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.

Dudeface wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Geeze It's almost like everyone wants additional support for their armies. Who'd have thunk!

There is a slight difference between wanting an existing codex to be updated and insisting on creating a new sub-faction codex.

Glad you get it, I'm not fussed for a massive expansion or re-write of what I play, it doesn't need it.

I'm not fussed about inventing new factions overly, although there are some that need padding out a little.

Xenos do need some love, the eldar range is still ancient mostly, Harlequins is barely there (despite being an "old" army), then necrons and orks have some outdated kits that need a look in. But these aren't solved by inventing new supplements and codex "just because marine have it".

Dude just to be clear (because hopefully it'll help you see the other side of this discussion), I don't want a sub faction book 'just because marines have it', I want it because without it I feel that my faction just doesn't function as it should on the tabletop. Imagine if you were in this position? Your sub faction of choice just didn't work at all - the rules are vague and unfluffy, the army that you field is not representative of the fluff because you have no other choice or because the rules simply don't exist. It sucks.

Then on the other hand of the same argument is GW's resource. The best way I can describe the situation is by using a Street Fighter analogy. Marine factions are like Ryu and Ken. The same fighter (faction) but with very slight differences. GW keep making different skins of Ryu and Ken. First we had Chaos (Akuma), then Blood Angels (vampire Ryu), DA (secretive Ryu), Space Wolves (dog-cosplay Ken). Now we got all these subfaction codexes/supplements adding further 'skins'. Doesn't this sound insane? Why not branch out and do a wider variety of fighters? We don't need 15 versions of Ryu and Ken!

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Dude just to be clear (because hopefully it'll help you see the other side of this discussion), I don't want a sub faction book 'just because marines have it', I want it because without it I feel that my faction just doesn't function as it should on the tabletop. Imagine if you were in this position? Your sub faction of choice just didn't work at all - the rules are vague and unfluffy, the army that you field is not representative of the fluff because you have no other choice or because the rules simply don't exist. It sucks.

... and can be fixed by giving evil suns a clan trait, warlord trait and relics which actually benefit fast multi-wound models, bringing back Wazzdakka (or equivalent) and adding 2-3 stratagems to support that playstyle to Codex:Orks 2.0 in November.

However, everything that applies tot he urgency of an new DG codex also applies to orks.

 Jidmah wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Dude just to be clear (because hopefully it'll help you see the other side of this discussion), I don't want a sub faction book 'just because marines have it', I want it because without it I feel that my faction just doesn't function as it should on the tabletop. Imagine if you were in this position? Your sub faction of choice just didn't work at all - the rules are vague and unfluffy, the army that you field is not representative of the fluff because you have no other choice or because the rules simply don't exist. It sucks.

... and can be fixed by giving evil suns a clan trait, warlord trait and relics which actually benefit fast multi-wound models, bringing back Wazzdakka (or equivalent) and adding 2-3 stratagems to support that playstyle to Codex:Orks 2.0 in November. .

More than 2-3 stratagems I think Jid. That's where the power is these days - we need a supplement's worth.

However, everything that applies tot he urgency of an new DG codex also applies to orks.

Agreed but I think its fair to say that DG smash Evil Sunz/Speed Freaks on the table so if we're going weaker factions first...

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Dude just to be clear (because hopefully it'll help you see the other side of this discussion), I don't want a sub faction book 'just because marines have it', I want it because without it I feel that my faction just doesn't function as it should on the tabletop. Imagine if you were in this position? Your sub faction of choice just didn't work at all - the rules are vague and unfluffy, the army that you field is not representative of the fluff because you have no other choice or because the rules simply don't exist. It sucks.

... and can be fixed by giving evil suns a clan trait, warlord trait and relics which actually benefit fast multi-wound models, bringing back Wazzdakka (or equivalent) and adding 2-3 stratagems to support that playstyle to Codex:Orks 2.0 in November. .

More than 2-3 stratagems I think Jid. That's where the power is these days - we need a supplement's worth.

However, everything that applies tot he urgency of an new DG codex also applies to orks.

Agreed but I think its fair to say that DG smash Evil Sunz/Speed Freaks on the table so if we're going weaker factions first...

Don't know, if you go for two Thematic lists.

