Warhammer 40k redundant units.

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.

**Galef**

Ratius wrote:
Monolith. Grossly overcosted to be viable.
Howling Banshees. Have not seen them on a tabletop in years.
Tervigons. Received the nerf bat and didnt recover.

Having lousy rules doesn't make them redundant. The Monolith is an iconic part of the Necron identity as a faction. Its rules suck, yes, but nothing in the codex can replace it from that standpoint.

-

**A.T.**

John Prins wrote:
Rhinos are iconic to Space Marines, and as noted there are GKSM that can't teleport.

On the flip-side, rhinos were not iconic to grey knights until they were 'ultramarined' with their 5th edition codex, with the non-teleporting units advancing under cover of shrouding or within landraiders.

**Ratius**

True, I took redundant to mean under used not necessarily non iconic or cool.

**Sgt. Cortez**

Lord of Contagion and malignant plaguecaster should have simply been sorcerer and Lord with disgustingly resilient, T5 and their flavorful special rules. And Access to their legacy equipment though Index. Now nobody uses the Lord of Contagion because of his limited equipment and worse Aura. And since you rarely need a sorcerer in just Power armor the caster is also overlooked.

**Galef**

Eldar Warlocks, Warlock Conclaves and Spiritseers. They all kinda do the same thing, but could easily occupy the same datasheet.
The entry can be "Seer Conclave" and include 1-5 Warlocks. Any single Warlock can be upgraded to a Spiritseer. All models in the unit deploy at the same time, but are treated as separate characters for the rest of the game.

From there it's an easy fix to tweak the "Conclave" specific stratagem refer to when 2 or more Warlocks are within 3" or something like that.

Do the same for Warlock Skyrunners.

-

**Grimtuff**

pm713 wrote:
Explain how skyclaws and wolf scouts are ported over from the marine codex.

Indeed. Wolf Scouts are not raw recruits like their codex counterparts. They're an elite vanguard unit that sows disruption behind enemy lines. If anything, the Primaris Reivers are stepping on the Wolf Scout's toes.

**Skaorn**

Tau Breacher squads: they could have easily been folded into strike squads as a load out option for the squad.

**DoomMouse**

Conscripts aren't redundant - large units are a great advantage. As you use them for screening, they're the perfect receivers of GTG and psychic barrier. It gives you a unit of 30 3+ save models for minimal investment. They're also better at making use of the valhallan relic (petrovs 45) to make them fearless too. Large units also have an inherent advantage fir screening as you can remove casualties from where you like, and guarantee they'll not all die to a strong overwatch

**vaklor4**

DoomMouse wrote:
Conscripts aren't redundant - large units are a great advantage. As you use them for screening, they're the perfect receivers of GTG and psychic barrier. It gives you a unit of 30 3+ save models for minimal investment. They're also better at making use of the valhallan relic (petrovs 45) to make them fearless too. Large units also have an inherent advantage fir screening as you can remove casualties from where you like, and guarantee they'll not all die to a strong overwatch

I think people see them as redundent because the rules around them make them so. They can't be put into as large blobs as before, they don't have particularly good morale anymore (although i'll take this over auto-morale any day), and just on a math basis, the guardsmen can put out far more damage for their points.

**Galef**

I really don't want to admit it....but Windriders. Eldar Windriders are now redundant.
As a Troop unit, they had a purpose but should never have been given access to special weapons on every bike.

As a Fast Attack unit there is no reason to take them over Shining Spears or even Vypers. Both units can do what WRs can do, but better.

-

**meleti**

Space Marines have like 50+ units, so most of them end up being redundant. It’s just the nature of having a sprawling codex like that.

**skchsan**

Entire primaris line is redundant.

**Stux**

skchsan wrote:
Entire primaris line is redundant.

Not quite sure how...

Intercessors better than Tacticals. Aggressors see play. Hellblasters see play. Inceptors see play. Maybe not so much at top tables in tournaments, but that's a general Marines issue, not a Primaris specific issue. Within the vacuum of the Marine codex those units are all very solid.

**Ice_can**

Stux wrote:
skchsan wrote:
Entire primaris line is redundant.

Not quite sure how...

