Switch Theme:

What do you think of the "lighter" 40K setting?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dreadnought




San Jose, CA

Moriarty wrote:
Don’t think the setting is ‘lighter’, just a different colour black.


like chaos vs abbadon
   
Made in us
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard





pm713 wrote:

Except the Imperium can't go into the Rift at all. But the Chaos forces can and they don't need to go around it. They have a massive advantage in manoeuvrability and should be able to move from where they are to winning. The only reason they haven't is because that would end things and GW can't do that. They wrote themselves into a corner and the only way forwards is to retcon or keep piling on the stupid.


Why can't they go into the Rift? They can't do it as well, and they can't warp through it, but they can go into it can't they? They may or may not have the same navigational expertise once inside but they can physically enter the rift, and launch a surprise attack not? I mean they could do that with the Eye itself. Combine that with traitors within traitors, schisms for power, competition/animosity between the chaos gods themselves and their followers, and there's any number of reasons the forces of Chaos in and around the rift have to watch their backs and move carefully

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in ie
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle






bouncingboredom wrote:I think it's fine to do narrative development for the characters. Where you run into problems is when the entire universe starts getting shifted about on a massive scale. 40K is only about thirty years old. They could for example have tried playing out the narratives in something close to real time, which explains why the over arching narrative never really shitfs much (it would even play into the idea of the Imperium for example as a slow, cumbersome organisation).

It's a bit like the WHFB issue. They could have switched to a skirmish game and done a lot of things with it without having to blow the entire world up. The problems with GW's story telling structure were in evidence throughout the WHFB run as well, as they struggled to create new and vibrant heroes and instead tried to push these big campaigns that ultimately came to nothing.


Don't get me wrong, I don't think GW did the best job when it came to unfreezing the timeline from one minute to the 13th Black Crusade, it probably would have been more interesting and engaging if we got to play through the aftermath rather than skipping to a new status quo. The biggest development, the Great Rift, is clearly GW trying to make Chaos much more of an existential threat to the Imperium. Having the figurehead of the Chaos faction perpetually bogged down in one warzone really undermined this, as is evident in the all the "armless failure" memes. I can never quite get over how mind-mindbogglingly massive the Imperium is. In the past the only way they could make anything a proper threat to it was by having a Black Crusade or an Ork Waaaagh! poised to strike at Terra itself. The Great Rift sidesteps this by making the front of the conflict much broader.

Gitdakka wrote:
I dont get why the setting had to change. We choose 40k because we liked the setting. It was a huge galaxy eith endless options to add more stuff. Nothing had to be removed. This is supposed to be a wargame not a boon or a movie.

Do people who play napoleonics whine that the setting never changes? No! They love the specific setting and make up new battles and scenarios in the same setting. You can take inspiration from available historical events or you can create your own.


I still don't understand the "setting not a story" point of view, GW were constantly retconning the 40k lore to add or delete stuff before, why is it more egregious to change things in a moving timeline rather than in a frozen one? Also, if the setting is the appeal rather than any new narrative developments or warzones that GW might come up with, there's nothing stopping anyone setting their games at earlier point in the timeline, 40k has plenty of scope for "historical" battles.

 
   
Made in gb
Tough-as-Nails Ork Boy



UK

 nurgle5 wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I don't think GW did the best job when it came to unfreezing the timeline from one minute to the 13th Black Crusade, it probably would have been more interesting and engaging if we got to play through the aftermath rather than skipping to a new status quo. The biggest development, the Great Rift, is clearly GW trying to make Chaos much more of an existential threat to the Imperium. Having the figurehead of the Chaos faction perpetually bogged down in one warzone really undermined this, as is evident in the all the "armless failure" memes. I can never quite get over how mind-mindbogglingly massive the Imperium is. In the past the only way they could make anything a proper threat to it was by having a Black Crusade or an Ork Waaaagh! poised to strike at Terra itself. The Great Rift sidesteps this by making the front of the conflict much broader.
I don't think it would be so bad if the advancing storyline was written by someone competent. One of the main arguments against moving the setting on is GW's reputation for massive incompetence in story telling. There's also that commercial element to worry about.

You could write probably quite a compelling narrative about how one by one many of the main non-codex compliant SM Chapters and/or those with serious geneseed flaws are given an ultimatum; crusade to the last man and die in a blaze of glory or be exterminated as heretics. How does each chapter deal with the proposition? How do their sub-chapters respond? But then you're essentially putting some of your best selling lines on the chopping block with no guarantee that you could replace them with something else e.g. say a BA themed Imperial Guard regiment. Would any sane person trust GW to write these stories in a compelling and interesting way? I fething wouldn't.

There's still room for the story to advance a bit without having to massively change everything else. Take Vigilus. Did anyone know that planet even existed before the books? So what's the harm in having Chaos win there and force the Imperium into retreat for a change, giving Chaos a big win to coincide with some new releases etc? GW can't even score when they have an open goal in front of them, which I think is symbollic of why many people are so nervous about them trying to handle an issue like the advancement of the entire setting.


If you mention second edition 40k I will find you, and I will bore you to tears talking about how "things were better in my day, let me tell ya..." Might even do it if you mention 4th/5th/6th WHFB 
   
Made in ie
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle






bouncingboredom wrote:
There's still room for the story to advance a bit without having to massively change everything else. Take Vigilus. Did anyone know that planet even existed before the books? So what's the harm in having Chaos win there and force the Imperium into retreat for a change, giving Chaos a big win to coincide with some new releases etc? GW can't even score when they have an open goal in front of them, which I think is symbollic of why many people are so nervous about them trying to handle an issue like the advancement of the entire setting.



I don't think we'll see anything as big as the Fall of Cadia/opening of the Great Rift going forward, I reckon it'll be stuff more like Konor and Vigilus -- campaigns in "important" warzones, but nothing that'll change the galactic map wholesale. I do agree with you on Vigilus, the Imperium could have lost that one and then down the line have won a new path through the Rift as the warp storms ebb and flow.

bouncingboredom wrote:
I don't think it would be so bad if the advancing storyline was written by someone competent. One of the main arguments against moving the setting on is GW's reputation for massive incompetence in story telling. There's also that commercial element to worry about.

You could write probably quite a compelling narrative about how one by one many of the main non-codex compliant SM Chapters and/or those with serious geneseed flaws are given an ultimatum; crusade to the last man and die in a blaze of glory or be exterminated as heretics. How does each chapter deal with the proposition? How do their sub-chapters respond? But then you're essentially putting some of your best selling lines on the chopping block with no guarantee that you could replace them with something else e.g. say a BA themed Imperial Guard regiment. Would any sane person trust GW to write these stories in a compelling and interesting way? I fething wouldn't.


As you say, GW has written some pretty questionable lore in the past, but I would point out that some of the worst offenders (Matt Ward's work comes to mind ) was written when the timeline was frozen.

Any particular reason for that example about an Abyssal Crusade type event for the non-compliant Chapters?

 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






bouncingboredom wrote:
Take Vigilus. Did anyone know that planet even existed before the books?

Never mind the question of who was going to win on Vigilus; the fact that we had no idea that this world which is of massive strategic importance even existed prior to the campaign illustrates how poor GW is at 'forging a narrative'.

In fact, nobody in-universe seemed to be particularly concerned about it, despite it supposedly being one of the most vital worlds in the Imperium for several hundred years!
   
Made in us
Jinking Ravenwing Land Speeder Pilot




Hanoi, Vietnam.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
bouncingboredom wrote:
Take Vigilus. Did anyone know that planet even existed before the books?

Never mind the question of who was going to win on Vigilus; the fact that we had no idea that this world which is of massive strategic importance even existed prior to the campaign illustrates how poor GW is at 'forging a narrative'.

