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.

3rd edition back of the rulebook codices FTW. Best games I ever played.

Wow, long reply. Looks like we're killing a lot of digital trees!

Also, I think we have issues with what we really mean when we write...

aka_mythos wrote:Lost and the Damned And Sisters of Battle both belong in all scales of 40k; the LatD simply aren't allowed in tournaments, I know people who still use them to play. SoB belong simply because they're about as number as much as Space Marines do.

LatD are not an army in Apocalypse simply because they simply don't have any miniatures; at this point GW has just said if you want to do LatD to simply use the IG codex, effectively giving anyone playing an IG force the option of being LatD by simply choosing some chaos models to partner up with in an Apocalypse game. Also if you're playing something as flexible with the rules and army lists as Apocalypse what stops a person from using the Codex Eye of Terror.

IIRC, by the Fluff, SoB outnumber Marines considerably.

Also, GW very clearly told the LatD players what they could do with their armies: GW actually web-published an Apocalypse Datasheet for LatD, stripping way more than half of the LatD options in the process. Quite frankly, I figured GW to let LatD die of neglect, but publishing an Apocalypse datasheet like that was a real surprise. Methinks someone in GW *really* hates LatD.

aka_mythos wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:You might not believe the Inquisition and by association the Grey Knights, Sister of Battles, and Deathwatch belong in 40k, but GW does and that they are here to stay. It might not be in this form but they are here in 40k now and those forces are here to stay.

Don't you put words in my mouth then, either.

What words did I put in your mouth?

Specifically the bit above. I never said that Inquisition, GK, SoB, and DW didn't belong in 40k. I only state that GK, and DW don't belong as full armies in 40k. And by "40k", I mean the main game system. Not "40k universe" like books, Fluff, Inquisitor, or Apocalypse. I'm perfectly content to see the ultra-rare Chambers like GK and DW appear only as individual units, with their larger units reserved for Apocalypse only.

aka_mythos wrote:The Killteam rules allowed you to alternately field a Space Marine army in which any model in any HQ, Elite, Troops may be upgraded to a Deathwatch member and given the special ammunition available to them. That sure sounds like rules for a full army, not all that unique but it is an army none the less.

OK, if that's how you want to define Deathwatch as a "full army", I guess that would be acceptable. When I say "full army", I tend to imagine a full, paper-printed Codex with multiple options for HQ, Elite, Troops, Transport, Fast, and Heavy, along with Special Characters.

aka_mythos wrote:Presumably the Deathwatch would get the same treatment as Grey Knights and Sisters of Battle, in the form of adversary rules; the adversary rules are only included in both of those codex books to provided the additional rules to create the interesting narrative to help the narrow minded justify using those armies.

Oh, God, that would be horrible. Adversary rules are the bane of 40k. If you cost for them, then the force is grossly overpriced against ordinary opponents. If you don't, then they're overpowered against their enemy. Given the massive rules bloat in the Hunters book, less would be so much more.

aka_mythos wrote:Do you moonlight as a rules lawyer? My friends and I play 500 pt games and its fun. Also GW escalation leagues start with 500 pts, are you telling me for two weeks people are being told to play the game incorrectly?

I'm saying that I agree with GW's suggestion that a game of 1500 pts makes for a pleasant experience, and that much larger or smaller games have a very different feel than a 1500-pt game.

aka_mythos wrote:Grey Knights belong as an army more than ever now that there is a Codex Daemons. They had army rules in RT for an army it was in 2nd Ed they were downgraded

By the fluff Deathwatch predate the founding of the SoB.

I have a copy of RoC, thank you. Model-wise GK were just the Termies until DH came out. And yes, I have a squad of the OOP GK Termies. And yes, everything gets downgraded from RT to 2E to 3E+.

By the models and rules, Deathwatch are n00bs.

aka_mythos wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
For the same effort required to make DW into an actual army, GW could do 2 (or 3) Ruinous Powers books. There are lots more WE / DG / EC players who'd like a Chaos book, compared to the handful of DW players out there. For the same effort in updating GK, GW could update IG and SW. Again, there are a lot more IG and SW players compared to GK players.

