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.

jmurph wrote:I have both SWs and UMs, FWIW, and think that, from a design view, all SMs should be in one codex. Give all of 'em Bolter/BP/CCW and let the SCs and HQ change things up. So you get Furious Charge if you take the Red special character, Counter Charge if you take the grey one, Stubborn if you take the green or yellow one, Infiltrate if you take the black one, troop bikes if you take a bike one, troop jumps if you take the jump pack one retinue termies if you take a termie one, etc.

Most of the differences are really modeling and philosophy, not so much units in a small scale battle.

Thank you. It helps when a SM player backs me up on this. SMs really aren't very different from each other. And like you said, compiling them into one big codex works better from a design standpoint. GW would save development time and especially money (since they wouldn't have to print so many different books) for a product that will inevitably sell like crazy.

I appreciate and understand that sentiment, but it is an irrelevant argument in 2009. They did not do that, and SW are second or third in line as oldest Codex (and unique that they require two books) depending on how you count releases. If you want to cogently make that argument, wait for 6th edition murmurs and howl about it then. It's too late now, and I want a new Wolf release. It skipped 4th completely, as did BA and DE.

Besides, the rubber meets the road with models. I wouldn't care if they WD'ed the SWs, as long as I got new model releases. Which is what drives this whole process.

Anyways, SMs will never be a single book, due to the sales. The rules similarities aren't relevant; the SALES similarities are. The rules being similar is actually a BONUS to the developer, because less rules work still yields a high selling product. That is a demonstrable fact, so it would really help the process if folks could get on board with that and move on.

dienekes96 wrote:I appreciate and understand that sentiment, but it is an irrelevant argument in 2009.

Completely agree. Nobody need take it personally when people speak of compiling SMs. I've said before that I'm excited for SW players because I can empathize with the thought of getting a new codex with fresh fluff and, best of all, new models. I can't wait to hear the first reports of how they play.
I mention it merely as hypothetical food for thought. I think that although:

less rules work still yields a high selling product.

putting SMs in one codex would allow zero rules work to yield a high selling product. If Codex: Space Marines contained everything SM players needed, GW would save on print costs + R&D of multiple codices while selling the same amount of product.

I have to admit, there is a small part of me that is tired of watching new SM codices hold up the line for everybody else. But I make an effort to be understanding of the fact that devotion to a specific SM chapter excites the same feelings as devotion of any xeno player to their respective army. I sincerely hope your new codex delivers, and turns out to be worth the wait.

Archonate wrote:
If Codex: Space Marines contained everything SM players needed, GW would save on print costs + R&D of multiple codices while selling the same amount of product.

If there was a 1-to-1 relationship between customer and codex, where the rule is 1 customer buys only codex SW and another buys only codex SM, you might have a point. But, I for one play both SM and SW, and I know many others who have pretty much every codex, or at least every space marine codex. Granted, that's anecdotal, but my sense is GW's best scenario for increasing profit margin, at least for printed material, is through increased revenue over reducing cost of goods sold (especially where print costs are variable and dependent on print volume, and R&D is already sunk).

In other words, more best-selling codices are more gooder.

Archonate wrote:putting SMs in one codex would allow zero rules work to yield a high selling product. If Codex: Space Marines contained everything SM players needed, GW would save on print costs + R&D of multiple codices while selling the same amount of product.

The point of having multiple space marine codexes is to enable GW to do a big space marine release at least once every year rather than once every edition. Space marine codexes give them the most bang for their buck because all use the same existing line of space marine plastic kits (which are more profitable than metals) and as such they don't require very much investment. Afterall why should I go through the expense of updating an entire separate model line when I can just sell you the one I've already got over and over and over again year after year? Especially if the one I've already got has a higher profit margin due to its high proportion of plastic kits? If GW could get away with only releasing space marines they would. The other armies exist only to give space marines someone to fight.

Archonate wrote:SMs really aren't very different from each other.

I think it is more accurate to say that SM weren't very different from each other.

We haven't seen this new space wolf codex. In all likelihood, GW is quite aware of how homogenous the space wolves, blood angels and dark angels were to standard space marines, and so they may have taken steps to make them much more unique in game balance. Divergent model counts, different special rule sets, new global special rules, etc.

They may have gone as far as to have the guy who writes all of the xenos codexes try his hand at space marines in order to inject some 'differentness'.

The only issue I have, and I do see your point, is the amount of unique wargear and such that would have to find a place in the conjoined dex lest detail of equipment and rules and units and characters and background and... suffer.

