Switch Theme:

The Toyification of Orks (and all of 40k?)  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in ca
Yellin' Yoof on a Scooter





Toronto

Hey Dakkadakka team,

I need to vent. If you like to avoid negativity, it would be best to avoid this thread. Ultimately though, this is a cry for help. I am reaching into the online world to express something that has been on my mind since I got the new Ork Codex, and have not yet seen expressed elsewhere online. I feel compelled to put this out there and see what other Warbosses think and hopefully bring closure, or at least a new perspective to my mind.

The new Ork codex is the worst Ork codex I have ever read. I go back to 2nd edition and I'm not using hyperbole. It is completely discouraging, and it takes the wind out of my sails.

Let me explain. I'm not talking about the play-ability of the army, it's tactical viability, or it's position in the metagame. Frankly, I've never been a great enough tactician for that to matter to me so much. There are other posters who can chew this fat and make that call. For myself, I just want to play a fun game, win or lose. So long as I don't feel like I'm playing non-stop rock paper scissors, I'll have a good time.

What bothers me about this new book is complete neglect for the notion that many (most?) Ork Warbosses are also Mekaniaks at heart. What made Orks unique is that their army books have always been about potential. You could open the book, look at a datasheet, statline, or piece of wargear, and wonder "Wouldn't it be awesome IF _______...?"

Ork miniatures, as far back as 2nd edition, have always been about utility. Any kit bought by an Ork player, is to a certain degree, just a starting point. Even if you aren't scratch building or kitbashing, non-essential bits from nearly any kit can find a home on a miniature from another kit. Not only does it look cool, but those changes could be reflected in the rules. Battlewagons don't come with Rokkits? No problem, we'll figure it out. Deffcoptas don't come with any CCW? No problem, I got a fing for dat somewhere...

At first I thought this problem existed only with the new vehicles. Those are some sexy minis, I'm sure we all agree. They are the mini's we've spent 20 years waiting for. But my heart broke when I read the rules for them: They are no longer Ork vehicles. No options.

This is really disappointing given the emphasis GW has put on the narrative aspect of the game in the past few years. What exactly is the narrative behind the Boomdakka Snazzwagon specifically having burna bottles? Or the only specifically the Boosta Blasta having a burna exhaust? I know these questions might seem silly, but these items, as just one of many examples littered throughout the codex expose a fundamental shift in the creative process at GW. I suspected this notion upon the release the Gorka and Morkanaughts, and I remember having this thought as well when I first saw IG's Taurox, and the revelation that it's weapons are the "Taurox Battle Cannon/gattling gun/missile launcher" rather than, well, ya know, perfectly fine weapons that already exist in the wh40k canon.

I would like to clarify that I'm not just an old git on a porch complaining about new things. I've been at this for 20 years. It's been nothing but new things. Size creep has made dreadnaughts look like kans and Nobs look like boyz. Flyers showed up. Psychic phases have come and gone and come and gone. Hell, between 2nd and 3rd, my whole army became aesthetically obsolete. These are at best, exciting developments for the game, at worst, a minor annoyance. This thread is about a much bigger problem.

What is the fundamental shift in the creative process? Miniatures come first, rules second.

There's no other explanation I can think of. Maybe GW is trying to bolster sales. I have no idea. But this frustrates me immensely. Frustrates me to the degree that I'm having a hard time getting the words out, so here's the less nimble part of my rant;

It looks like somebody made some beautiful minis, and then somebody else, who has zero understanding of the mindset of many established ork players, went "Oh wow! Those are great! It'll be SO COOL to make hyper specific rules for all those cool little touches you put on the model! It'll be SO FLUFFY" and zero thought or consideration was put into leaving at least some space for the creative potential of the gamers at home.

This is what I am calling the Toyification of Orks.

If you think I'm being unreasonable, let me ask you this: Why does virtually every nob have weapon options except the Kommando Nob, which is armed with a PK? If you don't know the answer, here it is: The Kommando Nob model is a pose-specific miniature with a PK. Every other Nob mini has joints/options. It is completely unmotivated as far as story or gameplay are concerned. Why would this default wargear be written into the rules?

This approach to wh40k is anti-conversion and anti-creativity.

A miniature with no assembly options can be a beautiful thing. There is nothing inherently better or worse about it than your standard core kits. To see it reflected in the rules for a non-named character? How can I not be insulted by this? I'm not asking this rhetorically, if you can tell me how you wrap your brain around it, please tell me so I can shake this headache.

This new book effectively spits in the face of the most inspiring part of the hobby for me: Imagining something, creating it, and then putting to test on the battlefield. Our minis are an extension of ourselves. This hobby is a very personal and even vulnerable experience. Who doesn't love the rush of fielding a freshly-dried squad on the tabletop for the first time? Maybe it'll smash the enemy HQ? Maybe it'll be flattened by artillery on turn 1. That feeling of excitement is the feeling of being emotionally engaged. The new Ork Codex doesn't not seem to get this.

The burna-exhaust, nosedrill, spikes, etc etc, should exist and upgrades available to many vehicles. The BoostaBlasta/Snazzwagon should just be able to take whatever weapon on top. I could go on, but you get the idea. As players and hobbyists, we need to craft the story, models, and tactics that are unique to us.

For what it's worth, I don't blame GW for this. For all I know this is a reverse Batman situation: the Orks I need, not the orks I deserve. If Orks were going the way of the Squats, and and this is the result of GW trying to save them, fine so be it. Maybe Ork players don't care as much as I do about walking the line between what they can build vs what they can field? For all I know this has been going on for other factions over the past few years and I just never noticed because I don't analyze the kits vs the codex vs canon to the degree that I do for Orks. What I do know is that I've been hurt, for lack of better phrasing. Like when that one friend drops a revealing comment and you know no amount of re-phrasing can take it back. The trust has been broken, the damage has been done.


Moving forward:
- Keep making the models I want to make.
- Magnetize zoggin everything from here out.
- Laugh and shrug when my opponent is as baffled as I am why the Battelwagon with two clearly big guns on it only has one big gun, and the Painboy holding a choppa is hitting with a Powerklaw.
- Hope that GW figures out why Ork players choose Orks OR come to terms with the notion that a sandbox approach to miniatures' relationships with rules is not sustainable for GW in the long run.


This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/01/08 17:20:33


 
   
Made in us
Slaanesh Havoc with Blastmaster





New Orleans

yep...

still love my Orks, too!
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






Blame the Chapter House Lawsuits. It's why No Model, No Rules exists. Everything needs to be expressly unique and copywritable, preferably with Adjective VerbNoun names.

GW have also shifted their focus from adults with disposable income to kids with their parents income.

Add me on Discord: BaconCatBug#0294
+++++There are currently ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTEEN (117) documents required to play Warhammer 40,000 8th edition+++++
+++++List of "broken" RaW in Warhammer 40,000 8th edition+++++
Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written (or modified by Special Snowflake FAQ) in the rulebooks, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective. Even GW agrees with me, send an email to 40kfaq@gwplc.com for a confirmation reply "4. Apply The Rules As Written. If you still don’t have a satisfactory answer, use the rule just as it is written if you possibly can, even if you are not completely happy with the effect the rule has."
Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities || Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. || Userscript to add a button to open all "[First Unread]" links on the page, hides the "[Blog View]" links, and adds a "Subscribed Threads" link to forum pages.  
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Maybe the looted wagon rules might scratch that itch for you?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BaconCatBug wrote:


GW have also shifted their focus from adults with disposable income to kids with their parents income.


Today I learned that I'm a kid with disposable income. NO RESPONSIBILITIES! WOOO!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/08 17:21:39


   
Made in ca
Dipping With Wood Stain




t.dot

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Blame the Chapter House Lawsuits. It's why No Model, No Rules exists. Everything needs to be expressly unique and copywritable, preferably with Adjective VerbNoun names.

GW have also shifted their focus from adults with disposable income to kids with their parents income.


Basically this.

The Chapter House lawsuit had a BIG impact on the way GW has approached army and miniature design.


 DaRealJDB wrote:
*snip*
Ork Warbosses are also Mekaniaks at heart.
*snip*


Unfortunately, you're look at a shift in demography. Many of the new players who got in from recent editions are used to the lack of options. That and less options means easier to balance (presumably).

Honestly, unless you're playing hyper-competitive tournaments, forge your own narrative. The latest WD (or the one prior, I think?) had Narrative rules to loot vehicles, and I'm sure your average casual player has no problem with you kit-bashing and combining vehicle data sheets (at an appropriate power/points cost).

   
Made in ca
Eternally-Stimulated Slaanesh Dreadnought





Hamilton, ON

Yeah, it's pretty much entirely down to the fact that GW still refuses to retain a competent IP lawyer.

