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.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
I agree 100% with the sentiment but this kind of stuff needs to be consistent across the edition.
I like the idea of the accursed weapons for terminators and chosen ( I think that's what they are called) in principal but either:-
-Not every faction will be like this going forward
-10th ed chaos codex will go back to a mess of similar but different melee weapons
We dont need intercessors to have 15 different types of bolters that are only defined by a logo on the magazine.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
This is absurd. Balance vs options isn't an absolutist binary that leads to a free for all (let alone S8 flamers on guard, which isn't even an 'options' problem). That isn't even vaguely in the realm of anything, and isn't going to get there because chaos lords keep access to the standard array of rifles, pistols and melee weapons.
Balance isn't some magical mystery of the ages- its about being 'good enough' to go on with. Something they're willing to do with most codex releases (though some of the recent errors makes me think they've abandoned part of their process, as there is a huge difference between this faction wins 5% more often and 20% more often), and twice over with loyalist marines, but when chaos wanders around, suddenly it all becomes an issue. Options disappear and everything (bizarrely) becomes even more regimented.
----
@arcanum - same. Accursed weapons would be fine if the whole edition was operating that way from the start. That they're inconsistently applied externally and internally is just bewildering.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/03/31 17:18:16
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
I agree 100% with the sentiment but this kind of stuff needs to be consistent across the edition.
I like the idea of the accursed weapons for terminators and chosen ( I think that's what they are called) in principal but either:-
-Not every faction will be like this going forward
-10th ed chaos codex will go back to a mess of similar but different melee weapons
We dont need intercessors to have 15 different types of bolters that are only defined by a logo on the magazine.
The best part of the Accursed Weapons is not having to deal with the dumbass "build what's only in the box" rules.
clockworkchris9 wrote: Standard spells
-warptime still there but no charge
-+1 to hit
-no invul on 1 ennemy unit
- 1 model get s+2 & +1a
-3d6 each 4+ = 1mw
-if d6 is bigger then T, then d3 MW and units within 6" take 1mw on a 4+
I played against a beefier version of d6 vs T used by Tyranids. It's a fun concept, but the CSM version I don't think I'd use it unless you're dealing with a horde of Guardsmen or Gaunts.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
This is absurd. Balance vs options isn't an absolutist binary that leads to a free for all (let alone S8 flamers on guard, which isn't even an 'options' problem). That isn't even vaguely in the realm of anything, and isn't going to get there because chaos lords keep access to the standard array of rifles, pistols and melee weapons.
Balance isn't some magical mystery of the ages- its about being 'good enough' to go on with. Something they're willing to do with most codex releases (though some of the recent errors makes me think they've abandoned part of their process, as there is a huge difference between this faction wins 5% more often and 20% more often), and twice over with loyalist marines, but when chaos wanders around, suddenly it all becomes an issue. Options disappear and everything (bizarrely) becomes even more regimented.
----
@arcanum - same. Accursed weapons would be fine if the whole edition was operating that way from the start. That they're inconsistently applied externally and internally is just bewildering.
its also funny when some of the factions it doesn't really apply do get even more options on average in an edition than some factions got in decades
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/03/31 18:10:12
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
I agree 100% with the sentiment but this kind of stuff needs to be consistent across the edition.
I like the idea of the accursed weapons for terminators and chosen ( I think that's what they are called) in principal but either:-
-Not every faction will be like this going forward
-10th ed chaos codex will go back to a mess of similar but different melee weapons
We dont need intercessors to have 15 different types of bolters that are only defined by a logo on the magazine.
The best part of the Accursed Weapons is not having to deal with the dumbass "build what's only in the box" rules.
Is this you unironically defending the removal of options?
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
I agree 100% with the sentiment but this kind of stuff needs to be consistent across the edition.
I like the idea of the accursed weapons for terminators and chosen ( I think that's what they are called) in principal but either:-
-Not every faction will be like this going forward
-10th ed chaos codex will go back to a mess of similar but different melee weapons
We dont need intercessors to have 15 different types of bolters that are only defined by a logo on the magazine.
The best part of the Accursed Weapons is not having to deal with the dumbass "build what's only in the box" rules.
Is this you unironically defending the removal of options?
I'm for consolidation of weapon profiles, not weapon options. Huge difference between a Bolt Pistol and Combi-Bolter vs Power Sword and Power Axe.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
I agree 100% with the sentiment but this kind of stuff needs to be consistent across the edition.
I like the idea of the accursed weapons for terminators and chosen ( I think that's what they are called) in principal but either:-
-Not every faction will be like this going forward
-10th ed chaos codex will go back to a mess of similar but different melee weapons
We dont need intercessors to have 15 different types of bolters that are only defined by a logo on the magazine.
The bolter thing for the new Primaris was really baffling for me. When they first came out, everyone swore it was the rifle that was best. Then a new codex and everyone wanted the LMG variant. I don't think anyone ever took the heavy ones because the squad needs to be mobile. It's just weird as heck because the variants all felt like an amalgamation of different ideals all slapped onto one kit because reasons.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
This is absurd. Balance vs options isn't an absolutist binary that leads to a free for all (let alone S8 flamers on guard, which isn't even an 'options' problem). That isn't even vaguely in the realm of anything, and isn't going to get there because chaos lords keep access to the standard array of rifles, pistols and melee weapons.
Balance isn't some magical mystery of the ages- its about being 'good enough' to go on with. Something they're willing to do with most codex releases (though some of the recent errors makes me think they've abandoned part of their process, as there is a huge difference between this faction wins 5% more often and 20% more often), and twice over with loyalist marines, but when chaos wanders around, suddenly it all becomes an issue. Options disappear and everything (bizarrely) becomes even more regimented.
----
@arcanum - same. Accursed weapons would be fine if the whole edition was operating that way from the start. That they're inconsistently applied externally and internally is just bewildering.
Clearly it isn't when the rules writers haven't been able to do it. The rules for Warhammer games are an afterthought, it's pretty clear by this point that they do not put any reasonable level into writing editions and are only fishing for the next book sale.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
I agree 100% with the sentiment but this kind of stuff needs to be consistent across the edition.
I like the idea of the accursed weapons for terminators and chosen ( I think that's what they are called) in principal but either:-
-Not every faction will be like this going forward
-10th ed chaos codex will go back to a mess of similar but different melee weapons
We dont need intercessors to have 15 different types of bolters that are only defined by a logo on the magazine.
The best part of the Accursed Weapons is not having to deal with the dumbass "build what's only in the box" rules.
Is this you unironically defending the removal of options?
This is me explaining what I *think* the GW rules team is doing, and what they *might* give as an answer as to why they're doing it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/03/31 20:01:30
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
I agree 100% with the sentiment but this kind of stuff needs to be consistent across the edition.
I like the idea of the accursed weapons for terminators and chosen ( I think that's what they are called) in principal but either:-
-Not every faction will be like this going forward
-10th ed chaos codex will go back to a mess of similar but different melee weapons
We dont need intercessors to have 15 different types of bolters that are only defined by a logo on the magazine.
The best part of the Accursed Weapons is not having to deal with the dumbass "build what's only in the box" rules.
Is this you unironically defending the removal of options?
I'm for consolidation of weapon profiles, not weapon options. Huge difference between a Bolt Pistol and Combi-Bolter vs Power Sword and Power Axe.
So you are unironically defending the removal of options that you don't like.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
I agree 100% with the sentiment but this kind of stuff needs to be consistent across the edition.
I like the idea of the accursed weapons for terminators and chosen ( I think that's what they are called) in principal but either:-
-Not every faction will be like this going forward
-10th ed chaos codex will go back to a mess of similar but different melee weapons
We dont need intercessors to have 15 different types of bolters that are only defined by a logo on the magazine.
The best part of the Accursed Weapons is not having to deal with the dumbass "build what's only in the box" rules.
Is this you unironically defending the removal of options?
I'm for consolidation of weapon profiles, not weapon options. Huge difference between a Bolt Pistol and Combi-Bolter vs Power Sword and Power Axe.
So you are unironically defending the removal of options that you don't like.
I didn't remove any options though. Removing Combi-Bolter is removing an option. Saying all Power Weapons are the same is not. So if they said Lords could only have Thunder Hammers I would give the same argument.
clockworkchris9 wrote: Standard spells
-warptime still there but no charge
-+1 to hit
-no invul on 1 ennemy unit
- 1 model get s+2 & +1a
-3d6 each 4+ = 1mw
-if d6 is bigger then T, then d3 MW and units within 6" take 1mw on a 4+
No big surprises here. Still, a bit sad that "worse smite" seems to be a gift that keeps on giving for designers.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
I would prefer large number of units not be made invalid and models removed from the game as part of what seems to be a sort of 'sterilising process'.
