The game is basically nothing but marine on marine anyway. People seem fine playing games of nothing but iron hands vs raven guard, or white scars vs blood angels. The rules are great, there are plenty of options
So why not just give every other army marine stats and just embrace it? It means people can buy the models they like without having to worry about the army functionality. GW can sell all their products based on personal aesthetic preference over how bad or good their rules are.
** only somewhat sarcastic. If I could go to a tournament using blood angels rules for a saim hann army, or space wolves for an ork army, I wouldn't mind so much. At least I know they'd be up to date with the best rules forever.
GW would be surprised how many people buy their other armies on looks if thy didn't have to worry about getting good rules...
GW have spent the last 20 years stealing all the unique abilities of other armies to give to marines while expanding their army line massively.
So non marine rules are kind of already in the marine army.
GW have spent so much time trying to make marines varied and interesting in order to allow for marines to have interesting fights with each other, that they've basically built an entire marine on marine wargame ecosystem INSIDE 40k.
The marine codex is now larger enough to be its own wargame where no two armies need look the same and still be competitive. Which we see in the current tournament scene and casual play.
In order to keep this viable for customers they keep expanding the ecosystem inside the marine book so that two people can effectively use one book to build two armies to play.
so I figure it's probably easier all round if they just rolled all armies into that one book and then 40k would be more like classic historical games where you have one list to represent all factions.
It's less work for GW...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Newman wrote: Like Bolt Action, where a heavy tank is a heavy tank is a heavy tank. I've heard worse ideas.
yeah pretty much. It sounds like bitter sarcasm, but as I outline, it's not that ridiculous.
The Newman wrote: Like Bolt Action, where a heavy tank is a heavy tank is a heavy tank. I've heard worse ideas.
This is how the early pioneers of miniature gaming did it. They figured within a historical period and theater, it would pretty much all even out Thus Byzantine cataphracts are the same as their Sassanid Persian opponents, etcetera. However, adding special rules to historical games is easier than fantasy or sci-fi as we have a real-world baseline as a measurement.
the real solution is readjusting the game around the primaris statline, switch to d10 & take current points values & double them. which I can actually see them doing.
AnomanderRake wrote: So...we should all be playing 30k? I have no problems with this.
The distinction here is that GW would still be selling their non marine models, so unless they retconned 30k to include aliens, that would not be what would happen.
guardians, guardsmen, gretchin would all be scout units (maybe scouts could be taken in larger squads and infiltration was an upgrade) and so on.
I mean...Chapter Tactics is and always was a "Marine" thing.
GW wanted to give Marine Chapters unique rules and so gave ALL factions <CHAPTER> in various forms.
Then that escalated to each Chapter getting a super Doctrine, because Marines have to have something special.
What the OP is asking for is an arms race, Codex creep, basically.
Every faction can have its own flavor without a mountain of rules.
Galef wrote: I mean...Chapter Tactics is and always was a "Marine" thing.
GW wanted to give Marine Chapters unique rules and so gave ALL factions <CHAPTER> in various forms.
Then that escalated to each Chapter getting a super Doctrine, because Marines have to have something special.
What the OP is asking for is an arms race, Codex creep, basically.
Every faction can have its own flavor without a mountain of rules.
Apart from the fact that there already is an arms race inside the marine list but also between marines and everyone else - that's not what I was saying.
I was literally saying use the marine codex for everyone. Change it to codex 'armies of the 41st millennium' and give us lists of what models represent what units.
Galef wrote: I mean...Chapter Tactics is and always was a "Marine" thing.
GW wanted to give Marine Chapters unique rules and so gave ALL factions <CHAPTER> in various forms.
Then that escalated to each Chapter getting a super Doctrine, because Marines have to have something special.
What the OP is asking for is an arms race, Codex creep, basically.
Every faction can have its own flavor without a mountain of rules.
Apart from the fact that there already is an arms race inside the marine list but also between marines and everyone else - that's not what I was saying.
I was literally saying use the marine codex for everyone. Change it to codex 'armies of the 41st millennium' and give us lists of what models represent what units.
That wouldn't give Astartes players the feeling of effortlessly stomping a non-Astartes army, though, which is important. GW wants to reinforce purchasing decisions with overpowered rules.
The game is basically nothing but marine on marine anyway. People seem fine playing games of nothing but iron hands vs raven guard, or white scars vs blood angels. The rules are great, there are plenty of options
So why not just give every other army marine stats and just embrace it? It means people can buy the models they like without having to worry about the army functionality. GW can sell all their products based on personal aesthetic preference over how bad or good their rules are.
** only somewhat sarcastic. If I could go to a tournament using blood angels rules for a saim hann army, or space wolves for an ork army, I wouldn't mind so much. At least I know they'd be up to date with the best rules forever.
GW would be surprised how many people buy their other armies on looks if thy didn't have to worry about getting good rules...
Have you considered just getting a new hobby? This one seems to make you kind of miserable.
I myself am heavily leaning towards using my minis with Grimdark Future or something. Just sick of the roulette wheel of GW design. Great models and a cool setting but the rules aggravate me more than provide an enjoyable gaming experience.
Eldarain wrote: I myself am heavily leaning towards using my minis with Grimdark Future or something. Just sick of the roulette wheel of GW design. Great models and a cool setting but the rules aggravate me more than provide an enjoyable gaming experience.
Same. I play the FFGrpgs, but for minis gaming I play Infinity.
The game is basically nothing but marine on marine anyway. People seem fine playing games of nothing but iron hands vs raven guard, or white scars vs blood angels. The rules are great, there are plenty of options
So why not just give every other army marine stats and just embrace it? It means people can buy the models they like without having to worry about the army functionality. GW can sell all their products based on personal aesthetic preference over how bad or good their rules are.
** only somewhat sarcastic. If I could go to a tournament using blood angels rules for a saim hann army, or space wolves for an ork army, I wouldn't mind so much. At least I know they'd be up to date with the best rules forever.
GW would be surprised how many people buy their other armies on looks if thy didn't have to worry about getting good rules...
Have you considered just getting a new hobby? This one seems to make you kind of miserable.
Alas that 40k got stamped into my brain at an age where these things stick. I stopped playing after 5th ed entirely because of Ward's marine fluff - the prices and miniatures while stupid I could deal with. But carving names into daemon prince hearts, wandering the warp walking into the physical manifestation of a god as a landscape and smashing it up, bloodthirsters being lifted up by a marine with a jumppack, the never ending Avatar whack-a-mole, was all so bad it made the last vestige of the game i liked terrible.
8th ed brought me back as it seemed to reign this in, despite also adding primaris.
but it really seems like the marine fetish is in hyperdrive now and while my space wolves are fine, my eldar look almost identical to what they did 10 years ago, just a decade older.
the universe and models are great, but they do make it very hard to be a fan if you aren't an imperial or space marine player...
There sure is a lot of hyperbole going on here! How quickly you all forget that almost the entire marine roster was noncompetitive and dysfunctional for most of 8th edition. Yeah yeah, Iron Hands are broken. And the new SM codex is a cut above everything else. But that's because it was the first generation of new design choices. We can now see from what's coming for Necrons that we're getting more army wide rules for other factions.
People have this narrative that Xenos get totally neglected compared to marines, right after an edition where marines could barely field a tournament competitive list, and had their rules totally neglected. And now GW has been overhauling SM for awhile, and has started an overhaul of Necrons paired with one of the largest model range expansions we've ever seen. A lot of people's rules have been neglected for all of 8th. Chaos did too, and they're also marines, dontcha know! Heck, they got model releases and a new book and were STILL useless except for really whacky stuff like double primarch+brimstone spam because of their rules not getting addressed.
The problem isn't GW favoring marines over Xenos that much (i mean they do, but that's to be expected of their flagship faction and biggest seller. The issue is if they're favoring them more than they ought to be.) The problem is that 8th edition broke EVERYTHING. Units of all sorts from tons of factions kept mostly the same statlines in an edition where the core rules changed drastically. The fact that anything worked at all was a miracle. And a lot of things didn't. Large amounts of most faction's units were not worth fielding, and pretty much all competitive lists were unfluffy spam fests and silly.
And Marines were screwed up too, including the new Primaris, for a good 2 years! And now they're finally fixing that (and also fixing how badly they broke parts of it), and people are acting like this is the problem. The problem is that it was all so busted in the first place, not that they're fixing it. 8th edition codices essentially failed for everybody. They had terrible internal and external balance and consistency. Yes, the new SM codex+supplements were a lot more powerful and had some outliers (which have been mostly addressed). But its clearly the beginning of a new design philosophy, which is a good thing because the last one failed.
And now we're starting to see rumors of major statline changes for marine weapons and units. Which should be celebrated, because the lack of statline changes is what caused most of 8th's problems. Instead of complaining that marines are the test bed and get the changes first, you all should be happy that things seem to be moving in a better direction at all.
Ah yes, I'll wait for the day that we'll see a xenos faction receive non-stop supplements and releases for at least a year.
Thank you for that advice mr drudge.
Maybe, just maybe this frothing hatred for all things mehreen is a side effect of a large buy-in cost to the hobby, only seeing your time, passion and effort get put to the side for reasons.
Rules? Primaris weren't actually that bad compared to majority of troop options in the game, it's just that they weren't "the best" like they are now in every single category.
And acting like "Every competitive list is spammy and silly" is a strange point to make, as every competitive game is "spammy and silly". See Street Fighter IV: Elena was picked every game until it's closure, Tekken 7? Leroy. The only reason there's faction diversity in the competitive scene is because of the previously mentioned buy-in cost.
The game is basically nothing but marine on marine anyway. People seem fine playing games of nothing but iron hands vs raven guard, or white scars vs blood angels. The rules are great, there are plenty of options
So why not just give every other army marine stats and just embrace it? It means people can buy the models they like without having to worry about the army functionality. GW can sell all their products based on personal aesthetic preference over how bad or good their rules are.
** only somewhat sarcastic. If I could go to a tournament using blood angels rules for a saim hann army, or space wolves for an ork army, I wouldn't mind so much. At least I know they'd be up to date with the best rules forever.
GW would be surprised how many people buy their other armies on looks if thy didn't have to worry about getting good rules...
Have you considered just getting a new hobby? This one seems to make you kind of miserable.
Alas that 40k got stamped into my brain at an age where these things stick. I stopped playing after 5th ed entirely because of Ward's marine fluff - the prices and miniatures while stupid I could deal with. But carving names into daemon prince hearts, wandering the warp walking into the physical manifestation of a god as a landscape and smashing it up, bloodthirsters being lifted up by a marine with a jumppack, the never ending Avatar whack-a-mole, was all so bad it made the last vestige of the game i liked terrible.
8th ed brought me back as it seemed to reign this in, despite also adding primaris.
but it really seems like the marine fetish is in hyperdrive now and while my space wolves are fine, my eldar look almost identical to what they did 10 years ago, just a decade older.
the universe and models are great, but they do make it very hard to be a fan if you aren't an imperial or space marine player...
I think it's twofold, they're clearly trying to rush out the (hopefully) last chunks of the primaris line which can only end in the removal of small marines eventually which has created a slightly marine skewed release schedule, although it's potentially maybe no more than we used to have proportionally.
The other side is the community on here is instantly prodded and whipped up into a frenzy by the mention of anything marine related, to an utterly irrational level. This thread ironically is a fantastic example, rather than opening with "give generic balanced unit profiles" you had to try and target it at marines because you know it's what gets people worked up. Your suggestion immediately has merit on a pure balance level but by throwing that tasty marine shade on it, you've catered to a self-sustaining marine-centric community
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Eonfuzz wrote: Ah yes, I'll wait for the day that we'll see a xenos faction receive non-stop supplements and releases for at least a year.
Thank you for that advice mr drudge.
Maybe, just maybe this frothing hatred for all things mehreen is a side effect of a large buy-in cost to the hobby, only seeing your time, passion and effort get put to the side for reasons.
Rules? Primaris weren't actually that bad compared to majority of troop options in the game, it's just that they weren't "the best" like they are now in every single category.
And acting like "Every competitive list is spammy and silly" is a strange point to make, as every competitive game is "spammy and silly". See Street Fighter IV: Elena was picked every game until it's closure, Tekken 7? Leroy. The only reason there's faction diversity in the competitive scene is because of the previously mentioned buy-in cost.
But do you really want a range of Eldar Craftworld supplements? Do you really want 6 months of Ork Klan books with 1-2 kits for them every month (tbh I can't remember how many klans there are)? You'll be waiting for the exact same problem for some other faction you don't care about.
