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.

As has already been suggested, more xenos, non humanoid if possible.
And if anybody wants my suggestion, the Arachnoids. Real nasty spiders. But unlike the Nids I'd have them as technologically advanced, making use of non organic armour and weapons.

 Melissia wrote:
Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

Personally I don't want to explain how averages work again or why the number of people who are average is actually really, really tiny. I feel it's a mathematical concept that anyone playing a crazy-expensive miniatures game involving lots of dice should actually understand.

 Melissia wrote:
Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

We've had it several times in this thread already. The end point is that Men and Women are not totally different. We have IRL instances of women beating men at feats of strength, and we have instances of men beating women at feats of endurance. It is just not as simple as "Man has Strength 4, Woman has Strength 3".

 Selym wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

We've had it several times in this thread already. The end point is that Men and Women are not totally different. We have IRL instances of women beating men at feats of strength, and we have instances of men beating women at feats of endurance. It is just not as simple as "Man has Strength 4, Woman has Strength 3".

Militarum Tempestus, highly elite trained military men, are Strength 3.

Sisters of Battle, highly elite trained religious military women (whose power armor doesn't increase their strength) are also Strength 3.

Death-Cult Assasins, wacko melee assassins whose lore I haven't looked into but all the models are women so I've always assumed they're always women, are Strength 4.

Space Marines, who we should all be familiar with, are Strength 4.

Eldar Banshees are Strength 3.

Ork Boys are Strength 3.

So we have, among just those units, men paralling women, men beating women, women beating men, women beating women, and men beating men, and both women and men beating AND paralleling two different types of melee-oriented Xenos.

So apparently, yes, it does in fact matter what your personal characteristics are, more so than your gender in terms of strength in the Warhammer 40k game. Your gender seems to be practically irrelevant compared to which unit you actually are in the equation.

Except those are game statistics and have little impact on lore.

 HANZERtank wrote:
How would people here go about adding more diversity to the 40k universe. I hear things about female space marines need to be added in. I'm personally not too bothered about that as it currently doesn't exist in the fluff. I get that maybe it should amd feel free to discuss it. However I do believe that distinctly female options should be made for Guard and Tau. Both of these have female warriors in the fluff yet not properly represented (at least with gw minis) on the table.

Here is the original post in this thread. This discussion has seemed to drift far afield of the original question.

1. I think Female Space marines are silly because they are against the existing/current lore. Feel free to sculpt your minis how you wish, but I shall roll my eyes at your 36 HH boob plate armor just as I would roll them at another players declaration that their Space Marine Chapter is from one of the two Lost Legions.
2. I think that there is 100% NOTHING wrong either in modeling or in lore with female IG, Female Tau, or even female Kroot. However, I don't know how you depict Male/Female variance from a species that evolved from birds (Kroot)... Knock yourself off with female cadians and catachans and Death Korps of Krieg.

"And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself. "

Have you ever heard of xenoblogulogutlrararin?

Fire caste Tau have a lot of it, Earth Caste don't. It gives you a lot of muscles.

40k is a sci fi setting. You can have alien races with as much or as little sexual dimorphism in whatever direction you want.

For instance, in the Tau, it's clear that rather than sexual dimorphism (which appears to be very minimal) they have subspecies differences between the different castes. Eldar are already established to have almost no difference in build between the males and females, which is why arguments like "they put the heavier armor on the men and keep most of the instinctually nurturing wimminfolk at home makin' babies where they belong!"

In the game's established lore, Eldar, Guard, and Dark Eldar have equal representation between the sexes. The only model line that comes even close is the Dark Eldar, with usually around 20% female sculpts. GW does not make female or non-white sculpts for their minis, with very few exceptions, and recently even models that once had female sculpts (Shadowseer, Eldar Windriders, Dire Avengers) were changed to be all-male. Even in cases where the parts don't need to be interchanged (genestealer cult, chaos cult) they sculpt and paint everyone male and white.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
Agreed. I am likely allowing my personal favoritism towards Tau to interfere with other's preferences. Eldar can be excused (possibly!) because likely the Old Ones got lazy and made humans and Eldar share some features. That's pretty much the only reason I can think of for them having enlarged breasts like humans.

The thing is that the Old Ones had nothing to do with Humanity. They were long gone by the time Man's earliest ancestors came about. The same with that bit of throwaway fluff back in the day regarding Necrons and the "Pariah Gene".


