars and Iron Hands are actually divergent compared to Blood Angels (who really just have Death Company as different in their Chapter organization) and Dark Angels (where everyone in 1st Company can get a Terminator suit).
It isn't justified so don't pretend it is.
There are already far too many differences to be one book, and you're one of the only people saying one book anyway. Almost everyone else is shouting 'supplemental'.
You really didn't prove anything other than that you think they aren't special. Sorry Cupcake.
So yeah, it is justified, no matter how much you pretend.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: I think that if GW could split it in to 3 or more books they would. Look at vigilus, all the people that bought those book must now feel dumb, that now to use the rules they need to buy the new sm codex and supplement.
In fact, if GW could they would probably be willing to sell books with just one unit rules inside. heck they could do it for a weapon upgrade to a unit. And people would be buying them, because they need rules to legaly play, and if something makes a unit good people are going to be buy it no matter how it looks.
Mmmpi wrote: Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
Codex Marines have to buy two books if they want to use a chapter supplement too atm so not really an argument. If you want to play marines you need one book. If you want to play a specific chapter, you buy two books, one on marines and one on the specificity of your chapter.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
This is not why we want consolidation and we have been over this.
No, you want to field all of the broken units in one army, despite the fact that you can already do that.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
"SIGH" I don't have one just faction - I collect pretty much ALL of them including the Wolves and Angels - AS I said about a million fething times.
Still ignoring the question - does GW have infinite resources or does, in fact, making one thing mean you don't do another?????????
You aren't everyone else. There are plenty of others who have argued this.
And he answered your question.
"My Terminators can take a SS in their shooting squad" isn't a difference hahahahahaha! Neither is "my apothecaries look different".
Yeah you need to get over it. The circlejerk for the Angels codices is unbelievable, you proving as much thinking they're even close to different.
That is literally a difference. And considering those 'different looking apothicaries' have added rules (which is why they're HQ instead of Elites), they aren't the same unit either.
So you need to get over it. The circle jerk of pushing your opinion as fact is sadly all too common, you're providing no thinking at all.
Try again Princess.
I proved in one post how consolidation would work and you chose to ignore it, without actually stating how I impacted ANYTHING worthwhile and "unique".
For someone slinging "princess" as an insult, I'm not the one acting like the entitled princess.
You didn't prove anything. You just blathered on about your opinion.
You actually are acting entitled.
Not surprising that you can't see it though.
More of a “weird rule artifact” than a difference.
And by weird artifact, you mean something that's been tweaked occasionally over the last 15 years, showing that GW has been looking at it and chose to leave it in?
Why tweak something that's literally NEVER worked? Deathwing Terminators have NEVER worked, and that's a fact. Meanwhile other attempts have gotten at least somewhat below mediocre Terminators. Wonder why that is?
Deathwing Terminators aren't popular in tournaments. Several people have already posted that they like and use them.
BrianDavion wrote: and if we got rid of every unit that wasn't sued for winning tourny lists, well.. let's get rid of every codex but Imperial Guard and Knights!
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
"SIGH" I don't have one just faction - I collect pretty much ALL of them including the Wolves and Angels - AS I said about a million fething times.
Still ignoring the question - does GW have infinite resources or does, in fact, making one thing mean you don't do another?????????
You aren't everyone else. There are plenty of others who have argued this.
And he answered your question.
What - he quoted me direct - so who the feth else was he talking to/ about. What are you on about?
No he didn't - he mumbled some rubbish and diverted and acted out.
But if they tweaked terminators you could still play your terminators as Deathwing terminators.
I dont understand why people are getting so hung up on the name of the actual rules. If you had good and working terminators that allowed you to equip them like deathwing terminators and you could paint them as deathwing terminators but the data sheet said "Terminators". Wouldn't that be better than the same terminators but under the old forgotten datasheet called "Deathwing Terminators" that had rules that if translated to modern english would be "You will lose the game since you cared more about the name of the rule than what it actually represent on the tabletop". Isn't it just more fluffy to have good terminators than 10 different versions that are all just bad but with a different rule to explain why they are bad. Could still have a DA specific stratagem called "DeathWing xxx" that does something unique for your terminators that other chapters dont get.
The actual name of the rules shouldnt matter at all. Its what they do with your models when they are on the table that is important. For me its way more important that I can play my Blood Angels as jumpy assaulty marines than which actual book I take the rules from to represent them on the table. If the BA book is complete garbage and the normal marine book have good rules that support the BA play style and fit their identity better I'm sure as hell gonna use those rules. They are all the emperors angels anyway. A bolter is a bolter and a chainsword is a chainsword. 99% the same anyway.
People should try to separate the fluff section and the rules section a bit more I think, GW too. Have good rules that can allow you the represent the background on the table should be the priority. Not how fluffy it sounds or a certain legacy mechanic still following despite the core rules have changed. Make terminators walking tanks that are worth putting on the table and then put in some rules for different load outs and let players then build them like their favorite background terminator squad visually.
Klickor wrote: But if they tweaked terminators you could still play your terminators as Deathwing terminators.
I dont understand why people are getting so hung up on the name of the actual rules. If you had good and working terminators that allowed you to equip them like deathwing terminators and you could paint them as deathwing terminators but the data sheet said "Terminators". Wouldn't that be better than the same terminators but under the old forgotten datasheet called "Deathwing Terminators" that had rules that if translated to modern english would be "You will lose the game since you cared more about the name of the rule than what it actually represent on the tabletop". Isn't it just more fluffy to have good terminators than 10 different versions that are all just bad but with a different rule to explain why they are bad. Could still have a DA specific stratagem called "DeathWing xxx" that does something unique for your terminators that other chapters dont get.
The actual name of the rules shouldnt matter at all. Its what they do with your models when they are on the table that is important. For me its way more important that I can play my Blood Angels as jumpy assaulty marines than which actual book I take the rules from to represent them on the table. If the BA book is complete garbage and the normal marine book have good rules that support the BA play style and fit their identity better I'm sure as hell gonna use those rules. They are all the emperors angels anyway. A bolter is a bolter and a chainsword is a chainsword. 99% the same anyway.
People should try to separate the fluff section and the rules section a bit more I think, GW too. Have good rules that can allow you the represent the background on the table should be the priority. Not how fluffy it sounds or a certain legacy mechanic still following despite the core rules have changed. Make terminators walking tanks that are worth putting on the table and then put in some rules for different load outs and let players then build them like their favorite background terminator squad visually.
Because it's a unit in a separate army. Your example is ridiculous. People aren't taking the unit because of the name. People take the unit because they play the faction and it fits their army. There's also no reason that general improvements to terminators can't also be applied to DW, WGT, and such. As for the stratagem, why bother, when the unit already does things differently.
The name isn't important, the army it's a part of is however. And for others, the fact that the BA are separate is important, because of the fluff, because of the more emphasis on their army, and because they don't have to buy a $200 book with 1/3 the pages not applying to them. If the BA book is garbage, it's your prerogative to play generic marines instead. But plenty of people will still be playing BA, even if it sucks. And while a bolter is a bolter, an encarmine axe isn't a power axe, and death company aren't veterans. 25-33% of the non-codex marines are unique units. If you condense characters (captains with bike captains, with jump pack captains for example) that ratio gets even steeper towards unique.
