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.

Dunno if I'm making this post just to irritate old-hands or not, but I for one believe that the "bring back the Squats" camp are quite over-represented... literally a small group screaming at the top of their lungs

So I've made this poll, Dakka, so that the silent (and obvious) majority might be able to express their solidarity with the quite sensible decision to rid 40k of the Squats.

-They looked awful.
-The fluff is a tad ridiculous.
-They just weren't popular enough to justify the costs.
-They didn't fit in.

My points.

Be happy with the Demiurg, y'all.

Why are people voting no. You idiots!


EDIT: This was entirely a joke intended to nod towards the consensus that squats are the unwanted nerdy fat kid that hangs around your group at school. I apologize for causing offence if it did.

If someone disagrees with your opinion it generally doesn't make them or you an idiot

I don't really like them, but I'm still voting no because they would have kept some more diversity in the game rather than all the marine codices. They said at the time the reason they were removed was because an army with lots of vehicles doesn't fit in with 40k. While it was probably true back then the IG have probably taken over the role that the Squats seemed to have had back then. Probably why counts as Squats use the IG codex so much.

Jaon wrote:Why are people voting no. You idiots!

To be "hip" and "in", possibly?

I think the Squats were a stupid army that have no place in the grimdark that 40k has become. As far as I am concerned even at their best they were a bit of a joke army.

You people obviously can't handel the awsomeness that is dwarves in space.

Just because you dont like them doesnt meen that they werent a fun competitave army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, this post is stupid.

Jaon wrote:Why are people voting no. You idiots!

Because I don't believe GW should 'squat' any army. I miss my Genestealer Cult, my Lost and the Damned, etc etc........

GW should never "Squat" a non Space Marine Army.

There's enough Space Marine Codices to where I don't think anyone would be raging on the Internet if a Space Marine Codex got "Squatted".

I hated them. Voted so.

Yay for Dwarves in Space

miserable beardy old gits of the universe unite!
To boldy grump where no bald has boldly grumped before!

don_mondo wrote:

Jaon wrote:Why are people voting no. You idiots!

Because I don't believe GW should 'squat' any army. I miss my Genestealer Cult, my Lost and the Damned, etc etc........

I think that Squats should have been squatted. Genestealer cults and Lost and the Dammed on the other hand were great armies that should have been kept on.

I don't mind Squats. They could have been done more seriously if they were actually given a CHANCE. Second edition as a whole wasn't entirely serious.

Yeah but you are a SOB Ordo
you hate anything Xenos

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:Yeah but you are a SOB Ordo
you hate any mutant sub-human "race"

Fixed

Squats had potential.

Demiurg have similar potential, I hope GW doesn't ignore it this time.

And what part of second edition was serious at all? Squats were a joke, but so was everything else.

Now we just have the Orks.

Weren't Demiurg an attempt to reboot the Squats?

Space Dwarves, but of a different flavor.

The Squats were the drinkin' bruiser dwarves. The Demiurg are the skilled craftsmen dwarves.

omnom'd? I am unfamilar with this term omnom'd.

Yak9UT wrote:omnom'd? I am unfamilar with this term omnom'd.

It means "eaten" in baby talk

People can hate on the Squats if they wish. I have had mine since 2nd ed. I played them in tournies with a great deal of success.
Reasons I have heard for them being deleted were many: another army did the same better, creative staff drew a blank, sculptors were not being creative, Andy Chambers couldn't beat them....

Ok Space Wolves did the "vikings in space" thing better, Maybe. Another direction could have been taken.... Feudal Japan maybe. They had the Ancestor worship part already.
Fact is GW let some people down to make even sillier armies. How many Dark Eldar player do you really see on a regular basis... even in their heyday? One in twenty? One in fifty? One in one hundred? Legoburner's poll on first armies shows 22 out of 696.. that 11 out of @350 or 1 out of 32 that post here.
In the same poll Squats got 9 out of 696 or @1 out of 77. Of course, these figures are skewed by the fact that Squats have not had any support since 2nd ed and were effectively fully eliminated by 4th ed.
People will stand behind some other "Fringe" armies, some that didn't even poll as well as Squats..... Chaos Deamons, Witch Hunters, Stealer Cults, Mechanicus, Lost and Damned, Inquisition....
But hey.... Those are "Popular" armies..... right?

Fixed that for you wrote:Dunno if I'm making this post just to irritate old-hands or not, but I for one believe that the "bring back the Dark Eldar" camp are quite over-represented... literally a small group screaming at the top of their lungs

So I've made this poll, Dakka, so that the silent (and obvious) majority might be able to express their solidarity with the quite sensible decision to rid 40k of the Dark Eldar.

-They looked awful.
-The fluff is a tad ridiculous.
-They just weren't popular enough to justify the costs.
-They didn't fit in.

My points.

Be happy with the Demiurg, y'all.

See how easy that is? The poll itself is not very telling really, because of the fact that it lumps together sets of people what would be worth distinguishing:

Yes - Man wearing helmet and water wings: "SPESH MURREEENS!!! DURP DE DURP"
Yes - "While I feel as though six Space Marine factions needing to be represented by their own codex is very excessive, Space Dwarves are too over the top."
No - "We have space elves, space drow, space mind flayers, space vampires, and space vikings, why not have space Dwarves?"

What I'm trying to say, first and foremost, is, how many of the people who voted yes did so because they're frothing at the mouth marine crazy and would say so with regards to ANY Xenos, and how many of them did it because they genuinely disliked the Squats for whatever reason?

Secondly, why squat anyone? As little material as GW puts out, and with their consistent profit-reporting, you'd think they'd be able to expand, hire a few new developers... you know what, see the generic "GW codex updates" rants in 40k discussions every other week.

Finally, and to draw attention back to my above quote, people hate because they can. If it was "army that needs/needed to be squatted the most:" And you listed ALL the armies, I bet you'd probably see more Space Marine hate that you would Squat hate.

Personally, I think that the Tau are silly and don't need to be in the 40k universe. Everything else is obviously Fantasy in Space. We have these Space Paladins protecting mankind with their 'magic' swords and their 'artificer' armor. We have the elves, both good and evil, with their 'magic'. Why do we need Gundam?

The Epic concept of Squats was great. What's not to love about an off-shoot of the human race that believes it's a good thing to develop new technology; rather than stagnating.

It was the 40k implementation that left a bit to be desired. It's nothing someone new couldn't work their way around.

I liked squats in epic,

however the 40k implementation was just slow midget bikers with beards. Honestly the army was just IG that moved slower and had bikes.

I am pretty sure the reason they were scrapped were:

a.) The entire army was comical, it wasn't just a unit or two that had random rules tables like orks which people still consider clowns. The entire backstory of the army was basically a midget biker bar joke.

b.) Movement distance has been removed. Previously eldar moved fast, and everything else about the same, and squats were slower. Now movement is gone and no one would want to play an army that was all slow and purposeful in a game about manuevering. And yes they would have to use slow and purposeful now that they cant say "moves 3"

c.) The army was redundant. It had access to archeotech special weapons, but the imperium still has those. It had bikers, but the imperium still has those. The only thing unique about the army was that it had different psyker powers, and it was easier to get archeotech weapons on characters as opposed to maybe having 1 or 2 in an army. Im talking conversion beamers and graivton guns. So basically the army is just IG with space marine bikes, and all the special characters have access to special guns. Most players just nullified the fact the army was slow by taking just bikes. Oh and they had "terminators" the short fat exo armor guys that looked like they were from a bad wizard of oz sequel. Honestly the army was just IG+Space marine allies, or the other way around with slow movement for foot troops.

endtransmission wrote:The Epic concept of Squats was great. What's not to love about an off-shoot of the human race that believes it's a good thing to develop new technology; rather than stagnating.

It was the 40k implementation that left a bit to be desired. It's nothing someone new couldn't work their way around.

This is exactly what I was going to say. Squats strongholds were brilliant in Epic 2nd edition, and they never caught up to that in 40k.

Jack

My concept of Dwarves in the Warhammer worlds is a seperate species. ie humanoid, but definitely non human.

A couple of references above suggest that they are a su-species?

Can someone clarify please?

I dont dislike squats. I dislike people who keep bringing them up.

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:My concept of Dwarves in the Warhammer worlds is a seperate species. ie humanoid, but definitely non human.

A couple of references above suggest that they are a su-species?

Can someone clarify please?

Like Ogryns or Ratlings, they were a subspecies that evolved on a unique planet over many generations (twenty thousand years is a short time to do this, but still on the verge of believability, scientifically speaking). In the case of Squats, it was a high-gravity mining planet that was cut off from the Imperium for an extended amount of time.


Personally, I too would prefer a xeno race.

Thanks for the background Melissa.

Treading carefully hoping to avoid a minefield, a xenos race would have been more acceptible, socially speaking* perhaps. A reason for them going bye-byes?

(*trying to avoid the term PC )

I like the Squats. Having them eaten by the nids was dumb. Half-way re-imagining them as the Demiurg is even dumber. The Squat models were no worse than other models contemporary with them. Saying they don't "fit" is pretty ludicrous and could be as easily applied to Tau or even Eldar (really, anything that's not a Space Marine). They also played an important role in the early years of the Great Crusade.

Yeh it would have made more sense if they were Xeno. I also think they could have done a better job than Tyranids out of no where. Space Marines would have been all over an important Imperial resource like that. I mean look at Armageddon, why is that planet important again?

Squats have the problem that they came from a different era of 40k. They are hard to take seriously now - their name conjures bathroom jokes ("Man, I ate at that cheap Mexican place and had the squats all weekend"), and their look and feel is like the 'midget biker joke'. Their background is stuck back in the old 'rip off fantasy' era, they're pretty much generic fantasy dwarves in space, while everyone else has either moved on and has unique fluff or vanished. Their position as 'allied with the imperium but separate and has lots of tech' has been taken over by the Adeptus Mechanicus. Their army doesn't bring anything unique to the table, at best their army would be like 'guardsmen shooting plus some bikes with marines in slow terminator armor for leaders'.

I think bringing back squats would be a bad idea, even naming them is a problem. By the time you gave them a name that doesn't invite snickering, more unique background, gave them a place that's not 'short adeptus mechanicus clones that ride bikes and drink a lot', something interesting to do on the field, an updated look, and everything else to bring them into 40k, you'd have nothing like the original squats. Now 'space dwarves' does have some promise, if they took the Demiurg and made them into a list they could make something cool that fits into modern 40k without looking goofy, it's just that they'd be very little like the original squats.

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:My concept of Dwarves in the Warhammer worlds is a seperate species. ie humanoid, but definitely non human.A couple of references above suggest that they are a sub-species? Can someone clarify please?

40k squats (the original model in 1st and 2nd edition) were the descendants of humans who lived on and/or were bioengineered to live on high gravity worlds, they're abhumans like ratlings and ogryns not xenos. The Demiurg (new race that sometimes works with the Tau) are probably not related to humans at all, though I don't think that's definite.