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.

 Vash108 wrote:

 OIIIIIIO wrote:
Why not take and roll Chaos Marines into C:SM as well they are just marines with spikey bits? They only have a few different units and all of their special rules could be covered with a quick blurb. One could roll them into Chaos Deamons book too ...this could be justified by them hanging out with bad things.

You know what, I would love that. Then maybe we would actually see some supplements.

We'd actually have chapter tactics and points costs! Hell as it is CSM are vastly worse to their SM brethren, and several times worse then GH, our 'tactics' is VOTLW, which we pay for, and is specific.

As depressing as it sounds, we could actually run legion/warband tactics...!

 Crimson Devil wrote:

Of course it won't happen, but I think 40k would be healthier if GW dropped some of the armies. Since they have proven they can't support this many armies properly.

The thing is, they've also proven that they can't properly support armies that they fold. If the choice is between satisfying people who don't like Marines and people who don't want their army to be neutered, I'm going to argue that until such a time as GW has shown that they can fold variant Codices in properly no more experiments of the kind should be done.

That's not getting into the differentiation aspect; if Marines of various sorts are the most played, it makes sense that they'd get additional books to increase diversity. This is the thing that gets me; people are arguing in favour of folding Marine books into the Vanilla Codex because it would somehow "increase diversity". All it'd do is make all Space Marine players play the same book, which means that if there's one combo or one set of units in that book that's better than the others, more people than currently are going to jump to that. If you thought the number of Space Wolf players or Grey Knights players in 5th was bad, imagine if this theoretical "Codex: Astartes (pun intended)" existed and every Space Marine player effortlessly and without extra cost for a new Codex could Codex-jump in-Codex to Space Wolves or Grey Knights. As such, I argue that the diversity argument is wrong.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Vash108 wrote:

 OIIIIIIO wrote:
Why not take and roll Chaos Marines into C:SM as well they are just marines with spikey bits? They only have a few different units and all of their special rules could be covered with a quick blurb. One could roll them into Chaos Deamons book too ...this could be justified by them hanging out with bad things.

You know what, I would love that. Then maybe we would actually see some supplements.

We'd actually have chapter tactics and points costs! Hell as it is CSM are vastly worse to their SM brethren, and several times worse then GH, our 'tactics' is VOTLW, which we pay for, and is specific.

As depressing as it sounds, we could actually run legion/warband tactics...!

Depends, double special weapons are really good, as are the various Marks. I'd argue that CSM are better than Tacticals.

I think I'll vote no on that. Two reasons for that. Firstly, GW is releasing things quicker now, and has even divorced model releases from codex releases just recently. So any impact that the BA might have had on other releases has been minimised.

Secondly, well, I just can't help but empathise with BA fans a little. They'd probably be upset if they got rolled. And they seem fairly divergent from the vanilla Marines, from what I've seen, so any rolling might not go too smoothly anyway.

 BlackArmour wrote:
The only books I think should be brought together is to make Codex Inquisition include Grey Knights and SoB - and I say that cause its the only way I see SoB getting an honest update.

But the SoB aren't a part of the Inquisition. That makes about as little sense as rolling the IG into into the Space Marines.

Besides, only reason SoB didn't get a "proper" update is because their models aren't ready yet. But GW has tried make plastic Sisters, and the release of the digital codex implies that they still want to do a full SoB update somewhere down the road.

Depends, double special weapons are really good, as are the various Marks. I'd argue that CSM are better than Tacticals.

Double special weapons are good, but the lack of ATSKNF, the fact that most marks are very costly, or outright worthless, along with the expense of banners means that they'll suddenly shoot up to a higher cost very fast at an inefficient rate.

Double special weapons are good, but Sisters do it better.

Yes, you read that right. Chaos Space Marines, the arch-enemy, the big bad of the setting... is upstaged by the least supported army in the game.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Double special weapons are good, but Sisters do it better.

Yes, you read that right. Chaos Space Marines, the arch-enemy, the big bad of the setting... is upstaged by the least supported army in the game.

Lack of ATSKNF is the real kicker though. Would it have killed GW to give them all Fearless?

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Depends, double special weapons are really good, as are the various Marks. I'd argue that CSM are better than Tacticals.

Double special weapons are good, but the lack of ATSKNF, the fact that most marks are very costly, or outright worthless, along with the expense of banners means that they'll suddenly shoot up to a higher cost very fast at an inefficient rate.

ATSKNF doesn't matter when you're dead. Having double specials means you could actually hurt things, whereas Tactical Squads are a horrible mash of trying to do everything at once and failing.

Sisters don't have ATSKNF either, although they do have cheap access to Fearless.

The Sisters' advantage lies in the fact the carrier squads are cheap and resistant to AP3 weapons.

Oh, and the fact that they can ride in Immolators or Repressors.

CSM would be a lot better if they had access to a half-decent transport option.

3rd Edition did the Marine variants in the best way. A supplement Codex costing a third of the price detailing the units that differed from the main Codex only. It meant you needed both books yet the cut price made it viable.

Over the years so much has been added to BA that a Codex of their own is required unless GW decide to go back to rules supplements instead of fluff supplements.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 OIIIIIIO wrote:
I am curious how Space wolf players would feel about their codex being rolled into SM codex. It could be done easier than the BA Codex. CT could read something like: CT:SW grants the ability to take 4 HQ choices. Scouts gain BS and WS +1. Assault Marines lose 1 to WS and BS while gaining FC. This detachment has access to Thunderwolf Calvary while losing all access to any and all fliers.

Couple of SC that grant armywide buffs and you are done.

Personaly I would not like it at all.
And no it would not be easy at all, we have to many unique units and it would clutter up the Codex: Space Marines jutst like Blood Angles, Dark Anges would and Black Templars did.

Chapter Tactics: Space Wolves

Non Special Character HQ units may take up to two items from the Space Wolves Wargear list. Tactical Squads may take a Veteran Sergeant equipped with Terminator armor for 25 points.

The Emperor's Executioners:
All Space Wolf non vehicle units are counted as having a CCW if they do not already have a melee weapon. In addition, Bike Squads may be counted as Calvary for 5 points per model and may equip items from the melee weapons lists, Storm Shields (See entry for relevant costs) but lose access to Attack Bikes.

Too be honest, Blood Angels have a bigger claim to a unique codex than Space Wolves do.

You didn't actually read the SW codex did you?
The BA codex is just the vanilla marine codex with a few special rules, characters and one unique unit (Death Company) added in. All their other 'special' stuff is just a variation of vanilla SM stuff (predator, dreadnought, honour guard)
The SW codex has apart from a few vehicles, nothing in common with C:SM.
SW don't even have tactical squads. Apart from all their special characters, they would need to have Blood Claws, Wolf Guard, Lone Wolfs, Thunderwolf Cavalry and Fenrisian Wolves as special units. Not to mention that the SW have far more special rules than the BA, and even their units that could their units that could be seen as having codex equivalents (Grey Hunters as tact. squad etc.) are a lot more different from codex marines than their BA counterparts.
The BA are not any more unique than other 1st founding chapters. They and the DA could be rolled into C:SM in the same way as the BT without problems. The SW could also be rolled into C:SM, but it would require a whole lot more work.

SW don't even have tactical squads. Apart from all their special characters, they would need to have Blood Claws, Wolf Guard, Lone Wolfs, Thunderwolf Cavalry and Fenrisian Wolves as special units. Not to mention that the SW have far more special rules than the BA, and even their units that could their units that could be seen as having codex equivalents (Grey Hunters as tact. squad etc.) are a lot more different from codex marines than their BA counterparts.

Grey hunters:

Tactical squad to GH

+CCW
Chapter Tactics: Space Wolf
May take 'Wolf Guard' squad leader
May take two special weapons, one of which is a power weapon.

+2 points.

Blood Claws:

Scout squad:

Replace Wargear and rules.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 OIIIIIIO wrote:
I am curious how Space wolf players would feel about their codex being rolled into SM codex. It could be done easier than the BA Codex. CT could read something like: CT:SW grants the ability to take 4 HQ choices. Scouts gain BS and WS +1. Assault Marines lose 1 to WS and BS while gaining FC. This detachment has access to Thunderwolf Calvary while losing all access to any and all fliers.

Couple of SC that grant armywide buffs and you are done.

Personaly I would not like it at all.
And no it would not be easy at all, we have to many unique units and it would clutter up the Codex: Space Marines jutst like Blood Angles, Dark Anges would and Black Templars did.

Chapter Tactics: Space Wolves

Non Special Character HQ units may take up to two items from the Space Wolves Wargear list. Tactical Squads may take a Veteran Sergeant equipped with Terminator armor for 25 points.

The Emperor's Executioners:
All Space Wolf non vehicle units are counted as having a CCW if they do not already have a melee weapon. In addition, Bike Squads may be counted as Calvary for 5 points per model and may equip items from the melee weapons lists, Storm Shields (See entry for relevant costs) but lose access to Attack Bikes.

Too be honest, Blood Angels have a bigger claim to a unique codex than Space Wolves do.

You didn't actually read the SW codex did you?
The BA codex is just the vanilla marine codex with a few special rules, characters and one unique unit (Death Company) added in. All their other 'special' stuff is just a variation of vanilla SM stuff (predator, dreadnought, honour guard)
The SW codex has apart from a few vehicles, nothing in common with C:SM.
SW don't even have tactical squads. Apart from all their special characters, they would need to have Blood Claws, Wolf Guard, Lone Wolfs, Thunderwolf Cavalry and Fenrisian Wolves as special units. Not to mention that the SW have far more special rules than the BA, and even their units that could their units that could be seen as having codex equivalents (Grey Hunters as tact. squad etc.) are a lot more different from codex marines than their BA counterparts.
The BA are not any more unique than other 1st founding chapters. They and the DA could be rolled into C:SM in the same way as the BT without problems. The SW could also be rolled into C:SM, but it would require a whole lot more work.

Oh man, the irony in this post. Okay, I'll bite.

Blood Claws: Assault marines with no jetpacks. These are available in C:SM.

Wolf Guard: Terminator Squads/VV/SG. Just add a special rule saying Tac squads can take one as a leader.

Lone Wolf: Make a Champion from the Command Squad a IC? I don't get why this unit needs to exist.

Thunderwolf Cavalry: Bike Squads with wolves instead of bikes.

Grey Hunters: Tac squad with CCWs and can take another special weapon.

The only really unique entry you'd need is one for is the Wolf and Lone Wolf unit but that's it. However, my sentiment about Blood Angels extends to Space Wolves. I hope they don't roll in the SW codex and add a supplement because it's just making SW players pay twice as much for the same amount of info. You guys already basically have a supplement for C:SM so why make you pay for the main book too?

Why do people, other than BA players care so much about this? Why are some people so keen to see BA rolled into the vanilla codex?

Seems like the general consensus between BA players (and SW players for that matter) is that we like our own separate codex. So what's the issue here? Honestly, why are people so against us having our own codices?

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Why do people, other than BA players care so much about this? Why are some people so keen to see BA rolled into the vanilla codex?

Seems like the general consensus between BA players (and SW players for that matter) is that we like our own separate codex. So what's the issue here? Honestly, why are people so against us having our own codices?

As a CSM player who never understood why slightly divergent chapters got entire codex's, but chaos which diverges wildly from warband to warband, to world to world. Still is stuck all in one codex. A book of Khorne would FAR be more divergent then a Book of Tzeentch, but hey you don't follow the codex astartes 100% so you get a special snowflake book! Have that special Imperium Star Sticker.

At this point, I'd say it's spite on my end. Why exactly do you deserve a codex to yourself?

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Why do people, other than BA players care so much about this? Why are some people so keen to see BA rolled into the vanilla codex?

Seems like the general consensus between BA players (and SW players for that matter) is that we like our own separate codex. So what's the issue here? Honestly, why are people so against us having our own codices?

Well you're also in a thread asking people's opinion on the matter, so you'll likely see more people than you'd expect advocating a combined book.

I just think it makes sense. Its not like BA and SW are so different they couldn't be combined, so why bother with a different codex when more time could be spent on either releasing/updating/balancing all the other books, or working on entirely new factions, or maybe working on expanding Sisters, who could really use some love.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Why do people, other than BA players care so much about this? Why are some people so keen to see BA rolled into the vanilla codex?

Seems like the general consensus between BA players (and SW players for that matter) is that we like our own separate codex. So what's the issue here? Honestly, why are people so against us having our own codices?

As a CSM player who never understood why slightly divergent chapters got entire codex's, but chaos which diverges wildly from warband to warband, to world to world. Still is stuck all in one codex. A book of Khorne would FAR be more divergent then a Book of Tzeentch, but hey you don't follow the codex astartes 100% so you get a special snowflake book! Have that special Imperium Star Sticker.
,
At this point, I'd say it's spite on my end. Why exactly do you deserve a codex to yourself?

Well, you've just answered my question. Spite. Just spite. If you aren't getting your word bearers codex, we can't have our BA and SW books. Nice. Mature. And I like how you think I don't "deserve" my Codex : Blood Angels.

I agree with you on the CSM codex, I'm starting a Nurgle army myself and would love to see a separate codex for each god. Hopefully the rumours of these supplements to come to fruition.

I'd also like a separate Black Templars codex.

If BA were rolled into C:SM I'd be disappointed, but would I start campaigning for Dark Eldar to be rolled into the Eldar codex, or Grey Knights into the SM codex? Or a retraction of other supplements because we didn't get one? No, because I'm not spiteful.

So, thanks for the sticker. I really hope this doesn't keep you up at night.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blacksails wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Why do people, other than BA players care so much about this? Why are some people so keen to see BA rolled into the vanilla codex?

Seems like the general consensus between BA players (and SW players for that matter) is that we like our own separate codex. So what's the issue here? Honestly, why are people so against us having our own codices?

Well you're also in a thread asking people's opinion on the matter, so you'll likely see more people than you'd expect advocating a combined book.

I just think it makes sense. Its not like BA and SW are so different they couldn't be combined, so why bother with a different codex when more time could be spent on either releasing/updating/balancing all the other books, or working on entirely new factions, or maybe working on expanding Sisters, who could really use some love.

True, and people are entitled to their opinions. Just don't know why people feel it affects them so much. A fair point about time and resources though. But since the BA codex already exists. It shouldn't really take too much time and effort to update it for future editions. In fact, it could be argued that it would take more time and effort to try shoehorn them into C:SM.

You're definitely right about the sisters, though.

 alanmckenzie wrote:

True, and people are entitled to their opinions. Just don't know why people feel it affects them so much. A fair point about time and resources though. But since the BA codex already exists. It shouldn't really take too much time and effort to update it for future editions. In fact, it could be argued that it would take more time and effort to try shoehorn them into C:SM.

You're definitely right about the sisters, though.

It doesn't affect everyone, but when asked, I'll state what I'd like to happen, hypothetically speaking. I don't walk around stores parading about with large cardboard signs bemoaning the state of how my Mordian guard don't have their own book but BA do. While I know that keeping the BA updated isn't some monumental task, in a hypothetical world, cutting it would free up time to update other factions or develop new ones.

On a very minor side note for my reasoning, I've always had a bit of a raised eyebrow why three marine chapters have their own books, when dozens of other equally important ones don't. But that's far from any primary reason why I support a combined C:SM.

I hold no ill will to BA players, but there isn't a whole lot of reasons gameplay wise to keep them in a distinct book.

Well, you've just answered my question. Spite. Just spite. If you aren't getting your word bearers codex, we can't have our BA and SW books. Nice. Mature. And I like how you think I don't "deserve" my Codex : Blood Angels.

There are several other reasons, namely to avoid clogging the pipeline with very similar releases for example, not to mention the annoying releases of something very similar in style that could all become 'supplements' or stuffed into the main book. Just do like third edition, the SM codex is the main book, with supplemental releases for the others.

You don't, why exactly do you deserve it? I don't deserve my CSM, but people are talking like they 'deserve' it, because they have X or Y and it can't be represented by Z despite being the near exact same.

I agree with you on the CSM codex, I'm starting a Nurgle army myself and would love to see a separate codex for each god. Hopefully the rumours of these supplements to come to fruition.

We've seen the Black Legion supplement.

Blacksails wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:

True, and people are entitled to their opinions. Just don't know why people feel it affects them so much. A fair point about time and resources though. But since the BA codex already exists. It shouldn't really take too much time and effort to update it for future editions. In fact, it could be argued that it would take more time and effort to try shoehorn them into C:SM.

You're definitely right about the sisters, though.

It doesn't affect everyone, but when asked, I'll state what I'd like to happen, hypothetically speaking. I don't walk around stores parading about with large cardboard signs bemoaning the state of how my Mordian guard don't have their own book but BA do. While I know that keeping the BA updated isn't some monumental task, in a hypothetical world, cutting it would free up time to update other factions or develop new ones.

On a very minor side note for my reasoning, I've always had a bit of a raised eyebrow why three marine chapters have their own books, when dozens of other equally important ones don't. But that's far from any primary reason why I support a combined C:SM.

I hold no ill will to BA players, but there isn't a whole lot of reasons gameplay wise to keep them in a distinct book.

I know it doesn't affect everyone, and I'm sure people who feel very strongly about it are very much in the minority. I also wasn't suggesting that you were zealous campaigner for one loyalist SM book. I realise you (and others) are only offering your opinion, and I appreciate that. I just wondered why some people do feel so strongly about it.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Well, you've just answered my question. Spite. Just spite. If you aren't getting your word bearers codex, we can't have our BA and SW books. Nice. Mature. And I like how you think I don't "deserve" my Codex : Blood Angels.

There are several other reasons, namely to avoid clogging the pipeline with very similar releases for example, not to mention the annoying releases of something very similar in style that could all become 'supplements' or stuffed into the main book. Just do like third edition, the SM codex is the main book, with supplemental releases for the others.

You don't, why exactly do you deserve it? I don't deserve my CSM, but people are talking like they 'deserve' it, because they have X or Y and it can't be represented by Z despite being the near exact same.

I agree with you on the CSM codex, I'm starting a Nurgle army myself and would love to see a separate codex for each god. Hopefully the rumours of these supplements to come to fruition.

We've seen the Black Legion supplement.

Yeah, hopefully there'll be more (death guard, death guard, death guard).

With regards to "deserving", I don't see why that, or entitlement, need be a factor. Codex BA exists, why can't it go on existing? As I've said, I understand the time, effort, argument, but, again, not sure how much of an argument it is. Why can't we ask for more books rather than less?

One main Loyalist SM book with supplements would be ok. My only problem with that is that BA, SW, players would have to buy two books. And while those two codices still exist, updating them isn't going to take much more effort than writing a supplement for them.

 alanmckenzie wrote:

I know it doesn't affect everyone, and I'm sure people who feel very strongly about it are very much in the minority. I also wasn't suggesting that you were zealous campaigner for one loyalist SM book. I realise you (and others) are only offering your opinion, and I appreciate that. I just wondered why some people do feel so strongly about it.

Ah, gotcha. We're on the same page then. Then again, some people take this whole thing a little seriously.

Its like the people who use 'We' when describing their army, like its an extension of their being. Weirds me out.

 Blacksails wrote:
some people take this whole thing a little seriously.

Agreed.

I really don't care, as long as they quit being horrible.

Martel732 wrote:
I really don't care, as long as they quit being horrible.

Classic Martel.

Yes, do this. Separate Marine Codexes make the release schedule longer, and dilute it with 'more-of-the-same' armies. Either as part of the normal 'dex or as a supplement, Blood Angels are probably the closest chapter to codex marines. I would have rolled them in before Black Templars, honestly.

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Why do people, other than BA players care so much about this? Why are some people so keen to see BA rolled into the vanilla codex?

Seems like the general consensus between BA players (and SW players for that matter) is that we like our own separate codex. So what's the issue here? Honestly, why are people so against us having our own codices?

For me its quite simple. I don't like the direction the army is headed and I think having a separate codex is the reason. I strongly believe the next codex is going to be borderline parody of itself. The current book is blood this, blood that with bolt on wings, and it is unnecessary. GW will reinforce that theme and we will get some silly new units and lazy writing to justify it.

What I want is some new character sculpts of Dante and Mephiston. What GW will give us is all new Bloody McBlood the badass who can donkey punch a Blood Thirster and who can beat Slaanesh thumb wrestling with bolt on wings.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Why do people, other than BA players care so much about this? Why are some people so keen to see BA rolled into the vanilla codex?

Seems like the general consensus between BA players (and SW players for that matter) is that we like our own separate codex. So what's the issue here? Honestly, why are people so against us having our own codices?

For me its quite simple. I don't like the direction the army is headed and I think having a separate codex is the reason. I strongly believe the next codex is going to be borderline parody of itself. The current book is blood this, blood that with bolt on wings, and it is unnecessary. GW will reinforce that theme and we will get some silly new units and lazy writing to justify it.

What I want is some new character sculpts of Dante and Mephiston. What GW will give us is all new Bloody McBlood the badass who can donkey punch a Blood Thirster and who can beat Slaanesh thumb wrestling with bolt on wings.

I get this concern.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 OIIIIIIO wrote:
I am curious how Space wolf players would feel about their codex being rolled into SM codex. It could be done easier than the BA Codex. CT could read something like: CT:SW grants the ability to take 4 HQ choices. Scouts gain BS and WS +1. Assault Marines lose 1 to WS and BS while gaining FC. This detachment has access to Thunderwolf Calvary while losing all access to any and all fliers.

Couple of SC that grant armywide buffs and you are done.

Personaly I would not like it at all.
And no it would not be easy at all, we have to many unique units and it would clutter up the Codex: Space Marines jutst like Blood Angles, Dark Anges would and Black Templars did.

Chapter Tactics: Space Wolves

Non Special Character HQ units may take up to two items from the Space Wolves Wargear list. Tactical Squads may take a Veteran Sergeant equipped with Terminator armor for 25 points.

The Emperor's Executioners:
All Space Wolf non vehicle units are counted as having a CCW if they do not already have a melee weapon. In addition, Bike Squads may be counted as Calvary for 5 points per model and may equip items from the melee weapons lists, Storm Shields (See entry for relevant costs) but lose access to Attack Bikes.

Too be honest, Blood Angels have a bigger claim to a unique codex than Space Wolves do.

You didn't actually read the SW codex did you?
The BA codex is just the vanilla marine codex with a few special rules, characters and one unique unit (Death Company) added in. All their other 'special' stuff is just a variation of vanilla SM stuff (predator, dreadnought, honour guard)
The SW codex has apart from a few vehicles, nothing in common with C:SM.
SW don't even have tactical squads. Apart from all their special characters, they would need to have Blood Claws, Wolf Guard, Lone Wolfs, Thunderwolf Cavalry and Fenrisian Wolves as special units. Not to mention that the SW have far more special rules than the BA, and even their units that could their units that could be seen as having codex equivalents (Grey Hunters as tact. squad etc.) are a lot more different from codex marines than their BA counterparts.
The BA are not any more unique than other 1st founding chapters. They and the DA could be rolled into C:SM in the same way as the BT without problems. The SW could also be rolled into C:SM, but it would require a whole lot more work.

Oh man, the irony in this post. Okay, I'll bite.

Blood Claws: Assault marines with no jetpacks. These are available in C:SM.

Wolf Guard: Terminator Squads/VV/SG. Just add a special rule saying Tac squads can take one as a leader.

Lone Wolf: Make a Champion from the Command Squad a IC? I don't get why this unit needs to exist.

Thunderwolf Cavalry: Bike Squads with wolves instead of bikes.

Grey Hunters: Tac squad with CCWs and can take another special weapon.

The only really unique entry you'd need is one for is the Wolf and Lone Wolf unit but that's it. However, my sentiment about Blood Angels extends to Space Wolves. I hope they don't roll in the SW codex and add a supplement because it's just making SW players pay twice as much for the same amount of info. You guys already basically have a supplement for C:SM so why make you pay for the main book too?

Congratulations! You just turned SW into C:SM thereby illustrating my point that it would be possible but that it would be a lot more work than the BA. You have not yet found a good solution for the Wolf Guard (They would really need to be unique unit since they have no SM equivalent) and Thunderwolf cavalry (there are no Thunderwolf mounts in the C:SM therefore making them Bike Squads wouldn't work without making a special entry anyways) yet, nor all the special rules.
BA would be far simpler to roll into C:SM as it would need only one entry to describe their one truly special unit (Death Company) and a few entries for some of their special rules.

As to the question why I would care about this; I happen to like the BA, but I don't see why every chapter needs its own codex, especially since the BA and DA are not anymore unique than other 1st founding chapters.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Congratulations! You just turned SW into C:SM thereby illustrating my point that it would be possible but that it would be a lot more work than the BA. You have not yet found a good solution for the Wolf Guard (They would really need to be unique unit since they have no SM equivalent) and Thunderwolf cavalry (there are no Thunderwolf mounts in the C:SM therefore making them Bike Squads wouldn't work without making a special entry anyways) yet, nor all the special rules.
BA would be far simpler to roll into C:SM as it would need only one entry to describe their one truly special unit (Death Company) and a few entries for some of their special rules.

As to the question why I would care about this; I happen to like the BA, but I don't see why every chapter needs its own codex, especially since the BA and DA are not anymore unique than other 1st founding chapters.

You don't need to have every single piece of wargear, every single unit, and every single SC to be represented to retain the overall theme/feel/play style of the chapter.

You don't need to have a specific unit entry for guys riding wolves (silly idea IMO anyways) when you could just use the bike entry and model them riding wolves. Same goes for most other supposedly unique and must have options.

A lot of the options in 5th ed Wolves and Angel codices were added simply to create stuff to justify having a codex; it'd be like giving the Sallies their own codex. All of the sudden we'd have green marines riding dragons and using Drake weapons with Drake patten rhinos and whatever other dragon related paraphenalia. None of that stuff is needed to represent a Salamanders force though; the same goes for the wolves and BA.

What is the difference between Wolf Guard and regular Terminators? From what I can tell they are just a Tac Terminator Squad that can equip members for assault.

Wolf Guard aren't Terminators, for a start. :p

They're more like the old Veteran squad, from before the Stern/Van split. Every Wolf Guard can be equipped individually, although there is a limit on how many heavy weapons they can carry. You can even mix and match power and terminator armour within the squad.