Humans in 40k evolved on Earth naturally. They weren't "created" by anybody.

Wait, really? That's interesting. I wonder why Eldar resemble humans so much, then. I was always under the impression that the Old Ones seeded Earth with material to eventually create humans, but died out before they could finish the job.

the_scotsman wrote:
"And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself. "

Have you ever heard of xenoblogulogutlrararin?

Fire caste Tau have a lot of it, Earth Caste don't. It gives you a lot of muscles.

40k is a sci fi setting. You can have alien races with as much or as little sexual dimorphism in whatever direction you want.

For instance, in the Tau, it's clear that rather than sexual dimorphism (which appears to be very minimal) they have subspecies differences between the different castes. Eldar are already established to have almost no difference in build between the males and females, which is why arguments like "they put the heavier armor on the men and keep most of the instinctually nurturing wimminfolk at home makin' babies where they belong!"

In the game's established lore, Eldar, Guard, and Dark Eldar have equal representation between the sexes. The only model line that comes even close is the Dark Eldar, with usually around 20% female sculpts. GW does not make female or non-white sculpts for their minis, with very few exceptions, and recently even models that once had female sculpts (Shadowseer, Eldar Windriders, Dire Avengers) were changed to be all-male. Even in cases where the parts don't need to be interchanged (genestealer cult, chaos cult) they sculpt and paint everyone male and white.

Given that only 00.1% of Imperial citizens are recruited into the IG, the difference between an average female and male human in terms of strength making any difference seems silly. The IG is using a percentage of Imperial citizens so small they can afford to set their recruitment requirements pretty high and still maintain enough numbers. You wouldn't be looking at average people being in the Imperial Guard, but only above average ones. And since this implies some sort of minimum requirement that is uniform across all members, the Astra Militarum's requirements for hand to hand combat strength are met in every case, male and female. And the number of people being recruited into the IG compared to the total population is so low that it is quite feasible for many IG regiments to end up being wholly female and having the physical strength to give a fully male Regiment an even fight.

In short, the Imperium of Man is so vast that it is entirely possible for them to happen to have only recruited women across the entire Imperium of Man without negatively affecting their hand-to-hand combat abilities in any way.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

We've had it several times in this thread already. The end point is that Men and Women are not totally different. We have IRL instances of women beating men at feats of strength, and we have instances of men beating women at feats of endurance. It is just not as simple as "Man has Strength 4, Woman has Strength 3".

Militarum Tempestus, highly elite trained military men, are Strength 3.

Sisters of Battle, highly elite trained religious military women (whose power armor doesn't increase their strength) are also Strength 3.

Death-Cult Assasins, wacko melee assassins whose lore I haven't looked into but all the models are women so I've always assumed they're always women, are Strength 4.

Space Marines, who we should all be familiar with, are Strength 4.

Eldar Banshees are Strength 3.

Ork Boys are Strength 3.

So we have, among just those units, men paralling women, men beating women, women beating men, women beating women, and men beating men, and both women and men beating AND paralleling two different types of melee-oriented Xenos.

So apparently, yes, it does in fact matter what your personal characteristics are, more so than your gender in terms of strength in the Warhammer 40k game. Your gender seems to be practically irrelevant compared to which unit you actually are in the equation.

My comparison was to highlight the lack of logic behind the statement "men are stronger", rather than to put it into 40k statlines.
And yes, the statlines have little to do with the fluff. We have fluff guardsmen of varying strengths and accuracies, and passages in which SM punch holes in what would on the TT be an Av14 building.

 Selym wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Are we really getting in to this argument again, about the supposed differences between generic man and generic woman in fiction, as imagined by various popular culture versions of statistics?

We've had it several times in this thread already. The end point is that Men and Women are not totally different. We have IRL instances of women beating men at feats of strength, and we have instances of men beating women at feats of endurance. It is just not as simple as "Man has Strength 4, Woman has Strength 3".

Militarum Tempestus, highly elite trained military men, are Strength 3.

Sisters of Battle, highly elite trained religious military women (whose power armor doesn't increase their strength) are also Strength 3.

Death-Cult Assasins, wacko melee assassins whose lore I haven't looked into but all the models are women so I've always assumed they're always women, are Strength 4.

Space Marines, who we should all be familiar with, are Strength 4.

Eldar Banshees are Strength 3.

Ork Boys are Strength 3.

So we have, among just those units, men paralling women, men beating women, women beating men, women beating women, and men beating men, and both women and men beating AND paralleling two different types of melee-oriented Xenos.

So apparently, yes, it does in fact matter what your personal characteristics are, more so than your gender in terms of strength in the Warhammer 40k game. Your gender seems to be practically irrelevant compared to which unit you actually are in the equation.

My comparison was to highlight the lack of logic behind the statement "men are stronger", rather than to put it into 40k statlines.
And yes, the statlines have little to do with the fluff. We have fluff guardsmen of varying strengths and accuracies, and passages in which SM punch holes in what would on the TT be an Av14 building.

Yeah, I like my argument above your post better. : D

Side note: I did actually ask on the Overwatch forums about a First Nations character. The reponses I got from the Americans led me to conclude that Americans in general do not actually put any effort into learning about Canada.

the_scotsman wrote:
"And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself. "

Have you ever heard of xenoblogulogutlrararin?

Fire caste Tau have a lot of it, Earth Caste don't. It gives you a lot of muscles.

40k is a sci fi setting. You can have alien races with as much or as little sexual dimorphism in whatever direction you want.

For instance, in the Tau, it's clear that rather than sexual dimorphism (which appears to be very minimal) they have subspecies differences between the different castes. Eldar are already established to have almost no difference in build between the males and females, which is why arguments like "they put the heavier armor on the men and keep most of the instinctually nurturing wimminfolk at home makin' babies where they belong!"

In the game's established lore, Eldar, Guard, and Dark Eldar have equal representation between the sexes. The only model line that comes even close is the Dark Eldar, with usually around 20% female sculpts. GW does not make female or non-white sculpts for their minis, with very few exceptions, and recently even models that once had female sculpts (Shadowseer, Eldar Windriders, Dire Avengers) were changed to be all-male. Even in cases where the parts don't need to be interchanged (genestealer cult, chaos cult) they sculpt and paint everyone male and white.

We weren't talking about Tau, or Eldar, we were talking about Imperial Guard/humans. And thanks for making me sound like a redneck southerner despite me having fully supported arguments. (is it just because I disagree with you?) And Dark Eldar have more than 20%, at least 33 ranging to 60%. The Wych squads have practically only females, succubus is female only, kabalites have at least 3-4 female torsos, and the Raider kit has like 2 female passengers and reavers have 2 female torsos.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Was waiting for bigot to be used. So someone argues that black people on Cadia isn't lore friendly (which it isn't) and that women are weaker than men, and they're a bigot? I don't understand. Everything in my argument is supported, but I'm a bigot?

Nothing in your argument is supported. You are, at this point, metaphorically jumping up and down going "NO WIMMINS NO BLACKS" and not actually engaging with anything.

Even if one accepts that Cadia is magically 100% white, that does not mean that all the Guard armies that use Cadian-pattern equipment are. In fact, just a slight engagement with the background will give you the Catachans, who are both black and white, the Vitrian Dragoons, who are all black, the Attillans, who are Mongolian, and so on and so forth. So we know that humanity remains diverse in the 41st Millenium. Therefore, adding a couple of non-white heads into the boxes of figures makes sense, follows the background, and allows people to build armies that are diverse, or not, depending on what they want to do as individual players!

There are absolutely no reasons whatsoever to object to female figures in boxes of Imperial Guard, because, as we know from the background, there are female Imperial Guard. Some regiments are mixed (Tanith 1st, Valhallan 397th), some regiments are not (Xenonian Guard - all female). That's leaving aside the debate about statistical average strength, which as we can see in reality means that there are plenty of really strong women. Unless you're saying you'd be happy to go toe-to-toe with Cristiane "Cyborg" Justino, because she's a girl lol?

So. To sum.

Your arguments are not supported either in reality, or in the background, beyond "all the art shows Cadians as white!", which doesn't take into account all the non-white regiments, or the black Catachans, or the female regiments.

Therefore, I can only assume your objection to women and non-white figures is because you don't like seeing women or non-white people represented in games or fiction... even when they already are, quite clearly, in the 40K universe.

 Pouncey wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
"And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself. "

Have you ever heard of xenoblogulogutlrararin?

Fire caste Tau have a lot of it, Earth Caste don't. It gives you a lot of muscles.

40k is a sci fi setting. You can have alien races with as much or as little sexual dimorphism in whatever direction you want.

For instance, in the Tau, it's clear that rather than sexual dimorphism (which appears to be very minimal) they have subspecies differences between the different castes. Eldar are already established to have almost no difference in build between the males and females, which is why arguments like "they put the heavier armor on the men and keep most of the instinctually nurturing wimminfolk at home makin' babies where they belong!"

In the game's established lore, Eldar, Guard, and Dark Eldar have equal representation between the sexes. The only model line that comes even close is the Dark Eldar, with usually around 20% female sculpts. GW does not make female or non-white sculpts for their minis, with very few exceptions, and recently even models that once had female sculpts (Shadowseer, Eldar Windriders, Dire Avengers) were changed to be all-male. Even in cases where the parts don't need to be interchanged (genestealer cult, chaos cult) they sculpt and paint everyone male and white.

Given that only 00.1% of Imperial citizens are recruited into the IG, the difference between an average female and male human in terms of strength making any difference seems silly. The IG is using a percentage of Imperial citizens so small they can afford to set their recruitment requirements pretty high and still maintain enough numbers. You wouldn't be looking at average people being in the Imperial Guard, but only above average ones. And since this implies some sort of minimum requirement that is uniform across all members, the Astra Militarum's requirements for hand to hand combat strength are met in every case, male and female. And the number of people being recruited into the IG compared to the total population is so low that it is quite feasible for many IG regiments to end up being wholly female and having the physical strength to give a fully male Regiment an even fight.

In short, the Imperium of Man is so vast that it is entirely possible for them to happen to have only recruited women across the entire Imperium of Man without negatively affecting their hand-to-hand combat abilities in any way.

You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

If you have a problem with girls and/or people of different races, maybe you should talk to someone.

The first step is acceptance.

Gen.Steiner wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Was waiting for bigot to be used. So someone argues that black people on Cadia isn't lore friendly (which it isn't) and that women are weaker than men, and they're a bigot? I don't understand. Everything in my argument is supported, but I'm a bigot?

Nothing in your argument is supported. You are, at this point, metaphorically jumping up and down going "NO WIMMINS NO BLACKS" and not actually engaging with anything.

Even if one accepts that Cadia is magically 100% white, that does not mean that all the Guard armies that use Cadian-pattern equipment are. In fact, just a slight engagement with the background will give you the Catachans, who are both black and white, the Vitrian Dragoons, who are all black, the Attillans, who are Mongolian, and so on and so forth. So we know that humanity remains diverse in the 41st Millenium. Therefore, adding a couple of non-white heads into the boxes of figures makes sense, follows the background, and allows people to build armies that are diverse, or not, depending on what they want to do as individual players!

There are absolutely no reasons whatsoever to object to female figures in boxes of Imperial Guard, because, as we know from the background, there are female Imperial Guard. Some regiments are mixed (Tanith 1st, Valhallan 397th), some regiments are not (Xenonian Guard - all female). That's leaving aside the debate about statistical average strength, which as we can see in reality means that there are plenty of really strong women. Unless you're saying you'd be happy to go toe-to-toe with Cristiane "Cyborg" Justino, because she's a girl lol?

So. To sum.

Your arguments are not supported either in reality, or in the background, beyond "all the art shows Cadians as white!", which doesn't take into account all the non-white regiments, or the black Catachans, or the female regiments.

Therefore, I can only assume your objection to women and non-white figures is because you don't like seeing women or non-white people represented in games or fiction... even when they already are, quite clearly, in the 40K universe.

It IS fully supported. No artwork or paintjobs have shown black Cadians, thus we can infer Cadia has no black people. Women are statistically weaker than men. This has been proven by many studies. Why are you getting your panties in a knot over the truth? I am not arguing against less diversity in 40k, and I understand there is female Imperial Guardsmen. I have already stated that when they get updated a couple different bits would be good.

At this point it's just become an echo-chamber of "HEY YOU BAD MAN WHY YOU GOTTA HATE BLACKS AND THE WOMAN MAN".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kronk wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

If you have a problem with girls and/or people of different races, maybe you should talk to someone.

The first step is acceptance.

Yes, I have an issue with someone because they are scientifically weaker. /s I am simply stating facts. Are you denying women aren't weaker than men?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
"And female warriors exist and will always exist, but you are literally lying to yourself if you don't think men are stronger than women. Have you ever heard of testosterone? The thing that gives you a lot of muscles? Men have a lot of it, women don't. Figure out the rest for yourself. "

Have you ever heard of xenoblogulogutlrararin?

Fire caste Tau have a lot of it, Earth Caste don't. It gives you a lot of muscles.

40k is a sci fi setting. You can have alien races with as much or as little sexual dimorphism in whatever direction you want.

For instance, in the Tau, it's clear that rather than sexual dimorphism (which appears to be very minimal) they have subspecies differences between the different castes. Eldar are already established to have almost no difference in build between the males and females, which is why arguments like "they put the heavier armor on the men and keep most of the instinctually nurturing wimminfolk at home makin' babies where they belong!"

In the game's established lore, Eldar, Guard, and Dark Eldar have equal representation between the sexes. The only model line that comes even close is the Dark Eldar, with usually around 20% female sculpts. GW does not make female or non-white sculpts for their minis, with very few exceptions, and recently even models that once had female sculpts (Shadowseer, Eldar Windriders, Dire Avengers) were changed to be all-male. Even in cases where the parts don't need to be interchanged (genestealer cult, chaos cult) they sculpt and paint everyone male and white.

Given that only 00.1% of Imperial citizens are recruited into the IG, the difference between an average female and male human in terms of strength making any difference seems silly. The IG is using a percentage of Imperial citizens so small they can afford to set their recruitment requirements pretty high and still maintain enough numbers. You wouldn't be looking at average people being in the Imperial Guard, but only above average ones. And since this implies some sort of minimum requirement that is uniform across all members, the Astra Militarum's requirements for hand to hand combat strength are met in every case, male and female. And the number of people being recruited into the IG compared to the total population is so low that it is quite feasible for many IG regiments to end up being wholly female and having the physical strength to give a fully male Regiment an even fight.

In short, the Imperium of Man is so vast that it is entirely possible for them to happen to have only recruited women across the entire Imperium of Man without negatively affecting their hand-to-hand combat abilities in any way.

You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

The number of humans in the Imperium is not actually set in stone, you're right, but it wasn't completely made up. It was calculated to be a roughly average estimate based on the official population figures regarding hive cities, number of hives on a hive, number of hive worlds in the Imperium, average population of a non-hive world, and the number of non-hive worlds in the Imperium. All of the number ranges that went into calculating the average are official, confirmed lore from Lexicanum.

And plugging in the math, we find that the Imperium has around 20 quadrillion people in it. Lexicanum says there "must be many billions" of Imperial Guard, and the estimate that I arrived at to conclude the Imperium has 00.1% of its population in the AM assumed there were 20 trillion Guardsmen, which is multiple orders of magnitude above what is actually defined by the lore. Correcting it to 200 billion Guardsmen, a very high end but still within the numbers given, would result in there being 00.001% of all humans being in the AM.

Where is the math wrong?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

You recall you explained what an "average" is to him last night, right?

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Gen.Steiner wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Was waiting for bigot to be used. So someone argues that black people on Cadia isn't lore friendly (which it isn't) and that women are weaker than men, and they're a bigot? I don't understand. Everything in my argument is supported, but I'm a bigot?

Nothing in your argument is supported. You are, at this point, metaphorically jumping up and down going "NO WIMMINS NO BLACKS" and not actually engaging with anything.

Even if one accepts that Cadia is magically 100% white, that does not mean that all the Guard armies that use Cadian-pattern equipment are. In fact, just a slight engagement with the background will give you the Catachans, who are both black and white, the Vitrian Dragoons, who are all black, the Attillans, who are Mongolian, and so on and so forth. So we know that humanity remains diverse in the 41st Millenium. Therefore, adding a couple of non-white heads into the boxes of figures makes sense, follows the background, and allows people to build armies that are diverse, or not, depending on what they want to do as individual players!

There are absolutely no reasons whatsoever to object to female figures in boxes of Imperial Guard, because, as we know from the background, there are female Imperial Guard. Some regiments are mixed (Tanith 1st, Valhallan 397th), some regiments are not (Xenonian Guard - all female). That's leaving aside the debate about statistical average strength, which as we can see in reality means that there are plenty of really strong women. Unless you're saying you'd be happy to go toe-to-toe with Cristiane "Cyborg" Justino, because she's a girl lol?

So. To sum.

Your arguments are not supported either in reality, or in the background, beyond "all the art shows Cadians as white!", which doesn't take into account all the non-white regiments, or the black Catachans, or the female regiments.

Therefore, I can only assume your objection to women and non-white figures is because you don't like seeing women or non-white people represented in games or fiction... even when they already are, quite clearly, in the 40K universe.

It IS fully supported. No artwork or paintjobs have shown black Cadians, thus we can infer Cadia has no black people. Women are statistically weaker than men. This has been proven by many studies. Why are you getting your panties in a knot over the truth? I am not arguing against less diversity in 40k, and I understand there is female Imperial Guardsmen. I have already stated that when they get updated a couple different bits would be good.

At this point it's just become an echo-chamber of "HEY YOU BAD MAN WHY YOU GOTTA HATE BLACKS AND THE WOMAN MAN".

Did you actually go through all the Cadian artwork dating back to 2nd edition, more than 20 years ago, in one night?

Impressive.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

You recall you explained what an "average" is to him last night, right?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

No, but they can make it so that when you only need to select 200 billion from 20,000,000 billion the choices you end up with make the average a very irrelevant number.

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Gen.Steiner wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
Was waiting for bigot to be used. So someone argues that black people on Cadia isn't lore friendly (which it isn't) and that women are weaker than men, and they're a bigot? I don't understand. Everything in my argument is supported, but I'm a bigot?

Nothing in your argument is supported. You are, at this point, metaphorically jumping up and down going "NO WIMMINS NO BLACKS" and not actually engaging with anything.

Even if one accepts that Cadia is magically 100% white, that does not mean that all the Guard armies that use Cadian-pattern equipment are. In fact, just a slight engagement with the background will give you the Catachans, who are both black and white, the Vitrian Dragoons, who are all black, the Attillans, who are Mongolian, and so on and so forth. So we know that humanity remains diverse in the 41st Millenium. Therefore, adding a couple of non-white heads into the boxes of figures makes sense, follows the background, and allows people to build armies that are diverse, or not, depending on what they want to do as individual players!

There are absolutely no reasons whatsoever to object to female figures in boxes of Imperial Guard, because, as we know from the background, there are female Imperial Guard. Some regiments are mixed (Tanith 1st, Valhallan 397th), some regiments are not (Xenonian Guard - all female). That's leaving aside the debate about statistical average strength, which as we can see in reality means that there are plenty of really strong women. Unless you're saying you'd be happy to go toe-to-toe with Cristiane "Cyborg" Justino, because she's a girl lol?

So. To sum.

Your arguments are not supported either in reality, or in the background, beyond "all the art shows Cadians as white!", which doesn't take into account all the non-white regiments, or the black Catachans, or the female regiments.

Therefore, I can only assume your objection to women and non-white figures is because you don't like seeing women or non-white people represented in games or fiction... even when they already are, quite clearly, in the 40K universe.

It IS fully supported. No artwork or paintjobs have shown black Cadians, thus we can infer Cadia has no black people. Women are statistically weaker than men. This has been proven by many studies. Why are you getting your panties in a knot over the truth? I am not arguing against less diversity in 40k, and I understand there is female Imperial Guardsmen. I have already stated that when they get updated a couple different bits would be good.

At this point it's just become an echo-chamber of "HEY YOU BAD MAN WHY YOU GOTTA HATE BLACKS AND THE WOMAN MAN".

Did you actually go through all the Cadian artwork dating back to 2nd edition, more than 20 years ago, in one night?

Impressive.

If you want to be smartass, can you show me where the proof of black Cadians is?

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

You recall you explained what an "average" is to him last night, right?

I actually corrected myself, I know fully what an average is, but I used the wrong terminology. I meant mode, so you can stop gak talking me now.

Cool. Any comment on the math you cropped out of your post?

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

No, but they can make it so that when you only need to select 200 billion from 20,000,000 billion the choices you end up with make the average a very irrelevant number.

An above average woman is still weaker than an above average man.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

Let's be scientific. Are there IRL women who are stronger than IRL men?

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

You recall you explained what an "average" is to him last night, right?

I actually corrected myself, I know fully what an average is, but I used the wrong terminology. I meant mode, so you can stop gak talking me now.

Cool. Any comment on the math you cropped out of your post?

Something about 20 trillion people and 1%. I don't need to read it a 10th time. We get it. The imperium is a big place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

Let's be scientific. Are there IRL women who are stronger than IRL men?

Yes, but those men are below average and those women are above average.

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:


You can't just keep using the argument "Well, I have no proof, but the imperium has like 6 gorjillian people! That's a lot, right? Some of the girls gotta be ripped!"

SB, do you have any concept of statistical odds?

I do, but statistical odds can't defy science and make women stronger than men.

No, but they can make it so that when you only need to select 200 billion from 20,000,000 billion the choices you end up with make the average a very irrelevant number.

An above average woman is still weaker than an above average man.

And it doesn't matter, really. The Astra Militarum have minimum requirements for duty, not one-on-one duels to determine who's better. And the kind of standards they're able to set make it so that every member of the IG, male and female, fulfill a very high criteria for melee combat. And they can afford to be VERY choosy about who they let in, to the point where in an Imperium of a million worlds they likely have entire tithes which are male or female which are completely equal to each other.

They're NOT recruiting EVERY above average person. They're recruiting enough to maintain numbers of 200 billion, from an overall population one hundred thousand times larger.

In short, the averages are irrelevant to even talk about because the Astra Militarum has standards, and the number of people they're able to reject and still maintain their numbers means that every combination of male and female recruits is both possible and still maintains the physical strength deemed necessary to be combat-capable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:

Yes, but those men are below average and those women are above average.

How do you figure that?

Yeah, stop attacking this poor guy, it's not as if he's said anything sexist or racist in the course of this post, he's just passionate about -

"Again, this usually goes against the Lore and is super forceful when for some reason Ultras, Celestial Lions and White Scars team up for no other reason than the perfect ethnic trio."

wait..

"Maybe, just maybe, something isn't racist, but the vast majority would rather a hero from a large country with plenty of players, instead of a hero from Zimbabwe which 2 people could enjoy?"

but..

"Actually, if you had all the women at home acting as baby machines they guy that got shot would have a bigger army. The 2 guys next to him gun both of you down. Game over. "

I guess in context of...

"It's only Chinese because they breed like rabbits over there, however most foreign countries teach English and some of the arguably most important countries have it as their primary language. "

oh.

"you can infer that they probably wanted their strongest people on the front, and the instinctively nurturing people on the backlines caring for the soldiers and keeping the grease in the wheels back home."

oh.

"In this post: 40k is a safe space! Chinese people, mexican people, black people! If I don't see a transgender space marine GW is bigots!"

 #1ShieldBrother3++ wrote:
It IS fully supported. No artwork or paintjobs have shown black Cadians, thus we can infer Cadia has no black people. Women are statistically weaker than men. This has been proven by many studies. Why are you getting your panties in a knot over the truth? I am not arguing against less diversity in 40k, and I understand there is female Imperial Guardsmen. I have already stated that when they get updated a couple different bits would be good.

At this point it's just become an echo-chamber of "HEY YOU BAD MAN WHY YOU GOTTA HATE BLACKS AND THE WOMAN MAN".

Hang on... wait...

You're saying Cadians aren't black, therefore no African or Asian facial features are allowed at all, despite all the other non-white ethnic groups in the 41st Millenium.

You're also saying, women are statistically weaker, therefore no female Guardsmen, despite all the female Guard troopers and forces.

THEN you say you're NOT arguing for less diversity and you know there are female Guard?

...

What? You are literally arguing against there being diversity in the Imperial Guard range. That is why I've been banging my head against your brick wall of NO WIMMIN NO BLAKS for the last day.

I've also given you multiple examples of very strong women (and at least one nine year old girl) who out-do almost everyone else on the planet, regardless of gender or testosterone levels. Yet you ignore that.

I've given you examples of non-white humans in the background of 40K, and examples of women in the background of 40K, all of them relevant to the Imperial Guard...

...and you respond with BUT SCIENCE SAYS WOMEN ARE WEAK.

Good grief, man. Either you're a bigot or a troll. Pick your poison.