Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Warpig1815 wrote:
I'd be interested to know...

I'm going to use the Ravenwing - they're Astartes on bikes. Every Chapter has Astartes on bikes, but the lore wise, the Ravenwing operate differently. So what justifies their getting rules? Lore-wise they operate differently, but are functionally identical, model wise they're just aesthetically different, so it all boils down to giving them a rule just to create a different army because you can. So now you have Ravenwing with new rules - for DA players does it not feel like cheating that you've got an extra rule in your arsenal, for a unit that is functionally identical, whilst others go without just because of a disinterest in the lore?

Obviously, that is avoiding the fact that Ravenwing may be balanced by the fact that DA can't take a different unit, but if that isn't a reality, what is providing the balance? Is it just omissions of units, or do they get certain traits and rules taken away too. I'm just curious is all.

EDIT: Ignore this. @bullyboy basically answered this by pointing out DA can't take stuff like Vanguards. So I understand the balance now

Right now? The fact that those new rules aren't that potent. Before? The Force Org magic Sammael and Belial could work making them Troops for a full fluffy army. Do you think it's cheating that Adeptus Custodes or Knights get to have a more elite lower model count army?

I have no problems with DA being able to do a -Wing army. I have no problems with Saim-Hann being able to do a -Riders army. Right now they can't which is a problem, but neither here nor there on the current discussion. Normal Astartes bike troops don't have Teleport Homers, and Terminators do. Deathwing don't have Teleport homers (I think) but Ravenwing Bikes do. (this worked better fluff/story -wise in the past when a Ravenwing bike WAS the Teleport Homer) Normal Astartes don't have Plasma bikes, Darkshrouds or Vengeances.

The Jetfighter and the Talon do not behave the same. One has Hoverjet and Stasis Bomb, one does not.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Then, because we have space in the supplement, we might as well reprint all the relative common units, so people don't have to buy two books to use their separate army.

No, because if we do, when we update the common core units, the version in the supplement will be out of date, and two books are fine!

 Stux wrote:
You just don't seem to grasp though - some of us get a lot more out of the game for them having different rules. That in itself is something I think is cool and makes me feel more invested in my faction. They're my guys that can do their unique thing. Lore alone doesn't cut it for me, it needs a reflection in the mechanics.

The supplement for your faction includes specific stratagem that affect your units, making them "your guys that can do their unique thing, that only every one else who chose the same faction can do!", i.e. what you are asking for.
Those bikers are ravenwing whatsthename bikers rather than simple veteran bikers because they have access to the "Capture the fallen" stratagem, not because they have a different datasheet.
Done.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Then, because we have space in the supplement, we might as well reprint all the relative common units, so people don't have to buy two books to use their separate army.

No, because if we do, when we update the common core units, the version in the supplement will be out of date, and two books are fine!

Or they release a small update pdf and life goes on.

If two books are fine, having them be separate codexes is also fine.

I must admit, when I thumbed through the new SM Codex this weekend I did actually think "there is a crapton of datasheets here....too many in fact" . i think inevitably that will have to be reduced.
I felt like I was in a Captain Morgan commercial reading it...Primaris Captain, Captain in Gravis, Captain in Phobos, Captain in Terminator Armour, Captain in Cataphracti Armour, Captain, Captain on bike. 7 different captains.

23 different Elite entries, Yikes.

Maybe we're looking at this wrong. Primaris probably should have been a complete separate Codex supplement by itself. Even the non codex chapters would use this book as all Primaris are the same.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Or they release a small update pdf and life goes on.

How is that better?

 bullyboy wrote:
I must admit, when I thumbed through the new SM Codex this weekend I did actually think "there is a crapton of datasheets here....too many in fact" . i think inevitably that will have to be reduced.
I felt like I was in a Captain Morgan commercial reading it...Primaris Captain, Captain in Gravis, Captain in Phobos, Captain in Terminator Armour, Captain in Cataphracti Armour, Captain, Captain on bike. 7 different captains.

23 different Elite entries, Yikes.

Maybe we're looking at this wrong. Primaris probably should have been a complete separate Codex supplement by itself. Even the non codex chapters would use this book as all Primaris are the same.

This is what I expected them to do in all honesty.

We will have to wait and see what the plan is with future Primaris though - perhaps we will see some Chapter specific units down the line.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Or they release a small update pdf and life goes on.

How is that better?

How is that worse?

 Mmmpi wrote:
How is that worse?

It's worse because it means selling books with outdated information, and the pdf updates won't carry all the information in a practical format, just the changes, which is very unpractical if there are a lot of changes.
(If the pdf carries all the information in a practical format, it's like giving away the Space Marines codex for free...)

 Warpig1815 wrote:
But what I can't understand is why those 3 Chapters in particular have been elevated out of 'Astartes' in general, and had whole product lines and codices deveted to them.

Because it generates an arse load of cash for GW. Only a few years back they released a list of their top ten selling items (presumably in raw value terms, not so much units). One of the top ten was the SM tactical squad. Another - a little higher up - was the BA tactical squad. The unique tac squad box sold better than the generic tac squad box used by virtually every other SM Chapter combined. That's insane and from GW's perspective, totally justifies it.

In part the special snowflake marines allow you to combine the awesome of the overall SM aesthetic with something a little more tweaked to your taste, e.g. having more or less skulls/vampire/Grail lore themes, more or less dudes in cloaks and hoods, more or less of a roman influence on your SM, more or less wolfy wolfness. There's an argument that these chapters would add additional flavour if they were a little more limited in their wargear choices, creating a somewhat unique feel to each of them, but that would doubtless bring about even more complaining than there is now about SM.

BrianDavion wrote:

Why would some Chapters not have Ancients in Teminator armour but called something else.

someone, BTW hasn't read the new SM codex.

Wierd - I was told these are "Unique" DA units that would dilute their reason for existance if they were not the only ones to have that option.

Racerguy180 wrote:
I'm pretty sure the Salamanders make their own wargear, hence the whole Master Artisans thingy.

Let me reiterate that NO ONE IS SAYING TAKE ANYTHING AWAY from the snowflakes. But unfortunately this is the only reaction we get when this subject is discussed.

Wierd is it not that people are so busy screaming and throwing things to ensure that they keep the units that no one is trying to take away If only people read the actual post and did not post "the world is ending" crap like:

If you want fewer options why not push all the Eldar into 1 book? Or remove the Deathwatch and Greg Knights and push them I to Codex Space Marines. In fact why not just have a codex power armour that has 15 total units in, since the rest are all arguably fighting for the same spots.

Let's remove Tyranids, hell let's remove all factions and just have space marines vs space marines, we can call it "warhammer 40k Heresy edition!" we can reduce the models to space marines (that can be kitted as tac devestator or assault squads) a razorback and call it a day! it's simplier and less bloated the game'll be better! wait player base were you goiong!?

. Why having Tau, necron, dark eldar and eldar when one xenos faction could do the same as all those three ?

Seriously its scary how stupid these posts are and compleely at odds with the OP or indeed the actual points raised.

So why should marines armies be different ? Because people like to feel different and have different clans, groups, gangs, etc

Is missing the entire point = again - why do we not allow anything other than colour difference in 996 Chapters but we do for 4? Why should we not provide the ability to represent the varied Chapters that are not currently able to be "different" - what makes them inferior to these 4?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
I actually like the different marks of terminator armor having slightly different rules. The non imdomintus pattern have slightly different rules that reflect a variance in tech and unit priority. Plus if you think that having five terminator entries is what's causing 40k to be a mess, I disagree with you.

It's not units entries or number of options but it's scale being way out of wack. If I wanted a game with far less unit options and granularity I would play Apoc. A game that is trying to have viable rules for a Grot, a Space Marine, a Knight and a Titan is never going to work properly.

So do different Power Armor Mks. Do all those need separate rules? After all they have kits!

The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities. So why would they be consolidated? that would literally be removing options, which I am against. I do think that marines could be covered by main codex and then any changes applied to the supplements. Kinda like how it works in 30k.

oh BTW I am specifically not on anyone's side, just the side of ASTARTES.

I am not advocating that anyone "special" or otherwise losing stuff. it just boggles the mind that anybody is wanting to remove stuff from the game. If it doesnt effect your army comp, how is it a problem? But...but, balance, unfortunately that ship sailed a while ago. GW obviously don't want to so just deal with it or bounce.

If someone is upset that another faction gets something and whine/bitch/moan about it, its gotta suck to be you. People need to get off their high horse and realize that wanting to remove stuff from ones collection/army is a bad idea. It may seem like a good one, but it seems like if it doesnt effect them, they dont care.

Racerguy180 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
I actually like the different marks of terminator armor having slightly different rules. The non imdomintus pattern have slightly different rules that reflect a variance in tech and unit priority. Plus if you think that having five terminator entries is what's causing 40k to be a mess, I disagree with you.

It's not units entries or number of options but it's scale being way out of wack. If I wanted a game with far less unit options and granularity I would play Apoc. A game that is trying to have viable rules for a Grot, a Space Marine, a Knight and a Titan is never going to work properly.

So do different Power Armor Mks. Do all those need separate rules? After all they have kits!

The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities. So why would they be consolidated? that would literally be removing options, which I am against. I do think that marines could be covered by main codex and then any changes applied to the supplements. Kinda like how it works in 30k.

oh BTW I am specifically not on anyone's side, just the side of ASTARTES.

I am not advocating that anyone "special" or otherwise losing stuff. it just boggles the mind that anybody is wanting to remove stuff from the game. If it doesnt effect your army comp, how is it a problem? But...but, balance, unfortunately that ship sailed a while ago. GW obviously don't want to so just deal with it or bounce.

If someone is upset that another faction gets something and whine/bitch/moan about it, its gotta suck to be you. People need to get off their high horse and realize that wanting to remove stuff from ones collection/army is a bad idea. It may seem like a good one, but it seems like if it doesnt effect them, they dont care.

Not whats suggested in the OP - AT ALL.

Also all the Marks of armour used to have rules.

Oh so you just want an answer to the op question of what would be lost. Simple: the flavour of the game that has been built for over 30yrs.
Now before you dismiss it or find a way to way 'but they can just retcon/rewrite it all so no one cares'.. a lot of people care about that flavour. And those people spend money to have that flavour. Dismissing that to favour cutting things down so theres no flavour or differences for people within your biggest selling product line is probably a bad idea.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Is missing the entire point = again - why do we not allow anything other than colour difference in 996 Chapters but we do for 4? Why should we not provide the ability to represent the varied Chapters that are not currently able to be "different" - what makes them inferior to these 4?

It is not our choice maybe? GW....

We had Grey Knights as a Squad to support existing Armies against Demons. ( Termies ). GW said: lets have a codex and a multiple Units. So it is now. Who asked for this? We?

I remember the first Space Marine codex I have bought had supplements ( 3 ) and GW stopped right at the IG codex ( 1 supplement ) with that idea. The split into 4 publications for loyalist chapters seems consistent from 1998 - 2018+ .

If you want to provide the ability to represent more than different paint-jobs , you can't make the "build them right out of the box scheme" of GW ( paint by numbers and obey the datasheets ) work or you have to offer thousands of kits. Sure, today the people who collect faction A are satisfied with Boxes 1-100, but tomorrow the other people would expect the same for their faction too. How many years do you think this could go on without trouble?
Thats why it made sense to pick a theme, make some general kits and a few special ones like we had. The Problem is WH 40k isn't a game lasting for 1-10 years with a few updates. We are past the third decade IIRC?


The only way to give almost endless Options to everyone is:
- buy a scout. Equip him with gear available to scouts.
- or upgrade that scout to space marine in Power Armor. Equip with gear available for PA.
- or upgrade to veteran. Equip with more gear ( complete access ) and allow a branch of your list to offer TDA and limit to TDA options there.
- plus, vehicles and dreads etc pp are just equipment you get access to if you buy the crew first.
- maybe a promotion system to represent the specialists and officers. ( plus access to relics for example right there )
- just limit the unit size to 1 -10 scouts. Thus you can't run into "creative people" generating giant blobs.
- you will need an Armoury, yes. And maybe a basic layout like the FOC was to keep things within lines.
- Heavy weapons and anything you don't want spammed could be tied to squad size. Or you say variety is key and we have to endure whatever you made possible.

But, these "build your won space marine" thing isn't very protectable ( IP ) so my guess is we see more "ready to run" stuff with names attached to it.

Racerguy180 wrote:

The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities.

But those differnces are completely made up and don't need to exist.

So why would they be consolidated?

So that people can use whichever type they find visually most appealing without harming the performance of their army.

Let's just embrace our differences and realize we can't all have everything in one codex. Once we do that, we'll all get along.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Let's just embrace our differences and realize we can't all have everything in one codex. Once we do that, we'll all get along.

How about in one codex and several supplements?

 Mr Morden wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Why would some Chapters not have Ancients in Teminator armour but called something else.

someone, BTW hasn't read the new SM codex.

Wierd - I was told these are "Unique" DA units that would dilute their reason for existance if they were not the only ones to have that option.

Racerguy180 wrote:
I'm pretty sure the Salamanders make their own wargear, hence the whole Master Artisans thingy.