I think a single Ruinous Power book covering all four is really all thats needed especially with the larger size Codex: Space Marines is done in. The same could be easily done with the Non-codex marines.

From a rules standpoint, GW could do Codex: MEQ if they wanted to. But GW wants to sell models, so they purposefully split things up into pieces. Doing a single DE or Ork Codex each decade isn't the business model they want. But as SM and WFB Chaos shows, if you pimp new flavors every year or two, you can sell a lot of stuff.

aka_mythos wrote:They're are more IG and SW players than GK players because GK are not as old as a fully supported army and they are all metal making them cost prohibitive.

Newsflash - IG aren't very well-supported either, despite being the largest Imperial force by far, Fluff-wise.

As for metals being cost-prohibitive, I have to disagree. I have:
- 200+ metal Aspects
- 100+ metal Guardsmen
- 40+ metal Sisters
- 30+ metal Stormtroopers
The very idea that an army being metal precludes collection is rather silly. You simply have a smaller army and collect more slowly.

aka_mythos wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Heck, I'd be willing to see DE get a little love before DW, and we all know *that* ain't gonna happen...

DE are next year. Best bet for DW in the unified Inquisition book is at best in 2010 or 2011.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Also, GW very clearly told the LatD players what they could do with their armies

Yes. Yes they did.

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Also, GW very clearly told the LatD players what they could do with their armies

Yes. Yes they did.

Wow really? that's doubly harsh when you think how spiky they are.

George Spiggott wrote:

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Also, GW very clearly told the LatD players what they could do with their armies

Yes. Yes they did.

Wow really? that's doubly harsh when you think how spiky they are.

Weren't some of them tentacly, because then it would kind of make sense.

JohnHwangDD wrote:GW very clearly told the LatD players what they could do with their armies.

I know! And I still can't sit properly...

BYE

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Also, GW very clearly told the LatD players what they could do with their armies: GW actually web-published an Apocalypse Datasheet for LatD, stripping way more than half of the LatD options in the process. Quite frankly, I figured GW to let LatD die of neglect, but publishing an Apocalypse datasheet like that was a real surprise. Methinks someone in GW *really* hates LatD.

The people I play with and I don't really worship at the alter to such a degree that we have to recieve their permission to do things. I think the LatD are just viable now as they were when they originally got rules. Though I do agree with the sentiment that GW has expressed that for the average game they can just be stood in for with IG. I think Apocalypse is great and the flexibility of rules in whats allowed is really how 40k should be, just in the lower point scale.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:You might not believe the Inquisition and by association the Grey Knights, Sister of Battles, and Deathwatch belong in 40k, but GW does and that they are here to stay. It might not be in this form but they are here in 40k now and those forces are here to stay.

Don't you put words in my mouth then, either.

What words did I put in your mouth?

Specifically the bit above. I never said that Inquisition, GK, SoB, and DW didn't belong in 40k. I only state that GK, and DW don't belong as full armies in 40k. And by "40k", I mean the main game system. Not "40k universe" like books, Fluff, Inquisitor, or Apocalypse. I'm perfectly content to see the ultra-rare Chambers like GK and DW appear only as individual units, with their larger units reserved for Apocalypse only.

Thats exactly what I meant with the above. To reiterate and clarify, you might not believe the Inquisition and by association all the chamber militant belong in the average 40k game but GW does, as do I and many others, GW has said they're here to stay.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:The Killteam rules allowed you to alternately field a Space Marine army in which any model in any HQ, Elite, Troops may be upgraded to a Deathwatch member and given the special ammunition available to them. That sure sounds like rules for a full army, not all that unique but it is an army none the less.

OK, if that's how you want to define Deathwatch as a "full army", I guess that would be acceptable. When I say "full army", I tend to imagine a full, paper-printed Codex with multiple options for HQ, Elite, Troops, Transport, Fast, and Heavy, along with Special Characters.

Well by the definition you just gave no army was a "full army" till 2nd edition.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Oh, God, that would be horrible. Adversary rules are the bane of 40k. If you cost for them, then the force is grossly overpriced against ordinary opponents. If you don't, then they're overpowered against their enemy. Given the massive rules bloat in the Hunters book, less would be so much more.

I don't really like adversary rules either. I just think that any minuscule equivalent of adversary rules carried over would be supported for them as much as for SoB and GK.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
I'm saying that I agree with GW's suggestion that a game of 1500 pts makes for a pleasant experience, and that much larger or smaller games have a very different feel than a 1500-pt game.

Of course they have a different feel but as long as your not playing against the wrong sort of player any sized game of 40k will be just as pleasant. Some of the best games I've had have been 500 pt games.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I have a copy of RoC, thank you. Model-wise GK were just the Termies until DH came out. And yes, I have a squad of the OOP GK Termies. And yes, everything gets downgraded from RT to 2E to 3E+. By the models and rules, Deathwatch are n00bs.

And back then tyranids were just genestealers and zoats. Back in rogue trader an army could be just a handful of models, 3 squad of GK and a Daemonhunter Inquisitor was an army. Not the best army but as much as much an army as some other things that are now bigger. Everything has to start somewhere and ruling out Grey Knights because they're representation changed and Deathwatch cause they're "n00bs" creates an air of an elite attitude that would force the game in to a state of stagnation in which nothing new is ever added.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:They're are more IG and SW players than GK players because GK are not as old as a fully supported army and they are all metal making them cost prohibitive.

Newsflash - IG aren't very well-supported either, despite being the largest Imperial force by far, Fluff-wise.

As for metals being cost-prohibitive, I have to disagree. I have:
- 200+ metal Aspects
- 100+ metal Guardsmen
- 40+ metal Sisters
- 30+ metal Stormtroopers
The very idea that an army being metal precludes collection is rather silly. You simply have a smaller army and collect more slowly.

IG are well supported, they're just not well represented by the rules at this time, but that will change shortly.

Just because you can afford multiple armies or even multiple armies nearly entirely metal armies doesn't mean everyone else can. The scale of a 40k game has been creeping higher and higher with each edition. Fully metal armies can end up 20-30% more than a predominantly plastic army; in a game that has a high price tag already that 20-30% is cost prohibitive for some people. Not everyone is as fortunate as you or me. Your reasoning would throw the fundamentals of micro-economics in the trash.

Back on topic though...

While Deathwatch get a tip of the hat with Sternguard in the new Space Marine codex, they aren't the same thing. GW tournament ruling on this is really just to move away from article based rule sets and less a matter of the implications specifically on the Deathwatch. Deathwatch and Grey Knights will inevitably get a revisit and will have more than just a single unit choice. No one can really know what form that revisit will take beyond a fuller support. We wait, we see.

aka_mythos wrote:[R]uling out Grey Knights ... and Deathwatch ... creates an air of an elite attitude that would force the game in to a state of stagnation in which nothing new is ever added.

I would've thought it obvious that that's what DD wants. He is the one who suggested that all GKs be rolled into a 'Generic Grey Knight' entry in the next Inquisitorial Codex.

Remember, he likes the fact that Daemons are generic in Chaos Armies. He's really happy that LatD isn't an army now. Moreoever, he likes to remind us of this at every opportunity (in the same way I like to remind people here just how stupid I think GW is, at every opportunity).

But by all means Mythos, keep going. I'll slink back into the shadows, 'cause it's far more fun when he can't see me talk.

BYE

aka_mythos wrote:I think the LatD are just viable now as they were when they originally got rules. Though I do agree with the sentiment that GW has expressed that for the average game they can just be stood in for with IG. I think Apocalypse is great and the flexibility of rules in whats allowed is really how 40k should be, just in the lower point scale.

Yeah, I'd agree with that. I mostly play Apocalyse now, haven't play an actualy tournament in years, so "40k gaming" is starting to become synonymous with "Apocalypse gaming". And that's a good thing, IMO.

aka_mythos wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:I never said that Inquisition, GK, SoB, and DW didn't belong in 40k. I only state that GK, and DW don't belong as full armies in 40k. And by "40k", I mean the main game system. Not "40k universe" like books, Fluff, Inquisitor, or Apocalypse. I'm perfectly content to see the ultra-rare Chambers like GK and DW appear only as individual units, with their larger units reserved for Apocalypse only.

Thats exactly what I meant with the above. To reiterate and clarify, you might not believe the Inquisition and by association all the chamber militant belong in the average 40k game but GW does, as do I and many others, GW has said they're here to stay.

OK, though GW never said what form they should take as they stay, so I'm thinking a limited form is more appropriate for certain factions.

aka_mythos wrote:Well by the definition you just gave no army was a "full army" till 2nd edition.

True. The Codex concept didn't come together until then. But I'd count RoC as a solid predecessor.

aka_mythos wrote:I don't really like adversary rules either. I just think that any minuscule equivalent of adversary rules carried over would be supported for them as much as for SoB and GK.

Of course, that means even more stuff in the pending Inquisition book. Really, the thing is becoming totally unworkable in light of more recent Codex designs.

aka_mythos wrote:Some of the best games I've had have been 500 pt games.

Mine, too. Early 3rd Ed was a great time to play.

aka_mythos wrote:And back then tyranids were just genestealers and zoats. Back in rogue trader an army could be just a handful of models, 3 squad of GK and a Daemonhunter Inquisitor was an army. Not the best army but as much as much an army as some other things that are now bigger. Everything has to start somewhere and ruling out Grey Knights because they're representation changed and Deathwatch cause they're "n00bs" creates an air of an elite attitude that would force the game in to a state of stagnation in which nothing new is ever added.

Of course, RT was just a little a skirmish game, so that made sense. 2E started to grow it, and 3E completed the process of army-fying things. Per my other discussion thread, I think 40k has nearly reached a "state of stagnation" due to saturation of the release schedule with existing armies.

aka_mythos wrote:Just because you can afford multiple armies or even multiple armies nearly entirely metal armies doesn't mean everyone else can. The scale of a 40k game has been creeping higher and higher with each edition. Fully metal armies can end up 20-30% more than a predominantly plastic army; in a game that has a high price tag already that 20-30% is cost prohibitive for some people. Not everyone is as fortunate as you or me. Your reasoning would throw the fundamentals of micro-economics in the trash.

I would disagree with this in many ways, and I'm going to use automobiles as the analogy basis. I can afford multiple cars, just like most other families do. Car prices (cars, service, fuel) have been climbing every year, but people still manage to afford cars. New cars on the market have a price ratio of well over 20:1 ($200k USD for a Rolls Royce vs $10k for a microcompact), and people accept this. If you're on a budget you don't buy a Rolls Royce. And you certainly don't entertain notions of motorsport (a weekend's event can easily burn $1k in tires alone). So budget players have to make more decisions or shop more carefully / buy less over time. If you're really on a budget, you should probably take the bus (i.e. play Specialist Games skirmish) instead of buying a car (i.e. play 40k Apocalypse).

40k has never been a cheap hobby, never will be. Perhaps we should poll, because I'll be the majority of the 40k players are making above average money. Otherwise, you simply can't afford to play 40k (or golf, or motorsport).

Also, speaking from experience, fully metal armies can end up 50% to 80% more than plastic (e.g. 10 "Collectors" metal IG is $35 vs 20 plastic IG for $35). They don't play any differently, but they do cost quite a bit more. That's why I strongly advocate for plastic greatcoat guard, fully-masked - to give a 3rd alternative for players to get in and play.

I think right now in some circles basic 40k games are over competitive to such a degree that apocalypse had to codify the inherent flexibility of a tabletop game that had so largely gone ignored by those overly competitive.

Some form of adversary rules doesn't necessarily mean significant inclusions in an Inquisition Codex. Those rules may end up simply take the form of upgrades your opponent might be able to take. The new space marine codex is something no one saw coming; its larger with many more special rules and new units than anyone would have thought based on other current codices. GW reversed their general direction with the newer codices and they can do it again just as easily.