Intercessors better than Tacticals. Aggressors see play. Hellblasters see play. Inceptors see play. Maybe not so much at top tables in tournaments, but that's a general Marines issue, not a Primaris specific issue. Within the vacuum of the Marine codex those units are all very solid.

Not at codex points they weren't, they outperform regular marines as (bias) GW only reduced the points costs of primaris leaving regular power armour lacking point for point. GW needs to work out a strategy for marines or they are going to end up being the next bretonians.

**pm713**

Stux wrote:
skchsan wrote:
Entire primaris line is redundant.

Not quite sure how...

Intercessors better than Tacticals. Aggressors see play. Hellblasters see play. Inceptors see play. Maybe not so much at top tables in tournaments, but that's a general Marines issue, not a Primaris specific issue. Within the vacuum of the Marine codex those units are all very solid.

But they're all redundant. Not one of them brings something new.

**Formosa**

As much as I like the models got to agree that primaris are pretty redundant, primaris are what normal marines should have always been, and if primaris are a must then actually add some flavour to them, they are dull as old rocks right now do to severe lack of options, customisation etc.

It’s probably a wait and see with them at the moment, since they lack in some pretty glaring areas, no assault and no options, they also lack a “heavy” unit like terminators and no I don’t consider the mini centurions as terminator equivalents.

**Stux**

pm713 wrote:
Stux wrote:
skchsan wrote:
Entire primaris line is redundant.

Not quite sure how...

Intercessors better than Tacticals. Aggressors see play. Hellblasters see play. Inceptors see play. Maybe not so much at top tables in tournaments, but that's a general Marines issue, not a Primaris specific issue. Within the vacuum of the Marine codex those units are all very solid.

But they're all redundant. Not one of them brings something new.

No, but they do certain roles better. They aren't redundant, they made other marine choices redundant.

Actually you know what, even that only applies to Intercessors and arguably Hellblasters. Inceptors and Aggressors do things that can't be done by other marine units. Inceptors bring a high level of plasma fire dropped anywhere on the battlefield, and Aggressors bring amazing defence against assault hordes.

**pm713**

Stux wrote:
pm713 wrote:
Stux wrote:
skchsan wrote:
Entire primaris line is redundant.

Not quite sure how...

Intercessors better than Tacticals. Aggressors see play. Hellblasters see play. Inceptors see play. Maybe not so much at top tables in tournaments, but that's a general Marines issue, not a Primaris specific issue. Within the vacuum of the Marine codex those units are all very solid.

But they're all redundant. Not one of them brings something new.

No, but they do certain roles better. They aren't redundant, they made other marine choices redundant.

Actually you know what, even that only applies to Intercessors and Arguably Hellblasters. Inceptors and Aggressors do things that can't be done by other marine units. Inceptors bring a high level of plasma fire dropped anywhere on the battlefield, and Aggressors brink amazing defence against assault hordes.

The only thing I see them doing better is provoking lawsuits from Blizzard.

**jeff white**

Primaris weenies of every variety.
Centurions.

**Stux**

pm713 wrote:
Stux wrote:
pm713 wrote:
Stux wrote:
skchsan wrote:
Entire primaris line is redundant.

Not quite sure how...

Intercessors better than Tacticals. Aggressors see play. Hellblasters see play. Inceptors see play. Maybe not so much at top tables in tournaments, but that's a general Marines issue, not a Primaris specific issue. Within the vacuum of the Marine codex those units are all very solid.

But they're all redundant. Not one of them brings something new.

No, but they do certain roles better. They aren't redundant, they made other marine choices redundant.

Actually you know what, even that only applies to Intercessors and Arguably Hellblasters. Inceptors and Aggressors do things that can't be done by other marine units. Inceptors bring a high level of plasma fire dropped anywhere on the battlefield, and Aggressors brink amazing defence against assault hordes.

The only thing I see them doing better is provoking lawsuits from Blizzard.

Then you haven't given them a fair chance. An Inceptor squad on average deletes a Daemon Prince, which costs more points, in one round of shooting. They're an amazing unit.

**ZergSmasher**

I may catch hell for this opinion, but I think Ynnari are redundant. We really don't need a fourth Eldar (sorry, Aeldari) faction, and the only reason anyone actually plays them is because of their grossly OP and abusive rules. The only one of their unique things anyone takes is the cat lady, and if you didn't have to have her or one of the others to make a Ynnari detachment we wouldn't see her either probably. I love the models, I really do, but I say we've got enough pointy-eared bastards in the game already, and they are already really good without getting all that Soulburst nonsense.

