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.

A question to the OP; does 'knights' refer to Gey Knights or Imperial Knights?

 jreilly89 wrote:


Tau are a small fringe empire that could easily be annihilated by any of the larger empires if they so desired.

Except the only two empires that crossed paths with Tau desired exactly that and failed: hive Fleet Gorgon and Damocles Gulf Crusade.
The Imperium can't crush Tau because of a simple logistic issue: sending enough men and material on the far end of Damocles Gulf (which is difficult for Warp travel to traverse) and keeping it there for the long, bloody war that would follow is something the Imperium can't afford without letting large swathes of it's territory undefended.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Even the Necrons outnumber them.

There are I believe less of both Eldar and Dark Eldar than Tau, are they not?

 jreilly89 wrote:
Second, they have mech suits with no AV (Dreadnoughts have AV)

So do Eldar (all Wraith constructs are either Infantry or MCs), and Dreadknights are also not walkers.

 jreilly89 wrote:
more firepower than the almighty Bolter.

Tau Pulse Rifles/Carbines are exactly as strong (s5 ap5) as Volkite Chargers, the 'common' weapon of the Early Great Crusade Era Marines. Mankind went through 10 years of 'dumbing-down' since then. Fluff-wise Tau are supposed to do better.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Also, in the grim dark of 40k, they are perhaps the least Grim Dark and run around screaming about 40k-era Communism.

You mean the race universally enthralled to their leadership caste that has popped into existance out of nowhere and has a totally inscrutable agenda is not grimdark enough for 40k?

That's just my opinion on why I want them gone.

In general, I think diversity is good in 40k. Keeps things from getting boring.

If I had to remove something, it would probably be Tau. Just because I find the blatant attempt to suck in anime fans with no consideration for background or theme to be galling. They just aren't MISERABLE enough to fit into the 40k universe.

Give them a non-anime look & have their entire civilization hurtling helplessly towards their own obliteration... and I'm good!

 Gitsplitta wrote:
In general, I think diversity is good in 40k. Keeps things from getting boring.

If I had to remove something, it would probably be Tau. Just because I find the blatant attempt to suck in anime fans with no consideration for background or theme to be galling. They just aren't MISERABLE enough to fit into the 40k universe.

Give them a non-anime look & have their entire civilization hurtling helplessly towards their own obliteration... and I'm good!

What about Eldar who are just there for fantasy players who like elves? Or Space Marines who are just there for children?

All armies are based on something:
Tau=anime
SM=starship trooper dudes
Eldar=elves
Orks=orcs
Tyranids=alien
Necrons=tomb kings/terminator
Etc.

Well, the elder, orks, & dwarves were carry-overs from fantasy from the very beginning. Plus they're all miserable or psychotically violent... and the Dwarves have been "wiped out" by the tyranids. So all is properly grim-dark. I'm not sure where you get the idea that the space marines are "just there for the children". You might want to read the actual Starship Troopers novel. Nothing child-like about them.

Ad yes, GW has stolen nearly every idea it's ever had. But the rest fit into the greater theme of their universe... the Tau do not.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
The size things makes sense, I have always wished that they had just retconned them in to have a sizable area in their control.

But the other stuff is silly IMO. First, the tau are not communist, but utilitarian. There are no castes, or ranks in communism. If you think they aren't grimdark, then you obviously haven't looked into there lore. They are just not in-your-face grimdark.
The bolter is a middling power weapon. Yes, they can kill on one hit easily, but so can almost every basic weapon in the game. The suit thins is just option, I've seen people with both. The funny thing is changing them to walker would be a buff to them. Other than the riptide, but I'd be ok with getting rid of the riptide.


Overall it sounds like someone with a personal vendetta after losing to them.

So? I do have a personal vendetta against them. Anyone who voted to remove an army in this thread most likely does. I explained my opinion on why I think they're not aesthetically pleasing. You're free to debate me on this, but this is my opinion, not something you can call me "wrong" on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SGTPozy wrote:
A question to the OP; does 'knights' refer to Gey Knights or Imperial Knights?

Imperial Knights. I lumped GK under SM.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Imperial Guard for sure.

Actually, I agree with this.

They are great in the fluff but their individual power level on the tabletop is out of proportion compared to the other races. A standard Guardsman is simply way too strong compared to a Tyranid, Eldar, Space Marine or Necron. It makes them downright immersionbreaking to fight, and it detracts from the grimdark of 40k to have normal guys so strong.

It's very hard to fix in the current situation, so off they go.

The same goes for Orks, although much less so, so they can stay.

Imperial Guardsmen too strong? How? They cost even less then Orks. Lore-wise, a Guardsman would take on a single Ork or Termagant/Hormagaunt all day. Tabletop-wise, Tyranids and Orks are few in number and come in limited wave. The tabletop is poor representation of the fluff.

For this, I would say either any of those Space Marine clone army, either Blood Angels or Dark Angels and the Necron. Necron aren't that great. Their lore has changed so much and now they are just awakening and gak.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Wait...thee WS3 BS3 S3 T3 I3 5+sv Ld7 guardsmen wielding S3 Rapid Fire guns isn't just too strong, but actually *immersion breaking*?

Yeah. 4-5 Guardsmen will kick a Space Marine's ass in melee, which is pretty funny as I am fairly certain that never ever happens in any lore (codex or BL) outside of obvious plot armour aka Cain/Gaunt. Hell, have the SM shoot the Guardsman with his grotesquely large explosive shells and he'll just shrug it off 1/3 of the time. BS.

4-5 guardsmen trade even casualties with a Space Marine, it only looks like they're "kicking his ass" because the Space Marine only has one wound to lose, but the killing power of both groups is roughly equal (assuming neither side charges), while that group of guardsmen costs 43-80% more than that single space marine (depending on if it's 4 or 5 guardsmen).

If they're all attacking him at once, as a unit, I don't see anything wrong with that. That's called a force multiplier, and the Space Marine can only have hands, blades, and eyes in so many places. If they're attacking together, that's not terribly unrealistic, if he were simply going room to room and punching one guy to death at a time, or if he caught them by surprise (not something tabletop 40k has mechanics for), he could do that all day and kill huge numbers of them without any problems. When there's a grip of them attacking as an organized, disciplined group acting with purpose (something rarely portrayed by most fluff, trope link below) that's not at all inconceivable.

There was a video posted in a thread elsewhere, showing a world class fencer taking on 50 guys at a time, and IIRC taking out 15 or 16 before losing and lasted several minutes. Well, that worked because they could only attack in one particular manner and only strike one small spot in the most defensible part of his body and could only be engaged one at a time, and had those restrictions not been there he'd have been done in just a couple of seconds against such numbers. A Space Marine would have more vulnerable areas than just that (power-backpack, groin, neck, underarms, back of the knee, insides of the elbows, torso joint, potentially head, hands, etc) and face the same issue. A coordinated group of trained soldiers in a general melee combat against a *single* Space Marine trading casualties on an even basis isn't so outrageous under such circumstances.

Say five go in, the Space Marine puts one guy down before anyone else can connect, say he blocks or parries two very swiftly, one guy lands a blow but is completely offset by the armor, while the last guy gets a sword-bayonet into the torso-joint and unloads a dozen Lasgun bolts into the wound and puts the Space Marine down. That suddenly doesn't sound so far fetched.

Additionally, you're taking the to-wound mechanics far too literally. A Guardsmen is not simply shrugging off a direct hit to the chest 1/3rd of the time. That whole system is abstracted. The Space Marine isn't simply firing 1 bolt out to 24" or 2 shots at 12" and under, that's an abstraction. The shooter is often likely firing a burst or rapid repeated shots, the entire sequence of which is abstracted in that "BS4-66% hit rate". And, again, what a "hit" constitutes isn't necessarily a direct center-mass hit, but rather "the burst of fire lands in an area where it's possible to harm the target". A hit may be a headshot or a near miss that explodes two feet away. The combined abstract average of the potential of harm of both of those (and everything in between) is what is represented by that "33% of the time they're shrugging off the hit" you're talking about. Yeah, a headshot will kill a Guardsmen dead, often will kill a Space Marine dead too, but a shot that explodes two feet away probably won't do much to either but has a very small chance of potentially hurting, and it's that entire spectrum that's being abstracted in the whole process here.

Also, when we're talking about Bolters, these are weapons that realistically probably couldn't hit the broad side of a barn (such weapons have been tried, even produced commercially, there's a reason they don't exist anymore). They simply do not have sufficient muzzle velocity to properly stabilize, and often have a minimum effective range, and if a booster charge is used then there's no reason for them to not simply function as more traditional firearms and you're losing a huge amount of potential space that could go to a larger penetrator or warhead to an internal rocket that could be dispensed with. They also have extremely short barrels, particularly relative to the projectile size (and *especially* storm bolters) and would only further reinforce the accuracy problem. This is also a weapon that's been described as caseless, yet clearly has casings and ejections. It's a weapon that's been described as far too powerful for normal humans to wield, yet they clearly can and have had fluff, models and rules available to do so from Rogue Trader up to the current edition. We have depictions of them effortlessly cutting through Space Marine power armor, and being nigh-useless against it, and everything in between.

If you're only paying attention to the most powerful and outlandish aspects of fluff, sure, then Guardsmen might seem overpowered. If you take everything as a whole, acknowledge that there are contradictions, stunningly gigantic variances in described power & capability, and functionality issues with it, the in-game representations are absolutely fine.

Au contraire. I'd argue it is a gross underestimation of the abilities of other factions.

Given the wildly varying portrayals and huge variations in power, methinks not. In some books, immensely experienced and capable Chaos Space Marines die to simple IG Mortars. In others, a single squad Space Marines slays literally thousands of Dark Eldar in close quarters combat without a casualty. How do you reconcile these? Do we assume that a DE Warriors should simply die in immense droves against an SM in tabletop gameplay?

Lets be honest, the overwhelmingly vast majority of descriptions of fluff fights suffer heavily from both the "Conservation of Ninjutsu" syndrome, as well as being "Mooks". and associated "Mook Chivalry".

It's like Black Crusade, the humans nerf everything else so they won't be too weak gamewise. Which sucks in a story-driven game.

Again, FFG's RPG's, like most RPG's, often exaggerate elements of the setting for the sake of cool factor. The Space Marines of Black Crusade and Deathwatch are also insanely more capable than the original Space Marines released for use in Dark Heresy in 2007/2008.

Under FFG's rules, many common weapons in the 40k universe, often those that have consistently been portrayed as being capable of hurting a Space Marine, literally cannot do so unless massed in abstracted "Horde" units that artifically vastly increase their power. These are cinematic aspects and game mechanics, meant to portray a "special" and "heroic" band, with many associated tropes and belief suspensions, as opposed to an accurate reflection of the capabilities of various weapons and foes.

Ripper swarms are fine. As said, some Orks would need toning down too, though nowhere near as much. As would Tau, but again, nowhere near as much. MEQ, Daemons, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Necrons, and most Tyranids are good where they are.

Why are Ripper Swarms fine but Guardsmen are not? How much would you have to nerf Orks before they fit the narrative you seek? How much more pathetic can you make a Fire Warrior given their already terrible statline? Why are Eldar and Dark Eldar fine despite having similar depictions of them being slaughtered en-masse by Space Marines?

How the statlines came where they are is irrelevant, it's where they are now that matters. GW wants me to play a narrative game, but I can't do this as the game is unable to reflect its own lore.

If you're only looking at the absolute most exaggerated aspects of said lore.

I'd argue that Cain's Berzerker antics are up there with the subsonic Marines fwiw.

Subsonic marines?

The scene with 6 CSM casually wiping out a Guard company is not at all out of place in the setting. 'Tis part of the grimdark.

Sure. But why is it unthinkable for the reverse to occur as part of the same token of the grimdark? The 6 heroes/anti-heroes charge the faceless mob and are obliterated by overwhelming firepower before they can do anything and are soon forgotten as the bureaucracy and faceless ranks roll forward over everything. That's the aspect that's being forgotten here.

OP complains about "elitism" from an army in a fantasy game, but is somehow completely oblivious to their own actual elitism and is also not surprisingly a hypocrite, ignoring the "elitist" aspects of their own preferred faction(s) while complaining about others they personally don't find appealing. I also do love the idea that "Everything I don't like doesn't deserve to exist!"

What's the point of this thread, other than just to troll or alienate people? Because I personally don't see one.

i think deamons

 Sidstyler wrote:
OP complains about "elitism" from an army in a fantasy game, but is somehow completely oblivious to their own actual elitism and is also not surprisingly a hypocrite, ignoring the "elitist" aspects of their own preferred faction(s) while complaining about others they personally don't find appealing. I also do love the idea that "Everything I don't like doesn't deserve to exist!"

What's the point of this thread, other than just to troll or alienate people? Because I personally don't see one.

I don't understand why this passive aggressive comment exists. I'm legitimately curious why people don't like certain armies and who they'd want gone.

Also, everyone here has been pretty respectful, other than those calling me out for having a dislike of a fictional army. Its like my opinion, man.

All of them. I like to think that in the future everyone will have left the barbaric practice of warfare behind and learned to resolve conflicts through interpretive dance.

Brennonjw wrote:I hate this idea, why is it a big deal if there are many codexes? I'd rather pay 50 for the codex I need than 100 for the 1/3 of the book that I would use.

People still don't understand that there are more Marine codex books because people buy them. Rolling them into one book wouldn't give more time/books to other factions. There would just be less books. Space Marines don't sell more because they have more books. They have more books because they sell more.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

Brennonjw wrote:I hate this idea, why is it a big deal if there are many codexes? I'd rather pay 50 for the codex I need than 100 for the 1/3 of the book that I would use.

People still don't understand that there are more Marine codex books because people buy them. Rolling them into one book wouldn't give more time/books to other factions. There would just be less books. Space Marines don't sell more because they have more books. They have more books because they sell more.

There's a lot of supposition there, and a chicken-egg problem. Are there lots of marine books because marines are popular, or are there lots of marine players because marines are the best supported, most varied, and usually cheapest army to buy/build/paint?

The same can be applied to sisters. Have they seen a lack of support because they're unpopular, or are they unpopular because their support has been abysmal and the cost to build an army of Sisters dwarfs that of even some Forgeworld IG armies?

Remember, a lot of the early stuff, where marine started getting their own books, happened because that's just what the studio guys felt like doing, long before the studio became subordinate to the marketing and sales groups.

 Raxmei wrote:
All of them. I like to think that in the future everyone will have left the barbaric practice of warfare behind and learned to resolve conflicts through interpretive dance.

Dancehammer, yes yes. I approve.

None. I don't believe in wrongbadfun on the tabletop.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Imperial Guard for sure.

Actually, I agree with this.

They are great in the fluff but their individual power level on the tabletop is out of proportion compared to the other races. A standard Guardsman is simply way too strong compared to a Tyranid, Eldar, Space Marine or Necron. It makes them downright immersionbreaking to fight, and it detracts from the grimdark of 40k to have normal guys so strong.

It's very hard to fix in the current situation, so off they go.

The same goes for Orks, although much less so, so they can stay.

Because no matter how strong of an xenos/chaos space marine you are, in real space, Physics will win, especially if it involves the explosive force of a leman russ shell

I was ready to vote daemons, but it really wouldn't be that hard to try to balance them and their crazy invul saves, if geedubs really had any intention of balancing them a bit better.

Imperial knights is really just mini-Apocalypse guard, so I guess my vote is for the knights to shove off.

 toasteroven wrote:

 Raxmei wrote:
All of them. I like to think that in the future everyone will have left the barbaric practice of warfare behind and learned to resolve conflicts through interpretive dance.

Dancehammer, yes yes. I approve.

"In the far future, there is only rhythm and groove."

Orks or necrons.

i wanna say nids so bad because of grudges but they are a unique enough enemy that there would be a big boring gap and we would be left with chaos versus...not chaos.

orks i would just like to see go away. i don't like their aesthetic, the general attitude of ork players(in my meta/area) is just horrid and boring.

I have one or two that come to the tourneys my friend and i run and are just insufferable. they slow play, gripe about having an underpowered army(debatable, i know) and just are debbie downers.

die toten hosen wrote:
Orks or necrons.

i wanna say nids so bad because of grudges but they are a unique enough enemy that there would be a big boring gap and we would be left with chaos versus...not chaos.

orks i would just like to see go away. i don't like their aesthetic, the general attitude of ork players(in my meta/area) is just horrid and boring.

I have one or two that come to the tourneys my friend and i run and are just insufferable. they slow play, gripe about having an underpowered army(debatable, i know) and just are debbie downers.

For me, that describes Blood Angels. Almost every BA player I've met has either been surly, cheaty, or just otherwise unpleasant. I've had very few pleasant experiences against BA players, and it's not even really the fault of the army, but just the people I've happened to play against.

Moreso than any other army, it's always the BA player that's going to be a TFG in my experience.

Blood Angels. They are a Codex Adherent chapter. Just roll them into C:SM, give them some Chapter tactics and DC as a chapter unit.

Knights....Its just pay to win. We all know it. The damn things are way too good for their points, and impossible to beat unless you have a list tailored to beat them.There is no reason to be bringing these obnoxious wraithknights and knights in non-apoc games.

Give the the axe

 iGuy91 wrote:
Knights....Its just pay to win. We all know it. The damn things are way too good for their points, and impossible to beat unless you have a list tailored to beat them.There is no reason to be bringing these obnoxious wraithknights and knights in non-apoc games.

Give the the axe

I think it's more an issue that multiples are a problem. One for nearly 400pts is pretty ok, most armies can deal with that. When you've got to deal with 5, or worse yet, an Adamantine Lance where they get to reroll saves...just because, Gerantius with this 3++, and another one rolling around for kicks in a 2k game, that gets truly ridiculous.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
Knights....Its just pay to win. We all know it. The damn things are way too good for their points, and impossible to beat unless you have a list tailored to beat them.There is no reason to be bringing these obnoxious wraithknights and knights in non-apoc games.

Give the the axe

I think it's more an issue that multiples are a problem. One for nearly 400pts is pretty ok, most armies can deal with that. When you've got to deal with 5, or worse yet, an Adamantine Lance where they get to reroll saves...just because, Gerantius with this 3++, and another one rolling around for kicks in a 2k game, that gets truly ridiculous.

Exactly. Kill the Codex and put a Knight in an Imperial Armour book.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
Knights....Its just pay to win. We all know it. The damn things are way too good for their points, and impossible to beat unless you have a list tailored to beat them.There is no reason to be bringing these obnoxious wraithknights and knights in non-apoc games.

Give the the axe

I think it's more an issue that multiples are a problem. One for nearly 400pts is pretty ok, most armies can deal with that. When you've got to deal with 5, or worse yet, an Adamantine Lance where they get to reroll saves...just because, Gerantius with this 3++, and another one rolling around for kicks in a 2k game, that gets truly ridiculous.

Exactly. Kill the Codex and put a Knight in an Imperial Armour book.

putting it in an over priced forge world book is the solution because?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Necrons, for sure. 40k didn't need another MEQ army, what with Space Undead already taken by BA Space Vampire Knights.

So then get rid of Eldar. Elves are supposed to be fragile, yet 3+ saves galore.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 iGuy91 wrote:
Knights....Its just pay to win. We all know it. The damn things are way too good for their points, and impossible to beat unless you have a list tailored to beat them.There is no reason to be bringing these obnoxious wraithknights and knights in non-apoc games.

Give the the axe

Spoken with truth. Though I will admit one of them isn't a big deal, it's the fact that it's yet another toy only for imperial armies, and it doesn't take up a LOW slot, it gets to be its own special thing, which is stupid.

Knights, simply because all their units are superheavies when all other factions wield mostly humanoid-sized units. Not really sure what niche they're supposed to fill either.

I'd replace them with the Adeptus Mechanicus faction.







Also Sisters of Battle. Sorry, Sisters of Silence were better!

One of the things I like about 40k, is all the choices you have.

Sure, some armies are just unnecessary splinters of other armies, but if (somehow... If you're rich)you can look past that, you can build almost any army you want. Beats facing the same stale forces, when suddenly the Nids are getting artillery support from tau! Giant robots are charging legions of demons!

I voted none.

If a had to choose one it would be Imperial Knights.