Eonfuzz wrote: Ah yes, I'll wait for the day that we'll see a xenos faction receive non-stop supplements and releases for at least a year.
Thank you for that advice mr drudge.
We both know we're not going to see that much content for a specific xeno race, as none have large enough model lines to support it. Perhaps after we see an Eldar range refresh, then we could see supplements for each craftworld. But Eldar is stuck in a catch-22: its not popular because the models are old, and they aren't in a hurry to give it new models because its not popular. That's a bigger reason these factions get neglected. And yes it does suck, but its not directly the fault of marines.
Maybe, just maybe this frothing hatred for all things mehreen is a side effect of a large buy-in cost to the hobby, only seeing your time, passion and effort get put to the side for reasons.
Hey, i know plenty about buy-in costs and dissatisfaction. I have Chaos Marines with a focus on Legions (which have been meh since 3.5, and dead in 8th), Dark Eldar cabal (which has been between useless and whacky all of 8th, and is pretty dead now), Khorne and Slaanesh daemons (lol), and a blood angel all jump Dante list made of sanguinary guard and assault marines (how do ya think that's been doing in 8th?). And I know that none of it is getting fixed until Primaris and Codex Marines are in a good spot.
Rules? Primaris weren't actually that bad compared to majority of troop options in the game, it's just that they weren't "the best" like they are now in every single category.
Don't forget that Primaris is more than intercessors. For large amounts of 8th, competitive lists favored scouts over Intercessors, and the rest of the range was pretty meh. Now Intercessors are too efficient for some chapters and broken for others. But lets be honest: when people complain about space marines, its not suppressors and inceptors that they're upset about.
And acting like "Every competitive list is spammy and silly" is a strange point to make, as every competitive game is "spammy and silly". See Street Fighter IV: Elena was picked every game until it's closure, Tekken 7? Leroy. The only reason there's faction diversity in the competitive scene is because of the previously mentioned buy-in cost.
Those are other games, so its a bad comparison. A better comparison would be previous editions of 40k. Some had very few A+ lists, but I'm talking about list composition. In those fighting games everyone may be playing the same character, but are they only spamming 1 move? That'd be the equivalent. And if they are, its bad for those games too. In past editions, we weren't seeing silly things like hive tyrant spam. Or 2x Nurgle Princes and 10x crawlers. Or Double Super Heavy + Brimstones. Many of 8th's competitive lists don't even remotely resemble the sort of army composition that the game is supposed to have. In previous editions there were obvious includes, but it wasn't anywhere near this bad. And just look at stuff like the Loyal32 and 3x shield captains that were showing up in so many lists.
8th was a bad edition that caused lots of problems. Xenos will get fixed after marines are fixed and in a good place, and ought to get similar sorts of things. So seeing progress being made on that front should have us all optimistic about the future. Has it taken way too long to happen? Yes. But you should be made about 8th edition and to a lesser extent the whole Primaris idea, not mad at marines in general.
If someone wants to play marines on marines they can play 30k. I don't like marines so i don't play 30k but if 40k turns into 30k 2.0 i am out and i think a lot of people will also leave. I think GW needs to be very careful with how much they buffed marines and how they release more kits for marines than all other armies combined.
nordsturmking wrote: If someone wants to play marines on marines they can play 30k. I don't like marines so i don't play 30k but if 40k turns into 30k 2.0 i am out and i think a lot of people will also leave. I think GW needs to be very careful with how much they buffed marines and how they release more kits for marines than all other armies combined.
They've always released more marine kits than for everyone else, done them reasonably well for 30 years now. They've also not released more marine kits than everyone else combined, that's straight up hyperbole.
nordsturmking wrote: If someone wants to play marines on marines they can play 30k. I don't like marines so i don't play 30k but if 40k turns into 30k 2.0 i am out and i think a lot of people will also leave. I think GW needs to be very careful with how much they buffed marines and how they release more kits for marines than all other armies combined.
People have such short memories. Less than 2 years ago, people were complaining that 8th had turned into the 'edition of Xenos' because marines were so uncompetitive. Then the new marine releases came, and now a new edition. And now people are acting like this is both unusual, and the end of the world. We've been going through cycles like this at least as long as I've been in the hobby (13 years), and probably before. This cycle isn't new, and it isn't going away. What's new was 8th edition breaking everything, and pushing the cycle back so much.
See balance should be a scale, not a pendulum, but as drudge said , gw follows the pendulum approach, but even that tehy don't realy do because they can't contain themselves and rather push the pendulum again to see it swing.
nordsturmking wrote: If someone wants to play marines on marines they can play 30k. I don't like marines so i don't play 30k but if 40k turns into 30k 2.0 i am out and i think a lot of people will also leave. I think GW needs to be very careful with how much they buffed marines and how they release more kits for marines than all other armies combined.
People have such short memories. Less than 2 years ago, people were complaining that 8th had turned into the 'edition of Xenos' because marines were so uncompetitive. Then the new marine releases came, and now a new edition. And now people are acting like this is both unusual, and the end of the world. We've been going through cycles like this at least as long as I've been in the hobby (13 years), and probably before. This cycle isn't new, and it isn't going away. What's new was 8th edition breaking everything, and pushing the cycle back so much.
I think people forget that Marines are what likely pays GW's bills. they're a safe bet, marine stuff is garnteed to sell well. this ensures a basic level of profit for GW that allows them to task risks, such as specialist games, Sisters of battle. and other things that might make the bean counters they answer too nervous.
Threads and attitudes like this really add a nasty toxic smog on the hobby. Its sad really.
GW will always put marines releases first since it accounts for around 50% of their entire revenue. However as we are now seeing, they are using that boost to revamp other factions. Necrons are getting new everything. Most if not all models are getting redesigned, new rules etc. Now GW has two factories its not a coincidence that two faction are getting big new releases. And im willing to bet my entire warhammer collection that we will see revamps for most if not all factions over the course of the next 5 or so years.
People also forget, GW is not a large company. Until earlier this year they had A SINGLE factory supplying dozens of countries and all the customers that go with it. Patience is required with this hobby. They cannot pump gak out like Apple or Microsoft. They have neither the man power or infrastructure to put stuff out any faster than they are now.
Now balance is another matter, but there is a issue at the very core of this game. Warhammer is based on an unbalanced universe. So you either have this semi balanced game that feels kinda like its supposed to from a lore perspective, or you have a game thats more basic, better balanced, doesnt connect with the lore. TBH if i wanted to play a perfectly balanced game, i would just play chess, and use warhammer models as the pieces.
Warhammer will never be perfectly balanced and still maintain its true essence.
Finally, to me, and i think the majority of warhammer hobbyists out there, gak doesnt need to be perfectly balanced because its never been a "competitive" game for us. We dont try and min/max lists, or find all the most efficient combination of rules and stratagems to create deathballs. We dont try and be little gakkers by going out of our way to find tiny inconsistencies in the wording of rules to find an advantage. Warhammer has always been about meeting up with some like minded friends, building an awesome army, and having some beers and a laugh. Nerding out over each others latest additions to their armies or paint job, appreciating the hard work and how fething badass they all look on the table.
I feel sorry for those who never had this with this hobby or dont want that. Life is to short for all this pent up toxic moaning. Beerhammer for life yo.
30k is in an even worse situation for non marine armies.
Militia get shredded by sheer volume of fire.
Custodes are just too much of a small elite army so get shot to pieces.
Mechanicum though, they drew the short straw.
Worse saves than marines, despite being robots in suits of armour.
Massive fear of instant death weaponry as EW is impossibly rare for them.
Low numbers.
Add that together and they are at a loss against just about every 30k army.
The idea of streamlining by default profiles is a thing that many games used to do though as it works.
But I feel it would drain a lot out of the game.
Kind of funny though since previously, IG, Tau, Eldar and even orks (nob bikers) have dominated the meta.
The game is basically nothing but marine on marine anyway. People seem fine playing games of nothing but iron hands vs raven guard, or white scars vs blood angels. The rules are great, there are plenty of options
So why not just give every other army marine stats and just embrace it? It means people can buy the models they like without having to worry about the army functionality. GW can sell all their products based on personal aesthetic preference over how bad or good their rules are.
** only somewhat sarcastic. If I could go to a tournament using blood angels rules for a saim hann army, or space wolves for an ork army, I wouldn't mind so much. At least I know they'd be up to date with the best rules forever.
GW would be surprised how many people buy their other armies on looks if thy didn't have to worry about getting good rules...
Have you considered just getting a new hobby? This one seems to make you kind of miserable.
Alas that 40k got stamped into my brain at an age where these things stick. I stopped playing after 5th ed entirely because of Ward's marine fluff - the prices and miniatures while stupid I could deal with. But carving names into daemon prince hearts, wandering the warp walking into the physical manifestation of a god as a landscape and smashing it up, bloodthirsters being lifted up by a marine with a jumppack, the never ending Avatar whack-a-mole, was all so bad it made the last vestige of the game i liked terrible.
8th ed brought me back as it seemed to reign this in, despite also adding primaris.
but it really seems like the marine fetish is in hyperdrive now and while my space wolves are fine, my eldar look almost identical to what they did 10 years ago, just a decade older.
the universe and models are great, but they do make it very hard to be a fan if you aren't an imperial or space marine player...
I think it's twofold, they're clearly trying to rush out the (hopefully) last chunks of the primaris line which can only end in the removal of small marines eventually which has created a slightly marine skewed release schedule, although it's potentially maybe no more than we used to have proportionally.
The other side is the community on here is instantly prodded and whipped up into a frenzy by the mention of anything marine related, to an utterly irrational level. This thread ironically is a fantastic example, rather than opening with "give generic balanced unit profiles" you had to try and target it at marines because you know it's what gets people worked up. Your suggestion immediately has merit on a pure balance level but by throwing that tasty marine shade on it, you've catered to a self-sustaining marine-centric community
Oh I freely admit to throwing some shade. On the other hand, this is all self inflicted shade - nothing said is untrue. GW Have done all the things described, and while pointing them out sarcastically is shady, the bad behaviour is still on them, not me.
And the rules are a small part of the picture - without a constant need to cycle through codex releases, and everyone using a single one, they aren't slaved to the cycle for releasing new models for everyone else.
Now balance is another matter, but there is a issue at the very core of this game. Warhammer is based on an unbalanced universe. So you either have this semi balanced game that feels kinda like its supposed to from a lore perspective, or you have a game thats more basic, better balanced, doesnt connect with the lore. TBH if i wanted to play a perfectly balanced game, i would just play chess, and use warhammer models as the pieces. .
That's the most ridiculous argument ever. Warhammer needs to be unbalanced due to fluff?
You realize right fluff and balance are 100% separate things? That you can have balanced AND fluffy game? That only reason GW goes for unbalance is to make people buy new models all the time by changing balance around. It's marketing tool.
Game could be balanced and still fit fluff. Marines are super killy in fluff? Good. Quite possible to represent in fluff. Of course as per fluff they are also seriously outnumbered...
Of course this would require a) GW not using points and rules as marketing tools to force sales b) actually have competent game designers rather than people who shout WAAAAGH loudest at job interview(plus are willing to work at low wage)
Warhammer will never be perfectly balanced and still maintain its true essence.
Nonsense. The game's essence doesn't depend on the Marines automatically winning on the tabletop. If you want to read bolter porn, be my guest, but the game needs to be more than just a narrative of how the Marines win yet again. The fact that "perfect balance" is unachievable does not mean that any attempt at balance should be abandoned.
GW will always put marines releases first since it accounts for around 50% of their entire revenue.
Marines also account for more than 50% of the products they produce, go figure.
Marines outselling everything else though has been the case for ages. and it's not even just a matter of "what's avaliable" Indomatus sold out in minutes, meanwhile blood of the pheonix.... didn't. nor did the chaos deamons focused box. we can "explain this" all we want, but GW looks at those figures and draws their own conclusions
the reason they won't do this is because muhreens have to "FEEL ELITE" and they can't do that without min squads of space marines effortlessly mowing down whole squads of genestealer cultists or orks or tyranids.
If I could just...declare that my Eldar will be using Imperial rules, run my Fire Dragons as Eradicators, my Storm Guardians as Assault Intercessors, my Dire Avengers as assault bolter intercessors, my Banshees as Bladeguard Veterans, my Dark Reapers as Suppressors, my rangers as Eliminators, my warp spiders as aggressors.....
Now balance is another matter, but there is a issue at the very core of this game. Warhammer is based on an unbalanced universe. So you either have this semi balanced game that feels kinda like its supposed to from a lore perspective, or you have a game thats more basic, better balanced, doesnt connect with the lore. TBH if i wanted to play a perfectly balanced game, i would just play chess, and use warhammer models as the pieces. .
That's the most ridiculous argument ever. Warhammer needs to be unbalanced due to fluff?
You realize right fluff and balance are 100% separate things? That you can have balanced AND fluffy game? That only reason GW goes for unbalance is to make people buy new models all the time by changing balance around. It's marketing tool.
Game could be balanced and still fit fluff. Marines are super killy in fluff? Good. Quite possible to represent in fluff. Of course as per fluff they are also seriously outnumbered...
Of course this would require a) GW not using points and rules as marketing tools to force sales b) actually have competent game designers rather than people who shout WAAAAGH loudest at job interview(plus are willing to work at low wage)
Not to mention other games have perfectly fluffy rules and still maintaining a good ballance among factions.
One of the big issues GW has is on top of the poor ballance to the game, they have awful ballance to the fluff.
Space marines are supposed to be elite and cool, in the part of super human with aliens and monsters. With factions like grey knights pushing the upper limit of the elite cool status. With primaris and custodies being even mor elite cool in a game and setting that is written rather poorly in more modern times, with more literal interpretations than the more mythic style they often went with before.
This needs to fit in primarchs and titans which even then get lots of exaggeration and pushed into some of the worst styles of power fantasy. With the company also seeming to push for flattening of the rules and less complication to its rules to a fault.
With all of this, some factions do not even get equal tools if they where to expand though poor design or poor planing. The game has been left in a state where both the fluff and the rules are playing catch up consistently.
It’s sorta ironic in a way.
GW will always put marines releases first since it accounts for around 50% of their entire revenue.
Marines also account for more than 50% of the products they produce, go figure.
Marines outselling everything else though has been the case for ages. and it's not even just a matter of "what's avaliable" Indomatus sold out in minutes, meanwhile blood of the pheonix.... didn't. nor did the chaos deamons focused box. we can "explain this" all we want, but GW looks at those figures and draws their own conclusions
Producing new models would help non-marine sales...
Models sell vast majority of their lifetime sales in first 3 months.
Thus if your faction has had nothing released for years...you unsurprisingly won't be selling much. Most of your sales happened years ago and you are left at tiny trickle sales.
GW will always put marines releases first since it accounts for around 50% of their entire revenue.
Marines also account for more than 50% of the products they produce, go figure.
Marines outselling everything else though has been the case for ages. and it's not even just a matter of "what's avaliable" Indomatus sold out in minutes, meanwhile blood of the pheonix.... didn't. nor did the chaos deamons focused box. we can "explain this" all we want, but GW looks at those figures and draws their own conclusions
Indomatus was a way better designed box than both others, it’s the same as when people say sisters of battle won’t sell. They sold when GW put effort into them just fine it seems.
Eonfuzz wrote: Brian, blood of the phoenix was a trash box and you know it. Stop being disingenuous
Not to mention that when Terminators get a fething rebox for the new edition, they get 1.5x the wounds, rebalanced powerfists, +1S power swords, 12" range heavy flamers....
when banshees get remade into plastic, they get...nothing. And when Jain Zar gets remade into plastic, she gets nerfed. And then you can't buy either of them unless you buy a 240$ box filled with 30 year old fething sculpts....lol.
Eonfuzz wrote: Brian, blood of the phoenix was a trash box and you know it. Stop being disingenuous
Not to mention that when Terminators get a fething rebox for the new edition, they get 1.5x the wounds, rebalanced powerfists, +1S power swords, 12" range heavy flamers....
when banshees get remade into plastic, they get...nothing. And when Jain Zar gets remade into plastic, she gets nerfed. And then you can't buy either of them unless you buy a 240$ box filled with 30 year old fething sculpts....lol.
I feel like someone said they cannot rework the banshees without doing all the other aspects somewhere in management, and naively thought the models alone would carry the box. It was a pathetic release all over, selling it on hopes and very lack lustre promises.
I also feel like there attempt at a reboot with Ynarri just failed and they found they have no ideas left for craftworld eldar.
Eonfuzz wrote: Brian, blood of the phoenix was a trash box and you know it. Stop being disingenuous
Not to mention that when Terminators get a fething rebox for the new edition, they get 1.5x the wounds, rebalanced powerfists, +1S power swords, 12" range heavy flamers....
when banshees get remade into plastic, they get...nothing. And when Jain Zar gets remade into plastic, she gets nerfed. And then you can't buy either of them unless you buy a 240$ box filled with 30 year old fething sculpts....lol.
I feel like someone said they cannot rework the banshees without doing all the other aspects somewhere in management, and naively thought the models alone would carry the box. It was a pathetic release all over, selling it on hopes and very lack lustre promises.
I also feel like there attempt at a reboot with Ynarri just failed and they found they have no ideas left for craftworld eldar.
Yeah, CWE feel a bit out of sorts with 40k to be honest, I mean you have the Imperium of man, this massive empire, etc and you have the barbarians braying at the gate etc. each of the non-IoM races basicly represents a differant "end game" if you will. be it the corruption and conquest of chaos, the literal barbarians over running the empire (Orks) falling pray to sadistic raiders (dark eldar) being consumed by the Tyranids. Having their life and very souls snuffed out by the Necrons (the Pariah nexus was a wonderful idea, it basicly means the IoM is, where the warp is concerned, trapped between the extremes of the necrons and the forces of chaos. neither of which is desirable) subverted by xenos diplomacy into giving up the soverigty (the Tau)
With craftworld eldar, the problem is... where's the threat? how are the CWE going to, if not stopped going to put an end to the Imperium of Man?
from a story POV... there's no real hook for the CWE, which I def think is a problem
Marines outselling everything else though has been the case for ages. and it's not even just a matter of "what's avaliable" Indomatus sold out in minutes, meanwhile blood of the pheonix.... didn't. nor did the chaos deamons focused box. we can "explain this" all we want, but GW looks at those figures and draws their own conclusions
Comparing Indomitus and Blood of the Phoenix is a bit weird. Indomitus was all new models at an unbelievable low price tag. Blood of the Phoenix was a few resculpts(of models that have been underperforming) padded with garbage that hasn't been selling for ages at an extremely high price tag. Wrath and Rapture was at a better price but still included a lot of old models that most Chaos Daemons players have plethora of.
Nobody, and I mean absolutely nobody, should be using the Indomitus box to make a point against other boxes as the Indomitus box was on a completely different level.
With craftworld eldar, the problem is... where's the threat? how are the CWE going to, if not stopped going to put an end to the Imperium of Man?
from a story POV... there's no real hook for the CWE, which I def think is a problem
So in this vast setting, with a multitude of factions, the only thing that gives anything value is how it interacts with and affects The Imperium of Man.
Eonfuzz wrote: Brian, blood of the phoenix was a trash box and you know it. Stop being disingenuous
Not to mention that when Terminators get a fething rebox for the new edition, they get 1.5x the wounds, rebalanced powerfists, +1S power swords, 12" range heavy flamers....
when banshees get remade into plastic, they get...nothing. And when Jain Zar gets remade into plastic, she gets nerfed. And then you can't buy either of them unless you buy a 240$ box filled with 30 year old fething sculpts....lol.
I feel like someone said they cannot rework the banshees without doing all the other aspects somewhere in management, and naively thought the models alone would carry the box. It was a pathetic release all over, selling it on hopes and very lack lustre promises.
I also feel like there attempt at a reboot with Ynarri just failed and they found they have no ideas left for craftworld eldar.
Yeah, CWE feel a bit out of sorts with 40k to be honest, I mean you have the Imperium of man, this massive empire, etc and you have the barbarians braying at the gate etc. each of the non-IoM races basicly represents a differant "end game" if you will. be it the corruption and conquest of chaos, the literal barbarians over running the empire (Orks) falling pray to sadistic raiders (dark eldar) being consumed by the Tyranids. Having their life and very souls snuffed out by the Necrons (the Pariah nexus was a wonderful idea, it basicly means the IoM is, where the warp is concerned, trapped between the extremes of the necrons and the forces of chaos. neither of which is desirable) subverted by xenos diplomacy into giving up the soverigty (the Tau)
With craftworld eldar, the problem is... where's the threat? how are the CWE going to, if not stopped going to put an end to the Imperium of Man?
from a story POV... there's no real hook for the CWE, which I def think is a problem
There is a lot you can do with a enigmatic race that is both friend and foe, working in the background to push you forward when it suits them. But that own forward momentum often pushed right into there enemy’s just as often.
The issue is here, GW wants simple in a setting already set up to be quite complex. There is a fantastic ideas in the background of aliens and when and when not to deal with them.
Putting the imperium up as this impenetrable thing is the simple idea, they could be the worst threat the imperium ever face, the one that never lets them know they are just that.
And that’s very grim dark, inquisition and the lords dealing with the craftworlds to push there own agenda, playing games with the lives of the humans under there charge, to stay ahead of the threats they see outside the imperium.
The issue really just comes down to there own poor setting design at this point, the craftworlds should be the alien ally the imperium works with. The ones they think they can deal with diplomatically and on equal terms.
This doesn’t mean they cannot battle, cannot have open warfare on planets at times.
There is a lot of grim dark to an alien invasion sanction and covered up by the inquisition or the high lords to deal with a small cult threat or a pesky government that is difficult to handle for the position the imperium is in.
And lots of open places for the game to go with them :-)
I wouldn't go as far as some on this thread have and would agree that Xenos need more model releases but this forum has become almost unreadable over the past while due to every other post essentially being the same sarcastic post about Space Marines/NPC's/little Timmy etc
Supreme Command Detachment: Robute Guilliman (Avatar of Khaine) 380, Warlord for +2CP total
Battalion Detachment:
HQ: Librarian in Phobos Armor 100 (Warptime power, Terrify Power But Also With -1 To hit)
HQ: Primaris Librarian 95 (Mind War UM Power, Might of Heroes to buff the Avatar)
(2 farseers, gets me access to more psychic powers than my Eldar get)
Troops: Assault Intercessor Squad 95 (Storm Guardians)
Troops: incursor Squad 105 (Striking Scorpions)
Troops: Intercessor Squad 100, Sergeant with Power Sword 5, Assault Boltguns (Dire Avenger squad with Dire Sword exarch)
Elites: 3x Bladeguard Veterans 105 (Warlock Conclave)
Elites: Redemptor Dreadnought with Storm Bolters, Heavy Flamer, Onslaught Gatling (Wraithlord)
Elites: 9x Reivers with Knives (Howling Banshees)
This list will "feel like" eldar more than any list I can make out of Codex: Eldar. I get to fall back and shoot with everything, if I stay in Tactical doctrine as long as possible I get a better version of Battle Focus, the Avatar still has an open hand and a sword weapon, does a better job of representing "inspiring my eldar to incredible feats of combat prowess" and still gets back up when he dies (but without spending CP to do it!). I get 2CP more than any opponent representing my Eldar strategic prowess/foresight, and I no longer have to wonder why a hyperadvanced race that had space travel while mankind was discovering fire decided to make their armor as gakky as imperial conscripts and their guns shittier versions of the old obsolete space marines' guns.
if anyone asks "hey why are your weenie elves so tough" I'll just say that they have super-advanced ultra space armor that makes Iron Man's suit look like medieval knight armor, and that's represented by their 3+ armor save and 2 T4 wounds.
Dai wrote: I wouldn't go as far as some on this thread have and would agree that Xenos need more model releases but this forum has become almost unreadable over the past while due to every other post essentially being the same sarcastic post about Space Marines/NPC's/little Timmy etc
That’s kinda the thing, a lot of factions really only need one model and smart selection to be way better.
Sisters of silence is a good example I think, they only really need a HQ and could probably just use all the space marines vehicles.
GW could even update the rhino line for all the marines with cool hover upgrade or still tracked to make a lot of people happy.
New falcon and wave serpent update could be used in both craftworld and halequin, and a update to ynarri as a dark eldar force that gains access to some of the craftworld units could use it as well but loses some of the other dark eldar units that don’t make as much sense in a mixed force without faction dissent.
I think that’s where so much animosity can come from, it’s not just one thing but often a failure across the board of GW to cater to some of there customers where they could expand a whole faction or two with one release and someone working a half day that cared.
To the idea above, I have been using my chaos marines are loyal marines for years. And it’s never really failed to stay on theme. The rules of 40k just are not that deep.
Dai wrote: I wouldn't go as far as some on this thread have and would agree that Xenos need more model releases but this forum has become almost unreadable over the past while due to every other post essentially being the same sarcastic post about Space Marines/NPC's/little Timmy etc
That’s kinda the thing, a lot of factions really only need one model and smart selection to be way better.
Sisters of silence is a good example I think, they only really need a HQ and could probably just use all the space marines vehicles.
GW could even update the rhino line for all the marines with cool hover upgrade or still tracked to make a lot of people happy.
New falcon and wave serpent update could be used in both craftworld and halequin, and a update to ynarri as a dark eldar force that gains access to some of the craftworld units could use it as well but loses some of the other dark eldar units that don’t make as much sense in a mixed force without faction dissent.
I think that’s where so much animosity can come from, it’s not just one thing but often a failure across the board of GW to cater to some of there customers where they could expand a whole faction or two with one release and someone working a half day that cared.
To the idea above, I have been using my chaos marines are loyal marines for years. And it’s never really failed to stay on theme. The rules of 40k just are not that deep.
I lose out on fielding what seems like an IMPOSSIBLY small number of models fielding this as space marines rather than eldar. downgrading my army to 1W T3 mostly Sv4+ or worse nets me abooooout....15 additional bodies. Give or take. Plus some additional exarch gear options and such.
Dai wrote: I wouldn't go as far as some on this thread have and would agree that Xenos need more model releases but this forum has become almost unreadable over the past while due to every other post essentially being the same sarcastic post about Space Marines/NPC's/little Timmy etc
That’s kinda the thing, a lot of factions really only need one model and smart selection to be way better.
Sisters of silence is a good example I think, they only really need a HQ and could probably just use all the space marines vehicles.
GW could even update the rhino line for all the marines with cool hover upgrade or still tracked to make a lot of people happy.
New falcon and wave serpent update could be used in both craftworld and halequin, and a update to ynarri as a dark eldar force that gains access to some of the craftworld units could use it as well but loses some of the other dark eldar units that don’t make as much sense in a mixed force without faction dissent.
I think that’s where so much animosity can come from, it’s not just one thing but often a failure across the board of GW to cater to some of there customers where they could expand a whole faction or two with one release and someone working a half day that cared.
To the idea above, I have been using my chaos marines are loyal marines for years. And it’s never really failed to stay on theme. The rules of 40k just are not that deep.
I lose out on fielding what seems like an IMPOSSIBLY small number of models fielding this as space marines rather than eldar. downgrading my army to 1W T3 mostly Sv4+ or worse nets me abooooout....15 additional bodies. Give or take. Plus some additional exarch gear options and such.
And once on the table, it will look rather fluffy as a eldar strike force as well.
Finally, to me, and i think the majority of warhammer hobbyists out there, gak doesnt need to be perfectly balanced because its never been a "competitive" game for us. We dont try and min/max lists, or find all the most efficient combination of rules and stratagems to create deathballs. We dont try and be little gakkers by going out of our way to find tiny inconsistencies in the wording of rules to find an advantage. Warhammer has always been about meeting up with some like minded friends, building an awesome army, and having some beers and a laugh. Nerding out over each others latest additions to their armies or paint job, appreciating the hard work and how fething badass they all look on the table.
I feel sorry for those who never had this with this hobby or dont want that. Life is to short for all this pent up toxic moaning. Beerhammer for life yo.
Feel free to beerhammer some striking scorpions or howling banshees at a unit of... well, anything really. You'll be here posting abuse with the rest of us before the end of turn 3
I love fluffy, casual games and don't want to care about balance. Unfortunately my fluffy units/lists tend to underperform and get completely annihilated by my opponents; not (just) due to poor generalship, but due to quite significant differences in what you get for the points. Or worse, they massively overperform because GW accidentally boosted them, turning me into a cheesemongering neckbeard in the eye of my opponent. I've come to care a great deal about balance, because I just want to field a fluffy list without knowing I'll get stomped (or stomp) before the first die lands.
Mind you, I'm perfectly fine with infantry not being able to do much to tanks and the like, I don't "want to play chess". It's comparing stuff like intercessors versus storm guardians that grinds my gears (off the top of my hat, I'm sure there are better examples).
I don't know if it would be better if GW divided the armies into identifiable niches, and gave them more or less the same rules with a re-skin; so for example the 'sneaky armies', GSC, Alpha Legion, and Raven Guard would share the same overall design, with some unit variations.
Supreme Command Detachment: Robute Guilliman (Avatar of Khaine) 380, Warlord for +2CP total
Battalion Detachment:
HQ: Librarian in Phobos Armor 100 (Warptime power, Terrify Power But Also With -1 To hit)
HQ: Primaris Librarian 95 (Mind War UM Power, Might of Heroes to buff the Avatar)
(2 farseers, gets me access to more psychic powers than my Eldar get)
Troops: Assault Intercessor Squad 95 (Storm Guardians)
Troops: incursor Squad 105 (Striking Scorpions)
Troops: Intercessor Squad 100, Sergeant with Power Sword 5, Assault Boltguns (Dire Avenger squad with Dire Sword exarch)
Elites: 3x Bladeguard Veterans 105 (Warlock Conclave)
Elites: Redemptor Dreadnought with Storm Bolters, Heavy Flamer, Onslaught Gatling (Wraithlord)
Elites: 9x Reivers with Knives (Howling Banshees)
This list will "feel like" eldar more than any list I can make out of Codex: Eldar. I get to fall back and shoot with everything, if I stay in Tactical doctrine as long as possible I get a better version of Battle Focus, the Avatar still has an open hand and a sword weapon, does a better job of representing "inspiring my eldar to incredible feats of combat prowess" and still gets back up when he dies (but without spending CP to do it!). I get 2CP more than any opponent representing my Eldar strategic prowess/foresight, and I no longer have to wonder why a hyperadvanced race that had space travel while mankind was discovering fire decided to make their armor as gakky as imperial conscripts and their guns shittier versions of the old obsolete space marines' guns.
if anyone asks "hey why are your weenie elves so tough" I'll just say that they have super-advanced ultra space armor that makes Iron Man's suit look like medieval knight armor, and that's represented by their 3+ armor save and 2 T4 wounds.
While there may be a touch too much salt ITT it is important to recognize that from all angles the way in which GW skews their design system in favour of space marines is unhealthy for 40k. It just is. If GW wants to drive sales of their most popular toy soldiers, than just release new models of the same units. People would still buy them just as much and the design team wouldn't constantly find itself trapped into corners their rules create.
Supreme Command Detachment: Robute Guilliman (Avatar of Khaine) 380, Warlord for +2CP total
Battalion Detachment:
HQ: Librarian in Phobos Armor 100 (Warptime power, Terrify Power But Also With -1 To hit)
HQ: Primaris Librarian 95 (Mind War UM Power, Might of Heroes to buff the Avatar)
(2 farseers, gets me access to more psychic powers than my Eldar get)
Troops: Assault Intercessor Squad 95 (Storm Guardians)
Troops: incursor Squad 105 (Striking Scorpions)
Troops: Intercessor Squad 100, Sergeant with Power Sword 5, Assault Boltguns (Dire Avenger squad with Dire Sword exarch)
Elites: 3x Bladeguard Veterans 105 (Warlock Conclave)
Elites: Redemptor Dreadnought with Storm Bolters, Heavy Flamer, Onslaught Gatling (Wraithlord)
Elites: 9x Reivers with Knives (Howling Banshees)
This list will "feel like" eldar more than any list I can make out of Codex: Eldar. I get to fall back and shoot with everything, if I stay in Tactical doctrine as long as possible I get a better version of Battle Focus, the Avatar still has an open hand and a sword weapon, does a better job of representing "inspiring my eldar to incredible feats of combat prowess" and still gets back up when he dies (but without spending CP to do it!). I get 2CP more than any opponent representing my Eldar strategic prowess/foresight, and I no longer have to wonder why a hyperadvanced race that had space travel while mankind was discovering fire decided to make their armor as gakky as imperial conscripts and their guns shittier versions of the old obsolete space marines' guns.
if anyone asks "hey why are your weenie elves so tough" I'll just say that they have super-advanced ultra space armor that makes Iron Man's suit look like medieval knight armor, and that's represented by their 3+ armor save and 2 T4 wounds.
I... I actually like this approach.
yeah this isn't just a salty joke, this is how I'm playing my eldar now. It is actually ridiculous how FEW models I actually have to give up fielding to run my army like this. Like, I might ditch the Bladeguard "Warlocks" in favor of some Aggressor "warp spiders" but as space marine lists go it's pretty un-optimized...so what are they going to do? Refuse to play against it because only THEY get to use their OP rules? Nah feth that it's perfectly clear what everything is, I've even painted each and every unit a different color scheme so you know what's what. The psykers are psykers. The dudes with melta are dudes with melta. The dudes with chainswords are dudes with chainswords. The dudes on bikes are dudes on bikes.
If I owned a few more more Dire Avengers I'd probably skip the guardians entirely and run the whole kit and kaboodle as an aspect host army, with all the aspects represented with rules that actually work the way they're supposed to fight. You could swap out a farseer for a jump pack slash captain with Teeth of Terra as an Autarch with Wings and glaive
Dire Avengers actually work as a close range hybrid shooting/assault unit.
Striking Scorpions actually work as infiltrators.
Swooping hawks actually work as deep striking anti-infantry.
Fire Dragons actually work as tough, heavily armored melta troopers.
Shining Spears actually work as daring chargers.
Howling Banshees actually work as terrifying assault units.
only problems are Warp Spiders not teleporting anymore and instead being dedicated anti-chaff, and Howling Banshees not being particularly anti-elite with Reiver knives.but that's fine.
Ooh, for extra fun you could do an actual functional Wraith Host army using all the various types of WG as Gravis armor. Cannons = Erads, Scythes = Aggressors, Blades = Bladeguard, Spiritseer = BG Ancient
Supreme Command Detachment: Robute Guilliman (Avatar of Khaine) 380, Warlord for +2CP total
Battalion Detachment:
HQ: Librarian in Phobos Armor 100 (Warptime power, Terrify Power But Also With -1 To hit)
HQ: Primaris Librarian 95 (Mind War UM Power, Might of Heroes to buff the Avatar)
(2 farseers, gets me access to more psychic powers than my Eldar get)
Troops: Assault Intercessor Squad 95 (Storm Guardians)
Troops: incursor Squad 105 (Striking Scorpions)
Troops: Intercessor Squad 100, Sergeant with Power Sword 5, Assault Boltguns (Dire Avenger squad with Dire Sword exarch)
Elites: 3x Bladeguard Veterans 105 (Warlock Conclave)
Elites: Redemptor Dreadnought with Storm Bolters, Heavy Flamer, Onslaught Gatling (Wraithlord)
Elites: 9x Reivers with Knives (Howling Banshees)
This list will "feel like" eldar more than any list I can make out of Codex: Eldar. I get to fall back and shoot with everything, if I stay in Tactical doctrine as long as possible I get a better version of Battle Focus, the Avatar still has an open hand and a sword weapon, does a better job of representing "inspiring my eldar to incredible feats of combat prowess" and still gets back up when he dies (but without spending CP to do it!). I get 2CP more than any opponent representing my Eldar strategic prowess/foresight, and I no longer have to wonder why a hyperadvanced race that had space travel while mankind was discovering fire decided to make their armor as gakky as imperial conscripts and their guns shittier versions of the old obsolete space marines' guns.
if anyone asks "hey why are your weenie elves so tough" I'll just say that they have super-advanced ultra space armor that makes Iron Man's suit look like medieval knight armor, and that's represented by their 3+ armor save and 2 T4 wounds.
i actually had a thought of doing the same thing when eradicators came out, basically the last drop in marines stealing eldar's themes
Finally, to me, and i think the majority of warhammer hobbyists out there, gak doesnt need to be perfectly balanced because its never been a "competitive" game for us. We dont try and min/max lists, or find all the most efficient combination of rules and stratagems to create deathballs. We dont try and be little gakkers by going out of our way to find tiny inconsistencies in the wording of rules to find an advantage. Warhammer has always been about meeting up with some like minded friends, building an awesome army, and having some beers and a laugh. Nerding out over each others latest additions to their armies or paint job, appreciating the hard work and how fething badass they all look on the table.
I feel sorry for those who never had this with this hobby or dont want that. Life is to short for all this pent up toxic moaning. Beerhammer for life yo.
Feel free to beerhammer some striking scorpions or howling banshees at a unit of... well, anything really. You'll be here posting abuse with the rest of us before the end of turn 3
I love fluffy, casual games and don't want to care about balance. Unfortunately my fluffy units/lists tend to underperform and get completely annihilated by my opponents; not (just) due to poor generalship, but due to quite significant differences in what you get for the points. Or worse, they massively overperform because GW accidentally boosted them, turning me into a cheesemongering neckbeard in the eye of my opponent. I've come to care a great deal about balance, because I just want to field a fluffy list without knowing I'll get stomped (or stomp) before the first die lands.