The Fall of Kronstaat IV
Война Народная | Voyna Narodnaya | The People's War - 2,898pts painted (updated 18/09/19)
Волшебная Сказка | Volshebnaya Skazka | A Fairy Tale (updated 07/10/19, ep9 - Разорение | Razoreniye | Downfall)
Kabal of The Violet Heart (updated 18/09/19)

You know, if there's one thing I've learnt from being in the Army, it's never ignore a pooh-pooh. I knew a Major who got pooh-poohed; made the mistake of ignoring the pooh-pooh. He pooh-poohed it! Fatal error! 'Cause it turned out all along that the soldier who pooh-poohed him had been pooh-poohing a lot of other officers who pooh-poohed their pooh-poohs. In the end, we had to disband the regiment.
 
   
Made in ca
Yellin' Yoof on a Scooter





Toronto

 BaconCatBug wrote:
GW have also shifted their focus from adults with disposable income to kids with their parents income.


So I'm not crazy!

At what point does the market fork? Does everybody collectively just choose a past edition and start an underground codex rebalance of sorts?

Honestly, this hit me so hard, that I don't think I could take it again. I know everybody has been saying this on dakkadakka for ten years, but I know myself. I felt it when blizzard shifted starcraft from competitive to accessible and I stopped playing. When Apple shifted Final Cut's focus from professional to consumer, I didn't buy it. Suffice to say, I've been through this before, and right now I'm on the edge.

 
   
Made in ca
Eternally-Stimulated Slaanesh Dreadnought





Hamilton, ON

It doesn't help that the 'Eavy Metal team have adopted a new, cartoony style on the minis they paint.

I remember being in awe of 'Eavy Metal, these days I barely even glance at official pics.


The Fall of Kronstaat IV
Война Народная | Voyna Narodnaya | The People's War - 2,898pts painted (updated 18/09/19)
Волшебная Сказка | Volshebnaya Skazka | A Fairy Tale (updated 07/10/19, ep9 - Разорение | Razoreniye | Downfall)
Kabal of The Violet Heart (updated 18/09/19)

You know, if there's one thing I've learnt from being in the Army, it's never ignore a pooh-pooh. I knew a Major who got pooh-poohed; made the mistake of ignoring the pooh-pooh. He pooh-poohed it! Fatal error! 'Cause it turned out all along that the soldier who pooh-poohed him had been pooh-poohing a lot of other officers who pooh-poohed their pooh-poohs. In the end, we had to disband the regiment.
 
   
Made in ca
Yellin' Yoof on a Scooter





Toronto

Thank you everybody for the replies so far. This is really helping my brain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Excommunicatus wrote:
It doesn't help that the 'Eavy Metal team have adopted a new, cartoony style on the minis they paint.

I remember being in awe of 'Eavy Metal, these days I barely even glance at official pics.



Same. I come here and to Instagram to see awesome minis.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/08 17:30:03


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





The game is in something of a weird place regarding customization. I think on one hand, the game would benefit from having less rule granularity; not every customization needs to have rules to support it. The flip side of that is appreciating that every cool customization doesn't need to function with unique rules. We don't need unique rules for power swords, spears, axes, etc; we just need "power weapons" and let people model that however they like.
   
Made in gb
Sword-Bearing Inquisitorial Crusader




This approach has infected many, many armies and models. It is indeed, extremely discouraging, though I think the process began pre-Chapter House, since the shift from 'Wargear Lists'.

First we had, 'Take up to 50 points of ANYTHING FROM THIS LIST', which lead to fun things, like Veteran Guardsmen with Master Crafted lasguns.
Then we moved to, 'Take up to two of these six things'
Now we're on, 'Has X. May have Y.'

In some cases, [Like a lot of the new SuperScale Space Marines] we're on, 'Has X.'

I don't doubt that in the next wave of Codex's, when GW decides the Index is "Not a Thing" anymore, we'll see an awful lot of options go the way of the dinosaurs.

Disclaimer - I am a Games Workshop Shareholder. 
   
Made in us
Wing Commander





Dallas, TX

FW has made a kommando upgrade kit where the nob is armed with a big choppa.

Spoiler:


Orks are a easy faction to make count as weaponry, it doesn't have to make sense. You're also not obligated to toss out unusable model in this edition, simply store them away till next codex or supplement. Every army goes through this, cause you know GW is a model company first, they need the sales to keep the company alive.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/08 17:35:28


 
   
Made in ca
Yellin' Yoof on a Scooter





Toronto

 Big Mac wrote:
FW has made a kommando upgrade kit where the nob is armed with a big choppa.
Orks are a easy faction to make count as weaponry, it doesn't have to make sense. You're also not obligated to toss out unusable model in this edition, simply store them away till next codex or supplement. Every army goes through this, cause you know GW is a model company first, they need the sales to keep the company alive.