That's the nature of the beast. I understand your feelings, they're likely the feelings of most of the community. But as I said, the solution isn't simple. Balancing 2000+ data sheets over 6-10 different games, many with dozens of options of their own is going to be next to impossible for GW, as they are already not that great at game balance to begin with. With all the screaming for game balance to be a priority, they're making the best choice they have, which is to reduce the complexity and scope of the game, an easy way to do that is remove options.
For all the complaining I've been seeing about the loss of the Jump pack Chaos lord, I can honestly tell you that having been a part of the hobby for nearly 8 years, and having played in four different US states during that time, I've never seen a jump pack lord on the table that wasn't a Blood Angel. People obviously have them and use them, but they're not that popular and that is something that I am sure GW market research has shown. Axing weaker or limited things is the easiest solution to them.
You haven't seen a Jump Lord, in eight years. Not one. Only foot lords, and Terminator Lords. BULL. You're a day early, buy a calendar.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
I agree 100% with the sentiment but this kind of stuff needs to be consistent across the edition.
I like the idea of the accursed weapons for terminators and chosen ( I think that's what they are called) in principal but either:-
-Not every faction will be like this going forward
-10th ed chaos codex will go back to a mess of similar but different melee weapons
We dont need intercessors to have 15 different types of bolters that are only defined by a logo on the magazine.
The best part of the Accursed Weapons is not having to deal with the dumbass "build what's only in the box" rules.
Is this you unironically defending the removal of options?
I'm for consolidation of weapon profiles, not weapon options. Huge difference between a Bolt Pistol and Combi-Bolter vs Power Sword and Power Axe.
So you are unironically defending the removal of options that you don't like.
I didn't remove any options though. Removing Combi-Bolter is removing an option. Saying all Power Weapons are the same is not. So if they said Lords could only have Thunder Hammers I would give the same argument.
"All ranged weapons on chaos lords are now 'adjective boltnoun guns' range 12" pistol 1 s4 ap- d1" solved all the problems.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
Take for example a flamer and a marine/guardsman. A 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaos marine is not the same as a 12 inch auto hitting flamer on a chaff guardsman unit. They're both equal in most respects, save toughness. Because the flamer auto hits, the lower ballistic skill of the guardsman doesn't matter, and thus the option is better for the guardsman, he's cheaper and just as effective. Now imagine if flamers were changed to be S8 instead of S4. All of a sudden that would break the "balance" of the wargear for the guardsmen. The Marine still has other, better options they can capitalize on, but an S8 Auto hit flamer would be an automatic take for the guardsmen.
Which does the community want, balance or free for all? Because I don't think both can coexist without one of them suffering.
I would prefer large number of units not be made invalid and models removed from the game as part of what seems to be a sort of 'sterilising process'.
That's the nature of the beast. I understand your feelings, they're likely the feelings of most of the community. But as I said, the solution isn't simple. Balancing 2000+ data sheets over 6-10 different games, many with dozens of options of their own is going to be next to impossible for GW, as they are already not that great at game balance to begin with. With all the screaming for game balance to be a priority, they're making the best choice they have, which is to reduce the complexity and scope of the game, an easy way to do that is remove options.
For all the complaining I've been seeing about the loss of the Jump pack Chaos lord, I can honestly tell you that having been a part of the hobby for nearly 8 years, and having played in four different US states during that time, I've never seen a jump pack lord on the table that wasn't a Blood Angel. People obviously have them and use them, but they're not that popular and that is something that I am sure GW market research has shown. Axing weaker or limited things is the easiest solution to them.
You haven't seen a Jump Lord, in eight years. Not one. Only foot lords, and Terminator Lords. BULL. You're a day early, buy a calendar.
No, I haven't seen anyone in any of my play areas use Jump marines outside of the loyalist kind when smashers were all the rage. I've never actually seen mutilators or Warp Talons outside of box art either. It is possible there were some at LVO when I was there, but I didn't see them either. As for what I have seen, yes, it's mostly been terminator lords or the special characters. For the last four years I've been the only CSM player in my local meta as well, meaning if I don't run it, no one at my store is either.
I do hope these rumord about option removal prove incorrect if only because I wanted to kitbash Kharne and the World Claimer to make a Berserker Lord if I ever did World Eaters. Just thought a flying Berserker would look cool.
Night Lord players would feel the sting the most since building around jump packs is their whole schtick.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Actually the more I think about it the more I think the Chaos Lord rumors could be wrong. Namely because these two models are still for sale on the GW site with no sign of being removed with the rest of the range rotation stuff:
Spoiler:
Basically I'm going to chalk this up to early beta testing and not option removals at least until the point we see the actual datasheets.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/03/31 22:42:09
How about GW just leaving those 2 lords up there to sell until they are gone? It's not like GW doesn't have a habit of leaving items up for sale on their web page after they are no longer useful. IIRC at one point they were selling older edition Codices for some armies after the newer codices were announced as coming out in the near future.
Rihgu wrote: I don't know why you view it as a removal of options. I have way more options than ever before on how to model my Chosen.
I have multiple special weapon Chosen squads each modeled to look like a cohesive unit (All melta guys with skull helmets, all plasma guys with the chain mail tabard, etc) now those squads are gone.
Ohh boy I can give my guys a mix of random close combat weapons, thats great but not all my chosen are cc built.
Removing options sucks, especially when our loyalist counterparts have options for damn near everything and Primaris on top of it
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/03/31 23:16:34
"I prayed to that corpse for a millenia with no response, what makes you think he'll answer you?"
2000 Loki Snaketongue and the Serpents of Malice
ClockworkZion wrote: Actually the more I think about it the more I think the Chaos Lord rumors could be wrong. Namely because these two models are still for sale on the GW site with no sign of being removed with the rest of the range rotation stuff:
The Jump Lord is on LCtB / rotation on the UK site.
ClockworkZion wrote: Actually the more I think about it the more I think the Chaos Lord rumors could be wrong. Namely because these two models are still for sale on the GW site with no sign of being removed with the rest of the range rotation stuff:
The Jump Lord is on LCtB / rotation on the UK site.
Somehow missed that he was LCTB in the US as well. The Night Lord Lord is only temporarily out of stock.
Option consolidation isn't a bad thing--rolling various types of power weapon into one, for example. But rolling in weapons that had distinctly different roles, like thunder hammers or lightning claws, is what sucks. There is a difference between, say, making a heavy bolter and chaincannon one profile vs making all heavy weapons one profile.
ClockworkZion wrote:I do hope these rumord about option removal prove incorrect if only because I wanted to kitbash Kharne and the World Claimer to make a Berserker Lord if I ever did World Eaters. Just thought a flying Berserker would look cool.
That sounds awesome. I was actually thinking of buying another Kharn and turning him into a Word Bearers Lord of Khorne, since it both would look cool and as a nod to Argel Talk.
Basically I'm going to chalk this up to early beta testing and not option removals at least until the point we see the actual datasheets.
I think that this makes sense. Personally, I don't think that the jump lord is going away any time soon. The current model is very old and out of date and will probably be replaced. If a new model doesn't come out soon, I'm thinking that it might in tenth edition. Chosen had no official models during all of eighth except for the OOP Dark Vengeance ones, and when the current Death Guard codex was first released, there was no Lord of Contagion on sale. The Dark Imperium one is shown in the datasheet besides only being available second hand. I think that the Dark Vengeance cultists were also not being sold any more by then, despite a picture of one being used for the DG cultist datasheet. The no rules/no models thing is not some magical spell that causes all rules for a model to instantaneously disappear when a particular model is discontinued. Sometimes all that's happening is that GW is making room for a replacement, and that can take some time.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Option consolidation isn't a bad thing--rolling various types of power weapon into one, for example. But rolling in weapons that had distinctly different roles, like thunder hammers or lightning claws, is what sucks. There is a difference between, say, making a heavy bolter and chaincannon one profile vs making all heavy weapons one profile.
Yeah, strip options too far back and you get something dull and uninteresting (kind of how I think of OPR's version of 40k). I like the Accursed Weapons thing and would love to see things like that pop up more, but not on every weapon option a unit can take.
Togusa wrote: A vocal section of the community spent 6th, 7th, and 8th editions complaining about balance and testing. One issue with warhammer is that the amount of options some units had, was absurd, with data sheets taking up a full page of a codex or more on some of them. The more options you have, the harder it is to keep it balanced.
I agree 100% with the sentiment but this kind of stuff needs to be consistent across the edition.