Mind you, I'm perfectly fine with infantry not being able to do much to tanks and the like, I don't "want to play chess". It's comparing stuff like intercessors versus storm guardians that grinds my gears (off the top of my hat, I'm sure there are better examples).
If your playing fluffy vs fluffy then you shouldnt have a problem. Ive never had the problem in 20 years. Or play narrative scenarios, use house rules etc. Me and my friends have been using home brewed terrain rules for donkeys years. Back in the day, this was what the game was designed to be, just how the hobbying aspect was desinged to be. It gave you the backbone of whats what, and then let you customise how you felt. Hence why 90% of all marine chapters are not named and so on.
Finally, to me, and i think the majority of warhammer hobbyists out there, gak doesnt need to be perfectly balanced because its never been a "competitive" game for us. We dont try and min/max lists, or find all the most efficient combination of rules and stratagems to create deathballs. We dont try and be little gakkers by going out of our way to find tiny inconsistencies in the wording of rules to find an advantage. Warhammer has always been about meeting up with some like minded friends, building an awesome army, and having some beers and a laugh. Nerding out over each others latest additions to their armies or paint job, appreciating the hard work and how fething badass they all look on the table.
I feel sorry for those who never had this with this hobby or dont want that. Life is to short for all this pent up toxic moaning. Beerhammer for life yo.
Feel free to beerhammer some striking scorpions or howling banshees at a unit of... well, anything really. You'll be here posting abuse with the rest of us before the end of turn 3
I love fluffy, casual games and don't want to care about balance. Unfortunately my fluffy units/lists tend to underperform and get completely annihilated by my opponents; not (just) due to poor generalship, but due to quite significant differences in what you get for the points. Or worse, they massively overperform because GW accidentally boosted them, turning me into a cheesemongering neckbeard in the eye of my opponent. I've come to care a great deal about balance, because I just want to field a fluffy list without knowing I'll get stomped (or stomp) before the first die lands.
Mind you, I'm perfectly fine with infantry not being able to do much to tanks and the like, I don't "want to play chess". It's comparing stuff like intercessors versus storm guardians that grinds my gears (off the top of my hat, I'm sure there are better examples).
If your playing fluffy vs fluffy then you shouldnt have a problem. Ive never had the problem in 20 years. Or play narrative scenarios, use house rules etc. Me and my friends have been using home brewed terrain rules for donkeys years. Back in the day, this was what the game was designed to be, just how the hobbying aspect was desinged to be. It gave you the backbone of whats what, and then let you customise how you felt. Hence why 90% of all marine chapters are not named and so on.
I mean you do, though. It doesn't matter how "fluffy" you make your lists, eldar aspects feel like absolute garbage next to SM equivalents. They just aren't comparable. Ultramarines rules do a better job representing the Eldar style of war than do Eldar rules.
You can make the game balanced by, say, giving the eldar army 2500 points or something, but then you wind up with Eldar playing like a wonky suicide horde of conscripts getting mowed down en masse by the space marines. I don't have an eldar army for them to play like Tyranids, hurling 20 howling banshees across the table into 5-man squads of space marines in the hopes of dragging them down by weight of numbers.
FEARtheMoose wrote: They should just separate the competitive and the casual into two different rule sets. Send the toxicity away from the majority player base.
Then increase complexity in the games rules. feth streamlining it, that just makes things swing harder in either direction, less wiggle room.
They do. It's called Crusade Mode vs Matched Play.
But it doesn't matter if we use narrative Power Level with Crusade Mode or matched Points with missions from the tournament pack. If I want to play an eldar army and my opponent wants to use his new marines from the starter box, we are going to run into this problem of the fact that my opponent's 5 assault intercessors with astartes chainswords can fight 5 howling banshees who cost the exact same power level and nearly the same points without even breaking a sweat. they mow them right the feth down, and the Banshees are supposed to be a hyper-specialized unit designed to fight marines in melee.
It doesn't matter how you dress it up if Unit A is going to throw 4 WS3+ S4 AP-1 D1 attacks on the charge, and unit B is going to throw 2 WS3+ S3 AP-3 D1 attacks. And Unit A is T4 W2 sv3+ while unit B is T3 W1 Sv 4+ with -1 to hit.
You can use whatever custom terrain rules you want, whatever custom mission you want, Unit A will kill nearly twice their number of unit B in melee while losing half as many models.
FEARtheMoose wrote: They should just separate the competitive and the casual into two different rule sets. Send the toxicity away from the majority player base.
Then increase complexity in the games rules. feth streamlining it, that just makes things swing harder in either direction, less wiggle room.
The idea that competitive 40K is toxic, is bs, as is the insinuation that better balance between factions is only needed for competive play.
FEARtheMoose wrote: They should just separate the competitive and the casual into two different rule sets. Send the toxicity away from the majority player base.
Then increase complexity in the games rules. feth streamlining it, that just makes things swing harder in either direction, less wiggle room.
The idea that competitive 40K is toxic, is bs, as is the insinuation that better balance between factions is only needed for competive play.
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
FEARtheMoose wrote: They should just separate the competitive and the casual into two different rule sets. Send the toxicity away from the majority player base.
Then increase complexity in the games rules. feth streamlining it, that just makes things swing harder in either direction, less wiggle room.
They do. It's called Crusade Mode vs Matched Play.
But it doesn't matter if we use narrative Power Level with Crusade Mode or matched Points with missions from the tournament pack. If I want to play an eldar army and my opponent wants to use his new marines from the starter box, we are going to run into this problem of the fact that my opponent's 5 assault intercessors with astartes chainswords can fight 5 howling banshees who cost the exact same power level and nearly the same points without even breaking a sweat. they mow them right the feth down, and the Banshees are supposed to be a hyper-specialized unit designed to fight marines in melee.
It doesn't matter how you dress it up if Unit A is going to throw 4 WS3+ S4 AP-1 D1 attacks on the charge, and unit B is going to throw 2 WS3+ S3 AP-3 D1 attacks. And Unit A is T4 W2 sv3+ while unit B is T3 W1 Sv 4+ with -1 to hit.
You can use whatever custom terrain rules you want, whatever custom mission you want, Unit A will kill nearly twice their number of unit B in melee while losing half as many models.
Well when all the factions have had their revamps over the next couple years or so we shall see if thats still the case.
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
I think there is toxicity on the casual side too. You get people who blithely insist that any and all flaws in the game are perfectly fine (cos it's just about the beer and pretzels), even though we are expected to pay top dollar for apparently professionally written rules and books.
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
I think there is toxicity on the casual side too. You get people who blithely insist that any and all flaws in the game are perfectly fine (cos it's just about the beer and pretzels), even though we are expected to pay top dollar for apparently professionally written rules and books.
People always act like this is a real thing, but I've legitimately never encountered it.
I have, however, encountered toxicity from the more 'competitive' side of things. And over the dumbest damn things too.
FEARtheMoose wrote: They should just separate the competitive and the casual into two different rule sets. Send the toxicity away from the majority player base.
Then increase complexity in the games rules. feth streamlining it, that just makes things swing harder in either direction, less wiggle room.
The idea that competitive 40K is toxic, is bs, as is the insinuation that better balance between factions is only needed for competive play.
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
FEARtheMoose wrote: They should just separate the competitive and the casual into two different rule sets. Send the toxicity away from the majority player base.
Then increase complexity in the games rules. feth streamlining it, that just makes things swing harder in either direction, less wiggle room.
They do. It's called Crusade Mode vs Matched Play.
But it doesn't matter if we use narrative Power Level with Crusade Mode or matched Points with missions from the tournament pack. If I want to play an eldar army and my opponent wants to use his new marines from the starter box, we are going to run into this problem of the fact that my opponent's 5 assault intercessors with astartes chainswords can fight 5 howling banshees who cost the exact same power level and nearly the same points without even breaking a sweat. they mow them right the feth down, and the Banshees are supposed to be a hyper-specialized unit designed to fight marines in melee.
It doesn't matter how you dress it up if Unit A is going to throw 4 WS3+ S4 AP-1 D1 attacks on the charge, and unit B is going to throw 2 WS3+ S3 AP-3 D1 attacks. And Unit A is T4 W2 sv3+ while unit B is T3 W1 Sv 4+ with -1 to hit.
You can use whatever custom terrain rules you want, whatever custom mission you want, Unit A will kill nearly twice their number of unit B in melee while losing half as many models.
Well when all the factions have had their revamps over the next couple years or so we shall see if thats still the case.
What happened to "if you just play fluffy this is not a problem."
What is your proposed fluffy solution to make Eldar play like they should in the fluff? I presume that you'd have some kind of problem with my solution (i.e. treating Eldar units as Ultramarines and using those rules for them because the current Ultramarines rules do a better job of representing Eldar than the current Eldar rules) because otherwise you would not have made this statement about how easy it is to just house-rule some kind of solution.
Assuming I want to play a game tomorrow, a friendly fluffy narrative game, who wants his new starter box of space marines to play like Space Marines and I want my Eldar to play like Eldar with their brand new plastic Howling Banshees, how should we accomplish that using easy house-rules?
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
I think there is toxicity on the casual side too. You get people who blithely insist that any and all flaws in the game are perfectly fine (cos it's just about the beer and pretzels), even though we are expected to pay top dollar for apparently professionally written rules and books.
People always act like this is a real thing, but I've legitimately never encountered it.
I have, however, encountered toxicity from the more 'competitive' side of things. And over the dumbest damn things too.
Do you mean you never encountered the casual people that aggresively insist that 40k is fine with its flaws? Because theres quite a few posters on here that believe that.
Casual or Competitive doesn't make someone toxic or not, thats a character flaw that is unrelated to the game. People have to stop trying to label one side or the other as "toxic"
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
I think there is toxicity on the casual side too. You get people who blithely insist that any and all flaws in the game are perfectly fine (cos it's just about the beer and pretzels), even though we are expected to pay top dollar for apparently professionally written rules and books.
People always act like this is a real thing, but I've legitimately never encountered it.
I have, however, encountered toxicity from the more 'competitive' side of things. And over the dumbest damn things too.
Do you mean you never encountered the casual people that aggresively insist that 40k is fine with its flaws? Because theres quite a few posters on here that believe that.
Casual or Competitive doesn't make someone toxic or not, thats a character flaw that is unrelated to the game. People have to stop trying to label one side or the other as "toxic"
In my experience it's the casual players who are the least of the opinion that the game is fine, and who are most likely to do things like, say, not using SM doctrines against non-SM armies that are in a bad spot, or who are willing to waive the stupid and arbitrary distinctions like SM vehicles getting chapter tactics while CSM vehicles do not.
It's competitive players who expect everyone to all suddenly adopt smaller board sizes, stop playing the missions they enjoy in favor of the new not-ITC missions, and stop using models and rules that they bought and paid for extremely recently because GW wants to planned obsolete them.
They don't usually do it in a particularly dickish way, but competitive players in my experience are far, far more likely to try and force you to change the way you play than casual players are, as well as the least likely to change the way they play to allow for you to have more of a chance to win.
I have never, ever encountered a more casual player who insists that 40k is perfectly fine, if they thought that they wouldn't be seeking out less competitive games.
Maybe if some people didn't constantly act as if the sky was falling all the frigging time from some little changes there wouldn't be "casual people aggressively insisting that 40k is fine with its flaws".
Just throwing that out there.
And it absolutely is more common with the competitive crowd.
Kanluwen wrote: Maybe if some people didn't constantly act as if the sky was falling all the frigging time from some little changes there wouldn't be "casual people aggressively insisting that 40k is fine with its flaws".
Just throwing that out there.
And it absolutely is more common with the competitive crowd.
oh i agree with that, i was pointing out that what you said
People always act like this is a real thing, but I've legitimately never encountered it.
was untrue because we see it plenty on here.
Also, i point out the flaws and things i dislike in 40k and i'm 100% a casual player
AnomanderRake wrote: So...we should all be playing 30k? I have no problems with this.
I do, 30k is still using 7th and 7th was broken on a fundamental level that is utterly irreparable. Even marine v marine still ends up not being able to use vehicles because they're made out of nitroglycerine and explode when they touch bushes and any ap higher than 3 being completely pointless.
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
I think there is toxicity on the casual side too. You get people who blithely insist that any and all flaws in the game are perfectly fine (cos it's just about the beer and pretzels), even though we are expected to pay top dollar for apparently professionally written rules and books.
People always act like this is a real thing, but I've legitimately never encountered it.