No, if people like the fluff it's not our place to tell them they're wrong. Oftherwise you're just forcing your views on what is 'valid' about an army on other people. Good rules =/= a single book. And attempting to shoehorn them all into one book will just piss people off. Again, just because you don't consider the fluff to be important doesn't mean others don't. And again, there's no reason you can't improve terminators while also improving DW/DWK/WGT.
No, if people like the fluff it's not our place to tell them they're wrong. Oftherwise you're just forcing your views on what is 'valid' about an army on other people.
Very much this.
So much of this thread essentially boils down to people saying 'I don't understand why this is important to people, therefore it's not important'. And that simply isn't good enough.
Klickor wrote: But if they tweaked terminators you could still play your terminators as Deathwing terminators.
I dont understand why people are getting so hung up on the name of the actual rules. If you had good and working terminators that allowed you to equip them like deathwing terminators and you could paint them as deathwing terminators but the data sheet said "Terminators". Wouldn't that be better than the same terminators but under the old forgotten datasheet called "Deathwing Terminators" that had rules that if translated to modern english would be "You will lose the game since you cared more about the name of the rule than what it actually represent on the tabletop". Isn't it just more fluffy to have good terminators than 10 different versions that are all just bad but with a different rule to explain why they are bad. Could still have a DA specific stratagem called "DeathWing xxx" that does something unique for your terminators that other chapters dont get.
The actual name of the rules shouldnt matter at all. Its what they do with your models when they are on the table that is important. For me its way more important that I can play my Blood Angels as jumpy assaulty marines than which actual book I take the rules from to represent them on the table. If the BA book is complete garbage and the normal marine book have good rules that support the BA play style and fit their identity better I'm sure as hell gonna use those rules. They are all the emperors angels anyway. A bolter is a bolter and a chainsword is a chainsword. 99% the same anyway.
People should try to separate the fluff section and the rules section a bit more I think, GW too. Have good rules that can allow you the represent the background on the table should be the priority. Not how fluffy it sounds or a certain legacy mechanic still following despite the core rules have changed. Make terminators walking tanks that are worth putting on the table and then put in some rules for different load outs and let players then build them like their favorite background terminator squad visually.
Because it's a unit in a separate army. Your example is ridiculous. People aren't taking the unit because of the name. People take the unit because they play the faction and it fits their army. There's also no reason that general improvements to terminators can't also be applied to DW, WGT, and such. As for the stratagem, why bother, when the unit already does things differently.
The name isn't important, the army it's a part of is however. And for others, the fact that the BA are separate is important, because of the fluff, because of the more emphasis on their army, and because they don't have to buy a $200 book with 1/3 the pages not applying to them. If the BA book is garbage, it's your prerogative to play generic marines instead. But plenty of people will still be playing BA, even if it sucks. And while a bolter is a bolter, an encarmine axe isn't a power axe, and death company aren't veterans. 25-33% of the non-codex marines are unique units. If you condense characters (captains with bike captains, with jump pack captains for example) that ratio gets even steeper towards unique.
No, if people like the fluff it's not our place to tell them they're wrong. Oftherwise you're just forcing your views on what is 'valid' about an army on other people. Good rules =/= a single book. And attempting to shoehorn them all into one book will just piss people off. Again, just because you don't consider the fluff to be important doesn't mean others don't. And again, there's no reason you can't improve terminators while also improving DW/DWK/WGT.
I consider the fluff important. But the rules =! the fluff. The rules are only there to represent the fluff, not being the fluff. If the fluff is so important why be so adamant to follow the rules 100%? Outside of named characters its more like 5-10% that are "unique" units. And those units arent really that unique except for their looks. Baal Predator, Sanguinary Guard, Deathcompany, Sanguinary Priest and Librarian Dread. That is far from 30% difference. Sure SW are way different and I dont think they should be put in the same book as normal marines. But BA sure can.
Sure an encarmine axe isnt a power axe but why couldnt it have the same rules as a power axe? Because it looks slightly different? Do we need 2h and 1h rules for encarmine axes then since there are 2 versions of it? We dont have different rules for lots of other armors/weapons that are similar but slightly different. They just used to be master crafted powerweapons, or perhaps it were relic blades despite being represented with both 2 handed and one handed swords and axes. It worked fine to have smoe abstraction back then but now we cant? Sanguinary Guard are iconic honor guard models for BA but what makes them really unique is mostly their look and not their rules. Their unique rules and weapons are mostly garbage anyway. Especially since their weapons have the exact same stats as force weapons but cost more. If their weapons didnt have a unique name they would be a much better unit since they would get the same buffs/nerfs as more common weapons and not be forgotten like they are now. Perfect example of how tiny worthless name differentions make the iconic weapons of a unique Blood Angels unit complete crap. They pay for a thunderhammer but get a slightly improved power axe.
Wish we had more different models and kits to help make each chapter look more unique and iconic on the battlefield. But the rules should go in the other direction and be less bloated.
I wish GW would make a codex with just rules so I dont have to buy a book with mostly useless fluff. I love the fluff but I dont want to pay 50$ for a few pages of rules every few years. They should be 2 different things. I would rather have the marine core consolidated so we dont have it like right now. Half the marines are awesome and while we share almost all the datasheets and rules some flavours are really good and other garbage just due to them being in different books. With the way they are designing the books I probably wont buy them anyway. They are worthless for list building anyway if compared to battlescribe so they are mostly fluff books due to how convoluted the rules part is. I still look through my old 4th/5th edition books and 7th edition from fantasy from time to time and they are so much easier to use. Back then you could actually just build a list by going through each unit page by page and add it together. Now you have so many different datasheets with their options on a different page with their points in another book and this without using the index options. Cant see how they will continue this model in the future. Apps make the books obsolete, not in that they are free and accessible but in how easy they are to use. I actually got turned off by getting back in to 40k just due to how bad the books were and I couldnt even make a normal army list easily, until a month or 2 later a friend showed me battlescribe and that I didnt have to even bother with the worthless books.
Klickor wrote: But if they tweaked terminators you could still play your terminators as Deathwing terminators.
I dont understand why people are getting so hung up on the name of the actual rules. If you had good and working terminators that allowed you to equip them like deathwing terminators and you could paint them as deathwing terminators but the data sheet said "Terminators". Wouldn't that be better than the same terminators but under the old forgotten datasheet called "Deathwing Terminators" that had rules that if translated to modern english would be "You will lose the game since you cared more about the name of the rule than what it actually represent on the tabletop". Isn't it just more fluffy to have good terminators than 10 different versions that are all just bad but with a different rule to explain why they are bad. Could still have a DA specific stratagem called "DeathWing xxx" that does something unique for your terminators that other chapters dont get.
The actual name of the rules shouldnt matter at all. Its what they do with your models when they are on the table that is important. For me its way more important that I can play my Blood Angels as jumpy assaulty marines than which actual book I take the rules from to represent them on the table. If the BA book is complete garbage and the normal marine book have good rules that support the BA play style and fit their identity better I'm sure as hell gonna use those rules. They are all the emperors angels anyway. A bolter is a bolter and a chainsword is a chainsword. 99% the same anyway.
People should try to separate the fluff section and the rules section a bit more I think, GW too. Have good rules that can allow you the represent the background on the table should be the priority. Not how fluffy it sounds or a certain legacy mechanic still following despite the core rules have changed. Make terminators walking tanks that are worth putting on the table and then put in some rules for different load outs and let players then build them like their favorite background terminator squad visually.