Stagnation is a decline in growth. To some degree you're right that it is the result of an over saturated release schedule. The important thing is that growth demands the addition of new things, armie, rulesets, miniatures, scenarios, etc. DW and the Inquisition are such an example of growth. What we actually have with 40k is more a case of too much growth too quickly, out pacing GW's ability to keep up support.

Well car purchases allow you to take out a loan, thats how most people afford new cars. As far as I know GW doesn't allow a payment structure.

40k isn't cheap;GW derives most of its profit by making impulse sales to hobbyists but the higher the price the less likely to make that purchase. A half squad of Grey Knights costs $30 vs $20 for a space marine combat squad. Your recommendation is to buy in smaller increments, maybe blisters instead of box sets. That brings the price for the same squad to $42, which overall cuts more people out. Supply and demand dictate that with the relatively fixed demand and an inelastic spending power of the main demographic a 30% price difference will cut out nearly 30%, while the 60% price difference will cut out close to 60% of the people who'd otherwise purchase it; this is relative to the people who can purchase a basic combat squad box. All this holds true because of the presence of cheaper alternatives to the predominately metal armies, in the form of the plastic and mixed metal armies. So while an individual may be able to impulse buy that blister instead of the boxset, in the long run they will purchase less because of the overall cumulative price. Its simply the case that some can not afford a predominantly metal army.

Hey all. Long time reader, first time poster.

For what its worth, I agree with mythos completely.

I field a pure DH/GK army on a regular basis and whilst they obviously aren't a particularly easy or competitive army to play I would hate to see them relegated to Apocolapsye.

The argument for this demotion was that they are 'ultra-rare' and would therefore be better suited as inducted allies in other Imperial forces. I disgree whole-heartedly. I may be wrong here (so bear with me) but, firstly, Grey Knights are usually (according to fluff) only depolyed to crucial engagements. Engagements one would assume that normal Imperial forces cannot or will not deal with (warp breachs etc). When they tackle these threats (which they do 99% of the time) they do this alone. If anyone else joins them, it is usually Inquisitorial forces. Secondly, they are practically a myth within the Imperium. Most mistake them for normal Space Marines of an unknown chapter. This secrecy is used against them in the first GK novel. I believe this to be further evidence that they usually operate alone.

I am bias however, but just my feelings towards it .

As for DW, I hate what GW have done with the new SM codex. The creation of Sternguard seems to have only money making motivation. The fact that DW was elite and rarely used in-game was indication of their rarity and with every chapter now owning a 'better' version of them, simply makes a mockery of their place in the 40k universe. The same can be said about the GK's compared to the new marines. Laughable, but then, thats a different topic entirely.

Just my $0.02 anyway.

Sternguard replaste tyranit hunters from the ultra's

Orisis wrote:The fact that DW was elite and rarely used in-game was indication of their rarity and with every chapter now owning a 'better' version of them, simply makes a mockery of their place in the 40k universe.

Mockery? Are you serious? Step back a second and look at the situation again. It doesn't really make any sense fluff-wise to field DW with a SM army. It's like saying, "Hey, Space Marines! The Empire needs you to fight some aliens and to help make your mission a success, we're gonna send you a squad of Space Marines." See? It's redundant. Deathwatch have an actual roll to fill in DH armies (or as allies to IG) and that's where I saw them fielded most. The creation of Sternguard appears to be designed to give the SM player more reason to take and field Veterans in their army (as well as sell more bits).

Consider this. After a couple a thousand years of sending guys off to play with the Inquisition and having them bring back cool toys, where do you think those toys are going to wind up? Veterans, right? Even if you're talking about a Vet Sergeant from a Tactical Company, he's eventually going to leave his squad and join the First Company (that's the way the system usually works). You think he'll want to take his cool pea-shooter with him? Also, what happens when the guy with the cool gun dies? Does the Chapter give the gun back to the Inquisition or do they hand it off to some other deserving Veteran who's proven his worth to the Chapter a hundred-fold? I'm sorry if you disagree but I really like the Sternguard concept as a replacement to the old "Veteran Squad".

aka_mythos wrote:Some form of adversary rules doesn't necessarily mean significant inclusions in an Inquisition Codex. Those rules may end up simply take the form of upgrades your opponent might be able to take.

If so, you force Inquisition to be a scenario game, rather than a standard game. That's bad from a tournament standpoint.

aka_mythos wrote:Stagnation is a decline in growth. ... What we actually have with 40k is more a case of too much growth too quickly, out pacing GW's ability to keep up support.

I don't see that so much - GW continues to have something new each month. And there are enough release slots to maintain 40k for the duration of 5th Edition. It's just that GW isn't supporting things the way that certain vocal people might desire.

aka_mythos wrote:Well car purchases allow you to take out a loan, thats how most people afford new cars. As far as I know GW doesn't allow a payment structure.

Sure it does. And like cars, you can always buy GW used at a discount from current retail. The big advantage with GW is that you have the option to buy the army piecemeal -and- you own whatever you purchase. In a car loan situation, you are locked into buying the *entire* car -and- you don't own the car until the entire loan is paid in full - that's why they can repo your car if you miss the last payment.

That is, if GW army buying was like car loans, you'd make your entire 2000 pt list, and you'd pay it off in fixed installments every month. If the Rules, Codex, or metagame change partway through, you're stuck with the list. And if you wanted to change, you'd have to return the entire lot and likely pay a financing surcharge / penalty fee for breaking the contract.

aka_mythos wrote:40k isn't cheap;

GW derives most of its profit by making impulse sales to hobbyists

Your recommendation is to buy in smaller increments, maybe blisters instead of box sets

Supply and demand dictate ...

So while an individual may be able to impulse buy that blister instead of the boxset, in the long run they will purchase less because of the overall cumulative price.

Its simply the case that some can not afford a predominantly metal army.

Totally agreed. 40k isn't cheap. It is a luxury in every sense of the word. It just has a low bar to entry.

I also agree that GW makes most of their profit on impulse sales. Just like any other gaming-related seller. And I don't begrudge them those profits. However, I'm willing to do my homework to get better pricing on non-impulse buys. So I am a low-profit customer for them. But them's the breaks.

If you can't afford to buy in bulk, you buy smaller and pay more. That's just like everything else in the world. At a restaurant, you can buy wine by the glass, split, or full bottle. If you end up drinking a full bottle's worth of wine, you always pay the most by the glass and the least by the bottle. Same with beer by the pitcher, or any other bulk buy. So GW is doing the right thing with highest blister prices and lowest army / Apocalypse boxes.

Supply and demand dictate that people who can't afford luxuries don't spend their money on them. If you can't afford caviar or Rolls Royce, you don't buy it.

In the long run, if they have a hobby budget, they will get less stuff for the same amount of spend. That's their fault, not mine or GWs. If they had some micro-economic sense, they'd plan their purchases and get more for their dollar. But that's the price of not planning and requiring instant gratification. I really appreciate those guys, because their whimsical spending allows me to derive maximum benefit from my delayed gratification.

And if some can't afford metal armies, that's OK. I can't afford a Rolls Royce. They can play something else. Or shift priorities from cigarettes to minis. Or save their lunch money. If they have a cheap $2 lunch instead of a nice $5 lunch, they save $3/day. Over 250 working days, that's $750 per year. I'm pretty sure one can buy a mostly metal IG army for $750. Now if they're already eating peanut butter & jelly sandwiches for lunch, the perhaps the high-cost GW hobby isn't for them?

thay realy replase the tyranit hunter the chapter aproved of deathwatch is still dear and can still be juist wath I catcht is that its going to move to de IG codex whit the take that de ig ig is going to be 0-1 like da IA books codexis it leaves a open slote thats need filling.

quietus86 wrote:thay realy replase the tyranit hunter the chapter aproved of deathwatch is still dear and can still be juist wath I catcht is that its going to move to de IG codex whit the take that de ig ig is going to be 0-1 like da IA books codexis it leaves a open slote thats need filling.

Just so you know, I'm calling the Grammar Police as I write this.

Read his sig then delete your post Breotan.

BYE

H.B.M.C. wrote:Read his sig then delete your post Breotan.

BYE

What happens when JohnHwangDD sees something written by H.B.M.C. when someone quotes him?

Orisis wrote:I field a pure DH/GK army on a regular basis and whilst they obviously aren't a particularly easy or competitive army to play I would hate to see them relegated to Apocolapsye.

The argument for this demotion was that they are 'ultra-rare' and would therefore be better suited as inducted allies in other Imperial forces.

But they are ultra-rare. They are only employed in the event of a major warp breach or daemonic incursion - events that happen so infrequently GW wrote an entire codex to cover them.

Alpharius wrote:What happens when JohnHwangDD sees something written by someone he ignores when someone quotes him?

Not much, apparently.

You do understand the concept behind "ignore", right?

And you understand that it's not like you're only ever allowed to ignore one person - you can ignore several people.

So more precisely, it's nothing different from anybody else I might choose to ignore, either by the (ignore) button, or just simply choosing not to respond. The Ignore feature simplifies the process if bypassing those who generate more heat than light, or noise than signal.

Actually I love the fact that DD can't see me. Biggest mistake he ever made was telling me that I was on his ignore list. It's so much more fun knowing that he can't see me.

And as I've said before, an ignore list is the internet's equivalent of sticking fingers in your ears and going 'Lalalala! I can't hear you!' like a friggin' 6 year old. It's a refuge for those that can't face their issues.



BYE

H.B.M.C. is Ninja!

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

Orisis wrote:I field a pure DH/GK army on a regular basis and whilst they obviously aren't a particularly easy or competitive army to play I would hate to see them relegated to Apocolapsye.

The argument for this demotion was that they are 'ultra-rare' and would therefore be better suited as inducted allies in other Imperial forces.

But they are ultra-rare. They are only employed in the event of a major warp breach or daemonic incursion - events that happen so infrequently GW wrote an entire codex to cover them.

Population of Imperium: Hundreds of Trillions
Number of Space Marines in the Imperium: 1,000,000 (or 1000 times 1000)

Marines constitute less than .000000001% of the population of the Imperium.
ANY specific chapter represents .000000000001% of the population.

So if the claim that they are rare and should be excluded for GK, that claim would hold just as true of any other specific space marine chapter.

The fluff says that by the end of the 41st millennium the number of these incursions are becoming ever more common. Thus the grey knights in general would also become less uncommon. More importantly its a game about having fun and anything that can add to the fun should be welcome. 40k allows us to create narratives in which the players have the opportunity to play out these very sort of major and potentially cataclysmic events, where they can potentially play out a heroic victory over the forces of chaos.

H.B.M.C. wrote:<<Stuff that H.B.M.C. wrote>>

The IGNORE feature does seem to be a bit pointless...

Anyway, I'm looking forward to fielding the new Veterans, and since the DW appear to be getting the red-headed stepchild treatment from GW for the foreseeable future (and beyond!), I'll gladly use them as a 'counts as' DW too.

So be it!

Unquote me Alpharius! Unquote me!!!

I have to keep my shadowy mystique, and I can't do that if people keep quoting me!!

BYE

H.B.M.C. wrote:Unquote me Alpharius! Unquote me!!!

I have to keep my shadowy mystique, and I can't do that if people keep quoting me!!

BYE

What is this, a dating service?

A GK would totally see through your mystique.

I was surprised to see that the new Sternguard get ALL the ammo types, and don't have to choose before the game.

They out DW the DW!

Alpharius wrote:I was surprised to see that the new Sternguard get ALL the ammo types, and don't have to choose before the game.

They out DW the DW!

but non of the close combat weapons that makes em les effectif overal.

malfred wrote:A GK would totally see through your mystique.

You are, as always, 100% correct malf.






BYE