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.
2017/06/05 18:42:07
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
I wasn't introduced to 40k till 3.5ed and I didn't really get into regular gaming until 5ed so I am none the wiser to how the community reacted to the changes before that.
So to our veteran 40k players: what was the reaction to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd? Were people happy with the changes or were people not happy with the direction 40k was taking? Were there similar reactions to that of the 8th changes? Were the reaction more negative? More positive?
Just curious as to what players thought back then.
Thanks.
Ghorros wrote: The moral of the story: Don't park your Imperial Knight in a field of Gretchin carrying power tools.
Marmatag wrote: All the while, my opponent is furious, throwing his codex on the floor, trying to slash his wrists with safety scissors.
2017/06/05 18:52:46
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
I was fairly young myself at the time, but I'd say the reaction was much worse than the one 8th is getting. 2nd had a lot of things about it that made it pretty convoluted and the streamlining we're seeing now is nothing in comparison to how much 3rd took away from 2nd.
2017/06/05 18:53:59
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
The reaction was mostly the same. A ton of people loudly doomsaying about how 3rd oversimplified the rules and they would not play it. Most of them still play 40K to this day. 3rd edition started off a bit bland but as new codex and supplement books came along it regain complexity. The change to 8th feels a lot like that and I'm happy to ride this out and see where it goes. It's just going to be a period of adjustment.
2nd Edition had 4 different teardrop-shaped templates. You charged into melee during the movement phase. Combat was model-to-model and took forever. It was definitely a system for small skirmishes which is why it adapted so well to Shadow War (and Necromunda before it).
EWM Hobbies Tabletop game bases and dice.
2017/06/05 19:00:03
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
From the old farts still around at my FLGS, almost entirely positive. There's one guy who was so annoyed about all the options that disappeared he stopped playing. Though funnily enough he's also picked up 8th and decided he likes it.
Hard to tell from my view, but for me I just felt a bit underwhelmed. I preferred 2nd edition and just kind of drifted away from the game after 3rd was released. Used to play loads of 2nd and hardly any of 3rd. It felt bland and lifeless and some of the decisions felt odd. Removing of the movement characteristic and save mod was particular odd and rubbish decision. The codexes were atrocious and so Spartan they felt like an insult. To go from the 2nd edition Codex Chaos to 3rd edition Codex Chaos made you say "This is bloody ridiculous".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/05 19:10:33
2017/06/05 19:12:51
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
The rage was massive. A ton of things went away. There used to be IG speeder bikes, beastman IG, judges and a bunch of other units that didn't make it (pretty sure they were in 2nd. Might have disappeared in DM.)
The big thing was the dumbing down of saves. People hated it. If you want to see how the rules were the check out necromondia as they ported the system over there for that game.
In general people thought it was a big cash grab. The games were bigger and you needed more models. You couldn't make your own vehicle ir chapter rules anymore (were in Chapter Approved). The concept of a codex reaked of a cash grab and a way to force us to buy even more stuff. Most of us just wanted the units in the book and then add new units in WD and/or Chapter Approved.
2017/06/05 19:16:08
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
zedmeister wrote: To go from the 2nd edition Codex Chaos to 3rd edition Codex Chaos made you say "This is bloody ridiculous".
But, Codex Chaos 3.5ed?
Dunno about 3.5, as I wasn't playing at the time it was released. Was playing Epic and Fantasy. But the difference from the two [2nd and 3rd] was absurd. You had a ton of options, background, photography and stories in the 2nd edition version. 3rd edition one was pretty much a glorified pamphlet.
Also, did I mention I was a Squat player .
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/05 19:17:03
2017/06/05 19:18:29
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
I remember it being well received. It was before the internet was really the thing that it is today, so I guess that every store/group was its own little bubble that decided upon things by itself, with only a few people floating between different groups.
I remember games becoming much bigger, it really did change from a skirmish game to a wargame. Points were pretty much cut in half across the board, and the amount of vehicles you saw went way up.
I remember games becoming much bigger, it really did change from a skirmish game to a wargame. Points were pretty much cut in half across the board, and the amount of vehicles you saw went way up.
