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.

tneva82 wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
Centurions should definitely be redone if not abandoned.

I'm on the redesign train. The concept of Centurians is good: Heavy-armored weapon platforms that can perform where tanks can't. The only problem is is that we got the Stay-Puft Marshmallow man out of that deal.

That's terminators and dreadnoughts...

Yeah, the gap between terminators and dreadnoughts wasn't that wide, and it's not that Centurions fill that gap that's a problem. It's that they outshined both pretty dramatically, as well as devestators. One brand new unit, armed with a brand new gun, completely outcompeted three classic units, which is going to cheese people off.

If you toned down grav guns, and buff termies and dreads, Centurions won't be as clear cut a choice, but it's hard to really see what niche they fill.

Purge most of the Space Wolf line to get rid of the stupid "Wolves in SPAAAACE" bit and return them to being Norse. Wulfen, wolf sleds, Thunderwolves, cyber wolves, and their ilk can all be thrown out. Along with that awful ice flyer.

Throw out the Taurox, Centurions, and every Tau mech bigger than a Crsis Suit as well.

 mrhappyface wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Guillimarines.

Burn them before they hatch.

All it takes is one idiot, who's too curious for their own good, to stick their face in one of those eggs and we're all doomed!

Sir! This gigantic smurf attached itself to John Hurt's face! We tried to cut it off, but it only tightens its grip around his throat...

GW pricing model.

 Boniface wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
The entire Tau and Eldar line.

I understand Tau, lots of people hate the look, but Eldar? They've been here since the beginning.

I basically agree with everything space wolves. I have never liked them from day 1 in the hobby (1990s) but more the latest stupidity I.e. wolf riders.

I don't really like orks either, everything about them seems silly. Everyone else in the grimdark is all grim, dark, and serious space wolves and orks do feel a little out of place in their over the top nature.

He said what should be left behind. Doesn't matter if the Eldar have been here since the beginning, the army is goofy looking and not at all appealing. They just round everything.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galef wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
The entire Tau and Eldar line.

That would be sad considering Tau and Eldar have some of the best looking models GW has ever made. Much better than the gothic, clunky, boarder-line steam-punk Imperium junk.

You mean the walking Lego blocks? Everything is all rectangles.

 Polonius wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
Centurions should definitely be redone if not abandoned.

I'm on the redesign train. The concept of Centurians is good: Heavy-armored weapon platforms that can perform where tanks can't. The only problem is is that we got the Stay-Puft Marshmallow man out of that deal.

That's terminators and dreadnoughts...

Yeah, the gap between terminators and dreadnoughts wasn't that wide, and it's not that Centurions fill that gap that's a problem. It's that they outshined both pretty dramatically, as well as devestators. One brand new unit, armed with a brand new gun, completely outcompeted three classic units, which is going to cheese people off.

If you toned down grav guns, and buff termies and dreads, Centurions won't be as clear cut a choice, but it's hard to really see what niche they fill.

It really isn't that hard to see what niche they filled.

They're the Loyalist equivalent of Obliterators. They had three weapon options(anti-tank, anti-MC/vehicle, and anti-infantry). They were able to be (kinda) mobile and fire while doing so.

And really, toning down Grav Guns wouldn't do anything since Centurions brought Grav-Cannons.

 jreilly89 wrote:

You mean the walking Lego blocks? Everything is all rectangles.

 Galas wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

You mean the walking Lego blocks? Everything is all rectangles.

Spoiler:

But I love both so...

A Dreadnought is supposed to be blocky. It doesn't jump or deepstrike, it just walks up and punches people.

 Boniface wrote:
I don't really like orks either, everything about them seems silly. Everyone else in the grimdark is all grim, dark, and serious space wolves and orks do feel a little out of place in their over the top nature.

I don't know, humans being caged up in their own filth waiting their turn to be experimented on, people being slowly burned to death in front of their families for laughs, and people being fattened up on the remains of other humans before being hauled off to the rendering plant all seems pretty grimdark to me.

It's just a prank, bro!

(Edited because I messed up the quote.)

Everyone has different tastes and preferences.

It is great we have a great number of armies to pick from so we all do not look like different painted versions of IG.

There are some armies I would never want to play and might even think are silly or out of place, any user can say the same for any army I play.

Different Strokes for Different Folks.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Boniface wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
The entire Tau and Eldar line.

I understand Tau, lots of people hate the look, but Eldar? They've been here since the beginning.

I basically agree with everything space wolves. I have never liked them from day 1 in the hobby (1990s) but more the latest stupidity I.e. wolf riders.

I don't really like orks either, everything about them seems silly. Everyone else in the grimdark is all grim, dark, and serious space wolves and orks do feel a little out of place in their over the top nature.

He said what should be left behind. Doesn't matter if the Eldar have been here since the beginning, the army is goofy looking and not at all appealing. They just round everything.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galef wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
The entire Tau and Eldar line.

That would be sad considering Tau and Eldar have some of the best looking models GW has ever made. Much better than the gothic, clunky, boarder-line steam-punk Imperium junk.

You mean the walking Lego blocks? Everything is all rectangles.

I'm detecting exceptional sodium levels from this life-form Captain!

If the Avatar of Khaine and the Phoenix Lords can leave behind their old 1993 sculpts for some shiny new models, that would be nice.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:

 Boniface wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
I don't really like orks either, everything about them seems silly. Everyone else in the grimdark is all grim, dark, and serious space wolves and orks do feel a little out of place in their over the top nature.

I don't know, humans being caged up in their own filth waiting their turn to be experimented on, people being slowly burned to death in front of their families for laughs, and people being fattened up on the remains of other humans before being hauled off to the rendering plant all seems pretty grimdark to me.

It's just a prank, bro!

Yeah never said that. I love the Ork line, it's one of the best looking armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Skerr wrote:
Everyone has different tastes and preferences.

It is great we have a great number of armies to pick from so we all do not look like different painted versions of IG.

There are some armies I would never want to play and might even think are silly or out of place, any user can say the same for any army I play.

Different Strokes for Different Folks.

To quote the OP:

 Ratius wrote:
Which models due to their aesthetic, fluff, background or just downright sillyness do you think should have gone the way of the dodo with 8ths release (if any)?

No, Kanluwen, you cant comment here

 Galas wrote:
GW pricing model.

Needs re-imagination:

- Taurox; > real half track or No deal.
- Centurions; > we got TDA ...
- Dreadknight; > if it looks like e penitent engine, it belongs to the sisterhood... > one and only model I will never assemble

 jreilly89 wrote:
Yeah never said that. I love the Ork line, it's one of the best looking armies.

Sorry about that, I messed up the quotation tags.

I hope they keep buggies but get a new model for them.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Yeah I said that. I hate the Ork line, it's one of the worst looking armies.

Seems legit.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Dreadnought is supposed to be blocky. It doesn't jump or deepstrike, it just walks up and punches people.

And crisis suit is supposed to be blocky It just floats with rocket pack while blowing holes to enemy with deadly guns.

So much hate for Centurions, goodness me.
They're actually my favourite Space Marine model.

In all honesty, dreadnoughts probably look the way they do because at the time of their design, a block with cylinders for limbs was at the upper reaches of their technical limitations in casting and sculpting

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Polonius wrote:


Yeah, the gap between terminators and dreadnoughts wasn't that wide, and it's not that Centurions fill that gap that's a problem. It's that they outshined both pretty dramatically, as well as devestators. One brand new unit, armed with a brand new gun, completely outcompeted three classic units, which is going to cheese people off.

If you toned down grav guns, and buff termies and dreads, Centurions won't be as clear cut a choice, but it's hard to really see what niche they fill.

It really isn't that hard to see what niche they filled.

They're the Loyalist equivalent of Obliterators. They had three weapon options(anti-tank, anti-MC/vehicle, and anti-infantry). They were able to be (kinda) mobile and fire while doing so.

And really, toning down Grav Guns wouldn't do anything since Centurions brought Grav-Cannons.

Hmm, I guess that's a though, but I also chalked Oblits up to making up for Chaos Termies not being overly shooy (at least at range) and Chaos Dreads being intentionally unreliable for fire support. Oblits were the only dread or infantry unit with long range shooting, while SM had two.

And yes, technically centurions use grav cannons, not grav guns. Obviously my point is invalid.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Also, Centurions and the Taurox.

Nothing of value will be lost

Oh, wouldn't that be nice...

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
The Exorcist is by far the best tank model GW makes. I will fight you on that.

Yes, marvel at its beauty...


...oh, wait...

As much as I dislike some ranges based purely on visuals I say none.

SM.

I can't stand them.

Except the wolves.

Yeah, really, there aren't any models that aesthetically I think are so irredeemable that they should be dropped. The Taurox is a goofy looking piece of kit, but it's not jarringly bad. The last models that were that out of place for me were likely the metal Chaos Possessed from about 2004?



the big Tau stuff fits visually, and enough people love gundam stuff that I'm glad it's found a home. The babybjorn dreadknight has aged surprisingly well, as while it's goofy, it actually reinforces the concept that terminator armor is basically the safest thing to be in!

There are rules concepts I didn't care for, and overall I found the push to superheavies unpleasant in a game where it still matters what kind of pistol a grunt has, but virtually every model GW makes has a place, a niche, and some fans.

 Luciferian wrote:
Centurions should definitely be redone if not abandoned.

Yeah, terminators could use more weapon options...

They are, in my mind, probably the weirdest addition to any list in the last decade or so. They basically step all over the feet of terminators in terms of style and role, and they manage to look like in the process.

They basically made some kind of half-step between marine and dreadnaught where one already existed and then did it in a way to make them immediately better than terminators (more survivable, more firepower, etc.).

Sadly they are out of the bag and there aren't many ways to fix them without completely invalidating what people bought and built. But if there was one unit I wish to see thrown in to the wood chipper, it is Centurions. As it is, they overlap too much with pre-existing units that have traditionally sucked, so they formed this double-whammy of "why didn't you just fix terminators and dreadnaughts?"

What's worse, if this edition does fix those two, then what the hell is the Centurion's purpose at that point? And if the Centurion still does the job of either/both, then that means they haven't fixed the others. It is a Catch 22 at this point. No matter what they do, one of those three units wont pull its weight and there will be a pointless unit in the codex.

Flyers and Superheavies. If you want to play Epic, then it's there. Introducing them to 40K just doesn't work with the scale of a typical game.

There's a reason why few modern warfare games feature a couple squads of riflemen vs. the USS Missouri.

 John Prins wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
The Exorcist is by far the best tank model GW makes. I will fight you on that.

Yes, marvel at its beauty...
-Sanctorum Exorcist-

...oh, wait...

Forgeworld's Sanctorum Exorcist is pretty decent. I always thought the launcher box looked a little small for Str.8 AP1, though, and it looks a bit much like a Whirlwind. It looks military, which I can appreciate.

But I really do like the pipe organ tank.

 Ronin_eX wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
Centurions should definitely be redone if not abandoned.

Yeah, terminators could use more weapon options...

They are, in my mind, probably the weirdest addition to any list in the last decade or so. They basically step all over the feet of terminators in terms of style and role, and they manage to look like in the process.

They basically made some kind of half-step between marine and dreadnaught where one already existed and then did it in a way to make them immediately better than terminators (more survivable, more firepower, etc.).

Sadly they are out of the bag and there aren't many ways to fix them without completely invalidating what people bought and built. But if there was one unit I wish to see thrown in to the wood chipper, it is Centurions. As it is, they overlap too much with pre-existing units that have traditionally sucked, so they formed this double-whammy of "why didn't you just fix terminators and dreadnaughts?"

What's worse, if this edition does fix those two, then what the hell is the Centurion's purpose at that point? And if the Centurion still does the job of either/both, then that means they haven't fixed the others. It is a Catch 22 at this point. No matter what they do, one of those three units wont pull its weight and there will be a pointless unit in the codex.

Well, lets be real: they'd be fine as mobile platforms for heavy bolters and lascannons. It's the gravcannons, which erase units, that really eclipses terminators and dreads. Centurions are the most survivable mobile firepower, and with drop pods, they are even more mobile!

So, if you asked me to fix them, I'd make them 4 wound, T5, 3+ save models. This makes terminators more resilient on a per wound basis. I would also make dreadnought weapons more powerful. For example, more shots on high volume weapons, or extra rend or wounds on the lascannon. For terminators, I'd up their overall firepower, by making storm bolters Assault 3 Rend -1.

the real question is if they actually try to limit the amount of heavy weapons in 8th. Units like centurions are very 6th/7th edition, everybody has the biggest possible gun, while terminators are an old school, one special per five man deal.

 Asmodai wrote:
Flyers and Superheavies. If you want to play Epic, then it's there. Introducing them to 40K just doesn't work with the scale of a typical game.

There's a reason why few modern warfare games feature a couple squads of riflemen vs. the USS Missouri.

Because the US navy hasn't had an equally powerful naval opponent to successfully launch a boarding action since ww2?