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.

FyoraSilverwolf wrote:This is probably common knowledge, but 'sanguin' is latin for blood. Their Primarch is basically named Blood. That really stood out for me as incredibly annoying when I was reading the fluff of the Space Marines. (Stuff like that just gets on my nerves.)

"Ferrus Manus" Hate that so much.

But in all seriousness, for me it goes to the Blood Angels. Deep Striking Land Raiders? Feth that noise.

MekanobSamael wrote:

FyoraSilverwolf wrote:This is probably common knowledge, but 'sanguin' is latin for blood. Their Primarch is basically named Blood. That really stood out for me as incredibly annoying when I was reading the fluff of the Space Marines. (Stuff like that just gets on my nerves.)

"Ferrus Manus" Hate that so much.

But in all seriousness, for me it goes to the Blood Angels. Deep Striking Land Raiders? Feth that noise.

Same with that one. It didn't come to mind as quickly though, I'm sick today.

That's why I couldn't play regular Space Marines, though Horus also being in Egyptian mythology bothered me a little bit, but now I don't really think about it because I'm not in a Mythology class any more. And the story is different, if I remember right.

I still don't like the way Ork things are named though, just for the record. Improper spelling gets to me as well.

Necrons. I tend to hate any undead army thats thrown into the mix. There is always an undead something in games,...and I always hate it.

Space puppies, Stupid ragnar

You know, the fact that Ferrus Manus's name literally means "iron hand" doesn't bug me.

What bugs me is the horrid grammar.

Nominative case, they got that right, but the adjective comes after the object. Manus Ferrus.

SaintHazard wrote:You know, the fact that Ferrus Manus's name literally means "iron hand" doesn't bug me.

What bugs me is the horrid grammar.

Nominative case, they got that right, but the adjective comes after the object. Manus Ferrus.

I thought I was the only one...

Azezel wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:You know, the fact that Ferrus Manus's name literally means "iron hand" doesn't bug me.

What bugs me is the horrid grammar.

Nominative case, they got that right, but the adjective comes after the object. Manus Ferrus.

I thought I was the only one...

You are not. I've been in love with Latin grammar ever since this scene from Monty Python's Life of Brian.

Having a father who taught college-level Latin for several years doesn't help matters.

I voted IG.I hate how they can take 9 tanks in a normal game if they wanted to.

Space Wolves and BA win this but not by much. IG are a very close third.

blood angels, dark angels, black templars, space wolves. they should keep to one codex. you just wait. within 5 - 10 years we have codices for all of the loyal founding chapters. it just isn't fair, SM having multiple codices and CSM only having 1. a boring one that is.

I've always thought the opposite. More codices (or multi-part codices) for different Chaos legions.

Also, different Tau septs, different Chaos Gods for Chaos Daemons, different Craftworlds... you get where I'm going with this.

Granted that'd make buying all 500 codices expensive, hence my multi-part codices suggestion.

These books are not so expensive to produce that GW needs to be charging $30 apiece for them, anyway - gaming supplements have always been way too expensive.

For all those Space Puppy-haters out there, I've got 3 words for you....

Canis penis envy.

Hate the hater but don't hate the playa.

SaintHazard wrote:I've always thought the opposite. More codices (or multi-part codices) for different Chaos legions.

Also, different Tau septs, different Chaos Gods for Chaos Daemons, different Craftworlds... you get where I'm going with this.

GW is already two editions behind on some of the codicies. The Witch Hunters don't have a single plastic sprue that is not inhereted from another army. How about getting them done before devoting development and production to yet another derivative codex?

AlexHolker wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:I've always thought the opposite. More codices (or multi-part codices) for different Chaos legions.

Also, different Tau septs, different Chaos Gods for Chaos Daemons, different Craftworlds... you get where I'm going with this.

GW is already two editions behind on some of the codicies. The Witch Hunters don't have a single plastic sprue that is not inhereted from another army. How about getting them done before devoting development and production to yet another derivative codex?

How 'bout them dropping LotR and doing both?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also these are some interesting poll results.

Everyone hates Space Marines, but apparently everyone loves Grey Knights.

Still trying to figure out how that works.

Perhaps the poll should have checkboxes instead so people can select ALL the armies they hate.

Yak9UT wrote:
Depends I guess most people are sheep some are alphas

Most people go with the group only when it comes to choosing.

I make my own choices but if you look at studies and test on people when it comes to desiding something most will go with the group choice.

The popular option will always be the one chosen by the majority of people. It's how math works.

But I understand the point you were trying to make. People are sheep, yes I get it. But, you know, sometimes, the most popular choice is the most popular choice for a reason. Sometimes, yes, I agree, people make a decision based solely on what 'all of their friends are doing.' But everyone does that. Everyone. But sometimes, the popular choice is the popular choice because it's better.

And, no, I am not saying that such is the case when it comes to choosing an army in Warhammer 40k. Choosing to play World of Warcraft, yes, but 40k, no.

Jimsolo wrote:

The popular option will always be the one chosen by the majority of people.

The first rule of Tautology Club is the first rule of Tautology Club.


In any event, I think checkboxes would have made the poll more useful, and I suspect we'd see all MEQ armies, with the possible exception of Vanilla equal and way out in front.

IG are my most hated army for me. I think they are probably one of the least fun armies to fight because of the massive amount of blast templates and heavy weapons in the army. Lemann russ is pretty much crap also move 12" and an additional D6 then fire everything while having a front armor of 14 and side of 13. Why cant the LR fire all weapons and move a D6 + 12" it costs more.

Bloodfrenzy187 wrote:IG are my most hated army for me. I think they are probably one of the least fun armies to fight because of the massive amount of blast templates and heavy weapons in the army. Lemann russ is pretty much crap also move 12" and an additional D6 then fire everything while having a front armor of 14 and side of 13. Why cant the LR fire all weapons and move a D6 + 12" it costs more.

The way it plays and I think I told you this before its a D6 move and it can shoot its guns not 12 then d6 I never played it that way.

FyoraSilverwolf wrote:

final_boss325 wrote:Blood Angels. Their fluff is weak, non-sensical, and stupid. The army is overall over-costed and goofy. I seriously think GW just wanted to find a way to make a vampire space marine chapter.

That was probably their intention.

This is probably common knowledge, but 'sanguin' is latin for blood. Their Primarch is basically named Blood. That really stood out for me as incredibly annoying when I was reading the fluff of the Space Marines. (Stuff like that just gets on my nerves.)

Hey, our primarch wasn't named Ferrus Manus, we got a way to fall here still ;-)

As for my most hated army, I'd have to go with Space Wolves. If there was more a Norse focus and less a wolf one it wouldn't be so bad to me. As for the tabletop, admittedly it takes a lot of money to do exceptionally well with them, but they really make you go WTF a lot of the time. IG are also annoying as all hell on the tabletop, but I like their fluff, so I will take my pie plates to the face and like it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

templeorks wrote:

Bloodfrenzy187 wrote:IG are my most hated army for me. I think they are probably one of the least fun armies to fight because of the massive amount of blast templates and heavy weapons in the army. Lemann russ is pretty much crap also move 12" and an additional D6 then fire everything while having a front armor of 14 and side of 13. Why cant the LR fire all weapons and move a D6 + 12" it costs more.

The way it plays and I think I told you this before its a D6 move and it can shoot its guns not 12 then d6 I never played it that way.

Yeah, you need to read the IG codex, they can do a lot of BS but that's not on the list.

I hate both the 'nilla marine codex, simply because it doesn't feel like a 'nilla marine codex, it feels like codex ultramarines. I wish GW would take a break from all the UM fluff and create other stuff for other chapters. I wish the codex would feature more special characters that weren't from the ultramarines. Also i hate blood angels, i mean seriously "OMFG DEEP STRIKING LAND RAIDERS AND GOLDEN NIPPLES" who came up with that crap?

The Ghoma wrote:I hate both the 'nilla marine codex, simply because it doesn't feel like a 'nilla marine codex, it feels like codex ultramarines. I wish GW would take a break from all the UM fluff and create other stuff for other chapters. I wish the codex would feature more special characters that weren't from the ultramarines. Also i hate blood angels, i mean seriously "OMFG DEEP STRIKING LAND RAIDERS AND GOLDEN NIPPLES" who came up with that crap?

Agreed on both points. I don't hate the vanilla codex or Ultramarines. I DO hate Matt Ward for ruining their fluff. I also wish there were more non-UM SCs in the nilla codex.

I do, however hate Blood Angels.

Flying Land Raiders.

Flying Terminators with two-handed relic blades who can still fire 2 shots and then assault and can DS and only scatter 1d6.

Assault Marines as troops.

An IC who can DS without scattering - and any group he's with gets the same ability.

Fast predators with TL ACs.

It's all goddamned ridiculous.

SaintHazard wrote:Flying Terminators with two-handed relic blades who can still fire 2 shots and then assault and can DS and only scatter 1d6.

Just in case that wasn't just your attempt at comedic hyperbole, Sanguinary Guard don't have relic blades, they have two-handed master-crafted power weapons. So no Str increase and no extra attack for an additional CCW. They also have no invulnerable save and only come in groups of 5, so die fairly quickly to dedicated fire. They're also unable to DS and then assault, from what you wrote I'm not sure if you thought that was the case or not. If you already knew that however then I apologize.

Feel free to get your hate on of course, just want you to hate the army that I play for stuff we can actually do at least.

My personaly most disliked army is mech eldar, as it's main tactic seems to be not to fight. As Tyranids, I find that I do not have enough firepower to force the issue, with Eldar tanks being so ridiculously durable.

Neconilis wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:Flying Terminators with two-handed relic blades who can still fire 2 shots and then assault and can DS and only scatter 1d6.

Just in case that wasn't just your attempt at comedic hyperbole, Sanguinary Guard don't have relic blades, they have two-handed master-crafted power weapons. So no Str increase and no extra attack for an additional CCW. They also have no invulnerable save and only come in groups of 5, so die fairly quickly to dedicated fire. They're also unable to DS and then assault, from what you wrote I'm not sure if you thought that was the case or not. If you already knew that however then I apologize.

Feel free to get your hate on of course, just want you to hate the army that I play for stuff we can actually do at least.

Sorry. Relic blades was a brain fart. And yes, they can be taken down by focused fire - if you fail your damn 2+ armor saves.

Flying damn Terminators man.

Bloodfrenzy187 wrote:IG are my most hated army for me. I think they are probably one of the least fun armies to fight because of the massive amount of blast templates and heavy weapons in the army. Lemann russ is pretty much crap also move 12" and an additional D6 then fire everything while having a front armor of 14 and side of 13. Why cant the LR fire all weapons and move a D6 + 12" it costs more.

...that isn't how lumbering behemoth works at all. I will agree that it is unpleasant to fight people who cheat or have no clue how their army's rules work.

A Leman Russ can move 6" and fire its turret in additional to one other main weapon and all defensive weapons, or stand still and shoot everything. A Russ can move a maximum of 6+d6 inches a turn at cruising speed, and when it does it can't shoot anything.

I dont really get the BA hate.

Deepstriking LR make no sense in fluff terms but they cant even fire the term they come in, if you can deal with a LR dropping into the middle of your lines, most likely buy itself you got some real problems.

And the golden nipple thing is rapidy becaoming a stupid taboo and unclever 40k forum joke. Its based of old roman armor, same thing. OMFG nipples!?... grow up it has to do with actual historical armor, I say good job GW. Before you call me a fan boy know that I hate the new BA fluff, and am not all that partial to the codex itself. But it could be worse, Better than the vampire route they could have taken. Or the Wolfy Mcwerewolves riding wolves like they did with SW's.

Just saying...

Laughing God wrote:I dont really get the BA hate.

And the golden nipple thing is rapidy becaoming a stupid taboo and unclever 40k forum joke. Its based of old roman armor, same thing. OMFG nipples!?... grow up it has to do with actual historical armor, I say good job GW. Before you call me a fan boy know that I hate the new BA fluff, and am not all that partial to the codex itself. But it could be worse, Better than the vampire route they could have taken. Or the Wolfy Mcwerewolves riding wolves like they did with SW's.

Just saying...

THANK YOU I get so sick of people complaining about "gold nipples" because they haven't cracked open a history book. Grow up people!

Wraithlordmechanic wrote: THANK YOU I get so sick of people complaining about "gold nipples" because they haven't cracked open a history book. Grow up people!

Or it could just be that sculpted muscles look fine on a form-fitting bronze breastplate but don't on a suit of barrel-chested power armour.

Laughing God wrote:I dont really get the BA hate.

I don't hate an army for their fluff or even tactics and rules. I usually hate armies based on the players who command them.

And from my experience, BA and SM are usually manned by...people I'm not too fond of. To put it nicely. Granted, giant people I'm not too fond of can and do play any army, the bigger people I'm not too fond of play the 2 aforementioned armies. So i hate them most... Or at least, I'm most passionate about destroying them.

Laughing God wrote:And the golden nipple thing is rapidy becaoming a stupid taboo and unclever 40k forum joke. Its based of old roman armor, same thing.

You read too many comic books and not enough history books.

The Romans never had nipples on their armor. They never had ridiculous-looking muscly armor, let alone nipples. Do the damn research.

The Romans used three types of armor: lorica plumata (scale mail armor), lorica segmentata (segmented splint mail armor), and lorica hamata (chainmail).

And before anyone makes THIS claim, no, the Greeks didn't do it either. The closest they had was the form-fitting hardened leather armor the early Hoplites wore, and that wasn't even muscle-armor, it just happened to vaguely resemble the chest it was molded to. Hey, Greek soldiers never went to battle half-naked, either, but if your entire catalogue of knowledge on Greek warfare is based entirely on the movie 300, you might think so!

In fact, nobody in history has ever had muscles molded into their armor. One, because they knew it'd look idiotic. Two, because if you've ever seen a suit of armor being made, it'd be so inefficient and time-consuming to hammer out details like that in a suit of armor that it'd take five times as long to make a single suit - and when your smiths are making breastplates for your entire military force, they need to work quickly, not spend time on frivolous details.

The idea of muscle-armor (without nipples) is based on modern Hollywood interpretations that the writers thought would make the soldiers more manly and appealing to the audience. It's basically a fabrication, and it's stupid.

It was stupid in movies, it was stupid in comic books, and it's stupid in 40k.

And I hate BA for it. Among other reasons. Lots of other reasons.