Definitely. For example, one dreadnought was a massive deal. 3 on one side was unheard of. 3 dreadnoughts and several tanks? You were the ultimate beardy git !
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/05 19:21:52
2017/06/05 19:24:37
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
zedmeister wrote: To go from the 2nd edition Codex Chaos to 3rd edition Codex Chaos made you say "This is bloody ridiculous".
But, Codex Chaos 3.5ed?
Dunno about 3.5, as I wasn't playing at the time it was released. Was playing Epic and Fantasy. But the difference from the two [2nd and 3rd] was absurd. You had a ton of options, background, photography and stories in the 2nd edition version. 3rd edition one was pretty much a glorified pamphlet.
Also, did I mention I was a Squat player .
"Squats? No such thing! Now run along Imperial citizen!"
Ghorros wrote: The moral of the story: Don't park your Imperial Knight in a field of Gretchin carrying power tools.
Marmatag wrote: All the while, my opponent is furious, throwing his codex on the floor, trying to slash his wrists with safety scissors.
2017/06/05 19:29:20
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
ClockworkZion wrote: I wasn't playing back then, but consider the Squat rage has never ended....
It was the fact that they canned the entire race not because they sold poorly (they didn't) but because they couldn't be arsed to work on them. They had a range of models ready to go, they were excellent in Epic (Goliath Megacannons, Cyclops, Colossus, Iron Eagles, etc) and people had been asking about them for years and had armies of them. Here's one of the 2nd edition preview models circa 1992/93
2017/06/05 19:37:31
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
zedmeister wrote: It was the fact that they canned the entire race not because they sold poorly (they didn't) but because they couldn't be arsed to work on them. They had a range of models ready to go, they were excellent in Epic (Goliath Megacannons, Cyclops, Colossus, Iron Eagles, etc) and people had been asking about them for years and had armies of them. Here's one of the 2nd edition preview models circa 1992/93
"Watch yourself citizen, that kind of propaganda will earn you a short talk with this nice Comissar!"
Ghorros wrote: The moral of the story: Don't park your Imperial Knight in a field of Gretchin carrying power tools.
Marmatag wrote: All the while, my opponent is furious, throwing his codex on the floor, trying to slash his wrists with safety scissors.
2017/06/05 19:40:31
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
ClockworkZion wrote: I wasn't playing back then, but consider the Squat rage has never ended....
It was the fact that they canned the entire race not because they sold poorly (they didn't) but because they couldn't be arsed to work on them. They had a range of models ready to go, they were excellent in Epic (Goliath Megacannons, Cyclops, Colossus, Iron Eagles, etc) and people had been asking about them for years and had armies of them. Here's one of the 2nd edition preview models circa 1992/93
Spoiler:
I remember hearing that it had a lot to do with copyright issues, in that the creator of Squats left GW, and GW had no way to legally continue to sell the models and support their lore, because their creator kept the rights to them.
2017/06/05 19:46:47
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
BunkhouseBuster wrote: I remember hearing that it had a lot to do with copyright issues, in that the creator of Squats left GW, and GW had no way to legally continue to sell the models and support their lore, because their creator kept the rights to them.
Nah, that was the Chaos God Malal that, I believe, had some issues over it. Here's Jervis explaining the fate of the squats from 2004 (spoilered because it is long)
Spoiler:
"I know I shouldn't get drawn on this... but... can't... resist
Seriously, a couple of points just so you can have an informed debate based on the real reasons that Squats are no longer available. Be warned, it is going to be hard reading for people that like the Squat background.
First of all, Squats were *not* dropped because they were not selling well. There were then, and are now, plenty of other figure ranges that sell in the sort of % quantaties that the Squats pulled down, especially when you look across all of the ranges produced by GW rather than just those for 40K.
No, the reason that the Squats were dropped was because the creatives in the Studio (people like me, Rick, Andy C, Gav etc) felt that we had failed to do the Dwarf 'archetype' justice in its 40K incarnation. From the name of the race (Squats - what *were* we thinking?!?!) through to the short bikers motif, we had managed to turn what was a proud and noble race in Warhammer and the other literary forms where the archetype exists, into a joke race in 40K. We only fully realised what we had done when we were working on the 2nd edition of 40K. Try as we might, we just couldn't work up much enthusiasm for the Squats. The mistake we made then (deeply regreted since) was to leave them in the background and the 'get you by' army list book that appeared. With hindsight, we should have dropped the Squats back then, and saved ourselves a lot of grief later on.
Anyway, the Squats made it into 2nd edition, and since we were doing army books for each of the races, we started to try and figure out what to do with them. Unfortunately we just couldn't figure out a way to update them and get them to work that we felt was good enough. The 'art' of working on an army as a designer is to find the thing that you think is cool and exciting about an army, and work it up into a strong theme. This 'muse' didn't strike any of us, and so, rather than bring out a second-rate product simply re-hashing the old background, we kept doing other army books instead, with stuff we did feel inspired by.
Now, while this was all going on for 40K, we were actually doing some rather good stuff for the Squats in Epic. On this scale there was a natural tendancy to focus on the big 'hand-made' war machines the Squat artisans produced, and this created an army with a feel that was very different to the biker hordes in 40K. However, this tended to reinforce the problems we saw in the Squat background rather than alleviate them, underlining what we *should* have done with the Squats in 40K.
In the end (and it took years to really get to the roots of the problem) this led to a realisation that we were going to have to drop the Squats in their 'Squat' form from the 40K background. There was little point having a major race that we weren't willing to make an army book for, and their inclusion in the background meant that people kept asking us when we'd do a Squat Codex. Instead we decided that we'd write the Squats out of the background by saying that their Homworlds had been devoured by a Tyranid Hivefleet. This would give us the option in the future to return to making a race based ont he Squat archetype for 40K. This race was given the name of Demiurg, and a certain amount of preliminary work was done to get a 'feel' for what the race would be like. At present the only hint of the Demiurg in 40K is the Demiurg spaceship for BFG. However, we do have this race 'in our back pocket' as a possible new race for 40K, or an interesting character model in Inquisitor, or whatever. So far the Demiurg have lost out to other projects, and it may be that their time never actually comes, as they will have to win through on their merits, not simply because we once made some Squat models in the past. At present, I have to say that it is more lilely that they *don't* make the cut than do, as there is a certain predudice these days to simply taking races from Warhammer and cross them over to 40K like we did in the early days, so it may be that the Squats/Demiurg end up remaining a footnote in the history of the 40K galaxy. Only time will tell...
The second point I'd like to make is about 'old moulds'. In the past, Mail Order in the UK and US used to be the place that we kept all of the retired moulds for Citadel Miniatures, and we used to offer a service where you could order any Citadel Mniature ever made from MO. However, there are now so many of these 'back catalogue' miniatures that it is simply impossible to keep all of the old moulds in Mail Order and offer this service. Instead, we pick and choose which back catalogue miniatures are kept available. At present we're still struggling to produce special catalogues for these ranges (in the US there is the 'Phone Book' catalogue with everything in it, while the UK has special 'collectors guides' that are themed round a race). Once we've ironed out the kinks in the way we deal with the range of collectors models we want to keep permenantly available, the plan is to offer up other parts of the back catalogue for limited periods of time. In effect this will divide the back catalogue into three parts: a range of classic models that are permenantly available, a range of classic models we dip into and bring out for a limited release, and a range of retired models that will no longer be sold either because we've decided that they are embarrassingly bad, or because we are no longer allowed to sell them due to licencing agreement changes. So far we're still slowly working on deciding which classic models we want to keep permenantly available, and its going to take several years to work through just those. The old Squat range is most likely to end up as retired models, I have to say, though there is a good chance that the Squat war engines they could simply into the limited release classic range. Once again, only time will tell...
I'll finish off by saying that whatever we decide to do 'officially', there is nothing stopping players with Squat armies from using them, either in Epic or 40k for that matter. There is no GW 'rule' against using old Citadel Miniatures, as long as you use them with exisiting army lists and in a way that won't cause confusion for other players. I recommend taking a positive stand by saying "Have you seen these cool old models? They're called the Squats and GW used to make them back in the late eighties/early nineties. I love 'em, so I count them as Imperial Guard and use them with the current rules..." Put like this I can't imagine that anyone would stop you from using your army.
Best regards,
Jervis Johnson
Head Fanatic"
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/05 19:47:15
2017/06/05 19:49:07
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
CSM, Eldar, and Tyranid players lost their minds, as many of them were riding 20+ game winning streaks in my area. Tyranid strategy cards..... lol.
I know people aren't used to it anymore, but loyalist marines were THE biggest whipping boy in 2nd, and many people were pissed that they actually started losing to marines.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/05 19:52:51
2017/06/05 19:55:58
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
BunkhouseBuster wrote: I remember hearing that it had a lot to do with copyright issues, in that the creator of Squats left GW, and GW had no way to legally continue to sell the models and support their lore, because their creator kept the rights to them.
Nah, that was the Chaos God Malal that, I believe, had some issues over it. Here's Jervis explaining the fate of the squats from 2004 (spoilered because it is long)
Spoiler:
"I know I shouldn't get drawn on this... but... can't... resist
Seriously, a couple of points just so you can have an informed debate based on the real reasons that Squats are no longer available. Be warned, it is going to be hard reading for people that like the Squat background.
First of all, Squats were *not* dropped because they were not selling well. There were then, and are now, plenty of other figure ranges that sell in the sort of % quantaties that the Squats pulled down, especially when you look across all of the ranges produced by GW rather than just those for 40K.
No, the reason that the Squats were dropped was because the creatives in the Studio (people like me, Rick, Andy C, Gav etc) felt that we had failed to do the Dwarf 'archetype' justice in its 40K incarnation. From the name of the race (Squats - what *were* we thinking?!?!) through to the short bikers motif, we had managed to turn what was a proud and noble race in Warhammer and the other literary forms where the archetype exists, into a joke race in 40K. We only fully realised what we had done when we were working on the 2nd edition of 40K. Try as we might, we just couldn't work up much enthusiasm for the Squats. The mistake we made then (deeply regreted since) was to leave them in the background and the 'get you by' army list book that appeared. With hindsight, we should have dropped the Squats back then, and saved ourselves a lot of grief later on.
Anyway, the Squats made it into 2nd edition, and since we were doing army books for each of the races, we started to try and figure out what to do with them. Unfortunately we just couldn't figure out a way to update them and get them to work that we felt was good enough. The 'art' of working on an army as a designer is to find the thing that you think is cool and exciting about an army, and work it up into a strong theme. This 'muse' didn't strike any of us, and so, rather than bring out a second-rate product simply re-hashing the old background, we kept doing other army books instead, with stuff we did feel inspired by.
Now, while this was all going on for 40K, we were actually doing some rather good stuff for the Squats in Epic. On this scale there was a natural tendancy to focus on the big 'hand-made' war machines the Squat artisans produced, and this created an army with a feel that was very different to the biker hordes in 40K. However, this tended to reinforce the problems we saw in the Squat background rather than alleviate them, underlining what we *should* have done with the Squats in 40K.
In the end (and it took years to really get to the roots of the problem) this led to a realisation that we were going to have to drop the Squats in their 'Squat' form from the 40K background. There was little point having a major race that we weren't willing to make an army book for, and their inclusion in the background meant that people kept asking us when we'd do a Squat Codex. Instead we decided that we'd write the Squats out of the background by saying that their Homworlds had been devoured by a Tyranid Hivefleet. This would give us the option in the future to return to making a race based ont he Squat archetype for 40K. This race was given the name of Demiurg, and a certain amount of preliminary work was done to get a 'feel' for what the race would be like. At present the only hint of the Demiurg in 40K is the Demiurg spaceship for BFG. However, we do have this race 'in our back pocket' as a possible new race for 40K, or an interesting character model in Inquisitor, or whatever. So far the Demiurg have lost out to other projects, and it may be that their time never actually comes, as they will have to win through on their merits, not simply because we once made some Squat models in the past. At present, I have to say that it is more lilely that they *don't* make the cut than do, as there is a certain predudice these days to simply taking races from Warhammer and cross them over to 40K like we did in the early days, so it may be that the Squats/Demiurg end up remaining a footnote in the history of the 40K galaxy. Only time will tell...
The second point I'd like to make is about 'old moulds'. In the past, Mail Order in the UK and US used to be the place that we kept all of the retired moulds for Citadel Miniatures, and we used to offer a service where you could order any Citadel Mniature ever made from MO. However, there are now so many of these 'back catalogue' miniatures that it is simply impossible to keep all of the old moulds in Mail Order and offer this service. Instead, we pick and choose which back catalogue miniatures are kept available. At present we're still struggling to produce special catalogues for these ranges (in the US there is the 'Phone Book' catalogue with everything in it, while the UK has special 'collectors guides' that are themed round a race). Once we've ironed out the kinks in the way we deal with the range of collectors models we want to keep permenantly available, the plan is to offer up other parts of the back catalogue for limited periods of time. In effect this will divide the back catalogue into three parts: a range of classic models that are permenantly available, a range of classic models we dip into and bring out for a limited release, and a range of retired models that will no longer be sold either because we've decided that they are embarrassingly bad, or because we are no longer allowed to sell them due to licencing agreement changes. So far we're still slowly working on deciding which classic models we want to keep permenantly available, and its going to take several years to work through just those. The old Squat range is most likely to end up as retired models, I have to say, though there is a good chance that the Squat war engines they could simply into the limited release classic range. Once again, only time will tell...
I'll finish off by saying that whatever we decide to do 'officially', there is nothing stopping players with Squat armies from using them, either in Epic or 40k for that matter. There is no GW 'rule' against using old Citadel Miniatures, as long as you use them with exisiting army lists and in a way that won't cause confusion for other players. I recommend taking a positive stand by saying "Have you seen these cool old models? They're called the Squats and GW used to make them back in the late eighties/early nineties. I love 'em, so I count them as Imperial Guard and use them with the current rules..." Put like this I can't imagine that anyone would stop you from using your army.
Best regards,
Jervis Johnson
Head Fanatic"
I stand corrected, and informed. Thanks for that!
As a fan of the Squats, have you checked out the Kharadron Overlords for Age of Sigmar?
2017/06/05 19:58:37
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
BunkhouseBuster wrote: I remember hearing that it had a lot to do with copyright issues, in that the creator of Squats left GW, and GW had no way to legally continue to sell the models and support their lore, because their creator kept the rights to them.
Nah, that was the Chaos God Malal that, I believe, had some issues over it. Here's Jervis explaining the fate of the squats from 2004 (spoilered because it is long)
Spoiler:
"I know I shouldn't get drawn on this... but... can't... resist
Seriously, a couple of points just so you can have an informed debate based on the real reasons that Squats are no longer available. Be warned, it is going to be hard reading for people that like the Squat background.
First of all, Squats were *not* dropped because they were not selling well. There were then, and are now, plenty of other figure ranges that sell in the sort of % quantaties that the Squats pulled down, especially when you look across all of the ranges produced by GW rather than just those for 40K.
No, the reason that the Squats were dropped was because the creatives in the Studio (people like me, Rick, Andy C, Gav etc) felt that we had failed to do the Dwarf 'archetype' justice in its 40K incarnation. From the name of the race (Squats - what *were* we thinking?!?!) through to the short bikers motif, we had managed to turn what was a proud and noble race in Warhammer and the other literary forms where the archetype exists, into a joke race in 40K. We only fully realised what we had done when we were working on the 2nd edition of 40K. Try as we might, we just couldn't work up much enthusiasm for the Squats. The mistake we made then (deeply regreted since) was to leave them in the background and the 'get you by' army list book that appeared. With hindsight, we should have dropped the Squats back then, and saved ourselves a lot of grief later on.
Anyway, the Squats made it into 2nd edition, and since we were doing army books for each of the races, we started to try and figure out what to do with them. Unfortunately we just couldn't figure out a way to update them and get them to work that we felt was good enough. The 'art' of working on an army as a designer is to find the thing that you think is cool and exciting about an army, and work it up into a strong theme. This 'muse' didn't strike any of us, and so, rather than bring out a second-rate product simply re-hashing the old background, we kept doing other army books instead, with stuff we did feel inspired by.