In fact, nobody in-universe seemed to be particularly concerned about it, despite it supposedly being one of the most vital worlds in the Imperium for several hundred years!
Vigilus is only important now because it stands at the mouth of the Nachmund Gauntlet, which didn't exist before the Great Rift. Those "several hundred years" are only the time since the Rift opened, which in real life only happened a little over two years ago.
   
Made in us
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard





bouncingboredom wrote:

You could write probably quite a compelling narrative about how one by one many of the main non-codex compliant SM Chapters and/or those with serious geneseed flaws are given an ultimatum; crusade to the last man and die in a blaze of glory or be exterminated as heretics. How does each chapter deal with the proposition? How do their sub-chapters respond? But then you're essentially putting some of your best selling lines on the chopping block with no guarantee that you could replace them with something else e.g. say a BA themed Imperial Guard regiment. Would any sane person trust GW to write these stories in a compelling and interesting way? I fething wouldn't.

There's still room for the story to advance a bit without having to massively change everything else. Take Vigilus. Did anyone know that planet even existed before the books? So what's the harm in having Chaos win there and force the Imperium into retreat for a change, giving Chaos a big win to coincide with some new releases etc? GW can't even score when they have an open goal in front of them, which I think is symbollic of why many people are so nervous about them trying to handle an issue like the advancement of the entire setting.



You want to write off the Space Wolves and the Blood Angels because of genetic deviancy, AND replace them with something else with a similar genetic deviancy theme just in the Imperial Guard, but only want to advance the story without changing everything? Never mind that the Space Wolves were already:
- the very dogs of war the Emperor let slip when he needed to bring a legion back to heel.
- willing to stand up the the Inquisition over sterlising some civilians.

The basic theme you're suggesting is the same morality play in Marvel's Civil War story line, any episode of Star Trek ever, the more metaphysical takes on the Alpha Legion/the Cabal/?Eldrad, etc. It's usually an allegory for some sort of dilemma, racism, or other -phobia/intolerance- First they came for X, and I did nothing because I am not X. Then they came for Y, but I am not Y, when they came for me, I was all that's left.

Assuming we're speaking of the Pre-Vigilus timeline:
Russ Chapter(s) - Extreme phsical deviation - and GW can't even make up their mind on if the Wolves have successor chapters. Likely first Inquisition choice for this edict as the most different combined with recent conflict.
Sanguinius Chapters - Major physical, psychological and psychic deviations. Would extremely oppose this.

In addition to the Blood Angels and Space Wolves:
Dorn chapters - genetic deviation in missing organs, missing librarians - don't want to go down that slippery slope.
Corax chapters - missing organs, melanchromic malfunctions - also don't want to go down this slippery slope
Vulkan Chapters - eyes and skin - not generally considered deviation - potential variation in reaction time - probably don't want to go down this road.
Iron Hands - no physical signs, but their obsession with bionics is postulated as genetic in origin plus psychological blind spots following the death of Ferrus - PROBABLY don't want to go down this road fearing they may be next after the physical signs.
Johnson Chapters - No known genetic deviations, massive codex and technological deviations, plus a strong desire to keep Inquisitorial eyes off of Space Marines in general, and themselves in particular plus close ties/rivalry with the Wolves - they could go either way but I'd lean heavily on being against any sort of enforced conformity and/or change (See their reaction to Primaris Marines).
Khan Chapters - No known deviations, could go either way.
Guilliman Chapters - No known deviations, more than half the space marine contingent of the Imperium. So many chapters that some have diverged culturally (See: Mortifactors) so far they are unlikely to be uniform in response.