Let me reiterate that NO ONE IS SAYING TAKE ANYTHING AWAY from the snowflakes. But unfortunately this is the only reaction we get when this subject is discussed.

Wierd is it not that people are so busy screaming and throwing things to ensure that they keep the units that no one is trying to take away If only people read the actual post and did not post "the world is ending" crap like:

If you want fewer options why not push all the Eldar into 1 book? Or remove the Deathwatch and Greg Knights and push them I to Codex Space Marines. In fact why not just have a codex power armour that has 15 total units in, since the rest are all arguably fighting for the same spots.

Let's remove Tyranids, hell let's remove all factions and just have space marines vs space marines, we can call it "warhammer 40k Heresy edition!" we can reduce the models to space marines (that can be kitted as tac devestator or assault squads) a razorback and call it a day! it's simplier and less bloated the game'll be better! wait player base were you goiong!?

. Why having Tau, necron, dark eldar and eldar when one xenos faction could do the same as all those three ?

Seriously its scary how stupid these posts are and compleely at odds with the OP or indeed the actual points raised.

So why should marines armies be different ? Because people like to feel different and have different clans, groups, gangs, etc

Is missing the entire point = again - why do we not allow anything other than colour difference in 996 Chapters but we do for 4? Why should we not provide the ability to represent the varied Chapters that are not currently able to be "different" - what makes them inferior to these 4?

You do like to point fingers and call names. However, you can't seem to wrap your head around the fact. The special marine factions aren't better or worse than the marines who don't have the special units. They get the special units just to give them flavor and uniqueness and...AND..now this is the big part. They sell more books, and more reason for different colored marines selling the same models over again, with these special models to give them a reason to buy more units.

You keep acting like GW just doesn't get it. They get it just fine. If all armies could have the same units in marines, that would be a few less books they'd sell. As well many less models. As you'd never need to double up on tac squads, primaris troops, etc. As you just sell the special units, and they keep all the exisiting models with the same paint job.

It benefits them most to spread them out as you want to play vanilla marines ? Ok, two HQ and three troops and extras. Oh now you want DA ? Ok, best buy 3 MORE troops and 2 HQ and then the special units. Oh now BA you say ? Sure, just another 2 HQs and 3 troops, etc, etc. You play all three you've Now picked up 90 troops squads, and 6 HQs, when all you'd have before was the same 2 HQs and the same 3 troop squads. Now multiply that over all the players who want all the flavor , that is a lot of money GW would otherwise leave on the table to people who just can't miss out on all the special.

Also, and again, just because these other marine factions have things the core one doesn't, doesn't make them better than or worse than each other. It makes them different than, and difference sells. If you think not having all the options of everyone else makes your marines worse, you need to rethink how you view the game. Just my opinion though, the fact GW does this to make more money is fact however.

 Mr Morden wrote:
I own reasonable Dark Angels and Wolves armies (about 3000pts each) and some Blood Angels (about 1500pts).

There has always been alot of discussion of the "unique" units that have been given to the Angels and Wolves to make their codex fuller and boost sales, especially since the "basic" marine range has been complete for years (one of the reasons for Primaris).

However looking at the actual units - how many of them are actually in any way unique, how many would not actually be represented in some form in other Chapters both in terms of Lore and game stats.

The Librarian Dreadnoughts are only in one chapter? Really?
No other Chapter has Sargeants leading squads in Terminator armour? Isn't that an Iron Hands thing too?
No other Chapter has more flexible teminator squads mixing close and ranged combat versons?
No other Chapter has mutations like Wolfen - isn't that a Black Dragons thing
No other Chapter rides beasts (much as I hate Wolves on Wolves) to battle?

I would say Wulfen, cyberwolves, the Darkshroud and the Vengeance landspeeders are truly unique units. I don't agree that Wulfen are the same as Dragon Claws as Dragon Claws still wear power armour.

Surely the basic unit templates for pretty much every Unique unit could and should be expanded to include these slight variations, with the relevant Chapter Keyword allowing access to a few other special rules /armoury should cover anything else?

This is true I suppose. Even in the case of Wulfen/Dragon Claws, you could add, "If your army is Black Dragons, this unit can take power armour for x points giving it..." But I'm curious, what would you call these units? Wulfen/Dragon Claws?

What am I missing here. What would be lost by allowing those units be represeted in other Chapters?

That depends on each player. For me, while freedom of choice is great, it's important to have limitations and boundaries on those choices. While that may seem counterintuitive, let's expand the logic so that instead of getting rid of unique subfactions, let's get rid of unique factions. "Are your Craftworld Eldar really such special snowflakes that you really won't enjoy them if my Tyranids can't also have Aspect Warriors?" OK, so obviously this is not something that anyone is likely to say and mean, but by stretching the logic like this, perhaps you can see that for some people, the existence of unique subfactions are just as important as unique factions

It would also remove the problems of trying to cater for fans of these Chapters wanting everything plus their own "unique" units to make them Marines+ or having to have lesser versions of the same unit so that the three Chapters can retain a sense of specialness.

While obviously, I can't speak for all non-codex compliant chapter fans, I would like to say that I've never wanted everything that other chapters have. For me, having unique units that no one else can take works both ways. I never wanted Centurions and what not for my Dark Angels. Heck, I don't even run any Primaris yet, because they go against everything I know about the lore of my chapter.

In summary, while many people here are trying to use logic and reason to argue for or against subfactions, there really isn't much reason and logic behind why many people like or dislike them. Either you do, or you don't. It just boils down to personal preference.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
How is that worse?

It's worse because it means selling books with outdated information, and the pdf updates won't carry all the information in a practical format, just the changes, which is very unpractical if there are a lot of changes.
(If the pdf carries all the information in a practical format, it's like giving away the Space Marines codex for free...)

It's no different then codex + supplement. You have to wait for the supplement to get updated anyway. Sure the six new ones are getting released right now, all at once, but that's not the usual way GW operates.

we can't be sure the new supplements are all getting released at once for all we know it could be months before the next one.

Crimson wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:

The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities.

But those differnces are completely made up and don't need to exist.

So why would they be consolidated?

So that people can use whichever type they find visually most appealing without harming the performance of their army.

but maybe it should hurt their army? Commanders have to make decisions like these quite often, like all the time, and they all have pros & cons.

Deciding on which specific terminator plate, really depends on what you would use them for. So a TH/SS Indom would be used differently than a CF/SB dude and further a PS/PB Tartaros would be diff than the preceding. That's not even taking into account deathwing.

I mean hell, how many variants of special termies are there in 30k? Palantines, Pyroclasts, Justerian, I could go on. They work out of the same book right, but with specific things added supplementary to that section. Kinda like a base codex that everyone can use with added special stuff. Unfortunately since certain people only want stuff that others cant have. Then complain that they dont get access to stuff others have and flip out when the thought of it happening occurs.

They have different uses, tartaros are as fast as an infantry squad, Indom 1" less and Cataphrachtii even less. Their invulns are different as well. GW would say they'd have different specific uses and they do, so I'd believe them rather than....


once again, the only people that are removing anything from the game would do so irrespective of how it might effect another's enjoyment. Either by contrarian tendencies or tinfoil headgear.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Spoiler:

Racerguy180 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
I actually like the different marks of terminator armor having slightly different rules. The non imdomintus pattern have slightly different rules that reflect a variance in tech and unit priority. Plus if you think that having five terminator entries is what's causing 40k to be a mess, I disagree with you.

It's not units entries or number of options but it's scale being way out of wack. If I wanted a game with far less unit options and granularity I would play Apoc. A game that is trying to have viable rules for a Grot, a Space Marine, a Knight and a Titan is never going to work properly.

So do different Power Armor Mks. Do all those need separate rules? After all they have kits!

The marks of Astartes armour dont change their abilities/stats. Indomitus moves differently compared to Cataphrachtii, same goes for Tartaros. They also have diff invuln and other abilities. So why would they be consolidated? that would literally be removing options, which I am against. I do think that marines could be covered by main codex and then any changes applied to the supplements. Kinda like how it works in 30k.

oh BTW I am specifically not on anyone's side, just the side of ASTARTES.

I am not advocating that anyone "special" or otherwise losing stuff. it just boggles the mind that anybody is wanting to remove stuff from the game. If it doesnt effect your army comp, how is it a problem? But...but, balance, unfortunately that ship sailed a while ago. GW obviously don't want to so just deal with it or bounce.

If someone is upset that another faction gets something and whine/bitch/moan about it, its gotta suck to be you. People need to get off their high horse and realize that wanting to remove stuff from ones collection/army is a bad idea. It may seem like a good one, but it seems like if it doesnt effect them, they dont care.

Not whats suggested in the OP - AT ALL.

Also all the Marks of armour used to have rules.

Within 40k, not the 40k RPGs? Citation required.

Racerguy180 wrote:

but maybe it should hurt their army? Commanders have to make decisions like these quite often, like all the time, and they all have pros & cons.

It should hurt someone's army that they happen to like the look of the wrong terminator armour type?

Deciding on which specific terminator plate, really depends on what you would use them for. So a TH/SS Indom would be used differently than a CF/SB dude and further a PS/PB Tartaros would be diff than the preceding. That's not even taking into account deathwing.

I'd prefer if it dependent on which look I like the best.

I mean hell, how many variants of special termies are there in 30k?

Too many.

 Crimson wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:

but maybe it should hurt their army? Commanders have to make decisions like these quite often, like all the time, and they all have pros & cons.

It should hurt someone's army that they happen to like the look of the wrong terminator armour type?

but if it has different rules then you just have to deal with it. I prefer the look of tartaros, but I wouldnt expect them to behave the same way. why on earth would the mini which looks physically bulkier/heavier have the same rules as the lighter/faster one. a dodge hellcat and a mclaren 720s have approximately the same power, but one is significantly lighter, so in Gran Turismo, by your logic, should behave in the same way. damn I get that suspension of disbelief is a mutable thing but...

Deciding on which specific terminator plate, really depends on what you would use them for. So a TH/SS Indom would be used differently than a CF/SB dude and further a PS/PB Tartaros would be diff than the preceding. That's not even taking into account deathwing.

I'd prefer if it dependent on which look I like the best.

nothing is stopping you from using the one you like the look of best.

I mean hell, how many variants of special termies are there in 30k?

Too many.

so how is more options a problem?

When all the options suck, why even have them? They all play the same right now which is they play badly. You are just punishing one look more than the other. And it is quite unlikely GW will make the 3 different terminator armors and the different equipments balanced if they even were to try so at best one of the armors would be superior and if you were unlucky and chose wrong you are punished,

People are for some reason discussing all the datasheets as if they are all both well balanced between each other, other elite choices, other units in the book and even between other books. They arent and will never be as long its GW who writes the rules.

Isnt it better to just have 1 unit with lots of different options both with equipment and look and then have it almost good than 5+ that all suck?

I think even those that advocate removing datasheets and consolidating units wish that it wasnt needed. Think most would love to have each unit be more unique and have different mechanics and be meaningful choices in list building. But the game is too big in scope and GW sucks at writing good and well balanced rules. I rather have 50 datasheets that are balanced and do different things well than 150 with just 10-15 of them being well written. Use all those other models for different looks and asthetics, you can still play them as they are still marines just that their "unique" sheet isnt there anymore.

I think if you feel that just because there are less choices GW will somehow find the magic touch to make the smaller number of choices good, you're living in a dream world I'd love to experience once. All that would happen is there would be less options and still most of them would be considered not competitive or worth while.

I don't think its a matter of number of options its either a matter of lack of understanding of their own game, or they just don't want to do so.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I think if you feel that just because there are less choices GW will somehow find the magic touch to make the smaller number of choices good, you're living in a dream world I'd love to experience once. All that would happen is there would be less options and still most of them would be considered not competitive or worth while.

I don't think its a matter of number of options its either a matter of lack of understanding of their own game, or they just don't want to do so.

indeed. if that idea had merit a codex like Custodes with minimal choices woudl consist of complete contenders

 bullyboy wrote:
I must admit, when I thumbed through the new SM Codex this weekend I did actually think "there is a crapton of datasheets here....too many in fact" . i think inevitably that will have to be reduced.
I felt like I was in a Captain Morgan commercial reading it...Primaris Captain, Captain in Gravis, Captain in Phobos, Captain in Terminator Armour, Captain in Cataphracti Armour, Captain, Captain on bike. 7 different captains.

23 different Elite entries, Yikes.

Maybe we're looking at this wrong. Primaris probably should have been a complete separate Codex supplement by itself. Even the non codex chapters would use this book as all Primaris are the same.

The problem is organization not number. I get they want to seperate the stat lines for things like bikes, gravis, terminator, and so on. The real problem with the codex is they started bouncing around the lieutenants, Libbys and such.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
But I'm curious, what would you call these units? Wulfen/Dragon Claws?

Something like mutated marines or abnormal marines I guess? Could include death company as well.

 Mmmpi wrote:
It's no different then codex + supplement. You have to wait for the supplement to get updated anyway.

If and only if the new SM codex is not compatible with the old supplement, and if it's the case they can just release a free pdf mini-supplement with the bare minimum in the meantime.