Switch Theme:

Which codex would you remove to trim down the game ? (multiple choice poll)  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Which codex would you remove to trim down the game ? (multiple choice poll)
Astra Militarum
Adepta Sororitas
Adeptus Mechanicus
Chaos Space marines
Chaos Daemons
Eldar
Dark Eldar
Necrons
Orks
T'au
Tyranids
Genestealers cult
Adeptus Custodes
Space Marine chapters standalone codex
Harlequins
Inquisition
Imperial knights/chaos knights
Greyknights
I would keep every standalone codex
Death Guard
Thousand Sons

View results
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in at
Dakka Veteran




I say make more codices. Give me codex black templars back, give me codex world eaters, emperors children and dark mechanicus. Just write them competently and I'm happy. It's never going to happen though, especially the "writing them competently" part, but GW removing whole armies won't be happening either....so it's all just wishful thinking anyway.
   
Made in us
Boosting Black Templar Biker






 Kanluwen wrote:

If you're so, so, so fanatically desperate for "Traitor Guard ala Renegades & Heretics"? Give Codex: Chaos Space Marines the ability to take a detachment as an allied contingent. No Ordo Tempestus, no Officio Prefectus, no Psykana, no Navy, no Auxilia. Just straight Guardsmen with a regiment added to them--all housed in the CSM book, not the Guard book.

Fanatically desperate? That is some impressive hyperbole in response to a suggestion, where did all that resentment come from? In response I'd like to say I like your suggestion of putting Traitor Guard into the CSM book and I find it to be perfectly reasonable.
Spire Guard, assuming you're referencing Magnus' thing, is long dead.
Tyrant's Legion was basically just a Guard army with some Marines thrown in.
With Spire Guard it doesn't really matter if they're gone or not. If someone wants to play as [insert SM Chapter] that is long dead or disbanded I and many others would have no problem playing against them since 40k allows you to create your own stories with your guys.

Now if Tyrant's Legion is basically just a Guard army well sounds like a great reason to toss them in the Renegades & Heretics section of a future Guard book
Legends status means they're still in the game. The game != tourney scene/matched play only.
I'm more interested in Garagehammer than Tournaments myself. Legends status also means no further support. Traitor Guard and PDF are a very common enemy in the lore and I'm sure people would enjoy having future rules for them even if it's just a sliver of the Guard or the CSM codex.
   
Made in us
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Right behind you.

Where does my resentment come from?

Guard have been diluted down from an interesting, professional faction to basically just "Allies for Other Armies". GSC can take Guard as part of their Detachments, Guard got severe nerfs because of Marine players taking them as cheap bodies, etc, etc.

Stop asking for Chaos Guard. Stop asking for Dark Mechanicus. Stop asking for things that you don't deserve nor need. CSM are slated to get a rework. It's happening. We don't know when, we don't know how, we don't know what. The biggest and most important thing so far was reworking core model kits and that already happened.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/14 20:08:14


 
   
Made in fr
Regular Dakkanaut




Tiberias wrote:
I say make more codices. Give me codex black templars back, give me codex world eaters, emperors children and dark mechanicus. Just write them competently and I'm happy. It's never going to happen though, especially the "writing them competently" part, but GW removing whole armies won't be happening either....so it's all just wishful thinking anyway.


You re missing the point entirely. No one is asking to remove "factions".

You don't need an entire codex for one faction if you trim down the fat.

Less codex = better internal balance = less possible codex creep.

That's the point
   
Made in us
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Right behind you.

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Tiberias wrote:
I say make more codices. Give me codex black templars back, give me codex world eaters, emperors children and dark mechanicus. Just write them competently and I'm happy. It's never going to happen though, especially the "writing them competently" part, but GW removing whole armies won't be happening either....so it's all just wishful thinking anyway.


You re missing the point entirely. No one is asking to remove "factions".

They literally have been. That's the entire discussion on Knights every single time they get brought up. That's the discussion on Harlequins.

You don't need an entire codex for one faction if you trim down the fat.

Less codex = better internal balance = less possible codex creep.

That's the point

This is nonsense posting at its finest.

Frankly, if you want "better internal balance"?

You take the time and actively attempt to make things work outside of just "trimming the fat". Every single faction should get a supplement series of books, whether it's actual named subfactions or specific kinds of setups or whatever. Necrons could have used a series of supplements on their Big Name Dynasties, AdMech could have used their Big Name Forge Worlds, Drukhari could have used a series dedicated to the Wych Cults, Haemonculi Covens, and Kabalite Warriors. Tyranids could get a series dedicated to the stages of an invasion, etc etc.

At least one named character per book and you actually have something (gasp) unique and interesting!

Bonus points: we might trim the fat of some of the community that does nothing but complain about the "price of entry" when they confuse mandatory items(codices) for non-mandatory items(expanded rules+lore plus named characters for specific subfactions).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/14 20:16:53


 
   
Made in at
Dakka Veteran




Siegfriedfr wrote:
Tiberias wrote:
I say make more codices. Give me codex black templars back, give me codex world eaters, emperors children and dark mechanicus. Just write them competently and I'm happy. It's never going to happen though, especially the "writing them competently" part, but GW removing whole armies won't be happening either....so it's all just wishful thinking anyway.


You re missing the point entirely. No one is asking to remove "factions".

You don't need an entire codex for one faction if you trim down the fat.

Less codex = better internal balance = less possible codex creep.

That's the point


I don't think I'm missing the point. People literally have been talking about removing factions in this thread and not only knights.

Also, less codex=better internal balance=less codex creep is BS in my opinion. You can have diversity in codices and still write them competently.
Power creep has nothing to do at all with the total number of factions and codices. Power creep can still happen with fewer codices if the rules writers aren't conservative and smart with inflating stats and rules.

I've said it before these threads basically boil down to either "I'm pissed my faction doesn't get as much releases as marine subsections, therefore delete faction xyz so my faction can have more releases" or "yeah, let's just remove that faction I don't like and don't play".
It's just pure hypocrisy and not about "removing rules bloat".
   
Made in us
Pyro Pilot of a Triach Stalker





There is not even remotely enough production time for every faction to get the amount of support Space Marines get. Factions already get their main books delayed so Space Marines can get more support
   
Made in at
Dakka Veteran




 Arachnofiend wrote:
There is not even remotely enough production time for every faction to get the amount of support Space Marines get. Factions already get their main books delayed so Space Marines can get more support


Says who? Especially when moving to a digital ruleset and maybe only releasing the lore for a faction in print.
   
Made in ch
Warped Arch Heretic of Chaos





 Kanluwen wrote:
Where does my resentment come from?

Guard have been diluted down from an interesting, professional faction to basically just "Allies for Other Armies". GSC can take Guard as part of their Detachments, Guard got severe nerfs because of Marine players taking them as cheap bodies, etc, etc.

Stop asking for Chaos Guard. Stop asking for Dark Mechanicus. Stop asking for things that you don't deserve nor need. CSM are slated to get a rework. It's happening. We don't know when, we don't know how, we don't know what. The biggest and most important thing so far was reworking core model kits and that already happened.


Hahajajaja .
"
Because my faction got fethed up yours doesn't deserve to exist!"


Gotta be one of the best takes of dakka period and shows a truly great charachter of the poster.
   
Made in us
Boosting Black Templar Biker






Yeah it's a shame to see. I understand the passion for the Guard but all the hate and discontent blistering around it is beyond my ken.
   
Made in us
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Right behind you.

No hate or discontent. Just irritation at the obnoxiousness of some who feel they deserve just because they had an army before to have an army again.

My Wood Elves lost 100+ models when Cities of Sigmar dropped. I got over it. Renegades and Heretics players have repeatedly had it suggested to them that they start proxying them as Guard if they're able to...but nah. They need their army. They deserve their army.

Life isn't fair. I'm sorry you lost your army, I really am--but that doesn't mean you should get to just be another variation of Guard or clogging up the book for another faction.
   
Made in us
Boosting Black Templar Biker






Oh I've never played Traitor Guard, well, outside of Blackstone Fortress and those are some sharply dressed models! But I am fully in support of a faction that is incredibly common in the lore receiving a bit of rules to play with.

Even if it comes at the great expense of a whopping 4 pages of rules in a Guard codex detailing some Chaos themed Regimental traits.

Have a nice day!
   
Made in us
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Right behind you.

But therein lies the rub:

Why should a whole other faction(traditionally tied to Chaos Space Marines, mind you) be in someone else's book?

"Traitor Guard" covers a whole lot of stuff. It's not just Spikey Guard.
   
Made in at
Dakka Veteran




 Kanluwen wrote:
No hate or discontent. Just irritation at the obnoxiousness of some who feel they deserve just because they had an army before to have an army again.

My Wood Elves lost 100+ models when Cities of Sigmar dropped. I got over it. Renegades and Heretics players have repeatedly had it suggested to them that they start proxying them as Guard if they're able to...but nah. They need their army. They deserve their army.

Life isn't fair. I'm sorry you lost your army, I really am--but that doesn't mean you should get to just be another variation of Guard or clogging up the book for another faction.


So you're pissed at people wanting traitor guard because life isn't fair and GW screwed over multiple fantasy factions with that AOS garbage? That's a mature stance to take....
Like I said, it's never really about "removing bloat" and "slimming down the game". It's basically always resentment of GWs idiocy projected onto other hobbyists.
Cause if I lost my army because GW made some dumb ass decision, you can't have a new one!
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





Tiberias wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
No hate or discontent. Just irritation at the obnoxiousness of some who feel they deserve just because they had an army before to have an army again.

My Wood Elves lost 100+ models when Cities of Sigmar dropped. I got over it. Renegades and Heretics players have repeatedly had it suggested to them that they start proxying them as Guard if they're able to...but nah. They need their army. They deserve their army.

Life isn't fair. I'm sorry you lost your army, I really am--but that doesn't mean you should get to just be another variation of Guard or clogging up the book for another faction.


So you're pissed at people wanting traitor guard because life isn't fair and GW screwed over multiple fantasy factions with that AOS garbage? That's a mature stance to take....
Like I said, it's never really about "removing bloat" and "slimming down the game". It's basically always resentment of GWs idiocy projected onto other hobbyists.
Cause if I lost my army because GW made some dumb ass decision, you can't have a new one!


pretty much. most of the "dur remove the bloat" arguement is driven by that I suspect. resentment over things lsot and a feeling that "if GW removes some armies, my army will see more stuff!"
frankly, I wish the mods would make a point of just locking these types of threads. they're more tiresome then female space marine threads and are typically less constructive and less polite.

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Right behind you.

Tiberias wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
No hate or discontent. Just irritation at the obnoxiousness of some who feel they deserve just because they had an army before to have an army again.

My Wood Elves lost 100+ models when Cities of Sigmar dropped. I got over it. Renegades and Heretics players have repeatedly had it suggested to them that they start proxying them as Guard if they're able to...but nah. They need their army. They deserve their army.

Life isn't fair. I'm sorry you lost your army, I really am--but that doesn't mean you should get to just be another variation of Guard or clogging up the book for another faction.


So you're pissed at people wanting traitor guard because life isn't fair and GW screwed over multiple fantasy factions with that AOS garbage? That's a mature stance to take....
Like I said, it's never really about "removing bloat" and "slimming down the game". It's basically always resentment of GWs idiocy projected onto other hobbyists.
Cause if I lost my army because GW made some dumb ass decision, you can't have a new one!

Yeah, no. I'm "pissed at people" constantly spamming threads with the concept and insisting that the things be jammed in where they are unnecessary especially when it comes to Guard, an army that really needs a head to toe rework but likely will never receive one because they stupidly tied GSC to them.

It's more likely than not at this juncture that Traitor Guard are coming in some way, shape, or form. There's been a rumor for basically all of 40k 8E that World Eaters and Emperor's Children are going to get bumped out of the CSM book into their own standalones. If that happens? It's extremely likely that some of that space will be taken up by Traitor Guard.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/15 11:39:47


 
   
Made in fr
Regular Dakkanaut




BrianDavion wrote:
Tiberias wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
No hate or discontent. Just irritation at the obnoxiousness of some who feel they deserve just because they had an army before to have an army again.

My Wood Elves lost 100+ models when Cities of Sigmar dropped. I got over it. Renegades and Heretics players have repeatedly had it suggested to them that they start proxying them as Guard if they're able to...but nah. They need their army. They deserve their army.

Life isn't fair. I'm sorry you lost your army, I really am--but that doesn't mean you should get to just be another variation of Guard or clogging up the book for another faction.


So you're pissed at people wanting traitor guard because life isn't fair and GW screwed over multiple fantasy factions with that AOS garbage? That's a mature stance to take....
Like I said, it's never really about "removing bloat" and "slimming down the game". It's basically always resentment of GWs idiocy projected onto other hobbyists.
Cause if I lost my army because GW made some dumb ass decision, you can't have a new one!


pretty much. most of the "dur remove the bloat" arguement is driven by that I suspect. resentment over things lsot and a feeling that "if GW removes some armies, my army will see more stuff!"
frankly, I wish the mods would make a point of just locking these types of threads. they're more tiresome then female space marine threads and are typically less constructive and less polite.


I wish the mods closed any kind of thread that calls for Traitor Guard, Dark Mechanicus, or whichever new faction should gets added/ supported.

Those threads gets more timesome than the weekly DKOK threads, are based on a minority of people's desires, and are typically less constructive and polite.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/15 12:12:33


 
   
Made in ch
Warped Arch Heretic of Chaos





Siegfriedfr wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Tiberias wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
No hate or discontent. Just irritation at the obnoxiousness of some who feel they deserve just because they had an army before to have an army again.

My Wood Elves lost 100+ models when Cities of Sigmar dropped. I got over it. Renegades and Heretics players have repeatedly had it suggested to them that they start proxying them as Guard if they're able to...but nah. They need their army. They deserve their army.

Life isn't fair. I'm sorry you lost your army, I really am--but that doesn't mean you should get to just be another variation of Guard or clogging up the book for another faction.


So you're pissed at people wanting traitor guard because life isn't fair and GW screwed over multiple fantasy factions with that AOS garbage? That's a mature stance to take....
Like I said, it's never really about "removing bloat" and "slimming down the game". It's basically always resentment of GWs idiocy projected onto other hobbyists.
Cause if I lost my army because GW made some dumb ass decision, you can't have a new one!


pretty much. most of the "dur remove the bloat" arguement is driven by that I suspect. resentment over things lsot and a feeling that "if GW removes some armies, my army will see more stuff!"
frankly, I wish the mods would make a point of just locking these types of threads. they're more tiresome then female space marine threads and are typically less constructive and less polite.


I wish the mods closed any kind of thread that calls for Traitor Guard, Dark Mechanicus, or whichever new faction should gets added/ supported.

Those threads gets more timesome than the weekly DKOK threads, are based on a minority of people's desires, and are typically less constructive and polite.


Another uninformed person determining what other peoples should like.

Also "new" lmao.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Kanluwen wrote:

Yeah, no. I'm "pissed at people" constantly spamming threads with the concept and insisting that the things be jammed in where they are unnecessary especially when it comes to Guard, an army that really needs a head to toe rework but likely will never receive one because they stupidly tied GSC to them.

It's more likely than not at this juncture that Traitor Guard are coming in some way, shape, or form. There's been a rumor for basically all of 40k 8E that World Eaters and Emperor's Children are going to get bumped out of the CSM book into their own standalones. If that happens? It's extremely likely that some of that space will be taken up by Traitor Guard.



Why should guard be less likely to recieve a total rework if they are tied together with "broodbrothers". That's pretty backwards way of looking at it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/15 12:30:52


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page
A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

In the 41st millennium there is only overpriced hamberders.

 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Kanluwen wrote:
Slipspace wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:That's a terrible idea. Simply adding "Dark" to the Mechanicus does not make Dark Mechanicus a thing.

Same thing with "Traitor" to Guard.

Why not? At the scale 40k plays there's not really any major difference between a regular Guard unit and a traitor one.

Well for one thing, a "traitor Guard" unit won't tend to be from one of the Big Named ones. Cadians turned traitor tended to have a fairly short lifespan between the Ordos Cadia, Adeptus Arbites, or the Interior Guard...and that's at an individual level, not at the regimental level.
You'd be seeing things more at the level of Conscripts for the most part.


One of the things I'd also advocate GW to do is stop giving us rules tied so directly to regiments/chapters etc. Just because Cadians get the re-roll 1s rule, doesn't mean it has to be tied exclusively to them. Just have a generic trait called "Born Soldiers" or whatever and you get Cadian-style troops without any of the extra baggage associated with them.

This is exactly what I meant when I mentioned bespoke rules for everything. You don't need to format and present the rules in the way GW does and you can provide more flexibility without increasing bloat by allowing more freedom for people to choose sub-faction traits. So maybe the traitor regiment isn't Cadian, but they are from a similarly militaristic background as Cadians, or they're from a deathworld like Catachans so it would make perfect sense to use that trait to represent them. Or are we to believe that only Catachans grow big and strong, out of all the millions of Guard regiments?

 Kanluwen wrote:

Same with Dark Mechanicum. Ad Mech stuff is already massively weird and esoteric so a little bit of background info in the Codex pointing out that the Dark Mechanicum use warp lasers instead of neutron lasers but the effects are basically the same in game is all you need. That's how things used to be done and it was fine. You don't need bespoke rules for absolutely everything and GW's insistence that you do is one of the main reasons we have as much bloat as we do.

Dark Mechanicum isn't about "preserving technology" like the Mechanicus is. The Dark Mechanicum is about pushing technology beyond the boundaries of reality. They're blending daemons and the Warp with machines and humanity itself, with a goal that we don't really know about...but we do have examples of Dark Mechanicum designs.
Spoiler:






Then there's the Lord-Discordant and Warpsmith, both of which have ties to the Dark Mechanicum that are as yet unexplained.

The TLDR answer is that it isn't as simple as "warp lasers" or whatever garbage. They're distinctive entities.


Again, at the scale of 40k how distinctive do they need to be? AdMech are weird, Dark Mechanicum are weird, and ont he tabletop they can be functionally identical while having different descriptions in the lore as to what their weapons and equipment does. We already have that with Bright and Dark Lances and it works fine.
   
Made in us
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Right behind you.

Slipspace wrote:

One of the things I'd also advocate GW to do is stop giving us rules tied so directly to regiments/chapters etc. Just because Cadians get the re-roll 1s rule, doesn't mean it has to be tied exclusively to them. Just have a generic trait called "Born Soldiers" or whatever and you get Cadian-style troops without any of the extra baggage associated with them.

This is exactly what I meant when I mentioned bespoke rules for everything. You don't need to format and present the rules in the way GW does and you can provide more flexibility without increasing bloat by allowing more freedom for people to choose sub-faction traits. So maybe the traitor regiment isn't Cadian, but they are from a similarly militaristic background as Cadians, or they're from a deathworld like Catachans so it would make perfect sense to use that trait to represent them. Or are we to believe that only Catachans grow big and strong, out of all the millions of Guard regiments?

What you're talking about is what we got via The Greater Good. No armies, at the launch of 8E, had rules like that in their codices proper.
Some of them are not duplicated 1 for 1, but that's what makes the special named factions special.

The point you missed, in any regards, is that there's zero benefit to cramming in "just add "traitor" to it!". Chaos Knights are the perfect example of what could have been a lazy as hell thing that benefitted greatly from not just having "traitor" keywords thrown into their book.

Again, at the scale of 40k how distinctive do they need to be? AdMech are weird, Dark Mechanicum are weird, and on the tabletop they can be functionally identical while having different descriptions in the lore as to what their weapons and equipment does. We already have that with Bright and Dark Lances and it works fine.

What you're trying to do isn't as simple as "these two factions both have lasers".

One faction might use a piece of technoarcana that can fire a laser at a tank.
The other uses a daemon-infused construct that runs and punches the tank with a gauntlet that unleashes a tear in the fabric of reality to go through the tank's hull.

They are not the same in terms of what they field, in terms of what they use for technology, or anything beyond "Mechanic" is in their names and the fact that they act as a priesthood of sorts centered around technology. From what we know, the Dark Mechanicum don't even have Skitarii equivalents instead relying upon slaves and "donations" of traitor soldiery from the various entities that they provide and maintain wargear for.
   
Made in at
Discriminating Warrior





Austria

on the scale of 40k, having 1 Marine list and write in the fluff that UM like a mix of everything while WS like to have everything mounted (transports/bikes) and RG uses mostly jump troops
not even needing any special rules to get things done


the main reason for all does additional rules/supplements was because the original FOC did not allow to make such special armies, but now having more than one FOC and Keywords


The main difference between AdMech and Dark Mechanicum would be that the one can take Imperium and the other Chaos units as allied units
this is one sentence in the book,"chose to bei either AdMech and add the Imperium Keyword or Dark Mechanicum and add the Chaos Keyword to all units in the book"
(and the same for Guard)

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Annandale, VA

I've always liked games where you have a core set of 'universal' troops, and then a combination of:
-Subfaction-specific units
-Additional options for 'generic' units
-Army-wide traits

And those define your subfaction. It works great in Horus Heresy and it's sort of what GW did with Marine supplements; seems a natural fit for Dark Mechanicum or traitor Guard.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/15 15:56:50


 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: