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.

Thing is, there are only ever one or two optimal builds for any given unit anyway. I kind of had fun converting custom characters to be special and expensive snowflakes in the past, but once you get over the allure of playing dress-up with your dollmans and think abut building a more optimal list, spending a bunch of points on one character just to give them a lot of "cool" stuff isn't very efficient. I can remember having to mix metal and plastic parts to make a custom SM Chapter Master with a jump pack and lightning claws. It ended up being a cool model, but it was a pain compared to going with an out-of-the-box option, and in terms of in-game performance it wasn't ideal.

There are still units that have a huge array of options - going with the Death Guard example, you have tons of freedom to equip Plague Marines for many different tasks. What you don't have is the option to customize elite and HQ characters, but they are each equipped so as to serve a specialized purpose. The challenge in list building is still there, however, because you have to choose how to equip the troops or core of your army and which other units to support them with. You just don't go as much into the nitty gritty of how you're going to create your characters out of dozens of possible wargear options, which I frankly don't miss all that much, personally.

At the same time, "optimal" can also be more subjective in the grand scheme of things. For example, back in 3rd-7th, one of the most common adages was "don't mix Heavy Weapons in a unit." While this means not running a Devestator Squad with "one of each weapon," I did find at the tail-end of 7th that it was occasionally worth running Chaos Havocs as "2 Autocannons, 2 Missile Launchers." Both were range 48 weapons with 1 point of strength difference between them, but having a pair of AP shots to scare Jetbikes into Jinking (or a pair of frag rounds to discourage Napoleonic blocks) had its use, while keeping the unit focused.

There are/were other examples where there was a pragmatic use for non-optimal loadouts. I did something similar with Orks in 5th, running Kan units as "2 Rokkits, one Grotzooka," my rationale being one of the three would usually be shake-locked anyway, I could allocate hits, 2 Rokkits gave me "enough" chance to suppress a Razorback, and the Grotzooka allowed for close-quarters crowd control.

One of the more contentious ones was giving a Fire Dragon Exarch a Flamer, because the unit is "supposed" to be hunting tanks. Ok, fine, but you come across a Chimera that unloaded its infantry and you want to clip some errant Guardsmen while you blow up their ride. Or your opponent brought Shrouded chaff, or tries charging you with a throwaway MSU unit...

Heck, you could make a reasonable case for "TL Missile Pod and Flamer" Crisis Suits in 5th despite the "Fireknife Only" blowhards.

All this "only one or two optimal loadouts" is the result of Stop Having Fun Guys scrubbing up the game and going "NO OPTIONS! MONOPOSE ONLY! Final Destination." I honestly don't understand you. Who died and made you the Warhammer Police?

I'll love for a more variety on aesthetic options even if the ingame options aren't as varied.

If my HQ box gives me cyborg options, many heads, varios types of swords, axes, hammers, halberds, etc... I don't care that theres no rules for a "Cyborg" upgrade, or that all the weapons are "Power Weapons". Actually is better for me, because I can customize my HQ as I want without being punished by the options I want him to have being bad or expensive point-wise.

Obviously theres a minimun of options to be had. If theres no Meele options then, the box will not have meele options, even aesthetic ones, etc...

But ideally we should have a good array of options, with both rules and aesthetic-only options, bud try to made them all viable. Theres a point of having "Anti-Tank Meele Weapon", Anti-Horde Meele Weapon, Generic Meele Weapon. At the end of the day, having even more ends becoming redundant. And those three groups could be the rules for all:
-Thunder Hammers, Heavy Thunder Hammers, Power Fists, ChainFists.
-Power Claws, Power Falchions.
-Power Axes, Power Swords, Power Halberd, Power Maces.


And all the others I can't remember right now.

And yes. I'm with MaggicJuggler. Theres a point with having some "strange" options, that maybe aren't meta, but they could offer strategic variety.

 Luciferian wrote:
I kind of had fun converting custom characters to be special and expensive snowflakes in the past, but once you get over the allure of playing dress-up with your dollmans

I'll never get tired of that!

It is actually super annoying that when we finally have an edition with reasonably priced pistols and melee weapons, so that it would not be insanity to give them to your squad leaders and minor characters, the actual rule options to give them those items are severely limited.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
At the same time, "optimal" can also be more subjective in the grand scheme of things. For example, back in 3rd-7th, one of the most common adages was "don't mix Heavy Weapons in a unit." While this means not running a Devestator Squad with "one of each weapon," I did find at the tail-end of 7th that it was occasionally worth running Chaos Havocs as "2 Autocannons, 2 Missile Launchers." Both were range 48 weapons with 1 point of strength difference between them, but having a pair of AP shots to scare Jetbikes into Jinking (or a pair of frag rounds to discourage Napoleonic blocks) had its use, while keeping the unit focused.

There are/were other examples where there was a pragmatic use for non-optimal loadouts. I did something similar with Orks in 5th, running Kan units as "2 Rokkits, one Grotzooka," my rationale being one of the three would usually be shake-locked anyway, I could allocate hits, 2 Rokkits gave me "enough" chance to suppress a Razorback, and the Grotzooka allowed for close-quarters crowd control.

One of the more contentious ones was giving a Fire Dragon Exarch a Flamer, because the unit is "supposed" to be hunting tanks. Ok, fine, but you come across a Chimera that unloaded its infantry and you want to clip some errant Guardsmen while you blow up their ride. Or your opponent brought Shrouded chaff, or tries charging you with a throwaway MSU unit...

Heck, you could make a reasonable case for "TL Missile Pod and Flamer" Crisis Suits in 5th despite the "Fireknife Only" blowhards.

All this "only one or two optimal loadouts" is the result of Stop Having Fun Guys scrubbing up the game and going "NO OPTIONS! MONOPOSE ONLY! Final Destination." I honestly don't understand you. Who died and made you the Warhammer Police?

That's not flavor upgrades. Those are mechanical upgrades that specialize units. Diversity in mechanical upgrades allows units to have customized tactical roles.

 Galas wrote:
And yes. I'm with MaggicJuggler. Theres a point with having some "strange" options, that maybe aren't meta, but they could offer strategic variety.

Strange options are fun. One of my favorite examples in 7th was reading about Jon Camacho's Necron army from last year's LVO, where he got in the top 8 with a Living Tomb list with Monolith and Deathmarks. The list looked screwy ("Who takes a Monolith?" "Who takes a Judicator Battalion?" "No Destroyer Cult/Canoptek Harvest? URDOINIT Wrong!" etc), yet outplayed many supposedly better lists.

Personally, I do wish that 40k had less "bespoke" interactions, and that they all were semi-consolidated into a more robust framework of moving parts. There was a comedic appeal in finding the screwy combos, from hijacking an opponent's Void Shield Generator with Writhing Worldscape, or otherwise playing 40k in a "subversive" manner, but making rules that are more "emergent" (or at least their results are implied from their combinations). Having more noncombat applications for powers would be nice too: Webbers making it easier to scale terrain (disregarding how 8e simplifes terrain), Fusion Guns letting you weld bulkheads together, etc. Heck, I'd love if Ork Grabbin Klaws could drag vehicles or battle debris, or Guard Fire Barrels could either be "rolled" (to set up as a trap), "rolled and detonated", or used as a temporary ersatz Fuel Relay by nearby Guard Infantry.

Mind you, this could be the Starfleet Battles nerd in me talking, the one that enjoys dynamic Shuttle loadouts, Plasma Torpedoes having four separate fire modes ("standard, decoy rounds, shotgun mode, beam mode"), and trolling your foe with tractor beams.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
That's not flavor upgrades. Those are mechanical upgrades that specialize units. Diversity in mechanical upgrades allows units to have customized tactical roles.

That all go against the general belief that there is only "one right loadout." Said tactical roles sacrificing a tiny bit of primary efficiency for a secondary role; duality of purpose and all.

Id rather be able to build my model the way I want to than to have to worry about whether or not I have the 100% correct loadout suggested. Editions change, and not all models change well with it, but they will last far longer. I have the Commissar with book and powerfist, and he is my favorite one, do I run him with said powerfist? Hell no, theres no point to it, but it still looks way cooler in the end, and my opponents have never complained because its an ancient, distinct model that is well painted. Characters should be what you make of them, not what the rules make of them, just fit them in as best you can, that little guy is going to be with you far longer than the rules will.

 MagicJuggler wrote:


All this "only one or two optimal loadouts" is the result of Stop Having Fun Guys scrubbing up the game and going "NO OPTIONS! MONOPOSE ONLY! Final Destination." I honestly don't understand you. Who died and made you the Warhammer Police?

No need to get your huggies in a bunch. I wasn't trying to tell anyone who felt differently that they were wrong to hold their own opinion. It's just simple fact that certain ways of equipping squads and characters are the most points-efficient.

Besides, like I mentioned earlier, it's not like there are no options at all anymore. Plague Marines have 15 wargear options, not counting the combinations that can be derived thereof. It's only the newer HQ and elite characters that can't really be customized.

"Newer HQ and Elite characters" like IG Company Commanders who have been around as long as the IG. and IG Techpriests who have been around as long as the IG?

Voss wrote:

Azuza001 wrote:
I don't know, with the current release of tyrnaid coming out there looks to be some amazing different and diverse options that hive fleets and their hive tyrant hq's will be able to get. Maybe it's just a case of individuals are out, army modification is in with a sprinkle of custom hq?

That's going to be a mess again, with people complaining about models being built 'wrong' (for what their rules are), and opponents only being able to identify a handful of weapons and complete confusion about all the other crap. Especially with the addition of super-special-<hive fleet>-only versions of weapons.

It's skirmish level detail in a spam level mass battle game, and very much at odds with the new edition.

I don't know about all that. If my opponent told me "my hive tyrant has the toxin sacs and adrenal glands upgrades" I would not care if it's on the model, but I know what those are and thats all I care about. Same with a chaos lord or a company commander, having those options is fine to me. If you want your guy to have Bionics or an iron halo, whatever I don't mind if it is not totally modeled 100% (Maybe his halo is currently in his back pocket or behind his cape, you say he has it then he has it, let's move on) but if the issue I guess is when it is modeled and you can't take it anymore, that's annoying. You have a charecter that has a jump pack and is a tech marine? But it can't actually take that pack anymore? That can cause issues.

If people complain because something that you gave to a charecter is not modeled properly then really what's the real issue here? They don't think they can win if they don't complain and pressure you about your choice? Seems like a grot move to me.

I am not the biggest fan of the lack of options either.
Fir example why can a sorceror no longer get a invunrable save unless hes in terminator armour or on a disc?
Why has my chaos lord of Nurgle on bike lost the ootion for blight grenades or a free roll on the chaos boon table pre gane.
Why is there for the most part no diffrentiation between the marks? I get its hard to balance the marks but would it if hurt to have the marks give a buff and a negative .
Ultimately there is no difference between a lord of Nurgle on bike or a Tzeench lord on bike which if im honest sucks.