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.

Looking at Proposed Rules, there are always so many threads about giving IoM units (in particular SM) ridiculous buffs, such as:

Terminators gaining 1+ armour, 4++, FNP, point reductions etc.

Tactical Marines gaining FNP, 2W, Relentless etc.

Drop Pods gaining a point reduction.


I never see this level of complaining from other armies and it isn't as if IoM are a lower-tier army.

Why do you think many IoM players are like this?

Or, There's just more people that play space marines....

Hardly a mystery.

Deadnight wrote:
Or, There's just more people that play space marines....

Hardly a mystery.

So because they are the most popular they need massive buffs?

1. Everyone "wants" buffs for their faction

2. There are a lot of IoM players, and therefore, you should see more IoM... complaining... if you want to call it that.

3.Terminators really do suck.

4. Tactical marines are not really that great.

5. I'm not sure if I've seen anyone *seriously* asking for a point reduction on DP. If they do, well, they're just strange

Too many IoM players are probably too invested in the - most of the time - propaganda fluff. Even when it's not supposed to be propaganda, it's told from the point of view of a spess mehreen, who have a tendency of believing themselves to be truly all-mighty and righteous.

I would have no issue with tabletop marines having "movie marines" rules, as long as they paid for it. 2 wounds, FNP, relentless? Pay for it. Then keep complaining when meltas, battle cannons and anything else out there with F8 and FP3 keep turning your expensive super movie marines to shreds.

...because they always get them. Marine favorism has always been a thing.

 Talys wrote:
1. Everyone "wants" buffs for their faction

2. There are a lot of IoM players, and therefore, you should see more IoM... complaining... if you want to call it that.

3.Terminators really do suck.

4. Tactical marines are not really that great.

5. I'm not sure if I've seen anyone *seriously* asking for a point reduction on DP. If they do, well, they're just strange

1) I agree, however in my experience, whenever a non-IoM suggests massive buffs (like they love to suggest) they are called 'cheese', 'OP' or 'broken'.
There just seems to be a double standard.

2) Again I agree, however their buffs always seem to be ridiculous such as Terminators with a 1+ save...WTF? That's way too OP when other 2+ guys will still die to plasma.

3) They suck because they lost their purpose *cough* Centurions and Sternguard do it better *cough*

4) They are all-rounders, so they are as good as they should be.

5) Well many claim that it is OVERcosted (I accidentally put undercoated)... So I'd say that they do.

 Korinov wrote:
Too many IoM players are probably too invested in the - most of the time - propaganda fluff. Even when it's not supposed to be propaganda, it's told from the point of view of a spess mehreen, who have a tendency of believing themselves to be truly all-mighty and righteous.

I would have no issue with tabletop marines having "movie marines" rules, as long as they paid for it. 2 wounds, FNP, relentless? Pay for it. Then keep complaining when meltas, battle cannons and anything else out there with F8 and FP3 keep turning your expensive super movie marines to shreds.

I don't play marines but I really do believe they should be movie marines (and should pay for it) as well. At the moment on the tabletop they're nothing like the fluff and that disappoints me. I find them extremely lacklustre.

SGTPozy wrote:

Deadnight wrote:
Or, There's just more people that play space marines....

Hardly a mystery.

So because they are the most popular they need massive buffs?

No, because they are more popular, there are more threads about them.

Were the game more balanced, such threads would be minimal in quantity. Alas, "model first"...

Loyalist terminators are awful (only 2 of my 5 armies are IoM before any hint of bias is thrown my way). Sternguard and centurions do not fill their roll better as they have an entirely different roll - termis are close combat specialists... unless you believe 5 stormbolters is worth 200pts.
Tacticals are really really poor, their damage output is pathetic for their points and they are not that durable for 14pts apiece.

Now what you have done is taken what people have said entirely out of context. The termis for example - NOBODY on that thread claimed they needed 1+ (which you didn't describe properly), 4++, FnP and a points reduction. Some of these ideas were suggested singularly NOT joint.
IMO 2W would be sufficient for termis to make them worth their points.

If people are saying a drop pod is UNDERcosted, they are saying it should cost MORE not less.

Tactical marines gaining FnP is not ridiculous. Check out the Red Scorpion rules (hint - Red Scorps are not considered in the slightest OP).

Why have you in at least 3 seperate threads now, catagorized all IoM players together? Stereotyping helps no-one and instead gets peoples backs up.

Another stellar poll from SGTPozy. IoM players are not some kind of hive mind collective, different players want different things, so not every player is asking for all those buffs, or even any buffs. Tac Squads and Terminators could do with a buff, and the thread about Drop Pods the general consensus was that DPs are undercosted, not that they need to be cheaper.

I don't know why you hate IoM players so much...

SGTPozy wrote:


Why do you think many IoM players are like this?

I know many IoM players are Not like this.



Maybe your next thread should be:

" Why are xeno players satisfied with their cheese when more cheese is better ?"

Also think about this. Eldar Guardians needed a buff - Eldar players were always saying this (and most would agree), they ended up getting +1bs, +1ws, psudo-rending and battle focus, for no increase in costs when the new dex came out... and they are still rarely taken.
Discussing a unit which is not worth its points and how you would improve it is not being spoilt. Your thread options would suggest you seem to believe this. In fact I don't belive IoM ARMIES need buffing - hardly anybody seriously does. But many believe some UNITS need buffing. Your poll does not really allow this option, being biased towards the 'spoilt' option.
CSM need buffing and I see many threads discussing this. Orks need a few buffs here and there and I see threads dicussing this. Dark Eldar buffs have been discussed in depth too. Eldar, Tau, Deamons and Necrons? They're doing pretty fine as they are, especially in corncern to troops.

I've just mentioned the 7 basic non-IoM armies. Here are the IoM ones:
Dark Angels
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Grey Knights
Sisters of Battle
Space Marines
Astra Militarum
Militarum Tempestus
Imperial Knights
Inquisition

That's 10 Imperial armies. That's 59% of the available non FW armies out there. If you decide to put them all together under the name IoM - of course there will be more threads on the IoM units.

 1hadhq wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:


Why do you think many IoM players are like this?

I know many IoM players are Not like this.



Maybe your next thread should be:

" Why are xeno players satisfied with their cheese when more cheese is better ?"

Heh. Eldar, Daemon, and Necron cheese is totally fine! But that one thing IoM has, (grav star of the bike or cent variety) super op, proof that imperial players are all collectively GWs favorites, and do nothing but whine and cry about how they need buffs!

But on a serious note, just report the op for being inflammatory and move along. If you don't feed the troll, it starves.

No need to attack me.

All armies have their cheese but many (remember I did say 'many' in the OP and not 'all') IoM players want more.

They want their grav guns, they want invincible terminators and they want tacticals that are the best at everything, rather than being good/average at everything.

If people do not like the IoM being viewed as a single army then maybe people should stop playing them as a single army.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
If a unit is buffed and nothing gets nerfed, then the army got buffed. This means that my original statement is still correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Poly Ranger, I see one Ork and one Chaos thread on Proposed Rules, yet there are more SM ones... So people still complain more about IoM ones when they don't need it.

If a thread was about buffing DA that would be fine since they need it, but the problem is that suggested buffs will affect all marine armies including those that do not need the help.

SGTPozy wrote:
No need to attack me.

All armies have their cheese but many (remember I did say 'many' in the OP and not 'all') IoM players want more.

They want their grav guns, they want invincible terminators and they want tacticals that are the best at everything, rather than being good/average at everything.

If people do not like the IoM being viewed as a single army then maybe people should stop playing them as a single army.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
If a unit is buffed and nothing gets nerfed, then the army got buffed. This means that my original statement is still correct.

Okay, again with the most, it's not most players want more buffs, it's some players want more buffs. Most still gives it that hive mind feel, like most IoM players think the same. They don't. Some is accurate.

They want units that are good at everything but costed appropriately. Because that would fit the fluff.

No one said they didn't want them to be viewed as a single army? Why would people stop playing them with allies when it's in the rules and suits the fluff?

If a subpar unit gets buffed and nothing gets nerfed, the army didn't get buffed, you just might see more of that unit than before. It doesn't make the army any better overall, unless it suddenly becomes broken. But no one is asking for broken.

SGTPozy wrote:

Deadnight wrote:
Or, There's just more people that play space marines....

Hardly a mystery.

So because they are the most popular they need massive buffs?

No, but because there are more of them in general, the same percentage of unhappy people comes across as being much larger.

It's like the old saying. "It's not that a lot of Americans are stupid, its just that there are a LOT of Americans."

It's not saying that Americans are stupid. Just that with so many people talking, the stupid ones are more obvious.

"Why have you in at least 3 seperate threads now, catagorized all IoM players together? Stereotyping helps no-one and instead gets peoples backs up."

How is it offensive? People combine CSM and Daemons all of the time as 'Chaos' and they don't get offended.

It isn't stereotyping, if I was stereotyping I would have said that they all take minimum troops, spam grav centurions, ally in TWC and dreadknights and then take a couple IK... I did not say that, all that I did was combine them since they are essentially the same army.

No, you've combined all IoM players together as if they all think/want the same thing. He doesn't mean 'why have you counted all IoM armies as one army' he means 'why have you counted all IoM players as if they all want the same thing'. For the third time in this thread, different people want different things. They don't all think the same.

 ImAGeek wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
No need to attack me.

All armies have their cheese but many (remember I did say 'many' in the OP and not 'all') IoM players want more.

They want their grav guns, they want invincible terminators and they want tacticals that are the best at everything, rather than being good/average at everything.

If people do not like the IoM being viewed as a single army then maybe people should stop playing them as a single army.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
If a unit is buffed and nothing gets nerfed, then the army got buffed. This means that my original statement is still correct.

Okay, again with the most, it's not most players want more buffs, it's some players want more buffs. Most still gives it that hive mind feel, like most IoM players think the same. They don't. Some is accurate.

They want units that are good at everything but costed appropriately. Because that would fit the fluff.

No one said they didn't want them to be viewed as a single army? Why would people stop playing them with allies when it's in the rules and suits the fluff?

If a subpar unit gets buffed and nothing gets nerfed, the army didn't get buffed, you just might see more of that unit than before. It doesn't make the army any better overall, unless it suddenly becomes broken. But no one is asking for broken.

I used 'most' since on those threads no IoM players said no to the buffs.

What's wrong with a Hive Mind? Tyranids are fine with it

So it is okay though for Chaos to be combined? Still a double standard; either allow the groups or refer to every single army separately.

If something one player in a football team got better then the team got better. Same goes for codices and units.


I'd argue that terminators that are immune to plasma are pretty broken...



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ImAGeek wrote:
No, you've combined all IoM players together as if they all think/want the same thing. He doesn't mean 'why have you counted all IoM armies as one army' he means 'why have you counted all IoM players as if they all want the same thing'. For the third time in this thread, different people want different things. They don't all think the same.

Yet again, why are Chaos combined then? They don't want the same things/ think the same.

By that logic, no comparisons can be made because no one is the same.

People are happy to call Eldar players cheesy, yet they clearly aren't all serpent spammers, so I hope you continue your crusade against generalism to xenos and chaos too.

Right so the players talking in those threads are every single IoM player in the world? And no one said no to those buffs because Terminators and Tac Squads could do with a buff. Not being broken, or OP, just good.

What do you mean it's okay for chaos to be combined? We aren't talking about grouping the armies together, stop grouping the players together.

Yes I do. There's no need for any generalisation. Not everybody does spam Serpents. When has anyone combined Chaos players past using 'Chaos' as CSM and Daemons. Again! The issue isn't that you're saying 'IoM' to cover all Imperium armies. It's that you're assuming every IoM player wants he same thing.

Countless times I've seen you say things like 'IoM players just want IK spam' and stuff like that. 'Why do IoM Players always want buffs?' Not every IoM player does.

 ImAGeek wrote:
Right so the players talking in those threads are every single IoM player in the world? And no one said no to those buffs because Terminators and Tac Squads could do with a buff. Not being broken, or OP, just good.

What do you mean it's okay for chaos to be combined? We aren't talking about grouping the armies together, stop grouping the players together.

Chaos is referred to by both Daeoms and CSM, but you don't hear them complaining since you quite often see the two together; just like with the IoM.

They don't need a buff though, they are fine how they are (I used to play SM and they are fine).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ImAGeek wrote:

Yes I do. There's no need for any generalisation. Not everybody does spam Serpents. When has anyone combined Chaos players past using 'Chaos' as CSM and Daemons. Again! The issue isn't that you're saying 'IoM' to cover all Imperium armies. It's that you're assuming every IoM player wants he same thing.

Countless times I've seen you say things like 'IoM players just want IK spam' and stuff like that. 'Why do IoM Players always want buffs?' Not every IoM player does.

Yet Eldar players have a bad reputation for it because people generalise.

Yet again, I used the word 'most' and not 'all'.

When have I said about everyone wanting IK spam? I've said that many do use them, but not that they wanted them.

So DA players don't want buffs? GKs don't want more units? Sisters don't want to lose their monotonous?

It's not an Imperial player thing, it's a 40k player thing. Not all of them, or even half, but it's still a seriously vocal portion.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
It's not an Imperial player thing, it's a 40k player thing. Not all of them, or even half, but it's still a seriously vocal portion.

Exactly, so why are IoM players the most vocal? (Not directed at you personally)

Because there's a lot more of them. Simple as that.

Because there's more of them.

Its not that their more vocal, there's simply more players who have an IoM faction (marines in particular).

If you did more than a cursory glance at the proposed section, you'd also find plenty of threads looking to buff/fix all the other codices.

I saw 9 IoM buffing threads, yes there are 2 or 3 Ork ones and a CSM one but there are still far more IoM ones.

Because there's more people that play them. Cmon man...

stripeydave wrote:
Obvious troll is obvious.

Then why do 53% of people agree that it is just because they are GW's favourites?