I have, however, encountered toxicity from the more 'competitive' side of things. And over the dumbest damn things too.
Do you mean you never encountered the casual people that aggresively insist that 40k is fine with its flaws? Because theres quite a few posters on here that believe that.
Casual or Competitive doesn't make someone toxic or not, thats a character flaw that is unrelated to the game. People have to stop trying to label one side or the other as "toxic"
This is correct but the issue is being competitive by definition attracts more people with those character flaws - inflated sense of ego, lack of consideration for others experiences, need to be correct or the best, dislike of anything that isn't optimised and general disregard for anything flavourful over what is more efficient. Those aren't applied to everyone who is competitive but they're all very negative thought patterns and all applicable to playing a game competitively, just as some of those can be picked up by someone playing casually it's less common because they naturally move towards the competitive end of the spectrum over time.
Do agree with kan that if every time a marine model came out there wasn't a "OMG MY ARMY IS TRASH GW HATES ME AND POOPED IN MY CEREAL" thread it might stop a lot of petty back and forth.
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
I think there is toxicity on the casual side too. You get people who blithely insist that any and all flaws in the game are perfectly fine (cos it's just about the beer and pretzels), even though we are expected to pay top dollar for apparently professionally written rules and books.
People always act like this is a real thing, but I've legitimately never encountered it.
I have, however, encountered toxicity from the more 'competitive' side of things. And over the dumbest damn things too.
Almost all of the toxicity I've encountered has been from the casual crowd.
See, what harlokin left out is the OTHER half of what people say; people in the casual side say 'the game is perfectly fine even with all it's flaws except for competitive players who ruin muh immersion!!
Casual players constantly, constantly cry and moan and whine about competitive players 'ruining' the game when competitive players are just playing the game as it exists. Casual players have this ingrained, almost 'sacred' idea of what they THINK the game is what they THINK you should be allowed to do and if you present them anything that falls outside of that little bubble they've built for themselves, they freak out.
It doesn't even have to be 'WAAC' stuff, it can just be something they don't like. Remember the 'lasguns killing landraiders' thing at the start of 8th? No competitive player cared about that, they knew that that would never be an effective way to kill a tank and understood from a gameplay perspective why having weapons that literally can't hurt something can be problematic design wise. But the casual crowd had a full shrieking meltdown about it.
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
I think there is toxicity on the casual side too. You get people who blithely insist that any and all flaws in the game are perfectly fine (cos it's just about the beer and pretzels), even though we are expected to pay top dollar for apparently professionally written rules and books.
People always act like this is a real thing, but I've legitimately never encountered it.
I have, however, encountered toxicity from the more 'competitive' side of things. And over the dumbest damn things too.
Do you mean you never encountered the casual people that aggresively insist that 40k is fine with its flaws? Because theres quite a few posters on here that believe that.
Casual or Competitive doesn't make someone toxic or not, thats a character flaw that is unrelated to the game. People have to stop trying to label one side or the other as "toxic"
This is correct but the issue is being competitive by definition attracts more people with those character flaws - inflated sense of ego, lack of consideration for others experiences, need to be correct or the best, dislike of anything that isn't optimised and general disregard for anything flavourful over what is more efficient. Those aren't applied to everyone who is competitive but they're all very negative thought patterns and all applicable to playing a game competitively, just as some of those can be picked up by someone playing casually it's less common because they naturally move towards the competitive end of the spectrum over time.
Do agree with kan that if every time a marine model came out there wasn't a "OMG MY ARMY IS TRASH GW HATES ME AND POOPED IN MY CEREAL" thread it might stop a lot of petty back and forth.
I don't even agree that those threads come from competitive players.
In fact, competitive players are more likely to give a resigned sigh and go back to the drawing board to figure out how to deal with the new OP thing.
Ya'll like to act like the casual crowd doesn't care about how good their army is at all but that's some BS. EVERYONE cares about how good their army is. It's just casual and fluffy players that take it personally.
And all of those character flaws are things that are drawn to this hobby as a whole and don't apply to just competitive play. Inflated ego,lack of consideration for others, and need to be correct are still VERY prevelant in casual/fluff circles, it's just expressed in different ways.
"I'd never play against someone who had an unpainted army, they're just lazy WAAC losers because they don't have a lot of free time and their army came out a month ago."
"I can't believe you play space wolves and dark angels in the same army. Here's my 27 page essay on why your army is an abomination unto god and you should be cast into the pits of hell!'
"If you don't like X part of the 40k hobby that isn't gaming, you should just stop playing 40k. Go play chess because obviously there's no other reason to like 40k other than the way I like it!"
"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games (direct quote from the_scotsman btw).
Add in your "It's literally only the competitive players that are toxic and exlusionary. Listen to me heavily imply that if we used some sort of negative behavior to stop them from playing they wouldn't be ruining MY GAME THAT I GET TO DECIDE WHAT IS AND ISN'T THE RIGHT WAY TO DO THINGS!!!!"
I've heard variations of these things literally every day on dakka. Don't pretend that because you say you're not actually invested in winning you're somehow morally superior.
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
I think there is toxicity on the casual side too. You get people who blithely insist that any and all flaws in the game are perfectly fine (cos it's just about the beer and pretzels), even though we are expected to pay top dollar for apparently professionally written rules and books.
People always act like this is a real thing, but I've legitimately never encountered it.
I have, however, encountered toxicity from the more 'competitive' side of things. And over the dumbest damn things too.
Almost all of the toxicity I've encountered has been from the casual crowd.
See, what harlokin left out is the OTHER half of what people say; people in the casual side say 'the game is perfectly fine even with all it's flaws except for competitive players who ruin muh immersion!!
Casual players constantly, constantly cry and moan and whine about competitive players 'ruining' the game when competitive players are just playing the game as it exists. Casual players have this ingrained, almost 'sacred' idea of what they THINK the game is what they THINK you should be allowed to do and if you present them anything that falls outside of that little bubble they've built for themselves, they freak out.
It doesn't even have to be 'WAAC' stuff, it can just be something they don't like. Remember the 'lasguns killing landraiders' thing at the start of 8th? No competitive player cared about that, they knew that that would never be an effective way to kill a tank and understood from a gameplay perspective why having weapons that literally can't hurt something can be problematic design wise. But the casual crowd had a full shrieking meltdown about it.
Sorry i should of clarified what i meant. All the toxicity of the hobby is in the competitive side of it. NOT that all competitive PLAYERS are toxic.
I think there is toxicity on the casual side too. You get people who blithely insist that any and all flaws in the game are perfectly fine (cos it's just about the beer and pretzels), even though we are expected to pay top dollar for apparently professionally written rules and books.
People always act like this is a real thing, but I've legitimately never encountered it.
I have, however, encountered toxicity from the more 'competitive' side of things. And over the dumbest damn things too.
Do you mean you never encountered the casual people that aggresively insist that 40k is fine with its flaws? Because theres quite a few posters on here that believe that.
Casual or Competitive doesn't make someone toxic or not, thats a character flaw that is unrelated to the game. People have to stop trying to label one side or the other as "toxic"
This is correct but the issue is being competitive by definition attracts more people with those character flaws - inflated sense of ego, lack of consideration for others experiences, need to be correct or the best, dislike of anything that isn't optimised and general disregard for anything flavourful over what is more efficient. Those aren't applied to everyone who is competitive but they're all very negative thought patterns and all applicable to playing a game competitively, just as some of those can be picked up by someone playing casually it's less common because they naturally move towards the competitive end of the spectrum over time.
Do agree with kan that if every time a marine model came out there wasn't a "OMG MY ARMY IS TRASH GW HATES ME AND POOPED IN MY CEREAL" thread it might stop a lot of petty back and forth.
I don't even agree that those threads come from competitive players.
In fact, competitive players are more likely to give a resigned sigh and go back to the drawing board to figure out how to deal with the new OP thing.
A lot of them whine about codex creep and how GW changes rules too often as well.
Ya'll like to act like the casual crowd doesn't care about how good their army is at all but that's some BS. EVERYONE cares about how good their army is. It's just casual and fluffy players that take it personally.
Of course people want their stuff to work well, the difference is a casual player doesn't care if it's 5% less optimal than option 2 as long as they have a chance of playing a good game.
And all of those character flaws are things that are drawn to this hobby as a whole and don't apply to just competitive play. Inflated ego,lack of consideration for others, and need to be correct are still VERY prevelant in casual/fluff circles, it's just expressed in different ways.
Agreed
"I'd never play against someone who had an unpainted army, they're just lazy WAAC losers because they don't have a lot of free time and their army came out a month ago."
Hobby snobbery is definitely a thing, but if someone buys the new weblist with which to get easiest wins - competitive.
"I can't believe you play space wolves and dark angels in the same army. Here's my 27 page essay on why your army is an abomination unto god and you should be cast into the pits of hell!'
You're confusing narrative with casual here, some hardcore narrative types are nutty.
"If you don't like X part of the 40k hobby that isn't gaming, you should just stop playing 40k. Go play chess because obviously there's no other reason to like 40k other than the way I like it!"
This happens on both sides of the fence, same way the competitive scene in the US wouldn't use CA approved missions because the like ITC and it's their way or the high way. Likewise some casual players will get narked at knight armies etc as they're skewy to play against.
"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games (direct quote from the_scotsman btw).
Wanting to win more via being OP = competitive
Add in your "It's literally only the competitive players that are toxic and exlusionary. Listen to me heavily imply that if we used some sort of negative behavior to stop them from playing they wouldn't be ruining MY GAME THAT I GET TO DECIDE WHAT IS AND ISN'T THE RIGHT WAY TO DO THINGS!!!!"
Again, this happens both sides, not like we have competitive rules lawyers on these boards dictating people should play to the letter of dumbass wordings sometimes.
I've heard variations of these things literally every day on dakka. Don't pretend that because you say you're not actually invested in winning you're somehow morally superior.
I'm not on a moral high group my number 1 reason for a game is to hang out with someone, second to that I play to win but will do daft stuff for lulz sometimes, I'm no so hung up on winning that it's what gives me the most joy.
Those are oddly specific, so specific that they're maybe your experiences? You're also blurring playing casually with a die hard narrative crowd.
Erjak wrote:It doesn't even have to be 'WAAC' stuff, it can just be something they don't like. Remember the 'lasguns killing landraiders' thing at the start of 8th? No competitive player cared about that, they knew that that would never be an effective way to kill a tank and understood from a gameplay perspective why having weapons that literally can't hurt something can be problematic design wise. But the casual crowd had a full shrieking meltdown about it.
This is the funny thing...because yeah, it was the supposedly "competitive players" who kept harping on and on and on about this.
They pointed to this as an example of why the whole game was doomed from the start, just like when AoS dropped the legendary 'All Nagash/Archaon" list was the bugbear they kept bringing out.
Jackal90 wrote: 30k is in an even worse situation for non marine armies. Militia get shredded by sheer volume of fire. Custodes are just too much of a small elite army so get shot to pieces.
Mechanicum though, they drew the short straw. Worse saves than marines, despite being robots in suits of armour. Massive fear of instant death weaponry as EW is impossibly rare for them. Low numbers. Add that together and they are at a loss against just about every 30k army.
The idea of streamlining by default profiles is a thing that many games used to do though as it works. But I feel it would drain a lot out of the game.
Kind of funny though since previously, IG, Tau, Eldar and even orks (nob bikers) have dominated the meta.
As a 30k player who plays basically every army except marines, I have to disagree.
- My militia do indeed get shredded by volume of fire - but that's okay, because they can also summon Daemons, have the best artillery in the game, and very heavy tanks that I'll put toe-to-toe with any other tank in the game at the same points cost. Militia are supposed to be shredded by firepower. It's why one of their core troops choices has the Disposable special rule.
- Custodes are one of the ones I do not play, but a local player has had success with Talons of the Emperor (the real name of the army) employing a large number (31) of Sisters of Silence alongside his Custodes to fill out numbers (as well as make the enemy target priority difficult since they infiltrate forwards and get into melee quickly, and unlike modern 40k, a shooting unit in melee is in big trouble. They use Kharon transports to infiltrate forwards and blenderize the baddies.
- Mechanicum saves aren't the sum total of their toughness, typically it's Toughness and Wounds. A Thallax is only a 4+ save, but has 3 wounds at T5 (compared to 1 at T4 for a Marine), and is Stubborn at LD 8 so the usual way of defeating marines (beat and sweep them in combat) doesn't work reliably. Fear of instant death weapons is true but largely irrelevant, as outside of Talons of the Emperor they basically don't exist. Furthermore, Mechanicum have the tools to address every problem - if your problem is durability, bring big blobs of FNP Adsecularis in Carapace or lots of armored vehicles. The most durable Lord of War in the game (that can actually be played at 3k games in regular detachments) is the Ordinatus Sagittar. If you need firepower, then utilize the Myrmidon Destructors for example.
If you need help building a 30k list for non-marines, feel free to ask! I'd love to.
EDIT: I forgot about Daemons of the Ruinstorm but I won't go into them since you didn't mention them even though I play them. Suffice to say that the 30k Daemons rules are super rad and way cooler and better in the meta than 40k daemons.
I think everyone agrees the whines about space marines are tiresome. As someone guilty of it myself...believe me, I would like nothing better than not to have any reason to whine about space marines.
But when GW keeps Gee-dubbing it up with more and more new, usually overpowered Space Marine releases that continue to give Space Marines every single thing that used to be unique to other factions but better, what do you expect is going to happen? If you don't like Space Marine whines you should be mad at GW, not at the people reacting in a predictable way to GW's treatment of its game.
On a fundamental level, everyone but the most deluded of posters here agrees Space Marines get too much attention and are too powerful. So complaining about the complainers is really missing the point.
AnomanderRake wrote: So...we should all be playing 30k? I have no problems with this.
I do, 30k is still using 7th and 7th was broken on a fundamental level that is utterly irreparable. Even marine v marine still ends up not being able to use vehicles because they're made out of nitroglycerine and explode when they touch bushes and any ap higher than 3 being completely pointless.
Just gonna bolt my reply to this on the thread as well: what about 7th was broken that the Age of Darkness didn't change? Details please, your assertions without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Vehicles are easier to kill in 8th edition and 9th edition 40k than in 30k. Way easier. The lethality of modern 40k is dramatically higher than in 30k. Could you give some examples of how vehicles explode quickly and which ones do so? As for the touching bushes comment, that's called "bogging down", and in reality can cause a crew to abandon the tank; in 30k I think it's quite sensible that a badly damaged (one hull-point) tank is abandoned by its crew when it bogs down in difficult terrain. Want to not bog? There's tools for that in the army lists! But they cost points, so you have to make a choice. You know, like a real wargame where the best choice isn't blindingly obvious from the word go. (Also they don't 'explode when they touch a bush', they bog down in area terrain. But go ahead and do hyperbole, it's a good look).
As for an AP higher than 3, my friend with his custodes army would love to play someone with that attitude, and my Militia would too. Good luck destroying my Demolisher tanks without any low-pen guns. I actually go out of my way to slot AP1 or AP2 (in emergencies, 1 is definitely preferred) wherever I can, because of how annoying vehicles are to finish off once you've engaged them with low AP weapons.
Fire lascannon at tank. Need to hit, lets say 5-6 for penetration, and then on a 6 your vehicle is destroyed.
I'm sure you can do some statistics to show that a vehicle with say 12-16 wounds and a 5++ is easier to destroy in today's game with lascannons than that - but anyone who's watched their shiny new model they've sunk 20 hours painting into leave the table with the first shot fired in anger knows it doesn't always work out that way.
Tyel wrote: Fire lascannon at tank. Need to hit, lets say 5-6 for penetration, and then on a 6 your vehicle is destroyed.
I'm sure you can do some statistics to show that a vehicle with say 12-16 wounds and a 5++ is easier to destroy in today's game with lascannons than that - but anyone who's watched their shiny new model they've sunk 20 hours painting into leave the table with the first shot fired in anger knows it doesn't always work out that way.
Yeah, not like now, where you need a 3 to pen instead of a 5 and if you roll that 6 you lose 60% of your HP and, lets be honest, probably died because you let a second shot get through since you're wounding on 3s.
Just because you remember the times a big thing exploded because something rolled a 4+ then a 5+ then a 6, doesnt' mean it happens that way on average.
Tyel wrote: Fire lascannon at tank. Need to hit, lets say 5-6 for penetration, and then on a 6 your vehicle is destroyed.
I'm sure you can do some statistics to show that a vehicle with say 12-16 wounds and a 5++ is easier to destroy in today's game with lascannons than that - but anyone who's watched their shiny new model they've sunk 20 hours painting into leave the table with the first shot fired in anger knows it doesn't always work out that way.
In practice, it's never one lascannon firing on its own be it HH or 40K, it's 4 (or more) at once; and at that point the averages tend to make it significantly more likely to lose the tank (or have it crippled into irrelevance) in 8th/9th. I've removed plenty of newly-painted models T1 at the hands of massed anti-tank fire in 8th.
HH also has the advantage here of still using armor facings, which makes early-game frontal shots significantly less likely to destroy a vehicle, without making them universally more difficult to kill.
Yeah. In an army vs army context, HH's vehicles are much, much tougher than 8th or 9th 40k.
#1 reason is the difficulty of harming them due to armor. A good portion of the enemy army simply has a zero percent effectiveness against a tank.
#2 reason is rules surrounding the firing of anti-tank weapons; they tend to be heavy and therefore are the hardest to effectively employ. This is why melta was great except...
#3 reason is wargear. HH tanks have multiple survivability improvements that were never available (or rarely so) in 40k ever, including Armored Ceramite and Blessed Autosimulacra, to name a few. Flare shields is a big one, which goes a long way to closing the gap between the sheer mass and power of a superheavy and the smaller tanks. Armor 14 with a flare shield is harder to kill than a Baneblade, depending on the weapons present, but is easier to cripple or disable due to other damage as a general rule. (for example, a Malcador from the front against missile launchers is more durable (infinitely so) than a Baneblade, but from the side is far far more vulnerable than said Baneblade, which can largely ignore them. This dichotomy is due to the power of the flare shield).
#4 reason is close combat (arguably #1, lol). Tanks don't give a feth about CC in 30k unless the unit CCing them can penetrate their armor, in which case they only care because their armor is being penetrated, not because it's close combat. Meanwhile, in 8th edition 40k, tanks cared a LOT even if the unit couldn't hurt them much, and in 9th edition they care only a smidge less.
The issues of favouritism and support in the hobby are really tied up across a range of things.
I freely admit that marines are going to be the most innately likeable faction, due to wish fulfilment and badassery.
But that is one factor in the decision making process. They need enemies.to fight or they're just going to fight each other, they have invested in other ranges and they need to sell those too.
Continually pandering to marines through range expansion, overwhelming amount of fiction, more options, more regular updates, etc doesnt do the hobby any favours.
So if an army has few options, rarely gets new models, is ignored or even made fun of by the company selling them, gets its unique elements copied by marines, you've created an environment where there's no reason to leave the marine faction ever, except aesthetics or fluff.
You've not just made it really easy and accessible for players to play marines, youve actively made it comparatively harder for people to get into anything else. The effort required is higher and the sense of accomplishment less because there's no guarantee what you found unique in the army won't appear in the marine list.
My original point in the OP was effectively to take out one of the decision making factors in army choice that is tied up in the process a player goes through to pick an army.
It's mainly a thought experiment because we know they won't do it officially (even if they've basically done all they can for this to be the defacto truth of the gaming environment).
And it's basic experimental theory, you control for variables by removing one at a time to see the results.
My hypothesis is, if you remove the codex update neglect from the equation, then army choice isnt going to be as one sided as it currently is. If everyone used the same army list with different models and they all got tasty updates equally and together, the fluff and aesthetic factor that is currently pretty much the ONLY reason you choose a neglected faction becomes the most important reason.
Lets be real here... did space marines really need the quad bike, space bunker drop pod thingy and the support weapon platform not called support weapon platform. Like why? As mentioned its not just about the rules.. and its not just about the models. Its about both CONSTANTLY all of the time for at least a year.. The assumption on their podcasts that "ohh yeah everyone has a space marine army" which is of course nonsense.
Ever since I returned to the 40k the mid 8th edition its been nerf after nerf with practicaly zero new releases for me to enjoy.. No conversions to do.. Options being taken away.. While the most obviosuly OP stuff just being left alone. I guess those CHE kits must have been flying off the shelves.
Anyway.. its very tiresome and only the blind would shamelessly defend this as its certainly not good for the game as a whole. For one Im pretty much retiring from playing 40k for at least a year think and maybe revisit how things look. So already me and a couple more people are not partaking in local club events or tournaments in 40k coz why would we? Maybe when the new CWE codex drops Ill give it another spin and see if I can use some of my favourite units I poured effort into not suck..(real glad I painted those 40 guardians..) So Its probably modelling & painting for me from now on.
All I'm a say is that mierce & inffinity minatures look REAL good. I mean really good... Also thank god for vintage oldhammer.
yukishiro1 wrote: I think everyone agrees the whines about space marines are tiresome. As someone guilty of it myself...believe me, I would like nothing better than not to have any reason to whine about space marines.
But when GW keeps Gee-dubbing it up with more and more new, usually overpowered Space Marine releases that continue to give Space Marines every single thing that used to be unique to other factions but better, what do you expect is going to happen? If you don't like Space Marine whines you should be mad at GW, not at the people reacting in a predictable way to GW's treatment of its game.
On a fundamental level, everyone but the most deluded of posters here agrees Space Marines get too much attention and are too powerful. So complaining about the complainers is really missing the point.
For my part I have no problem with posts that criticise this, it just gets a little much to read the forum when it's one post of one or two sentence snark after another. There's been some very good posts on this thread too expressing the sentiment of Marines being to much! Also I've no issue with the OP, even though I'd disagree with their solution. The huge diversity of the Warhammer IP's were a big part of what got me into the game.
Argive wrote: All I'm a say is that mierce & inffinity minatures look REAL good. I mean really good... Also thank god for vintage oldhammer.
N4 looking pretty smooth, I agree.
Part of the stuff with GW and "casual" vs. "competitive" play is very frustrating to me. GW has done this amazing job of creating a culture where they can abdicate their responsibility to make balanced or fun rules, and instead have players blame each other for GW's unbalanced mess. If you play CWE into Astartes and get creamed because their units are so much more efficient and powerful for their points cost than yours, your response shouldn't be to get mad at the other player for being WAAC (as long as they didn't cheat, were sportsmanlike, didn't play gotcha with the rules, etc), it should be to take a hard look at the rules and determine whether you're getting what you're paying for. The idea that *players* need to know the rules better than GW, and modulate their own listbuilding to account for GW's unbalanced profiles, or else they're unsportsmanlike is pathetic and scrubby. The idea that players need to wait years for their army to be playable and/or competitive is demeaning; in Infinity, people still win games with MRRF or Acon, which haven't been updated in almost an entire edition, because the power creep is so much less prevalent and there's occasional profiles dropped back into them.
And for those complaining that there's nothing for CWE to do in the lore - that's incredibly shortsighted. The setting needs to revolve around the Imperium in general and Astartes in particular less, and that means allowing room for non-human heroes. Fundamentally, I find orks more relatable than the Imperium. The idea of killing someone because they refuse to follow the right religion, or because they were born with six fingers or limbs that developed differently I find monstrous; conversely, loud music, fast cars, hallucinogenic mushrooms, and starting fights all seem much more fun. GW is dancing around the fact that the Imperium is about as morally justified as the Skaven were in Warhammer Fantasy, but they're sold as a glorious faction of unironic heroes more and more.
yukishiro1 wrote: I think everyone agrees the whines about space marines are tiresome. As someone guilty of it myself...believe me, I would like nothing better than not to have any reason to whine about space marines.
But when GW keeps Gee-dubbing it up with more and more new, usually overpowered Space Marine releases that continue to give Space Marines every single thing that used to be unique to other factions but better, what do you expect is going to happen? If you don't like Space Marine whines you should be mad at GW, not at the people reacting in a predictable way to GW's treatment of its game.
On a fundamental level, everyone but the most deluded of posters here agrees Space Marines get too much attention and are too powerful. So complaining about the complainers is really missing the point.
For my part I have no problem with posts that criticise this, it just gets a little much to read the forum when it's one post of one or two sentence snark after another. There's been some very good posts on this thread too expressing the sentiment of Marines being to much! Also I've no issue with the OP, even though I'd disagree with their solution. The huge diversity of the Warhammer IP's were a big part of what got me into the game.
But that diversity is not really expressed anywhere in the game, A lot of it is fancy words saying there is without there really being functional ability for a lot of the factions to even play to there own Fluff very well.
Over exaggeration of power fantasy in marines have effectively taken anything a good deal of the factions could do to be unique in there own way.
It ends up feeling rather flat, Good Advertisement but in the end very shallow.
Argive wrote: All I'm a say is that mierce & inffinity minatures look REAL good. I mean really good... Also thank god for vintage oldhammer.
N4 looking pretty smooth, I agree.
Part of the stuff with GW and "casual" vs. "competitive" play is very frustrating to me. GW has done this amazing job of creating a culture where they can abdicate their responsibility to make balanced or fun rules, and instead have players blame each other for GW's unbalanced mess. If you play CWE into Astartes and get creamed because their units are so much more efficient and powerful for their points cost than yours, your response shouldn't be to get mad at the other player for being WAAC (as long as they didn't cheat, were sportsmanlike, didn't play gotcha with the rules, etc), it should be to take a hard look at the rules and determine whether you're getting what you're paying for. The idea that *players* need to know the rules better than GW, and modulate their own listbuilding to account for GW's unbalanced profiles, or else they're unsportsmanlike is pathetic and scrubby. The idea that players need to wait years for their army to be playable and/or competitive is demeaning; in Infinity, people still win games with MRRF or Acon, which haven't been updated in almost an entire edition, because the power creep is so much less prevalent and there's occasional profiles dropped back into them.
And for those complaining that there's nothing for CWE to do in the lore - that's incredibly shortsighted. The setting needs to revolve around the Imperium in general and Astartes in particular less, and that means allowing room for non-human heroes. Fundamentally, I find orks more relatable than the Imperium. The idea of killing someone because they refuse to follow the right religion, or because they were born with six fingers or limbs that developed differently I find monstrous; conversely, loud music, fast cars, hallucinogenic mushrooms, and starting fights all seem much more fun. GW is dancing around the fact that the Imperium is about as morally justified as the Skaven were in Warhammer Fantasy, but they're sold as a glorious faction of unironic heroes more and more.
The imperium has always been shown and described as the shady self service empire on the brink of collapse, corralling its own populace through fear and forcing them into horrible lifestyles because life is cheap. They do have heroes that fight for the human race, but the setting is primarily from the perspective of the commoner in the imperium where a space marine killing 5 orks in front of them brands them a hero, they don't then see said marine berating the lowly chapter serf for polishing their shoulder plate anti-clockwise and then self flagellating in a chamber for 36 hours because they lost a tooth on a chainsword. The astartes are blind to how they're perceived both as frightening and as heroic simultaneously, but I think more viewpoint from lowly worker X is needed to get some of that darkness back.
Argive wrote:Lets be real here... did space marines really need the quad bike, space bunker drop pod thingy and the support weapon platform not called support weapon platform. Like why? As mentioned its not just about the rules.. and its not just about the models. Its about both CONSTANTLY all of the time for at least a year.. The assumption on their podcasts that "ohh yeah everyone has a space marine army" which is of course nonsense.
Ever since I returned to the 40k the mid 8th edition its been nerf after nerf with practicaly zero new releases for me to enjoy.. No conversions to do.. Options being taken away.. While the most obviosuly OP stuff just being left alone. I guess those CHE kits must have been flying off the shelves.
Anyway.. its very tiresome and only the blind would shamelessly defend this as its certainly not good for the game as a whole. For one Im pretty much retiring from playing 40k for at least a year think and maybe revisit how things look. So already me and a couple more people are not partaking in local club events or tournaments in 40k coz why would we? Maybe when the new CWE codex drops Ill give it another spin and see if I can use some of my favourite units I poured effort into not suck..(real glad I painted those 40 guardians..) So Its probably modelling & painting for me from now on.
All I'm a say is that mierce & inffinity minatures look REAL good. I mean really good... Also thank god for vintage oldhammer.
You've been playing 40k for 2 years give or take and crossing an edition barrier. I regret to tell you this is normal, marines always get a release with a new edition. What isn't normal is that every army got a codex inside of a 2.5 year window which has never happened before. They're turning stuff around faster than they ever have previously and whilst yes the eldar range needs a refresh more than marines need a turret, their time might come with their next codex update. Not every army gets something every year, likewise Eldar have spent a fair amount of time being far more competitively viable than most armies.
Dudeface wrote: Not every army gets something every year, likewise Eldar have spent a fair amount of time being far more competitively viable than most armies.
There can be an ocean of difference between "competitively viable" and "fun to play" - and when your favourite units feel like an anchor around your neck when you use them, your faction probably fails at the latter, even if there is a build that satisfies the former.
GW created a problem here were they cannot get out any more
It is the same problem I ran into while writing optional rules/alterantive rules to be used instead.
people want all their shiny new toyes on the table
there is no way to get them into playing the game if there is not a 1:1 replacement for all possible Space Marine units, no matter how similar they are or if those are just different models for the same battlefield role
if you don't have all the units available, they are not even interested to try
there is hope that with the new Codex and all-Supplement stuff, GW take the chance to clean things up and remove not needed entries but I fear that it won't happen and the situation will get worse
yet, using the SM Codex to play every other Faction in the game is a viable option
there was never much difference between the factions anyway and with that many units/rules the SM now have there is a perfectly fine option for everything out there
kodos wrote: GW created a problem here were they cannot get out any more
It is the same problem I ran into while writing optional rules/alterantive rules to be used instead.
people want all their shiny new toyes on the table
there is no way to get them into playing the game if there is not a 1:1 replacement for all possible Space Marine units, no matter how similar they are or if those are just different models for the same battlefield role
if you don't have all the units available, they are not even interested to try
there is hope that with the new Codex and all-Supplement stuff, GW take the chance to clean things up and remove not needed entries but I fear that it won't happen and the situation will get worse
yet, using the SM Codex to play every other Faction in the game is a viable option
there was never much difference between the factions anyway and with that many units/rules the SM now have there is a perfectly fine option for everything out there
Trust me I am so close to just counts as my chaos space marine army as loyalists for the plain better rules and access to Heresy era terminators... Only thing I a, trying to figure out is what my defiler is going to be. I always loved that crab Walker...
Trust me I am so close to just counts as my chaos space marine army as loyalists for the plain better rules and access to Heresy era terminators... Only thing I a, trying to figure out is what my defiler is going to be. I always loved that crab Walker...
use it as the new SM Bunker (just needs more weapons)
or add in an AdMech Detachment to be used for all kind of Demon-Engines and Kultists
Dudeface wrote: Not every army gets something every year, likewise Eldar have spent a fair amount of time being far more competitively viable than most armies.
There can be an ocean of difference between "competitively viable" and "fun to play" - and when your favourite units feel like an anchor around your neck when you use them, your faction probably fails at the latter, even if there is a build that satisfies the former.
Aye, this, just play CSM dex from 4th edition. It was outright broken centered around 3 units, but it wasn't fun to play much less having a charachter to it that was identifyable or moldable. ( it also was not fun to play against, because yay, i got my extremely nice new unit painted and it's gone because lash into vindicator, etc....)
Also, CWE beeing comptetive is the same thing, every edition they play roulette which unit will work this time, in many ways making certain subaspects or even large swaths of the book basically not workable.
And in regards of actual new releases, well, i guess we don't need to talk about that...
yukishiro1 wrote: I think everyone agrees the whines about space marines are tiresome. As someone guilty of it myself...believe me, I would like nothing better than not to have any reason to whine about space marines.
But when GW keeps Gee-dubbing it up with more and more new, usually overpowered Space Marine releases that continue to give Space Marines every single thing that used to be unique to other factions but better, what do you expect is going to happen? If you don't like Space Marine whines you should be mad at GW, not at the people reacting in a predictable way to GW's treatment of its game.
On a fundamental level, everyone but the most deluded of posters here agrees Space Marines get too much attention and are too powerful. So complaining about the complainers is really missing the point.
For my part I have no problem with posts that criticise this, it just gets a little much to read the forum when it's one post of one or two sentence snark after another. There's been some very good posts on this thread too expressing the sentiment of Marines being to much! Also I've no issue with the OP, even though I'd disagree with their solution. The huge diversity of the Warhammer IP's were a big part of what got me into the game.
But that diversity is not really expressed anywhere in the game, A lot of it is fancy words saying there is without there really being functional ability for a lot of the factions to even play to there own Fluff very well.
Over exaggeration of power fantasy in marines have effectively taken anything a good deal of the factions could do to be unique in there own way.
It ends up feeling rather flat, Good Advertisement but in the end very shallow.
Agreed and this is an issue with the current ruleset I feel, through the game becoming more "board gamey". In my amateur opinion.
yukishiro1 wrote: I think everyone agrees the whines about space marines are tiresome. As someone guilty of it myself...believe me, I would like nothing better than not to have any reason to whine about space marines.
But when GW keeps Gee-dubbing it up with more and more new, usually overpowered Space Marine releases that continue to give Space Marines every single thing that used to be unique to other factions but better, what do you expect is going to happen? If you don't like Space Marine whines you should be mad at GW, not at the people reacting in a predictable way to GW's treatment of its game.
On a fundamental level, everyone but the most deluded of posters here agrees Space Marines get too much attention and are too powerful. So complaining about the complainers is really missing the point.
For my part I have no problem with posts that criticise this, it just gets a little much to read the forum when it's one post of one or two sentence snark after another. There's been some very good posts on this thread too expressing the sentiment of Marines being to much! Also I've no issue with the OP, even though I'd disagree with their solution. The huge diversity of the Warhammer IP's were a big part of what got me into the game.
But that diversity is not really expressed anywhere in the game, A lot of it is fancy words saying there is without there really being functional ability for a lot of the factions to even play to there own Fluff very well.
Over exaggeration of power fantasy in marines have effectively taken anything a good deal of the factions could do to be unique in there own way.
It ends up feeling rather flat, Good Advertisement but in the end very shallow.
Agreed and this is an issue with the current ruleset I feel, through the game becoming more "board gamey". In my amateur opinion.
I mean, all it takes is a cursory glance at what the rules used to be like to see that this has always been an issue. Armies in 2nd felt MUCH more similar to one another than they do right now IMO.
The problem comes from the fact that you've got the following situation:
Faction A's thing is that they're super speedy and fast, so they get to advance and still shoot, and their models move 1-2" more than other factions' equivalents.
Faction B's thing is that they shoot real good, so they get a free shooting attack that hits on 6s when you charge them.
Faction C's thing is that they pray for miracles, so they roll 1-3 dice at the beginning of the turn, and they get to substitute the results of those dice for random rolls they make during the turn.
Faction D's thing is they're real hard to kill, so they get to roll an extra dice before they die, and on a 5+ they don't take the wound.
Faction E's thing is that they're super hyper mega-elite and best at everything so they reroll morale, all their squads get to split into 2 when they deploy them if they want, they get more relics more stratagems more warlord traits and a unique psychic power for every subfaction, they get an extra -1AP on one category of weapons each turn, they get +1A on turns they charged or got charged or heroically intervened or their player yelled 'for the emperor', they get special better versions of every weapon that they share with other factions, they can spend CPs to make all their HQs into upgraded versions, they get to pick custom subfaction traits and still get all the unique stuff from one of the base subfactions, they can double tap rapid fire weapons if they stand still, each one gets a special extra trait on one turn category...
About a year ago GW decided Space Marines were missing something, some...je ne sais quoi, some small element that other factions had. So, they decided, best way to make sure we give them that is to throw ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING AND THE KITCHEN SINK AT THEM and you know, maybe some of it works, maybe some of it doesn't, CERTAINLY we won't be able to balance all of it, they'll have more rules content crammed into them than nearly every other faction combined, but hey, we'll sell models, so who cares?
Part of the change 40k went through going from 7th to 9th (and to some extent fifth to seventh) was a loss of emergent gameplay.
To provide an example of what I mean:
Back in the day (4th/5th) the Rhino and Chimera were different vehicles. Same total armor value, but one was weighted to the front. The Chimera was better armed, though not outrageously so being BS3. The Chimera had 2 more firepoints, but the models inside weren't as good.
So far so good - essentially, there were tiny differences between those vehicles. But the attributes mentioned here combined to result in totally different mechanized playstyles:
Marines relied on their infantry. 3-4 rhinos full of marines moving up the board was scary not because the rhino was AMAZING but because marines within 12" hopping out of a truck was actually pretty intimidating, especially when it's 30 or 40 with meltaguns, etc. Meanwhile, the Chimera's thinner side armor and greater firepoints saw it used more as a maneuverable asset with extra gun, the infantry almost taken as an upgrade for the tank rather than hopping out until they had to. Then you had Fish of Fury Tau, who utilized their skimmers totally differently than either army here despite being mechanized...
Two/three totally different mechanized playstyles, emerging from a couple shuffled armor points and a couple fire points. And skimming.
Now? They're basically identical in form and function, and "mechanized armies" in general play very samey.
And then you can't buy either of them unless you buy a 240$ box filled with 30 year old fething sculpts....
