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.

 Crimson wrote:
I mean it is OK to use them if you just happen to like models etc. but there is no reason to try to pretend that they aren't terrible.

You could literally use them as Vanguard if you wanted. That doesn't even work as a reason.

"You could literally use them as Vanguard if you wanted. That doesn't even work as a reason."

Since when do Vanguard Vets have Battle Brother markings? Or markings of a company other than 1st? Sure, I could counts-as my ASM as VV, but that's just a smaller jump than counts-as'ing my ASM as Striking Scorpions or Vespid. It's still a counts-as, and thus avoided by many. It'd be like using your Tacs as Sternguard or a LT.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I mean it is OK to use them if you just happen to like models etc. but there is no reason to try to pretend that they aren't terrible.

You could literally use them as Vanguard if you wanted. That doesn't even work as a reason.

Unless you're neurotic like me about the unit not having the correct veteran markings...

But yeah, even in that case it would probably be the best to just start painting those veteran markings on them...

Bharring wrote:
"You could literally use them as Vanguard if you wanted. That doesn't even work as a reason."

Since when do Vanguard Vets have Battle Brother markings? Or markings of a company other than 1st? Sure, I could counts-as my ASM as VV, but that's just a smaller jump than counts-as'ing my ASM as Striking Scorpions or Vespid. It's still a counts-as, and thus avoided by many. It'd be like using your Tacs as Sternguard or a LT.

Ok that's a massive jump. A marine with a jump pack is a marine with a jump pack. Half of my tactical marines have Sternguard bits. There is a reason that all the kits are compatible.

They *are* compatible. But when you build and paint a model, don't you always know - and make it crystal clear - what model he is?

VV and ASM can be assembled from the same kit. Unpainted, you wouldn't necessarily know which it was unless it had a loadout that clarified. But once painted, it should be immediately obvious.

Same with Sternies (or other vets) vs Tacs. Unpainted, a bolter dood could be either. But it should be in no way ambiguous once painted.

The "As SS or Vespids" one, yeah, that was a huge leap.

Bharring wrote:
"You could literally use them as Vanguard if you wanted. That doesn't even work as a reason."

Since when do Vanguard Vets have Battle Brother markings? Or markings of a company other than 1st? Sure, I could counts-as my ASM as VV, but that's just a smaller jump than counts-as'ing my ASM as Striking Scorpions or Vespid. It's still a counts-as, and thus avoided by many. It'd be like using your Tacs as Sternguard or a LT.

I paint all my stuff ambiguously. I use tacs as sternguard and LTs as well.

I don't use canonical anything for paint schemes.

I think you and I play very different games.

Assault Marines would be great if they were Blood Angels troop choices again. As it is, they aren't worth taking another slot for, even with them having plasma gun and meltagun access.

I've been toying with the idea of adding in some assault marines but am hard pressed to buy them.
My inceptors do the same thing but with 2 wounds and a ton of shots.

I don't play minmax and my local meta is pretty casual(1 or 2 tourney players).

Bharring wrote:
I think you and I play very different games.

I just don't care about GW canon and I aim to give them as little money as possible.

Martel732 wrote:

I don't use canonical anything for paint schemes.

Same, but I still decide my own marking logic and stick to it.

I don't see any reason to mark ASM from VV. Nor tacs from sternguard.

Bharring wrote:
"You could literally use them as Vanguard if you wanted. That doesn't even work as a reason."

Since when do Vanguard Vets have Battle Brother markings? Or markings of a company other than 1st? Sure, I could counts-as my ASM as VV, but that's just a smaller jump than counts-as'ing my ASM as Striking Scorpions or Vespid. It's still a counts-as, and thus avoided by many. It'd be like using your Tacs as Sternguard or a LT.

Actually my Mk3 and 4 dudes are used as Sternguard and Deathwatch Vets simply because I hate bling and I'm not terribly a fan of Mk8.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I mean it is OK to use them if you just happen to like models etc. but there is no reason to try to pretend that they aren't terrible.

You could literally use them as Vanguard if you wanted. That doesn't even work as a reason.

Unless you're neurotic like me about the unit not having the correct veteran markings...

But yeah, even in that case it would probably be the best to just start painting those veteran markings on them...

And, if you're half a decent painter (unlike me) painting those markings shouldn't be an issue.

Which, of course, is no issue. Some chapters - including mine - don't bling out everything the way some GW kits do.

However, your Sternguard and Deathwatch Vet models themselves are not Tac models. They might have been the same plastic, and even indistingiushable before being painted, but don't they have any sort of marking on them or kit on them suggesting they're vets?

Similarly, I could pick up the CSM codex (or DA or BA or whatever), and play my Wings of Dawn models as CSM. But, even though each option would be rules-legal, they still wouldn't be my 'Wings of Dawn'. They would be counts-as, because Wings of Dawn are a loyalist chapter that descends from UM (homebrew chapter).

If I wanted a game where the models, paint, and fluff didn't matter, there's always Chess or Axis & Allies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"And, if you're half a decent painter (unlike me) painting those markings shouldn't be an issue."

So I should destroy my ASM because VV are better right now? Should I reverse it again when ASM get better than VV again?

If you're a half-decent modeller, you can chaosify up your Loyalists, and play them as Alpha Legion, letting you take infiltrating berzerkers. But going Chaos isn't the right answer to "how should I play my Marines?".

Vanguard Veterans do have way better looking jump packs.

Fun fact:
Some kits, assembled & painted certain ways, can be VV, ASM, Termies, or Drop Pods:
http://www.plasticwrapballgame.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/10-tokens-300x300.jpg

Bharring wrote:
Fun fact:
Some kits, assembled & painted certain ways, can be VV, ASM, Termies, or Drop Pods:
http://www.plasticwrapballgame.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/10-tokens-300x300.jpg

Eh, this post weakens your argument.

The point is I don't play this game to move around tokens and roll dice. I use it to fight my little plastic guys against your little plastic guys. If you're saying I shouldn't care about what my little plastic guy was supposed to be and instead declare him to be something else, what's the point of modelling/painting him to be that specific thing in the first place? And if there's no point in modeling/painting him to be a specific thing in the first place, why not just move around some poker chips and throw dice?

In other words, if I wanted to play a game where the minis don't matter, why would I play a game where most of the time involves building/painting the minis?

"If I wanted a game where the models, paint, and fluff didn't matter, there's always Chess or Axis & Allies."

Axis and Allies has way better "fluff" than 40K. Real people died in WWII and it had real consequences.

Bharring wrote:
Fun fact:
Some kits, assembled & painted certain ways, can be VV, ASM, Termies, or Drop Pods:
http://www.plasticwrapballgame.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/10-tokens-300x300.jpg

Again with the hyperbole. A Marine is a Marine and the only difference rule wise is what gun or other equipment. A tactical marine has a boltgun. A sternguard vet has a boltgun. How someone paints something has no bearing or even mention in the rules.

Bharring wrote:
The point is I don't play this game to move around tokens and roll dice. I use it to fight my little plastic guys against your little plastic guys. If you're saying I shouldn't care about what my little plastic guy was supposed to be and instead declare him to be something else, what's the point of modelling/painting him to be that specific thing in the first place? And if there's no point in modeling/painting him to be a specific thing in the first place, why not just move around some poker chips and throw dice?

In other words, if I wanted to play a game where the minis don't matter, why would I play a game where most of the time involves building/painting the minis?

Because I just don't care that much about the plastic.

Bharring wrote:
The point is I don't play this game to move around tokens and roll dice. I use it to fight my little plastic guys against your little plastic guys. If you're saying I shouldn't care about what my little plastic guy was supposed to be and instead declare him to be something else, what's the point of modelling/painting him to be that specific thing in the first place? And if there's no point in modeling/painting him to be a specific thing in the first place, why not just move around some poker chips and throw dice?

In other words, if I wanted to play a game where the minis don't matter, why would I play a game where most of the time involves building/painting the minis?

Because while l love modelling painting and playing, my time and money are not infinite. I'm not going to buy another box of models just so I can have specific marines for each data sheet. Sometimes I run my guns as tacticals, other times I use them as sternguard. depends on what list i felt like playing that day.

Bharring wrote:
Which, of course, is no issue. Some chapters - including mine - don't bling out everything the way some GW kits do.

However, your Sternguard and Deathwatch Vet models themselves are not Tac models. They might have been the same plastic, and even indistingiushable before being painted, but don't they have any sort of marking on them or kit on them suggesting they're vets?

Similarly, I could pick up the CSM codex (or DA or BA or whatever), and play my Wings of Dawn models as CSM. But, even though each option would be rules-legal, they still wouldn't be my 'Wings of Dawn'. They would be counts-as, because Wings of Dawn are a loyalist chapter that descends from UM (homebrew chapter).

If I wanted a game where the models, paint, and fluff didn't matter, there's always Chess or Axis & Allies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"And, if you're half a decent painter (unlike me) painting those markings shouldn't be an issue."

So I should destroy my ASM because VV are better right now? Should I reverse it again when ASM get better than VV again?

If you're a half-decent modeller, you can chaosify up your Loyalists, and play them as Alpha Legion, letting you take infiltrating berzerkers. But going Chaos isn't the right answer to "how should I play my Marines?".

No. They're plain. I don't take Tactical Marines or Devastators as unit entries so it isn't an issue. For my own Plastics I don't borrow, I have the following:
2 squads of Mk3 with:
5 Vets with counts as Storm Bolters
3 Vets with Volkite Culverins for counts as Frag Cannons
1 Vanguard with Storm Shield + Chainsword
1 Terminator with Storm Bolter and Power Sword

1 squad of Mk4 with:
5 Vets with Shotguns
3 Vets with Volkite Culverins for counts as Frag Cannons
1 Vanguard with Storm Shield + Chainsword
1 Terminator with Storm Bolter and Power Sword

Then I'm working on, when I have free time, I bought 15 of the Mk3 Breacher Siege Marines for Counts As Primaris, either Intercessors or Hellblasters (I think I have enough Plasma Guns. I think).

It isn't terribly confusing for my opponents and those things aren't even painted yet!

Also you could just use your Assault Squads as Vanguard and you'd be fine. Whether you destroy all the markings you did is on you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Fun fact:
Some kits, assembled & painted certain ways, can be VV, ASM, Termies, or Drop Pods:
http://www.plasticwrapballgame.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/10-tokens-300x300.jpg

Honestly I would be impressed by a Drop Pod made with Marine bodies. Totally something a Night Lords pod might be like!

Hounds,
Yeah the post you're quoting was hyperbole.

The differences between a Loyalist Marine and a Chaos Marine are marginal. The same kit assembled the same way could be either. But once you've painted and fluffed a Loyalist unit, it isn't a Chaos Marine unit, and vice versa.

It certainly isn't mentioned in the rules. RAW, yes, you can play an ASM squad as a VV squad. But this is where the post becomes relevant: you can use a poker chip as an ASM or a VV. Or a drop pod. RAW, no problem with that. As long as GW sold you said poker chip, potentially. Can you find a rule that says my High Elf Wizard can't be Grimuldus, in a game of 40k?

HoundsofDemos wrote:

Bharring wrote:
The point is I don't play this game to move around tokens and roll dice. I use it to fight my little plastic guys against your little plastic guys. If you're saying I shouldn't care about what my little plastic guy was supposed to be and instead declare him to be something else, what's the point of modelling/painting him to be that specific thing in the first place? And if there's no point in modeling/painting him to be a specific thing in the first place, why not just move around some poker chips and throw dice?

In other words, if I wanted to play a game where the minis don't matter, why would I play a game where most of the time involves building/painting the minis?

Because while l love modelling painting and playing, my time and money are not infinite. I'm not going to buy another box of models just so I can have specific marines for each data sheet. Sometimes I run my guns as tacticals, other times I use them as sternguard. depends on what list i felt like playing that day.

This guy gets it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Hounds,
Yeah the post you're quoting was hyperbole.

The differences between a Loyalist Marine and a Chaos Marine are marginal. The same kit assembled the same way could be either. But once you've painted and fluffed a Loyalist unit, it isn't a Chaos Marine unit, and vice versa.

It certainly isn't mentioned in the rules. RAW, yes, you can play an ASM squad as a VV squad. But this is where the post becomes relevant: you can use a poker chip as an ASM or a VV. Or a drop pod. RAW, no problem with that. As long as GW sold you said poker chip, potentially. Can you find a rule that says my High Elf Wizard can't be Grimuldus, in a game of 40k?

LoS is something you forgot about with that argument.

Also if your High Elf Wizard had something that equated to being like a Crozius and a Plasma Pistol, I don't see the issue. More fitting for maybe one of the Eldar armies but yeah you're overall fine. It's an official GW product too!

Bharring wrote:
Hounds,
Yeah the post you're quoting was hyperbole.

The differences between a Loyalist Marine and a Chaos Marine are marginal. The same kit assembled the same way could be either. But once you've painted and fluffed a Loyalist unit, it isn't a Chaos Marine unit, and vice versa.

It certainly isn't mentioned in the rules. RAW, yes, you can play an ASM squad as a VV squad. But this is where the post becomes relevant: you can use a poker chip as an ASM or a VV. Or a drop pod. RAW, no problem with that. As long as GW sold you said poker chip, potentially. Can you find a rule that says my High Elf Wizard can't be Grimuldus, in a game of 40k?

There is not and personally I would have no problem playing you with you using alternative models or conversions as long as it's clear what is what. additional it's no where near the same thing as using poker chips. Models have different sized and that's pretty important in a game that revolves around TLOS.

"Honestly I would be impressed by a Drop Pod made with Marine bodies. Totally something a Night Lords pod might be like!"

Now I want to see that! Almost makes me want to start a CSM army!

"Also you could just use your Assault Squads as Vanguard and you'd be fine."
I'd be fine. But the same is true if I ran Scouts as Wraithguard. I wouldn't take 4d6 corruption damage (save for half). But I wouldn't be playing the game I want to play.

To say about wanting to play the units as they were modelled/painted "That doesn't even work as a reason" just dismisses why I, and some others, play the game. It may have no value to you, but you are not everyone.

Also yeah. If you wanted to use Loyalist bitz for your Chaos Marines and vice versa, you're welcome to. If you wanted to just use those squads as opposites, who cares?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
"Honestly I would be impressed by a Drop Pod made with Marine bodies. Totally something a Night Lords pod might be like!"

Now I want to see that! Almost makes me want to start a CSM army!

"Also you could just use your Assault Squads as Vanguard and you'd be fine."
I'd be fine. But the same is true if I ran Scouts as Wraithguard. I wouldn't take 4d6 corruption damage (save for half). But I wouldn't be playing the game I want to play.

To say about wanting to play the units as they were modelled/painted "That doesn't even work as a reason" just dismisses why I, and some others, play the game. It may have no value to you, but you are not everyone.

Once again you're forgetting LoS again. Wraithguard standins are fine as long as height and width are reasonable and you have a reasonable representation of wargear.

Some of my more extreme examples aren't properly living up to LoS. Although a stack of congealed greenstuff could stand in for any of them and fix the LoS issue.

It's not just about what you're willing to play against. It's about dismissing what I'm willing to play. A model painted as an ASM is not a counts-as VV. It's a proxy. Counts-as is stuff like Exodites or most Corsair models, where you use a datasheet that fits it's rules. With ASM as VV, the model is an exact fit in fluff and depiction as an ASM, but you're using VV rules because you want different rules.

Now, using an ASM kit to *make* VV is neither. It's scratchbuild or kitbash. That's very different from Countsas or Proxies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
We aren't talking about using ASM bits to make VV. We're talking about using ASMs (whether they're made of ASM kit or VV kit), that are clearly marked as ASMs, and clearly intended to be ASMs, using the VV rules.

I'm 100% pro kitbash. I think counts-as is cool. I try to minimize proxying.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"If you wanted to just use those squads as opposites, who cares?"
People who care about what their models are supposed to represent? I care that my ASM are ASM and not VV. Other people will see ASM markings, and some of them might care. Most may not, but to dismiss it as an argument that "doesn't even work" is insulting.

Ok so do they work well in any way? Would 20 assault marines huddled together do any good?
What about if teamed with HQ with re-rolls?
Or what about if team with Vanguard Veterans to sort of soak up shots?