Because it's a unit in a separate army. Your example is ridiculous. People aren't taking the unit because of the name. People take the unit because they play the faction and it fits their army. There's also no reason that general improvements to terminators can't also be applied to DW, WGT, and such. As for the stratagem, why bother, when the unit already does things differently.
The name isn't important, the army it's a part of is however. And for others, the fact that the BA are separate is important, because of the fluff, because of the more emphasis on their army, and because they don't have to buy a $200 book with 1/3 the pages not applying to them. If the BA book is garbage, it's your prerogative to play generic marines instead. But plenty of people will still be playing BA, even if it sucks. And while a bolter is a bolter, an encarmine axe isn't a power axe, and death company aren't veterans. 25-33% of the non-codex marines are unique units. If you condense characters (captains with bike captains, with jump pack captains for example) that ratio gets even steeper towards unique.
No, if people like the fluff it's not our place to tell them they're wrong. Oftherwise you're just forcing your views on what is 'valid' about an army on other people. Good rules =/= a single book. And attempting to shoehorn them all into one book will just piss people off. Again, just because you don't consider the fluff to be important doesn't mean others don't. And again, there's no reason you can't improve terminators while also improving DW/DWK/WGT.
I consider the fluff important. But the rules =! the fluff. The rules are only there to represent the fluff, not being the fluff. If the fluff is so important why be so adamant to follow the rules 100%? Outside of named characters its more like 5-10% that are "unique" units. And those units arent really that unique except for their looks. Baal Predator, Sanguinary Guard, Deathcompany, Sanguinary Priest and Librarian Dread. That is far from 30% difference. Sure SW are way different and I dont think they should be put in the same book as normal marines. But BA sure can.
Sure an encarmine axe isnt a power axe but why couldnt it have the same rules as a power axe? Because it looks slightly different? Do we need 2h and 1h rules for encarmine axes then since there are 2 versions of it? We dont have different rules for lots of other armors/weapons that are similar but slightly different. They just used to be master crafted powerweapons, or perhaps it were relic blades despite being represented with both 2 handed and one handed swords and axes. It worked fine to have smoe abstraction back then but now we cant? Sanguinary Guard are iconic honor guard models for BA but what makes them really unique is mostly their look and not their rules. Their unique rules and weapons are mostly garbage anyway. Especially since their weapons have the exact same stats as force weapons but cost more. If their weapons didnt have a unique name they would be a much better unit since they would get the same buffs/nerfs as more common weapons and not be forgotten like they are now. Perfect example of how tiny worthless name differentions make the iconic weapons of a unique Blood Angels unit complete crap. They pay for a thunderhammer but get a slightly improved power axe.
Wish we had more different models and kits to help make each chapter look more unique and iconic on the battlefield. But the rules should go in the other direction and be less bloated.
I wish GW would make a codex with just rules so I dont have to buy a book with mostly useless fluff. I love the fluff but I dont want to pay 50$ for a few pages of rules every few years. They should be 2 different things. I would rather have the marine core consolidated so we dont have it like right now. Half the marines are awesome and while we share almost all the datasheets and rules some flavours are really good and other garbage just due to them being in different books. With the way they are designing the books I probably wont buy them anyway. They are worthless for list building anyway if compared to battlescribe so they are mostly fluff books due to how convoluted the rules part is. I still look through my old 4th/5th edition books and 7th edition from fantasy from time to time and they are so much easier to use. Back then you could actually just build a list by going through each unit page by page and add it together. Now you have so many different datasheets with their options on a different page with their points in another book and this without using the index options. Cant see how they will continue this model in the future. Apps make the books obsolete, not in that they are free and accessible but in how easy they are to use. I actually got turned off by getting back in to 40k just due to how bad the books were and I couldnt even make a normal army list easily, until a month or 2 later a friend showed me battlescribe and that I didnt have to even bother with the worthless books.
No, the rules and the fluff are of equal value. The rules are followed so everyone can have an enjoyable game. But without the fluff, everything is just meaningless stats. Outside of the named characters, it's still 25-33%. Remember, the generic marines also have special characters which we would have to ignore in this situation. Baal Preditor: completely different weapons, and a special rule. Sanguinary Guard, different rules and different armor and weapons. Death company, different rules and options. Sanguinary Priest: doesn't exist anywhere else. It's not an apothicary clone. Same with the Librarian Dread. Doesn't exist outside the BA codex. You also forgot the DC dread, and the units the BA don't get that are in the generic codex. BA should definitely be separate.
An encarmine axe shouldn't have the same rules because it's not the same. It has different stats. You're asking why a wraithguard isn't a terminator. Sanguinary Guard are unique because of their look, the artificer armor + jumppack, their better one handed weapon (both are one handed), their different bolter, their special rules, and their death masks. That's five differences from basic honor guard (which are an ultra marine specific unit now from what I understand.) The weapons have a unique name because they're unique weapons. They have different rules from power axes, power swords, and bolters. They pay for a thunder hammer and get a weapon that lets them wound marines on a 2+ without a penalty to hit....that seems worth it.
You say bloated, I say indepth.
I'm glad GW makes codexes with fluff, because the fluff is some of the best parts. If you don't want the fluff, just buy a Battle Scribe subscription. I'm happy the marines are separate armies, because it lets the focus on the ones people are interested in. Half the marines being awesome isn't a "The BA/DA/SW are in another codex" problem. That's a rules in general problem, as well as a reflection of the hypercompetative mindset of much of the people who post here. People have done well with 'crap' units in casual settings. I can still build a list using my codex, going page by page. Wargear has always been on a separate page, and the rules for them have frequently been in separate books. If you can't see them using this model in the future, then you haven't been paying attention. If building a list for 40K turns you off, then just quit dude. No one is making you play. And you're one of the rare few who has an issue with it.
You do know that Sanguinary Guards weapon used to be just mastercrafted powerweapons/relic blades. Then they made them encarmine swords/axes with different rules depending on which weapon you equipped them with. They used the same rule for both since they were just abstracted as Encarmine Blades and they didnt even have unique stats for those blades, just a line saying they were counted as mastercrafted X. The models have one handed and two handed versions of both the sword and the axe yet for some reason they are treated the same. Them having unique and fluffy names only recently gave them partially new weapons that still doesnt even reflect fully what the model has. I don't think the game would be better if you had 2 handed axes and swords in the rules for them. Having encarmine weapons counts as relic blades for 9pts each on the other hand would be better than what we have now. Especially since you don't get enough weapons in the box to fully kit a squad with the same weapon. They were designed to have abstracted rules for their weapons since you got 1 powerfist, 1 2h axe, 1 2h sword and 2? each of 1h axe and sword. Could use whatever weapon you think look better and if they change the point cost or stats of relic blades it would be upgraded for Sanguinary Guard as well.
Their melee weapon is the most overpriced weapon in the whole codex. They can even choose a powerfist for 7pts less. A power axe also wounds a marine on a 2+ but costs less than a THIRD of what they pay for their axe. Their deathmasks costs 2pts per model and suck and their unique rule that gives rerolls does nothing with Dante. Their special honor guard rule does nothing when played with Dante, so fluffy wow!. You say indepth. I say bloated rules that just drag down the unit. That unit should be cleaned up and changed so it would feel great fielding them since they look so distinct. Having a bunch of useless rules doesnt really make a unit feel different if you never use them.