Beyond that many of the more obvious deviations trace back to the revered Primarch they inherited them from so it would be quite the tightrope to walk continuing to venerate Russ/Sanguinius/etc, while trashing his sons for having fangs/funky eyes/etc.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in ca
Commander of the Mysterious 2nd Legion





bouncingboredom wrote:
 nurgle5 wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I don't think GW did the best job when it came to unfreezing the timeline from one minute to the 13th Black Crusade, it probably would have been more interesting and engaging if we got to play through the aftermath rather than skipping to a new status quo. The biggest development, the Great Rift, is clearly GW trying to make Chaos much more of an existential threat to the Imperium. Having the figurehead of the Chaos faction perpetually bogged down in one warzone really undermined this, as is evident in the all the "armless failure" memes. I can never quite get over how mind-mindbogglingly massive the Imperium is. In the past the only way they could make anything a proper threat to it was by having a Black Crusade or an Ork Waaaagh! poised to strike at Terra itself. The Great Rift sidesteps this by making the front of the conflict much broader.
I don't think it would be so bad if the advancing storyline was written by someone competent. One of the main arguments against moving the setting on is GW's reputation for massive incompetence in story telling. There's also that commercial element to worry about.

You could write probably quite a compelling narrative about how one by one many of the main non-codex compliant SM Chapters and/or those with serious geneseed flaws are given an ultimatum; crusade to the last man and die in a blaze of glory or be exterminated as heretics. How does each chapter deal with the proposition? How do their sub-chapters respond? But then you're essentially putting some of your best selling lines on the chopping block with no guarantee that you could replace them with something else e.g. say a BA themed Imperial Guard regiment. Would any sane person trust GW to write these stories in a compelling and interesting way? I fething wouldn't.

There's still room for the story to advance a bit without having to massively change everything else. Take Vigilus. Did anyone know that planet even existed before the books? So what's the harm in having Chaos win there and force the Imperium into retreat for a change, giving Chaos a big win to coincide with some new releases etc? GW can't even score when they have an open goal in front of them, which I think is symbollic of why many people are so nervous about them trying to handle an issue like the advancement of the entire setting.



GW wou;dn't write those stories because they're Sane. only a insane person would toss a buncha fan favorites on the chopping block "FOR STORY" I mean seriously "a replace the blood angels with a guard regiment" do you have any idea how fething pissed off blood angel fans would be? that's the thing, people on one hand whine bitch and moan that the story is moving, but then scream it's not eneugh because GW didn't see fit to Invalidate a bunch of people's armies and I'm going to go out on a whim here and guess the people pushing for the Ultramarines to be killed don't play ultramarines. people pushing for blood angels to be killed, don't play blood angels etc.


Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in au
Stalwart Tribune





BrianDavion wrote:
bouncingboredom wrote:
 nurgle5 wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I don't think GW did the best job when it came to unfreezing the timeline from one minute to the 13th Black Crusade, it probably would have been more interesting and engaging if we got to play through the aftermath rather than skipping to a new status quo. The biggest development, the Great Rift, is clearly GW trying to make Chaos much more of an existential threat to the Imperium. Having the figurehead of the Chaos faction perpetually bogged down in one warzone really undermined this, as is evident in the all the "armless failure" memes. I can never quite get over how mind-mindbogglingly massive the Imperium is. In the past the only way they could make anything a proper threat to it was by having a Black Crusade or an Ork Waaaagh! poised to strike at Terra itself. The Great Rift sidesteps this by making the front of the conflict much broader.
I don't think it would be so bad if the advancing storyline was written by someone competent. One of the main arguments against moving the setting on is GW's reputation for massive incompetence in story telling. There's also that commercial element to worry about.

You could write probably quite a compelling narrative about how one by one many of the main non-codex compliant SM Chapters and/or those with serious geneseed flaws are given an ultimatum; crusade to the last man and die in a blaze of glory or be exterminated as heretics. How does each chapter deal with the proposition? How do their sub-chapters respond? But then you're essentially putting some of your best selling lines on the chopping block with no guarantee that you could replace them with something else e.g. say a BA themed Imperial Guard regiment. Would any sane person trust GW to write these stories in a compelling and interesting way? I fething wouldn't.

There's still room for the story to advance a bit without having to massively change everything else. Take Vigilus. Did anyone know that planet even existed before the books? So what's the harm in having Chaos win there and force the Imperium into retreat for a change, giving Chaos a big win to coincide with some new releases etc? GW can't even score when they have an open goal in front of them, which I think is symbollic of why many people are so nervous about them trying to handle an issue like the advancement of the entire setting.



GW wou;dn't write those stories because they're Sane. only a insane person would toss a buncha fan favorites on the chopping block "FOR STORY" I mean seriously "a replace the blood angels with a guard regiment" do you have any idea how fething pissed off blood angel fans would be? that's the thing, people on one hand whine bitch and moan that the story is moving, but then scream it's not eneugh because GW didn't see fit to Invalidate a bunch of people's armies and I'm going to go out on a whim here and guess the people pushing for the Ultramarines to be killed don't play ultramarines. people pushing for blood angels to be killed, don't play blood angels etc.



Except for Martel, for some reason.
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




Yeah, BA should have died to the man vs bugs. Game needs less power armor. Plus, it's a gak army. At this point, why would any BA player care what GW did?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/25 12:58:22


 
   
Made in us
Blood-Drenched Death Company Marine




Because most Blood Angel Players don't play them because they win, we play them because we like them.

Win or Lose, I'm a Blood Angel.
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

Martel732 wrote:
Yeah, BA should have died to the man vs bugs. Game needs less power armor. Plus, it's a gak army. At this point, why would any BA player care what GW did?


Ultramarines and Blood Angels should be dead - all nommed upon by the great Devourer! All hail the Tyranids!

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




 Crimson Devil wrote:
Because most Blood Angel Players don't play them because they win, we play them because we like them.

Win or Lose, I'm a Blood Angel.


Get used to losing and being beat at your own game by gsc. I used to like them, but 6th, 7th, and 8th have beem too much.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Overread wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Yeah, BA should have died to the man vs bugs. Game needs less power armor. Plus, it's a gak army. At this point, why would any BA player care what GW did?


Ultramarines and Blood Angels should be dead - all nommed upon by the great Devourer! All hail the Tyranids!


Even im not cynical enough to not expect um to survive. But BA? They're expendable. The rules writers prove this constantly.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/06/25 13:55:49


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Ginjitzu wrote:
 Lord Damocles wrote:
bouncingboredom wrote:
Take Vigilus. Did anyone know that planet even existed before the books?

Never mind the question of who was going to win on Vigilus; the fact that we had no idea that this world which is of massive strategic importance even existed prior to the campaign illustrates how poor GW is at 'forging a narrative'.

In fact, nobody in-universe seemed to be particularly concerned about it, despite it supposedly being one of the most vital worlds in the Imperium for several hundred years!
Vigilus is only important now because it stands at the mouth of the Nachmund Gauntlet, which didn't exist before the Great Rift. Those "several hundred years" are only the time since the Rift opened, which in real life only happened a little over two years ago.

I don't see how that's in any way a refutation of what I wrote..?

The importance of Vigilus wasn't highlighted/built up over those two real world years. A well crafted narrative wouldn't have sprung the importance of the world on the reader [us, the players] from basically nowhere with no build up.

Compare, for example, the 3rd War of Armageddon campaign where we knew something of the importance of Armageddon and had a reason to be invested in the fate of the world; to the Fall of Medusa V, which was a planet we'd never heard of before (and which has barely been acknowledged since), and had little reason to care about.


And the world doesn't appear to have been greatly fortified or defended during the in-universe several hundred years. The Imperium has been traversing the Nachmund Gauntlet for most of that period; they have a Chapter tasked with guarding it specifically; they require Vigilus to maintain their hold over the region and allow access to Imperium Nihilus; and yet they're cool with a Waaagh! roaming over large parts of the planet apparently..?
   
Made in us
Blood-Drenched Death Company Marine




Martel732 wrote:
 Crimson Devil wrote:
Because most Blood Angel Players don't play them because they win, we play them because we like them.

Win or Lose, I'm a Blood Angel.


Get used to losing and being beat at your own game by gsc. I used to like them, but 6th, 7th, and 8th have beem too much.




Yeah, winning is great. But it is not why I play this game.

It sounds like you're ready to move on. I wish you luck with your new army.
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




I don't army hop. It's the only way this is affordable.
   
Made in us
Blood-Drenched Death Company Marine




Affordability doesn't mean anything if you are unhappy. And it's not army hopping if you change once every 5 editions.

If you want to participate in this hobby, then you're going to spend money. If you want to win regularly, then you're going to spend money. It's the nature of the beast.

I think you want GW to kill the Blood Angels because you can't bring yourself to quit them on your own. It's a "Suicide by Cop" scenario.
   
Made in us
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter





 Andersp90 wrote:
So the first primarch has returned, and more are probably coming. The aeldari have received a possible "get-out-of-jail-free" card in the form of Ynnead, and the tyranid threat has been diminished by the the great rift.

Put short, there is hope.

But what do you think of this change in the setting? Good, bad?



This change has been long heralded, and the changes to the lore I don't like have been established well before the coming of 8e. I'm not super invested in the Imperium's status as being on the offense or defense, though I do have to say I welcome the shift to offensive operations since the whole "defiant last stand as the last hope for mankind" is kind of old.

As far as things I don't like: I feel like some of the satire extant in 40k has been being lost with the greater relevance of heroes and Imperial leaders to the lore. That said, they've also been doing a lot of good things recently, like Regimental Standard, that do keep to the satirical side of the game.

That said, I understand the requirement for simplification, since it needs to be appealed to middle and high school audiences if we want the hobby as a whole to survive.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/06/25 22:16:29


Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in gb
Tough-as-Nails Ork Boy



UK

nurgle5 wrote:Any particular reason for that example about an Abyssal Crusade type event for the non-compliant Chapters?
If selling models was not a concern and "progressing the narrative" or whatever we want to call it was the main thing, then I think it would be an interesting story to look into. The potential scope of that story is enormous and the multiple ways it could be handled would be intriguing. Would certainly satisfy somes desire for a shake up! Agree on the point that some pretty horrendous stuff has been written by GW inside what is essentially self contained narratives. The difference there is that it's self contained. You can write a horrible story about a new/unheard of Black Templars character and it doesn't spill over into the wider universe vs letting GW loose with something as narrative disrupting as say a true black crusade to Earth.

Lord Damocles wrote:the fact that we had no idea that this world which is of massive strategic importance even existed prior to the campaign illustrates how poor GW is at 'forging a narrative'. In fact, nobody in-universe seemed to be particularly concerned about it, despite it supposedly being one of the most vital worlds in the Imperium for several hundred years!
Bloody good points.

Breton wrote:You want to write off the Space Wolves and the Blood Angels because of genetic deviancy, AND replace them with something else with a similar genetic deviancy theme just in the Imperial Guard, but only want to advance the story without changing everything? etc, etc
No, I simply used that as an example. I can't imagine if you had a BA inspired Guard regiment it would involve any degree of genetic deviancy. It would likely involve them slapping the BA version of the aquilla on their rifles/standards etc and developing an unhealthy obsession with melta weapons and CQC (especially unhealthy for Guardsmen...), while maybe creating their own "Death Company", except without the black rage and more of the black-mark-with-the-Commissar.

BrianDavion wrote:GW wou;dn't write those stories because they're Sane. only a insane person would toss a buncha fan favorites on the chopping block "FOR STORY" I mean seriously "a replace the blood angels with a guard regiment" do you have any idea how fething pissed off blood angel fans would be?
Yes. Which is why I specifically mentioned GW looking at the idea from a sales perspective. Try not half reading the post next time.

Martel732 wrote:BA should have died to the man vs bugs.. Plus, it's a gak army.
The sales of Blood Angles miniatures, even the humble Tactical Squad, would appear to suggest that is not a commonly held opinion.

If you mention second edition 40k I will find you, and I will bore you to tears talking about how "things were better in my day, let me tell ya..." Might even do it if you mention 4th/5th/6th WHFB 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




There is a sucker born every minute. Every 10 seconds in the
US.

I'm sticking with the game needs less power armor. I volunteer ba and sw as tribute.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/26 01:04:53


 
   
Made in nz
Trigger-Happy Baal Predator Pilot



New Zealand

Leave my BA alone. Just because one of a group wants to die doesn't mean the rest do. The issue is not there is too many power armour armies it's that they have the lions share of models. I could cope with BA being merged in the regular SM codex.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/26 01:59:17


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Martel732 wrote:
There is a sucker born every minute. Every 10 seconds in the
US.

I'm sticking with the game needs less power armor. I volunteer ba and sw as tribute.


Your posts seem to contradict each other. You don't want to army hop due to the cost, which I get to a degree, but you also want GW to remove your army from the game. Which would make your army completely devoid of any value or use bar finding someone who wanted to play an earlier edition.

Idk if your local gaming area is just opposed to taking a toned down list against a weaker faction to give both players a solid game or you get off on being miserable but I really don't get why you continue to play both an army and hobby your claim to hate.
   
Made in ca
Commander of the Mysterious 2nd Legion





 Lord Damocles wrote:
 Ginjitzu wrote:
 Lord Damocles wrote:
bouncingboredom wrote:
Take Vigilus. Did anyone know that planet even existed before the books?

Never mind the question of who was going to win on Vigilus; the fact that we had no idea that this world which is of massive strategic importance even existed prior to the campaign illustrates how poor GW is at 'forging a narrative'.

In fact, nobody in-universe seemed to be particularly concerned about it, despite it supposedly being one of the most vital worlds in the Imperium for several hundred years!
Vigilus is only important now because it stands at the mouth of the Nachmund Gauntlet, which didn't exist before the Great Rift. Those "several hundred years" are only the time since the Rift opened, which in real life only happened a little over two years ago.

I don't see how that's in any way a refutation of what I wrote..?

The importance of Vigilus wasn't highlighted/built up over those two real world years. A well crafted narrative wouldn't have sprung the importance of the world on the reader [us, the players] from basically nowhere with no build up.

Compare, for example, the 3rd War of Armageddon campaign where we knew something of the importance of Armageddon and had a reason to be invested in the fate of the world; to the Fall of Medusa V, which was a planet we'd never heard of before (and which has barely been acknowledged since), and had little reason to care about.


And the world doesn't appear to have been greatly fortified or defended during the in-universe several hundred years. The Imperium has been traversing the Nachmund Gauntlet for most of that period; they have a Chapter tasked with guarding it specifically; they require Vigilus to maintain their hold over the region and allow access to Imperium Nihilus; and yet they're cool with a Waaagh! roaming over large parts of the planet apparently..?



timey whimy stuff is a bit odd, it might have been a few hundred years for vigilus and a week for the IoM. and it's not like the world is undefended. at the end of the day it basicly held out against 3 events that would have been eneugh to destroy your average world

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in ie
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle






bouncingboredom wrote:Agree on the point that some pretty horrendous stuff has been written by GW inside what is essentially self contained narratives. The difference there is that it's self contained. You can write a horrible story about a new/unheard of Black Templars character and it doesn't spill over into the wider universe vs letting GW loose with something as narrative disrupting as say a true black crusade to Earth.


Those "self contained" narratives had some pretty big implications for wider 40k setting. A lot of people were quite upset at things like the original version of the Bloodtide incident or Blood Angels teaming up with Necrons, back when the latter were still mindless robots, because they fundamentally undermined a collective understanding of who those factions are and how they operate. Is it more disruptive to the narrative to widen the front of a conflict or to change the character of some of the main participants?

Lord Damocles wrote:Medusa V, which was a planet we'd never heard of before (and which has barely been acknowledged since), and had little reason to care about.


There probably hasn't been any reason to mention it since the Fall of Medusa V campaign was erased from the 40k timeline.

Martel732 wrote:
I don't army hop. It's the only way this is affordable.


Wouldn't you need to get a new army anyway if GW did what you want and deleted yours from the game?

 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control





Holy Terra

So upon reading more comments it's pretty obvious that a lot of people have strange misconceptions about the recent lore. There is nothing limiting about it, in fact we finally have a justification for Tau to be in different parts of the galaxy.

There is nothing lighter about the setting, with the exception of the newer artwork always being in full colour. The new lore is mainly to introduce new models, all of which are better and more realistic than things in the past.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/26 10:55:57


-~Ishagu~- 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




"Wouldn't you need to get a new army anyway if GW did what you want and deleted yours from the game?"

I could at least kind of justify it then. Or take a vacation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ishagu wrote:
So upon reading more comments it's pretty obvious that a lot of people have strange misconceptions about the recent lore. There is nothing limiting about it, in fact we finally have a justification for Tau to be in different parts of the galaxy.

There is nothing lighter about the setting, with the exception of the newer artwork always being in full colour. The new lore is mainly to introduce new models, all of which are better and more realistic than things in the past.


There's nothing realistic about 40K. At all.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/26 12:50:06


 
   
Made in ie
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle






Martel732 wrote:
"Wouldn't you need to get a new army anyway if GW did what you want and deleted yours from the game?"

I could at least kind of justify it then. Or take a vacation.


Going by your posts you've been having a bit of miserable time with your current army since (I'm guessing) 6th ed. dropped in 2012, ever hear of the sunk cost fallacy?

 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control





Holy Terra

Martel732 wrote:
"Wouldn't you need to get a new army anyway if GW did what you want and deleted yours from the game?"

I could at least kind of justify it then. Or take a vacation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ishagu wrote:
So upon reading more comments it's pretty obvious that a lot of people have strange misconceptions about the recent lore. There is nothing limiting about it, in fact we finally have a justification for Tau to be in different parts of the galaxy.

There is nothing lighter about the setting, with the exception of the newer artwork always being in full colour. The new lore is mainly to introduce new models, all of which are better and more realistic than things in the past.


There's nothing realistic about 40K. At all.


If you actually learn to read, you'll realise that I'm talking about the models. The new Primaris Marines have more realistic proportions. Same with other recent kits as well. My statement is factually correct.

-~Ishagu~- 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




 nurgle5 wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
"Wouldn't you need to get a new army anyway if GW did what you want and deleted yours from the game?"

I could at least kind of justify it then. Or take a vacation.


Going by your posts you've been having a bit of miserable time with your current army since (I'm guessing) 6th ed. dropped in 2012, ever hear of the sunk cost fallacy?


I'm well aware.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ishagu wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
"Wouldn't you need to get a new army anyway if GW did what you want and deleted yours from the game?"

I could at least kind of justify it then. Or take a vacation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ishagu wrote:
So upon reading more comments it's pretty obvious that a lot of people have strange misconceptions about the recent lore. There is nothing limiting about it, in fact we finally have a justification for Tau to be in different parts of the galaxy.

There is nothing lighter about the setting, with the exception of the newer artwork always being in full colour. The new lore is mainly to introduce new models, all of which are better and more realistic than things in the past.


There's nothing realistic about 40K. At all.


If you actually learn to read, you'll realise that I'm talking about the models. The new Primaris Marines have more realistic proportions. Same with other recent kits as well. My statement is factually correct.


Never noticed.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/26 14:04:45


 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: