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.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Not sure BCB, i doubt you'd see much rage, due to how many players just converted them... as it stands i know not one chaos player that has decided that buying 4 boxes to get a full squad of em, was worth the money.

Not when a squad of Mark 3s and some of the fw rotar cannons works just as well for far less than half the money.

and you get the bonus of your heavy weapons guy not being larger than the rest of your CSM squad too!

 AngryAngel80 wrote:
Well there was the time that scouts lost their BS and went down to hitting on 4s in CC and shooting remember ? So their states were it then and the wolf scouts had behind enemy lines which was pretty good and a unique thing for them as well as unique weapon load outs.

Was some other stuff but they kept phasing them out book after book to take away their flavor and point.

Figures, I actually liked them,

Scouts are just in a really weird position overall. I'd almost call them a dead unit. The kit will never be updated and I don't see GW making any sweeping changes to them. I'm sure they make an ok cheap backfield unit in cover or w/e, but I don't think they can ever outshine other options.

Scouts are just in a really weird position overall. I'd almost call them a dead unit. The kit will never be updated and I don't see GW making any sweeping changes to them. I'm sure they make an ok cheap backfield unit in cover or w/e, but I don't think they can ever outshine other options.

Given how much GW hated the fact that a lot of people took them as a main troop choice in 8th, I would not be at all surprised to see the elimination of scouts as the harbinger of the great firstborn squatting. Whenever that happens ...

 BaconCatBug wrote:
As someone old enough to remember Dial Up Internet, BBS systems (yes I know the S stands for system shush) and the heydey of IRC, It's a hearty chuckle when people think Dakka is in any way toxic. It's a hugbox by any other name.

I fondly remember the AOL chat room with GW. It was a trip to be bugging the gak out of the designers.

I fondly remember the AOL chat room with GW. It was a trip to be bugging the gak out of the designers.

That takes me back. lol Had completely forgotten about those days.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Not sure BCB, i doubt you'd see much rage, due to how many players just converted them... as it stands i know not one chaos player that has decided that buying 4 boxes to get a full squad of em, was worth the money.

Not when a squad of Mark 3s and some of the fw rotar cannons works just as well for far less than half the money.

and you get the bonus of your heavy weapons guy not being larger than the rest of your CSM squad too!

But isn't it a bit different. It is a bit as if GW decided that csm squads can not heavy rottary cannons and what ever was considered the optimal weapon to go along side of it , while a the same time making the unit sized required to having both a heavy and a special 12 model strong.

But all I know is that when the rottary cannons for csm became a thing people here were super happy, to a point where my place run out of resin, because they were getting so many orders.

Karol wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Not sure BCB, i doubt you'd see much rage, due to how many players just converted them... as it stands i know not one chaos player that has decided that buying 4 boxes to get a full squad of em, was worth the money.

Not when a squad of Mark 3s and some of the fw rotar cannons works just as well for far less than half the money.

and you get the bonus of your heavy weapons guy not being larger than the rest of your CSM squad too!

But isn't it a bit different. It is a bit as if GW decided that csm squads can not heavy rottary cannons and what ever was considered the optimal weapon to go along side of it , while a the same time making the unit sized required to having both a heavy and a special 12 model strong.

But all I know is that when the rottary cannons for csm became a thing people here were super happy, to a point where my place run out of resin, because they were getting so many orders.

what?

GW are the ones that made the chaincannon legal for basic CSM.

Well it may not stay legal for basic squads is the problem. You just can't know for sure these days. You fill a list and then oops, it's only on havocs and you can only take 1 per 5 man even there. We need to see it happen but if it does the signs were out there. I am looking forward to the DE codex but also really afraid to get that information as if it ends up following the whats in the one box idea some units ( looking at scourges ) might as well not exist then.

Can someone post the Plague Marine datasheet?
I’ve only seen the Termies one in here, but trawling all the pages in case it’s there is a bit much,,

It should be either here or in the news and rumor page though a lot to sift through to find it.

Danny76 wrote:
Can someone post the Plague Marine datasheet?
I’ve only seen the Termies one in here, but trawling all the pages in case it’s there is a bit much,,

It's literally the first post.

I snagged a clearer one. I can kick out more stuff from the book if people want other details.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

stratigo wrote:
Decent what? He's a condescending, dismissive, and regularly insults people. More than what is standard for the pretty salty nature of Dakkadakka.

I disagree with your assessment, but I hear you. Like I said - I'll try to do better and I'll bow out of discussions if it looks like people are reacting negatively to my ideas.

Four years of insanity was lifted from my shoulders today so maybe I'll be more successful at tempering my approach.

As someone old enough to remember Dial Up Internet, BBS systems (yes I know the S stands for system shush) and the heydey of IRC, It's a hearty chuckle when people think Dakka is in any way toxic. It's a hugbox by any other name.

But on topic: I can't wait to see the rage when they restrict the amount of Chaincannons Havocs can take, as it needed multiple boxes to get enough.

"Back in my day, people were shouting slurs at each other all the time. Of course I just chuckle because none of those slurs ever referred to me"

yeah, Dakka doesn't let people shout the N word in every thread. But, like, if that wasn't a rule, it'd probly show up every other thread like it does on 4chan. Dakka is an incredibly salty community restrained by at least some rules. Let's not wax nostalgic over how awful people are with less rules, especially under the modern political climate.

Dakka is by any objective measure a nice place to be. The internet and its many forms hold many horrors, this isn't one of them. If having people speak, forcefully of their own opinion that doesn't match your own count as " toxic " the net is only going to get worse.

We could be better, and some of us do admit that but its far from the dark heart of warhammer.

I find it in fact more troubling to know people can't handle disagreement of any kind without hate, that isn't political that is a break down of personal discourse that has been happening for awhile. Some topics or places simply let it rise to the surface much easier.

(from the News topic as should to use this one for such discussions)

 AngryAngel80 wrote:
Some various levels of marines have had that happen over and over. Some set ups for Space wolves, Dark Angels, Deathwatch. I got to thinking on it last night and I actually got pretty upset, if I can be honest with you all. Made me question just stopping altogether.

This current situation being just that last straw. Like I went and spent the time for Space wolves to craft a fun, if not awesome wolf scout squad, a couple of them, only to have to alter their set ups, twice now and now it's wrong again. Spend the time to find and get the old generic wolf priest model, just for them to become chaplains and lose their flavor , making him basically a glorified chaplain, no more rune priests they are just libbys now.
[....]
Edit: On topic of my guard, I'm still afraid to build my Bullgryns because they originally came out with slab shield and that grenade gauntlet. Now, you can take the club with the shield but I am still very afraid I'll build them, paint them and as soon as i enjoy them they'll be changed for no reason other than " We changed our mind. " I don't think a player should have to feel that from their game system, that is a clear sign to me at least how messed up they are in this regard.

feel you, as I was at the same point

but for some the constant change is the exiting part of the hobby because playing always the same without being forced by the Devs to change is boring (change for the sake of change is not exclusive to GW)

I am not a big fan of needing to re-work an army as soon as I finished painting it just because someone else thought it might be a good idea
in the past I started a new one with a new Codex/Edition to keep playing, at some point the idea of a universal Marine army came up and was executed to some extend to keep up with the changes

but 8th was my last Edition for now as I don't see any benefit to re-build something or buy anything new just to have to do it again before I am able to play a game (as I expect changes to happen again with CA)

this thigns will never change with GW as their design philosophy is to make the model first and than think about what rules may fit but at the same time "having a crazy idea every 2 minutes that we will put into the rules" (yes, Devs said that this is their plan for 9th Edition in one of the promo videos)

my games are now either those that have proofen to not change much during updates (never start with a 1st Editon, wait for the 2nd or 3rd to see what is going on)

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I snagged a clearer one. I can kick out more stuff from the book if people want other details.

Hold on. Maybe I'm being stupid here but can anyone explain to me why the Blight Launcher and Plague Spewer restrictions are worded as they are? They're different to the plasma/melta/belcher restrictions in text but not in function, at least as far as I can figure out. The restrictions are stupid enough as is, but I'm struggling to understand what this specific set of restrictions achieves.

Edit: aaaand the penny has dropped. God that's dumb.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Danny76 wrote:
Can someone post the Plague Marine datasheet?
I’ve only seen the Termies one in here, but trawling all the pages in case it’s there is a bit much,,

It's literally the first post.

Oh that’s what that is.
Links dead or whatever, for me anyway. Just a failed picture square thing.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AngryAngel80 wrote:
Well there was the time that scouts lost their BS and went down to hitting on 4s in CC and shooting remember ? So their states were it then and the wolf scouts had behind enemy lines which was pretty good and a unique thing for them as well as unique weapon load outs.

Was some other stuff but they kept phasing them out book after book to take away their flavor and point.

Figures, I actually liked them,

Scouts are just in a really weird position overall. I'd almost call them a dead unit. The kit will never be updated and I don't see GW making any sweeping changes to them. I'm sure they make an ok cheap backfield unit in cover or w/e, but I don't think they can ever outshine other options.

I don't have the new codex, but I believe they still have a distinction of being able to infiltrate with a Heavy weapon. Their Sergeant can be loaded out pretty well too. In the opposite direction they're probably the cheapest infantry unit Marines can field with the probable exception of Servitors.

This stuff is why I switched to playing F28: War Always Changes, with my 40K minis.

Too many cycles of, spend a couple of years working out how I really wanted to play an army, tracking down the bits, converting the model, starting to get it painted, then a new edition would come out and invalidate the whole process.

*contemplates sad Dark Angels techmarine on converted trike with force field generator*

 VladimirHerzog wrote:


what?

GW are the ones that made the chaincannon legal for basic CSM.

Yes, but there is a difference between adding a new weapon to a squads line up. A changing a units rule set in a such a way that the most often run set ups, become either illegal or so bad you don't want or can't run them. One is a choice, you can or can not buy the new or new best thing. The other brings no choice, if you want to play with the stuff you have, you have to buy extra models. And the more extra models you have to buy, and the less the new set up is efficient comparing to the old one, the more people are going to be unhappy about it.

In the opposite direction they're probably the cheapest infantry unit Marines can field with the probable exception of Servitors.

Aren't they 1W though? that makes them less point efficient then the other 2W infiltrating units.

Slipspace wrote:


Hold on. Maybe I'm being stupid here but can anyone explain to me why the Blight Launcher and Plague Spewer restrictions are worded as they are? They're different to the plasma/melta/belcher restrictions in text but not in function, at least as far as I can figure out. The restrictions are stupid enough as is, but I'm struggling to understand what this specific set of restrictions achieves.

Edit: aaaand the penny has dropped. God that's dumb.

Take a look at the instructions and it becomes clear:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerInstructions/comments/7eb0rj/death_guard_plague_marines_imgur/

-One of the builds for Plague Marine 4 has the Blight Launcher, so its separate.
-Plague Marine 5 can be built with one Plasma, Melta, or Plague Belcher, so its separate.
-Plague Marine 6 can have the Plague Spewer, so its separate.

And then the extra guns per 5 models follows that same convention.

The melee stuff follows the same convention, too. Plague Marine 6 can have an axe. Plague Marine 2 can also have an axe, and the instructions call for him to also be given a mace. So those are separate entries. You can't have two guys with just axes or take just a mace at all, despite having a lot of leftover parts once you've built each variant. Because the instructions don't spell that out.

 Slowroll wrote:

Slipspace wrote:


Hold on. Maybe I'm being stupid here but can anyone explain to me why the Blight Launcher and Plague Spewer restrictions are worded as they are? They're different to the plasma/melta/belcher restrictions in text but not in function, at least as far as I can figure out. The restrictions are stupid enough as is, but I'm struggling to understand what this specific set of restrictions achieves.

Edit: aaaand the penny has dropped. God that's dumb.

Take a look at the instructions and it becomes clear:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerInstructions/comments/7eb0rj/death_guard_plague_marines_imgur/

-One of the builds for Plague Marine 4 has the Blight Launcher, so its separate.
-Plague Marine 5 can be built with one Plasma, Melta, or Plague Belcher, so its separate.
-Plague Marine 6 can have the Plague Spewer, so its separate.

And then the extra guns per 5 models follows that same convention.

The melee stuff follows the same convention, too. Plague Marine 6 can have an axe. Plague Marine 2 can also have an axe, and the instructions call for him to also be given a mace. So those are separate entries. You can't have two guys with just axes or take just a mace at all, despite having a lot of leftover parts once you've built each variant. Because the instructions don't spell that out.

My initial confusion was down to my own stupidity: I incorrectly assumed even GW couldn't be that dumb.

Well, I think we should summary the discussion in the approach GW has towards converting and modeling. Which is duplicitous.
Converting and modeling are the cornerstones of the hobby as it is, but both from a pure business perspective are detrimental... For the slight chances that someone may purchase multiple kits you open and encourage towards third party components, second hand market and such

Considered that GW decision are made by management who pretty clearly does not play/care/know about the game, I think they aren't even realizing they are shooting in their own foot.

I said it before and I say it again: GW is a bubble about to burst due to 3d, printing and such. I have a 3d printer in one of our gaming chat that purchase 3d models and customize them in terms of poses and weapons as you want them. GW simply can't compete.

The sooner they realize that the only business mod l susteinable for them long-term is the old Citadel approach (pure manufacturing) plus and IP company, the better.

 Cybtroll wrote:

I said it before and I say it again: GW is a bubble about to burst due to 3d, printing and such. I have a 3d printer in one of our gaming chat that purchase 3d models and customize them in terms of poses and weapons as you want them. GW simply can't compete.

People have said that for decades, meanwhile GW has record high profits.

So the current evidence is that they can compete, even thrive.

 Tyran wrote:

 Cybtroll wrote:

I said it before and I say it again: GW is a bubble about to burst due to 3d, printing and such. I have a 3d printer in one of our gaming chat that purchase 3d models and customize them in terms of poses and weapons as you want them. GW simply can't compete.

People have said that for decades, meanwhile GW has record high profits.

So the current evidence is that they can compete, even thrive.

People have been talking about 3D printing for decades?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Cybtroll wrote:

I said it before and I say it again: GW is a bubble about to burst due to 3d, printing and such. I have a 3d printer in one of our gaming chat that purchase 3d models and customize them in terms of poses and weapons as you want them. GW simply can't compete.

People have said that for decades, meanwhile GW has record high profits.

So the current evidence is that they can compete, even thrive.

People have been talking about 3D printing for decades?

Yes, the basic idea was coined in 50s.

Yeah, they were.

If you don't get the difference between long-term (back then) and short term (now). But it's human to understand change only after change already happened.

As I said, I can pay around the GW price (even less in some cases) and have a custom made model. Good for you that you like GW sculpting choices, I suppose?

Case ih point: I have a IK army fully converted, poseable, painted and with led. I never find a matching Imperial Guard Platoon. I found it as CAD model on Patreon, and I'm about to spend again in miniatures after quite some time, because I (the consumer) can really decide what I want instead of being fed the GW kool aid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And, BTW, I explicitly said that the Citadel facilities for mass production have a business value. It's simply a different one that the boutique-exclusive approach they cornered themselves into.

And the short term (now) is record high profits.

I mean, good for you that you have a 3D printer and know how to use it, but you cannot extrapolate your anecdotal experience into more generalist market forces.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Not sure BCB, i doubt you'd see much rage, due to how many players just converted them... as it stands i know not one chaos player that has decided that buying 4 boxes to get a full squad of em, was worth the money.

Well no, if you want a full squad of chain cannons (or anything else that comes only x#/box) you just buy the extra bitz online. Either official bitz, 3rd party, or 3d printed.
Some things can also be scratch built easily enough.

 Tyran wrote:

 Cybtroll wrote:

I said it before and I say it again: GW is a bubble about to burst due to 3d, printing and such. I have a 3d printer in one of our gaming chat that purchase 3d models and customize them in terms of poses and weapons as you want them. GW simply can't compete.

People have said that for decades, meanwhile GW has record high profits.

So the current evidence is that they can compete, even thrive.

I went to try and print a custom model by someone on this forum. Something the size of a daemon prince was going to run me $90 for good quality material.