I don't really know why GW is removing the abstraction in weapons and had power weapons become 4 or 5 different weapons or have Intercessors have 3 different guns. Usually one choice will almost always be the better one. It lessens the creativity. I used to have a variety of power weapons on my models since I thought a sword fitted some models better, an axe another pose and a maul a third. Now they all have the same axe. Each weapon in a list means much less now than it used to and now having 28 wound knights as potential targets each stat on the normal weapons means even less. It just a bunch of meaningless choice on the tiny level while Terminators are still a bad unit. We think we have a lot of choice and perhaps we do between 5 of almost the same choices that dont really matter, any of the 4-5pt costed power weapons will do about the same. But if we want to compete, taking terminators or not isnt even a choice, It's the illusion of choice while not really having any if we want to feel like we play a fair/balanced game.
I want to see different units and different load outs be taken and played on the battlefield. Rather than have shotgun scouts be bad this edition why not just have shooty scouts and dont differentiate rules wise between a shotgun and a bolter. Then you can load up your squad with whatever ranged weapon and have the same rules. More models would be playable and you dont have to feel bad for having glued on the "wrong" gun. With so many things that had meaningful details in the game being gone it just feels weird to have so extremely much meaningless detail on the tiny stuff. How many different bolter weapons do we have now? 20? 30? Do we still need more? I don't think we have a 25" RF1 STR4 AP0 bolter yet. I want a bit more abstraction going on since most of it is pointless when it turned from a skirmish game to apocalypse with 700pts knight models.
If GW came out and said that they have a goal of making rules that are balanced and gives lots of meaningful choices then I would be hesitant to consolidate weapons and units and give them a chance. But with their record so far I think this current trend will hurt the game more than it gives them. With solid core rules, both for the game and each faction its really easy for people and GW to make up more fluffy rules to more portrait the fluff on the battlefield. But that should be a bonus after everything else works and not something an amateurish company like GW should even try to do from the start.
No, if people like the fluff it's not our place to tell them they're wrong. Oftherwise you're just forcing your views on what is 'valid' about an army on other people.
Very much this.
So much of this thread essentially boils down to people saying 'I don't understand why this is important to people, therefore it's not important'. And that simply isn't good enough.
Or people screaming the world is going to end because other people might be allowed, shock horror to have units that could actually reperesent various Chapters many of whom are as or more codex divergent than the super special four..
We say - lets have base units and options that allow all the current "unique" builds - plus others - Immediate SCREAMS of -
"Your taking our stuff, you hate wolves, Angels etc."
We say the base unit, with a few adjusments is the same and can also incoproate all these different flavours - Immediate sceams of -
You might as well have one unit for all armies, or Wraithgaurd should be terminators or other BS, you just want chess. You hate us and our mdoels, stop trying to take out models away from us.
Klickor wrote: You do know that Sanguinary Guards weapon used to be just mastercrafted powerweapons/relic blades. Then they made them encarmine swords/axes with different rules depending on which weapon you equipped them with. They used the same rule for both since they were just abstracted as Encarmine Blades and they didnt even have unique stats for those blades, just a line saying they were counted as mastercrafted X. The models have one handed and two handed versions of both the sword and the axe yet for some reason they are treated the same. Them having unique and fluffy names only recently gave them partially new weapons that still doesnt even reflect fully what the model has. I don't think the game would be better if you had 2 handed axes and swords in the rules for them. Having encarmine weapons counts as relic blades for 9pts each on the other hand would be better than what we have now. Especially since you don't get enough weapons in the box to fully kit a squad with the same weapon. They were designed to have abstracted rules for their weapons since you got 1 powerfist, 1 2h axe, 1 2h sword and 2? each of 1h axe and sword. Could use whatever weapon you think look better and if they change the point cost or stats of relic blades it would be upgraded for Sanguinary Guard as well.
Their melee weapon is the most overpriced weapon in the whole codex. They can even choose a powerfist for 7pts less. A power axe also wounds a marine on a 2+ but costs less than a THIRD of what they pay for their axe. Their deathmasks costs 2pts per model and suck and their unique rule that gives rerolls does nothing with Dante. Their special honor guard rule does nothing when played with Dante, so fluffy wow!. You say indepth. I say bloated rules that just drag down the unit. That unit should be cleaned up and changed so it would feel great fielding them since they look so distinct. Having a bunch of useless rules doesnt really make a unit feel different if you never use them.
I don't really know why GW is removing the abstraction in weapons and had power weapons become 4 or 5 different weapons or have Intercessors have 3 different guns. Usually one choice will almost always be the better one. It lessens the creativity. I used to have a variety of power weapons on my models since I thought a sword fitted some models better, an axe another pose and a maul a third. Now they all have the same axe. Each weapon in a list means much less now than it used to and now having 28 wound knights as potential targets each stat on the normal weapons means even less. It just a bunch of meaningless choice on the tiny level while Terminators are still a bad unit. We think we have a lot of choice and perhaps we do between 5 of almost the same choices that dont really matter, any of the 4-5pt costed power weapons will do about the same. But if we want to compete, taking terminators or not isnt even a choice, It's the illusion of choice while not really having any if we want to feel like we play a fair/balanced game.
I want to see different units and different load outs be taken and played on the battlefield. Rather than have shotgun scouts be bad this edition why not just have shooty scouts and dont differentiate rules wise between a shotgun and a bolter. Then you can load up your squad with whatever ranged weapon and have the same rules. More models would be playable and you dont have to feel bad for having glued on the "wrong" gun. With so many things that had meaningful details in the game being gone it just feels weird to have so extremely much meaningless detail on the tiny stuff. How many different bolter weapons do we have now? 20? 30? Do we still need more? I don't think we have a 25" RF1 STR4 AP0 bolter yet. I want a bit more abstraction going on since most of it is pointless when it turned from a skirmish game to apocalypse with 700pts knight models.
If GW came out and said that they have a goal of making rules that are balanced and gives lots of meaningful choices then I would be hesitant to consolidate weapons and units and give them a chance. But with their record so far I think this current trend will hurt the game more than it gives them. With solid core rules, both for the game and each faction its really easy for people and GW to make up more fluffy rules to more portrait the fluff on the battlefield. But that should be a bonus after everything else works and not something an amateurish company like GW should even try to do from the start.
You do realize they don't have those now? They have separate weapons now. While you don't think the game would be better, people disagree with you. Making them relic blades works...for you. And not having enough is a typical GW thing. They've been doing that for the last 25 years. The rules do not have to be abstracted though. You just want them to be abstracted.
A power axe isn't an encarmine axe. Some people might value the difference, even if you don't. Same with death masks, and their rerolls. I say indepth. You saying 'bloated' doesn't change that, particularly as the changes you want won't actually remove 'bloat'. The unit is fine, it just .0000004 percent less points efficient compared to "flavor of the month". And just because you find the rules useless doesn't mean others don't. If you don't like them, take assault marines. Or play ultra marines and use honor guard.
GW did it because they wanted to. They felt there was value to it. I should also point out that while one choice might be better over all, it doesn't mean that the others don't have a point. But again, that would require not blindly netlisting.
If you want to see different units and load outs taken, then why are you trying to remove them? Shotguns and bolters have different rules because they're different weapons that do different things. If you want everything the same, do what someone else suggested and play chess, or if you must apocalypse. We have nine bolter weapons, including combi-weapons. I want less abstraction, since there is a point to it.
GW did come out and said that. Based on people's reaction here, even if they succeeded 100%, people would still complain about things, so you'll forgive me if I don't put any weight behind your claim here. If you don't like how GW does things (because they've made it clear over and over they aren't going to change), then just quit, and save yourself the aggravation.
