Poll |
 |
|
 |
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/16 16:32:23
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Andy Hoare
Turku, Finland
|
Tau, we could as well have pokemon in this game.
Tyranids, because flesh ships and such are a stupid idea, even in a world of walking battle cathedrals.
|
"Eagles may soar high, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines." - Lord Borak
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/16 16:37:55
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
The Last Chancer Who Survived
|
Rautakanki wrote:Tau, we could as well have pokemon in this game.
Tyranids, because flesh ships and such are a stupid idea, even in a world of walking battle cathedrals.
I like the space narwhals, if only because they're giant bags of blood waiting for Khorne to rip apart.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/16 16:42:08
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Elite Tyranid Warrior
|
I would not remove any. I think they all work pretty well together.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/16 17:10:17
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Thane of Dol Guldur
|
Consolidate all Space Marine codexes into 1, then add a Q codex, only available to me.
Tau I think are fine I just wish they matched the overall aesthetic of the game a little better.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/16 18:40:47
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Screaming Shining Spear
|
I voted Necrons, but only because of their terrible fluff recently.
If the most recent 'Necrons can conquer everything' fluff wasn't generated, I'd have said Tau.
|
Farseer Faenyin
7,100 pts Yme-Loc Eldar(Apoc Included) / 5,700 pts (Non-Apoc)
Record for 6th Edition- Eldar: 25-4-2
Record for 7th Edition -
Eldar: 0-0-0 (Yes, I feel it is that bad)
Battlefleet Gothic: 2,750 pts of Craftworld Eldar
X-wing(Focusing on Imperials): CR90, 6 TIE Fighters, 4 TIE Interceptors, TIE Bomber, TIE Advanced, 4 X-wings, 3 A-wings, 3 B-wings, Y-wing, Z-95
Battletech: Battlion and Command Lance of 3025 Mechs(painted as 21st Rim Worlds) |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/16 20:00:33
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Focused Fire Warrior
New Zealand
|
Space wolves, after reading betrayer and a thousand sons i just detest the space puppies. "No psykers" "but youre a psyker" "NOOOOOOO IM A RUNE PRIEST THATS DIFFERENT, GOSH"
|
6000pts
3000pts
1500pts
1000pts
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/16 20:04:29
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Like many have said, I have never really thought the Tau fit well into the 40k aesthetic. Too bright and clean, but without the "dying elite" schtick that the Eldar used up.
Based purely on fluff I would have said old necrons, mostly because I detested the way the C'Tan were suddenly shoehorned into everything. ZOMG C'TAN ASLEEP ON MARS! OMGWTFBBQ is the Hive Mind a C'TAN?!?!oneone
/vomit
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/16 20:08:16
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
The Last Chancer Who Survived
|
I'm surprised at the voting for the Ecclesiarchy and the Inquisition.
I love those parts of the fluff, they add grimdarkness, IMO.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/16 20:47:05
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Daring Dark Eldar Raider Rider
|
Necrons. I don't care about the rules or supposedly OP units or any of that. I just hate the tomb kings in space aesthetic. Liked them better as the terminators.
|
Alone in the warp. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/16 22:07:38
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Newcrons are the worst. They're entirely different from Necrons though, so keep them.
|
My Armies:
5,500pts
2,700pts
2,000pts
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 00:38:29
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Lurking Gaunt
Oxford/Southampton
|
To all saying they'd remove a Space Marine one just because there are many of them, I think you're missing a crucial point.
By having more space marine codexes, the space marine players are divided up across more diverse armies. If you didn't have, say, the Blood Angels codex then those players would most likely have chosen some other space marine codex... and you'd be facing even less variety.
I went with Tau. I feel like the 40k universe wouldn't miss much without them. Also, I think they can be kind of boring to play (though not necessarily against).
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/17 00:38:57
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 03:36:48
Subject: Re:Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Implacable Black Templar Initiate
|
I voted Tau based on fluff, though new fluff made Necrons a close second. If they ran with the fluff established in DoW: Dark Crusade, where the Tau were secretly sterilizing converts to the Greater Good, I think Tau would be way more Grimdark and appropriate for the 40k universe.
If based on rules, I would go with combining all Space Marines into one Codex and resorting to Chapter Tactics (not at all bitter about Black Templars getting pushed onto that train  ).
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 06:10:12
Subject: Re:Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Death-Dealing Devastator
|
Tau. I. Just. Don't. Like. Them.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 07:53:36
Subject: Re:Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
The Last Chancer Who Survived
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 08:02:36
Subject: Re:Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Preacher of the Emperor
|
Grey Knights. Hey, you know that SPESS MAHREENS are the best troops in the galaxy? Well we're better than them. Also we all have swords and storm bolters and everyone can take Terminator Armour.
It's like bad fan-fluff.
|
Veteran Sergeant wrote:If 40K has Future Rifles, and Future Tanks, and Future Artillery, and Future Airplanes and Future Grenades and Future Bombs, then contextually Future Swords seem somewhat questionable to use, since it means crossing Future Open Space to get Future Shot At.
Polonius wrote:I categorically reject any statement that there is such a thing as too much boob.
Coolyo294 wrote:Short answer: No.
Long answer: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 08:26:50
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Tzeentch Aspiring Sorcerer Riding a Disc
The darkness between the stars
|
Deadeight wrote:To all saying they'd remove a Space Marine one just because there are many of them, I think you're missing a crucial point.
By having more space marine codexes, the space marine players are divided up across more diverse armies. If you didn't have, say, the Blood Angels codex then those players would most likely have chosen some other space marine codex... and you'd be facing even less variety.
I went with Tau. I feel like the 40k universe wouldn't miss much without them. Also, I think they can be kind of boring to play (though not necessarily against).
Problem being there is hardly anything that makes THIS space marine different then THIS space marine. And I think that's really what many people have a problem with. Bar a few models, they look the same and are hardly different from it. Honestly I can't say I'd entirely remove anything from the setting. Ecclesiary? BLoody hell it's too important to the imperium. Inquisition? Those guys are what saves or destroys planets from exterminatus! Guardsman? Then how would the planets still be there? Chaos? The warp, the anti-human humans side? Yeah, you get my point. They all bring some form of appeal. Now, personally I don't really care for the tau asthetics. I prefer my battlesuits slow, bulky, and big and whilst I enjoy gundam-like suits to some extent, I do feel it a bit too animeish. But that's just me. Necrons? I really thinkk they need to be rebuilt from the ground up in terms of fluff. At the moment, they are we are better than all of you yay. And then you have nids that are raging from space squids that spew out bugs to take over worlds and there are OVeR 9000 OF THEM SINDRRIIIIIIIIIII!, yet I like Nids. I like the swarming hivemind organic assaults that charge using thousands of bodies to finally get the buggers into close combat whilst large slow hulking beasts follow behind.
So fluff wise, none of them. Perhaps some of them having renovations or a drastic makeover, but no to ctrl-alt-delete. In terms of codices, grab BA and DA and shove them right into the Codex Space Marine. We don't need this many codices that can easily be represented by a single one. Wolves are... whether I like them or not, rather unique. If they could, I would like these guys shoved in as well. At the very least they would be less likely from being SM+ and DA will finally have some consistent updates. GK personally I'd swap to being a support codex much like C:Inquisition. It's kinda like, you can take this as a support element (required 2 troops and maybe an hq?). Also, before any Imperials complain, bloody hell I have to represent my forces of chaos with a Chaos daemon codex that has no synergy with my CSM codex, a CSM codex that represents a far more varied list of units, and the only true way to rerpresent an armada of cultists and or lost and the damned is by way of grabbing allies of convenience guarsman that are really just imperial guardsman so no chaotic flair to them nor the bb status  . As mentioned before, the more the better! Ad Mech? support book. Perhaps even add in a unique one for chaos and the sorts! Rogue Trader support (mercanaries!)? Etc etc etc. There's so many interesting parts of the world we hardly touch! Let us span out and grasps these things! With quicker codex updates, the removal of 2-3 excess codices, they could arguably add 1-2 unique codices and perhaps some small restricted support books.
|
2375
/ 1690
WIP (1875)
1300
760
WIP (350)
WIP (150) |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 09:21:14
Subject: Re:Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Warp-Screaming Noise Marine
|
If I had to remove one faction, it would be Gey Knights. Frankly speaking, just toning them down would be enough, though.
|
Drukhari - 4.7k
Space Marines - 3.1k
Chaos Space Marines - 2.9k
Harlequins - 0.9k
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 09:28:21
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Yellin' Yoof on a Scooter
|
Phew, I ould remove no faction, since even if I dont like it, others do.
However, just for kicks, if I was forced to:
1. Inquisition. Simply because I have yet to read or hear about even ONE agent of the big ][ that is even remotely likeable. The whole faction is one big "Whos the biggest *bleep* competition. They are also those who regularly gak on everyone elses parade, prance around like arrogant douches of the highes caliber and compared to IG (TANKS! TANKS!) and Speehs Mareehns, they just suck.
2. Eldar. Less a removal, more of a rework. The whole "Dying race that gets owned EVERYWHERE" gets _really_ old after a while. Seriously, 80% of Fluff I read is horrible death and destruction for the Eldar, but ofc they still hang on somehow. Also, I dunno if its just me, but a lot of writers seem to have very different views on how the Eldar are actually faring currently. Sometimes you read about a ton of Craftworlds and only marginal losses, other times its only a handful of CWs and deaths rocking around 9 digits. Seriously, make up your mind allready.
3. Either give other races alternative Groups/Clans (Especially for Orks!)/etc or get rid of those 50 Spehs Mehreen Books. Its allready hard learning about the strengths, weaknesses and nuisances of the general factions, and now I have to take an advanced class with 20 addiotional Books because that dude paints his Guys green. Seriously, its not fair!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 10:44:22
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Homicidal Veteran Blood Angel Assault Marine
|
Deadeight wrote:To all saying they'd remove a Space Marine one just because there are many of them, I think you're missing a crucial point.
By having more space marine codexes, the space marine players are divided up across more diverse armies. If you didn't have, say, the Blood Angels codex then those players would most likely have chosen some other space marine codex... and you'd be facing even less variety.
I disagree. It's good that we have variety, but stupid that each have their own codex.
Eldar have different craftworlds but you don't see them getting a codex each. Easy to understand, but it's idiotic that GW has made Marines their unique snowflake pet and that they get specialities on the expensive of other armies.
My dream would be a SM super-codex. Much like the one we have now, but with SW, BA and DA there aswell. Other choice would be a codex: SM with different cheapish Chapter supplements.
A couple of points why:
1) their unique rules ( DoA, Inner Circle) are already very similar to Chapter tactics.
2) most of the units are still same. Each faction could have a couple of their own named characters and two or three own units.
3) that would keep the prices on the same level. Right now the older marine Codices have clear disadvantage compared to the newer ones. Automatically Appended Next Post: Stuebi wrote:
3. Either give other races alternative Groups/Clans (Especially for Orks!)/etc or get rid of those 50 Spehs Mehreen Books. Its allready hard learning about the strengths, weaknesses and nuisances of the general factions, and now I have to take an advanced class with 20 addiotional Books because that dude paints his Guys green. Seriously, its not fair! 
Agreed on this.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/17 10:46:38
4000p
1500p
=====Begin Dakka Geek Code=====
DS:90S+G+MB--IPw40k12+D+A++/mWD-R+T(T)DM+
======End Dakka Geek Code====== |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 10:54:26
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
Sweden
|
I voted Inquisition but not to be removed from the game, just not have their own book- make sm, ig and sisters have them in their books instead. Maybe not sm but gk perhaps.
|
Dark Elves |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 11:09:14
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Furious Fire Dragon
|
Necrons..
We already have enough bad guys. I don't like the models I don't like the fluff and the terminator movie is getting really old.
|
Got milk?
All I can say about painting is that VMC tastes much better than VMA... especially black...
PM me if you are interested in Commission work.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 11:21:28
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Morphing Obliterator
|
I voted Inquisition but only because of the Grey Knights.
IMO they should never have been made into a seperate army. These guys are just too rare and too elite to ever have an army of them in one place at the same time.
GW should write a codex Inquisition (a proper one instead of their e-pamphlet they have done recently) which has Inquisitors and their storm troopers and retinues as the focus and then allowing the additional use of Grey Knights, Deathwatch and Sisters (although they aren't Ordo Hereticus any more are they?) depending on which Ordo your Warlord Inquisitor belongs to.
My second choice would be to roll all the SM chapters into the main SM codex like others have said, but we all know that will never happen!
|
Chaos Space Marines - Iron Warriors & Night Lords 7900pts
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 11:38:31
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
The Tau.
Because as Alairos said, it's like having a World War II game with Germany, the Soviet Union, Japan, America, England, and El Salvador.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 11:42:31
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Glorious Lord of Chaos
The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer
|
I personally say IG. Nobody really plays IG any longer in my gaming group, and nobody's missing them. It was always very immersion-breaking to fight them.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/17 11:42:49
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 11:43:36
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Terrifying Doombull
|
BrotherHaraldus wrote:I personally say IG. Nobody really plays IG any longer in my gaming group, and nobody's missing them. It was always very immersion-breaking to fight them.
Have you even the sligthest understanding of the 40k setting?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/17 11:44:19
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 11:45:37
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Trazyn's Museum Curator
|
Nevermind. Read following post. I actually find there's quite a few players who play IG. I suspect they may be the second most popular army, after marine. Of course, your Meta may vary.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/12/17 11:49:18
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 11:46:26
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Glorious Lord of Chaos
The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer
|
Trondheim wrote: BrotherHaraldus wrote:I personally say IG. Nobody really plays IG any longer in my gaming group, and nobody's missing them. It was always very immersion-breaking to fight them.
Have you even the sligthest understanding of the 40k setting?
Yes.
I agree that they should be kept in the fluff and all. They have a place that they should keep. But gamewise they were very immersionbreaking to play with.
Settingwise they can stay. But if Codex: IG was discontinued I would not mourn them one second.
If I HAD to remove a race from the setting as a whole it would be IG. But I'd rather not.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/12/17 11:47:54
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 12:00:52
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Terrifying Doombull
|
Ah I see well then, I suppose ones experience of playing against Guard can be dull if both players just sit there and lob templates, or the like.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 12:26:44
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
The Last Chancer Who Survived
|
BrotherHaraldus wrote: Trondheim wrote: BrotherHaraldus wrote:I personally say IG. Nobody really plays IG any longer in my gaming group, and nobody's missing them. It was always very immersion-breaking to fight them.
Have you even the sligthest understanding of the 40k setting?
Yes.
I agree that they should be kept in the fluff and all. They have a place that they should keep. But gamewise they were very immersionbreaking to play with.
Settingwise they can stay. But if Codex: IG was discontinued I would not mourn them one second.
If I HAD to remove a race from the setting as a whole it would be IG. But I'd rather not.
But what about chaos humans; enslaved by a tyrannical warlord who just wants a ton of LRBT's?
Then you have the morality question in war: Are they truly evil, just because they are forced into chaos, or are they still irredeemable?
Immersive as feth, imo. Automatically Appended Next Post: Trondheim wrote:Ah I see well then, I suppose ones experience of playing against Guard can be dull if both players just sit there and lob templates, or the like.
IG armies with Conscripts running up the board all game can be fun
Then I'd finally have a reason to give my CSM flamers
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/17 12:28:48
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/12/17 13:41:59
Subject: Which faction would you remove from the 40k setting?
|
 |
Glorious Lord of Chaos
The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer
|
Selym wrote:
But what about chaos humans; enslaved by a tyrannical warlord who just wants a ton of LRBT's?
Then you have the morality question in war: Are they truly evil, just because they are forced into chaos, or are they still irredeemable?
Immersive as feth, imo.
Not what I meant.
I meant things like seeing your friend's Nobs mob get charged and cut down by a Guardsman Infantry Squad. When that happened even the IG player cringed.
I mean, some (Like most IG players, I imagine!) love that, but for me it is immersion-breaking to see.
|
|
|
 |
 |
|