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.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Hey, let's eliminate DKoK. They're basically Imperial Guard. And honestly, throw DE and Eldar into the same book. They're both elves, so it's fiiiine. Then put CSM, Necrons, and Tau into Codex: Emperor-less Heretics. Remember, trimming the rules = better game.

Exactly! DKoK should be a "chapter tactics" equivalent in the IG codex. DE and Eldar are kind of different, but since you can (and are encouraged to) ally them anyway you might as well just put them into a single book. The only one of those I disagree with is putting all the non-Imperial armies into one book because they have nothing in common and the combined book would be just as long as all of the separate books.

More votes to remove Orkz then Eldar.

Geez ..

I really think the overwhelming IK vote says something

 Peregrine wrote:

Hey, let's just have one book and give every army the same units with different models whilst we're at it. Make it colourful chess with a shooting phase.

Congratulations on missing the point. .

Actually you may be missing the point of the setting. Sure, the game may be bloated to someone who only looks at the rules but variety is kind of the point. The galaxy is a huge place in 40k, and one of the major draws is that there is so much variety. It is a galaxy with everything and anything. And everything happens. All the time, every day. So sure, to some people who don't want to buy so many codexes would love consolidated army books, and frankly I would like that too. However that defeats the point, this is a game of variety, for casual play, the point is not to make it feasible to know all the rules and efficiency but rather to have a lot of cool things that are unique. That is what drove me away from the vanilla marine codex in the first place. Flavor is the point, and if one redundant special rule accomplishes this so be it. Flavor is the point.

I look at this and all I see is hate for Tau and the diversity of SMs.
I can see the funeral now:
"Today, we say goodbye to many beloved friends. Some cruel bastard decided that they couldn't be different and merged them all together.
The resulting mass of twisted flesh caused death for all involved, and immense pain for them, their friends and players."

RIP

 Kriswall wrote:
Why do those three chapters deserve their own codex while the other core chapters don't? Why isn't there a Codex: Salamanders? Why not make 9 different Codexes and turn Codex: Space Marines into Codex: Ultramarines (which is basically what it is now)?

They don't deserve their own Codex, they have their own Codex.
Instead of demanding they remove BA, DA, SW and GK's you should probably advocate making a separate Codex for Salamanders.

 Peregrine wrote:
You don't need special rules to sell special models. TWC and Ravenwing are just bike squads with fancy models, sanguinary guard are just vanguard vets with fancy models.

Did you actually read the rules for Sanguinary Guard?
The only thing they have in common with Vanguard Veterans are.. uhm..
They both have Frag and Krak grenades? Because that is basically it.

Wow, I was dreading Sisters being in first place, glad to see their not! I don't really want to see any army gone, in fact I'd like to see more, especially Mechanicum. There are some army mergers I'd like to see, though.

I do think it would've nice to combine all the Space Marine armies into one codex, with additional dataslates being released for customizing your favorite chapter further. Kind of like how they did with the Iron Hands, if I recall correctly.

I wouldn't mind Sisters being tied in with Inquisition. Throw some Death Watch in there too, please!

Kangodo wrote:

They don't deserve their own Codex, they have their own Codex.
Instead of demanding they remove BA, DA, SW and GK's you should probably advocate making a separate Codex for Salamanders.

Then you might as well make a codex for every first founding chapter.

Then, in fairness to every other faction, release a codex for every single dynasty, hive fleet, regiment, clan, kabal, craftworld, and sept.

I'm all for options, but you'd be looking at 50+ codices. That's ridiculous. Even if they were supplements, that's a gak ton of repetition for what ultimately would boil down to a few characters and a special unit or two per codex.

Did you actually read the rules for Sanguinary Guard?
The only thing they have in common with Vanguard Veterans are.. uhm..
They both have Frag and Krak grenades? Because that is basically it.

Honour guard then, whatever, it doesn't matter.

You don't see Guard players complaining the codex doesn't have a Ragnarok tank option, because you could field a Ragnarok model using the rules for the Leman Russ. Sure, the Ragnarok is technically different, and potentially deserving of its own rules, but the published and known stats for the Russ fit it fine.

Same goes for much of the unique marine units; assuming a re-tooled Honour Guard could take jet packs, your Sanguinary Guard would fit right in. It wouldn't have every single special rule and tiny variance in wargear, but it would be WYSIWYG and it would work.

Having a properly done single loyalist marine book would solve many problems between the power levels of the current system. It would open more variety to DIY chapters and even established chapters finally getting access to reasonable units they should have (thunderfire cannons, hunters).

A well done Chapter Tactics system would still leave plenty of unique flavour, as well as a handful of special units only unlocked through an appropriate CT selection.

Frankly, all the marines are incredibly similar. They all wear power armour, shoot bolters, ride in rhinos and razorbacks, have Land Raiders, preds, vinidis, whirlwinds, have drop pods, have the same unit types available in each slot (or close enough to as not make much of a difference), have the same statline and base special rules, and play roughly the same as a smallish model count army that is good at everything and can be tooled to be much better at one particular thing. CTs would reinforce that.

It frees up development time for other factions, stops the power creep between marine books, adds more options for every marine player without going through allies and what-not, and is cheaper for those playing DIY chapters that use multiple marine books for their army. It retains the majority of table top flavour, is simpler and easier for opponents to learn, remember, and understand a single book than four.

The downside is the loss of in codex fluff for each individual chapter, and loss of some of the specific rules and units that can be represented by an existing unit. Frankly, GW should just release crunch only books/files and release separate fluff books for those inclined, which would make the first downside irrelevant.

All in all, its wishlisting and likely never to happen, but given the thread is a theoretical exercise anyways, I feel the merits of rolling in marines outweighs the cons. I think some marine players need to exercise their imagination a little more when discussing this topic, as I see no reason why TWC couldn't be represented by bike squads and a SW CT, just modelled as wolves. It's like how IG players often model Rough Riders as bikers instead of cavalry. You don't need a unique unit, or unique piece of wargear, or special rules to create fluffy, unique lists; painting and modelling goes a long way to making your army stand out visually, and proper list building would make your army unique on the table top depending on unit selection.

But hey, I'm a filthy Guard player, so what do I know?

I would remove the sisters of battle.

I suggest being careful what you wish for. Seeing as GW just took the axe to Lizardmen in fantasy. XD

 Blacksails wrote:
They're the chamber militant of the Ordo Hereticus.

Personally, I think a proper Inquisition book could support universal Inq units, plus the chambers militant; Sisters, GK, and DW.

Do you know what this whimsical fluff that was never mentioned outside of 3rd edition means? Well, here is what it means. It means that GK, that have always been devoted to fighting daemons, and still are, and care only about demons, are often working together with Inquisitors that fight demons. No big deal, here. It also means that Deathwatch, which are very special teams of marines that are sent by Ordo Xenos inquisitors, and only by them, to do specific missions that are always about fighting xenos, are, well, working a lot with Inquisitors that fight xenos (duh!). And finally, it means that Sisters of Battle, that are the troops of the Ecclesiarchy, which have their own aims and wars that are related to the politics of the Eclesiarchy and the Sisters' own faith, that spend a lot of time fighting xenos (like Orks and Necrons) and on rare occasion will also fight daemons, but also a lot fighting against heretics, sometime works with Inquisitors that fight against heretics.
Do you really think those three factions should be put on the same level as just “troops of the Inquisition”? Do you not see how the Sisters of Battle are much, much more independent from the Inquisition that the Grey Knights, which themselves are much more independent from the Inquisition than the Deathwatch?
It would basically make as much sense to melt Sisters with Inquisition as it would make to melt them with Mechanicum or Astra Militarum.

natpri771 wrote:
Well, if an Inquisition Codex was made, I would have henchmen as troops by default and all of the other troops stuff (SOB squad, GK strike squads, GK Terminators, Deathwatch Kill-Teams) as elites. If you take an Ordo Hereticus Inquisitor special character as your warlord, sisters of battle become troops. If you take an Ordo Xenos Inquisitor special character, Kill-Teams become troops and if you take an Ordo Malleus Inquisitor or special character, GK strike squads and GK terminators become troops. If you take an Ordo Malleus/Hereticus/Xenos warlord, all of the stuff from the other chambers militant are elites.

And so I could not even represent a normal Sister army from basically any fluff representation of them, where they are led by a Canoness or someone from their own hierarchy rather than by some Inquisitor?
What about instead we make all marines elite troops in the Inquisition codex because marines are extra-super rare and make 4 codexes to represent the different orders of the Sisters of Battle?

 The Home Nuggeteer wrote:
I would cut knights completely, and put an emphasis on smaller games, 1000 to 1500 points, as that is where the game seems to be at its best rules wise for me. The tau would go, and I would keep the orks, tyranids, and eldar, with minor tweaks but I would consolidate the eldar and dark eldar all together.

Why? Why would the Tau go? Why should the Tau go? You've given no reason or explanation for this, not that I would accept any reason or explanation to begin with because it's all entirely subjective and/or would most likely be bullgak anyway, but just throwing it out there like that with nothing to back it up is really fething annoying. You can't just remove an entire faction from the game like that, especially a game as expensive and time-consuming as 40k. You don't get to steal thousands of dollars and years of someone's life and then pull the fething rug out from under them after they've invested so much into your product, for reasons that are most likely going to be very petty or stupid, like "I personally don't like them so I don't want them in the game anymore.", which is what it almost always boils down to.

 The Home Nuggeteer wrote:
Actually you may be missing the point of the setting. Sure, the game may be bloated to someone who only looks at the rules but variety is kind of the point. The galaxy is a huge place in 40k, and one of the major draws is that there is so much variety. It is a galaxy with everything and anything. And everything happens. All the time, every day. So sure, to some people who don't want to buy so many codexes would love consolidated army books, and frankly I would like that too. However that defeats the point, this is a game of variety, for casual play, the point is not to make it feasible to know all the rules and efficiency but rather to have a lot of cool things that are unique. That is what drove me away from the vanilla marine codex in the first place. Flavor is the point, and if one redundant special rule accomplishes this so be it. Flavor is the point.

Uh, what?! "Variety, variety, variety, that's what 40k is all about! Anything and everything can happen!"

Which is why you'd quietly remove Tau without any reason or explanation for it? For the added "variety" of having fewer xenos factions than we did before? Cutting factions is working directly against what you claim you're trying to achieve. It's removing flavor, not adding anything to the game.

 Blacksails wrote:
I think some marine players need to exercise their imagination a little more when discussing this topic

You'd think having some imagination would be a requirement for a hobby like this one. Apparently not.

Hell, I'd bet money they'd say I was the unimaginative one for trying to argue that I can't just run my freshly-Squatted Tau army as "counts as" Imperial Guard if I really had to keep tainting their gaming tables with my eyesore models, and to stop "QQing" about my army losing support. But those same kind of people argue very strongly that painting a red Marine gold is a significant enough difference to warrant having a completely different stat line and all sorts of special rules and equipment.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
What about instead we make all marines elite troops in the Inquisition codex because marines are extra-super rare and make 4 codexes to represent the different orders of the Sisters of Battle?

Because then Marine players wouldn't get what they want, and that's a huge fething injustice, apparently. Red Marines are so vastly different from Blue Marines as to warrant having their own book and being treated like their own faction, but the galaxy is just way too small to justify having that and other fleshed-out factions with their own unique fluff, models, identity, and play styles, like Tau and Sisters of Battle.

There's only room for Marines in 40k, and a few token NPC bad guys for them to steamroll (since not every battle can be Marine vs. Marine, that's not "fluffy" either).

changemod wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
You don't need special rules to sell special models. TWC and Ravenwing are just bike squads with fancy models, sanguinary guard are just vanguard vets with fancy models.

If you feel like sucking all the joy out of it, sure.

To be fair, the existence of Thunderwolf cavalry sucks the joy out of the game for me, lol.

Imperial knights really aren't that bad. They are boring to play with/against over and over again but they're cool models and I enjoy seeing them on the table. I don't think sisters fit, they're extremely expensive, nobody plays them and GW doesn't seem to have any interest in fully supporting them. If I was going to squat an army, it would be sisters.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
They're the chamber militant of the Ordo Hereticus.

Personally, I think a proper Inquisition book could support universal Inq units, plus the chambers militant; Sisters, GK, and DW.

Do you know what this whimsical fluff that was never mentioned outside of 3rd edition means? Well, here is what it means. It means that GK, that have always been devoted to fighting daemons, and still are, and care only about demons, are often working together with Inquisitors that fight demons. No big deal, here. It also means that Deathwatch, which are very special teams of marines that are sent by Ordo Xenos inquisitors, and only by them, to do specific missions that are always about fighting xenos, are, well, working a lot with Inquisitors that fight xenos (duh!). And finally, it means that Sisters of Battle, that are the troops of the Ecclesiarchy, which have their own aims and wars that are related to the politics of the Eclesiarchy and the Sisters' own faith, that spend a lot of time fighting xenos (like Orks and Necrons) and on rare occasion will also fight daemons, but also a lot fighting against heretics, sometime works with Inquisitors that fight against heretics.
Do you really think those three factions should be put on the same level as just “troops of the Inquisition”? Do you not see how the Sisters of Battle are much, much more independent from the Inquisition that the Grey Knights, which themselves are much more independent from the Inquisition than the Deathwatch?
It would basically make as much sense to melt Sisters with Inquisition as it would make to melt them with Mechanicum or Astra Militarum.

To that end, DA should keep their own codex, as they have their own missions independent of all the other IoM. I'm fine with SoB and DA being their own codex, btw.

 Toofast wrote:
I don't think sisters fit, they're extremely expensive, nobody plays them and GW doesn't seem to have any interest in fully supporting them.

No one plays them because they get no support. They're an all-metal army that hasn't gotten a single new miniature since they were introduced well over a decade ago, they don't have a physical rulebook anymore, and a simple squad of 10 models costs you $80 now. Everything is also direct only and has been for quite some time, and there's a constant fear that the army is going to be Squatted, just in case all the previous issues weren't enough to put you off already.

It's Dark Eldar all over again, except DE didn't have the insane price tags. All you need to do is give the army some proper fething attention, and prices that make some god-damned sense, and people will probably buy them.

Sidstyler, the tau, which I play, add nothing to the setting. They barely make a ripple in the galactic stage, are all but ignored by chaos and were created to have something more anime fan for the iom to fight. They could have easily been filled by something that existed, like exodites. The reason I left it out was that I feel that whenever a thread comes up like this the arguement for cutting the tau is always way overdone, and repeated far too often. They seem out of place.

 Sidstyler wrote:

 Toofast wrote:
I don't think sisters fit, they're extremely expensive, nobody plays them and GW doesn't seem to have any interest in fully supporting them.

No one plays them because they get no support. They're an all-metal army that hasn't gotten a single new miniature since they were introduced well over a decade ago, they don't have a physical rulebook anymore, and a simple squad of 10 models costs you $80 now. Everything is also direct only and has been for quite some time, and there's a constant fear that the army is going to be Squatted, just in case all the previous issues weren't enough to put you off already.

It's Dark Eldar all over again, except DE didn't have the insane price tags. All you need to do is give the army some proper fething attention, and prices that make some god-damned sense, and people will probably buy them.

If I may call precedent on this one the GK were a nigh-useless all-metal force that did terrifying things to Daemons and nothing much to anyone else in 3e and 4e, then they got plastic models and a powerful Codex and now folks play them. The death spiral can be broken.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Do you know what this whimsical fluff that was never mentioned outside of 3rd edition means? Well, here is what it means. It means that GK, that have always been devoted to fighting daemons, and still are, and care only about demons, are often working together with Inquisitors that fight demons. No big deal, here. It also means that Deathwatch, which are very special teams of marines that are sent by Ordo Xenos inquisitors, and only by them, to do specific missions that are always about fighting xenos, are, well, working a lot with Inquisitors that fight xenos (duh!). And finally, it means that Sisters of Battle, that are the troops of the Ecclesiarchy, which have their own aims and wars that are related to the politics of the Eclesiarchy and the Sisters' own faith, that spend a lot of time fighting xenos (like Orks and Necrons) and on rare occasion will also fight daemons, but also a lot fighting against heretics, sometime works with Inquisitors that fight against heretics.

So, are you saying they aren't the chamber militant of the Ordo Hereticus? Because I'm seeing no refutation of that in this paragraph.

To that end, I'll go ahead and say it makes sense for Sisters to be part of an Inquisition book, you know, seeing as they are a chamber militant of the Inquisition.

Do you really think those three factions should be put on the same level as just “troops of the Inquisition”? Do you not see how the Sisters of Battle are much, much more independent from the Inquisition that the Grey Knights, which themselves are much more independent from the Inquisition than the Deathwatch?

They wouldn't be 'just troops', but good try. Their level of independence doesn't matter to me; in this purely theoretical exercise, I feel that a full fledged Inquisition book could easily include and accommodate Sisters, GK, DW, and universal Inq elements. None of these factions would be any more marginalized than they currently are, and I dare say that a properly done book would flesh them out better than the current offerings.

It would basically make as much sense to melt Sisters with Inquisition as it would make to melt them with Mechanicum or Astra Militarum.

No, because Sisters are a Chamber Militant of the Inquisition, whether or not you like that fluff. Therefore your comparison is weak, as the Sisters don't have near the connection to the Guard or Ad Mech as they do the Inquisition.

But I understand you're a Sisters player, which will obviously mean you support nothing but a fully independent codex. I do think a full codex would be good for the Sisters, but in the spirit of reducing the amount of books to some sort of logical collection, an Inquisition book containing the three chambers militant makes perfect sense.

 The Home Nuggeteer wrote:
Actually you may be missing the point of the setting. Sure, the game may be bloated to someone who only looks at the rules but variety is kind of the point. The galaxy is a huge place in 40k, and one of the major draws is that there is so much variety. It is a galaxy with everything and anything. And everything happens. All the time, every day. So sure, to some people who don't want to buy so many codexes would love consolidated army books, and frankly I would like that too. However that defeats the point, this is a game of variety, for casual play, the point is not to make it feasible to know all the rules and efficiency but rather to have a lot of cool things that are unique. That is what drove me away from the vanilla marine codex in the first place. Flavor is the point, and if one redundant special rule accomplishes this so be it. Flavor is the point.

Flavor is the point, but why are you assuming that flavor requires rules bloat? Is your fluffy TWC army suddenly no longer fluffy because the rules are found in C:SM instead of C:SW, and their T5 comes from the bike unit type instead of their basic stat line? Of course not. Trying to create flavor through giant piles of special rules is the last resort of the people who aren't imaginative enough to find flavor in the fluff and models.

 Sidstyler wrote:

 Toofast wrote:
I don't think sisters fit, they're extremely expensive, nobody plays them and GW doesn't seem to have any interest in fully supporting them.

No one plays them because they get no support. They're an all-metal army that hasn't gotten a single new miniature since they were introduced well over a decade ago, they don't have a physical rulebook anymore, and a simple squad of 10 models costs you $80 now. Everything is also direct only and has been for quite some time, and there's a constant fear that the army is going to be Squatted, just in case all the previous issues weren't enough to put you off already.

It's Dark Eldar all over again, except DE didn't have the insane price tags. All you need to do is give the army some proper fething attention, and prices that make some god-damned sense, and people will probably buy them.

Eh, I think the prices make perfect sense.

But then again, I think Games Workshop intentionally prices them high in order to not sell them. I know that seems counter-intuitive, but the reality is so long as they offer them for sale, they are maintaining the product line and can defend the IP. But so long as they don't actually sell any of them, they don't have to make more and can keep the amount of inventory they have to carry to a minimum. A company as large as Games Workshop has plenty of other products to drive revenue. Making the Sisters unattractive as an army choice means it drives players to play other armies instead.

I saw a Sisters hopeful talking about how he/she has been building Tyranids instead. Seems like a perfect example. The prices and lack of support means that player is now playing a different army entirely. They're still playing 40K, but now they are doing it using an army that is likely more profitable since they already sell a large amount of Tyranids.

Remember, there's a large investment in creating a new army. A material investment in production, a manpower investment in writers/artists/designers, and a space investment to carry inventory. With a product line as broad as 40K, it isn't a question of "Will this army sell models?" 40K has 11 army factions with current-generation models (and a handful of subfactions when you consider the various Spess Mahreens). That's a lot of products that essentially compete against one another. So the design of 40K armies is to attack as many different customer segments as possible. But at a certain point, you potentially see diminishing returns. If GW redoes the Sisters of Battle, are the Sisters models being sold new sales, or are they just cannibalizing sales from another line of miniatures Games Workshop already sells? In the mean time, any resources in time, money, materials and manpower being used to make the Sisters models is not being used to make something else. The question, especially with a company as large as GW and a product as mature as Warhammer 40K, is never "Will it sell?" That's far too simplified. The real question is "What will sell best?

Eldar players still haven't seen plastic Aspect Warriors (aside from the Dire Avengers). Take that into consideration when you consider Games Workshop's "How do we use our resources best?" question because obviously "Howling Banshees" or "Fire Dragons" hasn't been the answer to that question yet. Consider the fact that you can still get 10 metal IGuard for less than half what it costs to buy 10 metal Sisters that are approximately the same size because ultimately you still need all the same vehicles and other support units to play the army regardless of what troop type you choose.

I mean, we don't really know the answers to any of the theoreticals I've presented. But the scenarios make sense from a business standpoint. People look at the Sisters of Battle and think "Games Workshop is stupid! They are overlooking easy money!" but the real-world equation is far more complicated than "Release new Sisters, profit."

Right now, the Sisters Codex cost nearly nothing to make because all of the art and fluff was recycled and nearly nothing to sell because it has almost no carrying costs other than bandwidth. Every time they "sell" a copy of it, it's almost all profit. They may not sell a lot of them, but it's irrelevant because they have no leftover inventory being wasted. Switching from a Zero-Cost model where they simply sustain the existing player base with as high of margins as possible to a significant investment like a total model range overhaul is a huge undertaking.



No player base deserves new models more than the Sisters of Battle players for their dedication and persistence. And I'd love to see it happen if just for the conversion possibility (assuming the models are scaled properly and not like the chunky IGuard mess). But William Munny said it best.

 Blacksails wrote:

Do you really think those three factions should be put on the same level as just “troops of the Inquisition”? Do you not see how the Sisters of Battle are much, much more independent from the Inquisition that the Grey Knights, which themselves are much more independent from the Inquisition than the Deathwatch?

They wouldn't be 'just troops', but good try. Their level of independence doesn't matter to me; in this purely theoretical exercise, I feel that a full fledged Inquisition book could easily include and accommodate Sisters, GK, DW, and universal Inq elements. None of these factions would be any more marginalized than they currently are, and I dare say that a properly done book would flesh them out better than the current offerings.

I wrote one once!

 The Home Nuggeteer wrote:
Sidstyler, the tau, which I play, add nothing to the setting. They barely make a ripple in the galactic stage, are all but ignored by chaos and were created to have something more anime fan for the iom to fight. They could have easily been filled by something that existed, like exodites. The reason I left it out was that I feel that whenever a thread comes up like this the arguement for cutting the tau is always way overdone, and repeated far too often. They seem out of place.

I wouldn't have started 40k if it weren't for Tau, so apparently Tau added a hell of a lot to the setting for me. Of course I imagine that would have been just fine for this fething community if I hadn't started; less weeb trash stinking up the place, right?

The Eldar. they are a dieing race. Let them die

 Sidstyler wrote:

 The Home Nuggeteer wrote:
Sidstyler, the tau, which I play, add nothing to the setting. They barely make a ripple in the galactic stage, are all but ignored by chaos and were created to have something more anime fan for the iom to fight. They could have easily been filled by something that existed, like exodites. The reason I left it out was that I feel that whenever a thread comes up like this the arguement for cutting the tau is always way overdone, and repeated far too often. They seem out of place.

I wouldn't have started 40k if it weren't for Tau, so apparently Tau added a hell of a lot to the setting for me. Of course I imagine that would have been just fine for this fething community if I hadn't started; less weeb trash stinking up the place, right?

Nah. Animesque stuff makes more sense some games than others and there's some cross-contamination, I for one would be happy to have you running about with Yu Jing or Retribution even if there were no Tau at all.

Consider also that the debate as framed here suggests picking the army that fits the least, it's not an army that's a complete waste of space and contributes nothing (I was about to write "or GW wouldn't have released it" here but then I remembered Imperial Knights), it's the army that is the outlier if we start looking for patterns within the rest. Tau don't have the mysticism common to the rest of the mythos.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Alvar wrote:
The Eldar. they are a dieing race. Let them die

"Dying". Not to mention that if this is your criteria we should get rid of everyone and leave the Orks, Tyranids, and Daemons to fight over their corpses.

(Humanity: Slowly tearing itself apart. Tau: Woefully unprepared to face the broader galaxy. Necrons: Already dead.)

I'm actually more fond of Haqqislam, though I don't think it matters because Infinity in general is seen as the "anime game" so they're all weeb factions. I did pick Retribution though, so hilariously I bought into the animu weeb army for Warmachine, too. Except the community for Warmachine is nowhere near as hostile to Ret players as the community for 40k is to Tau players.

In any case it doesn't matter, I wanted to play 40k. I picked Tau because I wanted to play Tau in 40k, obviously. Getting rid of Tau means I can't play 40k anymore, and I have a lot of models that no longer serve any purpose, as I bought them solely to play 40k with and am not interested in running them as "counts as" for a different game. So telling me that everything will be fine because I can just play a weeb faction from another game instead isn't really going to solve my current issue with the 40k fanbase being stupid, stubborn fething dicks and refusing to let me enjoy my hobby.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Alvar wrote:
The Eldar. they are a dieing race. Let them die

"Dying". Not to mention that if this is your criteria we should get rid of everyone and leave the Orks, Tyranids, and Daemons to fight over their corpses.

(Humanity: Slowly tearing itself apart. Tau: Woefully unprepared to face the broader galaxy. Necrons: Already dead.)

That's exactly what I was thinking. I say feth it in any case, if you're going to remove one faction you might as well remove all of them. Three factions would be far easier to balance than what GW's supporting now, anyway.

 Sidstyler wrote:
I'm actually more fond of Haqqislam, though I don't think it matters because Infinity in general is seen as the "anime game" so they're all weeb factions. I did pick Retribution though, so hilariously I bought into the animu weeb army for Warmachine, too. Except the community for Warmachine is nowhere near as hostile to Ret players as the community for 40k is to Tau players.

In any case it doesn't matter, I wanted to play 40k. I picked Tau because I wanted to play Tau in 40k, obviously. Getting rid of Tau means I can't play 40k anymore, and I have a lot of models that no longer serve any purpose, as I bought them solely to play 40k with and am not interested in running them as "counts as" for a different game. So telling me that everything will be fine because I can just play a weeb faction from another game instead isn't really going to solve my current issue with the 40k fanbase being stupid, stubborn fething dicks and refusing to let me enjoy my hobby.

You sounded like you were taking the grumbling about Tau as a personal attack on you, thought I'd point out that we're (or at least I am) objecting to the Tau on basis of slightly more sophisticated logic than "feth the weeb trash". GW is never actually going to delete them, they sell too well, so at the end of the day your models are safe.

As to the 40k community most tabletop wargames work very well rules-as-written; 40k needs community answers to questions the rulebooks don't answer and the power curve is such that an individual play group has to have a consistent meta within itself. The result ends up being that players of other games can be equipped to deal with anyone playing the game any way, but 40k players have to focus down on people playing the game in a specific way or it becomes prohibitively expensive. This ends up with folks taking the reality of the situation too far and assuming it's their right and duty to judge how the game should and should not be played and start being a dick to people on the Internet about it, in extreme cases they start being a dick to people in person about it and drive them off go play with nice people instead. This is a problem that occurs in pockets, you may find one game store full of jerks and go ten miles away and find another one full of relaxed/laid-back folks.

 Peregrine wrote:
Sorry, I thought this thread was about "what army would you remove if you had the chance", not "GW is never going to remove an army because they'd rather milk the cash cow obsessively with tons of pointless rulebooks".

Considering your main vote when towards Tyranids, it's hard to take the bolded part seriously.

How do you get so emotionally involved with all the arguments you have on this site? Ever considered taking a little less full on approach? You're right about 90% of the time with most of your arguments that I've read but because you're so aggressive it just baits people into responding unnecessarily...

 Blacksails wrote:
Then you might as well make a codex for every first founding chapter.
Then, in fairness to every other faction, release a codex for every single dynasty, hive fleet, regiment, clan, kabal, craftworld, and sept.
I'm all for options, but you'd be looking at 50+ codices. That's ridiculous. Even if they were supplements, that's a gak ton of repetition for what ultimately would boil down to a few characters and a special unit or two per codex.

Yes, which is why they would never make a Codex for every single thing.
But if my brother gets a candy bar while I don't, I will ask for one too. Not ask to have his taken away.

Honour guard then, whatever, it doesn't matter.

So you want Sanguinary Guard to lose their Jump Packs?
And yes, it totally matters!
People can't run in here yelling that unit X and unit Y are so alike that unit Y could be removed when in fact they are completely different.
Next they are going to tell us that Sanguinary Priests are just like Techmarines.

So in short there are a few points:
-Power level: I don't see how this helps.
-Access to more units: Which they don't have for a good reason. Blood Angels don't take TFC's or Hunters.
-Development time for other Factions: If they just removed Tyranids, they could spend that time on Blood Angels.
It's a non-argument because it basically says that you want them to remove Codex X so they can spend more time on Codex <whatever I play>.

And yeah, I am sure the "benefits" outweigh the cons if you don't play those Codices yourself.
They've had those books for 18 years now if you count Angels of Death, otherwise it are 12.

Unbelievable that we have this threads while also having complaints about armies becoming bland.

Kangodo wrote:

Honour guard then, whatever, it doesn't matter.

So you want Sanguinary Guard to lose their Jump Packs?
And yes, it totally matters!
People can't run in here yelling that unit X and unit Y are so alike that unit Y could be removed when in fact they are completely different.
Next they are going to tell us that Sanguinary Priests are just like Techmarines.

So in short there are a few points:
-Power level: I don't see how this helps.
-Access to more units: Which they don't have for a good reason. Blood Angels don't take TFC's or Hunters.
-Development time for other Factions: If they just removed Tyranids, they could spend that time on Blood Angels.
It's a non-argument because it basically says that you want them to remove Codex X so they can spend more time on Codex <whatever I play>.

And yeah, I am sure the "benefits" outweigh the cons if you don't play those Codices yourself.
They've had those books for 18 years now if you count Angels of Death, otherwise it are 12.

Unbelievable that we have this threads while also having complaints about armies becoming bland.

Nope. Sanguiniary Priests are just like Apothecaries.

Honestly all you'd need to do to mix all the Space Marine Codexes into one book is give everything more options. Why can't you have Honour Guard with Jump Packs, or Bikes, or Terminator armour? Why are Tacticals stuck with bolters and one special/one heavy? Why can't Assault Marines have useful special weapons? Broaden access to options that ought to be broader and nobody loses anything by being made into a Chapter Tactic with an appendix chapter detailing your special characters and one or two unique units.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Do you know what this whimsical fluff that was never mentioned outside of 3rd edition means? Well, here is what it means. It means that GK, that have always been devoted to fighting daemons, and still are, and care only about demons, are often working together with Inquisitors that fight demons. No big deal, here. It also means that Deathwatch, which are very special teams of marines that are sent by Ordo Xenos inquisitors, and only by them, to do specific missions that are always about fighting xenos, are, well, working a lot with Inquisitors that fight xenos (duh!). And finally, it means that Sisters of Battle, that are the troops of the Ecclesiarchy, which have their own aims and wars that are related to the politics of the Eclesiarchy and the Sisters' own faith, that spend a lot of time fighting xenos (like Orks and Necrons) and on rare occasion will also fight daemons, but also a lot fighting against heretics, sometime works with Inquisitors that fight against heretics.

So, are you saying they aren't the chamber militant of the Ordo Hereticus? Because I'm seeing no refutation of that in this paragraph.

To that end, I'll go ahead and say it makes sense for Sisters to be part of an Inquisition book, you know, seeing as they are a chamber militant of the Inquisition.

Spoiler:

Do you really think those three factions should be put on the same level as just “troops of the Inquisition”? Do you not see how the Sisters of Battle are much, much more independent from the Inquisition that the Grey Knights, which themselves are much more independent from the Inquisition than the Deathwatch?

They wouldn't be 'just troops', but good try. Their level of independence doesn't matter to me; in this purely theoretical exercise, I feel that a full fledged Inquisition book could easily include and accommodate Sisters, GK, DW, and universal Inq elements. None of these factions would be any more marginalized than they currently are, and I dare say that a properly done book would flesh them out better than the current offerings.

It would basically make as much sense to melt Sisters with Inquisition as it would make to melt them with Mechanicum or Astra Militarum.

No, because Sisters are a Chamber Militant of the Inquisition, whether or not you like that fluff. Therefore your comparison is weak, as the Sisters don't have near the connection to the Guard or Ad Mech as they do the Inquisition.

But I understand you're a Sisters player, which will obviously mean you support nothing but a fully independent codex. I do think a full codex would be good for the Sisters, but in the spirit of reducing the amount of books to some sort of logical collection, an Inquisition book containing the three chambers militant makes perfect sense.

SoB are Not part of the Inquisition. The Ecclesiarchy (or as others call it the Imperial Church) is a completely separate organization and compeletly separate entity that. The SoB aka the AS serve as the millitary arm of the Ecclesiarchy.

From wh40k.lexicanum - http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Adepta_Sororitas

The Adepta Sororitas (also known as "the Sisterhood" or "Daughters of the Emperor") are an all-female subdivision of the religious organisation known as the Ecclesiarchy or Ministorum. The Sisterhood's Orders Militant serve as the Ecclesiarchy's fighting arm, mercilessly rooting out corruption and heresy within humanity and every organisation of the Adeptus Terra.

There is naturally some overlap between the duties of the Sisterhood and the Inquisition; for this reason, although the Inquisition and the Sisterhood remain entirely separate organisations, the Orders Militant of the Sisterhood also act in a similar role to the Chamber Militants of the Inquisition, especially the Ordo Hereticus.

lexicanum ordo hereticus - http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Ordo_Hereticus

Although completely unalike in their methods (where Inquisitors are analytical and suspicious, the Sisters of Battle are zealous and unquestioning of dogma) the Sisters and the Hereticus also have the common purpose of eradicating threats from within. Recognising this, the two organisations joined together in their efforts, a relationship formalised by the Convocation of Nephilim. Although the Sororitas and its Sisters of Battle remain part of the Ecclesiarchy, they respond when called upon by Inquisitors of the Ordo Hereticus

The only reason why the SoB and the Ordo Hereticus work together is because many time's their goals are the same. However they remain part of two separate orgainizations, the SoB with the Ecclesiarchy (officially the Adeptus Ministorum) and the ordo Hereticus with the Inquisition. It is mostly because of the Convocation of Nephilim why both the SoB and the Ordo Hereticus are quite friendly to each-other. Both organizations were founded for essentially the same purpose but have always remained separate from each other from the start.

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Convocation_of_Nephilim

The Convocation of Nephilim occurred after the Age of Apostasy and following the death of Goge Vandire. During this time, the Imperium suffered from such a terrible conflict that it nearly tore itself apart. Thus, a new branch of the Inquisition was formed known as the Ordo Hereticus. At the height of the Thorian Reformation, the female Imperial Cult known as the Daughters of the Emperor had their relationship with the Ordo Hereticus codified in the Convocation, thus leading to the formation of the Adepta Sororitas. This female sisterhood became the Chamber Militant of the Ministorum (Ecclesiarchy) where they purged the deviant, corrupt and heretical from the ranks of the Ecclesiarchy following the dismantlement of the Frateris Templar.