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.

 generalchaos34 wrote:
1. The galaxy is burning, chaos is winning and the Imperium is cut in two (thats pretty dark, right?)

I'm not really looking to get into a background debate, but there's a point I'd like to make about this.

Not sure how many people share this opinion, but it's pretty much the same in 40k as in Age of Sigmar. The big bad black crusade starts, Chaos players look forward to stuff finally happening, Imperial players dread what's going to happen to their beloved Imperium, then GW has the narrative fast forward to the point where all Chaos conquest has happened and the shiny heroes start their glorious reconquista with the latest toys (Sigmarines/Space Sigmarines) and push back the darkness.

I don't know about whether there's enough grim darkness in there for the general populace, but go around and ask if the people who would bring ruin to the Imperium feel satisfied by the situation. Ask the defenders of mankind how they feel about letting Chaos overrun everything without even getting a chance to do anything about it.

At least to me it feels like something happened for basically no reason, then the good part was skipped. What's the good part? Not the part where my or anyone else's favored faction wins. Never mind personal favoritism. No, the part that shows us how everything goes down the drain and there is nothing anybody can do about it. The part that builds up the drama for the finale in which Guilliman and his Space Sigmarines start their crusade and might, just might turn the tide.

Rushing through the first act and skipping the second one just so we get to see the heroes win (or try) in the final act robs the narrative of impact, because the third act is not set up. It just appears out of nowhere.

So the real question is, why should you care? You were told the galaxy burns. You didn't see it. You were told Chaos is winning. You didn't see it. So both on the Chaos and Imperial side, why should you care? The setting changed on a whim so that Girlyman can save the galaxy. Not that he could get through the depressive phase of seeing the Imperium burn (this time up close) to finally strike back, but right so he can do all the heroic stuff that sells the new Marines to impressionable kids. What does that tell us if not that the same thing could happen again and again and again to promote the newest idea the design studio cooks up.

Why should you care about the details of a story/setting whose integrity is in question?

Food for thought.

See now? There I went and wrote more on this than I wanted.

I'm not too big on the models (forever Mk3 and 4 <3) but in terms of crunch they're definitely welcomed additions. I know I plan to represent Intercessors as Marines with those giant boarding shields that FW sells.

I like them and plan to have a few in my Space Marine army. I like Mk. 7 more than Mk. 10, personally, so I'll never fully replace my marines.

I've made an army of them, but I don't really have strong feelings about them. Lore-wise, their inclusion is one of the worst handled since Matt Ward's Grey Knights Codex. Miniature wise, they're some of the best models GW has put out in a while (namely, being subtle with the details rather than just dipping something in glue and plastering skulls, seals and trim on everything). Gameplay wise, they're meh. They're like the Centurions from last edition; they do fulfill a niche, but said niche is so specific from the existing stuff that it's arguable if the need to fill it ever existed.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I've made an army of them, but I don't really have strong feelings about them. Lore-wise, their inclusion is one of the worst handled since Matt Ward's Grey Knights Codex. Miniature wise, they're some of the best models GW has put out in a while (namely, being subtle with the details rather than just dipping something in glue and plastering skulls, seals and trim on everything). Gameplay wise, they're meh. They're like the Centurions from last edition; they do fulfill a niche, but said niche is so specific from the existing stuff that it's arguable if the need to fill it ever existed.

I have reason to believe that we may not know the full extent of the Primaris design until more of the codexes/chapter approved come out. Once the pieces are in place it would be nice to see how they fit in to the final product! I would like to imagine they have a long term plan with these guys for rules.

wow.. does this mean I have to replace my rogue trader beakies?

and I have only just come back to the game too

Somewhere in between options 1 and 2. I still think most of their heavier stuff looks ridiculous (my Contemptors are sleek and beautiful, Redemptors are top-heavy waddling silliness), but the basic dudes (Intercessors/Reivers/Hellblasters) have started to grow on me, and I like being able to deploy infantry on the table outside of vehicles without them just exploding.

I don't know if I'd consider the Fallout-esque "1950s version of what the future will look like" aesthetic of the Contemptors anything to write home about but the Redemptor looks awful with its beer belly; much better armour up.

I'm pretty new to 40k, so not huge into the lore, but from a model, perspective, the Primaris Marines are first Space Marines I've really liked. I bought the Dark Imperium set mostly for Death Guard, but these new guys make me kind of want to do a Space Marine army too and if I do, it'll probably be nearly all Primaris because after seeing them next to the old Marines, I want to build and paint the old ones even less than before.

I like the primaris models and I like them on the table as they offer interesting alternatives to my existing marines.

The best thing about primaris is that they're in no way mandatory. Not from fluff, not from gameplay. Don't like em, don't play em!

The worst thing about primaris is their lack of mobility. They really need a transport that's not a pile of guns on antigravthingies.

 JinxDragon wrote:
Galas,
Wasn't that the entire point of the Models size in the first place?
Your Old Models do look like *removed* next to them, so why not replace your entire army....

I know if I was to go back into collecting Models, and Sallies are definitely an option, I would likely fill my Army with Primaris Marines models but use other Datasheets for the actual roles I want to field.

I'm gonna disagree thats the point. GW ahs purposefully gone out of their way to NOT simply replace standard marines. if they wanted to simply replace them. they would have gone about it very differantly. Intercessors would have been basicly "Tac Marines +1" hellblasters devestators +1 etc, instead GW went out of their way to ensure old school marines and primaris marines each could fill their own niche.

BrianDavion wrote:

 JinxDragon wrote:
Galas,
Wasn't that the entire point of the Models size in the first place?
Your Old Models do look like *removed* next to them, so why not replace your entire army....

I know if I was to go back into collecting Models, and Sallies are definitely an option, I would likely fill my Army with Primaris Marines models but use other Datasheets for the actual roles I want to field.

I'm gonna disagree thats the point. GW ahs purposefully gone out of their way to NOT simply replace standard marines. if they wanted to simply replace them. they would have gone about it very differantly. Intercessors would have been basicly "Tac Marines +1" hellblasters devestators +1 etc, instead GW went out of their way to ensure old school marines and primaris marines each could fill their own niche.

If GW wanted to replace existing Marines they'd already have been gone after a series of new books.

BrianDavion wrote:

 JinxDragon wrote:
Galas,
Wasn't that the entire point of the Models size in the first place?
Your Old Models do look like *removed* next to them, so why not replace your entire army....

I know if I was to go back into collecting Models, and Sallies are definitely an option, I would likely fill my Army with Primaris Marines models but use other Datasheets for the actual roles I want to field.

I'm gonna disagree thats the point. GW ahs purposefully gone out of their way to NOT simply replace standard marines. if they wanted to simply replace them. they would have gone about it very differantly. Intercessors would have been basicly "Tac Marines +1" hellblasters devestators +1 etc, instead GW went out of their way to ensure old school marines and primaris marines each could fill their own niche.

I'd say Intercessors handily replaced Tactical Marines but the rest filled a niche.

Despite being nice sculpts, they look stupidly huge.

Maybe I should clarify my point:
I am not saying Game Workshop is going to stop selling the old Models, at least not until marketing tells them keeping boxes around isn't worth it anymore, but they do want YOU to decide that replacing your army is a good thing.
When you put that new shiny Marine next to your older ones, doesn't it just seem to make them shrink in comparison...? maybe you should go buy some more to keep him company, and to make your Army stand as tall as your Marines dream to be!

This is why, if I was to start collecting, I would find these Models 'proxying' their smaller brothers... though a few of the older edition Marines are not bad.
Some are just down right pathetic, I have seen better Power Armour on Orks... they stole it, but damn they still made it look good.

I'm pretty ambivalent about them since I'm not a marine player. I think they look neat and it's nice to have tall marines, though. Honestly, what I'm secretly hoping for is the primaris project comes back to bite Robot Seagullman in the ass, with a bunch of them going haywire or something. Not falling to chaos, but turning absolutely insane and going rogue, kind of like how necron flayers do.

What about a more neutral option?

I tolerate them, maybe I'll include them later, maybe not. Their playstyle doesn't really fit how I want to play my Blood Angels, but maybe I'll pick some up if I start a Raven Guard or Salamanders force.

They're about as boring as anything else Adeptus Astartes to me.

I already have enough marines to choke a horse, so the Primaris don't really grab me, but I have nothing against someone else collecting them. Not much in flavor of their fluff, and their "timely arrival", and "hey, we've been secretly working on them for 10K years - really!" bother me.

I also find it funny (and ironic) that those who prefer the Imperium to be a backwards-looking entity who believes change is heresy don't like the new-fangled Primaris...

Models (specially size) and rules are pretty good if you use them as allies and pretend that they are normal astartes.