So, space wolves are getting a new unit that's basicly a redressed riever, it would seem that between this and death company, primaris unique units are indeed coming, but what I'm curious about is if we know what their rules are going to be? and barring that speculation and hopes.

I'm kinda hoping they'll end up being something similer to SOS in that they provide an anti-psyker aura (not as good a one obviously). that could be a niche but benifical unit for space wolves

I speculate that based on the image I've seen the models look like gak.

Probably a 5+++ versus mortal wounds.
Maybe a negative to cast in 6-12".
Possibly "+1 to wound" in close combat or something. Or 6s do 2 damage.

I am predicting SOS style psych out grenades,,, but better ^

 Void__Dragon wrote:
I speculate that based on the image I've seen the models look like gak.

Like any other primaris models.

Why didn't they just make the Reiver rules not-crap?

I hope their rule sucks so no-one misses them when they get dropped in the next codex/supplement, so we can stop the chapter specific units.

I predict the longevity and commitment to rules support that has been the hallmark of modern GW's space marine range of model game token products.

Players can purchase, convert, painstakingly paint and prepare these models with the level of confidence that they'll have rules support for years to come that we've come to expect from good old games workshop.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I hope their rule sucks so no-one misses them when they get dropped in the next codex/supplement, so we can stop the chapter specific units.

"I don't play this army so I hope those who do get screwed over"

BrianDavion wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I hope their rule sucks so no-one misses them when they get dropped in the next codex/supplement, so we can stop the chapter specific units.

"I don't play this army so I hope those who do get screwed over"

lol so true.

I know we disagreed on the other thread @BrianDavion,,, but everywhere else on this forum we seem to be on the same page.

Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

"ohhhh, ha ha ha, you think SWs are unique, HA HA HA"
(ill just write it before you do)

Yes, I do, and many others do.
We can talk about their plethora of unique rules, playstyles, units, wargear, unit compositions, and models. The fact that they were a unique faction since 2nd edition,,,, even before many armies even existed in the game.

Why do people want this game to be as little datasheets as possible ?
Honestly,
If we wanted to, we could play this entire game on 5-6 datasheets and just call it a day. Why not ? it would fix balance.
I would probably stop playing and go play a game with asymmetrical armies,,, you know,,, like the way this game currently exists by having different factions,,, dare I say, even factions with slight differences AND major differences !!! omg !!!

 Type40 wrote:
Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

Because you don't need every unit to have a unique datasheet for the smallest difference for the game to be unique and interesting?

The main reason people want it to go away is it isn't actually unique, as far as rules go.

Unique aesthetic? Sure, go wild. Wulfen as VVs are a unique aesthetic.

Unique rules/playstyle? Hold on now. What playstyle do wolves have that isn't just duplicated/copied from another army? Even another SM army? SM bloat is so real that not only do they do everything the other NPC factions do, but now they are stepping on each other's toes as well!

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

Because you don't need every unit to have a unique datasheet for the smallest difference for the game to be unique and interesting?

Right, so why not play eldar guardians using the tactical marine datasheet ?
You know, when a datasheet has unique rules, unique wargear, unique unit composition, unique unit size and the only thing that is the same is most of the stateline... are we really talking about "the smallest difference for the game" lol

BrianDavion wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I hope their rule sucks so no-one misses them when they get dropped in the next codex/supplement, so we can stop the chapter specific units.

"I don't play this army so I hope those who do get screwed over"

yeah, that is what 8th tought me. A anti psyker specific unit that is optimal to just take in a regular army, is not something I would like to see. I wish the hounds to be +4pts comparing to reavers with infiltration and a +6sv vs psychic power caused mortal wounds.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

Because you don't need every unit to have a unique datasheet for the smallest difference for the game to be unique and interesting?

Exactly. I think there are some situations where unique rules help differentiate units and armies but I think wherever the line of demarcation is, GW stepped way over it a long time ago. SW are a good example, I think. There are some things that I think the legitimately do need in order to show their unique traits and organisation. Blood Claws, for example. Or Thunderwolf Cavalry (though given how stupid they look I wouldn't be too bothered if they ceased to exist). But do they need to get their own super-special versions of weapons only they can use? Probably not. Frost Claws could just as easily be represented by Lightning Claws and the Frost Axe could just be a Power Axe. Yes, I know they have slightly different rules, but they don't need them.

The same goes for a lot of sub-factions nowadays IMO. We never used to have unique rules for Saim Hann, for example, but players could create characterful armies through which units they selected and what tactics they employed. That requires good internal balance, though, and GW seems to find it easier to just tack a bunch of special rules onto every unit and sub-faction in the game instead.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

Because you don't need every unit to have a unique datasheet for the smallest difference for the game to be unique and interesting?

Who cares about other armies in the first place. If SW were my army I would be very much in favour of them having as unique and many options as possible. the more options, the higher chance that some of them are actualy worth taking . If all options are more or less, or even just the same, and you get unlucky then suddenly you may end up with multiple factions being unfun or inferior to other factions, just because someone decided to make everthing uniform and kind of a the same. It is stupid to want something like that for ones own army or faction.

Slipspace wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

Because you don't need every unit to have a unique datasheet for the smallest difference for the game to be unique and interesting?

Exactly. I think there are some situations where unique rules help differentiate units and armies but I think wherever the line of demarcation is, GW stepped way over it a long time ago. SW are a good example, I think. There are some things that I think the legitimately do need in order to show their unique traits and organisation. Blood Claws, for example. Or Thunderwolf Cavalry (though given how stupid they look I wouldn't be too bothered if they ceased to exist). But do they need to get their own super-special versions of weapons only they can use? Probably not. Frost Claws could just as easily be represented by Lightning Claws and the Frost Axe could just be a Power Axe. Yes, I know they have slightly different rules, but they don't need them.

The same goes for a lot of sub-factions nowadays IMO. We never used to have unique rules for Saim Hann, for example, but players could create characterful armies through which units they selected and what tactics they employed. That requires good internal balance, though, and GW seems to find it easier to just tack a bunch of special rules onto every unit and sub-faction in the game instead.

Again, vanillafying the game seems a little counterintuitive.
Again, we do not NEED more then 5-6 datasheets all together, we can represent everything in the game with 5 or 6 datasheets and leave "painting and imagination" to fill in the fluff. But that is only if we are talking about what we NEED to make the game work.

What we NEED to make a working game is not what makes an interesting, customizable and unique feeling game. variance, options and unique access make the game interesting and is exactly what appeals to so many different players.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Some people want to play SWs not SMs and some people want that choice to make a difference on the tabletop.

If they wanted to take lightning claws over frost claws,,, they would have taken the lightning claws. But some players want their choices to mean something.

What we NEED is a rewritten game from the ground up that can properly model the difference between factions (the difference between a Marine and an Ork goes beyond power armor and an extra AP on certain turns).

But failing that I would probably have more fun riffing narrative off of 5-6 datasheets that are balanced rather than 1e10 or whatever it is, out of which like 5 or 6 are the only useful ones anyways.

If this was any of the 997 non pandered to Chapters it would be a lore footnote in the supplement.

But of course they need to bloat the Wolves even more. Except similar for the other 2 super special children.

I don't understand the pandared thing. SW are an IP GW created, there is a market for the models of the faction. So of course GW is making stuff for an army they know they will sell.

Ork or eldar pirates seem to be a thing in w40k lore too, but GW is not going to make whole armies of them, because they don't know if the new factions would sell well enough.

It is like being angry that BA gets all the specific units or ultramarines have a bucket of special characters.

The problem with the SM pandering is it is only escapable if GW cares.

Making more kits for SM and giving more stuff to SM will inevitably make SM sell better, which gives more kits and stuff to SM because they are sure they sell, so it makes them sell better...

Type40 wrote:Right, so why not play eldar guardians using the tactical marine datasheet ?

Reductio ad absurdum, again.

Space Wolves are Space Marines with a few flavour touches. They're not a whole bloody different race.

Otherwise, explain 30k.

You know, when a datasheet has unique rules, unique wargear, unique unit composition, unique unit size and the only thing that is the same is most of the stateline... are we really talking about "the smallest difference for the game" lol

Oh, how could I forget! Wolf Lords are totally different to Captains! Let's see... oh, they don't have an Iron Halo, they have... something that does exactly the same thing.

I'd be more receptive to your point if you weren't so blatantly grasping at straws and excusing things like I've just mentioned.

Karol wrote:Who cares about other armies in the first place. If SW were my army I would be very much in favour of them having as unique and many options as possible.

There's a word for that - seflishness.

If everyone wants "their" army getting all the good stuff without looking at the bigger picture, then the army with the most fans/players would be the strongest.

Options are useless without a reason for WHY they exist, beyond "I want OPTIONS". If people want uniqueness and flavour, what's stopping you saying "well, in the lore, the Bladeguard Vets of my Chapter actually function as part of the Chaplaincy and, in the case of the death of the commander, can take over as battlefield commanders in their own right!" - without needing to make rules for it?

It's why for the Hounds of Morkai, I think they should be have been a lore addition, such as "Space Wolves, when faced with psychic threats, often field specialised Reiver Squads known as Hounds of Morkai in order to deal with these foul sorcerers." and just left at that.

 Type40 wrote:


If they wanted to take lightning claws over frost claws,,, they would have taken the lightning claws. But some players want their choices to mean something.

Plus for all the people that do not paint their models at all, telling them that the army difference can come from different ways of painting the models is not a very enticing thing.

Different rules sets on the other hand, or even different ways of game play can entice people to play, and what is important to GW, buy new models.

No one was buying 15 centurions for their sm army up until the 2.0 sm codex droped with its supplements.

Karol wrote:
I don't understand the pandared thing. SW are an IP GW created, there is a market for the models of the faction. So of course GW is making stuff for an army they know they will sell.

Ork or eldar pirates seem to be a thing in w40k lore too, but GW is not going to make whole armies of them, because they don't know if the new factions would sell well enough. .

They don't know how they will sell because they are too busy making new.....Wolves - thanks for the confirmation

They said they would not sell Sisters and wierdly when they managed to squeeze in a realse between endless Marines - they sold...

Wierd that if you don't make stuff it does not sell.

Same with the Other Chapters -would it be nice to have a unit or two for at least the vastly important First Founding Chapters and their successors (again something the Wolves did not have) bt no - lets have more Wolves - cos Wolves.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Type40 wrote:Right, so why not play eldar guardians using the tactical marine datasheet ?

Reductio ad absurdum, again.

Space Wolves are Space Marines with a few flavour touches. They're not a whole bloody different race.

Otherwise, explain 30k.

You know, when a datasheet has unique rules, unique wargear, unique unit composition, unique unit size and the only thing that is the same is most of the stateline... are we really talking about "the smallest difference for the game" lol

Oh, how could I forget! Wolf Lords are totally different to Captains! Let's see... oh, they don't have an Iron Halo, they have... something that does exactly the same thing.

I'd be more receptive to your point if you weren't so blatantly grasping at straws and excusing things like I've just mentioned.

Karol wrote:Who cares about other armies in the first place. If SW were my army I would be very much in favour of them having as unique and many options as possible.

There's a word for that - seflishness.

If everyone wants "their" army getting all the good stuff without looking at the bigger picture, then the army with the most fans/players would be the strongest.

Options are useless without a reason for WHY they exist, beyond "I want OPTIONS". If people want uniqueness and flavour, what's stopping you saying "well, in the lore, the Bladeguard Vets of my Chapter actually function as part of the Chaplaincy and, in the case of the death of the commander, can take over as battlefield commanders in their own right!" - without needing to make rules for it?

It's why for the Hounds of Morkai, I think they should be have been a lore addition, such as "Space Wolves, when faced with psychic threats, often field specialised Reiver Squads known as Hounds of Morkai in order to deal with these foul sorcerers." and just left at that.

Exalted for excellence and accuracy

 Mr Morden wrote:

Karol wrote:
I don't understand the pandared thing. SW are an IP GW created, there is a market for the models of the faction. So of course GW is making stuff for an army they know they will sell.

Ork or eldar pirates seem to be a thing in w40k lore too, but GW is not going to make whole armies of them, because they don't know if the new factions would sell well enough. .

They don't know how they will sell because they are too busy making new.....Wolves - thanks for the confirmation

They said they would not sell Sisters and wierdly when they managed to squeeze in a realse between endless Marines - they sold...

Wierd that if you don't make stuff it does not sell.

Same with the Other Chapters -would it be nice to have a unit or two for at least the vastly important First Founding Chapters and their successors (again something the Wolves did not have) bt no - lets have more Wolves - cos Wolves.

I dunno, wolves have existed since 2nd edition as a unique army ,,,, they have been developing this unique army for a long time lol. different colours of regular SM are just that. some one sounds a bit jelous here XD.

Who cares if they have been developed since 2nd? That doesn't actually mean anything.

The real question is what they offer to Imperial players that is a fundamental playstyle difference from any other Imperial faction.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Type40 wrote:Right, so why not play eldar guardians using the tactical marine datasheet ?

Reductio ad absurdum, again.

Space Wolves are Space Marines with a few flavour touches. They're not a whole bloody different race.

Otherwise, explain 30k.

You know, when a datasheet has unique rules, unique wargear, unique unit composition, unique unit size and the only thing that is the same is most of the stateline... are we really talking about "the smallest difference for the game" lol

Oh, how could I forget! Wolf Lords are totally different to Captains! Let's see... oh, they don't have an Iron Halo, they have... something that does exactly the same thing.

I'd be more receptive to your point if you weren't so blatantly grasping at straws and excusing things like I've just mentioned.

Karol wrote:Who cares about other armies in the first place. If SW were my army I would be very much in favour of them having as unique and many options as possible.

There's a word for that - seflishness.

If everyone wants "their" army getting all the good stuff without looking at the bigger picture, then the army with the most fans/players would be the strongest.

Options are useless without a reason for WHY they exist, beyond "I want OPTIONS". If people want uniqueness and flavour, what's stopping you saying "well, in the lore, the Bladeguard Vets of my Chapter actually function as part of the Chaplaincy and, in the case of the death of the commander, can take over as battlefield commanders in their own right!" - without needing to make rules for it?

It's why for the Hounds of Morkai, I think they should be have been a lore addition, such as "Space Wolves, when faced with psychic threats, often field specialised Reiver Squads known as Hounds of Morkai in order to deal with these foul sorcerers." and just left at that.

LOL

You deliberately only refrence the captain... which BTW didnt even have a keyword addition in the new main marine dex lol... Yes if you focus on the one datasheet that was functionally the same, sure it sounds like you are right.

p.s. spacewolves have different genetics then normal marines in the lore,,, doesnt that make them a kind of WHOLE DIFFERENT BLOODY RACE .... and if you dont think different genetics is enough to make them a WHOLE DIFFERENT BLOODY RACE... then lets make gaurdsman use the tactical marine datasheets ? they are the same race after all ?
or where do you like the draw that line ?

There are no grasping at straws here. You have picked one example "the space marine captain" and are somehow convinced the fact that this one datasheet is exactly the same functionally that every other example of exceptions, unit composition differences, rules differences, wargear differences, and set of unique models do not count. quite frankly its getting ridiculous... how about you talk about something other then the space marine captain like we are XD >?

 Type40 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Type40 wrote:Right, so why not play eldar guardians using the tactical marine datasheet ?

Reductio ad absurdum, again.

Space Wolves are Space Marines with a few flavour touches. They're not a whole bloody different race.

Otherwise, explain 30k.

You know, when a datasheet has unique rules, unique wargear, unique unit composition, unique unit size and the only thing that is the same is most of the stateline... are we really talking about "the smallest difference for the game" lol

Oh, how could I forget! Wolf Lords are totally different to Captains! Let's see... oh, they don't have an Iron Halo, they have... something that does exactly the same thing.

I'd be more receptive to your point if you weren't so blatantly grasping at straws and excusing things like I've just mentioned.

Karol wrote:Who cares about other armies in the first place. If SW were my army I would be very much in favour of them having as unique and many options as possible.

There's a word for that - seflishness.

If everyone wants "their" army getting all the good stuff without looking at the bigger picture, then the army with the most fans/players would be the strongest.

Options are useless without a reason for WHY they exist, beyond "I want OPTIONS". If people want uniqueness and flavour, what's stopping you saying "well, in the lore, the Bladeguard Vets of my Chapter actually function as part of the Chaplaincy and, in the case of the death of the commander, can take over as battlefield commanders in their own right!" - without needing to make rules for it?

