I have not done a poll, and clearly crave the attention.
Anyway this came up briefly in discussion elsewhere.
I think there is enough in both ranges to be separate rounded armies. There are multiple ways the fluff can be handled. The codex's would be more manageable, would be easier to balance (cue laughter), armies would look better, etc.
I know some think the Primaris range need more options, or that the best builds cherry pick from both. I would ask you to imagine a time where both ranges had balanced competitive rules. At the very least hopefully there would be less pointless Datatfax. You could also have more of a crossover with Heresy gear for the mini marines, a better focus on the straightforward Primaris for beginners, etc.
I don't think we need another Codex that GW feels it has to make two attempts at per edition once they inevitably power creep the first attempt into obscurity.
They'll probably move Firstborn to their own game system before they make a separate codex.
Honestly, IMO, Legends should have been its own game system a la 30k. It's own ruleset based on older editions, with rules for models that no longer exist (and older ones that still do), and just semi-regular campaign books based on the classic battlefields (Vraks, Armageddon, First Tyrannic War, Badab War, etc.)
They should just throw both lines together. A Marine with a plasma gun is a marine with a plasma gun, we don't need 4 different kinds of Marines with a plasma gun where only the Marine player can see the difference, especially with the scale 40K has nowadays. I'm using my old Plague Marines from third edition right next to Plague Marines from 8th edition. Let loyalists do the same and don't force them to buy 2 Codizes + whatever supplement.
I don't see there's any benefit. The major issue when balancing a codex is the free chapter style rules, I don't think the marine codex has balance issues that split along the first born/ primaris line.
It would mean a lot of marine players now need 3 books too. That's 200% more than any other faction.
I don't see it being positive at all.
I wouldn't mind less differentiation between primaris and first born.
A doctrinal split between a heresy/indomitus style organisation and a post heresy codex organisation would be cool. So either all similar equipment in a squad with some sort of side benefit or a flexible approach that brings its own benefits through flexibility.
I just fail to see what purpose it would serve. At present, one can field a purist army for either incarnation if that’s what tickles your pickle, or mix and match to your heart’s content.
Anyway this came up briefly in discussion elsewhere.
I think there is enough in both ranges to be separate rounded armies. There are multiple ways the fluff can be handled. The codex's would be more manageable, would be easier to balance (cue laughter), armies would look better, etc.
I know some think the Primaris range need more options, or that the best builds cherry pick from both. I would ask you to imagine a time where both ranges had balanced competitive rules. At the very least hopefully there would be less pointless Datatfax. You could also have more of a crossover with Heresy gear for the mini marines, a better focus on the straightforward Primaris for beginners, etc.
NO.
I did not appreciate the 9e scam of needing SM Codex + SW + DA. I now need 3 books where 2 used to suffice. Beginners be damned, I don't want it to become 4 books to do the job of 2! Only a dumb would want that.
And should GW go this rout?? I will definitely pirate their stuff this time.
Keep them together, but consolidate. A marine is a marine. Intercessor squad? That’s just a tac squad, maybe with an AGL as a special. Swap in a hellblaster model if you want a plasma gun. Assault intercessors? Assault marines without JPs.
Make sure each box can build a legal unit, but trim all the bloat you can. You want an option allowed on the datasheet but not in the box? Kitbash or swap parts around. The marine range is deep and interchangable.
I wouldn't go that far with it. At most I'd consolidate the profiles that have less of a need to be individualised or can be easily made into wargear upgrades. Stuff like Gravis, Phobos, Jump, and Bike characters. Intercessors should absolutely be made into one profile with the option to kit them out as Assault or Tactical but there should still be the distinction between Firstborn and Primaris units.
Gert wrote: I wouldn't go that far with it. At most I'd consolidate the profiles that have less of a need to be individualised or can be easily made into wargear upgrades. Stuff like Gravis, Phobos, Jump, and Bike characters. Intercessors should absolutely be made into one profile with the option to kit them out as Assault or Tactical but there should still be the distinction between Firstborn and Primaris units.
Once they gave firstborn the second wound I started asking “why the distinction?”
In my opinion the datasheet bloat for similar units that could be consolidated is not worth it.
I’d rather have a “battleline squad” that encompasses multiple options then stuff getting squatted/legends.
Nevelon wrote: Once they gave firstborn the second wound I started asking “why the distinction?”
I would argue this is a wider issue for 40k as a whole with the system of dice and the limits placed on things like Strength, Toughness, and Wounds.
The baseline should be along the lines of:
Basic Humans/Fire Warriors/lesser Nid beasts i.e. Gaunts/Gants at 1 Wound
Tougher things like Orks/Necron Warrior classes/Aeldari at 2 Wounds
Units like Marines or Nobz would be 3 and so on so forth.
A Shuriken Catapult or Bolter would mince a Guardsman or Termagant but still do significant damage to a Space Marine without killing them.
I dunno, I ain't a game designer and this is just something I thought up on the spot.
Nevelon wrote: Once they gave firstborn the second wound I started asking “why the distinction?”
I would argue this is a wider issue for 40k as a whole where the system of dice and the limits placed on things like Strength, Toughness, and Wounds.
The baseline should be along the lines of:
Basic Humans/Fire Warriors/lesser Nid beasts i.e. Gaunts/Gants at 1 Wound
Tougher things like Orks/Necron Warrior classes/Aeldari at 2 Wounds
Units like Marines or Nobz would be 3 and so on so forth.
A Shuriken Catapult or Bolter would mince a Guardsman or Termagant but still do significant damage to a Space Marine without killing them.
I dunno, I ain't a game designer and this is just something I thought up on the spot.
There is a lot to break down about the statlines. The d6 does not give a whole lot of wiggle room to work with, and a lot of stats are tightly clustered across the game. How do we differentiate armies/units? What does a wound represent?
But that is more a game-wide scope question, and less relevant to if primaris/firstborn should share a codex. Especially as it would require a 3rd/8th level hard reboot of every unit in the game.
Nevelon wrote: But that is more a game-wide scope question, and less relevant to if primaris/firstborn should share a codex. Especially as it would require a 3rd/8th level hard reboot of every unit in the game.
Just brought it up as an extension of the "wounds" point you made.
The consolidation you propose strays into "hammer to crack a nut" IMO. You'd lose too much that makes each side of the army its own thing in an effort to reduce the size of the Codex, and while a sandbox can be nice for creativity, creativity isn't for everyone and some people prefer to have things set out in specific boundaries.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: They should just throw both lines together. A Marine with a plasma gun is a marine with a plasma gun, we don't need 4 different kinds of Marines with a plasma gun where only the Marine player can see the difference, especially with the scale 40K has nowadays. I'm using my old Plague Marines from third edition right next to Plague Marines from 8th edition. Let loyalists do the same and don't force them to buy 2 Codizes + whatever supplement.
This. Experiment failed. Use marines as whatever role they're armed for with whatever they're holding. use whatever scale you prefer, just be aware that future releases will be in the larger scale.
Definitely no to more books to invalidate and replace and churn and burn.
Nevelon wrote: Keep them together, but consolidate. A marine is a marine. Intercessor squad? That’s just a tac squad, maybe with an AGL as a special. Swap in a hellblaster model if you want a plasma gun. Assault intercessors? Assault marines without JPs.
Make sure each box can build a legal unit, but trim all the bloat you can. You want an option allowed on the datasheet but not in the box? Kitbash or swap parts around. The marine range is deep and interchangable.
Yeah, hard agree – conflate, unify and streamline the whole thing so a Marine's a Marine and a Bolter's a Bolter, and leave it at that.
Nevelon wrote: But that is more a game-wide scope question, and less relevant to if primaris/firstborn should share a codex. Especially as it would require a 3rd/8th level hard reboot of every unit in the game.
Just brought it up as an extension of the "wounds" point you made.
The consolidation you propose strays into "hammer to crack a nut" IMO. You'd lose too much that makes each side of the army its own thing in an effort to reduce the size of the Codex, and while a sandbox can be nice for creativity, creativity isn't for everyone and some people prefer to have things set out in specific boundaries.
That’s fair.
I see your point, and don’t completely disagree. I’d love to have the best of both worlds. All the new stuff, all the old stuff. Tons of options, but friendly to new players. But we are so bloated at this point. I don’t want to split the codex. It like primaris fighting shoulder to shoulder with the firstborn. But what can we do to reduce the amount of units? Without just deleting stuff?
Something needs to happen. GW cannot stay on the present course they're on with SM's. They cannot keep adding more and more units. Infinite expansion is not realistic.
oni wrote: Something needs to happen. GW cannot stay on the present course they're on with SM's. They cannot keep adding more and more units. Infinite expansion is not realistic.
Nevelon wrote: Keep them together, but consolidate. A marine is a marine. Intercessor squad? That’s just a tac squad, maybe with an AGL as a special. Swap in a hellblaster model if you want a plasma gun. Assault intercessors? Assault marines without JPs.
Make sure each box can build a legal unit, but trim all the bloat you can. You want an option allowed on the datasheet but not in the box? Kitbash or swap parts around. The marine range is deep and interchangable.
The AGL can go back to being grenade status.
I mean, my dream Marine squad is the Intercessor profile, they can choose either a Special or Heavy at 5 dudes, and then an Extra Special and Heavy at 10 dudes. AGL then goes back to Grenade status but with extended range.
Nothing about it is broken, it just merely gives the idea of what Marines should be.
That s a very bad idea - they could def consolodate many sheets rather than having a weapon option as a entire dataslate and also stop wasting so much space on blank paper.
oni wrote: Something needs to happen. GW cannot stay on the present course they're on with SM's. They cannot keep adding more and more units. Infinite expansion is not realistic.
Why do SM need new stuff? I mean new units with new datasheets. Most of the other factions' releases are just new kits of already existing units/models. And primaris already have a pretty wide range.
Replacing in terms of updating, instead of expanding. GW (and the fanbase) lived for decades without tons of new SM stuff every year, the new line of models shouldn't be the excuse to throw countless new kits every edition, which are totally unnecessary both modelwise and rulewise.
Re-do tons of stuff for AM, craftworlds (already happening), drukhari, chaos SM and tyranids instead, before even thinking about expanding the SM roster. Maybe also tau.
Sgt. Cortez wrote:They should just throw both lines together. A Marine with a plasma gun is a marine with a plasma gun, we don't need 4 different kinds of Marines with a plasma gun where only the Marine player can see the difference, especially with the scale 40K has nowadays. I'm using my old Plague Marines from third edition right next to Plague Marines from 8th edition. Let loyalists do the same and don't force them to buy 2 Codizes + whatever supplement.
Nevelon wrote:Keep them together, but consolidate. A marine is a marine. Intercessor squad? That’s just a tac squad, maybe with an AGL as a special. Swap in a hellblaster model if you want a plasma gun. Assault intercessors? Assault marines without JPs.
Make sure each box can build a legal unit, but trim all the bloat you can. You want an option allowed on the datasheet but not in the box? Kitbash or swap parts around. The marine range is deep and interchangable.
These. The primaris models really seem to be a modeling choice (truescale marines), but GW was worried that such a major scale creep on their most popular/profitable faction would turn people away. Plus, it's harder to sell tall tactical marines (intercessors) than it is to sell a "new" unit with a beefier statline. So they came up with fluff about a super secret but also really expansive project that has been in the works for 10,000 years to explain the sudden introduction of tall marines.
We can't really put that major of a fluff genie back in the bottle, but we can spare ourselves unnecessary bloat of datasheets. An intercessor and a bolter marine can just use the same datasheet. Fluff your dudes as primaris or firstborn as you see fit, but ultimately it's a T4 W2 Sv3+ guy with a bolter. We don't have to split hairs on whether one guy's bolter has better AP than the other's. They're essentially the same thing. Hellblasters are your new plasmagun marines. Eradicators are your new melta/multi-melta marines. It's fine. Sticking a hellblaster in the same squad as some intercessors hasn't made Death Watch overpowered, and it won't make smurfs or space puppies overpowered either.
I'd be tempted to make the heavy/assault variants of intercessor and hellblaster weapons into a benefit you unlock via chapter tactics. So certain chapters might have the option to fire the heavy version of their guns on turns that they hold still. Other chapters might get the Assault 3 versions of those guns on turns that they advance.
Intercessors/eradicators/hellblasters/heavy intercessors = marines with bolters and special weapons. Just use them as tac/dev/sternguard squads. I think I'd be okay with gravis armor just being mechanically the same as power armor.
Assault Intercessors = assault marines. GW already has a jump pack kit that looks pretty okay when you replace the backpack with it.
Reivers = either assault marines or scouts (with melee options). Alternatively, just lump reivers, infiltrators, and off-brand-infiltrators (the haywire mine guys) into a single unit. Possibly alongside scouts. Basically the Spectrus kill team from Death Watch.
Primaris and non-primaris versions of characters are 95% the same already. Just ditch the primaris-specific limitations on primaris buffs, and let the tech priests have their weapon options regardless of primaris status.
Outriders = bikes with optional chainsword upgrades.
Transports can carry both primaris/non-primaris models because the "primaris" keyword can just go away. We already have to pretend a rhino can carry 10 marines; who cares if they're slightly bulkier than before? It's a clown car either way.
Dreads... probably have to stay split up. Although some of them could probably just become a wargear or upgrade option for others. (What is a ven dread but a normal dread with a statline boost and a special rule?)
Do that, and you remove what? About 12 datasheets from the codex? More if you find a clean way to combine phobos and non-phobos versions of characters.
Hairesy wrote: Split them up. I'm tired of my army being used to prop up the new line while they figure out how to maximize profits.
Also, as Primaris get more and more stuff with each edition it is just going to mean that a single Codex gets too big, and too many things to even attempt at balancing.
From a fluff point, it also opens up the possibility of doing a schism between chapters that are against Primaris and those that are in favour of them.
Sgt. Cortez wrote:They should just throw both lines together. A Marine with a plasma gun is a marine with a plasma gun, we don't need 4 different kinds of Marines with a plasma gun where only the Marine player can see the difference, especially with the scale 40K has nowadays. I'm using my old Plague Marines from third edition right next to Plague Marines from 8th edition. Let loyalists do the same and don't force them to buy 2 Codizes + whatever supplement.
And this,
stonehorse wrote:
Spoiler:
Hairesy wrote: Split them up. I'm tired of my army being used to prop up the new line while they figure out how to maximize profits.
Also, as Primaris get more and more stuff with each edition it is just going to mean that a single Codex gets too big, and too many things to even attempt at balancing.
From a fluff point, it also opens up the possibility of doing a schism between chapters that are against Primaris and those that are in favour of them.
Are good answers imho.
First off, restartes should have been rolled out as new marines full stop. Updated models. No rievers tacticool bs. No sniper bullets that shoot backwards and around walls, no grappling bs and no stupid I named every idiot…
That rubicon crossed, now, however, split em up. For my dudes, restartes are obvious heresy. Burn them with righteous fire, and their leader girly man too… punk wannabe traitor heretic. Cawl, the face of obvious chaos taint. Somewhere, Tzeentch is laughing backwards at all this … so yeah, they do not belong on the same book.
Hairesy wrote: Split them up. I'm tired of my army being used to prop up the new line while they figure out how to maximize profits.
Also, as Primaris get more and more stuff with each edition it is just going to mean that a single Codex gets too big, and too many things to even attempt at balancing.
.
Happened years ago thats why is a vast bloated mess but split them up and you end with two vast bloated codexes at the same price. No one wins
oni wrote: Something needs to happen. GW cannot stay on the present course they're on with SM's. They cannot keep adding more and more units. Infinite expansion is not realistic.
Why do SM need new stuff? I mean new units with new datasheets. Most of the other factions' releases are just new kits of already existing units/models. And primaris already have a pretty wide range.
Replacing in terms of updating, instead of expanding. GW (and the fanbase) lived for decades without tons of new SM stuff every year, the new line of models shouldn't be the excuse to throw countless new kits every edition, which are totally unnecessary both modelwise and rulewise.
Sadly that is the MO for GW Poster boys and gals. I mean, in AoS we are just three editions in and already we have Stormcast(70+) closing in on the number of units Space Marines have(100+).
The curse of the poster factions is that they get way too much new toys that just makes the faction bloated and unwieldy.
Also, as Primaris get more and more stuff with each edition it is just going to mean that a single Codex gets too big, and too many things to even attempt at balancing.
Without separating anything lots of units could be merged into one profile and balance wise it wouldn't change anything while the codex would be smaller. Terminators, Assault Terminators and Relic Terminators are all the same thing, just like the three Land Speeders, the three Storm Speeders and the three Gladiators. Both Predators can be be one profile, some dreads too. Lots of almost identical weapons can also be merged into a single profile. And so on.
EviscerationPlague wrote: There's nothing wrong with the Tacticool Marines besides the fact they were made into two separate troops for no good reason.
Disagree. Put them in a book for GI Joe and his crew, then. That is my vote. Nast.
Sgt. Cortez wrote:They should just throw both lines together. A Marine with a plasma gun is a marine with a plasma gun, we don't need 4 different kinds of Marines with a plasma gun where only the Marine player can see the difference, especially with the scale 40K has nowadays. I'm using my old Plague Marines from third edition right next to Plague Marines from 8th edition. Let loyalists do the same and don't force them to buy 2 Codizes + whatever supplement.
Nevelon wrote:Keep them together, but consolidate. A marine is a marine. Intercessor squad? That’s just a tac squad, maybe with an AGL as a special. Swap in a hellblaster model if you want a plasma gun. Assault intercessors? Assault marines without JPs.
Make sure each box can build a legal unit, but trim all the bloat you can. You want an option allowed on the datasheet but not in the box? Kitbash or swap parts around. The marine range is deep and interchangable.
These. The primaris models really seem to be a modeling choice (truescale marines), but GW was worried that such a major scale creep on their most popular/profitable faction would turn people away. Plus, it's harder to sell tall tactical marines (intercessors) than it is to sell a "new" unit with a beefier statline. So they came up with fluff about a super secret but also really expansive project that has been in the works for 10,000 years to explain the sudden introduction of tall marines.
We can't really put that major of a fluff genie back in the bottle, but we can spare ourselves unnecessary bloat of datasheets. An intercessor and a bolter marine can just use the same datasheet. Fluff your dudes as primaris or firstborn as you see fit, but ultimately it's a T4 W2 Sv3+ guy with a bolter. We don't have to split hairs on whether one guy's bolter has better AP than the other's. They're essentially the same thing. Hellblasters are your new plasmagun marines. Eradicators are your new melta/multi-melta marines. It's fine. Sticking a hellblaster in the same squad as some intercessors hasn't made Death Watch overpowered, and it won't make smurfs or space puppies overpowered either.
I'd be tempted to make the heavy/assault variants of intercessor and hellblaster weapons into a benefit you unlock via chapter tactics. So certain chapters might have the option to fire the heavy version of their guns on turns that they hold still. Other chapters might get the Assault 3 versions of those guns on turns that they advance.
Intercessors/eradicators/hellblasters/heavy intercessors = marines with bolters and special weapons. Just use them as tac/dev/sternguard squads. I think I'd be okay with gravis armor just being mechanically the same as power armor.
Assault Intercessors = assault marines. GW already has a jump pack kit that looks pretty okay when you replace the backpack with it.
Reivers = either assault marines or scouts (with melee options). Alternatively, just lump reivers, infiltrators, and off-brand-infiltrators (the haywire mine guys) into a single unit. Possibly alongside scouts. Basically the Spectrus kill team from Death Watch.
Primaris and non-primaris versions of characters are 95% the same already. Just ditch the primaris-specific limitations on primaris buffs, and let the tech priests have their weapon options regardless of primaris status.
Outriders = bikes with optional chainsword upgrades.
Transports can carry both primaris/non-primaris models because the "primaris" keyword can just go away. We already have to pretend a rhino can carry 10 marines; who cares if they're slightly bulkier than before? It's a clown car either way.
Dreads... probably have to stay split up. Although some of them could probably just become a wargear or upgrade option for others. (What is a ven dread but a normal dread with a statline boost and a special rule?)
Do that, and you remove what? About 12 datasheets from the codex? More if you find a clean way to combine phobos and non-phobos versions of characters.
This is a pretty reasonable take and I agree. Plus, it would open up more opportunities to model units differently - you could have a mix of Primaris and Firstborn models (on 32mm bases) to represent a squad that is made from marines of different ages, or you could have them all be the same.
Honestly, I just want truescale MK VI and VII armor, along with terminator armor, but that might not be in the cards.
Hairesy wrote: Split them up. I'm tired of my army being used to prop up the new line while they figure out how to maximize profits.
From a fluff point, it also opens up the possibility of doing a schism between chapters that are against Primaris and those that are in favour of them.
They raised that fluff point all the way back at the beginning of 8th. Certain chapters (Flesh Tearers and Dark Angels definitely spring to mind, with the FT chapter master ranting at Dante about it at the end of Devastation of Baal, about how it would spell the end of everything they are) didn't trust or want primaris. They teased us with that and the 'no mutations... yet' aspect of primaris (particularly for space woofs). And then they said, 'Naw, its all fine. All the named chapters took them in, there are Inner Circle Primaris now, and BA primaris get the black and red thirsts just like everybody else. Primaris are perfectly normal (but vaguely better) marines and all that ominious hinting and foreshadowing was meaningless. The end.'
Voss wrote: They raised that fluff point all the way back at the beginning of 8th. Certain chapters (Flesh Tearers and Dark Angels definitely spring to mind, with the FT chapter master ranting at Dante about it at the end of Devastation of Baal, about how it would spell the end of everything they are) didn't trust or want primaris. They teased us with that and the 'no mutations... yet' aspect of primaris (particularly for space woofs). And then they said, 'Naw, its all fine. All the named chapters took them in, there are Inner Circle Primaris now, and BA primaris get the black and red thirsts just like everybody else. Primaris are perfectly normal (but vaguely better) marines and all that ominious hinting and foreshadowing was meaningless. The end.'
The whole situation is quite funny IMO because the anti-Primaris crowd decried the fact these new Marines could be clean of the flaws and curses that came to define the likes of the Blood Angels and Space Wolves, then GW added in that not only do the Primaris show the same flaws but in some cases show greater susceptibility and more extreme end results, and then people complained yet again.
Almost like nothing will please that crowd I mean sure, there wasn't a whole lot of diving into the cultural changes the Primaris caused and what the effects of these curses and flaws would be but hey it's not like there's a new book series dedicated to actually looking into stuff like that, no siree.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: They should just throw both lines together. A Marine with a plasma gun is a marine with a plasma gun, we don't need 4 different kinds of Marines with a plasma gun where only the Marine player can see the difference, especially with the scale 40K has nowadays. I'm using my old Plague Marines from third edition right next to Plague Marines from 8th edition. Let loyalists do the same and don't force them to buy 2 Codizes + whatever supplement.
I agree that there is a LOT of condensing they could do. Making Primaris an upgrade option for characters for +X points and consolidating alternate dataslates simply for different equipment options could eliminate probably a quarter of the slates in the Codex right now with no invalidation of miniatures. When people talk about excessive bloat, that is exactly the sort of thing they mean.
Voss wrote: They raised that fluff point all the way back at the beginning of 8th. Certain chapters (Flesh Tearers and Dark Angels definitely spring to mind, with the FT chapter master ranting at Dante about it at the end of Devastation of Baal, about how it would spell the end of everything they are) didn't trust or want primaris. They teased us with that and the 'no mutations... yet' aspect of primaris (particularly for space woofs). And then they said, 'Naw, its all fine. All the named chapters took them in, there are Inner Circle Primaris now, and BA primaris get the black and red thirsts just like everybody else. Primaris are perfectly normal (but vaguely better) marines and all that ominious hinting and foreshadowing was meaningless. The end.'
The whole situation is quite funny IMO because the anti-Primaris crowd decried the fact these new Marines could be clean of the flaws and curses that came to define the likes of the Blood Angels and Space Wolves, then GW added in that not only do the Primaris show the same flaws but in some cases show greater susceptibility and more extreme end results, and then people complained yet again.
Almost like nothing will please that crowd I mean sure, there wasn't a whole lot of diving into the cultural changes the Primaris caused and what the effects of these curses and flaws would be but hey it's not like there's a new book series dedicated to actually looking into stuff like that, no siree.
Hm, in my locale it was regarded as pretty obvious Cawl was full of it when he made those claims and that they would be proven false. I don't know a single person who was surprised by Primaris Death Company.
Hellebore wrote: What they should do, is say that everyone has been rubiconed, or is primaris.
Then as they slowly release new versions of old units, they primaris the models.
In a few years the tactical squad will be primaris and so on.
Eww. F that. They should find a horrible flaw with the Primaris geneseed and turn them all into penal legions, barring Marines that Rubiconned, and just revert Calgar back to his old self, as though awakening from a fever dream.
Hellebore wrote:What they should do, is say that everyone has been rubiconed, or is primaris.
Then as they slowly release new versions of old units, they primaris the models.
In a few years the tactical squad will be primaris and so on.
That would work pretty well, I think. Just throw in a snippet of fluff about how the rubicon process (or whatever it's called) has been refined over time so that marines don't lose half of their tiny population just for +1 Attacks.
Gert wrote:
Voss wrote: They raised that fluff point all the way back at the beginning of 8th. Certain chapters (Flesh Tearers and Dark Angels definitely spring to mind, with the FT chapter master ranting at Dante about it at the end of Devastation of Baal, about how it would spell the end of everything they are) didn't trust or want primaris. They teased us with that and the 'no mutations... yet' aspect of primaris (particularly for space woofs). And then they said, 'Naw, its all fine. All the named chapters took them in, there are Inner Circle Primaris now, and BA primaris get the black and red thirsts just like everybody else. Primaris are perfectly normal (but vaguely better) marines and all that ominious hinting and foreshadowing was meaningless. The end.'
The whole situation is quite funny IMO because the anti-Primaris crowd decried the fact these new Marines could be clean of the flaws and curses that came to define the likes of the Blood Angels and Space Wolves, then GW added in that not only do the Primaris show the same flaws but in some cases show greater susceptibility and more extreme end results, and then people complained yet again.
Almost like nothing will please that crowd I mean sure, there wasn't a whole lot of diving into the cultural changes the Primaris caused and what the effects of these curses and flaws would be but hey it's not like there's a new book series dedicated to actually looking into stuff like that, no siree.
I mean, I think it's fair to be displeased with both the initial "no more flaws!" thing and with the way all that buildup just got swept away for no payoff. I think that's how I feel about it. The previously unheard of Cawl coming out of nowhere and suddenly being able to improve on the marine making process felt kind of fanfic-y and unearned. Especially given that you have various bits of fluff (including Fabius Bile's whole gimmick) suggesting that doing so is all but impossible. So saying that Cawl not only made better marines than the Emperor but also fixed all those pesky gene flaws (that accounted for a lot of what makes certain chapters interesting) just added to the fanfic-yness.
Building up the possibility of internal conflict surrounding the forced assimilation of primaris into chapters was one of the few potentially interesting angles to the ham-fisted fluff that was very transparently trying to address the scale creep of the models. So in addition to being anticlimactic, ditching the built up marine civil war angle took away most of the interesting narrative hooks of the ham-fisted fluff. Oh, primaris and firstborn are actually totally cool now? Basically just bigger versions of the dudes we had before? Then why bother with the better-than-Fabius tech priest and the abundance of redundant datasheets at all?
Plus, it kind of smells of narrative being interrupted by marketing decisions, which is generally kind of unpleasant to catch a whiff of.
jeff white wrote:
EviscerationPlague wrote: There's nothing wrong with the Tacticool Marines besides the fact they were made into two separate troops for no good reason.
Disagree. Put them in a book for GI Joe and his crew, then. That is my vote. Nast.
I'm with EviscerationPlague. I don't love some of the tacticool heads, but I like the super duper special marine tech. I buy that something like an eliminator's special sniper rounds or a haywire mine or the infiltrator's thingy that prevents deepstriking near them would all be too expensive to make and hard to use for such equipment to be mass produced and put in the hands of guardsmen. Showing off equipment that only transhumans can reliably get use out of helps strengthen marine identity and sort of helps me mentally justify their existence. Like, marines that are just tougher, punchier sisters of battle kind of make you question the wisdom of creating them. Surely you'd be better off just taking those promising marine recruits and giving them some training and some power armor. Sure, they won't spit acid or be able to eat brains to gather intel, but you also won't kill off 90% of your recruits via over-the-top training and dangerous implantation surgeries either.
The shoot-around-corners sniper rounds are maybe a tad much, but I like that eliminators feel like they couldn't be replaced by a squad of guardsmen with sniper rifles. Scouts sort of do feel like they're failing to leverage transhuman muscle.Or maybe I'm just a sucker for cool gadgets. I really like the new doodads craftworlders can be equipped with.
Hellebore wrote: What they should do, is say that everyone has been rubiconed, or is primaris.
Then as they slowly release new versions of old units, they primaris the models.
In a few years the tactical squad will be primaris and so on.
Exactly. Re-do and update the already existing kits like the intercessors squad rather than expanding the army's roster. Possibly without invalidating older models/squad, aka banning certain currently possible loadouts or messing too much with the models' sizes.
Hellebore wrote: What they should do, is say that everyone has been rubiconed, or is primaris.
Then as they slowly release new versions of old units, they primaris the models.
In a few years the tactical squad will be primaris and so on.
Eww. F that. They should find a horrible flaw with the Primaris geneseed and turn them all into penal legions, barring Marines that Rubiconned, and just revert Calgar back to his old self, as though awakening from a fever dream.
lol.
Once all marines have been rubiconed then primaris is dropped because they're all just space marines then.
If Firstborn players are ever to add Primaris to their army, they really don't want to buy another Codex to use them.
Admittedly, if most changes from here on in are going to be to Primaris units, then a Firstborn codex does make sense. Upgrade the codex that gets updated, and leave the other alone.
I shelved my SM army long ago, as I could not keep up with the costant Codex updates.
I voted 'no', to keep the SM armies joined. But, as an ex-SM player, 2 parallel codex releases makes some sense. And, for new SM players, it keeps the Primaris options tidily trimmed.
Wyldhunt 804223 11332079 wrote:
Surely you'd be better off just taking those promising marine recruits and giving them some training and some power armor. Sure, they won't spit acid or be able to eat brains to gather intel, but you also won't kill off 90% of your recruits via over-the-top training and dangerous implantation surgeries either.
Without the training, conditioning and implants the humans in power armour would not be able to perform the jobs only space marines can perform. a force of unaugmented, GK without the proper training would just turn in to 100+ warp gates the moment they face any demonic force.
The_Real_Chris wrote: I mean currently a bunch of chaos players use the marine codex as its better than theirs.
For Killteam now all the first born guys are using or are thinking of use the new chaos tea profile.
It would surprise me when the Chaos dex comes out people will switch to that and use their first born armies as counts as.
Perfect reason to do your own color scheme! I more than encourage people to do counts as. Nobody should be punished because GW messed up doing Word Bearers.
Gert wrote: The whole situation is quite funny IMO because the anti-Primaris crowd decried the fact these new Marines could be clean of the flaws and curses that came to define the likes of the Blood Angels and Space Wolves, then GW added in that not only do the Primaris show the same flaws but in some cases show greater susceptibility and more extreme end results, and then people complained yet again.
You just made that second part up. What actually happened is that by the time they tried to patch all the holes in the primaris rollout lore nobody gave a gak, and nobody was going to be satisfied with whatever Frankenstein lore they cooked up to reconcile all the mistakes. If anything you would expect people who actually LIKED Bigger Batmen to be complaining that in lore they actually aren't any bigger except in some sort of ineffable abstract way that nobody can articulate.
If anyone's salty seems like it's you cuz your choice of marine is (and will continue to be) the source of scorn and ridicule.
Wyldhunt 804223 11332079 wrote:
Surely you'd be better off just taking those promising marine recruits and giving them some training and some power armor. Sure, they won't spit acid or be able to eat brains to gather intel, but you also won't kill off 90% of your recruits via over-the-top training and dangerous implantation surgeries either.
Without the training, conditioning and implants the humans in power armour would not be able to perform the jobs only space marines can perform. a force of unaugmented, GK without the proper training would just turn in to 100+ warp gates the moment they face any demonic force.
I'd read that book. some chapter on the fringe takes all aspirants, some unfit for service but they give them armor and do what they can. chaos incursion ensues as they are not properly conditioned when facing down the enemies of the imperium and bringing taint home.
Hairesy wrote: Split them up. I'm tired of my army being used to prop up the new line while they figure out how to maximize profits.
From a fluff point, it also opens up the possibility of doing a schism between chapters that are against Primaris and those that are in favour of them.
They raised that fluff point all the way back at the beginning of 8th. Certain chapters (Flesh Tearers and Dark Angels definitely spring to mind, with the FT chapter master ranting at Dante about it at the end of Devastation of Baal, about how it would spell the end of everything they are) didn't trust or want primaris. They teased us with that and the 'no mutations... yet' aspect of primaris (particularly for space woofs). And then they said, 'Naw, its all fine. All the named chapters took them in, there are Inner Circle Primaris now, and BA primaris get the black and red thirsts just like everybody else. Primaris are perfectly normal (but vaguely better) marines and all that ominious hinting and foreshadowing was meaningless. The end.'
The Torchbearer Fleet Crusade rules are pretty cool storytelling tools for the recruitment of Primaris into existing chapters, and there are a ton of potential stories to be told on the tabletop, including a parent chapeter which accepts its Greyshields reluctantly or not at all.
It's 40k- there is no "the end."
Just because a schism hasn't happened yet in the lore doesn't mean it won't, and even if it never happens in the lore, that doesn't mean it can't happen on your table.
Btw you don't need separate Codizes to have factions face each other. With Daemons, CSM and Orks we have three Codizes that do more infighting than fighting against any other faction . It’s also the reason why Fallen should be in the Dark Angels supplement but oh well...
Togusa wrote: How about we just DoDo the Firstborn and be done with it? That's what I'd like to see.
Except that restartes are already the Doh… Doh… marines, so, how about we make the new models fit the OG lore and retcon the heretical Cawlsian nonsense and be done with it?
Togusa wrote: How about we just DoDo the Firstborn and be done with it? That's what I'd like to see.
Except that restartes are already the Doh… Doh… marines, so, how about we make the new models fit the OG lore and retcon the heretical Cawlsian nonsense and be done with it?
Cawl isn't a heretic, he just doesn't keep the setting infinitely stagnate for the neckbeards that refuse any change in the setting.
Cawl is obviously a heretic, and could be represented that way, should be…
But I guess any progress is good progress, huh? Just have to go somewhere, huh, for the sake of change, right, because new is always better when attention spans are measured in twits rather than chapters, right?
Yeah, neckbeard… sure. Keep your insults to yourself.
Replace "neckbeard" with "Customer who's spent many thousands of dollars on a product that they've loved and advocated for for over 20 years, who is now dissatisfied with certain decisions the owning company has recently made."
But go with "neckbeard" if it pumps your dopamine, sure.
. . .
The truth is they could drastically reduce the amount of datasheets if they just wrote them better. Why are Intercessors and Assault Intercessors a different Datasheet, and not just a single Datasheet with a extra wargear option?
Back in the golden days, I had ONE Captain "Datasheet" option, but somehow he might have had MORE options available to him than the current paradigm where there are 8(?) Separate Captain Datasheets.
Wyldhunt 804223 11332079 wrote:
Surely you'd be better off just taking those promising marine recruits and giving them some training and some power armor. Sure, they won't spit acid or be able to eat brains to gather intel, but you also won't kill off 90% of your recruits via over-the-top training and dangerous implantation surgeries either.
Without the training, conditioning and implants the humans in power armour would not be able to perform the jobs only space marines can perform. a force of unaugmented, GK without the proper training would just turn in to 100+ warp gates the moment they face any demonic force.
Oh, I'm the first person to make the argument that marines are useful because they can do things that normal humans literally can't. They can wade through flooded areas and climb huge towers to strike from unexpected angles. They can eat brains to gain intel quckly. Plus they're tanky and killy and can squeeze a whole lot of manpower into the confines of a ship or sewer or what have you. That's kind of the point I was making about liking their tacticool special gear; it makes marines feel like they're wielding weapons and gear that guardsmen would struggle to get the most out of, and that helps you see why the imperium bothers killing off so many aspirants to produce a handful of marines.
But a lot of lore has them just like, fighting on a conventional battlefield, and it does sometimes feel like they're an inefficient use of resources in that role. Like, in MtG terms, they've got good offense/defense and a special rule that bypasses certain niche defensive strategies. But they also cost a ton of mana to the point that they're considered a bad card. Or in less confusing terms, each marine candidate seems to have the kind of plot armor and talent that would make them a guardsman on par with named guard characters. Yet the marine-making process ends up killing most of the candidates. So for every marine, you could've had 10 Marbo types working as guardsmen or storm troopers or whatever. In any book that shows marine aspirants undergoing their training/trials, I find myself screaming at the chapter to just send these guys off to become inquisitorial henchmen instead of getting them killed.
GK specifically are probably a bad example given that 100% of them being psykers raises a lot of variables that aren't present with, say, Space Wolves.
Togusa wrote: How about we just DoDo the Firstborn and be done with it? That's what I'd like to see.
Except that restartes are already the Doh… Doh… marines, so, how about we make the new models fit the OG lore and retcon the heretical Cawlsian nonsense and be done with it?
Cawl isn't a heretic, he just doesn't keep the setting infinitely stagnate for the neckbeards that refuse any change in the setting.
I actually liked that they've moved the story forward a bit. I even like Cawl as he's depicted in the Horus Heresy books. But the primaris fluff and his part in it is pretty awkward and pretty clearly written to explain away scale creep rather than serve a story someone really wanted to tell. I don't think we can retcon the primaris lore much; it has been front and center in too many novels and too much lore. We can, however, say that the primaris have been so thoroughly integrated into the astartes that there's functionally no difference between firstborn and primaris. Or just say that all living marines are either young enough to be primaris or else crossed the rubicon at some point. Let "primaris" be a non-essential tidbit of lore that players can pretty much ignore if they want to. Having separate primaris and non-primaris keywords and units instead hilights the distinction and makes it more relevant, which is sort of the opposite of what I want. Sure. Bob is a firstborn, and Frank is a primaris. Turns out being a little taller and having a couple extra organs still only makes you T4 W2, so no big deal. Those interceptors over there? Two of them are firstborn. Turns out it's not that hard to make primaris tech slightly smaller.
Insectum7 wrote: Replace "neckbeard" with "Customer who's spent many thousands of dollars on a product that they've loved and advocated for for over 20 years, who is now dissatisfied with certain decisions the owning company has recently made."
But go with "neckbeard" if it pumps your dopamine, sure.
You'd have a point if GW weren't making gakky decisions for several years and yet Primaris are somehow the breaking point. Neckbeard fits perfectly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jeff white wrote: Cawl is obviously a heretic, and could be represented that way, should be…
But I guess any progress is good progress, huh? Just have to go somewhere, huh, for the sake of change, right, because new is always better when attention spans are measured in twits rather than chapters, right?
Yeah, neckbeard… sure. Keep your insults to yourself.
EviscerationPlague wrote: You'd have a point if GW weren't making gakky decisions for several years and yet Primaris are somehow the breaking point. Neckbeard fits perfectly.
So anyone who doesn't like the styling or lore of Primaris is a neckbeard because... GW has made bad decisions prior to it too?
Insectum7 wrote: Replace "neckbeard" with "Customer who's spent many thousands of dollars on a product that they've loved and advocated for for over 20 years, who is now dissatisfied with certain decisions the owning company has recently made."
But go with "neckbeard" if it pumps your dopamine, sure.
EviscerationPlague wrote: You'd have a point if GW weren't making gakky decisions for several years and yet Primaris are somehow the breaking point. Neckbeard fits perfectly.
So anyone who doesn't like the styling or lore of Primaris is a neckbeard because... GW has made bad decisions prior to it too?
That's a non sequitur. And just plain dumb.
When they're somehow defending all of GW's decisions until THAT point, 100% yes I stand by my statement.
oni wrote: Something needs to happen. GW cannot stay on the present course they're on with SM's. They cannot keep adding more and more units. Infinite expansion is not realistic.
Why do SM need new stuff? I mean new units with new datasheets. Most of the other factions' releases are just new kits of already existing units/models. And primaris already have a pretty wide range.
Replacing in terms of updating, instead of expanding. GW (and the fanbase) lived for decades without tons of new SM stuff every year, the new line of models shouldn't be the excuse to throw countless new kits every edition, which are totally unnecessary both modelwise and rulewise.
Sadly that is the MO for GW Poster boys and gals. I mean, in AoS we are just three editions in and already we have Stormcast(70+) closing in on the number of units Space Marines have(100+).
The curse of the poster factions is that they get way too much new toys that just makes the faction bloated and unwieldy.
Exactly why I quit AoS. I started a Stormcast army, couldn't keep up, and eventually found myself overwhelmed with too many options and a feeling that GW doesn't have a plan or any idea what direction they want to go with Stormcast. The whole Stormcast range feels disjointed and incohesive.
How is Cawl a heretic? The Mechanicus has tampered with gene-seed before and does continuous research on it.
The one thing Cawl might actually have done that is legitimately heretical is the Cawl Inferior as it is potentially an A.I. but that's not confirmed and is just suspicion on Guilliman's part.
When they're somehow defending all of GW's decisions until THAT point, 100% yes I stand by my statement.
Find anyone who defended all of GWs decisions through 7th edition, lol.
I'll bet ya a case of beer that I can probably find some after a day of searching here. The 40k subreddits aren't really negative too so there's gonna be some success there.
My dudes and sisters and imperial guard hold that Cawl could not have done, or been, what he/it has done and is without chaos pulling his strings.
Prove this wrong.
Your dudes sound as imaginative and creative as the hundreds of fanmade Chapters that don't like the Imperium but fight for it for humanity and also have an unknown founding and totally don't like the Codex and hate the Inquisition but nothing bad happens to them.
The truth is they could drastically reduce the amount of datasheets if they just wrote them better. Why are Intercessors and Assault Intercessors a different Datasheet, and not just a single Datasheet with a extra wargear option?
Back in the golden days, I had ONE Captain "Datasheet" option, but somehow he might have had MORE options available to him than the current paradigm where there are 8(?) Separate Captain Datasheets.
Togusa wrote: How about we just DoDo the Firstborn and be done with it? That's what I'd like to see.
Except that restartes are already the Doh… Doh… marines, so, how about we make the new models fit the OG lore and retcon the heretical Cawlsian nonsense and be done with it?
Cawl isn't a heretic, he just doesn't keep the setting infinitely stagnate for the neckbeards that refuse any change in the setting.
In the lore of the Imperium as established before his introduction, Cawl is definitely a heretic to a lot of the Imperium. The Space Marines are the holy warriors of the Imperium's god, designed by his hand and created in his image. Then a human comes along and says he can make them better. That is a human claiming he can improve the creation of God. In a setting where some people are regarded as heretics because they thought that adding a hot plate for making tea to the interior of a chimera, which was not in the original STC design, was a good idea.
Gert wrote: How is Cawl a heretic? The Mechanicus has tampered with gene-seed before and does continuous research on it.
The one thing Cawl might actually have done that is legitimately heretical is the Cawl Inferior as it is potentially an A.I. but that's not confirmed and is just suspicion on Guilliman's part.
That is like saying someone isn't a war criminal, because others did war crimes before. W40k is a setting where the church can have official armies made out of men, because their write says "no man under arms". Different branches of imperial armies can not own land raiders, because a writ says that all of them should be given and crewed only by marines. In order to legally temper with a gene seed, one would have to have an okey to do so. And Cawl may even have it. There is only one problem with him, primaris and the lore about them. He was added in to the lore after 30+ years of the game and its lore existing. And the possible okey for him to do so, arrived in lore form after primaris entered the game. He has this distinct feeling of an OG character added to already existing lore, who ends up out doing everyone at everything. Better gene father then the Emperor, dunk on Bile as far upgrading marine goes, reverts exterminatus and planets being eaten by tyranids in under a century.
And the worse part about it, is the that lore changes are only made to phase out armies that people already bought. If primaris were just a better scale marines, a new style of MK suit of armour and a new bolter, people would have been largely fine with them.
That is like saying someone isn't a war criminal, because others did war crimes before.
No it isn't.
W40k is a setting where the church can have official armies made out of men, because their write says "no man under arms". Different branches of imperial armies can not own land raiders, because a writ says that all of them should be given and crewed only by marines. In order to legally temper with a gene seed, one would have to have an okey to do so. And Cawl may even have it. There is only one problem with him, primaris and the lore about them. He was added in to the lore after 30+ years of the game and its lore existing. And the possible okey for him to do so, arrived in lore form after primaris entered the game. He has this distinct feeling of an OG character added to already existing lore, who ends up out doing everyone at everything. Better gene father then the Emperor, dunk on Bile as far upgrading marine goes, reverts exterminatus and planets being eaten by tyranids in under a century.
New Thing Bad is not limited to Cawl and it never has been. Large parts of the 40k hobby are anathema to change for one reason or the other and anything new will always be bad and they will always find justification.
And the worse part about it, is the that lore changes are only made to phase out armies that people already bought. If primaris were just a better scale marines, a new style of MK suit of armour and a new bolter, people would have been largely fine with them.
They absolutely wouldn't because the exact same thing that's happening in HH circles right now with the potentially upscale MkVI would have happened in the 40k circles.
Arcanis161 wrote: They'll probably move Firstborn to their own game system before they make a separate codex.
Honestly, IMO, Legends should have been its own game system a la 30k. It's own ruleset based on older editions, with rules for models that no longer exist (and older ones that still do), and just semi-regular campaign books based on the classic battlefields (Vraks, Armageddon, First Tyrannic War, Badab War, etc.)
a "Warhammer 40k: Historicals" line would be intreasting.
And the worse part about it, is the that lore changes are only made to phase out armies that people already bought. If primaris were just a better scale marines, a new style of MK suit of armour and a new bolter, people would have been largely fine with them.
They absolutely wouldn't because the exact same thing that's happening in HH circles right now with the potentially upscale MkVI would have happened in the 40k circles.
Getting off topic but…
I have seen concern about parts being compatible but that’s it. Just like I didn’t see a wave of complaints about deathwatch being taller.
Should they do it? No. There are many players who have used Primaris marines to supplement that old squatted Space Marine army they have had for decades and it would run the risk of alienating them.
Will they do it? Possibly. GW doesn't care about alienating it's customer base. It's a great way to sell more books to players you know will buy them. It's a great way to begin squatting those old sculpts that take up space on the shelves but nobody really buys any more. A great way to start to phase out those old molds that will need to be renewed eventually and finally a great way to get rid of a line that quite frankly, looks really silly when side by side to a Primaris model.
For the moment, the firstborn make the Marines look really large, varied etc. As we get more and more (and more) Primaris marines, they'll eventually start to pull the plug on the rest or move them into a different gaming system.
And the worse part about it, is the that lore changes are only made to phase out armies that people already bought. If primaris were just a better scale marines, a new style of MK suit of armour and a new bolter, people would have been largely fine with them.
They absolutely wouldn't because the exact same thing that's happening in HH circles right now with the potentially upscale MkVI would have happened in the 40k circles.
Getting off topic but…
I have seen concern about parts being compatible but that’s it. Just like I didn’t see a wave of complaints about deathwatch being taller.
There were absolutely complaints about the Deathwatch being taller.
I find this Cawl hate rather funny. It's been long established that someone has been tinkering with Space Marine Geneseed for some time. Remember that cursed 21st Founding? Cawl is just a new name behind the existing lore along with the perfecting of the new line of Geneseed in the form for the Primaris Marine.
yeah, and the tinkering was illegal. The , it was me all along, thing is not something that adds much to the lore, and it is down right bad if it goes and warps the core rules of the setting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
EviscerationPlague 804223 11333547 wrote:
There were absolutely complaints about the Deathwatch being taller.
Crow looks like a gigant standing next to other GK, even those in termintor armour. Thankfuly he was locked behind a limited box and is not needed to build a GK army, so it isn't much of a problem.
alextroy wrote:I find this Cawl hate rather funny. It's been long established that someone has been tinkering with Space Marine Geneseed for some time. Remember that cursed 21st Founding? Cawl is just a new name behind the existing lore along with the perfecting of the new line of Geneseed in the form for the Primaris Marine.
See, the cursed founding lore is kind of what makes me feel Cawl is a bit cringe. Before Cawl and the primaris were introduced, you had a few bits of lore discussing attempts to modify the recipe for making marines. You had the cursed founding which was full of concerning mutations and seemingly unusual amounts of bad luck. And then you had Fabius whose creations were always sort of framed as a horrifying perversion of the "proper" process. The theme behind both of these seemed to be that messing with the marine making process was a big no-no, an abomination against the Emperor that either produced monsters or misfortune.
But then Cawl was introduced and just kind of went, "Naaaah. Making better marines is fine actually. In fact, I got rid of some of those pesky gene flaws while I was at it!"
That said, I do like how they've basically retconned the cursed founding as being a big batch of Cawl's experiments, but it still felt like their out-of-nowhere tech priest character was...
* Making Fabius look less competent.
* Uprooting the previously mentioned themes of messing with marine creation being a Bad Idea.
* Doing the above because GW had dragged their feet on truescale marines so long that they felt the need to explain a size and armor change in-universe.
Karol wrote:yeah, and the tinkering was illegal. The , it was me all along, thing is not something that adds much to the lore, and it is down right bad if it goes and warps the core rules of the setting.
I mean, "illegal." Pretty much every human in the imperium is a heretic if you ask the right ecclesiarchal sect or quirky inquisitor. The guys who worked on the cursed founding could say that they had a permission slip from Guilliman, and their opposers could say that Guilliman didn't have the authority to sign such a permission slip. So unless we really want to hash out the intentionally comically convoluted laws of the imperium to come to determine whether or not the cursed founding was conclusively a heretical act, it just is what it is.
As mentioned above, I actually kind of like that they made the cursed founding part of Cawl's research. Mostly because, if we're going to have awkward primaris lore, at least they addressed that particular loose end. Like, that chapter of extra big marines were probably proto primaris. Alright, that fits well enough. I like that better than there being a completely unrelated bigger-marine experiment that just failed because they didn't have golden boy Cawl supervising it.
I mean, "illegal." Pretty much every human in the imperium is a heretic if you ask the right ecclesiarchal sect or quirky inquisitor. The guys who worked on the cursed founding could say that they had a permission slip from Guilliman, and their opposers could say that Guilliman didn't have the authority to sign such a permission slip. So unless we really want to hash out the intentionally comically convoluted laws of the imperium to come to determine whether or not the cursed founding was conclusively a heretical act, it just is what it is.
yes. And there is gradation to everything. There is a huge difference between a sprocket 8 menial worker, turning a sprocket number 7. And someone modifying the gene seed of space marines. It is like a tribal world having faith that includes the golden sky warrior having , non ironic, two eagle heads. And someone else claiming that the emperor was just a philosophical concept, who got invented by high lords of terra to control the population.
Imperial laws are clear as day how they work. They may not be clear to people who live in some parts of the world, but to me they are 100% logical. Also law system like the imperial one don't work on . we were told we can do something. If you don't have papers you get blammed, on the spot most of the time. Sometimes you get blammed anyway, and then the document is returned to the vault and the internal documents of an effice report with high regret that proper papers were not delivered on time.
Compile all factions which can´t be classified as SM in a single book. Why? Well, then GW can do what it really wants to do all the time: Publish on a regular basis SM books with a slightly different flavour. Trust me it will be great. Brave New World indeed!
Jokes aside I couldn´t care less. When I spent hobby time with 40K it´s with the Battle Bible or a custom rule set of 3rd-6th. This means Primaris don´t exist for me which is a blessing.
No. This causes a whole host of problems without solving any. Do squatmarines and numarines get updates at the same time? How about supplements? Are we going to have 2 supplements for each faction now? DA, SW, BA, BT, DW each get 2 books, on top of the 2 books you now have to buy and carry with you to play codex SM? Do marines now get 4 codexes per edition or do you alternate and every year one of them gets screwed? Does GW have to start sculpting more new firstborn marines so they have a new model to release with each new edition of their codex?
I just don't see any possible upside to this idea. It's like standing in a long line and paying someone so they can kick you in the nuts.
I’ve been suggesting this very same thing ever since the current marine codex dropped.
Having a codex First-born and a codex Primaris would drastically reduce bloat in their respective books. It could even allow for greater customisation. Have custom first-born only chapter options, primaris only chapter options, and mixed chapter options.
Then once GW finally pull the plug on first-born they can just legend the first-born codex.
Toofast wrote: No. This causes a whole host of problems without solving any. Do squatmarines and numarines get updates at the same time? How about supplements? Are we going to have 2 supplements for each faction now? DA, SW, BA, BT, DW each get 2 books, on top of the 2 books you now have to buy and carry with you to play codex SM? Do marines now get 4 codexes per edition or do you alternate and every year one of them gets screwed? Does GW have to start sculpting more new firstborn marines so they have a new model to release with each new edition of their codex?
I just don't see any possible upside to this idea. It's like standing in a long line and paying someone so they can kick you in the nuts.
No, the idea behind separating codexes is that units from codex firstborn are different than units from codex primaris. Hence they don't need updates at the same time. With separated codexes, supplements could be axed as well condensing all their material in those two codexes. For example codex primaris wouldn't get deathwing stuff, sanguinary guard, TWC or even generic units such as stormravens and predators since those are firstborn units. And the firstborn range is so wide and relatively new that they could do well without new releases for at least a decade.
Of course the idea of two books instead of the current 7-8 (counting the supplements) messes with GW's plans .
Wyldhunt wrote: That said, I do like how they've basically retconned the cursed founding as being a big batch of Cawl's experiments
Have you got a cite for that, chief? Haven't seen anything about it, but I haven't read all the post-Steroid Boy material, especially novels.
Only kind of. I think it's more of a wink-wink nudge-nudge sort of thing. You've got page 58 of the 8th edition marine codex talking about how "highly-unreliable and apocryphal" sources claim that the Mentors chapter occassionally fielded marines of, "unusual size, strength, and fortitude." And then you've got the Sons of Antaeus (https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Sons_of_Antaeus) who sound an awful lot like a test run of statue-enhancing techniques. It's probably not confirmed anywhere, and I might be reading too much into it. On the other hand, it kind of feels like it would be weird for there to be a massive geneseed augmentation project (the 21st founding) and for Cawl to not be tied to it in any way. I mean, I guess it's a big galaxy, but...
EDIT: To clarify, I know the Mentors aren't part of the 21st founding. They are, however, said to sometimes be used to "test drive" the experimental imperial tech. So field testing some primaris as part of their ranks seems on-brand for them.
Toofast wrote: No. This causes a whole host of problems without solving any. Do squatmarines and numarines get updates at the same time? How about supplements? Are we going to have 2 supplements for each faction now? DA, SW, BA, BT, DW each get 2 books, on top of the 2 books you now have to buy and carry with you to play codex SM? Do marines now get 4 codexes per edition or do you alternate and every year one of them gets screwed? Does GW have to start sculpting more new firstborn marines so they have a new model to release with each new edition of their codex?
I just don't see any possible upside to this idea. It's like standing in a long line and paying someone so they can kick you in the nuts.
I would strongly suspect that the oldmarines wouldn't get many if any updates. It would also help move players away from the old army to the new (naff) one. They would have an easier time balancing it as well, with tiny marines relegated to second tier status (with a host of other armies we should add). To be clear the upsides are for GW. For players a massive unwieldy codex ensures your old models stay relevant.
Truemarines haven't needed any additions since about 4th, and even that's a stretch. As long as they recieve reasonable point updates and basic army maintenence I'm happy. There's zero chance I "update" to Primaris garbage. Tactical squads in Rhinos 4 lyfe.
I'd hate to see oldmarines squatted. Imo the only thing the Primaris Marines have going for them are their proportion. But it's hard to ignore the writing on the wall. So I think the old school should get a single book dedicated to them, that includes all chapters (no supplements needed). The book could be filled with images from past marine codexes, cover art, studio shots, golden demon winners, concept art, "the making of" the models or lore, and at the end you have the legends rules.
Insectum7 wrote: Truemarines haven't needed any additions since about 4th, and even that's a stretch. As long as they recieve reasonable point updates and basic army maintenence I'm happy. There's zero chance I "update" to Primaris garbage. Tactical squads in Rhinos 4 lyfe.
LOL Primaris garbage? Intercessors look SOOOO much better, especially when compared to models for other armies. Manlet Marines need to go the way of the dodo
Jimbobbyish wrote: I'd hate to see oldmarines squatted. Imo the only thing the Primaris Marines have going for them are their proportion.
I enjoy playing all Primaris with their slightly askew space marine experience. There's something to be said about playing space marines without a single MEQ in the army list, going all T5, Sv 3+, W3. I also like how Primaris space marines are a bit of a conundrum. They are easier to play generally having the same loadout, but also harder to play as they generally have more specific stratagems. More strategic rigid not having special/heavy/many Sgt weapons, but also can be more tactically flexible as they more basic attacks. Which I have caught out more than a few melee enemy units, so long as they didn't have a Strike First ability just through weight of attacks (it helps that I have a chapter tactic that yields more hits).
However, as space marines, Primaris are still a straight forward to play. Just on a slightly different parallel line to Firstborn. That parallel line actually feels slightly further away with Primars than it does with SM to CSM. But not as far as Grey Knights or Death Watch. Which is where I like to be, familiar enough that I can go weeks/months without playing them, but different enough that I don't feel like I am playing the same faction just with different sub-faction rules and a couple of unique units.
That said, I don't want Firstborn marines to go away. I honestly enjoy playing marine (SM,CSM, DG, GK, etc.) vs. marine more than anything else. And with 40k's 9th ed rules getting pretty fat and lethal, there is something I really pleased about Codex: Space Marin vs. Codex: Space Marine games. Even my horrible CSM army lists can make it to Turn 5 or occasionally the end of the game. They still lose most of the time, but they can go the distance vs. C:SM armies. I can't say that about Tyranids or even AdMech or a bevy of other factions. SM vs. SM more often than not, feel like the right level of lethality...or at least closer than almost any other faction.
Most of my space marine opponents go with a composite of Firstborn and Primaris. Which means our armies are never exactly the same. I like that too, and I don't want it to go away. There are some very distinct things an all Firstborn, a composite and an all Primaris army is going to try to accomplish even before considering chapter rules. So while the marine player base isn't likely to shrink anytime soon, at the least the games versus them isn't too cookie cutter. In a better world, that would work for all factions, but I live in this one. So I try to silver lining where I can.
Insectum7 wrote: Truemarines haven't needed any additions since about 4th, and even that's a stretch. As long as they recieve reasonable point updates and basic army maintenence I'm happy. There's zero chance I "update" to Primaris garbage. Tactical squads in Rhinos 4 lyfe.
LOL Primaris garbage? Intercessors look SOOOO much better, especially when compared to models for other armies. Manlet Marines need to go the way of the dodo
A rescale (more precisely: another rescale) could have happened without doubling the number of datasheets and weapons in the codex, let alone without creating redundant units (and, bizarrely, redundant units for the redundant units) that are less tactically flexible.
I do like the way primaris look. But that could have been achieved without any of the mess*, and gravis armor could have been introduced rather than the goofy centurions or the baby carrier not-a-dread.
And none of the overgunned floating brick-tanks, that still somehow manage to continue to be bad.
*like, I don't know, rescaled Mark VI marines...
I'd love to know the timelines and planning stages of the Primaris and new Heresy projects. Was there an emphasis on one over the other, a scramble back to older designs because of backlash, or just a casual shrug in a management meeting and the 'Why not both?' meme.
----
I still think the way forward for loyalists (in 40k) is just to quietly consolidate everything and just have the armor and primaris status not matter.
Any bolter is a bolter, any pistol is a bolt pistol and so forth.
Pistol and CCW: assault marine. Do some rescaled (and more detailed) jump packs as an option.
Tacticals have their special/heavy weapon options, Infiltrators don't, but have deployment and ignore penalty rules. (just glom all the Primaris I-names on foot and reivers together)
Devastators can take a pile of plasma guns if they want.
Gravis can be terminator variants? Something.
Work out a few other details for some of the more random units, but basically call it a day.
I still think the way forward for loyalists (in 40k) is just to quietly consolidate everything and just have the armor and primaris status not matter.
Any bolter is a bolter, any pistol is a bolt pistol and so forth.
Pistol and CCW: assault marine. Do some rescaled (and more detailed) jump packs as an option.
Tacticals have their special/heavy weapon options, Infiltrators don't, but have deployment and ignore penalty rules. (just glom all the Primaris I-names on foot and reivers together)
Devastators can take a pile of plasma guns if they want.
Gravis can be terminator variants? Something.
Work out a few other details for some of the more random units, but basically call it a day.
I'd agree, that might actually get me to play loyalist marines, maybe Flesh Eaters or something.
Insectum7 wrote: Truemarines haven't needed any additions since about 4th, and even that's a stretch. As long as they recieve reasonable point updates and basic army maintenence I'm happy. There's zero chance I "update" to Primaris garbage. Tactical squads in Rhinos 4 lyfe.
LOL Primaris garbage? Intercessors look SOOOO much better, especially when compared to models for other armies. Manlet Marines need to go the way of the dodo
I understand why people like the way Intercessors look, but I'd rather collect an army of RTB01s than weird oversized marines. Oh wait, I did!
And Primaris units are just stupid, suffering from pure product design mentality and catering to adolescent size fetishes of my-dad-is-bigger-than-your-dad.
Insectum7 wrote: Truemarines haven't needed any additions since about 4th, and even that's a stretch. As long as they recieve reasonable point updates and basic army maintenence I'm happy. There's zero chance I "update" to Primaris garbage. Tactical squads in Rhinos 4 lyfe.
LOL Primaris garbage? Intercessors look SOOOO much better, especially when compared to models for other armies. Manlet Marines need to go the way of the dodo
I understand why people like the way Intercessors look, but I'd rather collect an army of RTB01s than weird oversized marines. Oh wait, I did!
And Primaris units are just stupid, suffering from pure product design mentality and catering to adolescent size fetishes of my-dad-is-bigger-than-your-dad.
You mean the fantasy where the Marine models are reasonably larger than the humans, seeing as they're genetically modified and all that?
Seeing as truescale has been a thing before, don't think that was an adolescent fantasy.
Not sure if that's what Insectum7 meant, but I do really like the scale of primaris compared to other models. They're big enough next to a normal human model to convey their inhuman size. As opposed to my firstborn who all basically look like scrawny guardsmen stuffed into guardsman-sized armor.
The small marine size was never a huge issue for me, but it's honestly kind of nice to have. I also kind of like that their units come in smaller sizes. Lots of 3-man units. It reinforces that "elite" feeling.
Insectum7 wrote: Truemarines haven't needed any additions since about 4th, and even that's a stretch. As long as they recieve reasonable point updates and basic army maintenence I'm happy. There's zero chance I "update" to Primaris garbage. Tactical squads in Rhinos 4 lyfe.
LOL Primaris garbage? Intercessors look SOOOO much better, especially when compared to models for other armies. Manlet Marines need to go the way of the dodo
I too think that primaris look really silly. Flying tanks and bulky marines look awful IMHO. I think I only like the Judiciar from the primaris range.
And former standalone chapters like DA, BA or SW are just regular SM armies now. No primaris dedicated dreads, sang. guard, raven/death wing, wulfen, twc, etc...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Insectum7 wrote: Truemarines haven't needed any additions since about 4th, and even that's a stretch. As long as they recieve reasonable point updates and basic army maintenence I'm happy. There's zero chance I "update" to Primaris garbage. Tactical squads in Rhinos 4 lyfe.
Yeah, and firstborn range of models is still massive. Lots of factions didn't get any new release for a decade or more, firstborn can definitely manage without a new release for 15-20 years. Sooner or later primaris will become "old" and GW will launch a new line of models for marines. And I wouldn't bet against a firstborn revamp.
Yeah, and firstborn range of models is still massive. Lots of factions didn't get any new release for a decade or more, firstborn can definitely manage without a new release for 15-20 years. Sooner or later primaris will become "old" and GW will launch a new line of models for marines. And I wouldn't bet against a firstborn revamp.
Sooner, I think.
Sure, its 'officially' under the Heresy banner, but the revamp of older marines is happening this summer.
And in theory, more stuff should follow in plastic. A lot will be bought by 40k players, same as Calth and Prospero and the individual boxes that followed.
Insectum7 wrote: catering to adolescent size fetishes of my-dad-is-bigger-than-your-dad.
I thought it was catering to people who didn't like the awful proportions of squat marines being the same size as guardsmen. The people who don't like them are the ones who treat fluff as if it were actual history books rather than background material about a make-believe universe 40k years in the future.
Insectum7 wrote: catering to adolescent size fetishes of my-dad-is-bigger-than-your-dad.
I thought it was catering to people who didn't like the awful proportions of squat marines being the same size as guardsmen. The people who don't like them are the ones who treat fluff as if it were actual history books rather than background material about a make-believe universe 40k years in the future.
Hence my neckbeard comment about some of the older players. Hell, one of the ones that blocked me because of that said in another thread one of the balance problems was using named characters without permission. LOL, like how out of touch can you be?
Insectum7 wrote: catering to adolescent size fetishes of my-dad-is-bigger-than-your-dad.
I thought it was catering to people who didn't like the awful proportions of squat marines being the same size as guardsmen. The people who don't like them are the ones who treat fluff as if it were actual history books rather than background material about a make-believe universe 40k years in the future.
Hence my neckbeard comment about some of the older players. Hell, one of the ones that blocked me because of that said in another thread one of the balance problems was using named characters without permission. LOL, like how out of touch can you be?
I read that and thought I had accidentally time traveled to 1998 because that's the last time I heard someone seriously use that argument. You can tell people who have never played a tournament or haven't done so in 20 years because they complain about things like named chars, flyers and superheavies when vertus praetors, voidweavers and crisis suits are dominating the meta and would stomp all over a list relying on named chars/flyers/SHs...
See, the cursed founding lore is kind of what makes me feel Cawl is a bit cringe. Before Cawl and the primaris were introduced, you had a few bits of lore discussing attempts to modify the recipe for making marines. You had the cursed founding which was full of concerning mutations and seemingly unusual amounts of bad luck. And then you had Fabius whose creations were always sort of framed as a horrifying perversion of the "proper" process. The theme behind both of these seemed to be that messing with the marine making process was a big no-no, an abomination against the Emperor that either produced monsters or misfortune.
But then Cawl was introduced and just kind of went, "Naaaah. Making better marines is fine actually. In fact, I got rid of some of those pesky gene flaws while I was at it!"
That said, I do like how they've basically retconned the cursed founding as being a big batch of Cawl's experiments, but it still felt like their out-of-nowhere tech priest character was...
* Making Fabius look less competent.
* Uprooting the previously mentioned themes of messing with marine creation being a Bad Idea.
* Doing the above because GW had dragged their feet on truescale marines so long that they felt the need to explain a size and armor change in-universe.
Yeah, I don't really think the size change needed an explanation. That being said, the basic concept of Primaris is fine. It makes sense that after ten millennia of Ad Mech trying to improve marines, some of that stuff actually ends up working. Cawl of course is cringe. There really didn't need to be some immortal super techpriest mastermind. But I ignore that as propaganda. Cawl is just the current head of the Belissarian Conclave, an organisation in charge of marine development. He's not a ten millennia old super genius. Too bad it is harder to pretend something like that with Guilliman...
But no, of course the marine codex shouldn't be split. Quite the opposite, the distinction between primaris and non-primaris should be de-emphasised. In the fluff, sooner or later practically everyone will be primaris anyway, but some might still use the older marks of armour. Combine the datasheets when possible, and at absolute minimum, get rid of the utterly idiotic transport limitations!
Any form of improving as an idea or action, in the Imperium makes litterally zero sense. It is a culture that worships the past. Old things are not just though and believed to be better, but they actually are better. It is like writing peaceful orks, non animalistic tyranids or eldar carrying about any other race what so ever in to the w40k lore. At best one has to assume that the progress implementation is fake or some elaborate trick. But GW doesn't write their lore like that. When they write that the Indomitus crusade was 200years, then it took 200 years. When they change it later to something like 13 years, it is 13. With all the stupid consequances coming with it.
There is also problems with how acceptance of the procedure worked. Marines have started civil wars over smaller things or were wiped out for smaller diviations from the norm. I can imagine some chapters taking primaris in. some wouldn't care, IH for example don't care if the flesh is primaris or classic, both are weak and to be replaced with machine parts. But creating DA primaris, Having access to SW gene seed that would work with non fenrisian aspirants etc. Those thing were just going against decades of lore.
As a bonus there is the fact that the whole lore changes exists only to replace the marine line. Lore wise Cawl had 10 milenia to recreate legions of primaris, he somehow has hidden fleets to carry them, had secret ammo and gear stockpiles , which no one ever found and lived. But he could not make GK primaris? and by the way I don't want GK primaris. over 10k milenia he couldn't create 1000 librarian marines? I mean he could created them for the black shields and the other primaris. Ah wait GW didn't have and didn't want to invest time and money in to a GK primaris line, so the lore got adjusted to fit it.
Just from a lore perspective, this actually would be a fun way of turning humanity against the Emperor, if he went all "Thunderwarriors be G0nE!" on the Old Marines, and decried them to be destroyed. Then the Chapters basically rebel, except for Ultras, GK, and DeathWatch. And Bobby has a real reckoning, where after killing Cato S in a fight, he realizes the Emperor is wrong, and begins a Rebellion.
Insectum7 wrote: catering to adolescent size fetishes of my-dad-is-bigger-than-your-dad.
I thought it was catering to people who didn't like the awful proportions of squat marines being the same size as guardsmen. The people who don't like them are the ones who treat fluff as if it were actual history books rather than background material about a make-believe universe 40k years in the future.
Hence my neckbeard comment about some of the older players. Hell, one of the ones that blocked me because of that said in another thread one of the balance problems was using named characters without permission. LOL, like how out of touch can you be?
I read that and thought I had accidentally time traveled to 1998 because that's the last time I heard someone seriously use that argument. You can tell people who have never played a tournament or haven't done so in 20 years because they complain about things like named chars, flyers and superheavies when vertus praetors, voidweavers and crisis suits are dominating the meta and would stomp all over a list relying on named chars/flyers/SHs...
I have explained that my dislike of named characters in regular games has nothing to do with your meta chasing fetish, or so called balance, or winning builds or whatever… but carry on.
Karol gets it. Fezzik, love it. Except it wouldn’t be da emperor, it would be some chaos infested heretical admin mouthpiece, and his light would thereafter shine most bright for his forever loyal true marines in their continued struggle against heresy, including Cawl and his manipulations. Exalted, both.
Insectum7 wrote: catering to adolescent size fetishes of my-dad-is-bigger-than-your-dad.
I thought it was catering to people who didn't like the awful proportions of squat marines being the same size as guardsmen. The people who don't like them are the ones who treat fluff as if it were actual history books rather than background material about a make-believe universe 40k years in the future.
Hence my neckbeard comment about some of the older players. Hell, one of the ones that blocked me because of that said in another thread one of the balance problems was using named characters without permission. LOL, like how out of touch can you be?
I read that and thought I had accidentally time traveled to 1998 because that's the last time I heard someone seriously use that argument. You can tell people who have never played a tournament or haven't done so in 20 years because they complain about things like named chars, flyers and superheavies when vertus praetors, voidweavers and crisis suits are dominating the meta and would stomp all over a list relying on named chars/flyers/SHs...
I have explained that my dislike of named characters in regular games has nothing to do with your meta chasing fetish, or so called balance, or winning builds or whatever… but carry on.
Incorrect because you said, and I quote, in the "Power Up ir Power Down" thread:
"Imho, for me to be interested in learning a new edition of 40k, and anything more about this one including new codices yada, the game needs to return to roots. Lower models counts that are generally less Uber powerful E.g. no named characters unless by prior arrangement for some special scenario"
And then you proceeded to whine about Mortarion in the next post.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Just from a lore perspective, this actually would be a fun way of turning humanity against the Emperor, if he went all "Thunderwarriors be G0nE!" on the Old Marines, and decried them to be destroyed. Then the Chapters basically rebel, except for Ultras, GK, and DeathWatch. And Bobby has a real reckoning, where after killing Cato S in a fight, he realizes the Emperor is wrong, and begins a Rebellion.
Plague, reading comprehension is poor, and attitude seems to be out to get others instead of understanding, renders any engagement toxic, poisonous, and hence why you are blocked. I tried, again, to engage. But I honestly give up. You do you. No trouble here, just do not want that slimey sick feeling so I choose to ignore you.
Yeah, and firstborn range of models is still massive. Lots of factions didn't get any new release for a decade or more, firstborn can definitely manage without a new release for 15-20 years. Sooner or later primaris will become "old" and GW will launch a new line of models for marines. And I wouldn't bet against a firstborn revamp.
I imagine we're going to lose most, if not all current first-born boxes for 40k. Many will probably come back as true scale HH marines that also have 40k rules. Which would be a no brainer to cross-sell.
So a tactical squad say in 5 years time probably won't be assembled from the current tactical squad kit, but some new tactical squad with Mk 4 - 6 power armour originally released for HH but also usable for 40k.
jeff white wrote: Plague, reading comprehension is poor, and attitude seems to be out to get others instead of understanding, renders any engagement toxic, poisonous, and hence why you are blocked. I tried, again, to engage. But I honestly give up. You do you. No trouble here, just do not want that slimey sick feeling so I choose to ignore you.
My comprehension is fine. You said "lower model counts that are generally less Uber powerful EG NO NAMED CHARACTERS.
That literally says the named characters are too powerful LOL
jeff white wrote: Plague, reading comprehension is poor, and attitude seems to be out to get others instead of understanding, renders any engagement toxic, poisonous, and hence why you are blocked. I tried, again, to engage. But I honestly give up. You do you. No trouble here, just do not want that slimey sick feeling so I choose to ignore you.
My comprehension is fine. You said "lower model counts that are generally less Uber powerful EG NO NAMED CHARACTERS.
That literally says the named characters are too powerful LOL
And an example given was Mortarian, the explanation being that a game with Mortarian quickly becomes about whether or not Mortarian is killed. It was pretty straight forward.
It's not a reason borne out of tournament viability, it's a reason about how a central model dominates a game. It's not about "wins", it's about "play".
jeff white wrote: Plague, reading comprehension is poor, and attitude seems to be out to get others instead of understanding, renders any engagement toxic, poisonous, and hence why you are blocked. I tried, again, to engage. But I honestly give up. You do you. No trouble here, just do not want that slimey sick feeling so I choose to ignore you.
My comprehension is fine. You said "lower model counts that are generally less Uber powerful EG NO NAMED CHARACTERS.
That literally says the named characters are too powerful LOL
And an example given was Mortarian, the explanation being that a game with Mortarian quickly becomes about whether or not Mortarian is killed. It was pretty straight forward.
It's not a reason borne out of tournament viability, it's a reason about how a central model dominates a game. It's not about "wins", it's about "play".
Same question goes to why their no-name Captain or Chaos Lord is at every battle. Definitely ruins immersion if I play against my opponent on a snow battlefield, kill their Captain, and all the sudden next week I face that same Captain in some ruined city.
They're complaining about power and did so with that post. There's no backtracking.
jeff white wrote: Plague, reading comprehension is poor, and attitude seems to be out to get others instead of understanding, renders any engagement toxic, poisonous, and hence why you are blocked. I tried, again, to engage. But I honestly give up. You do you. No trouble here, just do not want that slimey sick feeling so I choose to ignore you.
My comprehension is fine. You said "lower model counts that are generally less Uber powerful EG NO NAMED CHARACTERS.
That literally says the named characters are too powerful LOL
And an example given was Mortarian, the explanation being that a game with Mortarian quickly becomes about whether or not Mortarian is killed. It was pretty straight forward.
It's not a reason borne out of tournament viability, it's a reason about how a central model dominates a game. It's not about "wins", it's about "play".
Yes but that's just how a wargame works. You can say the same thing about tanks. A 1k game with a repulsor executioner is exactly like that. Either the other person brought anti tank and will blow it up by turn 2, or they didn't and you'll delete his army unit by unit.
jeff white wrote: Plague, reading comprehension is poor, and attitude seems to be out to get others instead of understanding, renders any engagement toxic, poisonous, and hence why you are blocked. I tried, again, to engage. But I honestly give up. You do you. No trouble here, just do not want that slimey sick feeling so I choose to ignore you.
My comprehension is fine. You said "lower model counts that are generally less Uber powerful EG NO NAMED CHARACTERS.
That literally says the named characters are too powerful LOL
And an example given was Mortarian, the explanation being that a game with Mortarian quickly becomes about whether or not Mortarian is killed. It was pretty straight forward.
It's not a reason borne out of tournament viability, it's a reason about how a central model dominates a game. It's not about "wins", it's about "play".
Yes but that's just how a wargame works. You can say the same thing about tanks. A 1k game with a repulsor executioner is exactly like that. Either the other person brought anti tank and will blow it up by turn 2, or they didn't and you'll delete his army unit by unit.
Well yeah, you'd say the same thing about Superheavies, tanks or otherwise, in games of any size they can be the dominant factor in. As for just regular tanks, in general I don't think people expect a 1k game to be as balanced in the same way as a 2k, and such larger models will only dominate more in a smaller game.
But yes, a 300+ point model is something I'd expect to be a major factor in a 1k game. That said you could literally just rule it out if you wanted, saying that no model over 20% of the total army cost could be taken. (Or whatever)
"But that's just how a wargame works." No it's not, because 40k used to be more restrictive on what could be taken without your opponents permission, or had other factors in place in order to balace it better. Back in 4th(?) Abaddon was only allowed in a 2k+ game, for example. That's a far cry from Guilliman showing up in a 1k pointer.
Same question goes to why their no-name Captain or Chaos Lord is at every battle. Definitely ruins immersion if I play against my opponent on a snow battlefield, kill their Captain, and all the sudden next week I face that same Captain in some ruined city.
They're complaining about power and did so with that post. There's no backtracking.
Sure, but Guilliman showing up in a 1k pointer is more of a disadvantage for the person taking him. The lack of restrictions is not what's unbalancing the game. Undercosted units that can stack a bunch of buffs are what's dominating and restricting named characters, flyers and superheavies is only going to hurt the armies that are already struggling to keep up with tau/harlequins who don't rely on any of that stuff to crap all over the meta with a 70-90% win rate...
Toofast wrote: Sure, but Guilliman showing up in a 1k pointer is more of a disadvantage for the person taking him. The lack of restrictions is not what's unbalancing the game. Undercosted units that can stack a bunch of buffs are what's dominating and restricting named characters, flyers and superheavies is only going to hurt the armies that are already struggling to keep up with tau/harlequins who don't rely on any of that stuff to crap all over the meta with a 70-90% win rate...
But again, it's not about the win/loss necessarily, and more about the type of game you're playing. I played PUGs against Reaver Titans occasionally during 7th. I won the games, but they weren't exactly the gaming experience I was looking for.
Triptide was more competive to play against than the Titan, but it also offered more of a 'dialogue' between armies, therefore more interesting/fun.
Insectum is on point for me. I don’t mind playing the occasional game against Eldrad, for an example, but why is he there at every engagement? And big centrepiece Demi god characters like Mortarian, again, can be interesting for a special scenario, but … why is he here, that is the question for me.
As for super heavy tanks, yeah, can be fun. But why do I want to tailor my list against a tank meta, to use the hot phrases? I don’t … I like the idea of letting a fellow hobbyist put his big armor on the table but I do not want to make it my pass time to try to beat a huge tank every time we meet.
That said, I liked 500 point games of ninth, and 1500 point games of 2nd 3rd or 4th edition for example, on big tables… I had a table almost nine feet by four and a half, so that we had room for beers books and dice off the mat and so that the battlefield looked like a battlefield and not a game space with dice and junk tossed everywhere…the battlefield was always 8x4. For me… 6x4 was used at shops or friends’ houses where they didn’t have such a big space but for me, 8x4 is the right size for 1000 to 1500 point games… 2000 too. Ok. Back in the day, we could play through a game like that in 3or 4 hours with food breaks and beer phases added to every turn.
I think that I just associate the hobby with a different sort of experience than people who lol at using named characters because they don’t skew the meta and force radical builds or whatever it is that stands in for this hobby in their minds…
I think that for some people named characters are just plastic tokens for power cards in the way that a special card in a CCG should be in a deck every time they play… I don’t think of this hobby in that way.
Lol whatever … imho, my dudes are my dudes, none of them are Mortarian or Girlyman or Cawl… I have harlequins, have since 1992or so I guess, added new weaver bikes and plastics and still have my old metal harlequins bikes with the smiling face canopies, too… first army I bought actually, for 40k was CWE and harlequins. Have an old Eldrad model too… always used him as a generic Farseer. My phoenix lord models I always used as exarchs… converted muegan ra into an autarch… just how I roll.
But as I wrote earlier, you do you. No skin off my nose, but I don’t want anything to do with people who are so concerned with metas and builds and yada to not be able to see what I am trying to communicate, here. I am too old, and too busy, to waste my time on such nonsense.
Yeah, and firstborn range of models is still massive. Lots of factions didn't get any new release for a decade or more, firstborn can definitely manage without a new release for 15-20 years. Sooner or later primaris will become "old" and GW will launch a new line of models for marines. And I wouldn't bet against a firstborn revamp.
I imagine we're going to lose most, if not all current first-born boxes for 40k. Many will probably come back as true scale HH marines that also have 40k rules. Which would be a no brainer to cross-sell.
So a tactical squad say in 5 years time probably won't be assembled from the current tactical squad kit, but some new tactical squad with Mk 4 - 6 power armour originally released for HH but also usable for 40k.
I am interested in the new beakie models. Also in the new plastic tanks and so on… for use in 40k with xenos etc. So this is something of a forecast that might be ok imo. That said, I expect these new plastics to be sort of monoposish like the sisters are, and for me that is ok cuz I build them then cut them up and convert the as we did with old metals too, and for me this ok as I already have marines with which to mix the new stuff. But it does make collecting a big set sort of sad, with repetitive poses and so on, for newer collectors.
Toofast wrote: Sure, but Guilliman showing up in a 1k pointer is more of a disadvantage for the person taking him. The lack of restrictions is not what's unbalancing the game. Undercosted units that can stack a bunch of buffs are what's dominating and restricting named characters, flyers and superheavies is only going to hurt the armies that are already struggling to keep up with tau/harlequins who don't rely on any of that stuff to crap all over the meta with a 70-90% win rate...
But again, it's not about the win/loss necessarily, and more about the type of game you're playing. I played PUGs against Reaver Titans occasionally during 7th. I won the games, but they weren't exactly the gaming experience I was looking for.
Triptide was more competive to play against than the Titan, but it also offered more of a 'dialogue' between armies, therefore more interesting/fun.
Riptides deleting tons more units for the cost is more interesting than the army facing a giant robot? There's no dialogue there LOL
More units on the table means more opportunities to shut down units in assault, more methods to avoid fire with assault, more opportunities to deny LOS, and inflicted damage is more targeted and granular. If you're just standing there letting your units get deleted you aren't doing it right.
Also, that example was pre-8e. Riptides were hard to kill, yes, but (if I recall the stats correctly) that was more of a "nothing is efficient vs. Riptides" situation. Against Titans, the AV rules meant that you might easily find yourself with nothing that could reasonably harm them after a turn or two (depending on what heavy AT options you had and whether your list was more tailored/themed or TAC, and whether you rolled better than the Titan player, and whether the Titan player let you know ahead of time what they were bringing, and what terrain was like...). It's not as relevant now that we're post-8e (there's still issues of availability of efficient heavy weapons), but there is a big difference between "it is difficult to harm me" and "RAW and RAI, you cannot harm me".
Insectum7 wrote: More units on the table means more opportunities to shut down units in assault, more methods to avoid fire with assault, more opportunities to deny LOS, and inflicted damage is more targeted and granular. If you're just standing there letting your units get deleted you aren't doing it right.
You have to be moving very fast or the opponent has to be moving very slow for assault armies to be able to do that. From what I seen and expirianced in 9th, shoting is as dominant as ever. It is just that , same way as in 8th, the really good armies can run shoting and melee units in the same army. Pure or majority melee armies don't reach melee in large enough numbers to do much, and against some armies they will just not reach melee at all.
I preferred the rules that made it impossible to hurt some things, on tables large enough with terrain variable enough and movement short enough for such heavy units that is was also possible to avoid them and still satisfy scenario objectives, or at least not get deleted. and mostly, if one got some killy units behind those vehicles, and hit rear armor, this became a compelling objective and something for the opponent to be on guard against, therefore forcing her or him to play more conservatively, hold some units back for defense of said armor, etc... without this dynamic, there is less motivation to play strategically, and more to use the tank to, well, tank shots and soak up damage and sure, this is one way to use those resources but it seems that it is encouraged, rather, now, or hide away somewhere with the capacity to shoot effectively around corners, with most of the model tucked behind something, just so silly...
about numbers of units and so on, smaller points games encourage using more units of lower costed dudes, and also not loading up on 400pt titanic super dudes, and overwatch markers and so on offered more options, ow to play conservatively when dudes were at a premium.
like i said about big units and specials and so on, squaring off with those sorts of things can be fun, can be, given some forewarning so that a plan can be hatched. in a so-called 'pick up' game, however, and jeebus Mortarian leads the little horder everytime?, not so much.
Insectum7 wrote: More units on the table means more opportunities to shut down units in assault, more methods to avoid fire with assault, more opportunities to deny LOS, and inflicted damage is more targeted and granular. If you're just standing there letting your units get deleted you aren't doing it right.
I see you haven't played against new Tau or Harlequins. Denying LoS doesn't stop Tau from shooting at you and Harlequins have so much mobility they'll either move into LoS or camp objectives and win on points while you play hide and seek from their 9 unkillable voidweavers
Insectum7 wrote: More units on the table means more opportunities to shut down units in assault, more methods to avoid fire with assault, more opportunities to deny LOS, and inflicted damage is more targeted and granular. If you're just standing there letting your units get deleted you aren't doing it right.
You have to be moving very fast or the opponent has to be moving very slow for assault armies to be able to do that. From what I seen and expirianced in 9th, shoting is as dominant as ever. It is just that , same way as in 8th, the really good armies can run shoting and melee units in the same army. Pure or majority melee armies don't reach melee in large enough numbers to do much, and against some armies they will just not reach melee at all.
Yea, my Black Templars with a 5+ invuln and FNP from Grimaldus don't make it into combat against Tau other than the ones that come in from deep strike and get buffed to 7" charge from my chaplain. I can run big blocks of primaris crusaders and buff them to the moon but they get shot off the table before they get into combat.
I am referring to 7th ed specifically with my posts, and a bit of 8th I suppose. I haven't run my Marines in 9th, having been focussing on Nids, and haven't really played much of 9th at all, tbh.
Insectum7 wrote: I am referring to 7th ed specifically with my posts, and a bit of 8th I suppose. I haven't run my Marines in 9th, having been focussing on Nids, and haven't really played much of 9th at all, tbh.
9th mission wise is a step up from 8th, but smaller board sizes, the same outdated IGOUGO system, and the obvious Codex Creep GW can't keep in check from being a good game. The latter two of course per usual for all editions.
would want that.
. It’s also the reason why Fallen should be in the Dark Angels supplement but oh well...