As for tournament type lists, frankly DG get all the few good units from Chaos and then the game looks alot diffrent.

Personally i find the supposed archetypes in dexes work too bad overall.
Take daemonengine lists f.e. Basically gw has not done enough to make them work imo.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Dude just to be clear (because hopefully it'll help you see the other side of this discussion), I don't want a sub faction book 'just because marines have it', I want it because without it I feel that my faction just doesn't function as it should on the tabletop. Imagine if you were in this position? Your sub faction of choice just didn't work at all - the rules are vague and unfluffy, the army that you field is not representative of the fluff because you have no other choice or because the rules simply don't exist. It sucks.

... and can be fixed by giving evil suns a clan trait, warlord trait and relics which actually benefit fast multi-wound models, bringing back Wazzdakka (or equivalent) and adding 2-3 stratagems to support that playstyle to Codex:Orks 2.0 in November. .

More than 2-3 stratagems I think Jid. That's where the power is these days - we need a supplement's worth.

However, everything that applies tot he urgency of an new DG codex also applies to orks.

Agreed but I think its fair to say that DG smash Evil Sunz/Speed Freaks on the table so if we're going weaker factions first...

GW has put a supplements worth of stratigums in campaign books before. namely the black Legion stuff in Vigilius ablaze. I'd absolutely like to see things like that. or even Index Astartes articles doing it, or yes supplements. but I understand that GW may be of the mind that a full supplement for some subfactions might not sell by itself but make a great WD article.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Dude just to be clear (because hopefully it'll help you see the other side of this discussion), I don't want a sub faction book 'just because marines have it', I want it because without it I feel that my faction just doesn't function as it should on the tabletop. Imagine if you were in this position? Your sub faction of choice just didn't work at all - the rules are vague and unfluffy, the army that you field is not representative of the fluff because you have no other choice or because the rules simply don't exist. It sucks.

... and can be fixed by giving evil suns a clan trait, warlord trait and relics which actually benefit fast multi-wound models, bringing back Wazzdakka (or equivalent) and adding 2-3 stratagems to support that playstyle to Codex:Orks 2.0 in November. .

More than 2-3 stratagems I think Jid. That's where the power is these days - we need a supplement's worth.

Most supplements boil down to 2-3 good stratagems buried in two pages of garbage anyways. Death Guard has five unique stratagems (two of those see competitive use), everything else is just a subset of codex CSM.
Your Speed Freeks have Drive-By Krumpin', Snagga Grapple and Exhaust Clouds from the codex and Charge Through 'em and Turbo-Boostas from vigilus, plus all of the parent faction's stratagems (unlike DG).
I'm not sure a Speed Freeks psychic discipline would make sense fluff-wise, but it could be awesome - you'd loose da jump though.
Which leaves relics and warlord traits, and I don't think orks have lots of great options here and both the redder armor and the snazztrike are decent relics.

However, everything that applies tot he urgency of an new DG codex also applies to orks.

Agreed but I think its fair to say that DG smash Evil Sunz/Speed Freaks on the table so if we're going weaker factions first...

Your faction is Orks. Orks smash Death Guard on the table.
Your sub-faction is Evil Suns, which have just have had a major part in winning a large tournament two weeks ago, just like Death Guard have had part in multiple top chaos placings.
Evil Sunz Speed Freeks are as much a faction as Dark Angels Deathwing or Ravenwing are, both are a defining part of the Dark Angels codex and should never get their own.

The issue right now is that the units that make up the Speed Freeks are neither particularly powerful, cheap or durable, which is something that needs to be addressed.
If GW fails to do that, it doesn't matter whether they print those rules in their own book or in the existing codex. I'm sure all the White Scars players with cases full of marine bikes agree.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Geeze It's almost like everyone wants additional support for their armies. Who'd have thunk!

There is a slight difference between wanting an existing codex to be updated and insisting on creating a new sub-faction codex.

Glad you get it, I'm not fussed for a massive expansion or re-write of what I play, it doesn't need it.

I'm not fussed about inventing new factions overly, although there are some that need padding out a little.

Xenos do need some love, the eldar range is still ancient mostly, Harlequins is barely there (despite being an "old" army), then necrons and orks have some outdated kits that need a look in. But these aren't solved by inventing new supplements and codex "just because marine have it".

Dude just to be clear (because hopefully it'll help you see the other side of this discussion), I don't want a sub faction book 'just because marines have it', I want it because without it I feel that my faction just doesn't function as it should on the tabletop. Imagine if you were in this position? Your sub faction of choice just didn't work at all - the rules are vague and unfluffy, the army that you field is not representative of the fluff because you have no other choice or because the rules simply don't exist. It sucks.

Then on the other hand of the same argument is GW's resource. The best way I can describe the situation is by using a Street Fighter analogy. Marine factions are like Ryu and Ken. The same fighter (faction) but with very slight differences. GW keep making different skins of Ryu and Ken. First we had Chaos (Akuma), then Blood Angels (vampire Ryu), DA (secretive Ryu), Space Wolves (dog-cosplay Ken). Now we got all these subfaction codexes/supplements adding further 'skins'. Doesn't this sound insane? Why not branch out and do a wider variety of fighters? We don't need 15 versions of Ryu and Ken!

I agree actually, partly due to being in the same boat. I didn't get even evil sunz level of support until vigilus 2 for my red corsairs. Even then a legion trait of extra cp for reasons and run and charge, both useful but neither scream renegade pirate to me.

Never mind the sudden inability to raid and use razor backs or drop pods etc. Arguably they'd benefit from a supplement to remove some demonic stuff and add some marine stuff back in.

I get that there are too many marine books in comparison to some xenos factions, but they are the protagonists of the narrative. I'd also prefer more new factions to red marines or black eldar or yellow orks or whatever. If we want bigger subfaction diversity they need to bake them in better to the root books for some factions. The point we disagree on is what can or can't be represented with that process. But I firmly believe everyone thinks their faction could be better represented.

I think its clear that GW made the 1ksons and DG codex due to the presence of the respective primarchs. Rumours have been around for quite some time that Angron and Fulgrim are sculpted so I am sure we will see those codexes with splash primarch releases at some time in the future.

I've been running DG and find the book to still be holding its own in casual games and the meta creep has been kind to DG but its no longer competitive. I'm now switching to chaos soup with Mortarion, deathshroud and Lord discordants with a chaos knight.
I still think Morty is competitive with blades and miasma and warptiming deathshroud for turn 2 blending has some play but without warptime Morty is no good.

When I was playing mono DG even with 8CP I was rarely using any of the book strats. Only occasionally auto explode vehicles in opportunistic situations but I used my CP for re-rolls and interrupt melee. We need more/better strats.

I think it'd be nice because of the lack of bolter discipline and shock assault, it's not great that this is just an errata IMO. If Death Guard got an update I feel like it would be neat if DR was replaced with an ability that did not require a roll.

Remove DR from vehicles and monsters and give them 50% more wounds. Add 1 to the toughness characteristic of units with DR against weapons with a damage characteristic of 1 or something similar. I'd release this at the same time as a TS update shortly after WE and EC supplements or codexes were released and remove the Sv modifier for TS against D1 weapons because that's uncharacteristic of TS. Rubrics can have a 2+ Sv for all I care, but them having a weakness to multi-damage weapons is new and I don't like it.

Balance is totally borked for the next couple of months. I'd like to see -1 M for enemies that face purely Nurgle armies and then add another bonus level to Inexorable Advance as the Loyalists have with their doctrine specialization for successors of each specific legion. As far as Stratagem balance, I guess they need a buff to keep up with SM...? I really don't like the new level of balance SM have been taken to and would prefer nerfing SM.

While I would LOVE my army to get a new codex, I really think that most of the problems with Death Guard can be fixed in CA. Point drops for troops, let vehicles have DR or Inexorable Advance, give DR to generic Lords and Sorcerers, etc.

TBH though I think Daemons need WAY more love. Outside of troops and cheap HQs, they really don't have a lot going for them.

Need is a very emotive term....

Deathguard went from a lore and a couopel fo nits to a full codex so its seems highly disenengious to decide and declare that non-Marine factions should not be allowed to have the same treatment.

I really like my Nurgle marines but i don't think they should leapfrog (again) all those who need it more - along with the model release that so many non Marine factions are lacking.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Need is a very emotive term....

Deathguard went from a lore and a couopel fo nits to a full codex so its seems highly disenengious to decide and declare that non-Marine factions should not be allowed to have the same treatment.

I really like my Nurgle marines but i don't think they should leapfrog (again) all those who need it more - along with the model release that so many non Marine factions are lacking.

Consider how little effort is needed. Another 15 Stratagems, half of which you can copy-paste from the Vigilus books, maybe another 6-8 Relics, half of which can be copy-pasted into future CSM releases, a couple of army-wide buffs and a re-balanced pts, maybe allow them to use the Warptime discipline. How about Necrons? Datasheets need to be updated, 75 Stratagems, 36 WL traits, 100 Relics, a mono-faction benefit, five sub-faction bonus benefits, maybe another 4 or 6 new sub-factions or sub-faction generation rules, maybe 6-30 more C'tan personalities or powers. I don't like the SM codex and its supplements from a design or balance stand-point but the sheer scale of the project is impressive. Had GW focussed all that effort on balance the game would have been so-so great in a couple of months. But I am pessimistic, which also leaves an opportunity for GW to surprise me and get my money, but I'm not going to invest until GW fixes their game.

 vict0988 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Need is a very emotive term....

Deathguard went from a lore and a couopel fo nits to a full codex so its seems highly disenengious to decide and declare that non-Marine factions should not be allowed to have the same treatment.

I really like my Nurgle marines but i don't think they should leapfrog (again) all those who need it more - along with the model release that so many non Marine factions are lacking.

Consider how little effort is needed. Another 15 Stratagems, half of which you can copy-paste from the Vigilus books, maybe another 6-8 Relics, half of which can be copy-pasted into future CSM releases, a couple of army-wide buffs and a re-balanced pts, maybe allow them to use the Warptime discipline. How about Necrons? Datasheets need to be updated, 75 Stratagems, 36 WL traits, 100 Relics, a mono-faction benefit, five sub-faction bonus benefits, maybe another 4 or 6 new sub-factions or sub-faction generation rules, maybe 6-30 more C'tan personalities or powers. I don't like the SM codex and its supplements from a design or balance stand-point but the sheer scale of the project is impressive. Had GW focussed all that effort on balance the game would have been so-so great in a couple of months. But I am pessimistic, which also leaves an opportunity for GW to surprise me and get my money, but I'm not going to invest until GW fixes their game.

If its that little effort - then it should be a pdf update or at most a White Dwarf update - certainly not the massive cost of producing a Codex that means someone else can't have one.

 Mr Morden wrote:
If its that little effort - then it should be a pdf update or at most a White Dwarf update - certainly not the massive cost of producing a Codex that means someone else can't have one.

White Dwarf updates are horrible, horrible things. I played a game against a Ynnari player using the old rules many months after the WD update because he didn't think the new ones were official since GW hadn't errata'd Index Xenos 1 and it made into a codex. The game was fine, but if you're this far out of touch I think the codex needs a physical update. What I'd have actually preferred is nobody getting new codices and no new rules being printed, but a lot of people seem to think that Iron Hands or Ultramarines having 0 Veterans is fluffy as long as IH are tough and shooty and UM are resourceful. I don't know why it would take as much time to release a single update for Death Guard as making 6 updates for Necrons unless you want to do a really low-effort job with Necrons (I don't think GW will do anything, so a low-effort update would be good enough I suppose).

 vict0988 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
If its that little effort - then it should be a pdf update or at most a White Dwarf update - certainly not the massive cost of producing a Codex that means someone else can't have one.

White Dwarf updates are horrible, horrible things. I played a game against a Ynnari player using the old rules many months after the WD update because he didn't think the new ones were official since GW hadn't errata'd Index Xenos 1 and it made into a codex. The game was fine, but if you're this far out of touch I think the codex needs a physical update. What I'd have actually preferred is nobody getting new codices and no new rules being printed, but a lot of people seem to think that Iron Hands or Ultramarines having 0 Veterans is fluffy as long as IH are tough and shooty and UM are resourceful. I don't know why it would take as much time to release a single update for Death Guard as making 6 updates for Necrons unless you want to do a really low-effort job with Necrons (I don't think GW will do anything, so a low-effort update would be good enough I suppose).

And if the full codex re-do is carried out for Deathguard...and Thousand Sons...and Blood Angels...and Wolves ..rather than just tweeking what needs to be done.

I can't see GW making another full Codex without models - why do you think its needs the huge effort of a full Codex release? All these things drain the limited resources away from anything other than Marines....

 Mr Morden wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
If its that little effort - then it should be a pdf update or at most a White Dwarf update - certainly not the massive cost of producing a Codex that means someone else can't have one.

White Dwarf updates are horrible, horrible things. I played a game against a Ynnari player using the old rules many months after the WD update because he didn't think the new ones were official since GW hadn't errata'd Index Xenos 1 and it made into a codex. The game was fine, but if you're this far out of touch I think the codex needs a physical update. What I'd have actually preferred is nobody getting new codices and no new rules being printed, but a lot of people seem to think that Iron Hands or Ultramarines having 0 Veterans is fluffy as long as IH are tough and shooty and UM are resourceful. I don't know why it would take as much time to release a single update for Death Guard as making 6 updates for Necrons unless you want to do a really low-effort job with Necrons (I don't think GW will do anything, so a low-effort update would be good enough I suppose).

And if the full codex re-do is carried out for Deathguard...and Thousand Sons...and Blood Angels...and Wolves ..rather than just tweeking what needs to be done.

I can't see GW making another full Codex without models - why do you think its needs the huge effort of a full Codex release? All these things drain the limited resources away from anything other than Marines....

ignoring death guard and 1k sons for a moment, blood angels and space wolves just got a fairly chunky model release in the form of this latest phobos release. that means right now space wolves, blood angels and dark angels have access to 9 full datasheets thats not in their codex. that alone would be reason eneugh for a 2.0 update. and I suspect it'll eventually happen, however you're right that GW will likely not do it without any sort of model release, my guess is they'll put out a character for each of the marine books release it along side a 2.0 'dex and that'll be it. it'll happen but not nesscarily immediatly, consider how long it took space wolves to get their codex (and they didn't even get a Lt. for their trouble except for one in a boxed set)

 vict0988 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
If its that little effort - then it should be a pdf update or at most a White Dwarf update - certainly not the massive cost of producing a Codex that means someone else can't have one.

White Dwarf updates are horrible, horrible things. I played a game against a Ynnari player using the old rules many months after the WD update because he didn't think the new ones were official since GW hadn't errata'd Index Xenos 1 and it made into a codex.

Ignoring the fact that your opponent was delusional, I am surprised to note that there was no update to the Index: Xenos FAQ document with the Ynnari in to say that the WD update supersedes Index Xenos.

Though the Ynnari Index article does have its own FAQ document now. Hopefully that material will see a reprint in CA2019, just so it is readily available in an "official" book.

All I can say is that it was...underwhelming watching the Death Guard get wiped off the table by Iron Hands in the recent TTT battle report. That's obviously more an Iron Hands issue than a Death Guard one - but seeing the "tough" army just absolutely blitzed off the table was...saddening.

That doesn't surprise me. DG's only way of taking out vehicles is spamming tons of d3 ad 2 damage attacks, IH pretty much ignore that.

 Elbows wrote:
All I can say is that it was...underwhelming watching the Death Guard get wiped off the table by Iron Hands in the recent TTT battle report. That's obviously more an Iron Hands issue than a Death Guard one - but seeing the "tough" army just absolutely blitzed off the table was...saddening.

well Iron Hands take what makes deathguard good and makes it even better. I mean GW wouldn't give a FNP roll to every deathguard unit but happily gave it to iron hands.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
All I can say is that it was...underwhelming watching the Death Guard get wiped off the table by Iron Hands in the recent TTT battle report. That's obviously more an Iron Hands issue than a Death Guard one - but seeing the "tough" army just absolutely blitzed off the table was...saddening.

well Iron Hands take what makes deathguard good and makes it even better. I mean GW wouldn't give a FNP roll to every deathguard unit but happily gave it to iron hands.

The Ironhands FnP is a 6+ only. Disgustingly resilient is the best FnP on the game usually reserved for relics. Also Ironhands blast anything and everything off the table, it makes little difference what faction opposes them.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
All I can say is that it was...underwhelming watching the Death Guard get wiped off the table by Iron Hands in the recent TTT battle report. That's obviously more an Iron Hands issue than a Death Guard one - but seeing the "tough" army just absolutely blitzed off the table was...saddening.

well Iron Hands take what makes deathguard good and makes it even better. I mean GW wouldn't give a FNP roll to every deathguard unit but happily gave it to iron hands.

The Ironhands FnP is a 6+ only. Disgustingly resilient is the best FnP on the game usually reserved for relics. Also Ironhands blast anything and everything off the table, it makes little difference what faction opposes them.

maybe it is kinda annoying not having it on everything though, doubly so since the death guard lord with DR just has such crap equipment.

BrianDavion wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
All I can say is that it was...underwhelming watching the Death Guard get wiped off the table by Iron Hands in the recent TTT battle report. That's obviously more an Iron Hands issue than a Death Guard one - but seeing the "tough" army just absolutely blitzed off the table was...saddening.

well Iron Hands take what makes deathguard good and makes it even better. I mean GW wouldn't give a FNP roll to every deathguard unit but happily gave it to iron hands.

The Ironhands FnP is a 6+ only. Disgustingly resilient is the best FnP on the game usually reserved for relics. Also Ironhands blast anything and everything off the table, it makes little difference what faction opposes them.

maybe it is kinda annoying not having it on everything though, doubly so since the death guard lord with DR just has such crap equipment.

No doubt. But does a faction 'need' a new codex for a datasheet update? Doubtful. There's also tons of examples where GW misses rules interactions like this. Also if the DG Lord is to become more resilient, he'll need a points increase.

He is talking about Lords of Contagion which are completely useless right now.
Those need a reason to exist - I think just slapping the Lord of Nurgle aura on them is a great idea.

Given that there is no Beta dex this year - they could do a alot of "holding" Marine updates in Chapter Approved but I doubt it.

 Dysartes wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
If its that little effort - then it should be a pdf update or at most a White Dwarf update - certainly not the massive cost of producing a Codex that means someone else can't have one.

White Dwarf updates are horrible, horrible things. I played a game against a Ynnari player using the old rules many months after the WD update because he didn't think the new ones were official since GW hadn't errata'd Index Xenos 1 and it made into a codex.

Ignoring the fact that your opponent was delusional, I am surprised to note that there was no update to the Index: Xenos FAQ document with the Ynnari in to say that the WD update supersedes Index Xenos.

Though the Ynnari Index article does have its own FAQ document now. Hopefully that material will see a reprint in CA2019, just so it is readily available in an "official" book.

Well, looks like the Ynnari Index reprint is in Firechicken Rising, rather than CA, which at least means it is out a little sooner.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Given that there is no Beta dex this year - they could do a alot of "holding" Marine updates in Chapter Approved but I doubt it.

there was no beta index in CA 2017

they generally don't take time to update codices in Chapter approved, not so far. closest we ever got was the bolter beta rules IIRC

Xenos players need to realise that we are not factions in our own right like Chaos and the Imperium but just a selection of villanous foils for the true protagonists of the game (power armoured humans) to fight in between fighting each other. Our rules don't matter, our models don't matter. We're just extras in the background of the story being told about superhumans in power armour fighting other superhumans in power armour, an infinite variety of them with rules for every specific quirk and oddity.

Just accept it. It has been like that for 5 editions now. Sometimes they let Eldar be the "powerful" Xenos, but Orks and Necrons and Tau are always gonna be the buttmonkeys of the setting, with Tyranids yapping excited off to one side, only ever powerful if they play lists that go entirely against their background.

That is how Warhammer 40000 is designed, and it is righteous punishment for Xenos players being so STUPID as to pick something that is not a Space Marine, a Space Marine with Spikes On or at best another type of human.

Necrons were pretty powerful at the start of 7th when they got their Decurion. Tau were powerful in 6th as well, and very powerful in 4th due to Fish of Fury... Elder were strong in 4th and 6th, and I'm not sure when they petered off in 7th, but they had powerful Wraithknights..

Just saying, the balance in 40k tends to waver.

The international release of Space Marine Heroes 2 ended up giving Space Marines an actual new datasheet, the ancient in terminator armor. Space Marine Heroes 3 could very well do the same for Death Guard, like a real Death Guard Chaos Lord with DR.