**pm713**

Stux wrote:
pm713 wrote:
Stux wrote:
pm713 wrote:
Stux wrote:
skchsan wrote:
Entire primaris line is redundant.

Not quite sure how...

Intercessors better than Tacticals. Aggressors see play. Hellblasters see play. Inceptors see play. Maybe not so much at top tables in tournaments, but that's a general Marines issue, not a Primaris specific issue. Within the vacuum of the Marine codex those units are all very solid.

But they're all redundant. Not one of them brings something new.

No, but they do certain roles better. They aren't redundant, they made other marine choices redundant.

Actually you know what, even that only applies to Intercessors and Arguably Hellblasters. Inceptors and Aggressors do things that can't be done by other marine units. Inceptors bring a high level of plasma fire dropped anywhere on the battlefield, and Aggressors brink amazing defence against assault hordes.

The only thing I see them doing better is provoking lawsuits from Blizzard.

Then you haven't given them a fair chance. An Inceptor squad on average deletes a Daemon Prince, which costs more points, in one round of shooting. They're an amazing unit.

But remain redundant. They're basically deploy from orbit and come out shooting squad. Which is literally what Tac Marines did. Their sole purpose is to sell more stuff and bloat Marine ranges more.

**Gitdakka**

Stux wrote:
pm713 wrote:
Stux wrote:
skchsan wrote:
Entire primaris line is redundant.

Not quite sure how...

Intercessors better than Tacticals. Aggressors see play. Hellblasters see play. Inceptors see play. Maybe not so much at top tables in tournaments, but that's a general Marines issue, not a Primaris specific issue. Within the vacuum of the Marine codex those units are all very solid.

But they're all redundant. Not one of them brings something new.

No, but they do certain roles better. They aren't redundant, they made other marine choices redundant.

Actually you know what, even that only applies to Intercessors and arguably Hellblasters. Inceptors and Aggressors do things that can't be done by other marine units. Inceptors bring a high level of plasma fire dropped anywhere on the battlefield, and Aggressors bring amazing defence against assault hordes.

Yes and no. As long as the two units bring the same tactical asprct to the table they are both redundant, even if one is cheaper.

For example if GW introduced and ork boy for 3 points, with the same rules as the old then both the old and new would be redundant as as they are duplicates of the same unit, but one is cheaper.

Now regular marines can take stuff like melta bombs, power fist, lascannon while primaris can take no such options. So in that regard they are different. However regular marines can choose to take all bolters wich is pretty much the same loadout as intercessors but worse. If you compare those two squads then there is redundancy and they could be merged to one unit or one of them removed. Wich one is better would simply be points imbalance if they do the same thing. Both would be redundant.

Unless you think 1 better ap and one more wound is worth a new unit type.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Intercessors-sternguard (no upgrades) redundancy
Hellblasters-devaststors (plasma cannons) redundancy
Inceptors (plasma) - vanguard vets (jp plasma pistols) red.
Rievers (pistols) - scouts (pistols) red.
Agressors - ? Brought something new?

**Galas**

I don't think people really understand what means redundancy. Redundancy is not that a unit is just bad, redundancy means a unit fills a role that was allready filled by another unit, like Centurions/Agressors with Dreadnoughts/Devastators.

The only Primaris units that isn't redundant, are Inceptors, because a shooting jumpack unit wasn't something Space Marines had. Of course, I have no problems with redundancy because even if the differences are smal, as long as they exist can be translated in different strategies and lists:
Example: Terminators, Centurions, Agressors, they all kind of fill a similar role but they have their own differences, giving the players more options.

In other cases redundancy is negative, like Basilisk and Earthshater batteries, one will be mathematically more efficient than the other because they are literally the same thing, but one has wheels and a heavy bolter.

**Stux**

pm713 wrote:
Stux wrote:
pm713 wrote:
Stux wrote:
pm713 wrote:
Stux wrote:
skchsan wrote:
Entire primaris line is redundant.

Not quite sure how...

