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.

I'm just wondering. Honestly i'd get rid of Slaanesh. He just seems real boring fluff wise in my opinion.

Also if you think an army should just be combined with another. In my opinion it wouldn't hurt to lump Inquisition, Assassins, and Sisters of Battle together. like 3rd edition

I might say Crimson Slaughter CSM. CSM already had three red-armored factions (World Eaters, Word Bearers, and Red Corsairs), why do they really need another? And their fluff makes little sense either, or rather is poorly translated to the tabletop. They only recently turned to Chaos (recently compared to the others, anyway), so why don't they have the more modern wargear (i.e. Storm Bolters)? It just seems superfluous really.

Voted Eldar because I have always disliked Elves in their every appearance in anything ever. Dark Elves I am good with because they are usually evil, but every other form of elf needs a good krumpin!

 Madoch1 wrote:
I'm just wondering. Honestly i'd get rid of Tzeentch. He just seems real boring fluff wise

HE IS NOT BORING> HE IS THE OPPOSITE!

Tyranids. Stupid fluff, ugly models, just fix the mistake and get rid of them.

Second place goes to demons as an independent army. Put them back into being support units for a C:SM or cult army, not an opportunity to use your WHFB army in 40k.

Imperial knights. I don't mind seeing an IK or two as an addition to an army, but a list consisting of nothing but SHWs is really ridiculous to me.

Space Marines.

DA, BA, GK ans SW are all safe though. The rest can do one.

Generic sci-fi heroes that too many play, are covered in GW goo, that has left an overly bland dry taste in my mouth.

Go play 30k already!

Tau. They don't fit. In a world of grim darkness, they feel... Out of place. There is nothing grim dark, or scary, about them. Also, they hold the smallest scale, fluff wise, to anything else. Fluff wise, any faction could completely wipe out the tau in a heart beat if they focused on it for.. A few days, maybe? Also, they aren't fun to play, or to play against. It's probably the worst army that gw has thought of. Replace them with squats, and the masses will be happier for it.

Imperial Knights, definitely. They just don't fit as an independent army.

Imperial Knights are not a gods-damned army and never should be considered one. Just make them a specialist unit like other things with forge world, and have them ship with their own packaged rule-set.

Imperial Knights. Dull beyond words to face, and simply don't belong in 40k outside of Epic/Apocalypse.

Second would probably be assassins. Their stats always seem OTT (I can accept BS8 on the Vindicare, but WS8? Really?), and they just have a stupid number of special rules.

I mean, the Callidus Assassin has: Fearless, Fleet, Hit & Run, Independent Operative, Infiltrate, Lightning Reflexes, Move Through Cover, Neural Shock, No Escape, Phasing Hits, Polymorphine, Precision Strikes and Reign of Confusion

No model needs 13 special rules. And it's not even as if they're just USRs - more than half of the above are special rules unique to Assassins.

 vipoid wrote:
Imperial Knights. Dull beyond words to face, and simply don't belong in 40k outside of Epic/Apocalypse.

Second would probably be assassins. Their stats always seem OTT (I can accept BS8 on the Vindicare, but WS8? Really?), and they just have a stupid number of special rules.

I mean, the Callidus Assassin has: Fearless, Fleet, Hit & Run, Independent Operative, Infiltrate, Lightning Reflexes, Move Through Cover, Neural Shock, No Escape, Phasing Hits, Polymorphine, Precision Strikes and Reign of Confusion

No model needs 13 special rules. And it's not even as if they're just USRs - more than half of the above are special rules unique to Assassins.

The funny thing is that assassins are probably the only unit in 40k that are actually close to the fluff on the tabletop.

Necrons can just go and do one. I don't understand how such a bland playstyle like walk forward and shoot is fun. And on the opposite end, how is it fun if you cant actually kill anything? I would be ok I guess if RP either didn't exist, was replaced with something else or went back to 5th ed RP.




Please don't hurt meeee

 Wyzilla wrote:

The funny thing is that assassins are probably the only unit in 40k that are actually close to the fluff on the tabletop.

I wouldn't know.

All I know is that it takes waaaay too many special rules to get them there.

 WarbossDakka wrote:
Necrons can just go and do one. I don't understand how such a bland playstyle like walk forward and shoot is fun. And on the opposite end, how is it fun if you cant actually kill anything? I would be ok I guess if RP either didn't exist, was replaced with something else or went back to 5th ed RP.

I wouldn't want Necrons to go, but I really hate the current RP mechanic for them. It's dull, flavourless and boring to play against. I think it would be better if Necrons were easy to kill, but could be repaired/resurrected by the HQ models somehow.

Oh, I thought it was: what army need more supplements..
Seriously I voted for Imperial Guard because I want more different guard armie^^
If I had to say which army has to go, it would be Imperial Knight orAssassins.
They don't need to be an army.

Tyranids. Mind bogglingly, unbelievably, will-to-live robbingly boring.

Eldar. All day every day, twice on Fridays. Eldar are meta OP.

Harliquins, and also things like knights, assassins, LotD, etc. These things are billed as separate armies, but really they are just an ally unit or two to be tacked on to an existing force. With the way lists are built these days, they don’t need to be anything more then a WD article a/o minimal dataslate

If you don’t have something for every FOC, stop pretending you are an army. They don’t all have to be good units, but at least try to be a respectable, balanced, force.

 Nevelon wrote:
Harliquins, and also things like knights, assassins, LotD, etc. These things are billed as separate armies, but really they are just an ally unit or two to be tacked on to an existing force. With the way lists are built these days, they don’t need to be anything more then a WD article a/o minimal dataslate

If you don’t have something for every FOC, stop pretending you are an army. They don’t all have to be good units, but at least try to be a respectable, balanced, force.

This.

 Nevelon wrote:
Harliquins, and also things like knights, assassins, LotD, etc. These things are billed as separate armies, but really they are just an ally unit or two to be tacked on to an existing force. With the way lists are built these days, they don’t need to be anything more then a WD article a/o minimal dataslate

If you don’t have something for every FOC, stop pretending you are an army. They don’t all have to be good units, but at least try to be a respectable, balanced, force.

So you want to remove Skitarii and Cult Mechanicus as well?

Bah @ you. It's actually interesting to run things with relatively unique FOCs(Skitarii with no HQs for example).

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Harliquins, and also things like knights, assassins, LotD, etc. These things are billed as separate armies, but really they are just an ally unit or two to be tacked on to an existing force. With the way lists are built these days, they don’t need to be anything more then a WD article a/o minimal dataslate

If you don’t have something for every FOC, stop pretending you are an army. They don’t all have to be good units, but at least try to be a respectable, balanced, force.

So you want to remove Skitarii and Cult Mechanicus as well?

Bah @ you. It's actually interesting to run things with relatively unique FOCs(Skitarii with no HQs for example).

Agreed. It's also super fluffy. (Skitarii wouldn't have an hq on the field. He is in space observing a huge holo battlefield as everything takes place, planning new moves with every passing second and transmitting them into the minds of the soldiers below)

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Harliquins, and also things like knights, assassins, LotD, etc. These things are billed as separate armies, but really they are just an ally unit or two to be tacked on to an existing force. With the way lists are built these days, they don’t need to be anything more then a WD article a/o minimal dataslate

If you don’t have something for every FOC, stop pretending you are an army. They don’t all have to be good units, but at least try to be a respectable, balanced, force.

So you want to remove Skitarii and Cult Mechanicus as well?

Bah @ you. It's actually interesting to run things with relatively unique FOCs(Skitarii with no HQs for example).

I think they should be in the same book/army. The way they were released was just GW trying to sponge the cost of another hardcover rulebook off their fans. IKs can join them in the same book. I understand that knights might not technically be part of the AdMech, but they are thematically close enough they can share a book. Sort of like the old witchhunter codex.

There isn’t a lot of stuff I think should be removed, but a lot of things need to be restructured. And mono-unit hardcover “Codexes” are the first thing that needs to go.

 Nevelon wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Harliquins, and also things like knights, assassins, LotD, etc. These things are billed as separate armies, but really they are just an ally unit or two to be tacked on to an existing force. With the way lists are built these days, they don’t need to be anything more then a WD article a/o minimal dataslate

If you don’t have something for every FOC, stop pretending you are an army. They don’t all have to be good units, but at least try to be a respectable, balanced, force.

So you want to remove Skitarii and Cult Mechanicus as well?

Bah @ you. It's actually interesting to run things with relatively unique FOCs(Skitarii with no HQs for example).

I think they should be in the same book/army. The way they were released was just GW trying to sponge the cost of another hardcover rulebook off their fans.

Have you actually played either of those armies?
Them being released as not one book but two separate ones was actually the BEST way they could do it.
People who want to run the Cult Mechanicus side of things(the Servitors and Combat Robots) can do so without touching the Skitarii side of things and vice versa.

If Skitarii had been in the same book as Cult Mechanicus, I would not have bought into them. Serious statement there.

IKs can join them in the same book. I understand that knights might not technically be part of the AdMech, but they are thematically close enough they can share a book. Sort of like the old witchhunter codex.

There isn’t a lot of stuff I think should be removed, but a lot of things need to be restructured. And mono-unit hardcover “Codexes” are the first thing that needs to go.

Yeah, because there are SO MANY of those "mono-unit hardcover Codices" taking up room on the shelves, right?

 Kanluwen wrote:

Them being released as not one book but two separate ones was actually the BEST way they could do it.
People who want to run the Cult Mechanicus side of things(the Servitors and Combat Robots) can do so without touching the Skitarii side of things and vice versa.

Yeah, because people couldn't possibly have just elected to not use Skitarii or Cult Mechanicus units from their codex.

 vipoid wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Them being released as not one book but two separate ones was actually the BEST way they could do it.
People who want to run the Cult Mechanicus side of things(the Servitors and Combat Robots) can do so without touching the Skitarii side of things and vice versa.

Yeah, because people couldn't possibly have just elected to not use Skitarii or Cult Mechanicus units from their codex.

Try to make an army based upon the criteria you just used by combining those two books.
Going off of your criteria, every Skitarii player would have to take a Cult Mechanicus unit right away to field a CAD--since they have no HQ choices they need to take a Techpriest Dominus.

It's like if someone wants to field a strictly Scout army for Space Marines, they either have to go Ultramarines or field the 10th Company formation. There's no option for a Scout HQ beyond "counts as" or homebrewed characters.

Well, they could still include the Skitarii detachment, not to mention the various formations available.

 vipoid wrote:
Well, they could still include the Skitarii detachment, not to mention the various formations available.

And if they wrote them as "two books in one", those formations and that detachment probably would not have existed.

You can armchair as much as you like, but honestly I like the Skitarii and Cult Mechanicus split. If you were to put the two books together they would have ended up being Space Marine sized and there is no way in hell I would have paid $58 for an army that was so new with so few models/unit choices to begin with.

$33 for the Codex? That got me hooked.

Orks. They're boring as all hell. Modeling-wise they suck, because you can't convert anything. Painting-wise, they're nothing but bright green with red everywhere like a non-stop Christmas brunch. Their rules are too predictable, they're completely mono-build, and you never see anyone having fun with them, either playing with them or playing against them.

The cost of rulebooks being a bar to play is another hot button (and one reason I’d like to see fewer) I pay far, far to much for rules, where I’d rather be investing in minis. Frankly GW would get more of my money if they gave the rules away for free, but that’s a discussion for another thread.

But melding the two together is a far cry from going to the size of the SM codex. Put together there are 14 different AdMech units (looking at GW’s site and filtering out all the painting guides, bundles, etc). I’ll admit to not playing the armies, but that still seems low for a full book, and quite a distance from all the options in the SM codex. I think they could do justice to the force in a “normal” sized book.

And while people who want to play pure skitarii can get away with the $33, people who want to do a combined AdMech force would have to shell out $66, rather then the $50 most people pay. To be honest, I didn’t realize the price for the AdMech factions was that low. I thought they were full, or almost full, priced like the rest.

Being able to play a sub-set of an army (like an all-scout list) should be supported more, but often isn’t. But I’d rather have more options in one book and be able to choose what to use, rather then having to buy multiple books to assemble my force.

Opinions vary, so YMMV.

 Madoch1 wrote:
I'm just wondering. Honestly i'd get rid of Tzeentch. He just seems real boring fluff wise in my opinion.

Well, you're welcome to your opinion....

Tzeentch, the God of plotting, schemes and change. The God of betrayal who was one of the, if not THE orchestrator behind the Horus Heresy - compared to one dimensional Khone 'Moar Skulls', Nurgle 'Candida albicans is my favourite yeast' and Slaanesh 'One in the bum, no harm done'.

but sure...

*BLAM BLAM BLAM*


Personally, I'd like to see Sisters as a force either done properly, or binned - none of this crippled half-life existence as a metal only White Dwarf army.

Otherwise - Tau, just because they belong to Infinity more than 40K (imo, I know they have a large fanbase)