Mmmpi wrote: and because they don't have to buy a $200 book with 1/3 the pages not applying to them.
Hrm, I don't think this particular angle works, plenty of other gaming companies make 200-300 page hardcover full color books that are in the same price range as GW Codex books, there's no reason they'd need to be $200, and likewise just because some unit entries won't apply to every player that shouldn't be a dealbreaker, that holds true for many codex and gaming books in general (when I played flames of war the book I ran had soviet, german, hungarian, and romanian armies, didn't bother me that I only played one of them) and plenty of other 40k factions (my undivided Iron Warriors couldn't care less about entries for TSons, Noise Marines, etc for example) and that doesn't seem to turn people off anywhere else. Plenty of people picked up the $50 200 page Vigilus books just for a couple pages of datasheets after all.
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
When a quarter to a third of the units are specialty, then it makes more sense to keep a separate codex.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
But isn't it kind of a hard to trust that GW will do a supplment for your codex, that the supplement is going to be good and as a separate matter no one wants to buy their codex twice, specialy when you already have to buy CAs each year, want it or not.
Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
It. Doesn't. Need. To. Be. Two. Books.
Also those "specialty units" aren't really a specialty. I proved as such and you just refuse to accept it because "muh snowflake rules" instead of realizing that the balance (and therefore how your fluff plays out) would be a LOT better.
If anything, Black Templars and Iron Hands are actually divergent compared to Blood Angels (who really just have Death Company as different in their Chapter organization) and Dark Angels (where everyone in 1st Company can get a Terminator suit).
It isn't justified so don't pretend it is.
There are already far too many differences to be one book, and you're one of the only people saying one book anyway. Almost everyone else is shouting 'supplemental'.
You really didn't prove anything other than that you think they aren't special. Sorry Cupcake.
So yeah, it is justified, no matter how much you pretend.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: I think that if GW could split it in to 3 or more books they would. Look at vigilus, all the people that bought those book must now feel dumb, that now to use the rules they need to buy the new sm codex and supplement.
In fact, if GW could they would probably be willing to sell books with just one unit rules inside. heck they could do it for a weapon upgrade to a unit. And people would be buying them, because they need rules to legaly play, and if something makes a unit good people are going to be buy it no matter how it looks.
Mmmpi wrote: Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
Codex Marines have to buy two books if they want to use a chapter supplement too atm so not really an argument. If you want to play marines you need one book. If you want to play a specific chapter, you buy two books, one on marines and one on the specificity of your chapter.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
This is not why we want consolidation and we have been over this.
No, you want to field all of the broken units in one army, despite the fact that you can already do that.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
"SIGH" I don't have one just faction - I collect pretty much ALL of them including the Wolves and Angels - AS I said about a million fething times.
Still ignoring the question - does GW have infinite resources or does, in fact, making one thing mean you don't do another?????????
You aren't everyone else. There are plenty of others who have argued this.
And he answered your question.
"My Terminators can take a SS in their shooting squad" isn't a difference hahahahahaha! Neither is "my apothecaries look different".
Yeah you need to get over it. The circlejerk for the Angels codices is unbelievable, you proving as much thinking they're even close to different.
That is literally a difference. And considering those 'different looking apothicaries' have added rules (which is why they're HQ instead of Elites), they aren't the same unit either.
So you need to get over it. The circle jerk of pushing your opinion as fact is sadly all too common, you're providing no thinking at all.
Try again Princess.
I proved in one post how consolidation would work and you chose to ignore it, without actually stating how I impacted ANYTHING worthwhile and "unique".
For someone slinging "princess" as an insult, I'm not the one acting like the entitled princess.
You didn't prove anything. You just blathered on about your opinion.
You actually are acting entitled.
Not surprising that you can't see it though.
More of a “weird rule artifact” than a difference.
And by weird artifact, you mean something that's been tweaked occasionally over the last 15 years, showing that GW has been looking at it and chose to leave it in?
Why tweak something that's literally NEVER worked? Deathwing Terminators have NEVER worked, and that's a fact. Meanwhile other attempts have gotten at least somewhat below mediocre Terminators. Wonder why that is?
Deathwing Terminators aren't popular in tournaments. Several people have already posted that they like and use them.
Except they don't do anything different and I pointed that out. "I can take a SS!" (which is the only they do slightly more competitive compared to the basic entry) isn't a difference as much as you want to make it to be. Even their own Fearless rule isn't special because the Dark Angel Chapter Tactic basically does the same thing. So because even the competitive way doesn't make sense for them, nobody mixes half-melee half-range because it looks and performs bad, there's nothing important.
So yeah, we can replace the Deathwing entry, the Tart entry, and the Cata entry with the base Tactical + Assault entries. Nothing of value is lost.
Slayer-Fan22, I don't know why this is so hard for you - if you can do something that someone else can't, that is a difference, no matter how small it may seem to you.
Klickor wrote: But if they tweaked terminators you could still play your terminators as Deathwing terminators.
I dont understand why people are getting so hung up on the name of the actual rules. If you had good and working terminators that allowed you to equip them like deathwing terminators and you could paint them as deathwing terminators but the data sheet said "Terminators". Wouldn't that be better than the same terminators but under the old forgotten datasheet called "Deathwing Terminators" that had rules that if translated to modern english would be "You will lose the game since you cared more about the name of the rule than what it actually represent on the tabletop". Isn't it just more fluffy to have good terminators than 10 different versions that are all just bad but with a different rule to explain why they are bad. Could still have a DA specific stratagem called "DeathWing xxx" that does something unique for your terminators that other chapters dont get.
The actual name of the rules shouldnt matter at all. Its what they do with your models when they are on the table that is important. For me its way more important that I can play my Blood Angels as jumpy assaulty marines than which actual book I take the rules from to represent them on the table. If the BA book is complete garbage and the normal marine book have good rules that support the BA play style and fit their identity better I'm sure as hell gonna use those rules. They are all the emperors angels anyway. A bolter is a bolter and a chainsword is a chainsword. 99% the same anyway.
People should try to separate the fluff section and the rules section a bit more I think, GW too. Have good rules that can allow you the represent the background on the table should be the priority. Not how fluffy it sounds or a certain legacy mechanic still following despite the core rules have changed. Make terminators walking tanks that are worth putting on the table and then put in some rules for different load outs and let players then build them like their favorite background terminator squad visually.
they don't have to buy a $200 book with 1/3 the pages not applying to them.
1. You keep pulling this number out of nowhere.
2. Raven Guard players have to pay for Salamanders and Imperial Fists stuff they don't use. Should they get a separate codex?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dysartes wrote: Slayer-Fan22, I don't know why this is so hard for you - if you can do something that someone else can't, that is a difference, no matter how small it may seem to you.
Except it isn't because people don't do it. People will always specialize their unit as much as they can, meaning nobody is taking 2 LC Terminators with their 2 Storm Bolters and Assault Cannon.
Just because it CAN be done doesn't mean it should or would be done. Bad choices are the same as no choices at all.
Mmmpi wrote: And by weird artifact, you mean something that's been tweaked occasionally over the last 15 years, showing that GW has been looking at it and chose to leave it in?
By weird artifact, I mean something that GW changed from one to the other regularly, showing it's not something that they consider important or meaningful, yes!
Klickor wrote: You do know that Sanguinary Guards weapon used to be just mastercrafted powerweapons/relic blades. Then they made them encarmine swords/axes with different rules depending on which weapon you equipped them with. They used the same rule for both since they were just abstracted as Encarmine Blades and they didnt even have unique stats for those blades, just a line saying they were counted as mastercrafted X. The models have one handed and two handed versions of both the sword and the axe yet for some reason they are treated the same. Them having unique and fluffy names only recently gave them partially new weapons that still doesnt even reflect fully what the model has. I don't think the game would be better if you had 2 handed axes and swords in the rules for them. Having encarmine weapons counts as relic blades for 9pts each on the other hand would be better than what we have now. Especially since you don't get enough weapons in the box to fully kit a squad with the same weapon. They were designed to have abstracted rules for their weapons since you got 1 powerfist, 1 2h axe, 1 2h sword and 2? each of 1h axe and sword. Could use whatever weapon you think look better and if they change the point cost or stats of relic blades it would be upgraded for Sanguinary Guard as well.
Their melee weapon is the most overpriced weapon in the whole codex. They can even choose a powerfist for 7pts less. A power axe also wounds a marine on a 2+ but costs less than a THIRD of what they pay for their axe. Their deathmasks costs 2pts per model and suck and their unique rule that gives rerolls does nothing with Dante. Their special honor guard rule does nothing when played with Dante, so fluffy wow!. You say indepth. I say bloated rules that just drag down the unit. That unit should be cleaned up and changed so it would feel great fielding them since they look so distinct. Having a bunch of useless rules doesnt really make a unit feel different if you never use them.
I don't really know why GW is removing the abstraction in weapons and had power weapons become 4 or 5 different weapons or have Intercessors have 3 different guns. Usually one choice will almost always be the better one. It lessens the creativity. I used to have a variety of power weapons on my models since I thought a sword fitted some models better, an axe another pose and a maul a third. Now they all have the same axe. Each weapon in a list means much less now than it used to and now having 28 wound knights as potential targets each stat on the normal weapons means even less. It just a bunch of meaningless choice on the tiny level while Terminators are still a bad unit. We think we have a lot of choice and perhaps we do between 5 of almost the same choices that dont really matter, any of the 4-5pt costed power weapons will do about the same. But if we want to compete, taking terminators or not isnt even a choice, It's the illusion of choice while not really having any if we want to feel like we play a fair/balanced game.
I want to see different units and different load outs be taken and played on the battlefield. Rather than have shotgun scouts be bad this edition why not just have shooty scouts and dont differentiate rules wise between a shotgun and a bolter. Then you can load up your squad with whatever ranged weapon and have the same rules. More models would be playable and you dont have to feel bad for having glued on the "wrong" gun. With so many things that had meaningful details in the game being gone it just feels weird to have so extremely much meaningless detail on the tiny stuff. How many different bolter weapons do we have now? 20? 30? Do we still need more? I don't think we have a 25" RF1 STR4 AP0 bolter yet. I want a bit more abstraction going on since most of it is pointless when it turned from a skirmish game to apocalypse with 700pts knight models.
If GW came out and said that they have a goal of making rules that are balanced and gives lots of meaningful choices then I would be hesitant to consolidate weapons and units and give them a chance. But with their record so far I think this current trend will hurt the game more than it gives them. With solid core rules, both for the game and each faction its really easy for people and GW to make up more fluffy rules to more portrait the fluff on the battlefield. But that should be a bonus after everything else works and not something an amateurish company like GW should even try to do from the start.
You do realize they don't have those now? They have separate weapons now. While you don't think the game would be better, people disagree with you. Making them relic blades works...for you. And not having enough is a typical GW thing. They've been doing that for the last 25 years. The rules do not have to be abstracted though. You just want them to be abstracted.
A power axe isn't an encarmine axe. Some people might value the difference, even if you don't. Same with death masks, and their rerolls. I say indepth. You saying 'bloated' doesn't change that, particularly as the changes you want won't actually remove 'bloat'. The unit is fine, it just .0000004 percent less points efficient compared to "flavor of the month". And just because you find the rules useless doesn't mean others don't. If you don't like them, take assault marines. Or play ultra marines and use honor guard.
GW did it because they wanted to. They felt there was value to it. I should also point out that while one choice might be better over all, it doesn't mean that the others don't have a point. But again, that would require not blindly netlisting.
If you want to see different units and load outs taken, then why are you trying to remove them? Shotguns and bolters have different rules because they're different weapons that do different things. If you want everything the same, do what someone else suggested and play chess, or if you must apocalypse. We have nine bolter weapons, including combi-weapons. I want less abstraction, since there is a point to it.
GW did come out and said that. Based on people's reaction here, even if they succeeded 100%, people would still complain about things, so you'll forgive me if I don't put any weight behind your claim here. If you don't like how GW does things (because they've made it clear over and over they aren't going to change), then just quit, and save yourself the aggravation.
I wonder how fast this tune would change if they decided tomorrow to roll everything into one big Supplement for SM.
Mmmpi wrote: and because they don't have to buy a $200 book with 1/3 the pages not applying to them.
Hrm, I don't think this particular angle works, plenty of other gaming companies make 200-300 page hardcover full color books that are in the same price range as GW Codex books, there's no reason they'd need to be $200, and likewise just because some unit entries won't apply to every player that shouldn't be a dealbreaker, that holds true for many codex and gaming books in general (when I played flames of war the book I ran had soviet, german, hungarian, and romanian armies, didn't bother me that I only played one of them) and plenty of other 40k factions (my undivided Iron Warriors couldn't care less about entries for TSons, Noise Marines, etc for example) and that doesn't seem to turn people off anywhere else. Plenty of people picked up the $50 200 page Vigilus books just for a couple pages of datasheets after all.
Because that's about the price scale for a GW book of that size. What other companies do is irrelevant. If normal price standards mattered, each current codex would only be $20-$30, not $50.
BroodSpawn wrote: The reasons why they devoted time to those 4 and not the 996+ is because that's what the writers at various times decided to work on. You're complaining that people in the past put extra work in to differentiate an army of MArines from another army of Marines and now you want them to ignore and retroactively cancel out all that work just so you can make your super-special-awesome chapter that has 'Not-Deathwing' backed up by 'Not-Wulfen'.
How is that even a question?
How on earth did you get that from what I said?
The idea I support is to have a base Codex, that includes most or possibly all of the Space Marine units. From there, you have limited access to special units, possibly coming with restrictions on what can be selected together, and stuff like the "Make Your Own Chapter Tactic", so that way you can represent the chapters that get tons of attention, but ALSO represent those that don't.
Not removing any units.
Not removing any fluff.
When a quarter to a third of the units are specialty, then it makes more sense to keep a separate codex.
Sounds good to me = but apparently its just too hard a concept too grasp that people don't loose stuff, the paranoia is so prevelant about this issue......
But isn't it kind of a hard to trust that GW will do a supplment for your codex, that the supplement is going to be good and as a separate matter no one wants to buy their codex twice, specialy when you already have to buy CAs each year, want it or not.
Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
It. Doesn't. Need. To. Be. Two. Books.
Also those "specialty units" aren't really a specialty. I proved as such and you just refuse to accept it because "muh snowflake rules" instead of realizing that the balance (and therefore how your fluff plays out) would be a LOT better.
If anything, Black Templars and Iron Hands are actually divergent compared to Blood Angels (who really just have Death Company as different in their Chapter organization) and Dark Angels (where everyone in 1st Company can get a Terminator suit).