I like the idea of the accursed weapons for terminators and chosen ( I think that's what they are called) in principal but either:-
-Not every faction will be like this going forward
-10th ed chaos codex will go back to a mess of similar but different melee weapons
We dont need intercessors to have 15 different types of bolters that are only defined by a logo on the magazine.
The best part of the Accursed Weapons is not having to deal with the dumbass "build what's only in the box" rules.
Is this you unironically defending the removal of options?
I'm for consolidation of weapon profiles, not weapon options. Huge difference between a Bolt Pistol and Combi-Bolter vs Power Sword and Power Axe.
So you are unironically defending the removal of options that you don't like.
I didn't remove any options though. Removing Combi-Bolter is removing an option. Saying all Power Weapons are the same is not. So if they said Lords could only have Thunder Hammers I would give the same argument.
"All ranged weapons on chaos lords are now 'adjective boltnoun guns' range 12" pistol 1 s4 ap- d1" solved all the problems.
There's a distinct difference between how pistols and bolter variants operated on a Lord. Nice try though.
Ah, I thought the only thing the chaos lord could take melee wise was the thunder hammer, since that's literally the only chaos lord (non-terminator) that GW sells now. If I can take any melee weapon, then I'll probably convert a lord or two out of the Chosen set.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Option consolidation isn't a bad thing--rolling various types of power weapon into one, for example. But rolling in weapons that had distinctly different roles, like thunder hammers or lightning claws, is what sucks. There is a difference between, say, making a heavy bolter and chaincannon one profile vs making all heavy weapons one profile.
Yeah, strip options too far back and you get something dull and uninteresting (kind of how I think of OPR's version of 40k). I like the Accursed Weapons thing and would love to see things like that pop up more, but not on every weapon option a unit can take.
I'm very torn on this sort of thing. There are a few aspects to it.
A. If I want to give my Chosen squad a ton of Chain axes and Power Axes, I don't have to worry about a) splitting up all those attacks or b) those attacks being worse off than other weapon options, like power mauls, that I personally don't like the look of as much.
B. My unit of Chosen with a bunch of power axes is now the exact same rules-wise as my opponent's Chosen with a mix of power swords, power mauls, chainswords, and other things, so my Chosen squad has less to make it feel unique, which is part of the lore of what Chosen *are*
C. At the end of the day, this still stems from the issue that there aren't enough pieces in the Chosen box to equip the entire unit with certain types of weapons, ranged or melee. I can't make a squad of melta Chosen with power fists. I can't make a squad of Flamer chosen. I can't give the Chosen a bunch of Lightning Claws (in fact, only one Chosen can have lightning claws and it's just +1 attack to the accursed weapons).
Meanwhile, Heavy Intercessors get three different kinds of heavy bolt rifle that are only vaguely different from each other... THOSE are weapons that really need to be consolidated. Hellblasters, Intercessors, Heavy Intercessors, and Eradicators don't need 3 profiles each for their weapon that change the weapon by... one number in a random category. One of those weapon profiles always stands above the rest in any particular meta, and the fact that the meta constantly changes means that the ideal weapon for those units will constantly change, so how is that new-player friendly to have your newbies pick one of three nearly-identical rifles?
This is just where a lot of arguments about removal of options tend to fall apart. Like I said, I dig that my squad of axe-wielding maniacs will be just as good as someone that loads theirs with other melee weapons, but so many issues with Chaos Marines right now (and this includes the Death Guard for they suffer the same fate) comes from GW not loading their sprues and boxes up with enough bits. So instead they strip down the options and effectively tell us to deal with it.
So, here we are. Staring down the barrel of an overly complex Codex that'll likely have tons of army rules and special stratagems and stuff, but fewer ways to build our models. Fewer ways to make our models feel like OUR models, 'your guys', or whatever. Stratagems and army rules and all of that may change over the years, but the models we're getting we are going to have for the foreseeable future. Whether we have accursed weapons split back up into different types or not isn't the problem, it's the fact that Chosen and Terminators will, for the next 10+ years, have a hodgepodge of weapons.
It's the inconsistency of it all, and the fact that it's not done to make things simpler for players, because if it was it'd be done across the entire army, not just the two kits that don't have enough options built into the sprue.
That's why I default to leaving them with the rules they have, rather than consolidation, because if you're not going to consolidate everything, then why bother? It'd be like running file compression on a bunch of files, but leaving some uncompressed for no reason.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/04/01 04:32:44
2000 Loki Snaketongue and the Serpents of Malice 
