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.
2014/02/08 09:59:41
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Assault vehicle veterans sounds terrible, but really consistent with how rules lately has downgraded popular units in favor of new releases or previously obscure units.
To take it all the way, we might see some way to take new ogryns as troops, and forcing competetive list made of ogryns intstead of guard.
(looking at what happend when we finally got wraith guard plastics, but in all fairness eldar guardians are quite good to. Guess im just paranoid).
H.B.M.C. wrote: Not of replacing the name. Things having a High and Low Gothic name is normal. Outright removing "Imperial Guard" and replacing it with a High Gothic name is a bad thing.
it's happened once already....
Thing is its always been the IMPERIAL GUARD, the guardsmen of the emperor, the guard that defends the empire, flakjacket and lasgun, gijoe of the emperium, saving private ryan, band of brothers. Its not some mysterious cult, they are the cannonfodder of the emperiums warmachine, the endless wave of human determination to survive.
There is no need for a namechange, the fluff was great and they are changing it for the sake of marketing and sales.
Ps. if you are the least bit into reading 40k novels that involve the IG you'll understand that changing that name changes the story.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/08 10:56:19
3000+
3000+
2500+
2500+
1000+
1500+
1000+
2014/02/08 11:22:58
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
BrookM wrote: Well, it was bound to happen regardless, the Imperial Navy got the title Aeronautica Imperialis somewhere down the line.
They did? When? I don't really follow all the fluff, but I thought they were still the Imperial Navy. Aeronautica Imperialis was the title of the game, I haven't heard the Imperial Navy referred to as Aeronautica Imperialis though.
2014/02/08 12:15:45
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Is it possible that the 'Astra Militarum' is a larger group than just the Imperial Guard? Like, maybe it includes the navy, PDF forces and so on. All the fighting forces of the Departmento Munitorium?
Personally, I like the name change. 'Imperial Guard' always sounded like the Adeptus Custodes to me.
Perfect Organism wrote: Is it possible that the 'Astra Militarum' is a larger group than just the Imperial Guard? Like, maybe it includes the navy, PDF forces and so on. All the fighting forces of the Departmento Munitorium?
.
No, after the Heresy there was a very clear distinction made between the IN and IG, which were formally branches of the same organisation, and PDFs are under the control of their respective Governors. GW is free with its retcons though so who knows.
RegalPhantom wrote: If your fluff doesn't fit, change your fluff until it does
The prefect example of someone missing the point.
Do not underestimate the Squats. They survived for millenia cut off from the Imperium and assailed on all sides. Their determination and resilience is an example to us all.
-Leman Russ, Meditations on Imperial Command book XVI (AKA the RT era White Dwarf Commpendium).
Its just a shame that they couldn't fight off Andy Chambers.
Warzone Plog
2014/02/08 12:54:13
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
I really don't get all the rage about the IG getting an extra Latin name on top of their mundane name, like Sisters, Marines and Ecclesiarchy do.
I mean, practically every other organization of the Imperium have a Latin name.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Palindrome wrote: No, after the Heresy there was a very clear distinction made between the IN and IG, which were formally branches of the same organisation, and PDFs are under the control of their respective Governors.
And so ? Space marines are all part of the Adeptus Astartes even though they belong to different chapters for the very same reason. If they can share a name, while being very different organizations, why could the imperial navy and guard not ?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/08 12:56:39
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/02/08 12:59:15
Subject: Re:W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: If they can share a name, while being very different organizations, why could the imperial navy and guard not ?
Because it breaks the currently established fluff. Its also a really stupid name.
RegalPhantom wrote: If your fluff doesn't fit, change your fluff until it does
The prefect example of someone missing the point.
Do not underestimate the Squats. They survived for millenia cut off from the Imperium and assailed on all sides. Their determination and resilience is an example to us all.
-Leman Russ, Meditations on Imperial Command book XVI (AKA the RT era White Dwarf Commpendium).
Its just a shame that they couldn't fight off Andy Chambers.
Warzone Plog
2012/10/13 16:20:37
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/02/08 13:18:01
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
As I have said their parent organisation was very deliberately and definitively split after the Heresy. Magicing a shared organisation into being which contains both the IN and IG breaks this.
RegalPhantom wrote: If your fluff doesn't fit, change your fluff until it does
The prefect example of someone missing the point.
Do not underestimate the Squats. They survived for millenia cut off from the Imperium and assailed on all sides. Their determination and resilience is an example to us all.
-Leman Russ, Meditations on Imperial Command book XVI (AKA the RT era White Dwarf Commpendium).
Its just a shame that they couldn't fight off Andy Chambers.
Warzone Plog
2014/02/08 13:35:34
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Bull0 wrote: Yeah, exactly. It's hard enough getting people to accept change, but when it's a change for the worse, it's... even worse
How is that for the worse ? It is just an additional name !
Bull0 wrote: So far I haven't seen anyone say they like the name.
I am very indifferent to it, and I think most people are. It is just that few people feel the urge to shout “I am so indifferent to this new name that I am going to use extreme hyperbole at how indifference-inducing this new name is !”
But yeah, I could make a poll. I am just too lazy to do that just to prove such a minor and uninteresting point.
I assume it will be, and I am ready to take bets !
Palindrome wrote: As I have said their parent organisation was very deliberately and definitively split after the Heresy. Magicing a shared organisation into being which contains both the IN and IG breaks this.
You do not read my messages, do you ?
Marines legions were split into chapters after the Heresy.
The imperial army was split into imperial guard and imperial navy after the Heresy.
Marines chapters do not belong to a shared organization (save maybe if said organization is “The Imperium”), but the pseudo-Latin expression Adeptus Astartes still means the space marines of all chapters.
Imperial Guard and Imperial Navy do not belong to a shared organization (save maybe if said organization is “The Imperium”), but the pseudo-Latin expression Astra Militorum still means members of the guard and of the navy.
Do you notice a pattern ?
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/02/08 13:38:14
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/02/08 13:38:54
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Bull0 wrote: Yeah, exactly. It's hard enough getting people to accept change, but when it's a change for the worse, it's... even worse
How is that for the worse ? It is just an additional name !
Bull0 wrote: So far I haven't seen anyone say they like the name.
I am very indifferent to it, and I think most people are. It is just that few people feel the urge to shout “I am so indifferent to this new name that I am going to use extreme hyperbole at how indifference-inducing this new name is !” But yeah, I could make a poll. I am just too lazy to do that just to prove such a minor and uninteresting point.
Because they may have replaced the name we like with a name we don't like. It's pretty obvious how that's a change for the worse. Pay attention! And even if it is just additional, it's a change for the worse. Say your name is Dan, and I say "Actually guys, from now on you can either know him as Dan or as Fartbreath, it's up to you" you'd be indifferent?
And I don't buy the "Whenever you see an outcry that's just a vocal minority and the majority are indifferent / the majority like it" argument and never have. People like saying when they like something too, just look around the forum, heaps of examples.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/02/08 13:40:00
Dead account, no takesy-backsies
2014/02/08 13:45:24
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Bull0 wrote: Because they may have replaced the name we like with a name we don't like.
They may. They may also have made change so that every HQ available in the codex are abhumans, too. Now, let us wait until there is an actual rumor that Imperial Guard is totally replaced (unlike what they said for, say, Sisters of Battle) before crying doom and gloom over something extremely unlikely, shall we ?
Bull0 wrote: People like saying when they like something too, just look around the forum, heaps of examples.
They like saying when they like something. But when they are indifferent to something, they usually do not care to say it. Because it seems such a small, unmeaning detail that why waste efforts to say you do not care about it ? Personally, I think the new name add a little coherency by giving a pseudo-Latin name to the guard, but also breaks a little coherency by not using Adeptus. But I will wait until the actual release (or at least more precise rumors) to comment on any fluff change or addition surrounding the new name.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/08 13:46:02
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/02/08 13:46:15
Subject: Re:W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
I'd also would've liked a change of Space Marines to Adeptus Astartes. However, as GW claims (rightly or now) that Space Marines is a trademark they own (a claim they never made for Imperial Guard), I am sure they'll defend that one to their dying breath.
Let's just wait and see what they do with it, but if I were to make a guess, I'd suggest that 'Imperial Guard' is unenforceable as an IP/trademark, even less so than Space Marine was when they attempted that, and that just like the fanciful renaming of their paints to ingame specific titles, this proposed renaming is about brand.
There are Imperial Guard in history, Napoleonic Imperial Guard for example, there are Imperial Guard in Star Wars (try taking on Disney for the IP rights there...) and so on. Astra Militarum is a new thing, a brand GW can claim and that fits the pseudo-Latin-gothic of the 40k image. We might well see this sort of extra distinction take place across the GW spectrum as they seek to make their product line readily identifiable and more easily legally protectable. No small task, given how incredibly derivative most of it is from other sources and has been for the last 30 years.
If I were to guess and this renaming is true.
2014/02/08 13:59:57
Subject: Re:W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Trio of Warriors, […] the Talisaman world[…]Used without permission. No challenge to their status intended. All Rights Reserved to their respective owners.
What is that first one ? Also lol typo. And last but not least, where did you get that list ? Eatatau ? Then we should warn Darius about the typo.
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/02/08 14:01:55
Subject: Re:W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Trio of Warriors, […] the Talisaman world[…]Used without permission. No challenge to their status intended. All Rights Reserved to their respective owners.
What is that first one ? Also lol typo. And last but not least, where did you get that list ? Eatatau ? Then we should warn Darius about the typo.
MeanGreenStompa wrote: there are Imperial Guard in Star Wars (try taking on Disney for the IP rights there...)
Well, I am pretty sure GW thinking they would be more able to fight Blizzard on Space Marines than to fight Disney on Imperial Guard is like some paraplegic little girl thinking she would have a much better time fighting that angry CRS than she would have fighting that 3-time UFC world champion, i.e. completely delusional.
Oh. Ok. Then let them suffer the whole consequences for that typo .
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/08 14:06:32
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/02/08 14:06:45
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
I have been but nothing that you have written provides a basis for breaking the established fluff. GW clearly doesn't care for its own fluff though so who knows what will happen.
RegalPhantom wrote: If your fluff doesn't fit, change your fluff until it does
The prefect example of someone missing the point.
Do not underestimate the Squats. They survived for millenia cut off from the Imperium and assailed on all sides. Their determination and resilience is an example to us all.
-Leman Russ, Meditations on Imperial Command book XVI (AKA the RT era White Dwarf Commpendium).
Its just a shame that they couldn't fight off Andy Chambers.
Warzone Plog
2014/02/08 14:09:21
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Palindrome wrote: I have been but nothing that you have written provides a basis for breaking the established fluff.
So you do agree that the new name could include navy and guard without breaking established fluff, you also do agree that both could be fielded at the same time without breaking established fluff (doubly now that ally are even more common), but you are still sure that GW will break the established fluff because comic book villainy ?
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/02/08 14:09:56
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Well, I am pretty sure GW thinking they would be more able to fight Blizzard on Space Marines than to fight Disney on Imperial Guard is like some paraplegic little girl thinking she would have a much better time fighting that angry CRS than she would have fighting that 3-time UFC world champion, i.e. completely delusional.
Just because it is delusional, doesn't mean they will not do it. We are talking about Games Workshop here! I am pretty sure they will continue to plaster the term "Space Marine" on as many products as prominently as humanly possible, to defend that claim.
Now I want Blizzard to release some Starcraft Ghost-like game, but title Starcraft: Space Marine !
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/02/08 14:30:45
Subject: Re:W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
So you do agree that the new name could include navy and guard without breaking established fluff, you also do agree that both could be fielded at the same time without breaking established fluff (doubly now that ally are even more common), but you are still sure that GW will break the established fluff because comic book villainy ?
No, No and incompetence rather than villany.
RegalPhantom wrote: If your fluff doesn't fit, change your fluff until it does
The prefect example of someone missing the point.
Do not underestimate the Squats. They survived for millenia cut off from the Imperium and assailed on all sides. Their determination and resilience is an example to us all.
-Leman Russ, Meditations on Imperial Command book XVI (AKA the RT era White Dwarf Commpendium).
Its just a shame that they couldn't fight off Andy Chambers.
Warzone Plog
2014/02/08 14:57:02
Subject: Re:W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
never in the field of human conflict, has so much been fired at so many, by so few.
My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, Commander of the armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions. Loyal servant to the true emperor Marcus Aurelius. Father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next.
Please leave your message after the tone...
2014/02/08 15:13:16
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
Bull0 wrote: Because they may have replaced the name we like with a name we don't like.
They may. They may also have made change so that every HQ available in the codex are abhumans, too. Now, let us wait until there is an actual rumor that Imperial Guard is totally replaced (unlike what they said for, say, Sisters of Battle) before crying doom and gloom over something extremely unlikely, shall we ?
Sorry dude, I don't know which rumour you read that said "They're using Astra Militarum and Imperial Guard interchangeably and the original name is still in use inside the book" but the rumour I read said it's a name change. You can rationalise it by theorizing that it's only on the front cover, and they'll maintain the old name, but the rumour is that it's a rename, so I'd appreciate you not taking the piss and accusing me of "crying doom and gloom over something extremely unlikely". I'm not doing that, I'm rolling with the rumour as written. Thanks a bunch in advance for your cooperation.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/02/08 15:14:44
Dead account, no takesy-backsies
2014/02/08 15:23:27
Subject: W40k : Imperial Guard 6th ed codex for early 2014 (topic reloaded)
I think some folks are splitting hairs here, or not seeing both sides of the coin. Of course imperial guard will still be called imperial guard, but the rumor should have been stated more clearly that the codex name would (or might) be switched to some "latinized" term for them on the cover &/or the boxes.... after all, we still call sisters of battle, sisters of battle, and space marines (Adeptus Astartes) are still called space marines....
DISCLAIMER - I will not be liable for my opinions, nor plagerism, errors, facts, rumors, links, no links, or changing &/or omissions in my blog entries; nor for the availability of this informations origins, original author, truth, link, or vouch for it's factual reliabilty. So please don't fight with my opinions, nor badger me, nor troll my entries, and just stay on topic!
3000+
3000+
2500+
2500+
1000+
1500+
1000+ 
.
.