Now, while this was all going on for 40K, we were actually doing some rather good stuff for the Squats in Epic. On this scale there was a natural tendancy to focus on the big 'hand-made' war machines the Squat artisans produced, and this created an army with a feel that was very different to the biker hordes in 40K. However, this tended to reinforce the problems we saw in the Squat background rather than alleviate them, underlining what we *should* have done with the Squats in 40K.
In the end (and it took years to really get to the roots of the problem) this led to a realisation that we were going to have to drop the Squats in their 'Squat' form from the 40K background. There was little point having a major race that we weren't willing to make an army book for, and their inclusion in the background meant that people kept asking us when we'd do a Squat Codex. Instead we decided that we'd write the Squats out of the background by saying that their Homworlds had been devoured by a Tyranid Hivefleet. This would give us the option in the future to return to making a race based ont he Squat archetype for 40K. This race was given the name of Demiurg, and a certain amount of preliminary work was done to get a 'feel' for what the race would be like. At present the only hint of the Demiurg in 40K is the Demiurg spaceship for BFG. However, we do have this race 'in our back pocket' as a possible new race for 40K, or an interesting character model in Inquisitor, or whatever. So far the Demiurg have lost out to other projects, and it may be that their time never actually comes, as they will have to win through on their merits, not simply because we once made some Squat models in the past. At present, I have to say that it is more lilely that they *don't* make the cut than do, as there is a certain predudice these days to simply taking races from Warhammer and cross them over to 40K like we did in the early days, so it may be that the Squats/Demiurg end up remaining a footnote in the history of the 40K galaxy. Only time will tell...
The second point I'd like to make is about 'old moulds'. In the past, Mail Order in the UK and US used to be the place that we kept all of the retired moulds for Citadel Miniatures, and we used to offer a service where you could order any Citadel Mniature ever made from MO. However, there are now so many of these 'back catalogue' miniatures that it is simply impossible to keep all of the old moulds in Mail Order and offer this service. Instead, we pick and choose which back catalogue miniatures are kept available. At present we're still struggling to produce special catalogues for these ranges (in the US there is the 'Phone Book' catalogue with everything in it, while the UK has special 'collectors guides' that are themed round a race). Once we've ironed out the kinks in the way we deal with the range of collectors models we want to keep permenantly available, the plan is to offer up other parts of the back catalogue for limited periods of time. In effect this will divide the back catalogue into three parts: a range of classic models that are permenantly available, a range of classic models we dip into and bring out for a limited release, and a range of retired models that will no longer be sold either because we've decided that they are embarrassingly bad, or because we are no longer allowed to sell them due to licencing agreement changes. So far we're still slowly working on deciding which classic models we want to keep permenantly available, and its going to take several years to work through just those. The old Squat range is most likely to end up as retired models, I have to say, though there is a good chance that the Squat war engines they could simply into the limited release classic range. Once again, only time will tell...
I'll finish off by saying that whatever we decide to do 'officially', there is nothing stopping players with Squat armies from using them, either in Epic or 40k for that matter. There is no GW 'rule' against using old Citadel Miniatures, as long as you use them with exisiting army lists and in a way that won't cause confusion for other players. I recommend taking a positive stand by saying "Have you seen these cool old models? They're called the Squats and GW used to make them back in the late eighties/early nineties. I love 'em, so I count them as Imperial Guard and use them with the current rules..." Put like this I can't imagine that anyone would stop you from using your army.
Best regards,
Jervis Johnson
Head Fanatic"
I stand corrected, and informed. Thanks for that!
As a fan of the Squats, have you checked out the Kharadron Overlords for Age of Sigmar?
I know someone who is using those to play Squats (using Marine rules). They work a lot better than the old Squats did for 40k.
2017/06/05 20:05:14
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
As a fan of the Squats, have you checked out the Kharadron Overlords for Age of Sigmar?
I did, nice models for sure. Doesn't quite scratch the itch though. I always thought squats would be a good candidate for showing more dark age of technology level gear. Squats are a human offshoot and they could have survived with the rarer more esoteric stuff. I occasionally considering converting a bunch to hold Volkite weapons and the like.
2017/06/05 20:05:34
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
"I know I shouldn't get drawn on this... but... can't... resist
Seriously, a couple of points just so you can have an informed debate based on the real reasons that Squats are no longer available. Be warned, it is going to be hard reading for people that like the Squat background.