I mean, if all current seperated chapters were intered into the vanilla dex we'd have a 2nd rulebook wouldnt we?
I get how it would be best for those amongst you who play both vanilla and other legions and it is true that it creates impracticality in the dev system that slows new releases down for everyone else. just remember that patience is a useful trait. The Wolves have done it. The DE are STILL doing it for feths sake.

one last thing. the creation of an entirely separate book and background for an army creates, in my experience, a sense of pride in that force. you want them to do well in campaigns, hope they kick tail when new fluff is released. Yes you can develope this kind of attachment to a force anyway, I just think it makes it easier for some of the newer gamers. Its why I think what they (Mat Ward) did to Chaos was criminal. Granted their all heretics and deserve only the Emperors justice but its to see what was such a variable and vibrant force reduced to 2 winged daemon princes and 9 obs.

Thats all I got
Fire at will

Stygian Mole wrote:
one last thing. the creation of an entirely separate book and background for an army creates, in my experience, a sense of pride in that force. you want them to do well in campaigns, hope they kick tail when new fluff is released. Yes you can develope this kind of attachment to a force anyway, I just think it makes it easier for some of the newer gamers.

Yep. I like associating with a single army book. I like that all the fluff and pretty pictures support a common theme. Whenever I lose touch with the creative side of the army, the Codex is a fantastic way to get back into the mood of hairy drunks with high-tech beatsticks and large-caliber weapons. I don't get that same evil grin when I look at the generic space marine codex. I think it's because Ultramarines look far too hygenic.

And I'm REALLY excited about having all of my rules in one book. I hate having two codexes to look through to check a point value, or to remember if I'm allowed to field a specific unit or not. I want my own self-contained codex, with everything of relevence in one place.

I definitely sympathize with anyone who feels their codex is getting held up by the release cycle though. I'd very much like to see the Dark Eldar get some real love and attention after all this time. They have an amazing concept, just abysmal models.

Mastiff wrote: I'd very much like to see the Dark Eldar get some real love and attention after all this time. They have an amazing concept, just abysmal models.

Q.F.T.

Archonate wrote:SMs really aren't very different from each other.

Shep wrote:I think it is more accurate to say that SM weren't very different from each other.

Well, it depends what Edition we are talking about:

3rd Edition SW resembled SM in so much that CSM resembled SM. They were very differnet and played very differently as I have outlined previously (http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/120/240694.page#754035).

In 4rth Edition, SM got alot of the benefits/units that SW had exclusively, and this continued with the introduction of the 5th edition rule book. In otherwords, they made SM resemble SW. Plus, BT came out which shares several of the CC concepts of SW.

It is both mine and I believe Shep's hope that they again differentiate the SW codex significantly enough from SM that they are deserving of a stand alone codex.

SW deserve a Codex simply for being a bitchin and RAD concept.

As the famous revolutionary, Patrick Henry, once said "Give me SW or I will give you death"

Stygian Mole wrote:
one last thing. the creation of an entirely separate book and background for an army creates, in my experience, a sense of pride in that force. you want them to do well in campaigns, hope they kick tail when new fluff is released. Yes you can develope this kind of attachment to a force anyway, I just think it makes it easier for some of the newer gamers.

Very true. This is actually pretty much what I meant when I said:

devotion to a specific SM chapter excites the same feelings as devotion of any xeno player to their respective army.

Nobody ever wants to feel like their army is some generic, plain old everyday cookie-cutter monotony. I know I certainly don't like feeling that way... (which is precisely why I don't play SMs. In fact it's one of several driving reasons that I play DE.) But just because that's the way I look at SMs, doesn't mean I can't sympathize which those who somehow think SMs are unique. Particularly SW players because to a degree, they understand my frustration of watching all the other armies get updated repeatedly. And have had to tolerate the sniveling demands for a rules update by people who's armies just got updated a couple years ago... And then see them get those updates soon after!!!

@wyomingfox and Shep:
Very good point. GW does seem to be putting increasing amounts of effort to differentiate the chapters... I still fight all SMs the same way which is probably why I, personally, don't see much difference. But by the looks of this new SW codex, I might finally get to use other tactics!

P.S. In your link (http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/120/240694.page#754035) jmurph, the guy being lambasted by Alpharius and dienekes96 as a SM hater... is actually a SM player. Kinda funny.

I didn't lambast jmurph as a SM hater. The only person I directed any snide comments to was Shuma, and that was mostly based on earlier interactions in SW threads. I'll review and see.

Edit: Well, I did quote him and lambast his argument. So you are more correct than me. My bad. I was addressing the argument more than the poster, but that nuance is hardly obvious from my post.

I do stand by my point in that thread about SM not being nearly the army hog they are frequently portrayed as, especially the specialty chapters.

I remember this thread from a few pages ago... when we were talking about Space Wolf news and rumors.

Man, forget that. We're still having the argument over whether they should even exist or not. Well, they do exist, but some of us don't like it so wel'll keep having this conversation until either Space Wolves cease to exist or the haters will bury their head in the sand so deep they'll strike oil in China.

Nah, we need Space Wolves. They do stand apart from other chapters both visually and in their fluff... And they've been neglected for far too long. They are a little more 'spicy' than some of the others.

SO I wonder if this means that IG will be able to take Space Wolf Allies.

smart_alex wrote:
SO I wonder if this means that IG will be able to take Space Wolf Allies.

I think it's a pretty safe bet that won't be happening.
Part of me thinks they're going to phase out the allies rules altogether with the upcoming Inquisition dexes. If Chaos Daemons can't ally with Chaos Marines, (which I feel is a terrible oversight) I don't see why Guard would be able to ally with Wolves.

Archonate wrote:Nah, we need Space Wolves. They do stand apart from other chapters both visually and in their fluff... And they've been neglected for far too long. They are a little more 'spicy' than some of the others.

Quoted for truth

I've always been a Space Wolf fan, there fluff is interesting to read and for me they are the best chapter out there and stand out more for me than the other chapters do, I think it's high time the Wolves had some light shone on them since most other chapters ahem..Ultramarines,Templars have hogged the limelight!

I have always hated this army. I'm glad they're getting a new book because I have friends who seem to enjoy their hijinx, but if they squatted these guys tomorrow I wouldn't miss a thing.

Yeah, and if people would stop whining about SW, I wouldn't miss a thing. But mehh, your hatred gives me strength.

Archonate wrote:Nah, we need Space Wolves. They do stand apart from other chapters both visually and in their fluff... And they've been neglected for far too long. They are a little more 'spicy' than some of the others.

yeah, and they go well with the other original ideas GW has had for 40k back in the 1980's. to recap, we've got space werewolves, space vampires, space elves, space dwarves *offed*, space chaos, space lizards *offed*, space halflings, space ogres, and space skeletons.

wyomingfox wrote:Yeah, and if people would stop whining about SW, I wouldn't miss a thing. But mehh, your hatred gives me strength.

hehe




Automatically Appended Next Post:

warboss wrote:

Archonate wrote:Nah, we need Space Wolves. They do stand apart from other chapters both visually and in their fluff... And they've been neglected for far too long. They are a little more 'spicy' than some of the others.

yeah, and they go well with the other original ideas GW has had for 40k back in the 1980's. to recap, we've got space werewolves, space vampires, space elves, space dwarves *offed*, space chaos, space lizards *offed*, space halflings, space ogres, and space skeletons.

Space Lizards? Do you mean the Slann? I sort of remember them playing with the idea of Space Fomors as "old Ones", but I can't remember if they ever created models or not.

warboss wrote:

Archonate wrote:Nah, we need Space Wolves. They do stand apart from other chapters both visually and in their fluff... And they've been neglected for far too long. They are a little more 'spicy' than some of the others.

yeah, and they go well with the other original ideas GW has had for 40k back in the 1980's. to recap, we've got space werewolves, space vampires, space elves, space dwarves *offed*, space chaos, space lizards *offed*, space halflings, space ogres, and space skeletons.

You forgot space orks

sonofruss wrote:

warboss wrote:

Archonate wrote:Nah, we need Space Wolves. They do stand apart from other chapters both visually and in their fluff... And they've been neglected for far too long. They are a little more 'spicy' than some of the others.

yeah, and they go well with the other original ideas GW has had for 40k back in the 1980's. to recap, we've got space werewolves, space vampires, space elves, space dwarves *offed*, space chaos, space lizards *offed*, space halflings, space ogres, and space skeletons.

You forgot space orks

d'oh!!!

@mastiff: yup, i meant the space slann in RT. i guess they turned into tau since their leaders now have the hoverwheelchairs the slann were famous for!

http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=pro&pre=gwk_40k_ssw_ess_101_000

Available on the 10th of October

From Ravenous over on Warseer:


Space Wolves have ATSKNF, Acute Senses, and Counter attack

Bikers can take wolves instead and give you +1S, T, and A. Something about 50pts for 6 attacks with rending on the charge in there as well.

Bjorn if killed counts as an objective and makes all the space wolves fearless.

Lone wolves if ARENT killed give up a kill point

Berzerk charge(+2 attacks on charge) is there for ALL blood claw stuff.

Some sagas change the objectives in the game in some cases, some are army wide some are individual based (weird I know, screwing with objectives?)

And thats all I got off the top of my head. Oh and they definietely have the sprues in.

EDIT:

Right!

Wolf Guard start at 18pts with power armour and upgrade from there.

There is banner (banner of the wolf I think it was called) and when used lets you reroll all "to hit" rolls in combat for the entire army for one turn.

Apparently some stores have the "black boxes" in but are under order to not open them until next week.

Bikers can take wolves instead and give you +1S, T, and A. Something about 50pts for 6 attacks with rending on the charge in there as well.

Out and out the dumbest thing in 40K for a long time - and that's counting the Daemon Codex, the Chaos Codex, RObin Cruddace and Jervis. Men on horses in a Guard army I can handle. Marines on Wolves?

Come on! That's just... uhh...

H.B.M.C. wrote:Come on! That's just... uhh...

The word you are looking for is awesome.