It isn't justified so don't pretend it is.
There are already far too many differences to be one book, and you're one of the only people saying one book anyway. Almost everyone else is shouting 'supplemental'.
You really didn't prove anything other than that you think they aren't special. Sorry Cupcake.
So yeah, it is justified, no matter how much you pretend.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote: I think that if GW could split it in to 3 or more books they would. Look at vigilus, all the people that bought those book must now feel dumb, that now to use the rules they need to buy the new sm codex and supplement.
In fact, if GW could they would probably be willing to sell books with just one unit rules inside. heck they could do it for a weapon upgrade to a unit. And people would be buying them, because they need rules to legaly play, and if something makes a unit good people are going to be buy it no matter how it looks.
Mmmpi wrote: Not to mention, why should DA/BA/SW players have to buy two books, just because the core marines aren't 'special snowflake' enough?
Codex Marines have to buy two books if they want to use a chapter supplement too atm so not really an argument. If you want to play marines you need one book. If you want to play a specific chapter, you buy two books, one on marines and one on the specificity of your chapter.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
This is not why we want consolidation and we have been over this.
No, you want to field all of the broken units in one army, despite the fact that you can already do that.
Why do people believe GW has infinite resources - if you make one thing - you are not making another. Again how am I wrong here.
we don't we just contest your idea that somehow if GW squatted the various marine chapters (and the existance of 1k sons and death guard as their own codex suggests GW isn't going to be reducing the number of armies out there anytime soon) they'd suddenly pay more attention to YOUR faction. they'd just ohh.. put out the space wolves supplement instead of the space wolves codex
"SIGH" I don't have one just faction - I collect pretty much ALL of them including the Wolves and Angels - AS I said about a million fething times.
Still ignoring the question - does GW have infinite resources or does, in fact, making one thing mean you don't do another?????????
You aren't everyone else. There are plenty of others who have argued this.
And he answered your question.
"My Terminators can take a SS in their shooting squad" isn't a difference hahahahahaha! Neither is "my apothecaries look different".
Yeah you need to get over it. The circlejerk for the Angels codices is unbelievable, you proving as much thinking they're even close to different.
That is literally a difference. And considering those 'different looking apothicaries' have added rules (which is why they're HQ instead of Elites), they aren't the same unit either.
So you need to get over it. The circle jerk of pushing your opinion as fact is sadly all too common, you're providing no thinking at all.
Try again Princess.
I proved in one post how consolidation would work and you chose to ignore it, without actually stating how I impacted ANYTHING worthwhile and "unique".
For someone slinging "princess" as an insult, I'm not the one acting like the entitled princess.
You didn't prove anything. You just blathered on about your opinion.
You actually are acting entitled.
Not surprising that you can't see it though.
More of a “weird rule artifact” than a difference.
And by weird artifact, you mean something that's been tweaked occasionally over the last 15 years, showing that GW has been looking at it and chose to leave it in?
Why tweak something that's literally NEVER worked? Deathwing Terminators have NEVER worked, and that's a fact. Meanwhile other attempts have gotten at least somewhat below mediocre Terminators. Wonder why that is?
Deathwing Terminators aren't popular in tournaments. Several people have already posted that they like and use them.
Except they don't do anything different and I pointed that out. "I can take a SS!" (which is the only they do slightly more competitive compared to the basic entry) isn't a difference as much as you want to make it to be. Even their own Fearless rule isn't special because the Dark Angel Chapter Tactic basically does the same thing. So because even the competitive way doesn't make sense for them, nobody mixes half-melee half-range because it looks and performs bad, there's nothing important.
So yeah, we can replace the Deathwing entry, the Tart entry, and the Cata entry with the base Tactical + Assault entries. Nothing of value is lost.
[/spoiler]
In your opinion.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dysartes wrote: Slayer-Fan22, I don't know why this is so hard for you - if you can do something that someone else can't, that is a difference, no matter how small it may seem to you.
Klickor wrote: But if they tweaked terminators you could still play your terminators as Deathwing terminators.
I dont understand why people are getting so hung up on the name of the actual rules. If you had good and working terminators that allowed you to equip them like deathwing terminators and you could paint them as deathwing terminators but the data sheet said "Terminators". Wouldn't that be better than the same terminators but under the old forgotten datasheet called "Deathwing Terminators" that had rules that if translated to modern english would be "You will lose the game since you cared more about the name of the rule than what it actually represent on the tabletop". Isn't it just more fluffy to have good terminators than 10 different versions that are all just bad but with a different rule to explain why they are bad. Could still have a DA specific stratagem called "DeathWing xxx" that does something unique for your terminators that other chapters dont get.
The actual name of the rules shouldnt matter at all. Its what they do with your models when they are on the table that is important. For me its way more important that I can play my Blood Angels as jumpy assaulty marines than which actual book I take the rules from to represent them on the table. If the BA book is complete garbage and the normal marine book have good rules that support the BA play style and fit their identity better I'm sure as hell gonna use those rules. They are all the emperors angels anyway. A bolter is a bolter and a chainsword is a chainsword. 99% the same anyway.
People should try to separate the fluff section and the rules section a bit more I think, GW too. Have good rules that can allow you the represent the background on the table should be the priority. Not how fluffy it sounds or a certain legacy mechanic still following despite the core rules have changed. Make terminators walking tanks that are worth putting on the table and then put in some rules for different load outs and let players then build them like their favorite background terminator squad visually.
they don't have to buy a $200 book with 1/3 the pages not applying to them.
1. You keep pulling this number out of nowhere.
2. Raven Guard players have to pay for Salamanders and Imperial Fists stuff they don't use. Should they get a separate codex?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dysartes wrote: Slayer-Fan22, I don't know why this is so hard for you - if you can do something that someone else can't, that is a difference, no matter how small it may seem to you.
Except it isn't because people don't do it. People will always specialize their unit as much as they can, meaning nobody is taking 2 LC Terminators with their 2 Storm Bolters and Assault Cannon.
Just because it CAN be done doesn't mean it should or would be done. Bad choices are the same as no choices at all.
Should RG and SL get their own book? GW seems to think yes. But there's a difference between two pages in a codex and 40 pages in a codex. RG and SL take up two each. BA unique units would take up 30-40, as would SW and DA.
What people in tournaments don't do is irrelivant because people do in fact do what you're claiming they don't. At least two in this thread. But of course, you're just ignoring them because it doesn't fit your narrative of perceived worthlessness.
Mmmpi wrote: And by weird artifact, you mean something that's been tweaked occasionally over the last 15 years, showing that GW has been looking at it and chose to leave it in?
By weird artifact, I mean something that GW changed from one to the other regularly, showing it's not something that they consider important or meaningful, yes!
But they leave it in. Repeatedly. So it's actually meaningful that it exists, even if the exact form changes as the base rules do.
Klickor wrote: You do know that Sanguinary Guards weapon used to be just mastercrafted powerweapons/relic blades. Then they made them encarmine swords/axes with different rules depending on which weapon you equipped them with. They used the same rule for both since they were just abstracted as Encarmine Blades and they didnt even have unique stats for those blades, just a line saying they were counted as mastercrafted X. The models have one handed and two handed versions of both the sword and the axe yet for some reason they are treated the same. Them having unique and fluffy names only recently gave them partially new weapons that still doesnt even reflect fully what the model has. I don't think the game would be better if you had 2 handed axes and swords in the rules for them. Having encarmine weapons counts as relic blades for 9pts each on the other hand would be better than what we have now. Especially since you don't get enough weapons in the box to fully kit a squad with the same weapon. They were designed to have abstracted rules for their weapons since you got 1 powerfist, 1 2h axe, 1 2h sword and 2? each of 1h axe and sword. Could use whatever weapon you think look better and if they change the point cost or stats of relic blades it would be upgraded for Sanguinary Guard as well.
Their melee weapon is the most overpriced weapon in the whole codex. They can even choose a powerfist for 7pts less. A power axe also wounds a marine on a 2+ but costs less than a THIRD of what they pay for their axe. Their deathmasks costs 2pts per model and suck and their unique rule that gives rerolls does nothing with Dante. Their special honor guard rule does nothing when played with Dante, so fluffy wow!. You say indepth. I say bloated rules that just drag down the unit. That unit should be cleaned up and changed so it would feel great fielding them since they look so distinct. Having a bunch of useless rules doesnt really make a unit feel different if you never use them.
I don't really know why GW is removing the abstraction in weapons and had power weapons become 4 or 5 different weapons or have Intercessors have 3 different guns. Usually one choice will almost always be the better one. It lessens the creativity. I used to have a variety of power weapons on my models since I thought a sword fitted some models better, an axe another pose and a maul a third. Now they all have the same axe. Each weapon in a list means much less now than it used to and now having 28 wound knights as potential targets each stat on the normal weapons means even less. It just a bunch of meaningless choice on the tiny level while Terminators are still a bad unit. We think we have a lot of choice and perhaps we do between 5 of almost the same choices that dont really matter, any of the 4-5pt costed power weapons will do about the same. But if we want to compete, taking terminators or not isnt even a choice, It's the illusion of choice while not really having any if we want to feel like we play a fair/balanced game.
I want to see different units and different load outs be taken and played on the battlefield. Rather than have shotgun scouts be bad this edition why not just have shooty scouts and dont differentiate rules wise between a shotgun and a bolter. Then you can load up your squad with whatever ranged weapon and have the same rules. More models would be playable and you dont have to feel bad for having glued on the "wrong" gun. With so many things that had meaningful details in the game being gone it just feels weird to have so extremely much meaningless detail on the tiny stuff. How many different bolter weapons do we have now? 20? 30? Do we still need more? I don't think we have a 25" RF1 STR4 AP0 bolter yet. I want a bit more abstraction going on since most of it is pointless when it turned from a skirmish game to apocalypse with 700pts knight models.
If GW came out and said that they have a goal of making rules that are balanced and gives lots of meaningful choices then I would be hesitant to consolidate weapons and units and give them a chance. But with their record so far I think this current trend will hurt the game more than it gives them. With solid core rules, both for the game and each faction its really easy for people and GW to make up more fluffy rules to more portrait the fluff on the battlefield. But that should be a bonus after everything else works and not something an amateurish company like GW should even try to do from the start.
You do realize they don't have those now? They have separate weapons now. While you don't think the game would be better, people disagree with you. Making them relic blades works...for you. And not having enough is a typical GW thing. They've been doing that for the last 25 years. The rules do not have to be abstracted though. You just want them to be abstracted.
A power axe isn't an encarmine axe. Some people might value the difference, even if you don't. Same with death masks, and their rerolls. I say indepth. You saying 'bloated' doesn't change that, particularly as the changes you want won't actually remove 'bloat'. The unit is fine, it just .0000004 percent less points efficient compared to "flavor of the month". And just because you find the rules useless doesn't mean others don't. If you don't like them, take assault marines. Or play ultra marines and use honor guard.
GW did it because they wanted to. They felt there was value to it. I should also point out that while one choice might be better over all, it doesn't mean that the others don't have a point. But again, that would require not blindly netlisting.
If you want to see different units and load outs taken, then why are you trying to remove them? Shotguns and bolters have different rules because they're different weapons that do different things. If you want everything the same, do what someone else suggested and play chess, or if you must apocalypse. We have nine bolter weapons, including combi-weapons. I want less abstraction, since there is a point to it.
GW did come out and said that. Based on people's reaction here, even if they succeeded 100%, people would still complain about things, so you'll forgive me if I don't put any weight behind your claim here. If you don't like how GW does things (because they've made it clear over and over they aren't going to change), then just quit, and save yourself the aggravation.
I wonder how fast this tune would change if they decided tomorrow to roll everything into one big Supplement for SM.
So you're saying that I'd magically change my mind because GW did?
Because you'd be wrong.
Mmmpi wrote: and because they don't have to buy a $200 book with 1/3 the pages not applying to them.
Hrm, I don't think this particular angle works, plenty of other gaming companies make 200-300 page hardcover full color books that are in the same price range as GW Codex books, there's no reason they'd need to be $200, and likewise just because some unit entries won't apply to every player that shouldn't be a dealbreaker, that holds true for many codex and gaming books in general (when I played flames of war the book I ran had soviet, german, hungarian, and romanian armies, didn't bother me that I only played one of them) and plenty of other 40k factions (my undivided Iron Warriors couldn't care less about entries for TSons, Noise Marines, etc for example) and that doesn't seem to turn people off anywhere else. Plenty of people picked up the $50 200 page Vigilus books just for a couple pages of datasheets after all.
Because that's about the price scale for a GW book of that size. What other companies do is irrelevant. If normal price standards mattered, each current codex would only be $20-$30, not $50.
The Vigilus books were 200 pages and $50 each. Thats about the size a combined SM book would be. FW Imperial Armour books never approached anything near that price despie being a nonstandard oversized format with 200-400 pages in fullcover hardback, and even the insanely high quality Horus Heresy books, 300 pages with metal corners and leather binding and ribbon page keepers and foil edged pages, are only $115.
I dont see any reason a combined SM codex would be $200, or even anything near $100.
But precisely no, they change it. They change the exact loadout available for terminators and of the differences in loadout have been exchanged, which is proof that those difference in loadout are rule artifact rather than anything meaningful.
But there's no blind as one who would not see...
But precisely no, they change it. They change the exact loadout available for terminators and of the differences in loadout have been exchanged, which is proof that those difference in loadout are rule artifact rather than anything meaningful.
But there's no blind as one who would not see...
That's not a rules artifact. It would be a rules artifact if they didn't change it as the core rules changed.
Mmmpi wrote: The current SM book is bigger. Add in double the content.
Looking at GW's website, the newest SM book is 192 pages, and is $40. Looking at other codex books, the IG codex is $40, and is 144 pages. No difference in cost despite the SM codex having a third more pages.
You'd hardly need to double the size of the book given that two thirds of it (at least) is shared among all marines (bolters, rhinos, plasma guns, predators, dreadnoughts, land speeders, cyclone missile launchers, and most of the basic fluff loke the creation of space marines, etc), and the size of the book is a relatively minor part of the cost.
Looking at GW's current pricing of books, the page counts they have, that of other games and companies, it's really hard to see where a combined SM codex would come out at any significantly higher price point than any other codex. Maybe at worst it's $50 or 60 instead of 40? Even then I suspect they'd keep it about the same as the others, if for no other reason than to keep the main product line accessible, and it's certainly not going to be anywhere near $200, or even $100.
I don't expect we will ever see a single combined SM book for various other (mainly business cycle) reasons, but price isnt one of them.
If only people read the actual post and did not post "the world is ending" crap like:
