JohnHwangDD wrote:@uber: I hear you, but I don't quite see it. SW *are* SM (WS4 BS4 S4 T4 I4 Sv3+).
Sure, SW are fightier, but fundamentally, they fight and die a *lot* more like SM than Orks / Eldar / Nids / Guard.
And yes SW have the same problem as BA & BT, which is to be fighty but not Chaos-like.
But "totally different"? Give me a break.
This is about what I was going to say, albeit it in a more diplomatic way.
In 2nd ed, you had:
Ultramarines (basic)
Blood Angels (assault/fighty/vampires)
Dark Angels (Monastic/termies)
Space Wolves (assault/fighty/vikings)
Now, we have:
Ultramarines (basic, but with special characters you can be fighty, termie, mechanized, drop-pod, bikes, etc. - the only thing you can't be is a vampire or viking. But you can wear robes if you want

)
Dark Angels (monastic/termie, but not as good as Ultras)
Blood Angels (assault, fighty, less like vampires)
Black Templars (assault, monastic, run forward at you)
Space Wolves (assault, viking, old old dex in comparison)
Am I missing any
SM books? We only added one? Why does it seem like there are more? I personally don't like the
BTs that much. I loved them in 2nd, but
GW took them as a popular army out of Armageddon, created their fluff from wholecloth, and shoe-horned them into the Marine rotation. I don't see them as that different than
DA,
BA, or
SW.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of the Wolves. If anything, I'd dump
BTs use that energy to make the "big 4" work differently/better.
So where is the "new marine paradigm" that makes them potentially different from any of the others?