First of all, Squats were *not* dropped because they were not selling well. There were then, and are now, plenty of other figure ranges that sell in the sort of % quantaties that the Squats pulled down, especially when you look across all of the ranges produced by GW rather than just those for 40K.
No, the reason that the Squats were dropped was because the creatives in the Studio (people like me, Rick, Andy C, Gav etc) felt that we had failed to do the Dwarf 'archetype' justice in its 40K incarnation. From the name of the race (Squats - what *were* we thinking?!?!) through to the short bikers motif, we had managed to turn what was a proud and noble race in Warhammer and the other literary forms where the archetype exists, into a joke race in 40K. We only fully realised what we had done when we were working on the 2nd edition of 40K. Try as we might, we just couldn't work up much enthusiasm for the Squats. The mistake we made then (deeply regreted since) was to leave them in the background and the 'get you by' army list book that appeared. With hindsight, we should have dropped the Squats back then, and saved ourselves a lot of grief later on.
Anyway, the Squats made it into 2nd edition, and since we were doing army books for each of the races, we started to try and figure out what to do with them. Unfortunately we just couldn't figure out a way to update them and get them to work that we felt was good enough. The 'art' of working on an army as a designer is to find the thing that you think is cool and exciting about an army, and work it up into a strong theme. This 'muse' didn't strike any of us, and so, rather than bring out a second-rate product simply re-hashing the old background, we kept doing other army books instead, with stuff we did feel inspired by.
Now, while this was all going on for 40K, we were actually doing some rather good stuff for the Squats in Epic. On this scale there was a natural tendancy to focus on the big 'hand-made' war machines the Squat artisans produced, and this created an army with a feel that was very different to the biker hordes in 40K. However, this tended to reinforce the problems we saw in the Squat background rather than alleviate them, underlining what we *should* have done with the Squats in 40K.
In the end (and it took years to really get to the roots of the problem) this led to a realisation that we were going to have to drop the Squats in their 'Squat' form from the 40K background. There was little point having a major race that we weren't willing to make an army book for, and their inclusion in the background meant that people kept asking us when we'd do a Squat Codex. Instead we decided that we'd write the Squats out of the background by saying that their Homworlds had been devoured by a Tyranid Hivefleet. This would give us the option in the future to return to making a race based ont he Squat archetype for 40K. This race was given the name of Demiurg, and a certain amount of preliminary work was done to get a 'feel' for what the race would be like. At present the only hint of the Demiurg in 40K is the Demiurg spaceship for BFG. However, we do have this race 'in our back pocket' as a possible new race for 40K, or an interesting character model in Inquisitor, or whatever. So far the Demiurg have lost out to other projects, and it may be that their time never actually comes, as they will have to win through on their merits, not simply because we once made some Squat models in the past. At present, I have to say that it is more lilely that they *don't* make the cut than do, as there is a certain predudice these days to simply taking races from Warhammer and cross them over to 40K like we did in the early days, so it may be that the Squats/Demiurg end up remaining a footnote in the history of the 40K galaxy. Only time will tell...
The second point I'd like to make is about 'old moulds'. In the past, Mail Order in the UK and US used to be the place that we kept all of the retired moulds for Citadel Miniatures, and we used to offer a service where you could order any Citadel Mniature ever made from MO. However, there are now so many of these 'back catalogue' miniatures that it is simply impossible to keep all of the old moulds in Mail Order and offer this service. Instead, we pick and choose which back catalogue miniatures are kept available. At present we're still struggling to produce special catalogues for these ranges (in the US there is the 'Phone Book' catalogue with everything in it, while the UK has special 'collectors guides' that are themed round a race). Once we've ironed out the kinks in the way we deal with the range of collectors models we want to keep permenantly available, the plan is to offer up other parts of the back catalogue for limited periods of time. In effect this will divide the back catalogue into three parts: a range of classic models that are permenantly available, a range of classic models we dip into and bring out for a limited release, and a range of retired models that will no longer be sold either because we've decided that they are embarrassingly bad, or because we are no longer allowed to sell them due to licencing agreement changes. So far we're still slowly working on deciding which classic models we want to keep permenantly available, and its going to take several years to work through just those. The old Squat range is most likely to end up as retired models, I have to say, though there is a good chance that the Squat war engines they could simply into the limited release classic range. Once again, only time will tell...
I'll finish off by saying that whatever we decide to do 'officially', there is nothing stopping players with Squat armies from using them, either in Epic or 40k for that matter. There is no GW 'rule' against using old Citadel Miniatures, as long as you use them with exisiting army lists and in a way that won't cause confusion for other players. I recommend taking a positive stand by saying "Have you seen these cool old models? They're called the Squats and GW used to make them back in the late eighties/early nineties. I love 'em, so I count them as Imperial Guard and use them with the current rules..." Put like this I can't imagine that anyone would stop you from using your army.
Best regards,
Jervis Johnson
Head Fanatic"
I left after they killed my Squat army and haven't been back since. But with 8th I kinda want to come back.
Gonna get Dark Imperium and start over from scratch.
I might buy some Kharadron Overlords and try to fit them in as allies
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/05 20:07:33
2017/06/05 20:05:48
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
I remember liking the simplifications, it seemed far easier to get on with larger battles even when I still knew 2nd edition rules better. The generalisation of close combat weapons and power weapons looked like a great excuse for modeling all sorts of weapons without worrying about WYSIWYG being violated because chainswords had different stats to normal swords.
2017/06/05 20:11:53
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
OP, you understand that those who played 2ed are, you know, old. Memory ain't exactly our strong suit...
2ed I had BA, loved the rolling for DC. The original Angels of Death codex had just come out. Then 3ed came and I could have DC at will, then 4ed came and I could only have so much DC. Stopped playing BA whenever they made the stupid rule that Assault Marines were no longer Troop choices for them. Somewhere in there they did the whole "combat squad" thing and you could split squads, then finally they made it to where you only had to pay for 5 at a time.
For Squats, they were all but dead iirc. AdMech seems like some sort of "revival" using Forge Worlds instead of Mining Worlds, nobody has the whole Arty Barrage/Biker Rampage combo they did.
si vis pacem, para bellum
2017/06/05 20:17:23
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
zedmeister wrote: To go from the 2nd edition Codex Chaos to 3rd edition Codex Chaos made you say "This is bloody ridiculous".
But, Codex Chaos 3.5ed?
chaos 3.5 was pure love....but everyone hated you for using it.
2nd is the same ruleset as necromunda, very detailed and better suited to small skirmishes. 3rd doubled/tripled the model count. My 2nd ed Dark Angels consisted of 20 marines, 2 leaders, 1 dreadnought, 1 land speeder, 1 rhino.
I rage quit when they changed from 2nd to 3rd. Addictions are powerful though and I managed to stay away for only 9 months. The biggest problem for me was the invalidation of all the codex books. Ever since then they managed to make small changes so we could still use our old books until the new ones came out. That is until now. I skipped 7th so I don't have $1200 worth of worthless rulebooks this time around but I imagine those that do are a bit irked. I think 7th was a mess and welcome the change to 8th.
Standing with my enemies, hung on my horns. With haste and reverie, killing with charm. I play, I'm sick and tame, drawing the hordes. I wait, and show the lame, the meaning of harm. The skulls beneath my feet, like feathers in sand. I graze among the graves, a feeling of peace.
2017/06/05 20:17:39
Subject: For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
Pedroig wrote: OP, you understand that those who played 2ed are, you know, old. Memory ain't exactly our strong suit...
2ed I had BA, loved the rolling for DC.
For example, you didn't roll for Death Company in 2nd, you bought them specifically. Rolling for Death Company was a 3rd edition thing.
"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."
This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.
Freelance Ontologist
When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life.
2017/06/05 20:42:40
Subject: Re:For the older members of the community: what was the reactions to the changes made from 2nd to 3rd?
While there wasn't rage...my entire group faded out of 40K between 3rd and 4th as a result of the massive change (it really was a hugely fundamental shift in how the game played/felt). I haven't played till just a few weeks ago (threw some models in a few games of 7th...and Christ, it's terrible).
Will be looking at 8th or at least have a rulebook on hand even if I don't actively play it.
EWM Hobbies 