My kommando nob also has a big choppa. In game both of these nobs have a powerklaw.

It's like... okay... it's not wysiwyg, not a big deal to me as far as gameplay is concerned, but it's hard for me to care as much as I would if it was wysiwyg. I like to be rewarded for my creativity, not shunned.

 
   
Made in us
The Last Chancer Who Survived




On moon miranda.

40k has been on this road for many years. Everything comes complete and prepackaged from GW, it only gets rules if they sell it, and they have gone *deep* into that distinction. This has even gotten into stuff like terrain in some respects.

Since GW hasn't been in the Bitz business for a decade now, they have no incentive to drive that aspect unfortunately.

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

Heavy Gear Painting Log, Northern Guard, Southern Republican Army, and Terrain
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




It's sadly something that GW has been trending towards for a long time. I was flipping through the old witch hunter book yesterday and it really hit me how much flavor the game has either lost or is on the chopping block once GW conducts the purge 2.0 and purges the index options.

For me it's just how little to none the various primaris space marines have compared to the original marine line. So much flavor and need for kitbashing/converting is gone.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






Falls Church, VA

I have noticed this too, and it's disappointed me many times.

Back in the day, my Baneblades could take awesome upgrades like "Crew Escape Hatches", which allowed 2d6 Imperial Guardsmen armed with laspistols to appear when the tank was wrecked, and I think 1d6 if it exploded... I barely remember.

Point is, a lot of the cool flavorful stuff has died, and my Imperial Tank Crew models have long since been reconverted into something else. :(

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/08 18:05:33


Some people say they know no fear. What they mean is that they have encountered and conquered it. I, on the other hand, truly know no fear. It is as alien to me as doubt, rage, or mercy.

2nd Concordian Independent Super Heavy Tank Armoured Regiment - 12,376 points
Order of the Luminous Beacon - 2087 points
Nevian Conclave of the Ordo Hereticus - 2002 points 
   
Made in us
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle






All issues about no model no rules, monopose, limited option kits and hyper-specificity go back to Chapterhouse. As far as the creative process it's always been similar; the lead designers come up with some sketches and concepts, the modelers turn that into something that can be produced in plastic, and the rules guys turn the design notes directly into rules. Rules have always come last and GW has always been transparent about the fact that they're more about producing cool models than games themselves.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/08 18:32:00


 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




UK

 BaconCatBug wrote:


GW have also shifted their focus from adults with disposable income to kids with their parents income.


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/763215.page

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ERmUzs1O5E


Actually GW has always been marketed and aimed at kids. The early teens is a critical market for GW that often nets them long term gamers; whilst adults are important, they are far less likely to pick the game up blind without a history of being in the geek world/hobby world. So that "kid" market is essential for GW - in fact I'd wager most of us here started when we were young.

The difference is that perhaps you "notice" this now whilst when you were a kid Warhammer was always that game "played by adults" or appeared far more mature than everything else for kids at that age. So its not so much that anything GW end has changed; but that you've changed and your perceptions of things have changed and its hard to view the past without it going through your own internal mind filter.

A Blog in Miniature - now featuring reviews of many new Black Library books (latest Novellas) 
   
Made in us
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant





 Excommunicatus wrote:
Yeah, it's pretty much entirely down to the fact that GW still refuses to retain a competent IP lawyer.
Or competent rule writers for that matter.

Nor did they have proper in house communication where the lore writers mention few new things in the book, rule writers make rules for select few, and the sculpting department has no knowledge of what to sculpt out next.

GW created the niche for 3rd party markets themselves and then went onto sue them for doing what they themselves fell short of doing.

 Luciferian wrote:
...As far as the creative process it's always been similar; the lead designers come up with some sketches and concepts, the modelers turn that into something that can be produced in plastic, and the rules guys turn the design notes directly into rules. Rules have always come last...
This would be the proper process in which these types of business would run. Clearly, GW has not.

 Luciferian wrote:
... and GW has always been transparent about the fact that they're more about producing cool models than games themselves.
Maybe that explains why their rules are so poorly written.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/01/08 18:57:24


 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot





The design of these miniatures is down to sprue vs opportunity costs.

I have no doubt that at some point along the design process, there was one - maybe two - chassis planned for the new ork buggies, and the designers had all these incredible ideas: a drag racer, a mud buggy, the fuselage of a jet customized into a halftrack. But there was just no way to feasibly make vehicles that distinct into one or two multipart swappable kits.

So, the ultimatum came down, because this is plastic sprue design and the upfront cost comes per sprue: Make a vehicle as amazing as you can make it, and put it on a single sprue.

So the options went out the window in favor of an "every part of the buffalo" sprue where you use 100% everything on it to maximize usage. Similarly sized kits to the buggies are at the 66$ price mark rather than 45$ because they contain 2 distinct sprues.

And ultimately, if we had gotten the options that you wanted - if you could swap your Mek Speshul out for a Rokkit Kannon or a Zzap Blasta, then you'd just have one datasheet, not six. The buggies contain the same number of options spread out over more datasheets and more kits because the designers wanted to have the chassis be distinct. That's not a bad thing, or a good thing, IMO, just a thing.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Cutting stuff up and bunging it back together in new and interesting ways.






Under the couch

Honestly, I think the 'No Model No Rules' policy is a completely separate issue to what happened with Orks.

The no-option buggies aren't a casualty of the Chapterhouse case. They're a result of GW's current drive to remove points-driven list building from the game.

Power Levels only really work if units either have minimal options that are all equal to each other, or no options at all. So the trend that we've been seeing from (at least) the release of the Primaris Marines is for kits with fewer or no options.

The end goal will be what we have with the buggies - Instead of one 'buggy' unit with a range of different options to choose from, we have 6 different units that are all essentially the same thing, with fixed options differentiating them

Expect to see this carried across to other new kits for other races.

 
   
Made in us
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle






 skchsan wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
...As far as the creative process it's always been similar; the lead designers come up with some sketches and concepts, the modelers turn that into something that can be produced in plastic, and the rules guys turn the design notes directly into rules. Rules have always come last...
This would be the proper process in which these types of business would run. Clearly, GW has not.

Well you might want to tell them, because that's how they describe the workflow for their design team. I don't see how this is contradictory to ending up with poorly written rules or what type of process you think they must have followed alternatively.

 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 insaniak wrote:
Honestly, I think the 'No Model No Rules' policy is a completely separate issue to what happened with Orks.

The no-option buggies aren't a casualty of the Chapterhouse case. They're a result of GW's current drive to remove points-driven list building from the game.

Power Levels only really work if units either have minimal options that are all equal to each other, or no options at all. So the trend that we've been seeing from (at least) the release of the Primaris Marines is for kits with fewer or no options.

The end goal will be what we have with the buggies - Instead of one 'buggy' unit with a range of different options to choose from, we have 6 different units that are all essentially the same thing, with fixed options differentiating them

Expect to see this carried across to other new kits for other races.


Except that they just made upgrades for Primaris. There's a balance between options and cost and options will lost most of the time.

Could they make an IK kit that has two of every weapon so we could arm them however we wanted? Sure, but you'd pay through the nose for it.

   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






Why exactly do you need special snowflake rules to build a cool model? Simplifying rules bloat is a good thing, and you can still do all the aesthetic conversions you want.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant





 Luciferian wrote:
 skchsan wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
...As far as the creative process it's always been similar; the lead designers come up with some sketches and concepts, the modelers turn that into something that can be produced in plastic, and the rules guys turn the design notes directly into rules. Rules have always come last...
This would be the proper process in which these types of business would run. Clearly, GW has not.

Well you might want to tell them, because that's how they describe the workflow for their design team. I don't see how this is contradictory to ending up with poorly written rules or what type of process you think they must have followed alternatively.
Off the top of my head, mycetic spore, doom of malantai, and a few other nid named characters were mentioned in a book, which got translated to a rule in a codex, and no model was made for them. Nid players were psyched to have a drop pod for their armies, but were bummed out that there were no official models for them - enter chapter house.

So, here we have:
1. Conception of ideas for new units
2. Rules for new units
3. No model

This clearly contradicts your statement regarding the supposedly credible source describing their workflow because according to your source it follows:
1. Conception of ideas for new units
2. Idea is modelled out
3. Rules are released for new models
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Peregrine wrote:
Why exactly do you need special snowflake rules to build a cool model? Simplifying rules bloat is a good thing, and you can still do all the aesthetic conversions you want.


Because options are awesome and make it so my army doesn't look and play just like everyone else. They also enspire conversions and kitbashing. The main reason I've stuck with space marines over the years is because they have so many options.

All my tactical and scout squads are equipped different;y and I frequently use different loadouts for my HQ, my vehicles, etc. Instead GW lately has been treanding towards this unit has x and does y. That's boring game design and the game isn't any more balanced, so it literally has no upsides.
   
Made in us
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle






 skchsan wrote:
Off the top of my head, mycetic spore, doom of malantai, and a few other nid named characters were mentioned in a book, which got translated to a rule in a codex, and no model was made for them. Nid players were psyched to have a drop pod for their armies, but were bummed out that there were no official models for them - enter chapter house.

So, here we have:
1. Conception of ideas for new units
2. Rules for new units
3. No model

This clearly contradicts your statement regarding the supposedly credible source describing their workflow because according to your source it follows:
1. Conception of ideas for new units
2. Idea is modelled out
3. Rules are released for new models

All of that was shaken out and changed after the Chapterhouse legal battle, which we all know about, and which resulted in the No Model No Rules policy, which we all know about and which I explicitly mentioned. I don't really know what you're getting at here - that a very small number of exceptions from one codex that was published years ago proves that I am wrong? I'm just relaying information explicitly stated by people like Jes Goodwin. It kind of seems like your only point here is to "win" or argue for the sake of it. Again, if you want to argue for argument's sake, take it up with Jes Goodwin, not me.

 
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Cutting stuff up and bunging it back together in new and interesting ways.






Under the couch

HoundsofDemos wrote:

All my tactical and scout squads are equipped different;y and I frequently use different loadouts for my HQ, my vehicles, etc. Instead GW lately has been treanding towards this unit has x and does y. That's boring game design and the game isn't any more balanced, so it literally has no upsides.

The thing is, you're not necessarily going to actually wind up losing a great many options in the long run, other than for characters. Again, the Orks wound up with 6 different buggies to choose from. If they had gone with one buggy with 6 different loadouts, the end result would have been the same. The only difference is that the 6 different buggies have 6 different names.

The fixed loadouts are admittedly not as customisable as just having a list of stuff and choosing what you want... but it's not quite as bad as it appears at a first glance.



It does suck for characters, though.


 
   
Made in us
Grisly Ghost Ark Driver





The Eternity Gate

Fun law and business lesson incoming.

The Chapter House suit completely changed the way GW designs and builds models from the ground up. For non-americans the case went all the way to the Supreme Court. Digress for a second and realize the most powerful justices in our court system debated the IP law around space Marines shoulder pads. Really, it happened. The decision is publicly available for a nice boring read if anyone is interested.

Anyways, on topic, one of the results of CH suit was that the justices ruled it was not an IP violation to build a model that resembled something in the fiction. Everyone knows this part. But the other, an I think more important, part of their ruling was that compatible parts were NOT IP infringement.

What this means is that all those third party sellers of SM shoulder pads could proceed at will. This fundamentally changed the way GW models needed to be built on the sprues so they could prevent third party compatible bits. Look at sprues now a days and you'll notice they are molded so there are no easy modifications to parts. Take the new primaris or DG spures and they are intentionally cut so you can't just replace a head, a weapon, or a shoulder pads without ruining the model.

The consequences which OP is referencing is a "toyification" as, inherantly, they have to design their sprues to only have a specific, or a few specific, builds.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/01/08 20:11:23


01001000 01100001 01101001 01101100 00100000 01101111 01110101 01110010 00100000 01001110 01100101 01100011 01110010 01101111 01101110 00100000 01101111 01110110 01100101 01110010 01101100 01101111 01110010 01100100 01110011 00100001  
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





HoundsofDemos wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
Why exactly do you need special snowflake rules to build a cool model? Simplifying rules bloat is a good thing, and you can still do all the aesthetic conversions you want.


Because options are awesome and make it so my army doesn't look and play just like everyone else. They also enspire conversions and kitbashing. The main reason I've stuck with space marines over the years is because they have so many options.

All my tactical and scout squads are equipped different;y and I frequently use different loadouts for my HQ, my vehicles, etc. Instead GW lately has been treanding towards this unit has x and does y. That's boring game design and the game isn't any more balanced, so it literally has no upsides.


I think you're putting way too much emphasis on putting plasma on a couple guys over the whole squad. Hellblasters get different gun variants. So do Inceptors. So do Primaris. You can make an army as varied as you want with the dozens of data sheets, stratagems, relics, and traits available.

   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: