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.

Custodes are supposed to be as far beyond marines as marines are beyond normal humans.

Right now Custodes have the WORST vehicles in the Imperium, and that's just wrong. The faction as a whole needs something that they didn't get in the Balance Update. Including them in Armor of Contempt might just do it.

I still think they need to be a couple points more per model, but also have +1 attack on the charge/being charged.

Hecaton wrote:

 Thairne wrote:
I'd rather say that while Astartes are reliable, mass produced, simple but effective weapons (bolters), Custodes are the more advanced, hand crafted and very expensive to create and maintain version (volkites).

In the setting, boltguns are not simple or particularly reliable. They take extensive maintenance and support, but they are *very* effective.

Unfortunately, Volkite Weapons of the various types were difficult to manufacture, even for the most able of the ancient Mechanicum's forges, and the demands of the expanding Great Crusade in the late 30th Millennium swiftly overwhelmed the supply of these relic-weapons.
Once relatively common within the fledgling Space Marine Legions and the military forces of the pre-Heresy Mechanicum, Volkite Weapons had fallen largely from favour by the time the Horus Heresy began in the early 31st Millennium and had been superseded by the far more flexible and utilitarian Terran bolter.

https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Volkite_Weapons

Volkites are superior in every way, but far more expensive to craft and maintain. Bolters are "flexible and utilitarian". The reason marines got bolters in the first place is that the fledgling imperium couldnt provide enough volites to equip the marines, so the "lesser" Bolter became the standard gear.
Its just the same with Custodes vs Marines, which is why I drew upon that.. erh.. metaphor.

 Dysartes wrote:

They fact that they're not - within the setting, at the very least - "Astartes, but better" confirms that people arguing that they shouldn't exist have no ground to stand upon.

I think the majority of the Custodes fanbase sees them that way. Their attraction to them seems to be that they're more elite, more heroic, smarter, better, etc than Astartes.

It's the "bigger Batman" analogy that's used with Primaris so often.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:


Eh...custodes have existed weeeee bit longer.

Good way of demonstrating ignorance of 40k.

Can't say about 1st ed since never had that but 100% sure they existed in 2nd ed.

In the fluff, yes, but they didn't have rules.

tneva82 wrote:
Eh...custodes have existed weeeee bit longer.

Good way of demonstrating ignorance of 40k.

Can't say about 1st ed since never had that but 100% sure they existed in 2nd ed.

They existed in the lore. They did not exist in the game. It should have stayed that way.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Custodes are supposed to be as far beyond marines as marines are beyond normal humans.

I think that's an exaggeration.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Right now Custodes have the WORST vehicles in the Imperium, and that's just wrong. The faction as a whole needs something that they didn't get in the Balance Update. Including them in Armor of Contempt might just do it.

You still have an above-50% win rate. I think that's cool.

 cuda1179 wrote:
I still think they need to be a couple points more per model, but also have +1 attack on the charge/being charged.

Nah, Angels of Death/Shock Assault is an Astartes rule. Jealous that Astartes have something you don't?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Thairne wrote:

Volkites are superior in every way, but far more expensive to craft and maintain. Bolters are "flexible and utilitarian". The reason marines got bolters in the first place is that the fledgling imperium couldnt provide enough volites to equip the marines, so the "lesser" Bolter became the standard gear.
Its just the same with Custodes vs Marines, which is why I drew upon that.. erh.. metaphor.

I don't think the metaphor works as well for Custodes and Astartes, because a soldier is basically limited to carrying one longarm... the Imperium will field as many soldiers as its resources allow, so if you can field 3 Astartes for every Custodes, it might be better to field Astartes, but if you could field 3 boltguns for every volkite, it might be better to field volkites still since each soldier can only carry one longarm.

You can field a hellofalot Guardsman for each Astartes...
Dont overanalyze, it was a metaphor to just say "Custodes are master crafted, Astartes are mass produced"

 Thairne wrote:

Dont overanalyze, it was a metaphor to just say "Custodes are master crafted, Astartes are mass produced"

No, a lot of effort and skill goes into making and training each individual Astartes as well. Plus, you know, they've done more to protect and safeguard the Imperium than the Custodes ever have.

Hecaton wrote:

 Thairne wrote:

Dont overanalyze, it was a metaphor to just say "Custodes are master crafted, Astartes are mass produced"

No, a lot of effort and skill goes into making and training each individual Astartes as well. Plus, you know, they've done more to protect and safeguard the Imperium than the Custodes ever have.

The hell is even your point? Thairne just basically said that it is more difficult to produce a Custodes than it is to produce an Astartes in comparison. Nobody claimed that no skill is involved training Astartes or that they haven't achieved monumental tasks in defending the imperium since the heresy.

Tiberias wrote:

The hell is even your point? Thairne just basically said that it is more difficult to produce a Custodes than it is to produce an Astartes in comparison. Nobody claimed that no skill is involved training Astartes or that they haven't achieved monumental tasks in defending the imperium since the heresy.

By saying that Astartes are mass-produced, they *are* implying that no skill is involved in creating them.

Hecaton wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

The hell is even your point? Thairne just basically said that it is more difficult to produce a Custodes than it is to produce an Astartes in comparison. Nobody claimed that no skill is involved training Astartes or that they haven't achieved monumental tasks in defending the imperium since the heresy.

By saying that Astartes are mass-produced, they *are* implying that no skill is involved in creating them.

In COMPARISON to custodes. Purposefully thick as always, right?

Edit: also implying that mass production requires no skill is a complete non-sequitur. There can be a lot of skill involved in setting up mass-productions, but there is a clear difference to something being hand crafted.

There is nobody here who claimed that creating astartes isn't a laborious and difficult process, only that in comparison to custodes its like they are mass produced. There is a reason that there are only 10000 custodes and a million astartes.

Tiberias wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

The hell is even your point? Thairne just basically said that it is more difficult to produce a Custodes than it is to produce an Astartes in comparison. Nobody claimed that no skill is involved training Astartes or that they haven't achieved monumental tasks in defending the imperium since the heresy.

By saying that Astartes are mass-produced, they *are* implying that no skill is involved in creating them.

In COMPARISON to custodes. Purposefully thick as always, right?

This just reinforces the idea to me that Custodes fans specifically like their faction because it comparatively devalues Astartes.

Also, "mass production" as an idea is not strictly speaking about rate of production, but about the amount of attention given to each individual piece - by calling Astartes "mass produced" it's devaluing them.

tneva82 wrote:


Eh...custodes have existed weeeee bit longer.

Good way of demonstrating ignorance of 40k.

Can't say about 1st ed since never had that but 100% sure they existed in 2nd ed.

I know, but they were completely absent in 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and pretty much the entire 7th. Which means at least 20 years of absence. Pre 3rd edition 40k was a completely different game with a lot of stuff that was axed at the end of 2nd, basically like comparing AoS to WHFB. And I'm not even sure if they had rules in 2nd, I never saw any, let alone models. So yeah, Custodes were actually introduced in the game at the very end of 7th, like I said.

Nords 30K may be the place for you now, i am not sure, the old school 30K players are a bit put off by GW corporates eye upon what Alan Bligh managed to create with love and passion.

I have heard mixed reviews, they like some changes and hate others, as you will with GW, when they change editions.

The only custodes i have are more for display with the 3rd party model of the emperor i have. i managed to use them once as a retinue in a game of 30K using some very old rules for the emperor. it was silly fun, but then my approach to 40K isn't what most players are after since i despise everything about 9th edition and have gone back to playing 5th. In the end it depends on what you want out of the game and what the community is like where you play.

 Blackie wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Eh...custodes have existed weeeee bit longer.

Good way of demonstrating ignorance of 40k.

Can't say about 1st ed since never had that but 100% sure they existed in 2nd ed.

I know, but they were completely absent in 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and pretty much the entire 7th. Which means at least 20 years of absence. Pre 3rd edition 40k was a completely different game with a lot of stuff that was axed at the end of 2nd, basically like comparing AoS to WHFB. And I'm not even sure if they had rules in 2nd, I never saw any, let alone models. So yeah, Custodes were actually introduced in the game at the very end of 7th, like I said.

Waaay back in RT days they had a mini or two based on some crap art in one of the books. I'm betting they had a stat block in some WD or something of the time.
And I could swear they had several models released as an LE set in the Skulls promo circa 2001 (3e era) or so. But I couldn't find a pic.

In response to the OP, yes I feel the same and don't particularly want to play with my golden boys in 40K atm.

There are a few issues, when the codex came out it was demonstrably too good, I didn't lose a game with it.

That said it felt really fluffy as I went around killing their lesser mortals and being immune to all but their most concerted attacks.

Sadly that isn't good for game balance so they smashed all our survivability strats, greatly reduced our flexibility strats and took away our obsec.
I'd have much preferred points increases!

Without the strats we just don't feel at all survivable given our tiny number of models and the amount of anti tank guns in the game.

Now the nerfs had the desired effect and reduced our win rate to around 55% which is still good and in the balanced zone GW are no doubt aiming at - sadly the win rate doesn't tell the whole story.

Removing obsec from our infantry has had a really bad effect on our list building, I understand the need to remove it from characters but removing it from all our infantry was a really badly thought out move.
Our book was designed to have obsec on infantry as a base rule, the units are balanced with that in mind and we have none of the usual Relics/traits/strats that other factions have to spread out obsec - why would we, everything already has it.
Without obsec our terminators, wardens and other no troop infantry have become void choices - they don't really do anything that we can't do with our troop options and certainly don't anything that is worth paying more points for and losing obsec. We have thus lost various base codex units from consideration.
Instead all our successful list have just doubled down on the problem units which are forgeworld vehicles and dreads, they don't really use most of the stuff in the codex and are just flat great datasheets so they nicely sidestep GWs attempts to nerf them.

Hopefully GW will notice their error and give back obsec in a future dataslate, I'd really like a little army building versatility but I'm not holding my breath.

Hecaton wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

The hell is even your point? Thairne just basically said that it is more difficult to produce a Custodes than it is to produce an Astartes in comparison. Nobody claimed that no skill is involved training Astartes or that they haven't achieved monumental tasks in defending the imperium since the heresy.

By saying that Astartes are mass-produced, they *are* implying that no skill is involved in creating them.

In COMPARISON to custodes. Purposefully thick as always, right?

This just reinforces the idea to me that Custodes fans specifically like their faction because it comparatively devalues Astartes.

Also, "mass production" as an idea is not strictly speaking about rate of production, but about the amount of attention given to each individual piece - by calling Astartes "mass produced" it's devaluing them.

It is truly amazing to witness how you always just know what people are thinking, even though they clarified their stance to you. It must be great having such an awsome talent.

If you compare a pagani zona with a top of the line mercedes and come to the conclusion that more care and time went into the construction of the pagani, it doesn't devalue the (probably) very good build quality of the mercedes. It just means even greater care and time went into the pagani, hence why their are more expensive and exist in fewer numbers.

You just cling to the assumption that custodes players/fans get off on the idea that a single custodes is in all likelyhood quite a bit more powerful than a single astartes (exceptions exist as we have established, with 30k Sigismund being a prime example) when this is just a fact in 30k and 40k lore. And when that fact is not really that well represented in the rules due to 9th ed power creep, it breaks immersion for a lot of people. That's it.

Just regarding the lore it's similar to saying: in 40k an astartes is on average taller and stronger than an unaugmented human. Does that devalue imperial soldiers as a whole? No, it's just simply a fact.....it even elevates the imperial guard to an extent because they hold their ground in a galaxy full of horrors without augmentation or power armor.

Consequently if the lore doesn't matter at all in rules representation why dont we go ahead and have grots of guardsmen at S5, T5? Why don't we include lore where a sororitas just punches through power armor or terminator armor bare handed? After all, a lot is possible with rage and warp juice, right? If the lore doesn't matter then any continuity is lost and anything goes. Which is why we have such terrible examples like in the outcast dead where the author just didn't do proper research and as a result people are arguing about a ridiculously stupid scene that shouldn't have been written they way it was and wasn't even a super crucial part of the book.

 Blackie wrote:
I expect this to happen very soon since they're now the only faction without a 9th codex.

Daemons.

 Blackie wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Eh...custodes have existed weeeee bit longer.

Good way of demonstrating ignorance of 40k.

Can't say about 1st ed since never had that but 100% sure they existed in 2nd ed.

I know, but they were completely absent in 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and pretty much the entire 7th. Which means at least 20 years of absence. Pre 3rd edition 40k was a completely different game with a lot of stuff that was axed at the end of 2nd, basically like comparing AoS to WHFB. And I'm not even sure if they had rules in 2nd, I never saw any, let alone models. So yeah, Custodes were actually introduced in the game at the very end of 7th, like I said.

If only things that deserve to be in 40k are the things that had model from the get-go...

Well basically tactical marines. Nothing else. No eldar. No tyranid. No IG. No Ad mech. Everything but marines(and not much of them). Gone. poof. don't deserve to be in the game.

Model lines are expanded. Deal with it.

Hecaton wrote:


This just reinforces the idea to me that Custodes fans specifically like their faction because it comparatively devalues Astartes.

Also, "mass production" as an idea is not strictly speaking about rate of production, but about the amount of attention given to each individual piece - by calling Astartes "mass produced" it's devaluing them.

This just reinforces the idea to me that astartes fans specifically like their faction because it comparatively devalues Guard and SoB.

By calling basic humans "mass produced" its devalueing them.


I get it, you dont like custodes for whatever reason.
That does not change the fact that Custodes lost their faction identity this edition, which this topic is about. Not if they should exist as an army, when they started existing or anything else.
Heck, AdMech didnt exist until 6th.
You're making up arguments and derailing the threat in bad faith, please stop.

tneva82 wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Eh...custodes have existed weeeee bit longer.

Good way of demonstrating ignorance of 40k.

Can't say about 1st ed since never had that but 100% sure they existed in 2nd ed.

I know, but they were completely absent in 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and pretty much the entire 7th. Which means at least 20 years of absence. Pre 3rd edition 40k was a completely different game with a lot of stuff that was axed at the end of 2nd, basically like comparing AoS to WHFB. And I'm not even sure if they had rules in 2nd, I never saw any, let alone models. So yeah, Custodes were actually introduced in the game at the very end of 7th, like I said.

If only things that deserve to be in 40k are the things that had model from the get-go...

Well basically tactical marines. Nothing else. No eldar. No tyranid. No IG. No Ad mech. Everything but marines(and not much of them). Gone. poof. don't deserve to be in the game.

Model lines are expanded. Deal with it.

Excuse me what? Custodes were in the lore since decades, had a handful of limited edition models but no rules or line of models as an actual playable faction for another couple of decades. They weren't a faction before late 7th, this is facts, accept that and deal with it. It didn't take two decades to expand model lines, let alone to provide their first official plastic kits, for any of the factions you mentioned.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Thairne wrote:

That does not change the fact that Custodes lost their faction identity this edition, which this topic is about. Not if they should exist as an army, when they started existing or anything else.

But the point is they really never had it. When custodes were released deathwing armies were already popular, so were SW armies that were based on wulfen and TWC. And those SW bespoke units were already multiwounds with strong invuln and extremely good in melee.

Custodes really didn't add anything in terms of faction's diversity, not even at their first official release. They just were a shiny new line of models. Like the snagga guys compared to the already existing orks, they didn't add anything to the game, just new models to use and with slightly different stats/tactics than something that existed already. Or primaris compared to firstborn. Even Harlequins didn't really add anything, they're not that different than possible builds from both cousins, Craftworld and Drukhari.

Tiberias wrote:


It is truly amazing to witness how you always just know what people are thinking, even though they clarified their stance to you. It must be great having such an awsome talent.

I mean, I've seen all this bs before.

Tiberias wrote:
If you compare a pagani zona with a top of the line mercedes and come to the conclusion that more care and time went into the construction of the pagani, it doesn't devalue the (probably) very good build quality of the mercedes. It just means even greater care and time went into the pagani, hence why their are more expensive and exist in fewer numbers.

In the context of the Custodes, though, it's also that they emphatically get higher performance.

Tiberias wrote:
You just cling to the assumption that custodes players/fans get off on the idea that a single custodes is in all likelyhood quite a bit more powerful than a single astartes (exceptions exist as we have established, with 30k Sigismund being a prime example) when this is just a fact in 30k and 40k lore. And when that fact is not really that well represented in the rules due to 9th ed power creep, it breaks immersion for a lot of people. That's it.

It's quite well represented in the rules.

Tiberias wrote:
Just regarding the lore it's similar to saying: in 40k an astartes is on average taller and stronger than an unaugmented human. Does that devalue imperial soldiers as a whole? No, it's just simply a fact.....it even elevates the imperial guard to an extent because they hold their ground in a galaxy full of horrors without augmentation or power armor.

Yeah but the Guard are individually mechanically weaker than Astartes, just like Astartes are of Custodes. What's the problem?

Tiberias wrote:
Consequently if the lore doesn't matter at all in rules representation why dont we go ahead and have grots of guardsmen at S5, T5? Why don't we include lore where a sororitas just punches through power armor or terminator armor bare handed? After all, a lot is possible with rage and warp juice, right? If the lore doesn't matter then any continuity is lost and anything goes. Which is why we have such terrible examples like in the outcast dead where the author just didn't do proper research and as a result people are arguing about a ridiculously stupid scene that shouldn't have been written they way it was and wasn't even a super crucial part of the book.

This has nothing to do with what I'm saying.

 Blackie wrote:


But the point is they really never had it. When custodes were released deathwing armies were already popular, so were SW armies that were based on wulfen and TWC. And those SW bespoke units were already multiwounds with strong invuln and extremely good in melee.

Custodes really didn't add anything in terms of faction's diversity, not even at their first official release. They just were a shiny new line of models. Like the snagga guys compared to the already existing orks, they didn't add anything to the game, just new models to use and with slightly different stats/tactics than something that existed already. Or primaris compared to firstborn. Even Harlequins didn't really add anything, they're not that different than possible builds from both cousins, Craftworld and Drukhari.

Oh they did. In times when Marines were T4 1W 3+.
Even Terminators were, at best, T4 2w 2+/4++.
Custodes were T5 and 3W. 2+/3++ with similar loadout.

More S, more T, more WS, more BS, better invul, more wounds. And a pricetag to match.

Now though, with Gravis Armour, Permatranshuman Terminators, Primaris Grav vehicles etc. Custodes lost their identity. Because Marines took their design space in its entirety, not only some elite specialist units like TWC.
They had it, they lost it and the players that got the army to play THAT faction want it back. Its not that hard of a concept, really.

Also its also not about diversity, but IDENTITY. Different words.

Marines have gobbled up many faction identities over time. It's tiresome.

Hecaton wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
If you compare a pagani zona with a top of the line mercedes and come to the conclusion that more care and time went into the construction of the pagani, it doesn't devalue the (probably) very good build quality of the mercedes. It just means even greater care and time went into the pagani, hence why their are more expensive and exist in fewer numbers.

In the context of the Custodes, though, it's also that they emphatically get higher performance.

The pagani also has higher performance than a mercedes since it's purpose built sports car, does it not? The point was, again, just to illustrate that saying Astartes are mass produced in comparison to Custodes does not necessarily devalue them.

Tiberias wrote:
You just cling to the assumption that custodes players/fans get off on the idea that a single custodes is in all likelyhood quite a bit more powerful than a single astartes (exceptions exist as we have established, with 30k Sigismund being a prime example) when this is just a fact in 30k and 40k lore. And when that fact is not really that well represented in the rules due to 9th ed power creep, it breaks immersion for a lot of people. That's it.

It's quite well represented in the rules.

Perfectly valid stance to take on this point, I just personally disagree.

Tiberias wrote:
Just regarding the lore it's similar to saying: in 40k an astartes is on average taller and stronger than an unaugmented human. Does that devalue imperial soldiers as a whole? No, it's just simply a fact.....it even elevates the imperial guard to an extent because they hold their ground in a galaxy full of horrors without augmentation or power armor.

Yeah but the Guard are individually mechanically weaker than Astartes, just like Astartes are of Custodes. What's the problem?

There is no problem? That's just part of the custom made/mass produced argument. I was just trying to lay out why it doesn't necessarily devalue Astartes when saying that they are mass produced in comparison to Custodes, that's all.

Personally, I don't think they ever should have been added to the game as anything, save for a single unit imperium armies could buy in the elite slot.

Insectum7 wrote:Marines have gobbled up many faction identities over time. It's tiresome.

You're not wrong, but I feel like the issue here is that marine players and custodes players were both sold on the same sales pitch. Both want to be the super duper elite heavily-armored transhumans with ultra mega awesome training where each dude is worth a whole squad of guardsmen. But if marines successfully fill that niche, then you have to make custodes individually powerful to the point of feeling mechanically awkward. And if you put the custodes in that niche instead and tone down marines, then marines feel like pale comparisons.

It's the Dragonball thing. Going super saiyan goes from being awesome to being cute once the protagonist can unlock super saiyan god mode++ with extra cheese.

Togusa wrote:Personally, I don't think they ever should have been added to the game as anything, save for a single unit imperium armies could buy in the elite slot.

This. Absolutely this. If custodes had to be added as playable models, they should have been a single unit (maybe even a single model) that you can splash one of into your imperial army. That way, you can make individual custodes as powerful as you want without having to balance that statline as an entire army, AND it would make the custodes feel more rare/special. There are so few of them spread so thin that you literally can't field a whole army of them but the couple of dudes that did show up are hugely inspiring badasses.

Remember in late 7th/early 8th when you could field a custodes with a banner that impacted all IMPERIAL units? That's the direction I was hoping they'd go in.

 Thairne wrote:


Oh they did. In times when Marines were T4 1W 3+.
Even Terminators were, at best, T4 2w 2+/4++.
Custodes were T5 and 3W. 2+/3++ with similar loadout.

And Wulfen were T4 2W 3++/5+++, TWC were T5 2W 3++ if both equipped with shields. And in combat they were both beasts, Wulfen could even fight twice in an era in which such abilities weren't common or didn't even exist. Competitive SW used to run tons of those units. I ran between 16 and 25 of them in 7th.

So yeah, slightly different stats aside, there was no need of an imperium army of dudes that were more elite than standard marines because people were already running them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wyldhunt wrote:
If custodes had to be added as playable models, they should have been a single unit (maybe even a single model) that you can splash one of into your imperial army. That way, you can make individual custodes as powerful as you want without having to balance that statline as an entire army, AND it would make the custodes feel more rare/special. There are so few of them spread so thin that you literally can't field a whole army of them but the couple of dudes that did show up are hugely inspiring badasses.

I agree. Like knights and IMHO harlequins, they should simply have been a new small line of units for an already existing faction. Agents of Imperium was released in that period, they could have been part of that books. Like what beastsnagga units are for the ork roster.

Wyldhunt wrote:
]
You're not wrong, but I feel like the issue here is that marine players and custodes players were both sold on the same sales pitch. Both want to be the super duper elite heavily-armored transhumans with ultra mega awesome training where each dude is worth a whole squad of guardsmen. But if marines successfully fill that niche, then you have to make custodes individually powerful to the point of feeling mechanically awkward. And if you put the custodes in that niche instead and tone down marines, then marines feel like pale comparisons.

Yeah that's the issue, there's significant identity overlap between Astartes and Custodes even without getting into power levels. I kind of feel like if they wanted to play something different Custodes players should have chosen a different faction.

 Blackie wrote:


And Wulfen were T4 2W 3++/5+++, TWC were T5 2W 3++ if both equipped with shields. And in combat they were both beasts, Wulfen could even fight twice in an era in which such abilities weren't common or didn't even exist. Competitive SW used to run tons of those units. I ran between 16 and 25 of them in 7th.

So yeah, slightly different stats aside, there was no need of an imperium army of dudes that were more elite than standard marines because people were already running them.

Like I said, except some select elite units that could match the basic troops of custodes. Custodes elite could slap around the elite units of other factions with a price point to match, and this is where they should be. The army exists. You're not getting rid of them now. That line of discussion cannot lead to a conclusion, so even following that line is... strange.
I get the feel that you're just afraid of your astartes not being the best, so you're just doing the same the OP and other custodes players are doing, which makes it quite hyporcritical.

That was their identity. Marines stole that. Marines stole everything from everyone at this point.
If anything, marines need to shrink so they're not encroaching on everyone elses space instead of killing other armies as you'd prefer it.

Do folks play pure Sisters of Silence?

I'm super into the idea. They remind me of Pariahs. Also really intrigued by their stats. Making lists is frustrating with things only being in 3PL chunks. For larger games (here 25PL is a big game, most are 6-12PL), I'm considering rhinos.

Modelwise, they cost a fortune and finding appropriately kick-ass third party models is hard.

This would be my first imperial army in... yikes almost 20yrs of playing.