It's why for the Hounds of Morkai, I think they should be have been a lore addition, such as "Space Wolves, when faced with psychic threats, often field specialised Reiver Squads known as Hounds of Morkai in order to deal with these foul sorcerers." and just left at that.

LOL

You deliberately only refrence the captain... which BTW didnt even have a keyword addition in the new main marine dex lol... Yes if you focus on the one datasheet that was functionally the same, sure it sounds like you are right.

p.s. spacewolves have different genetics then normal marines in the lore,,, doesnt that make them a kind of WHOLE DIFFERENT BLOODY RACE .... and if you dont think different genetics is enough to make them a WHOLE DIFFERENT BLOODY RACE... then lets make gaurdsman use the tactical marine datasheets ? they are the same race after all ?
or where do you like the draw that line ?

There are no grasping at straws here. You have picked one example "the space marine captain" and are somehow convinced the fact that this one datasheet is exactly the same functionally that every other example of exceptions, unit composition differences, rules differences, wargear differences, and set of unique models do not count. quite frankly its getting ridiculous... how about you talk about something other then the space marine captain like we are XD >?

What do those differences actually change about the faction? What playstyle difference is there between, say, SW and BA/BT/fightyMarine?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Who cares if they have been developed since 2nd? That doesn't actually mean anything.

The real question is what they offer to Imperial players that is a fundamental playstyle difference from any other Imperial faction.

Different set of rules, unique models, wargear, unique unit compositions, unique unit sizes, some unique unit stats, and unique unit rules. With some overlap.
Soooo... the same differences that CSM has with SMs.

 Type40 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Who cares if they have been developed since 2nd? That doesn't actually mean anything.

The real question is what they offer to Imperial players that is a fundamental playstyle difference from any other Imperial faction.

Different set of rules, unique models, wargear, unique unit compositions, unique unit sizes, some unique unit stats, and unique unit rules. With some overlap.
Soooo... the same differences that CSM has with SMs.

Well the difference between CSM and SM is the difference between a villain and a hero.

What actual playstyle differences are there? Those are just rule differences. What impact do they have?

What do those differences actually change about the faction? What playstyle difference is there between, say, SW and BA/BT/fightyMarine?

um well a different set of rules, unique models, wargear, unique unit compositions, unique unit sizes, some unique unit stats, and unique unit rules kind of makes it a different army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I am not sure how you don't think having different everything but some base statelines means they play the same ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
minus vanila primaris (because yes, an entire primaris army is an entire primaris army no mater how you look at it)

p.s. spacewolves have different genetics then normal marines in the lore,,, doesnt that make them a kind of WHOLE DIFFERENT BLOODY RACE .... and if you dont think different genetics is enough to make them a WHOLE DIFFERENT BLOODY RACE... then lets make gaurdsman use the tactical marine datasheets ? they are the same race after all ?
or where do you like the draw that line ?

There are no grasping at straws here. You have picked one example "the space marine captain" and are somehow convinced the fact that this one datasheet is exactly the same functionally that every other example of exceptions, unit composition differences, rules differences, wargear differences, and set of unique models do not count. quite frankly its getting ridiculous... how about you talk about something other then the space marine captain like we are XD >?

Wow what a lot of fething nonsese!

Space Wolves are Marines - why is that so hard for you to accept! Have you even read the lore?

Can you build a bigger strawman than this ill informed BS

then lets make gaurdsman use the tactical marine datasheets

 Type40 wrote:

What do those differences actually change about the faction? What playstyle difference is there between, say, SW and BA/BT/fightyMarine?

um well a different set of rules, unique models, wargear, unique unit compositions, unique unit sizes, some unique unit stats, and unique unit rules kind of makes it a different army.

How, though? In what way does it make it function differently.on the tabletop?

If I am fighting BA/BT/fighty regular SM as an opponent, what is there that is significantly different between them and wolves? They're still fighty marines with fighty units but your Vanguard Veterans have more hair and call themselves Wulfen. I still melt if they touch me.

Explain to me how they are different, not in terms of rules (because I get that) but in terms of playstyle.

 Mr Morden wrote:

p.s. spacewolves have different genetics then normal marines in the lore,,, doesnt that make them a kind of WHOLE DIFFERENT BLOODY RACE .... and if you dont think different genetics is enough to make them a WHOLE DIFFERENT BLOODY RACE... then lets make gaurdsman use the tactical marine datasheets ? they are the same race after all ?
or where do you like the draw that line ?

There are no grasping at straws here. You have picked one example "the space marine captain" and are somehow convinced the fact that this one datasheet is exactly the same functionally that every other example of exceptions, unit composition differences, rules differences, wargear differences, and set of unique models do not count. quite frankly its getting ridiculous... how about you talk about something other then the space marine captain like we are XD >?

Wow what a lot of fething nonsese!

Space Wolves are Marines - why is that so hard for you to accept! Have you even read the lore?

Yes I have,
Clearly more of the lore then you have. SWs are made from fenerisians who have already gone through genetic modifications. Magnus told his own thousand sons in 30k that a fenerisian could live on fenris but a TS wouldnt even be able to survive living there... that is right out of the books.
but w/e, lore arguments aside... they have been a unique army in the game since 2nd edition,,, is it really so hard for you to understand that some people do not want their unique faction to get lumped into some other army ?
Is it really so hard for you to see the different sets of rules, models, and units compositions, wargear and etc make this a different faction lol.

Oh they are a different faction alright. But the question is: why should they stay that way if it is unhealthy for the game? What do they offer as a different playstyle that couldn't be replicated by folding then in as Marines?

Factions should have good reasons to exist. Otherwise, let's make a Craftworld Altansar codex. I am sure we could make up a whole new set of wargear, units, datasheets, and whatever else right here on the spot

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

What do those differences actually change about the faction? What playstyle difference is there between, say, SW and BA/BT/fightyMarine?

um well a different set of rules, unique models, wargear, unique unit compositions, unique unit sizes, some unique unit stats, and unique unit rules kind of makes it a different army.

How, though? In what way does it make it function differently.on the tabletop?

If I am fighting BA/BT/fighty regular SM as an opponent, what is there that is significantly different between them and wolves? They're still fighty marines with fighty units but your Vanguard Veterans have more hair and call themselves Wulfen. I still melt if they touch me.

Explain to me how they are different, not in terms of rules (because I get that) but in terms of playstyle.

lol,, ya and the same when my horde of fighty unit from any faction touch you lol ... what do you want me to say ... they are clearly the same because they are good at melee ? lol ... it doesnt mater that these ones get 2 attacks on the charge and carry different weapons, or that these ones can advance and charge and have different stats / weapons... or that these ones can do XYZ ...

so, again, are you arguing we should have

1. Melee datasheet
2. shooty datasheet
3. heavy tank datasheet
4. light tank transport datasheet
5. walker datasheet

?

whats the difference between space marine scouts and eldar rangers !!! OMG WHY DO THEY NOT JUST ROLL THEM INTO ONE BOOK ,,, I can't believe they would dare have some overlap, they are all just snipers that MW on 6s !!!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Oh they are a different faction alright. But the question is: why should they stay that way if it is unhealthy for the game? What do they offer as a different playstyle that couldn't be replicated by folding then in as Marines?

Factions should have good reasons to exist. Otherwise, let's make a Craftworld Altansar codex. I am sure we could make up a whole new set of wargear, units, datasheets, and whatever else right here on the spot

how is SWs remaining their own faction unhealthy for the game ?
that is a ridiculous notion... there is literally no difference now then there was 3 month ago except now SWs players need to buy 2 books and decipher their rules being spread out to 6 sections of 2 books.
If anything this is far worse then before.

People get into this hobby because the asthetics and playstyles of different armies appeal to them... does it really confuse you that some people want their choices to mean something ? they don't want to play symetrical game where no mater what choices they make they are playing the same faction ? is that really so hard for you to comprehend >?
Is it really so hard to understand how the uniqueness and significance of choice is what sells non-marine factions to players ?

Is it really so hard for you to see that these factions play different ,,, due to the fact that they have different rules, unique modles/units(with unique stats) , different wargear, unit sizes, and unique unit rules... are you really going to say they are "functionally the same on the tabletop because they are just 'fighty' like everything else that is fgihty" lol... do you really not understand the deliberate lack of nuance you have by stating that XD.

 Type40 wrote:
lol,, ya and the same when my horde of fighty unit from any faction touch you lol ... what do you want me to say ... they are clearly the same because they are good at melee ? lol ... it doesnt mater that these ones get 2 attacks on the charge and carry different weapons, or that these ones can advance and charge and have different stats / weapons... or that these ones can do XYZ ...

so, again, are you arguing we should have

1. Melee datasheet
2. shooty datasheet
3. heavy tank datasheet
4. light tank transport datasheet
5. walker datasheet

?

whats the difference between space marine scouts and eldar rangers !!! OMG WHY DO THEY NOT JUST ROLL THEM INTO ONE BOOK ,,, I can't believe they would dare have some overlap, they are all just snipers that MW on 6s !!!

Hey man, you said it not me. I think the game would be healthier if we only differentiated factions based on what was different about them, rather than the simple fact that they EXIST.

And no, it's not the same when a fighty unit from any faction touches me. I play against genestealers fundamentally differently than I play against wytches. The reason is that wytches typically ride in a tank and are very hard to kill in melee comparatively due to their better invuln, but are typically vulnerable to shooting. Furthermore, they aren't as fast and don't have a Fight Twice. So I can parry the wytches with an expendable unit (if I can't KO their transport) and then shoot them to death. Genestealers are less vulnerable to shooting and are faster, but don't have a tank to protect them, so I can focus my "lesser" weapons on them while knocking out harder targets with the larger weapons. I can't parry the genestealers as well typically due to greater speed, larger squad size, and a Fight Twice stratagem that lets them get a bunch of extra movement in the fight phase. When Genestealers make it to me, they move dramatically up in my priority list (if they weren't high already) while wytches remain fairly low due to different damage output - though they are a nuisance that can tie up my shooting units with their net...
I mean really, the difference between wytches and GS couldn't be starker...

Wulfen? I treat them the same as BT vanguard vets with TH/SS and the onus is on you to explain how they're different.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Type40 wrote:
People get into this hobby because the asthetics and playstyles of different armies appeal to them... does it really confuse you that some people want their choices to mean something ? they don't want to play symetrical game where no mater what choices they make they are playing the same faction ? is that really so hard for you to comprehend >?

You said they get into the hobby for different aesthetics and playstyles.

I'm asking you to demonstrate the second for the wolves - how is the playstyle different?

And I think people's choices should mean something ON THE TABLETOP. Choices during listbuilding should be less meaningful. Otherwise let's play a CCG.

Because people want less marines. Not more. It's simple enough to comprehend.

 Type40 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

p.s. spacewolves have different genetics then normal marines in the lore,,, doesnt that make them a kind of WHOLE DIFFERENT BLOODY RACE .... and if you dont think different genetics is enough to make them a WHOLE DIFFERENT BLOODY RACE... then lets make gaurdsman use the tactical marine datasheets ? they are the same race after all ?
or where do you like the draw that line ?

There are no grasping at straws here. You have picked one example "the space marine captain" and are somehow convinced the fact that this one datasheet is exactly the same functionally that every other example of exceptions, unit composition differences, rules differences, wargear differences, and set of unique models do not count. quite frankly its getting ridiculous... how about you talk about something other then the space marine captain like we are XD >?

Wow what a lot of fething nonsese!

Space Wolves are Marines - why is that so hard for you to accept! Have you even read the lore?

Yes I have,
Clearly more of the lore then you have. SWs are made from fenerisians who have already gone through genetic modifications. Magnus told his own thousand sons in 30k that a fenerisian could live on fenris but a TS wouldnt even be able to survive living there... that is right out of the books.
but w/e, lore arguments aside... they have been a unique army in the game since 2nd edition,,, is it really so hard for you to understand that some people do not want their unique faction to get lumped into some other army ?
Is it really so hard for you to see the different sets of rules, models, and units compositions, wargear and etc make this a different faction lol.

So cite where it states they are different to other Marines in terms of anything other than recruiting from one specfic genetic stock?

Are they or are they not Marines?

Blood Angels remold each aspirant - are they not Marines

Is a Human guardsman a Marine? No - thats the stupid BS comparision YOU made.

I have a Space Wolf army - I don't have all the flandersised crap of recent years.

Is it really so hard for you to realise that this pandering no stop bloat of one specific sub sub faction harms the chnaces of anyone else getting stuff - cos Wolves.

whats the difference between space marine scouts and eldar rangers !!! OMG WHY DO THEY NOT JUST ROLL THEM INTO ONE BOOK ,,, I can't believe they would dare have some overlap, they are all just snipers that MW on 6s !!!

oH god - this BS again Seriously read your posts before you type.

Marines and Eldar are different fething races - get it through your head that Space Wolves and Imperial Fists or Black Dragons are part of the same enhanced human race.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
lol,, ya and the same when my horde of fighty unit from any faction touch you lol ... what do you want me to say ... they are clearly the same because they are good at melee ? lol ... it doesnt mater that these ones get 2 attacks on the charge and carry different weapons, or that these ones can advance and charge and have different stats / weapons... or that these ones can do XYZ ...

so, again, are you arguing we should have

1. Melee datasheet
2. shooty datasheet
3. heavy tank datasheet
4. light tank transport datasheet
5. walker datasheet

?

whats the difference between space marine scouts and eldar rangers !!! OMG WHY DO THEY NOT JUST ROLL THEM INTO ONE BOOK ,,, I can't believe they would dare have some overlap, they are all just snipers that MW on 6s !!!

Hey man, you said it not me. I think the game would be healthier if we only differentiated factions based on what was different about them, rather than the simple fact that they EXIST.

And no, it's not the same when a fighty unit from any faction touches me. I play against genestealers fundamentally differently than I play against wytches. The reason is that wytches typically ride in a tank and are very hard to kill in melee comparatively due to their better invuln, but are typically vulnerable to shooting. So I can parry the wytches with an expendable unit (if I can't KO their transport) and then shoot them to death. Genestealers are less vulnerable to shooting and are faster, but don't have a tank to protect them, so I can focus my "lesser" weapons on them while knocking out harder targets with the larger weapons.

Wulfen? I treat them the same as BT vanguard vets with TH/SS and the onus is on you to explain how they're different.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Type40 wrote:
People get into this hobby because the asthetics and playstyles of different armies appeal to them... does it really confuse you that some people want their choices to mean something ? they don't want to play symetrical game where no mater what choices they make they are playing the same faction ? is that really so hard for you to comprehend >?

You said they get into the hobby for different aesthetics and playstyles.

I'm asking you to demonstrate the second for the wolves - how is the playstyle different?

And I think people's choices should mean something ON THE TABLETOP. Choices during listbuilding should be less meaningful. Otherwise let's play a CCG.

HOLY gak YOUR BT VANGAURD VETS CAN FIGHT WHEN THEY ARE KILLED ? dammmmmnnnnnnnn how did you figure out that hack .

so when are we going to get the generic sniper datasheet ? when are we rolling the eldar rangers and the SM scouts into one datasheet ? that's how we want it right ?

I can't wait to roll together my thunderwolf cavalry with melee bikers.

Oh and how about those custodes getting rolled intogether with heavy intecessors XD lol .

Might as well arbitrarily pick what datasheets should be rolled together based on how you , some guy on the internet, treats them when you are battling against them lol.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Because people want less marines. Not more. It's simple enough to comprehend.

I don't want vanilla SM stuff either
I do like getting SW stuff though.
Especially when SWs were there own faction lol.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
There's a word for that - seflishness.

If everyone wants "their" army getting all the good stuff without looking at the bigger picture, then the army with the most fans/players would be the strongest.

Karol has a point IMHO. He didn't say: give me the best options ever, he said give me unique options.

Why even bother with supplements if the SM chapters were basically the same thing?

I also think that having 200 datasheets available is the opposite of internal balance, that's why chapters should have their 40-50 datasheets, with just a few ones in common with other chapters. Worked very well in the past, the whole codex+supplement thing was unnecessary, actually very annoying and doesn't provide any benefit for the players.

so when are we going to get the generic sniper datasheet ? when are we rolling the eldar rangers and the SM scouts into one datasheet ? that's how we want it right ?

Seriously just stop - your embarssing yourself with your hysterical nonsense.

 Type40 wrote:
HOLY gak YOUR BT VANGAURD VETS CAN FIGHT WHEN THEY ARE KILLED ? dammmmmnnnnnnnn how did you figure out that hack

No, but at the same time, that rule doesn't change the playstyle of the faction. Does it? If so, please tell me. Like I've been asking you to. Several times.

 Type40 wrote:
so when are we going to get the generic sniper datasheet ? when are we rolling the eldar rangers and the SM scouts into one datasheet ? that's how we want it right ?

Strawmen and slippery slope fallacy all in one. I'm just going to stop answering strawman fallacies. (That said, eldar rangers and SM scouts are actually really similar. If they were both on the same team I'd say "roll 'em together" in a heartbeat).

 Type40 wrote:
I can't wait to roll together my thunderwolf cavalry with melee bikers.

Exactly, now you're getting it.

 Type40 wrote:
Oh and how about those custodes getting rolled intogether with heavy intecessors XD lol

Custodes are a melee unit and heavy intercessors are not. If you'd said Saggitarum Guard, I'd say now you're getting it. Delete Heavy Intercessors and SM players can just take Saggitarum Guard if they want that.

 Type40 wrote:
Might as well arbitrarily pick what datasheets should be rolled together based on how you , some guy on the internet, treats them when you are battling against them lol.

No, not what I said. I said "If they can be demonstrated to have different playstyle differences, then keep them separate." Just waiting on an explanation of how they play differently. Any time now. *checks watch*

be happy, fwiw they could've squatted your faction far more readily if rules and units were the measurement as you demand, then my R&H

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
HOLY gak YOUR BT VANGAURD VETS CAN FIGHT WHEN THEY ARE KILLED ? dammmmmnnnnnnnn how did you figure out that hack

No, but at the same time, that rule doesn't change the playstyle of the faction. Does it? If so, please tell me. Like I've been asking you to. Several times.

 Type40 wrote:
so when are we going to get the generic sniper datasheet ? when are we rolling the eldar rangers and the SM scouts into one datasheet ? that's how we want it right ?

Strawmen and slippery slope fallacy all in one. I'm just going to stop answering strawman fallacies. (That said, eldar rangers and SM scouts are actually really similar. If they were both on the same team I'd say "roll 'em together" in a heartbeat).

 Type40 wrote:
I can't wait to roll together my thunderwolf cavalry with melee bikers.

Exactly, now you're getting it.

 Type40 wrote:
Oh and how about those custodes getting rolled intogether with heavy intecessors XD lol

Custodes are a melee unit and heavy intercessors are not. If you'd said Saggitarum Guard, I'd say now you're getting it. Delete Heavy Intercessors and SM players can just take Saggitarum Guard if they want that.

 Type40 wrote:
Might as well arbitrarily pick what datasheets should be rolled together based on how you , some guy on the internet, treats them when you are battling against them lol.

No, not what I said. I said "If they can be demonstrated to have different playstyle differences, then keep them separate." Just waiting on an explanation of how they play differently. Any time now. *checks watch*

1. If you really can't understand that there are tactical differences to consider when deciding whether or not to charge a unit or enter into melee with a unit that can fight back when it dies v.s. fighting a unit that can't,,,, honestly you can't be very good at this game.

2. It isn't a strawman, there are less differences between those two datasheets then BT Vangaurd and Wulfen LOL ... you can't just dismiss how absurd your argument would be if applied globally across each faction XD.

3. fine sggitarum gaurd,,, you go tell those custodes players that lol XD.

4. uhhhhh..... really ? lol are wolves the same "race" as bikes now XD. Is this your new argument ?

5. just because you can't seem to understand how they are different, despite having different rules, models (and stats), unit sizes, unit compositions, unique wargear, and unique unit rules... doesn't mean they arnt different, it just means you are being willfully ignorant and are ignoring nuances in game play because "fighty unit is fighty and shooty unit is shooty" lol

 Type40 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

Because you don't need every unit to have a unique datasheet for the smallest difference for the game to be unique and interesting?

Right, so why not play eldar guardians using the tactical marine datasheet ?
You know, when a datasheet has unique rules, unique wargear, unique unit composition, unique unit size and the only thing that is the same is most of the stateline... are we really talking about "the smallest difference for the game" lol

I do that. Eldar rules are depressing at this point, so I run Ultramarines rules when I run them against people playing marines.

Avatar = Guilliman
Dire Avengers = Assault Bolter Intercessors
Striking Scorpions = Incursors
Swooping Hawks = Bolter Incursors
Fire Dragons = Eradicators
Rangers = Eliminators

etc.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

Because you don't need every unit to have a unique datasheet for the smallest difference for the game to be unique and interesting?

Right, so why not play eldar guardians using the tactical marine datasheet ?
You know, when a datasheet has unique rules, unique wargear, unique unit composition, unique unit size and the only thing that is the same is most of the stateline... are we really talking about "the smallest difference for the game" lol

I do that. Eldar rules are depressing at this point, so I run Ultramarines rules when I run them against people playing marines.

I think this is just the sad state that I hope this game avoids in the future.

Honestly, I am sorry you have to do this, I think that if this becomes the norm, the game has failed and has become pretty boring... if I wanted to paly a symetrical board game I would have chosen a symetrical board game.

 Type40 wrote:
1. If you really can't understand that there are tactical differences to consider when deciding whether or not to charge a unit or enter into melee with a unit that can fight back when it dies v.s. fighting a unit that can't,,,, honestly you can't be very good at this game.

If I am entering melee with BT VV, it is either:
1) to stop them from charging next turn (which means I am not killing them in melee, so Wulfen wouldn't get to strike back either)
or
2) because I have no other option (in which case I'll charge the Wulfen anyways, because I have no other option...)
VV with a 2+/4++ are not good targets for another melee unit to charge, especially not if a judicator is nearby. Neither are wulfen.

 Type40 wrote:
2. It isn't a strawman, there are less differences between those two datasheets then BT Vangaurd and Wulfen LOL ... you can't just dismiss how absurd your argument would be if applied globally across each faction XD.

I don't think it's absurd. Historicals do this all the time. The difference between a Russian sniper and a German sniper in most WWII games isn't huge. I'd be fine folding them together (as I mentioned) if GW's game structure permitted different "teams" to share datasheets. I said that in the very post you quoted.

 Type40 wrote:
3. fine sggitarum gaurd,,, you go tell those custodes players that lol XD.

What would they care that Heavy Intercessors are being deleted?

 Type40 wrote:
4. uhhhhh..... really ? lol are wolves the same "race" as bikes now XD. Is this your new argument ?

No? I don't see how that is relevant to the fact that the rules are functionally identical (fighty SM riding a thing and go fast brrrr)

 Type40 wrote:
5. just because you can't seem to understand how they are different, despite having different rules, models (and stats), unit sizes, unit compositions, unique wargear, and unique unit rules... doesn't mean they arnt different, it just means you are being willfully ignorant and are ignoring nuances in game play because "fighty unit is fighty and shooty unit is shooty" lol

Then explain to me how they are different - and I mean in function, not in form. I can see how they are different in form, but I'd like to know what they functionally do differently - or, to rephrase:
How is their playstyle different?

Like I've asked what, eight times now?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
1. If you really can't understand that there are tactical differences to consider when deciding whether or not to charge a unit or enter into melee with a unit that can fight back when it dies v.s. fighting a unit that can't,,,, honestly you can't be very good at this game.

If I am entering melee with BT VV, it is either:
1) to stop them from charging next turn (which means I am not killing them in melee, so Wulfen wouldn't get to strike back either)
or
2) because I have no other option (in which case I'll charge the Wulfen anyways, because I have no other option...)
VV with a 2+/4++ are not good targets for another melee unit to charge, especially not if a judicator is nearby. Neither are wulfen.

 Type40 wrote:
2. It isn't a strawman, there are less differences between those two datasheets then BT Vangaurd and Wulfen LOL ... you can't just dismiss how absurd your argument would be if applied globally across each faction XD.

I don't think it's absurd. Historicals do this all the time. The difference between a Russian sniper and a German sniper in most WWII games isn't huge. I'd be fine folding them together (as I mentioned) if GW's game structure permitted different "teams" to share datasheets. I said that in the very post you quoted.

 Type40 wrote:
3. fine sggitarum gaurd,,, you go tell those custodes players that lol XD.

What would they care that Heavy Intercessors are being deleted?

 Type40 wrote:
4. uhhhhh..... really ? lol are wolves the same "race" as bikes now XD. Is this your new argument ?

No? I don't see how that is relevant to the fact that the rules are functionally identical (fighty SM riding a thing and go fast brrrr)

 Type40 wrote:
5. just because you can't seem to understand how they are different, despite having different rules, models (and stats), unit sizes, unit compositions, unique wargear, and unique unit rules... doesn't mean they arnt different, it just means you are being willfully ignorant and are ignoring nuances in game play because "fighty unit is fighty and shooty unit is shooty" lol

Then explain to me how they are different - and I mean in function, not in form. I can see how they are different in form, but I'd like to know what they functionally do differently - or, to rephrase:
How is their playstyle different?

Like I've asked what, eight times now?

So setting aside the very rude ad hominems you keep throwing out that imply something about my intelligence:

can you, or can you not, explain how SW function differently on the tabletop from other melee Space Marines?

If you cannot explain this, then SW will be fine being thrown into the same bucket as those, with their models remaining attractive alternative options for those who actually enjoy SW for their SWness rather than their rules.

If you can explain this, be my guest. I'm waiting. You say there is more to the game - then elucidate it. Tell me. You assert SW are way different than Black Templars, but I've seen exactly zero evidence except that Wulfen fight when they die, which, while true, doesn't explain to me why BT shouldn't have that rule or why SW should.

I'm asking to be educated about how those rules, datasheets, wargear, etc. are meaningfully different than the alternatives. Educate me.

Revivers with the collars of Khorne effect. That's it.


Sorry for going back to the original question.

 Type40 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

Because you don't need every unit to have a unique datasheet for the smallest difference for the game to be unique and interesting?

Right, so why not play eldar guardians using the tactical marine datasheet ?
You know, when a datasheet has unique rules, unique wargear, unique unit composition, unique unit size and the only thing that is the same is most of the stateline... are we really talking about "the smallest difference for the game" lol

I do that. Eldar rules are depressing at this point, so I run Ultramarines rules when I run them against people playing marines.

I think this is just the sad state that I hope this game avoids in the future.

Honestly, I am sorry you have to do this, I think that if this becomes the norm, the game has failed and has become pretty boring... if I wanted to paly a symetrical board game I would have chosen a symetrical board game.

Yeah, me too. It'd be great if GW had a big grand idea with how they were going to balance marines with everyone else that they'd just fuckin do it instead of making everyone wait until 2021 to MAYBE get their new codex where they might be able to compete.

An eldar guardian being 10ppm is the worst joke in the game. Primaris Ultramarines play more like eldar than eldar.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
So setting aside the very rude ad hominems you keep throwing out that imply something about my intelligence:

can you, or can you not, explain how SW function differently on the tabletop from other melee Space Marines?

If you cannot explain this, then SW will be fine being thrown into the same bucket as those, with their models remaining attractive alternative options for those who actually enjoy SW for their SWness rather than their rules.

If you can explain this, be my guest. I'm waiting. You say there is more to the game - then elucidate it. Tell me. You assert SW are way different than Black Templars, but I've seen exactly zero evidence except that Wulfen fight when they die, which, while true, doesn't explain to me why BT shouldn't have that rule or why SW should.

I'm asking to be educated about how those rules, datasheets, wargear, etc. are meaningfully different than the alternatives. Educate me.

I am literally quoting you XD

"fighty SM riding a thing and go fast brrrr"

"fighty marines fight and melt me"

etc...

I have explained, and if you can't understand how being able to fight when a model is destroyed has different tactical implications then not being able to do that,,, again,,, that is on you ... not sure how to help you further then that...

I am not going to continue to explain differences to you when your only response is to go "WELL THATS NOT DIFFERENT ENOUGH EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THEY ARE DIFFERNT" lol... I am not playing your game, if you keep moving the goal post then its impossible for me to answer the question lol XD...

Honestly.
Lets stop pretending here. if you want to dilute the game to
"fighty unit"
"shooty unit"
"fast fight unit"
"fast shooty unit"
"HQ"

then do that... but it seems like a pretty damn boring game to me.

I haven't moved the goalpost one iota.

I asked how their playstyle was different, you gave me a rule. I asked how their playstyle was different, you talked about Eldar rangers. I asked how their playstyle was different, you teased me. I asked how their playstyle was different, you claim I want to dilute the game.

If you just explained how their playstyle was different, I wouldn't have to keep asking and we could end this charade.

'These units seem incredibly similar in their battlefield role and function, with only minor differences that don't impact how they behave on the tabletop. Why do they need to be different units, rather than minor variants of the same thing?'
'LOLOL MIGHT AS WELL MAKE GUARDSMEN USE SPACE MARINE STATS TURN THE GAME INTO FIVE UNITS'

???????????????????

Unit, you've got a lot more patience than I would dealing with an argument that is 100% bad faith and straw men.

Thanks, Catbarf, appreciated. I do try to have patience, as sometimes people who are wrong become angry, then they cool off and revisit the arguments later. As long as I am not angry, my points will still be clearly stated when they return with a clearer head to review them.

Sometimes, they get them and understand. Other times, they have more thoughtful refutations, but either way it becomes fruitful again.

 Blackie wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
I speculate that based on the image I've seen the models look like gak.

Like any other primaris models.

Wow, must of been hard getting into this hobby if primaris look like gak to you because minimarines were everywhere and so much worse, objectively, you must have projectile vomited every time you saw them.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Thanks, Catbarf, appreciated. I do try to have patience, as sometimes people who are wrong become angry, then they cool off and revisit the arguments later. As long as I am not angry, my points will still be clearly stated when they return with a clearer head to review them.

Sometimes, they get them and understand. Other times, they have more thoughtful refutations, but either way it becomes fruitful again.

and sometimes people think their subjective beliefs about what should and shouldn't be given unique and flavorful consideration trumps other gamers and the manufactures idea of what constitutes as unique and interesting playstyles. It seems to be an inability comprehend the uses for something that they themselves have not put the time into considering a need for...

"fighty units be fighty,,, why need something else for fights ? unless its my own thing,,, give me attention not them !!!! I don't want these other people to have toys that do things when you could be giving attention to MY toys and make them do nice things instead !!!"

 Type40 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Thanks, Catbarf, appreciated. I do try to have patience, as sometimes people who are wrong become angry, then they cool off and revisit the arguments later. As long as I am not angry, my points will still be clearly stated when they return with a clearer head to review them.

Sometimes, they get them and understand. Other times, they have more thoughtful refutations, but either way it becomes fruitful again.

and sometimes people think their subjective beliefs about what should and shouldn't be given unique and flavorful consideration trumps other gamers and the manufactures idea of what constitutes as unique and interesting playstyles. It seems to be an inability comprehend the uses for something that they themselves have not put the time into considering a need for... "

Unique and flavorful consideration would require the thing being considered to be unique and flavorful, unfortunately. If it has a unique and flavorful playstyle, maybe I could be convinced, but I haven't seen any evidence of that yet.

Otherwise it's just wasting time and release slots.

The unique and flavorful playstyle is looking at your roster and seeing wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf and wolf.

It does nothing for me, but it does for other people.

Realistically this kit is an existing kit and an upgrade sprue, which may also already exist. The development time is therefore quite minimal.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Thanks, Catbarf, appreciated. I do try to have patience, as sometimes people who are wrong become angry, then they cool off and revisit the arguments later. As long as I am not angry, my points will still be clearly stated when they return with a clearer head to review them.

Sometimes, they get them and understand. Other times, they have more thoughtful refutations, but either way it becomes fruitful again.

and sometimes people think their subjective beliefs about what should and shouldn't be given unique and flavorful consideration trumps other gamers and the manufactures idea of what constitutes as unique and interesting playstyles. It seems to be an inability comprehend the uses for something that they themselves have not put the time into considering a need for... "

Unique and flavorful consideration would require the thing being considered to be unique and flavorful, unfortunately. If it has a unique and flavorful playstyle, maybe I could be convinced, but I haven't seen any evidence of that yet.

Otherwise it's just wasting time and release slots.

Again,,,

These are fething werewolves who fight before they die on the table.... are the BG Vangaurd Vets fething werewolves that fight before they die ? do you really not understand what you are comparing here ? do you really not understand how they might play differently on the table ? do you really not understand that wulfen should be allowed to have a unique mechanic for achieving a similar goal in a different way XD ?

I can not for the life me comprehend where your mental block is here ? they are different units, they do different things, they achieve a similar table top goal, sure, but so do bezerkers, are we goinfg to roll them into the same datasheet too ?

Tyel wrote:
The unique and flavorful playstyle is looking at your roster and seeing wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf and wolf.

It does nothing for me, but it does for other people.

Realistically this kit is an existing kit and an upgrade sprue, which may also already exist. The development time is therefore quite minimal.

On this specific kit, perhaps, but the entire SW supplement took time to write, I guarantee it.

Wulfen used to do more than just fight when they die. They buffed the rest of the army, too. I have no idea why this guy is comparing them to VVs when one is BS 3+ and the other is BS 5+. Plus, before the Great Wound Increase, they were W2 despite not being Primaris.

 Type40 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Thanks, Catbarf, appreciated. I do try to have patience, as sometimes people who are wrong become angry, then they cool off and revisit the arguments later. As long as I am not angry, my points will still be clearly stated when they return with a clearer head to review them.

Sometimes, they get them and understand. Other times, they have more thoughtful refutations, but either way it becomes fruitful again.

and sometimes people think their subjective beliefs about what should and shouldn't be given unique and flavorful consideration trumps other gamers and the manufactures idea of what constitutes as unique and interesting playstyles. It seems to be an inability comprehend the uses for something that they themselves have not put the time into considering a need for...

The thing is, neither side is "correct" since we're talking about subjective opinions about game design. It just seems one side in particular is getting quite worked up about the disagreement.

I could equally well characterise the arguments as "one side thinks the only way to differentiate armies is through excessive numbers of unique rules and units and is unable to understand that player creativity and more army-wide rules can create equally compelling differences, because they lack the imagination to comprehend such a scenario."

 RaptorusRex wrote:
Wulfen used to do more than just fight when they die. They buffed the rest of the army, too. I have no idea why this guy is comparing them to VVs when one is BS 3+ and the other is BS 5+. Plus, before the Great Wound Increase, they were W2 despite not being Primaris.

Yes. I actually think they were more unique in the past, but the BS thing is exactly what I am talking about with "fake options." It doesn't actually mean anything for either VV or Wulfen. They have like, some grenades (launcher on the wulfen, thrown by the VV) but that isn't a meaningful difference in terms of how they play on the table.

But I would agree that, back in the past, they were very different. Now? Not so much. One could knock GW for removing the meaningful difference as much as I am knocking them for being separate without having a meaningful difference. That I could agree with.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
On this specific kit, perhaps, but the entire SW supplement took time to write, I guarantee it.

*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*
*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*
*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*

Maybe. Writing books is pretty easy though. Could be a quick copy paste job "supplementalising" things that were in the 8th edition codex/PA that they wanted carried over.

Slipspace wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Thanks, Catbarf, appreciated. I do try to have patience, as sometimes people who are wrong become angry, then they cool off and revisit the arguments later. As long as I am not angry, my points will still be clearly stated when they return with a clearer head to review them.

Sometimes, they get them and understand. Other times, they have more thoughtful refutations, but either way it becomes fruitful again.

and sometimes people think their subjective beliefs about what should and shouldn't be given unique and flavorful consideration trumps other gamers and the manufactures idea of what constitutes as unique and interesting playstyles. It seems to be an inability comprehend the uses for something that they themselves have not put the time into considering a need for...

The thing is, neither side is "correct" since we're talking about subjective opinions about game design. It just seems one side in particular is getting quite worked up about the disagreement.

I could equally well characterise the arguments as "one side thinks the only way to differentiate armies is through excessive numbers of unique rules and units and is unable to understand that player creativity and more army-wide rules can create equally compelling differences, because they lack the imagination to comprehend such a scenario."

Frankly SW beeing SM doesn't strengthen their cause. Neither does the fact that they still have more datasheets then whole other factions alone nor the excessive time devoted to any kind of SM release associated. Meanwhile we had 2 far more unique armies squatted recently with the full corresponding rulesets and units , so that people are right fully mad at what they percive as blatant favouritsm on gw's side is justified, imo atleast. That they also get mad at people complaining for beeing now "only a supplement" is especially for those that lost armies quite frankly extremely shallow and insulting.

Doubly so when these posters now so avidly beeing angry (also justifyable) for beeing supplemented have however forgone any and all support of the armies now completely gone . ( and no legends is not really a valid army anymore much less in the sense of the unit once was intended to be there)

Tyel wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
On this specific kit, perhaps, but the entire SW supplement took time to write, I guarantee it.

*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*
*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*
*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*

Maybe. Writing books is pretty easy though. Could be a quick copy paste job "supplementalising" things that were in the 8th edition codex/PA that they wanted carried over.

Could be, but if GW took no time to do it at all, then I feel bad for SW players and they deserve better.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I hope their rule sucks so no-one misses them when they get dropped in the next codex/supplement, so we can stop the chapter specific units.

"I don't play this army so I hope those who do get screwed over"

When your one hundredth datasheet suck, it's not "You being screwed over", it's you having access to more good datasheet than I have access to in my entire codex.
Stop it playing the victim because someone hopes the extra stuff on top of the extra stuff on top of the extra stuff that you get over other people might be bad.

And please, people, stop doing the "Space Wolves are not Space Marines and cannot use the Space Marines rules", everyone knows that Space Wolves are Space Marines!

"Yes. I actually think they were more unique in the past, but the BS thing is exactly what I am talking about with "fake options." It doesn't actually mean anything for either VV or Wulfen. They have like, some grenades (launcher on the wulfen, thrown by the VV) but that isn't a meaningful difference in terms of how they play on the table.

But I would agree that, back in the past, they were very different. Now? Not so much. One could knock GW for removing the meaningful difference as much as I am knocking them for being separate without having a meaningful difference. That I could agree with."

oh, you saw the new wulfen datasheet that comes out next week ?

Is it exactly the same as BG VV ?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I hope their rule sucks so no-one misses them when they get dropped in the next codex/supplement, so we can stop the chapter specific units.

"I don't play this army so I hope those who do get screwed over"

When your one hundredth datasheet suck, it's not "You being screwed over", it's you having access to more good datasheet than I have access to in my entire codex.
Stop it playing the victim because someone hopes the extra stuff on top of the extra stuff on top of the extra stuff that you get over other people might be bad.

And please, people, stop doing the "Space Wolves are not Space Marines and cannot use the Space Marines rules", everyone knows that Space Wolves are Space Marines!

The fact that so many people argue that they arn't just regular marines means your wrong about the whole "everyone" thing.

What people are arguing is that we shouldn't arbitrarily squat the uniqueness of one army because some people simply do not like that two guys wearing power armor can have different rules. Or even that a guy riding a dire wolf should be treated differently then a guy riding a bike... these arguments are ridiculous.

There is no reason to remove SWs uniqueness. I do see a valid point on not giving them attention for a while however but putting time into literally removing their unique flavor from the rules is counter intuitive. It not only upsets people who like that their choice to play them gives them access to interesting diffrences but it also wastes time figuring out the logistics of making sure GW can still sell their very active and popular spacewolf kits while allowing them to still have all their unique load outs, weapon options, and unit numbers. (because they arnt just gonna throw those kits out)

 Type40 wrote:
oh, you saw the new wulfen datasheet that comes out next week ?

Is it exactly the same as BG VV ?

No, I haven't seen the one next week. But unless it's SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT than the one in 8th (which means GW spent more time on it) then I'm going to continue to essentially treat them like Black Templar's VVs with a few bits stickytacked to them.

Tyel 793315 10966435 wrote:

*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*

Weren't scyths of the emperor GSC space marines in power armour, until they got killed off by primaris .

 Type40 wrote:


Again,,,

These are fething werewolves who fight before they die on the table.... are the BG Vangaurd Vets fething werewolves that fight before they die ?

He keeps asking what makes them different in role or purpose and you keep replying by pointing out mechanical differences, without providing any argument as to how these mechanical differences lend them a different role on the tabletop.

In other words, if you were forced to take melee VanVets instead of Wulfen, what would change about your army? Not 'they wouldn't get to fight before they die', but what would actually change in terms of strategy or the composition of the rest of your army to compensate?

 Type40 wrote:
The fact that so many people argue that they arn't just regular marines means your wrong about the whole "everyone" thing.

How many people argue that space wolves aren't space marines?
Certainly not GW, who correctly identifies Space Wolves as Space Marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Type40 wrote:
What people are arguing is that we shouldn't arbitrarily squat the uniqueness of one army because some people simply do not like that two guys wearing power armor can have different rules.

Two guys in power armor should have different rules if they are different. An Inquisitor in Power Armor (we SHOULD have this one, instead we have stupid gray marines) should not have the same rules as a tactical marines. Even different marines wearing power armor should have different rules if they are different. For instance, an apothecary shouldn't have the same rules as a chapter master.
But Space Wolves should not have different rules though, sorry .

"How many people argue that space wolves aren't space marines?"

Arn't REGULAR space marines is not thesame as saying not space marines.

don't be facetious.

lol and sure, the guys who literally have wolf genetics spliced into their genetic make up, are trained differently and have different weapons can't be represented differently then their vanilla counter parts XD lol

. But unless it's SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT than the one in 8th (which means GW spent more time on it) then I'm going to continue to essentially treat them like Black Templar's VVs with a few bits stickytacked to them.

You mean when they had armor 5+, had +1 attack aura, re-roll charge aura, could advance and charge, could atatck when they died, had significant wargear no one else had access too, 2 Ws vs 1 w, 7" mvm, str 5, 3/4 attacks and a 5+++ ? you mean those guys in 8th edition wern't different enough from BG Van Vets for you ??? !!! oh man,,, here I was thinking you were talking about the current ones in the FAQ index, but your talking about the ones from 8th ! woww... ok ... if you can not see the difference between those two units,,, you really need to step back and re-evaluate how you paly this game XD lol .
Did you even read the 8th edition Space Wolves codex ? do you have any idea what they are trying to stuff into the supplement lol

 Type40 wrote:

Did you even read the 8th edition Space Wolves codex ? do you have any idea what they are trying to stuff into the supplement lol

Well that is how it is. You have people playing xeno claiming that marines should be one codex with SG vets, DC, wulfen be represented by the same unit, and at the same time saying that they should get R&H, eldar corsairs etc.

The point is not "What makes them different in the rules" it's "What makes them PLAY different".

Both are a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast.

 JNAProductions wrote:
The point is not "What makes them different in the rules" it's "What makes them PLAY different".

Both are a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast.

Yes, and i will point out again they obviously PLAY different.
Are you really not seeing that you would paly a unit that can fight back as it dies in a different way then you would play a unit that can't ?

Are you really saying that you would play a unit that can advance and charge but not shoot riding a wolf in a different way then you play a unit that can not advance and charge but CAN shoot and is riding a bike in the exact same way ?

That is what people are saying we should be doing ? XD ?

Sriously.

Just because they are hard hitting melee units that move relatively fast does not mean they do those things in the EXACT same way or even that you would use them in the EXACT same way.

My harlies Troupe are also a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast, why arnt we rolling them into the same datasheet too ? Do you think I would play my harlies in the exact same way as i would wulfen or BG Van Vets ?

No, all three units are fast hard hitting melee units, but they don't play the same way, I don't make the same choices when playing any of them, I have to make different tactical considerations with all of them. Just because they fit a similar role doesnt make them "play the same" that is just ridiculous and its stupid that people keep suggesting that.

There is more nuance to this game then just "this unit moves fast and is fighty" and "this unit shoots well"

we can't just pretend that they play exactly the same because we can sum up their battlefield role with the same 5 -7 words.
If that's how you think of the game, you can't be winning very many matches.

 Type40 wrote:
My harlies Troupe are also a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast, why arnt we rolling them into the same datasheet too ?

You know, the reason everyone is finding your posts so obnoxious is because you either don't seem to have the slightest idea why these comparisons are strawmen, or do and are making them anyways.

If there are two Harlequin units where the only difference rules-wise is that one can fight after it dies... Yeah, roll them together.

I'll ask it again: If you were forced to take melee VanVets instead of Wulfen, what would change about your army? Not 'they wouldn't get to fight before they die', but what would actually change in terms of strategy or the composition of the rest of your army to compensate?

 JNAProductions wrote:
The point is not "What makes them different in the rules" it's "What makes them PLAY different".

Both are a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast.

Lets be fair to the guy. You all are trying too hard to arguee that Wulfen dont have a place and are just Vanguard Veterans when literally they never had the same statlines, weapon options or special rules like... never . Probably they are one of the most non-normal marines unit marines have (Before this codex, Wulfen were more similar to ork nobz than to vanguard veterans) , even if they end up playing similarly, just like Khorne Berzerkers and Meele Chosen do. But thats fine. Reiskguard, Knights of the Wolf and Blazing Sun Knights weren't all that different ones from the others, or from Bretonian and Grail Knights. They had a couple special rules but they were all different flavours or heavy shock cavalry and it was fine.

I'm not really sure why Space Wolves are getting a slightly different box of Reivers.

Do they want to soft squat Firstborn by giving similar chapter specific units? I guess Wulfen and stuff like that are not getting new models then.

 catbarf wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
My harlies Troupe are also a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast, why arnt we rolling them into the same datasheet too ?

You know, the reason everyone is finding your posts so obnoxious is because you either don't seem to have the slightest idea why these comparisons are strawmen, or do and are making them anyways.

If there are two Harlequin units where the only difference rules-wise is that one can fight after it dies... Yeah, roll them together.

I'll ask it again: If you were forced to take melee VanVets instead of Wulfen, what would change about your army? Not 'they wouldn't get to fight before they die', but what would actually change in terms of strategy or the composition of the rest of your army to compensate?

Also a re-roll charge aura, a diffrence in armor save, a difference to speed, diffrence tough, diffrent strenghth, different wargear options .... hmmm ...
lol sooo, ya,,, a fast hard hitting unit,,, that does completely different things..

You know what I find so obnoxious.
That people keep saying things like "it's just a fast hard hiting unit and so is the other one" and then when i bring up another fast hard hiting unit from another faction people are like "OMG STRAWMAN THEY ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT"
even though they have as many differences as these two units... like,,, its absolutely ridiculous XD ... different armour save, toughness, strength, speed, warhear, abilities... but they are a fast hard hiting unit... yup all three fit into that catagory...

this isn't comparing a harlequin troupe that fights back when it dies to one that doesnt. This is comparing a harlequin unit to BG Van Vets XD lol because they have as different of a statline as wulfen do to BG Van Vets and just as many different rules AND different wargear options LOL . Are people really this daft that they can't read the different numbers on the different datasheets ? the only thing that is the same between the two units AT ALL is their WS and number of attacks.

then when it comes to game play , yes, i would treat harlies that attack back when they die differently then harlies that don't... sure they wouldnt need seperate datasheets... but that's not what this is XD they have completely different stat lines, rules, AND wargear XD comparing the two based only off of having one abilitiy and not the rest of their datasheet is ridiculous.

Type40, a question you ignored is this:

What would change if you had to replace your Wulfen with Vanguard Vets armed similarly, in terms of your army comp and strategy?

Actually the best games have units that are mostly the same with a couple of differences in stats or 1-2 special rules that add or even just weapon options to cather for other kind of lists, uses, or enemies, even if tactically they are similar. Using just GW games as examples, both Fantasy and LOTR have many units across factions that are the same with just a single change in 1 stat , or with +1 extra attack.

The biggest difference between Wulfen and Vanguard Veterans is that Wulfen are a more elite unit, with support auras and habilities that work best when working with other units were Vanguard Veterans are much more independent, less resilient and put out less damage, a much cheaper option. I would say Vanguard Veteran are much more redundant in Blood Angels basically because they were a specific BA unit that got superseeded with Sanguinary Guard and Death Company.

In this case, Vanguard Veterans are probably the unit that should not exist, because assault marines allready exist. But I would arguee the three units have a place, they are different gradients of power in the "fast space marine meele unit" and eliteness. Now one could arguee, why do Jumpack marines exist when you have biker marines? They are, tactically, units that do the same with slighly different interactions with terrain, if we go down to the logical conclusion of that route.

 Type40 wrote:
Also a re-roll charge aura, a diffrence in armor save, a difference to speed, diffrence tough, diffrent strenghth, different wargear options .... hmmm ...
lol sooo, ya,,, a fast hard hitting unit,,, that does completely different things..

Incredible.

'How would your strategy change if you had X unit instead of Y unit?'
'X HAS ABILITY Y HAS WEAPON MIGHT AS WELL MAKE HARLEQUINS COUNT AS SPACE MARINES LMAO GOTTEM'


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galas wrote:
Actually the best games have units that are mostly the same with a couple of differences in stats or 1-2 special rules that add or even just weapon options to cather for other kind of lists, uses, or enemies, even if tactically they are similar. Using just GW games as examples, both Fantasy and LOTR have many units across factions that are the same with just a single change in 1 stat , or with +1 extra attack.

FWIW I actually really like this approach, especially how LotR did it. With a minimum of special rules, those individual stat changes or different wargear feel pretty meaningful, as they actually impact what you can do with a unit- Haldir's elves with bows and swords can actually function as multirole units just on account of their wargear. Meanwhile in 40K it really doesn't matter what melee weapon you have if you're a shooting unit; you're still going to get dumpstered by a tricked-out melee unit with four attacks each and a pharmacy receipt's worth of special rules.

Horus Heresy has a lot more chrome than LotR, and that provides scope for differentiating changes beyond statlines. A unit of Tactical Marines under Imperial Fists versus Night Lords play very differently; the former is incentivized to play defensively and maximize the effectiveness of their boltguns, while the latter wants to get into melee while outnumbering the target. See, these are the exact same unit, but because of limited and flavorful army-wide rules, I can describe the different tactical function on the battlefield.

What you don't want is having two units with different statlines, but only in minute ways that don't really impact how they behave on the table. That's the sort of detail that's called 'chrome' in game design, and while a bit of chrome to convey themes can be a good thing, it adds to the bloat and cognitive load associated with the system.

A good example of excessive chrome is the Death Korps Infantry Squad. Death Korps Infantry Squads are WS3+, codex Infantry Squads can be S4. Death Korps sergeants have lasguns, codex sergeants can take bolters. Death Korps have access to a different set of orders, but in most cases they're functionally identical. These are two separate units with separate datasheets and a lot of nitpicky little differences... but functionally, they're both infantry squads, and the really relevant difference between the two is the DKoK's resilience to morale loss. Based on the table of contents of the new Imperial Armour book, it seems that the DKoK-specific Infantry Squad entry is going away, and despite being a long-time DKoK player I'm completely fine with that. The new Cult of Sacrifice rule conveys the theme and flavor of the Death Korps, without needing its own unit entry. This is Good Design™.

 Type40 wrote:
Arn't REGULAR space marines is not thesame as saying not space marines.

don't be facetious.

lol and sure, the guys who literally have wolf genetics spliced into their genetic make up, are trained differently and have different weapons can't be represented differently then their vanilla counter parts XD lol

Iron Hands have massively replaced their flesh with bionics, are organized and trained massively differently from Ultramarines, etc.
Still regular marines.

Remember when Salamanders had a lower initiative stat? I do.

Meanwhile, Cadians with flak armor and a heavily militaristic and industrial culture, Catachans with t-shirts and a pure machoman culture, and Savlar Chem Dogs, eqquiped with whatever they can find on the battlefield and with a culture of "I'm a dirty criminal doing whatever it takes to survive, including running or stabbing my commanding officer" share the same codex.
I'm pretty sure those three armies don't share the same weapons, aren't trained the same, and frankly given the muscle on the catachan, borderline don't share the same genetics!

Hey Zeus this forum is becoming unreadable with every thread becoming derailed around the same things by the same people.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Type40, a question you ignored is this:

What would change if you had to replace your Wulfen with Vanguard Vets armed similarly, in terms of your army comp and strategy?

They are a completely different unit, with a different statline, different wargear, different access to transports, different unit size, and very different rules.... I do not even understnad how someone would play them the same way XD other then dedicating them to do melee damage at some point in the match.

Honestly it isn't my responsibility to try and theory craft different comp and stratagy for wulfen v.s. Van Vets,,, all I can say is there stat line, abilities and synergies are totally different... but in the same way a unit a of Harlie troupes are fast and good at fighting, these two units are also fast and good at fighting,,, doesnt mean i am going to play them the same way at all XD.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Arn't REGULAR space marines is not thesame as saying not space marines.

don't be facetious.

lol and sure, the guys who literally have wolf genetics spliced into their genetic make up, are trained differently and have different weapons can't be represented differently then their vanilla counter parts XD lol

Iron Hands have massively replaced their flesh with bionics, are organized and trained massively differently from Ultramarines, etc.
Still regular marines.

Remember when Salamanders had a lower initiative stat? I do.

Meanwhile, Cadians with flak armor and a heavily militaristic and industrial culture, Catachans with t-shirts and a pure machoman culture, and Savlar Chem Dogs, eqquiped with whatever they can find on the battlefield and with a culture of "I'm a dirty criminal doing whatever it takes to survive, including running or stabbing my commanding officer" share the same codex.
I'm pretty sure those three armies don't share the same weapons, aren't trained the same, and frankly given the muscle on the catachan, borderline don't share the same genetics!

where is the iron hands 30+ unique datasheets and their 2nd edition codex and do you really think their unique stuff should also be squatted ? XD


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 catbarf wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Also a re-roll charge aura, a diffrence in armor save, a difference to speed, diffrence tough, diffrent strenghth, different wargear options .... hmmm ...
lol sooo, ya,,, a fast hard hitting unit,,, that does completely different things..

Incredible.

'How would your strategy change if you had X unit instead of Y unit?'
'X HAS ABILITY Y HAS WEAPON MIGHT AS WELL MAKE HARLEQUINS COUNT AS SPACE MARINES LMAO GOTTEM'

So can you actually explain how a harlequin troupe is less different from BG Van Vets then wulfen are from BG Van Vets ? XD lol ...

or are you just gonna mock my position like it has no weight. When people in this thread keep repeating "they are just fast fighty units and completely interchangeable" lol. why not swap em out with harlies then ,,, just another "fast fighty unit" with completely different rules and stats as well.

Karol wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

Did you even read the 8th edition Space Wolves codex ? do you have any idea what they are trying to stuff into the supplement lol

Well that is how it is. You have people playing xeno claiming that marines should be one codex with SG vets, DC, wulfen be represented by the same unit, and at the same time saying that they should get R&H, eldar corsairs etc.

Because Marines should and are now in one Codex but of course get their own super special supplements for each sub-sub faction unlike any other faction in the game.

Saying that say Grey Hunters only have minor differences to a Tac Marine squad is not saying BS like all Imperials should be represented by one squad - which is incredably insulting to anyone with any ounce of objective interlect.

You actually believe that Space Wolves needed a super special new reivers unit other than in the lore.

Probably going to get the same rules as Sisters of Silence - cos the constantly evolving Mary Sue Wolves.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

Because you don't need every unit to have a unique datasheet for the smallest difference for the game to be unique and interesting?

Yet somehow it seems that only Marine subfactions *need* unique non-character units...

This thread is not what I thought it would be about too!

 catbarf wrote:

 Type40 wrote:


Again,,,

These are fething werewolves who fight before they die on the table.... are the BG Vangaurd Vets fething werewolves that fight before they die ?

He keeps asking what makes them different in role or purpose and you keep replying by pointing out mechanical differences, without providing any argument as to how these mechanical differences lend them a different role on the tabletop.

In other words, if you were forced to take melee VanVets instead of Wulfen, what would change about your army? Not 'they wouldn't get to fight before they die', but what would actually change in terms of strategy or the composition of the rest of your army to compensate?

I mean, I'll hop in here I guess...

They're...very different units? I guess that they're both melee-oriented units with mixed wargear who can take storm shields, but your battle strategy would change significantly if you took wulfen vs taking vanguard veterans.

Vanvets are most likely to be taken with jump packs, as a deep strike assault unit, probably accompanied by a jump pack chaplain who'll pop oratory to give them +2" charge. Wulfen have an 8" move, making them not suitable for a turn 1 charge, and they've got worse durability per wound than anything else in the marine codex vs anti-chaff weaponry, so you want to make sure to field them alongside a chaff type unit to draw that fire - probably Fenrisian Wolves, another unique SW unit that is entirely unlike anything else other marines field. As such you probably want to support them with a defensive buff, rather than a + to charge buff as they're probably going to be in turn 2 with an 8" move+advance.

They have a similar offensive profile to vanvets, but that's it. Assault Terminators are less meaningfully distinct from Vanvets than Wulfen. T5 4+ W2 with access to only TH/SS is not T4 3+ W2 with access to Chainsword/SS, theyr'e a whole different ballgame defensively, and 8" no fly is not 12" fly deep strike. Vanvets also have full transport access, don't have an aura, dont have perma-assault doctrine...

Like, there's a certain point where, sure, a melee unit is a melee unit, but you wouldn't argue that Skorpekh Destroyers and Vanvets were "basically the same" would you?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
How I'd field Wulfen:

Frost Claws/Maybe axes depending on meta, maybe 2 TH/SS, a couple cheapos. Field on foot alongside Fenrisian Wolves, bring in some Skyclaw squads to benefit from the aura for the turn 2 tempo. A psyker with the defensive 5++ spell (or most likely, the inevitable -1 to hit spell the SW are all but guaranteed to have) and a bike to keep up with them.

Basically, distraction carnifex unit.

How I'd field Vanvets: Chainsword/SS on some models, Chainfist/Chainsword on others (or Thunder Hammer, I can't remember if they can do chainfists) or Lightning Claw/Chainsword meta depending, with a jump pack chaplain only.

Basically, anti-elite point removal. Support with turn 1 antichaff screen clearing firepower.

Yeah, thats what I tried to say, as the_scotsman with much more meta knowledge said.

If theres a unit to arguee that shouldnt exist because he's just the same as other space marine option, Wulfen are the last one one should pick. Before mini marines became 2 wounds they had literally the same Statline as a Ork Nobz and a ton of different rules compared with anything space marines had.

hey mods, can you I duinno try to keep this topic on topic? I didn't create it so that the useal jelous children could hijack it with bitching that "someone else's army got something"

Karol wrote:

Tyel 793315 10966435 wrote:

*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*

Weren't scyths of the emperor GSC space marines in power armour, until they got killed off by primaris .

They were Advanced Space Crusade!

BrianDavion wrote:
hey mods, can you I duinno try to keep this topic on topic? I didn't create it so that the useal jelous children could hijack it with bitching that "someone else's army got something"

I can't help but read this post in the tone of a snooty aristocrat telling the servants to clear the filthy, non-Marine-playing riff-raff off the lawn.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I hope their rule sucks so no-one misses them when they get dropped in the next codex/supplement, so we can stop the chapter specific units.

Prediction: You'll stop playing 40k long before GW will stop making chapter specific units.

 CEO Kasen wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
hey mods, can you I duinno try to keep this topic on topic? I didn't create it so that the useal jelous children could hijack it with bitching that "someone else's army got something"

I can't help but read this post in the tone of a snooty aristocrat telling the servants to clear the filthy, non-Marine-playing riff-raff off the lawn.

I think asking people to keep a thread on topic isn't too much to ask.

I would posit that expressing irritation that Space Marines are getting yet another new unit in a thread about a new Space Marine unit is entirely an on-topic response.

 CEO Kasen wrote:
I would posit that expressing irritation that Space Marines are getting yet another new unit in a thread about a new Space Marine unit is entirely an on-topic response.

I tarted this thread so people could specualte about what the unit was dude, not so the whiny entitled xenos players could be whiney and entitled that someone else's army got something and they didn't.

 CEO Kasen wrote:
I would posit that expressing irritation that Space Marines are getting yet another new unit in a thread about a new Space Marine unit is entirely an on-topic response.

Na man, OP was specifically asking about speculated rules and hopes for the new unit. On the first page there were a total of 3 posts - including the starting post - which were talking about it. The rest was already off-topic.
If people don't like the look or that Marines get yet another unit (which to be fair, is simply a paint job and an existing upgrade sprue thrown together), how hard is it to NOT hijack yet another thread and derail it for several pages?

Nearly every thread that goes for several pages is ending in the same few people argueing back and forth about the same frickin topic for a year now. At least that is how it feels, anyway.

I became less interested in starting topics myself because of it and definitely more often than not think to myself "I'd like to reply to a post, but it is just not worth it".

I have updated the thread title to reflect that this topic is about the rules, whining about SM in general is off topic and from this point on will earn its poster a warning.
Stay on topic.
Be Polite.
Don't spam.
These three little rules are not hard to follow.

[Mod posted while message was under construction; deleted by poster]

Alrigh, so, riever stats, an SOS style aura maybe? Psych out grenades and a deep strike? This is my guess. Perhaps some extra dmg against psykers type bullets? I dunno. This is my speculation.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Type40 wrote:
Alrigh, so, riever stats, an SOS style aura maybe? Psych out grenades and a deep strike? This is my guess. Perhaps some extra dmg against psykers type bullets? I dunno. This is my speculation.

psyker type bullets seems unlikely, grey knights would be, rightly, ticked off if they got psybolt ammo.

BrianDavion wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Type40 wrote:
Alrigh, so, riever stats, an SOS style aura maybe? Psych out grenades and a deep strike? This is my guess. Perhaps some extra dmg against psykers type bullets? I dunno. This is my speculation.

psyker type bullets seems unlikely, grey knights would be, rightly, ticked off if they got psybolt ammo.

fair, but maybe with a strat. SOS also have psyker bullets that get to snipe psykers...
I could definitly see a deny the witch strat for them ...

i am kinda hoping they have some rune priest fluff to them or maybe even make them blanks ,,, but i think i am speculating to hard on this one lol
XD... I just hope that for the first unique non-vanilla primaris (sans characters) there is some cool heavy fluff style stuff atatched to its rules. But that's just me XD .

 catbarf wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, I'll hop in here I guess...

They're...very different units? I guess that they're both melee-oriented units with mixed wargear who can take storm shields, but your battle strategy would change significantly if you took wulfen vs taking vanguard veterans.

Vanvets are most likely to be taken with jump packs, as a deep strike assault unit, probably accompanied by a jump pack chaplain who'll pop oratory to give them +2" charge. Wulfen have an 8" move, making them not suitable for a turn 1 charge, and they've got worse durability per wound than anything else in the marine codex vs anti-chaff weaponry, so you want to make sure to field them alongside a chaff type unit to draw that fire - probably Fenrisian Wolves, another unique SW unit that is entirely unlike anything else other marines field. As such you probably want to support them with a defensive buff, rather than a + to charge buff as they're probably going to be in turn 2 with an 8" move+advance.

They have a similar offensive profile to vanvets, but that's it. Assault Terminators are less meaningfully distinct from Vanvets than Wulfen. T5 4+ W2 with access to only TH/SS is not T4 3+ W2 with access to Chainsword/SS, theyr'e a whole different ballgame defensively, and 8" no fly is not 12" fly deep strike. Vanvets also have full transport access, don't have an aura, dont have perma-assault doctrine...

Like, there's a certain point where, sure, a melee unit is a melee unit, but you wouldn't argue that Skorpekh Destroyers and Vanvets were "basically the same" would you?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
How I'd field Wulfen:

Frost Claws/Maybe axes depending on meta, maybe 2 TH/SS, a couple cheapos. Field on foot alongside Fenrisian Wolves, bring in some Skyclaw squads to benefit from the aura for the turn 2 tempo. A psyker with the defensive 5++ spell (or most likely, the inevitable -1 to hit spell the SW are all but guaranteed to have) and a bike to keep up with them.

Basically, distraction carnifex unit.

How I'd field Vanvets: Chainsword/SS on some models, Chainfist/Chainsword on others (or Thunder Hammer, I can't remember if they can do chainfists) or Lightning Claw/Chainsword meta depending, with a jump pack chaplain only.

Basically, anti-elite point removal. Support with turn 1 antichaff screen clearing firepower.

Thanks for the breakdown! Seriously, thanks- I don't really know what Wulfen do, since my local Space Wolves player doesn't use them. I was just getting very frustrated by seeing a simple question asked over and over again with constant dodging as a reply.

I think I said earlier in the thread that Space Wolves using Codex: SM but having Wulfen and Thunderwolves as their unique units seemed fine to me, since those are conceptually and aesthetically very distinct and don't have any apparent direct codex counterparts. If the rules for this new unit end up basically just being slightly different Reivers, well, seems kind of pointless.

well according to GW they're "psykic hunters" in which case, taking GW at their word and assuming that's what they'll be it is a niche we don't really have for Marines. right now if we wanna shut down a psyker about all we can do is deny the witch with libbies. It's not going to be a game winner (at least in the meta right now) but it could def be useful.

the_scotsman wrote:
I predict the longevity and commitment to rules support that has been the hallmark of modern GW's space marine range of model game token products.

Players can purchase, convert, painstakingly paint and prepare these models with the level of confidence that they'll have rules support for years to come that we've come to expect from good old games workshop.

They'll be able to ride right up to that rules support in a Land Raider Ultima.

The Hounds of Morkai are relentless hunters of psykers, protected against the magicks of their prey with runic wards. This new Reivers variant, which includes a Space Wolves Primaris Upgrade Frame, is available to pre-order this weekend.

Sounds like a 5+ against mortal wounds to me OR being able to make a deny the witch test. Maybe both. At the current rules for Reivers they could add both abilities at no additional cost and they would still be a "maaaaaaybe" pick for me, sadly.

a_typical_hero wrote:
The Hounds of Morkai are relentless hunters of psykers, protected against the magicks of their prey with runic wards. This new Reivers variant, which includes a Space Wolves Primaris Upgrade Frame, is available to pre-order this weekend.

Sounds like a 5+ against mortal wounds to me OR being able to make a deny the witch test. Maybe both. At the current rules for Reivers they could add both abilities at no additional cost and they would still be a "maaaaaaybe" pick for me, sadly.

Honestly, I think the deny will be a strat even

My guess is no new actual special rules on the data sheet just a keyword and a strat that only works for that keyword.

The Salt Mine wrote:
My guess is no new actual special rules on the data sheet just a keyword and a strat that only works for that keyword.

Hope not, but I could see that happening.

Clad in the midnight armour of the Cult of Morkai, the Hounds are relentless hunters of enemy psykers, warded against the wyrd with runic totems. Once they’ve caught the scent of their quarry, the hapless witch is as good as dead.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Spoiler:

Clad in the midnight armour of the Cult of Morkai, the Hounds are relentless hunters of enemy psykers, warded against the wyrd with runic totems. Once they’ve caught the scent of their quarry, the hapless witch is as good as dead.

Really cool !

Thanks for this post !

That's pretty brutal, if they can get within 12" to snipe a Psyker. S4 is only okay, but AP-2 and D2 is pretty damn good.

Getting in range, though... That's the issue.

ccs wrote:
Prediction: You'll stop playing 40k long before GW will stop making chapter specific units.

I've just got plastic SoB so that may take a LONG time bro .

I hope they get the anti-psyker part of Shield of Faith. They can Deny the Witch, but with just one die instead of two because they aren't psykers. Keep things coherent and all that .

[edit]Of course they got way stronger rules than Sisters, because Space Marine...[/edit]

 Kanluwen wrote:

Clad in the midnight armour of the Cult of Morkai, the Hounds are relentless hunters of enemy psykers, warded against the wyrd with runic totems. Once they’ve caught the scent of their quarry, the hapless witch is as good as dead.

Cool, so they are, in fact, better at hunting psykers than Sisters of Silence.

Yeah, that tracks for a fluff-compliant space wolf unit

Super neat unit. One more reason to just not even bother with my 1ksons though :(.

I really like them. Gives me an excuse to buy another box of Rievers, not that I need an excuse to buy models.

I am excited for there lore entry in the supplement and excited to see mechanics that are relevant to that fluff on the table ... but I am not going further into my thoughts or ideas on this because i don't want to start an argument

 Type40 wrote:
I am excited for there lore entry in the supplement and excited to see mechanics that are relevant to that fluff on the table ... but I am not going further into my thoughts or ideas on this because i don't want to start an argument

Been a long while since I've seen a thread simply be deleted lol

That's a pretty cool unit. Not as good as my sister of silence at giving the middle finger to psykers, but won't break my detachment bonuses.

Dudeface wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
I am excited for there lore entry in the supplement and excited to see mechanics that are relevant to that fluff on the table ... but I am not going further into my thoughts or ideas on this because i don't want to start an argument

Been a long while since I've seen a thread simply be deleted lol

Well we know the rules now so they could do the same with this one or close it.

Dudeface wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
I am excited for there lore entry in the supplement and excited to see mechanics that are relevant to that fluff on the table ... but I am not going further into my thoughts or ideas on this because i don't want to start an argument

Been a long while since I've seen a thread simply be deleted lol

Right,, lets try to be more civil with each other ,, I honestly don't think anyone enjoyed that XD at least I didn't XD

the_scotsman wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Clad in the midnight armour of the Cult of Morkai, the Hounds are relentless hunters of enemy psykers, warded against the wyrd with runic totems. Once they’ve caught the scent of their quarry, the hapless witch is as good as dead.

Cool, so they are, in fact, better at hunting psykers than Sisters of Silence.

Yeah, that tracks for a fluff-compliant space wolf unit

Surprising that once again Marines manage to get another factions entire stick for one of their yet another flavpur of Chadmaris BS but somehow do it better for cheaper because Marines.

So does their Howl aura stack with multiple units? seems to

What do this Reivers have to make them that good vs Psykers? It's... the small trinkets?... with the runes on it?

I can't help but imagine Cawl into his advanced and highly techological lab:

"haha! my new Primaris Reivers are done! I guess I could equip them with those small leather and bone trinkets and send them to Grimnar..."

 Mr Morden wrote:
So does their Howl aura stack with multiple units? seems to

I thought the concept was multiples of the same aura don't stack unless stated to do so, but given it's Marines GW will probably FAQ it to stack.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Denegaar wrote:
What do this Reivers have to make them that good vs Psykers? It's... the small trinkets?... with the runes on it?

I can't help but imagine Cawl into his advanced and highly techological lab:

"haha! my new Primaris Reivers are done! I guess I could equip them with those small leather and bone trinkets and send them to Grimnar..."

I suspect Cawls about to be told to go raid Fenrris of every dang runic totem he can find and scatter them into the citrixmaledictum as apparently tese things are potent enough to stop 50% of warp shenanigans. Also when the wolfs find out he's stollen all their shiny trinkets and start howling at the void apparently it'll be soo terrifying that choas will just retreat into the warp, why they didnt just try that against the eye of terror dumb space puppies.

Ice_can wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
So does their Howl aura stack with multiple units? seems to

I thought the concept was multiples of the same aura don't stack unless stated to do so, but given it's Marines GW will probably FAQ it to stack.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Denegaar wrote:
What do this Reivers have to make them that good vs Psykers? It's... the small trinkets?... with the runes on it?

I can't help but imagine Cawl into his advanced and highly techological lab:

"haha! my new Primaris Reivers are done! I guess I could equip them with those small leather and bone trinkets and send them to Grimnar..."

I suspect Cawls about to be told to go raid Fenrris of every dang runic totem he can find and scatter them into the citrixmaledictum as apparently tese things are potent enough to stop 50% of warp shenanigans. Also when the wolfs find out he's stollen all their shiny trinkets and start howling at the void apparently it'll be soo terrifying that choas will just retreat into the warp, why they didnt just try that against the eye of terror dumb space puppies.

the trickets likely wouldn't work for non wolves, for the same reason why a Tau screaming "the emperor protects" when confronted with a deamon won't work while a SOB doing so it might.

BrianDavion wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
So does their Howl aura stack with multiple units? seems to

I thought the concept was multiples of the same aura don't stack unless stated to do so, but given it's Marines GW will probably FAQ it to stack.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Denegaar wrote:
What do this Reivers have to make them that good vs Psykers? It's... the small trinkets?... with the runes on it?

I can't help but imagine Cawl into his advanced and highly techological lab:

"haha! my new Primaris Reivers are done! I guess I could equip them with those small leather and bone trinkets and send them to Grimnar..."

I suspect Cawls about to be told to go raid Fenrris of every dang runic totem he can find and scatter them into the citrixmaledictum as apparently tese things are potent enough to stop 50% of warp shenanigans. Also when the wolfs find out he's stollen all their shiny trinkets and start howling at the void apparently it'll be soo terrifying that choas will just retreat into the warp, why they didnt just try that against the eye of terror dumb space puppies.

the trickets likely wouldn't work for non wolves, for the same reason why a Tau screaming "the emperor protects" when confronted with a deamon won't work while a SOB doing so it might.

Aka GW needed another WGAF reason to pump out more primarcrap so lets take a POS unit that we duck the rules for and make them into some sort of SOS Calexus assasin wombcombo with marine doctorines and chapter tactics and then we'll finally sell those revier kits.

Don't bother that lore wise it makes zero sence and bonus totally destroys what little balance their was between psychic armies and anti psycher units in the game.

As now every dang psycher army is going to be demanding better rules as are going to have to face this BS so those without anti psycher units abilities or strategums will get double screwed, but we should all be happy for more marine BS.

At this point I'm just done waiting and seeing. I've seen enough.

Ice_can wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
So does their Howl aura stack with multiple units? seems to

I thought the concept was multiples of the same aura don't stack unless stated to do so, but given it's Marines GW will probably FAQ it to stack.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Denegaar wrote:
What do this Reivers have to make them that good vs Psykers? It's... the small trinkets?... with the runes on it?

I can't help but imagine Cawl into his advanced and highly techological lab:

"haha! my new Primaris Reivers are done! I guess I could equip them with those small leather and bone trinkets and send them to Grimnar..."

I suspect Cawls about to be told to go raid Fenrris of every dang runic totem he can find and scatter them into the citrixmaledictum as apparently tese things are potent enough to stop 50% of warp shenanigans. Also when the wolfs find out he's stollen all their shiny trinkets and start howling at the void apparently it'll be soo terrifying that choas will just retreat into the warp, why they didnt just try that against the eye of terror dumb space puppies.

the trickets likely wouldn't work for non wolves, for the same reason why a Tau screaming "the emperor protects" when confronted with a deamon won't work while a SOB doing so it might.

Aka GW needed another WGAF reason to pump out more primarcrap so lets take a POS unit that we duck the rules for and make them into some sort of SOS Calexus assasin wombcombo with marine doctorines and chapter tactics and then we'll finally sell those revier kits.

Don't bother that lore wise it makes zero sence and bonus totally destroys what little balance their was between psychic armies and anti psycher units in the game.

As now every dang psycher army is going to be demanding better rules as are going to have to face this BS so those without anti psycher units abilities or strategums will get double screwed, but we should all be happy for more marine BS.

ok honest question, do you think this new unit is going to be "on meta"?

I don't even think it is going to be on meta. I'm just past caring.

Am I the only one that's seriously unimpressed with the new unit's rules...? I do appreciate trying to do something different with it than just "here are some Wolf Reivers, they howl extra wolfily" or something. But... their role seems incredibly niche for (what I'm guessing will be) the Elite slot... and they're not even that great at taking out psykers unless that psyker is a small-fry one, and has no support nearby.

The pistol snipe ability seems handy... until you realise it's only 12" range and S4 (the AP isn't too bad, mind). That's decent against your basic Farseer or Weirdboy I suppose, but it's not doing anything against Greater Daemons, Hive Tyrants or Librarian Dreads. That's far too specific a target for a unit that isn't even as good as basic Reivers against any non-psyker target. If your army is having that much trouble with one non-monstrous psyker, you've got bigger problems... and if that psyker is really important to the opponent, they're not going to be on their own, so getting within that 12" could be a tricky prospect.

I could see them being fantastic against Grey Knights, Thousand Sons and Daemons armies, to fight alongside the rest of the army rather than hunting anything specific. But if you've taken them because you know you'll be playing one of those armies... I dunno, seems a bit "that guy" to me. Doubly so if you take more than one unit of them.

Clearly the threat is so real post Psychic Awakening with all the new psyker units and rules, this unit was sorely needed for grey wolfy marines..


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Super Ready wrote:
Am I the only one that's seriously unimpressed with the new unit's rules...? I do appreciate trying to do something different with it than just "here are some Wolf Reivers, they howl extra wolfily" or something. But... their role seems incredibly niche for (what I'm guessing will be) the Elite slot... and they're not even that great at taking out psykers unless that psyker is a small-fry one, and has no support nearby.

The pistol snipe ability seems handy... until you realise it's only 12" range and S4 (the AP isn't too bad, mind). That's decent against your basic Farseer or Weirdboy I suppose, but it's not doing anything against Greater Daemons, Hive Tyrants or Librarian Dreads. That's far too specific a target for a unit that isn't even as good as basic Reivers against any non-psyker target. If your army is having that much trouble with one non-monstrous psyker, you've got bigger problems... and if that psyker is really important to the opponent, they're not going to be on their own, so getting within that 12" could be a tricky prospect.

I could see them being fantastic against Grey Knights, Thousand Sons and Daemons armies, to fight alongside the rest of the army rather than hunting anything specific. But if you've taken them because you know you'll be playing one of those armies... I dunno, seems a bit "that guy" to me. Doubly so if you take more than one unit of them.

They seem really good for screening out smite.

As well as taking out things like IG priamaris psykers, or CWE Warlocks (which are 2W T3)

So against amries like CWE, Tsons, Tyranids, GK or any other army that includes psyker elements as key strategies (da jump for example?) they could be great.
Especially if you can boom them forward in a impulsor and just have them run out + shoot & eat all the smite and nerf psychic.

 Argive wrote:
They are excellent for screening out smite.

Only once they're actually close enough, so same problem as with the pistol snipe really. Arguably decent against smite spam, but the armies that can achieve that can spread their units out far enough that it won't matter.

As well as takign out things like IG priamaris psykers, or CWE Warlocks (which are 2W T3)

Again, you really don't need a specialised unit to take care of those. It's still too niche for me to consider spending an already hotly-contested Elite slot for the sake of taking out one piddly psyker.

 CEO Kasen wrote:
I don't even think it is going to be on meta. I'm just past caring.

So, it's a medicore unit that fills a specialist function that's mostly narrative.... so whats the problem?

Because it just doesn't end. I no longer hold out hope it ever will.

BrianDavion wrote:

 CEO Kasen wrote:
I don't even think it is going to be on meta. I'm just past caring.

So, it's a medicore unit that fills a specialist function that's mostly narrative.... so whats the problem?

So why then do we needed this unit to be yet another flavour of SM?

BrianDavion wrote:

 CEO Kasen wrote:
I don't even think it is going to be on meta. I'm just past caring.

So, it's a medicore unit that fills a specialist function that's mostly narrative.... so whats the problem?

Yeah whats the problem with marines getting yet another pointless mediocare unit using a bit more of the design space+ resource while everyone else lingers about with nothing? Whats the problem with that CEO Kasen? Don't you play grey wolfy marines? Maybe you should..

Seriously though this is minimal effort/investment type thing with a unit of rievers (that amriens decry as gutetr trash since inception..)and an upgrade sprue in a new box so its very meh *shrugs*.
Id rather they do this than put time into even more new sculpts for a mediocare pointles sunit for an over-bloated faction so yay? I guess?

It seems they feel they need to have "something NEW!!!" to go with each new codex/supplement. So we are likely to end up with more hare brained pointless bloaty data sheets coz GW be GW..


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Super Ready wrote:

 Argive wrote:
They are excellent for screening out smite.

Only once they're actually close enough, so same problem as with the pistol snipe really. Arguably decent against smite spam, but the armies that can achieve that can spread their units out far enough that it won't matter.

As well as takign out things like IG priamaris psykers, or CWE Warlocks (which are 2W T3)

Again, you really don't need a specialised unit to take care of those. It's still too niche for me to consider spending an already hotly-contested Elite slot for the sake of taking out one piddly psyker.

I assume they can grav shoute in or DS? So you could drop them in some cover/crater and be a real pain int he ass...

The impulsor stil has the asult ramp rule doesnt it?

It could be a speedbump unit against some factions that will funnel them and restrict their movement. If I have to shoot some pesky rievers in order to enable my psykers to do their key roles, im not shooting at things I actually want to shoot at ?

I don't think they are meta shattering or anything. But certainly against some armies they could eeek out a win.
Anything that dictates deployment and movement for you opponents and make them think twice about positioning psyker characters is more powerful than simply dice output IMO

 Argive wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 CEO Kasen wrote:
I don't even think it is going to be on meta. I'm just past caring.

So, it's a medicore unit that fills a specialist function that's mostly narrative.... so whats the problem?

Yeah whats the problem with marines getting yet another pointless mediocare unit using a bit more of the design space+ resource while everyone else lingers about with nothing? Whats the problem with that CEO Kasen? Don't you play grey wolfy marines? Maybe you should..

Seriously though this is minimal effort/investment type thing with a unit of rievers (that amriens decry as gutetr trash since inception..)and an upgrade sprue in a new box so its very meh *shrugs*.
Id rather they do this than put time into even more new sculpts for a mediocare pointles sunit for an over-bloated faction so yay? I guess?

It seems they feel they need to have "something NEW!!!" to go with each new codex/supplement. So we are likely to end up with more hare brained pointless bloaty data sheets coz GW be GW..

.. you realize the rules team and the mini design team are entirely two differant groups of people right?

BrianDavion wrote:

 Argive wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 CEO Kasen wrote:
I don't even think it is going to be on meta. I'm just past caring.

So, it's a medicore unit that fills a specialist function that's mostly narrative.... so whats the problem?

Yeah whats the problem with marines getting yet another pointless mediocare unit using a bit more of the design space+ resource while everyone else lingers about with nothing? Whats the problem with that CEO Kasen? Don't you play grey wolfy marines? Maybe you should..

Seriously though this is minimal effort/investment type thing with a unit of rievers (that amriens decry as gutetr trash since inception..)and an upgrade sprue in a new box so its very meh *shrugs*.
Id rather they do this than put time into even more new sculpts for a mediocare pointles sunit for an over-bloated faction so yay? I guess?

It seems they feel they need to have "something NEW!!!" to go with each new codex/supplement. So we are likely to end up with more hare brained pointless bloaty data sheets coz GW be GW..

.. you realize the rules team and the mini design team are entirely two differant groups of people right?

I fail to see how that's relevant at all to what I said. Other then being needlessly condescending and doing yourself no favours....

 Argive wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Argive wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 CEO Kasen wrote:
I don't even think it is going to be on meta. I'm just past caring.

So, it's a medicore unit that fills a specialist function that's mostly narrative.... so whats the problem?

Yeah whats the problem with marines getting yet another pointless mediocare unit using a bit more of the design space+ resource while everyone else lingers about with nothing? Whats the problem with that CEO Kasen? Don't you play grey wolfy marines? Maybe you should..

Seriously though this is minimal effort/investment type thing with a unit of rievers (that amriens decry as gutetr trash since inception..)and an upgrade sprue in a new box so its very meh *shrugs*.
Id rather they do this than put time into even more new sculpts for a mediocare pointles sunit for an over-bloated faction so yay? I guess?

It seems they feel they need to have "something NEW!!!" to go with each new codex/supplement. So we are likely to end up with more hare brained pointless bloaty data sheets coz GW be GW..

.. you realize the rules team and the mini design team are entirely two differant groups of people right?

I fail to see how that's relevant at all to what I said. Other then being needlessly condescending and doing yourself no favours....

I actually misread you, and thought you where saying they should put more time into new sculpts

BrianDavion wrote:

 Argive wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Argive wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 CEO Kasen wrote:
I don't even think it is going to be on meta. I'm just past caring.

So, it's a medicore unit that fills a specialist function that's mostly narrative.... so whats the problem?

Yeah whats the problem with marines getting yet another pointless mediocare unit using a bit more of the design space+ resource while everyone else lingers about with nothing? Whats the problem with that CEO Kasen? Don't you play grey wolfy marines? Maybe you should..

Seriously though this is minimal effort/investment type thing with a unit of rievers (that amriens decry as gutetr trash since inception..)and an upgrade sprue in a new box so its very meh *shrugs*.
Id rather they do this than put time into even more new sculpts for a mediocare pointles sunit for an over-bloated faction so yay? I guess?

It seems they feel they need to have "something NEW!!!" to go with each new codex/supplement. So we are likely to end up with more hare brained pointless bloaty data sheets coz GW be GW..

.. you realize the rules team and the mini design team are entirely two differant groups of people right?

I fail to see how that's relevant at all to what I said. Other then being needlessly condescending and doing yourself no favours....

I actually misread you, and thought you where saying they should put more time into new sculpts

Ah fair enough.. I retract my earlier assessment. And int he words of some random gospel music I heard on youtube:
"Helll no!!! To the no to the no no noooooo Hell to the no!"

Its essentially repackaging reivers with additional sprue. Its very minimal effort/investment so its better than the alternative totally new priamris kit.. But its still effort and investment so wotcha gunna do.

Is it me or do they now feel beholden to the idea that for every book they need to have a "NEW RELASE NEW * MODELS** NEW NEW**!!" ??
Cos that does not bode well if we get more hack jobs like this for everyone rather than meaningful units for those taht need them.

 Argive wrote:
I assume they can grav shoute in or DS? So you could drop them in some cover/crater and be a real pain int he ass...

Nope. They can only outflank, hence my previous comment about them not even being as good as Reivers outside of hunting psykers.

The impulsor stil has the asult ramp rule doesnt it?

Yes, it does indeed... but I feel like that's throwing more points after bad. That Impulsor could be used elsewhere.

It could be a speedbump unit against some factions that will funnel them and restrict their movement. If I have to shoot some pesky rievers in order to enable my psykers to do their key roles, im not shooting at things I actually want to shoot at ?

That's true. I suppose they could well serve as a decent distraction if you run them cheap and are otherwise focusing hard on your objectives.

I don't think they are meta shattering or anything. But certainly against some armies they could eeek out a win.
Anything that dictates deployment and movement for you opponents and make them think twice about positioning psyker characters is more powerful than simply dice output IMO

Not a bad analysis. Perhaps I've been overly harsh on them, and I'm sure some players will find a use for them. I just can't see many lists actually wanting to take them over, say, Aggressors or Bladeguard. Meanwhile if you really need units to dictate deployment and movement, you've got much better options in the Fast Attack slot that can continue doing so all game long.

this is honestly part of the problem with elites, it includes both hyper specialist and hyper killy. if 10th edition divided elites into "elites" and "specialists" then people might be more incliend to take some of these style of units but as it is, "I could take these....... or I could take blade guard" isn't a hard choice

So custodes can ignore wounds in the psychic phase on six but these schmucks do it on a 4+ because lord help us if space marines don’t do something better. This is just laughable at this point. How on earth do you justify that choice? Thank god the Space Wolves’ rivals aren’t a psychic based legion. Seriously good luck to any 1000 Sons player. Enjoy the one or two powers you can cast.

There was zero need for this unit. It’s just one more case of marine BS. Plus to add insult to injury it’s another unit that marine players will label as mediocre because they’re spoiled for options.

 evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
So custodes can ignore wounds in the psychic phase on six but these schmucks do it on a 4+ because lord help us if space marines don’t do something better. This is just laughable at this point. How on earth do you justify that choice? Thank god the Space Wolves’ rivals aren’t a psychic based legion. Seriously good luck to any 1000 Sons player. Enjoy the one or two powers you can cast.

There was zero need for this unit. It’s just one more case of marine BS. Plus to add insult to injury it’s another unit that marine players will label as mediocre because they’re spoiled for options.

........ are you really objecting to the fact that a specialist anti-psyker reiver varient gets it, but an ENTIRE ARMY of 2+/4++ guys with a higher toughness also don't have a 4+ save vs wounds?!

BrianDavion wrote:

ok honest question, do you think this new unit is going to be "on meta"?

At this point your going into the old circular argument marine players always make X isnt as Broken as Y so why should I ever take it.

While missing the wider issue these dang things even exsisting within a marine codex causes a host of issues.
They are shoot psychers on 2+, with Ap-2/3 D2 weapons.
The hit them on 1+ in CC FFS. These smucks hit a demon primarch on a 1+ in CC

This now means that inevitably more -1 to be hits will be spread around screwing over everyone else who doesn't get the new buffed up psychers or anti psycher unit.

Ice_can wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

ok honest question, do you think this new unit is going to be "on meta"?

At this point your going into the old circular argument marine players always make X isnt as Broken as Y so why should I ever take it.

While missing the wider issue these dang things even exsisting within a marine codex causes a host of issues.
They are shoot psychers on 2+, with Ap-2/3 D2 weapons.
The hit them on 1+ in CC FFS. These smucks hit a demon primarch on a 1+ in CC

This now means that inevitably more -1 to be hits will be spread around screwing over everyone else who doesn't get the new buffed up psychers or anti psycher unit.

... no they don't. their pistols are 1 DMG.

and their knives are AP - 4 dmg 1.

How is that a threat to a deamon Primarch?

hell, how are these fethers reaching close combat with a deamon primarch?!

BrianDavion wrote:


... no they don't. their pistols are 1 DMG.

and their knives are AP - 4 dmg 1.

How is that a threat to a deamon Primarch?

hell, how are these fethers reaching close combat with a deamon primarch?!

Hey, we're complaining about Marines here, accuracy and honesty aren't important. Nerfing Marines even before they're released is what's important.

Breton wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:


... no they don't. their pistols are 1 DMG.

and their knives are AP - 4 dmg 1.

How is that a threat to a deamon Primarch?

hell, how are these fethers reaching close combat with a deamon primarch?!

Hey, we're complaining about Marines here, accuracy and honesty aren't important. Nerfing Marines even before they're released is what's important.

Maybe read their special rule giving them +1 and +1 before complaining about being inaccurate.
GW have made compairing marines actually very contrived now that they get bonuses stacjed ontop of bonuses ontop of some very cheap statlines.

Also for complaining about inaccurate information where are you getting Ap-4 from that datasheet is on pg 4 of this thread FFS.

Breton wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:


... no they don't. their pistols are 1 DMG.

and their knives are AP - 4 dmg 1.

How is that a threat to a deamon Primarch?

hell, how are these fethers reaching close combat with a deamon primarch?!

Hey, we're complaining about Marines here, accuracy and honesty aren't important. Nerfing Marines even before they're released is what's important.

Now now Breton, It's theorieticly possiabler the unit COOOOULD kill Magnus, I mean, a 5 man squad has 16 attacks! and the pistol! they could roll straight 6's and kill magnus in close combat! clearly they are a broken unit and will thus absolutely destroy every army with a psyker ever!

Ice_can wrote:


Hey, we're complaining about Marines here, accuracy and honesty aren't important. Nerfing Marines even before they're released is what's important.

Maybe read their special rule giving them +1 and +1 before complaining about being inaccurate.
GW have made compairing marines actually very contrived now that they get bonuses stacjed ontop of bonuses ontop of some very cheap statlines.

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Hey, we're complaining about Marines here, accuracy and honesty aren't important. Nerfing Marines even before they're released is what's important.

Maybe read their special rule giving them +1 and +1 before complaining about being inaccurate.
GW have made compairing marines actually very contrived now that they get bonuses stacjed ontop of bonuses ontop of some very cheap statlines.

Did you claim a WS 3+ stat lined unit hits in close combat on 1+?

Ice_can wrote:

Breton wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:


... no they don't. their pistols are 1 DMG.

and their knives are AP - 4 dmg 1.

How is that a threat to a deamon Primarch?

hell, how are these fethers reaching close combat with a deamon primarch?!

Hey, we're complaining about Marines here, accuracy and honesty aren't important. Nerfing Marines even before they're released is what's important.

Maybe read their special rule giving them +1 and +1 before complaining about being inaccurate.
GW have made compairing marines actually very contrived now that they get bonuses stacjed ontop of bonuses ontop of some very cheap statlines.

I think you mean complicated not contrived. my point is, that these guys are NOT a threat to a deamon primarch.

are they a threat to a random libraran or sorcrer? sure...

but they're JUST reivers. you know why Reivers suck? because.. they tend to die before they can get into combat. seriously, for these guys to do their job, they have to basicly walk up to the enemy, and get into close combat with them. sure they can be dangerous if they're able to do their job (EVERY unit should be dangerous if they're able to do their job. ) but yeah... let's not pretend these guys are going to be breaking the game.

Ice_can wrote:


Plus +1 to hit roll againt psychers +1 in CC because space puppies, WS3+ on a D6+2 1+2=3 really is that so difficult?

Max of final +1 or -1 to hit. The only way they can use a second +1 is if there's a corresponding -1. They will never hit on a 1+. And that second +1 only applies on charge turns. That isn't difficuilt. But it it is honest. And that's difficult for you.

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Plus +1 to hit roll againt psychers +1 in CC because space puppies, WS3+ on a D6+2 1+2=3 really is that so difficult?

Max of final +1 or -1 to hit. The only way they can use a second +1 is if there's a corresponding -1. They will never hit on a 1+. And that second +1 only applies on charge turns. That isn't difficuilt. But it it is honest. And that's difficult for you.

good catch, and reivers can't take thunderhammers so the rule'd only come into play if the psyker cast some sort of "-1 to hit me in combat" spell.

still I suppose if the combat stretches past 1 round that special rule might be relevant

They don't have to break the whole game marines have pretty much already got that locked down, this is just breaking Psychers.
Which inevitably leads to psychers needing to be buffed as who's going to take them now, then they get buffed and then those without power armour and the new fancy anti psycher outflanking infanry that double their damage agaisnt psychers get left behind in the powercreep again.

BrianDavion wrote:

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Plus +1 to hit roll againt psychers +1 in CC because space puppies, WS3+ on a D6+2 1+2=3 really is that so difficult?

Max of final +1 or -1 to hit. The only way they can use a second +1 is if there's a corresponding -1. They will never hit on a 1+. And that second +1 only applies on charge turns. That isn't difficuilt. But it it is honest. And that's difficult for you.

good catch, and reivers can't take thunderhammers so the rule'd only come into play if the psyker cast some sort of "-1 to hit me in combat" spell.

still I suppose if the combat stretches past 1 round that special rule might be relevant

Figures don't lie, but liars can figure. They (always) hit Demon Princes on a 1+ is far different from they CAN get +2 to hit in the right circumstances

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Plus +1 to hit roll againt psychers +1 in CC because space puppies, WS3+ on a D6+2 1+2=3 really is that so difficult?

Max of final +1 or -1 to hit. The only way they can use a second +1 is if there's a corresponding -1. They will never hit on a 1+. And that second +1 only applies on charge turns. That isn't difficuilt. But it it is honest. And that's difficult for you.

Natural 1's always fail aswell, but ignore that your unit hits on 2+ againt a -1 to hit target sure. Not like everyone else is stuck at 4+ or worse.
You sure it is just when charging? Not it when chargeing, charged or heroic intervention too.

Ice_can wrote:

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Plus +1 to hit roll againt psychers +1 in CC because space puppies, WS3+ on a D6+2 1+2=3 really is that so difficult?

Max of final +1 or -1 to hit. The only way they can use a second +1 is if there's a corresponding -1. They will never hit on a 1+. And that second +1 only applies on charge turns. That isn't difficuilt. But it it is honest. And that's difficult for you.

Natural 1's always fail aswell, but ignore that your unit hits on 2+ againt a -1 to hit target sure. Not like everyone else is stuck at 4+ or worse.
You sure it is just when charging? Not it when chargeing, charged or heroic intervention too.

dude, how often is this imaginary scenerio going to come up? How many psykers have spells that can add a -1 to attack agaisnt them?

Ice_can wrote:

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Plus +1 to hit roll againt psychers +1 in CC because space puppies, WS3+ on a D6+2 1+2=3 really is that so difficult?

Max of final +1 or -1 to hit. The only way they can use a second +1 is if there's a corresponding -1. They will never hit on a 1+. And that second +1 only applies on charge turns. That isn't difficuilt. But it it is honest. And that's difficult for you.

Natural 1's always fail aswell, but ignore that your unit hits on 2+ againt a -1 to hit target sure. Not like everyone else is stuck at 4+ or worse.
You sure it is just when charging? Not it when chargeing, charged or heroic intervention too.

“On charge turns” is what I said. You can’t even tell the truth about the post you quoted. Nor can you, even now, include the situational requirements for that second +1. Like I said, honesty is difficult for you, and not important when we’re calling for nerfing marines before they’re even released.

BrianDavion wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Plus +1 to hit roll againt psychers +1 in CC because space puppies, WS3+ on a D6+2 1+2=3 really is that so difficult?

Max of final +1 or -1 to hit. The only way they can use a second +1 is if there's a corresponding -1. They will never hit on a 1+. And that second +1 only applies on charge turns. That isn't difficuilt. But it it is honest. And that's difficult for you.

Natural 1's always fail aswell, but ignore that your unit hits on 2+ againt a -1 to hit target sure. Not like everyone else is stuck at 4+ or worse.
You sure it is just when charging? Not it when chargeing, charged or heroic intervention too.

dude, how often is this imaginary scenerio going to come up? How many psykers have spells that can add a -1 to attack agaisnt them?

It doesn't have to be a spell it can be anything that gives them a -1 be that strategum, ability, power, wargear.

Ice_can wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Plus +1 to hit roll againt psychers +1 in CC because space puppies, WS3+ on a D6+2 1+2=3 really is that so difficult?

Max of final +1 or -1 to hit. The only way they can use a second +1 is if there's a corresponding -1. They will never hit on a 1+. And that second +1 only applies on charge turns. That isn't difficuilt. But it it is honest. And that's difficult for you.

Natural 1's always fail aswell, but ignore that your unit hits on 2+ againt a -1 to hit target sure. Not like everyone else is stuck at 4+ or worse.
You sure it is just when charging? Not it when chargeing, charged or heroic intervention too.

dude, how often is this imaginary scenerio going to come up? How many psykers have spells that can add a -1 to attack agaisnt them?

It doesn't have to be a spell it can be anything that gives them a -1 be that strategum, ability, power, wargear.

sure my point is, you're making much ado about something that is absurdly niche. seriously, Breton's right, you've already decided this unit is bad and you're grasping at straws to "prove it"

BrianDavion wrote:

sure my point is, you're making much ado about something that is absurdly niche. seriously, Breton's right, you've already decided this unit is bad and you're grasping at straws to "prove it"

Its new, its Marine, and he's one of the usual suspects. It must be nerfed.

BrianDavion wrote:

dude, how often is this imaginary scenerio going to come up? How many psykers have spells that can add a -1 to attack agaisnt them?

Thousand Sons
Death Guard
Tyranids
Genestealer Cults
Orkz (Death Skulls specifically)
Harlequins (has TWO spells that can do it!)
Craftworld Eldar
Chaos Daemons
Space Marines (Objuration Discipline)

At least.

And like, I actually largely agree with you and think this unit is really overhyped. But "-1 to hit" is one of the single most common psychic power effects among every army in the game.

Well, basically any Eldar Psyker can LFR, Harlequin Shadowseers could Fog of Dreams themselves (and LFR for 2 CP for a -2, making charging Morkai Hounds hit on 3+ again). Most Nurgle stuff, including Morty, could have Miasma. Most Tzeentch stuff, including Magnus, could have Glamour.

It's not a super uncommon scenario IMO, but also not super problematic IMO.

BrianDavion wrote:

sure my point is, you're making much ado about something that is absurdly niche. seriously, Breton's right, you've already decided this unit is bad and you're grasping at straws to "prove it"

How niche do you think the psycher keyword is? Seriously
This unit is the latest in GW making a unit for marines that's anti X so automatically anyone who was playing X (assuming x was at a fair and balanced points) is going to be pointing out they are now weaker with a hard counter unit being handed to the largest faction in the game. (Marines are 1 faction, played against enough grey blood angles, green Guillimans etc. They are the same army.) so GW drops the points for psychers or adds rules they are now balanced against marines but oh look they wipe the floor with everyone else.

It's starting another round of powercreep in yet another area.

If they had their Bolt Carbines they might see some play (in fact they might just be completely broken with 24" range). 12" just isn't going to cut it most of the time. Outflanking MIGHT work if your opponent forgets to screen their Farseer of whatever. However unless your opponent is a potato, screening against 12" weapons is absolutely trivial.

(Marines are 1 faction, played against enough grey blood angles, green Guillimans etc. They are the same army.)

If something requires a different rule set then it is a different thing. Just like in sports, being 100m dash can make you good at other sprints, but not always and they are separate cathegories in any event. Now you can hate the fact that they are more model efficient then other stuff GW sells, but that is like hating ethiopians for being being good at every type of long run.

Karol wrote:

(Marines are 1 faction, played against enough grey blood angles, green Guillimans etc. They are the same army.)

If something requires a different rule set then it is a different thing. Just like in sports, being 100m dash can make you good at other sprints, but not always and they are separate cathegories in any event. Now you can hate the fact that they are more model efficient then other stuff GW sells, but that is like hating ethiopians for being being good at every type of long run.

Way to monumentally miss the point.

Want to move fron eldar to GK guess what you need to go and buy 2000 points of new units
Drukari to Orks same

Want to play your Dark Angles as Ultramarines, you need a codex no new models no painting.

Ice_can wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

sure my point is, you're making much ado about something that is absurdly niche. seriously, Breton's right, you've already decided this unit is bad and you're grasping at straws to "prove it"

How niche do you think the psycher keyword is? Seriously

... pretty fething niche.

Outside of 2 armies it's restricted to mostly HQs. something not every army has. your average 2000 game is going to have a battlaion vs a battlaion (or maybe a brigade if your enemy has a TON of cheap units)

a battlaion is 2-3 HQs. this means, MAX a list will have 3 Psykers, and guess what, plenty won't have ANY.

as it is MOST armies only have a single psyker entry as a HQ type. So yeah you're talking about a squad that in your average game will hunt down a SINGLE MODEL on the table top.

BrianDavion wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

sure my point is, you're making much ado about something that is absurdly niche. seriously, Breton's right, you've already decided this unit is bad and you're grasping at straws to "prove it"

How niche do you think the psycher keyword is? Seriously

... pretty fething niche.

Outside of 2 armies it's restricted to mostly HQs. something not every army has. your average 2000 game is going to have a battlaion vs a battlaion (or maybe a brigade if your enemy has a TON of cheap units)

a battlaion is 2-3 HQs. this means, MAX a list will have 3 Psykers, and guess what, plenty won't have ANY.

as it is MOST armies only have a single psyker entry as a HQ type. So yeah you're talking about a squad that in your average game will hunt down a SINGLE MODEL on the table top.

Assuming the hounds turn up out of reserve within 12" of the target, the 5 man squad will chip 4 damage off a marine psyker with pistols, against a lot of weaker psykers physically they have good odds of outright killing them.

I think this is the unit for Space Wolves to counter their nemisis - Thousand Sons. Not only their pseudo "shadow of the warp" ability make TS harder to cast powers, but also the +1dmg against psyker units will nullify the "all is dust" rule for TS marines and Terminators.

I feel like it would be a dick to take 3 units of these against TS in a "non competitive" game.

The best use for them is probably having them enter somewhere out of sight and then set up teleport homers and score linebreaker while they mess up your opponent's casting with their 18" aura.

If the opponent doesn't have psykers they are just worse reavers though.

They need an update sprue so they can all take thunder hammers.

Neophyte2012 wrote:
I think this is the unit for Space Wolves to counter their nemisis - Thousand Sons. Not only their pseudo "shadow of the warp" ability make TS harder to cast powers, but also the +1dmg against psyker units will nullify the "all is dust" rule for TS marines and Terminators.

I feel like it would be a dick to take 3 units of these against TS in a "non competitive" game.

The Thousand Sons don't need stupidly strong counters like this one to lose vs them. And I don't think the Thousand Sons are going to get an Aura that reduces charge distances or number of attacks in melee to counter their nemesis, the Space Wolves.

There's dicks in every faction, but the problem is not the customer, is the company.

GW was not selling Reivers because of their rules and now every SW player is going to buy a box of these just in case they play vs a Psyker army (and I'm pretty sure SW is one of the most played SM chapters) because they are pretty good at their job. GW doing GW things and abusing the customers. In my opinion, everyone should be sad about releases like this one.

 Denegaar wrote:

Neophyte2012 wrote:
I think this is the unit for Space Wolves to counter their nemisis - Thousand Sons. Not only their pseudo "shadow of the warp" ability make TS harder to cast powers, but also the +1dmg against psyker units will nullify the "all is dust" rule for TS marines and Terminators.

I feel like it would be a dick to take 3 units of these against TS in a "non competitive" game.

The Thousand Sons don't need stupidly strong counters like this one to lose vs them. And I don't think the Thousand Sons are going to get an Aura that reduces charge distances or number of attacks in melee to counter their nemesis, the Space Wolves.

There's dicks in every faction, but the problem is not the customer, is the company.

GW was not selling Reivers because of their rules and now every SW player is going to buy a box of these just in case they play vs a Psyker army (and I'm pretty sure SW is one of the most played SM chapters) because they are pretty good at their job. GW doing GW things and abusing the customers. In my opinion, everyone should be sad about releases like this one.

Thousand Sons get DttfE, and not even on just one unit.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Denegaar wrote:

Neophyte2012 wrote:
I think this is the unit for Space Wolves to counter their nemisis - Thousand Sons. Not only their pseudo "shadow of the warp" ability make TS harder to cast powers, but also the +1dmg against psyker units will nullify the "all is dust" rule for TS marines and Terminators.

I feel like it would be a dick to take 3 units of these against TS in a "non competitive" game.

The Thousand Sons don't need stupidly strong counters like this one to lose vs them. And I don't think the Thousand Sons are going to get an Aura that reduces charge distances or number of attacks in melee to counter their nemesis, the Space Wolves.

There's dicks in every faction, but the problem is not the customer, is the company.

GW was not selling Reivers because of their rules and now every SW player is going to buy a box of these just in case they play vs a Psyker army (and I'm pretty sure SW is one of the most played SM chapters) because they are pretty good at their job. GW doing GW things and abusing the customers. In my opinion, everyone should be sad about releases like this one.

Thousand Sons get DttfE, and not even on just one unit.

Lol as if DttfE is relevant compared to say ATSKNF, especially on Thousands sons, to which it was incepted as answer to make any CSM diffrent from SM.
Shall we now go through all the nonsense GW stacked on SM compared to CSM? I am sure the list will be.... amusing.

Sunny Side Up wrote:


Thousand Sons get DttfE, and not even on just one unit.

My point wasn't trying to compare factions... even if I think that SW wins most of the time.

I was trying to say that if SW got the Hounds to counter TS, I think that the rules are pretty overkill. In a world that TS vs SW is a fair fight, adding this unit to the (already winning, IMO) side is just too much.

That's why I believe it's not a "lore" decision but a "sales" decision.

BrianDavion wrote:

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:


Plus +1 to hit roll againt psychers +1 in CC because space puppies, WS3+ on a D6+2 1+2=3 really is that so difficult?

Max of final +1 or -1 to hit. The only way they can use a second +1 is if there's a corresponding -1. They will never hit on a 1+. And that second +1 only applies on charge turns. That isn't difficuilt. But it it is honest. And that's difficult for you.

good catch, and reivers can't take thunderhammers so the rule'd only come into play if the psyker cast some sort of "-1 to hit me in combat" spell.

still I suppose if the combat stretches past 1 round that special rule might be relevant

You know, a -1 to hit spell, like magnus has and basically always casts on himself.

That'd be wild.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sunny Side Up wrote:


Thousand Sons get DttfE, and not even on just one unit.

I find that mostly gets balanced by my entire army being W1 while his entire army is W2 for basically the same cost.

That tends to make a difference.

Weird how GW decided it was so urgent that no space wolf player has to ever play with a W1 marine that they instantly FAQ'ed all the unique units to get them redesigned immediately, AND they decided they needed to get the very first codex slot after the marine codex, but it wasn't urgent at all for any chaos army to get their redesign to W2.

 Denegaar wrote:

Neophyte2012 wrote:
I think this is the unit for Space Wolves to counter their nemisis - Thousand Sons. Not only their pseudo "shadow of the warp" ability make TS harder to cast powers, but also the +1dmg against psyker units will nullify the "all is dust" rule for TS marines and Terminators.

I feel like it would be a dick to take 3 units of these against TS in a "non competitive" game.

The Thousand Sons don't need stupidly strong counters like this one to lose vs them. And I don't think the Thousand Sons are going to get an Aura that reduces charge distances or number of attacks in melee to counter their nemesis, the Space Wolves.

There's dicks in every faction, but the problem is not the customer, is the company.

GW was not selling Reivers because of their rules and now every SW player is going to buy a box of these just in case they play vs a Psyker army (and I'm pretty sure SW is one of the most played SM chapters) because they are pretty good at their job. GW doing GW things and abusing the customers. In my opinion, everyone should be sad about releases like this one.

So Jes Goodwin was lying when he said a while back that Reavers are one of their best sellers? I mean it is possible that someone just thought that this was a cool idea that would sell well. Not everything has to be a nefarious plot. Add to that there are plenty and I mean plenty of people who buy models just because they think they look cool/want to paint them just as there are plenty who buy them just for their rules.

Dai wrote:

 Denegaar wrote:

Neophyte2012 wrote:
I think this is the unit for Space Wolves to counter their nemisis - Thousand Sons. Not only their pseudo "shadow of the warp" ability make TS harder to cast powers, but also the +1dmg against psyker units will nullify the "all is dust" rule for TS marines and Terminators.

I feel like it would be a dick to take 3 units of these against TS in a "non competitive" game.

The Thousand Sons don't need stupidly strong counters like this one to lose vs them. And I don't think the Thousand Sons are going to get an Aura that reduces charge distances or number of attacks in melee to counter their nemesis, the Space Wolves.

There's dicks in every faction, but the problem is not the customer, is the company.

GW was not selling Reivers because of their rules and now every SW player is going to buy a box of these just in case they play vs a Psyker army (and I'm pretty sure SW is one of the most played SM chapters) because they are pretty good at their job. GW doing GW things and abusing the customers. In my opinion, everyone should be sad about releases like this one.

So Jes Goodwin was lying when he said a while back that Reavers are one of their best sellers?

Clearly he meant Reavers not Reivers. Those are two different units.

the_scotsman wrote:

Dai wrote:

 Denegaar wrote:

Neophyte2012 wrote:
I think this is the unit for Space Wolves to counter their nemisis - Thousand Sons. Not only their pseudo "shadow of the warp" ability make TS harder to cast powers, but also the +1dmg against psyker units will nullify the "all is dust" rule for TS marines and Terminators.

I feel like it would be a dick to take 3 units of these against TS in a "non competitive" game.

The Thousand Sons don't need stupidly strong counters like this one to lose vs them. And I don't think the Thousand Sons are going to get an Aura that reduces charge distances or number of attacks in melee to counter their nemesis, the Space Wolves.

There's dicks in every faction, but the problem is not the customer, is the company.

GW was not selling Reivers because of their rules and now every SW player is going to buy a box of these just in case they play vs a Psyker army (and I'm pretty sure SW is one of the most played SM chapters) because they are pretty good at their job. GW doing GW things and abusing the customers. In my opinion, everyone should be sad about releases like this one.

So Jes Goodwin was lying when he said a while back that Reavers are one of their best sellers?

Clearly he meant Reavers not Reivers. Those are two different units.

Sorry for the typo, he was certainly talking about the Primaris skull dudes though.

I really don't know what all this fuss is about.

Since we already established in threads some months ago that taking any sort of psyker is non viable due to Abhor the Witch secondary, this unit is dead on arrival.

Such an important task that they're armed with just combat knives. What a fething waste of a unit entry. GW should be embarrassed legit for publishing these rules.

Such an important task that they're armed with just combat knives. What a fething waste of a unit entry. GW should be embarrassed legit for publishing these rules.

"Wolf Priest Ranek, did you find something to occupy those useless Primaris Reivers?".

"Why yes Lord Logan. I told them they had the most important mission. To sneak around behind enemy lines and assassinate their Psykers. Gave them a few Runic Charms and some stolen Psy-bolt ammo and sent them on their way."

"Brilliant I say, Brilliant. Now lets get on with planning the actual mission."

Justyn wrote:

Such an important task that they're armed with just combat knives. What a fething waste of a unit entry. GW should be embarrassed legit for publishing these rules.

"Wolf Priest Ranek, did you find something to occupy those useless Primaris Reivers?".

"Why yes Lord Logan. I told them they had the most important mission. To sneak around behind enemy lines and assassinate their Psykers. Gave them a few Runic Charms and some stolen Psy-bolt ammo and sent them on their way."

"Brilliant I say, Brilliant. Now lets get on with planning the actual mission."

I legit think the only reason to do this is to rid the warehouses of Reiver models.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Justyn wrote:

Such an important task that they're armed with just combat knives. What a fething waste of a unit entry. GW should be embarrassed legit for publishing these rules.

"Wolf Priest Ranek, did you find something to occupy those useless Primaris Reivers?".

"Why yes Lord Logan. I told them they had the most important mission. To sneak around behind enemy lines and assassinate their Psykers. Gave them a few Runic Charms and some stolen Psy-bolt ammo and sent them on their way."

"Brilliant I say, Brilliant. Now lets get on with planning the actual mission."

I legit think the only reason to do this is to rid the warehouses of Reiver models.

nah space wolves running around with reivers has been a thing in GW's mind for awhile. the space marine kill team... space wolf reivers (in fact they where called the hounds of Mokai) and the white dwarf that came out with saga of the beast also talked about the cult of mokai and reivers.