Intercessors better than Tacticals. Aggressors see play. Hellblasters see play. Inceptors see play. Maybe not so much at top tables in tournaments, but that's a general Marines issue, not a Primaris specific issue. Within the vacuum of the Marine codex those units are all very solid.

But they're all redundant. Not one of them brings something new.

No, but they do certain roles better. They aren't redundant, they made other marine choices redundant.

Actually you know what, even that only applies to Intercessors and Arguably Hellblasters. Inceptors and Aggressors do things that can't be done by other marine units. Inceptors bring a high level of plasma fire dropped anywhere on the battlefield, and Aggressors brink amazing defence against assault hordes.

The only thing I see them doing better is provoking lawsuits from Blizzard.

Then you haven't given them a fair chance. An Inceptor squad on average deletes a Daemon Prince, which costs more points, in one round of shooting. They're an amazing unit.

But remain redundant. They're basically deploy from orbit and come out shooting squad. Which is literally what Tac Marines did. Their sole purpose is to sell more stuff and bloat Marine ranges more.

It's clear you have a chip on your shoulder about Primaris, so I don't think there's much point debating it further with you.

**SHUPPET**

This thread didn't take long to turn into whining about the SM codex

**Karol**

GK termintors. Having them and paladins in the same codex at the same time, will always mean that one of the too will be overcosted. Same with purfires and strikes.

**meleti**

SHUPPET wrote:
This thread didn't take long to turn into whining about the SM codex

It makes sense that a discussion about redundancy centers around the faction with the most units, codex and FW. There’s a lot of units that have similar roles.

**SHUPPET**

meleti wrote:
SHUPPET wrote:
This thread didn't take long to turn into whining about the SM codex

It makes sense that a discussion about redundancy centers around the faction with the most units, codex and FW. There’s a lot of units that have similar roles.

fair enough point

**Delvarus Centurion**

bibotot wrote:
What units in the game do you think don't fit into the army they are currently in? These units are extremely unpopular on the tabletop and don't make much sense lore-wise as well. If GW were smart, they would cut off these units and fill the gap with much better stuff.

These units are the worst offenders here, in my opinion:

- Grey Knights Rhino. Basically the Space Marine Rhino. Completely redundant because most Grey Knights will be Deepstriking. The Rhinos were meant for the Inquisitorial Henchmen back in 5th edition, but the Inquisition has been removed and shared transport is no longer a thing.

- Eldar Storm Guardians. An inferior version of the Howling Banshee. As I have said, they exchange 1 shooting attack at S4, potentially AP-3, for 1 melee attack at S3. It also makes no sense that the Eldar would throw their already few troops into melee against hordes of Orks or Tyranids.

- Conscripts. They cost the same as the vastly superior Guardsmen, which are complained to be too efficient nowadays. Why can't they just bring the cost of Guardsmen to 5 points per model?

- Warp Talon: These are not completely extinct, but do Chaos really need another melee-focused infantry unit? They already have Khorne Berserkers, Possessed, Spawn and Raptors. Depending on configuration, Chaos Space Marines, Plague Marines, Chosens, Cultists and Terminators can be melee-focused as well. It's strange but Chaos love melee more than Orks. In the lore, they are mutated Raptors, so just give the Raptors the upgrade to become Daemons with 5++ rather than making a whole new unit.

- Wolf Scouts and Sky Claw. They are not bad, but are just transferred from the Space Marine Codex with little consideration. The Space Wolves already have Blood Claws and Thunderwolves for these types of roles.

- Blood Angel Vanguard Veterans. Why these and Sanguinary Guards at the same time?

What do you think are the unpopular units that don't really fit into their Codice nowadays? Comment below, let me know.

Grey knights do not always deepstrike. Its not redundant at all, like in the siege of vraks, there were battles all over the planet, are they supposed to deepstrike in and then after the battle and get back in their drop pods and deepstrike back up to the strike cruiser and deepstrike back down to another battle on the planet, same with teleporting why risk teleporting when you can travel in vehicles... they were on the planet for most of the time, so they'd need vehicles like rhinos and landraiders. Your Space wold complaint also doesn't hold any water. They need scouts therefore they 'have' wolf scouts, blood claws do not fit the jump pack rule in any way shape or form. Sanguinary guards are not the same as veterans. Warp talons not being relevant because they already have CC units is ridiculous....