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.
You can't honesty ascertain that from just a post online though. Just because you can't see why someone see's beauty in something and you don't doesn't mean they are blinded by the light of the past.
Some have said many of these vehicles are silly and impractical. I'm not going to go into a huge list but it's there.
GW isn't very creative and most of these kits have design elements inspired by real life counterparts. However, you can like say a land raider over a repulsor without wearing them goggles.
Arguing which is more viable, is a fools errand I feel. If you were going down that path I'd pick the rhino, razorback, predators as the most viable actual designs.
BrianDavion wrote: I don't think it's wrong to say though that rose coloured glasses are impacting a lot of the judgements here. to say a new tank looks silly and poorly planned out, while the LAND RAIDER has a sensable design is definatly a case of it
The Land Raider is a work of art. I never said it's sensible.
You're right, it IS obvious that they're easy to work with and customize.
I’m not sure what you are on about, I was commenting on the fact one is able to comment on the aethsetics of models they don’t own.
Not really. For example, FW does terrible paint jobs and their models look bad until they're seen in person and actually worked with. The best direct example was that lizard monster thing they previewed with the absolutely ghastly paintjob, and then we kinda got a better idea when it wasn't painted.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
As well I'll add loving the old marines isn't nostalgia, they are still around, I as one person see nothing wrong with them. If someone finds them awful, that is on them entirely and not on me or any other supporter of the line. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and no one can say what is more or less ugly to anyone they can only say their opinions.
Trying to devalue someones opinion by nostalgia is simply a weak statement. I can like the way a model looks..and..AND also feel good about it from history with them. You can do both, even if someone can't understand why anyone would like them.
Hell, I think Necrons as models are awful dumb, ugly trash, yet I can get why people like them aside from just being a bit daft, it's all about the person.
As a professionally trained artist, I really hate this 'it is just an opinion, man' bs. There is a bit more to evaluating art than that. To say that is just a matter of opinion whether Leonardo Da Vinci's The Last Supper is a better painting than the the portrait of Vladimir Putin by George W. Bush would be missing quite a bit of nuance.
And anyone who thinks that the new players will not overwhelmingly prefer the look of the primaris is just deluding themselves in a colossal degree.
If you need to teach someone why something is beautiful, that sounds like an issue in and of itself. We can go round and round on this if you want to. You're free to not like something or like something more, you're even free to tell me I'm wrong, I'm free to say the same to you and will, forever if need be, just let people like what they like and we can end it there.
Yes I agree, my response is over simple and I'm sure you're an amazing judge of art, but we're talking about models, not art. None of these designs are Da Vinci I think we can agree on that. However, being told over and over how I can't find something good looking when I do is making me recreate the scream, but in real life.
You want to love Primaris designs, go ahead, they look good, I and others think old marines look good and that is something I'm able to live with and not once tell any one of you you're wrong. Let new players like what they like, I think though the view of others may surprise you with what looks better. Now, if you ever can't get the old stuff, that will of course skew the results as people will pick up what they can find and have access to regardless of personal thoughts, as well rules will factor in here too.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, regardless if you like it or not.
Insectum7 wrote: I haven't. Because I don't like it. I've played against them a number of times though, and seen them in person. I like their commander model, but mostly because I want to use it as an Inquisitor Lord in 2nd. Ed.
I'd rather (and have) buy more Tacticals.
Which honestly demonstrates your inability to let go of the past. They're a dated kit and dated model. Even look at something as simple as the newer Rubric Marines.
My army is drawn from 25 years of consistent styling and scaling
...demonstrating EXACTLY what I just said. You won't let go of your whole "true marine" army idea you got going on in your head, which was demonstratingly wrong, by the way.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
As well I'll add loving the old marines isn't nostalgia, they are still around, I as one person see nothing wrong with them. If someone finds them awful, that is on them entirely and not on me or any other supporter of the line. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and no one can say what is more or less ugly to anyone they can only say their opinions.
Trying to devalue someones opinion by nostalgia is simply a weak statement. I can like the way a model looks..and..AND also feel good about it from history with them. You can do both, even if someone can't understand why anyone would like them.
Hell, I think Necrons as models are awful dumb, ugly trash, yet I can get why people like them aside from just being a bit daft, it's all about the person.
And anyone who thinks that the new players will not overwhelmingly prefer the look of the primaris is just deluding themselves in a colossal degree.
Do you have any form of evidence to back up your claim? It’s a pretty bold assertion. I’m talking verifiable data here, like a survey of thousands of new players. Things along the lines of ‘but muh proportions’ and my opinion is fact cause reasons don’t count.
Insectum7 wrote: I haven't. Because I don't like it. I've played against them a number of times though, and seen them in person. I like their commander model, but mostly because I want to use it as an Inquisitor Lord in 2nd. Ed.
I'd rather (and have) buy more Tacticals.
Which honestly demonstrates your inability to let go of the past. They're a dated kit and dated model. Even look at something as simple as the newer Rubric Marines.
This is utter nonsense, they are a relatively recent kit from the modern era with very sharp surface detailing. The Tactical kit only came out 3 years before the rubric marines kit you are talking about, in 2013. Hardly dated by any stretch of the imagination.
Insectum7 wrote: I haven't. Because I don't like it. I've played against them a number of times though, and seen them in person. I like their commander model, but mostly because I want to use it as an Inquisitor Lord in 2nd. Ed.
I'd rather (and have) buy more Tacticals.
Which honestly demonstrates your inability to let go of the past. They're a dated kit and dated model. Even look at something as simple as the newer Rubric Marines.
My army is drawn from 25 years of consistent styling and scaling, and I don't require that they scale "accurately" to anything other than themselves. They are playable for the time being, they look great, the model line offers anything I could possibly want and their army list allows me to field any battlefield role I could need. If GW does retire classics from the game, I'd sooner collect a different faction, and already have. I've got a 5000+ point collection of Tyranids ready to go. I'd get serious about my Eldar collection than start a new marine army, or add models to it that look out of place.
I'll be happy to slaughter Primaris with filthy xenos at my FLGS, and keep my marines for old school games with friends, if that's what it comes to.
Same here, I’m not going to move to Primaris if classics ever went away, I also collect other factions I would focus on more. I have Custodes for the more elite than marines requirement, there is no need for Primaris
And the kit is amazingly bad for being only 2013. Look at the Deathwatch and Rubric Marine kits. Even the Grey Knight one is just above it, and not by much based on the scaling.
As well I'll add loving the old marines isn't nostalgia, they are still around, I as one person see nothing wrong with them. If someone finds them awful, that is on them entirely and not on me or any other supporter of the line. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and no one can say what is more or less ugly to anyone they can only say their opinions.
Trying to devalue someones opinion by nostalgia is simply a weak statement. I can like the way a model looks..and..AND also feel good about it from history with them. You can do both, even if someone can't understand why anyone would like them.
Hell, I think Necrons as models are awful dumb, ugly trash, yet I can get why people like them aside from just being a bit daft, it's all about the person.
And anyone who thinks that the new players will not overwhelmingly prefer the look of the primaris is just deluding themselves in a colossal degree.
Do you have any form of evidence to back up your claim? It’s a pretty bold assertion. I’m talking verifiable data here, like a survey of thousands of new players. Things along the lines of ‘but muh proportions’ and my opinion is fact cause reasons don’t count.
Do the "Primaris are failing" baby-boomer-equivalents have evidence? No.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/27 22:46:17
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
You're right, it IS obvious that they're easy to work with and customize.
I’m not sure what you are on about, I was commenting on the fact one is able to comment on the aethsetics of models they don’t own.
Not really. For example, FW does terrible paint jobs and their models look bad until they're seen in person and actually worked with. The best direct example was that lizard monster thing they previewed with the absolutely ghastly paintjob, and then we kinda got a better idea when it wasn't painted.
No really, I’m not sure what you are on about. As I’ve already explained one has ample chances to see models they don’t own in the flesh. I don’t need to own a model before I can say if I like it or not, that would be absurd.
Also, quality of FW painting debates aside, they always show the bare resin models unpainted as well, so your example is terrible.
You're right, it IS obvious that they're easy to work with and customize.
I’m not sure what you are on about, I was commenting on the fact one is able to comment on the aethsetics of models they don’t own.
Not really. For example, FW does terrible paint jobs and their models look bad until they're seen in person and actually worked with. The best direct example was that lizard monster thing they previewed with the absolutely ghastly paintjob, and then we kinda got a better idea when it wasn't painted.
No really, I’m not sure what you are on about. As I’ve already explained one has ample chances to see models they don’t own in the flesh. I don’t need to own a model before I can say if I like it or not, that would be absurd.
Also, quality of FW painting debates aside, they always show the bare resin models unpainted as well, so your example is terrible.
Boy did you miss some of those FW previews.
Also it did take some people seeing them in person to confirm the models weren't bad.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Insectum7 wrote: I haven't. Because I don't like it. I've played against them a number of times though, and seen them in person. I like their commander model, but mostly because I want to use it as an Inquisitor Lord in 2nd. Ed.
I'd rather (and have) buy more Tacticals.
Which honestly demonstrates your inability to let go of the past. They're a dated kit and dated model. Even look at something as simple as the newer Rubric Marines.
This is utter nonsense, they are a relatively recent kit from the modern era with very sharp surface detailing. The Tactical kit only came out 3 years before the rubric marines kit you are talking about, in 2013. Hardly dated by any stretch of the imagination.
Insectum7 wrote: I haven't. Because I don't like it. I've played against them a number of times though, and seen them in person. I like their commander model, but mostly because I want to use it as an Inquisitor Lord in 2nd. Ed.
I'd rather (and have) buy more Tacticals.
Which honestly demonstrates your inability to let go of the past. They're a dated kit and dated model. Even look at something as simple as the newer Rubric Marines.
My army is drawn from 25 years of consistent styling and scaling, and I don't require that they scale "accurately" to anything other than themselves. They are playable for the time being, they look great, the model line offers anything I could possibly want and their army list allows me to field any battlefield role I could need. If GW does retire classics from the game, I'd sooner collect a different faction, and already have. I've got a 5000+ point collection of Tyranids ready to go. I'd get serious about my Eldar collection than start a new marine army, or add models to it that look out of place.
I'll be happy to slaughter Primaris with filthy xenos at my FLGS, and keep my marines for old school games with friends, if that's what it comes to.
Same here, I’m not going to move to Primaris if classics ever went away, I also collect other factions I would focus on more. I have Custodes for the more elite than marines requirement, there is no need for Primaris
And the kit is amazingly bad for being only 2013. Look at the Deathwatch and Rubric Marine kits. Even the Grey Knight one is just above it, and not by much based on the scaling.
I think you must be looking at the 1998 version of tactical marines or something, the one with only 3 leg poses . The 2013 tactical kit is superb. The detail is very crisp and sharp, the same quality as the deathwatch and rubric kits. They are only a few years apart in release terms, all 3 kits were digital and cast in laser cut molds. I think you prefer the deathwatch and rubrics because they are a couple of mm taller on average? That doesn’t make the tactical kit ‘amazingly bad’. That is just hyperbolic nonsense.
For what it's wort (which is $0 USD), I'm middle-aged but I love the Primaris stuff. I haven't played much 40k but have followed it for decades and I think the Primaris Marines make the old marines look silly in comparison. Honestly, it was one of the main reasons I started building a 40k army again and I'll be glad when Old Marines are gone. Primaris look how Marines were always supposed to look....cool. Not cartoon caricatures. I may be in the minority but I'm so glad GW did this.
Insectum7 wrote: I haven't. Because I don't like it. I've played against them a number of times though, and seen them in person. I like their commander model, but mostly because I want to use it as an Inquisitor Lord in 2nd. Ed.
I'd rather (and have) buy more Tacticals.
Which honestly demonstrates your inability to let go of the past. They're a dated kit and dated model. Even look at something as simple as the newer Rubric Marines.
This is utter nonsense, they are a relatively recent kit from the modern era with very sharp surface detailing. The Tactical kit only came out 3 years before the rubric marines kit you are talking about, in 2013. Hardly dated by any stretch of the imagination.
Insectum7 wrote: I haven't. Because I don't like it. I've played against them a number of times though, and seen them in person. I like their commander model, but mostly because I want to use it as an Inquisitor Lord in 2nd. Ed.
I'd rather (and have) buy more Tacticals.
Which honestly demonstrates your inability to let go of the past. They're a dated kit and dated model. Even look at something as simple as the newer Rubric Marines.
My army is drawn from 25 years of consistent styling and scaling, and I don't require that they scale "accurately" to anything other than themselves. They are playable for the time being, they look great, the model line offers anything I could possibly want and their army list allows me to field any battlefield role I could need. If GW does retire classics from the game, I'd sooner collect a different faction, and already have. I've got a 5000+ point collection of Tyranids ready to go. I'd get serious about my Eldar collection than start a new marine army, or add models to it that look out of place.
I'll be happy to slaughter Primaris with filthy xenos at my FLGS, and keep my marines for old school games with friends, if that's what it comes to.
Same here, I’m not going to move to Primaris if classics ever went away, I also collect other factions I would focus on more. I have Custodes for the more elite than marines requirement, there is no need for Primaris
And the kit is amazingly bad for being only 2013. Look at the Deathwatch and Rubric Marine kits. Even the Grey Knight one is just above it, and not by much based on the scaling.
As well I'll add loving the old marines isn't nostalgia, they are still around, I as one person see nothing wrong with them. If someone finds them awful, that is on them entirely and not on me or any other supporter of the line. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and no one can say what is more or less ugly to anyone they can only say their opinions.
Trying to devalue someones opinion by nostalgia is simply a weak statement. I can like the way a model looks..and..AND also feel good about it from history with them. You can do both, even if someone can't understand why anyone would like them.
Hell, I think Necrons as models are awful dumb, ugly trash, yet I can get why people like them aside from just being a bit daft, it's all about the person.
And anyone who thinks that the new players will not overwhelmingly prefer the look of the primaris is just deluding themselves in a colossal degree.
Do you have any form of evidence to back up your claim? It’s a pretty bold assertion. I’m talking verifiable data here, like a survey of thousands of new players. Things along the lines of ‘but muh proportions’ and my opinion is fact cause reasons don’t count.
Do the "Primaris are failing" baby-boomer-equivalents have evidence? No.
Please do not quote entire walls, at the very least use spoiler tags.
I'm sorry which side revived a months old antagonistic thread to start an argument about this same old same old again.
I'm not seeing anyone saying primaris are failing in the new posts that's something in your head you obviously feel defensive about.
IMHO both old and new marines are here to stay, old marines don't cost GW money to make, each kit sold is pure profit.
Primaris cost GW money but the money they cost was spent years ago.
They will release the models and make as much money as they can from both ranges, aslong as players have money GW will sell you plastic crack.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/08/28 06:02:33
That's all very cool, glad you enjoy it. I just can't get why people are so hell bent on seeing models some do love tossed away so. Does the fact the old marines yet remain somehow bring you down ? I find that so funny a concept. That someone can't be happy with what they have, until what came before is gone.
Though it's also a foolish concept as by the time the old guard all fade away, will most of us even still be around or playing this game ? People act like even if GW completely toss the old kits they'll never be seen again, they will be around for decades on decades yet especially with how slow the primaris release is going in terms of filling in all the blanks.
I do shed a small tear for all those who can't stand the visual of the old marines though, must be a tough thing to see them still.
puzzledust wrote: For what it's wort (which is $0 USD), I'm middle-aged but I love the Primaris stuff. I haven't played much 40k but have followed it for decades and I think the Primaris Marines make the old marines look silly in comparison. Honestly, it was one of the main reasons I started building a 40k army again and I'll be glad when Old Marines are gone. Primaris look how Marines were always supposed to look....cool. Not cartoon caricatures. I may be in the minority but I'm so glad GW did this.
You are not in the minority. This is how anyone who aren't looking the marines through nostalgia goggles so thinck that they could be used to measure unit coherency feel. The primaris design is clearly superior.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AngryAngel80 wrote: That's all very cool, glad you enjoy it. I just can't get why people are so hell bent on seeing models some do love tossed away so. Does the fact the old marines yet remain somehow bring you down ? I find that so funny a concept. That someone can't be happy with what they have, until what came before is gone.
I do not particularly want them gone, but they will be. And I just feel that Dakka denial brigade fosters a bit unhealthy attitude.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/27 23:16:53
puzzledust wrote: For what it's wort (which is $0 USD), I'm middle-aged but I love the Primaris stuff. I haven't played much 40k but have followed it for decades and I think the Primaris Marines make the old marines look silly in comparison. Honestly, it was one of the main reasons I started building a 40k army again and I'll be glad when Old Marines are gone. Primaris look how Marines were always supposed to look....cool. Not cartoon caricatures. I may be in the minority but I'm so glad GW did this.
You are not in the minority. This is how anyone who aren't looking the marines through nostalgia goggles so thinck that they could be used to measure unit coherency feel. The primaris design is clearly superior.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AngryAngel80 wrote: That's all very cool, glad you enjoy it. I just can't get why people are so hell bent on seeing models some do love tossed away so. Does the fact the old marines yet remain somehow bring you down ? I find that so funny a concept. That someone can't be happy with what they have, until what came before is gone.
I do not particularly want them gone, but they will be. And I just feel that Dakka denial brigade fosters a bit unhealthy attitude.
Except why is a primaris marine still way too short compaired to guardsmen?
Also why is your tac marine on a 25 mm base it should be on a 32mm.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/27 23:21:51
By the time all the old marines are gone I really doubt anyone fighting this fight is going to give two craps and may not even be playing the game still if the game exists at all at that time.
You can like the old stuff without nostalgia but please do keep expressing your casual disdain for anyone who likes the old marines it really shows more about you than it does anyone else.
Keep loving the primaris too, they are both good looking lines.
Hi all, i am a long time lurker here (well, like a year or two) and this is my first post. I am a space wolf player, have a large collection, and have been in the hobby now for around 2 years.
I have seen variations on this topic since 8th landed and will give my views for what they are worth.
I don't like primaris and won't buy them, ever. If oldmarines are squatted i will just leave the hobby, there's plenty of competing options for my time and money.
I dislike the design aesthetic, i disagree with the notion that there is any such thing as objectively better aesthetics, and even if it were conceded that intercessors look superior to tacticals, i've noted with interest that this is very often as far as primaris supporters are prepared to take the comparision - why not show a terminator next to an aggressor?
Or an assault marine next to an inceptor? Or an old dreadnought next to a redemptor?
My opinion, for what it's worth, of the design of the primaris and why i won't spend money on them is how many of the models are fat. And that's not hyperbole or even a judgement call, some people might like fat. I don't, the gravis captain is literally rocking a beer gut and looks fat. The aggressors are chunky and look overweight and top heavy.
The redemptor has skinny legs and is fat and weirdly proportioned. I just don't like this aesthetic direction.
I've kept my views on the lore out of it for the sake of brevity, but those are my views and i hope they are taken and considered in the open minded spirit they were given
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/27 23:42:56
Hecube wrote: Hi all, i am a long time lurker here (well, like a year or two) and this is my first post. I am a space wolf player, have a large collection, and have been in the hobby now for around 2 years.
I have seen variations on this topic since 8th landed and will give my views for what they are worth.
I don't like primaris and won't buy them, ever. If oldmarines are squatted i will just leave the hobby, there's plenty of competing options for my time and money.
I dislike the design aesthetic, i disagree with the notion that there is any such thing as objectively better aesthetics, and even if it were conceded that intercessors look superior to tacticals, i've noted with interest that this is very often as far as primaris supporters are prepared to take the comparision - why not show a terminator next to an aggressor?
Or an assault marine next to an inceptor? Or an old dreadnought next to a redemptor?
My opinion, for what it's worth, of the design of the primaris and why i won't spend money on them is how many of the models are fat. And that's not hyperbole or even a judgement call, some people might like fat. I don't, the gravis captain is literally rocking a beer gut and looks fat. The aggressors are chunky and look overweight and top heavy.
The redemptor has skinny legs and is fat and weirdly proportioned. I just don't like this aesthetic direction.
I've kept my views on the lore out of it for the sake of brevity, but those are my views and i hope they are taken and considered in the open minded spirit they were given
Welcome to the party, but get ready for the incoming fire. Keep your head down and it'll pass, welcome to the forum.
Hecube wrote: Hi all, i am a long time lurker here (well, like a year or two) and this is my first post. I am a space wolf player, have a large collection, and have been in the hobby now for around 2 years.
I have seen variations on this topic since 8th landed and will give my views for what they are worth.
I don't like primaris and won't buy them, ever. If oldmarines are squatted i will just leave the hobby, there's plenty of competing options for my time and money.
I dislike the design aesthetic, i disagree with the notion that there is any such thing as objectively better aesthetics, and even if it were conceded that intercessors look superior to tacticals, i've noted with interest that this is very often as far as primaris supporters are prepared to take the comparision - why not show a terminator next to an aggressor?
Or an assault marine next to an inceptor? Or an old dreadnought next to a redemptor?
My opinion, for what it's worth, of the design of the primaris and why i won't spend money on them is how many of the models are fat. And that's not hyperbole or even a judgement call, some people might like fat. I don't, the gravis captain is literally rocking a beer gut and looks fat. The aggressors are chunky and look overweight and top heavy.
The redemptor has skinny legs and is fat and weirdly proportioned. I just don't like this aesthetic direction.
I've kept my views on the lore out of it for the sake of brevity, but those are my views and i hope they are taken and considered in the open minded spirit they were given
I think you actually make some fair points. The main thing which makes the Primaris better looking is the improved proportions, and that doesn't apply to vehicles. It also gets less impactful when we get to heavier armour types which obscure the body shape. Though I still think that Gravis has clearly better proportions than Terminators, They're quite different designs though, so in many ways they're not directly comparable. The plastic Custodes Terminators have really nice proportions, I really wish that we will eventually get Primaris Terminators with similar proportions, incorporating some classic Marine Terminator elements. But yeah, whilst I would definitely argue that the Primaris basic infantry is by any reasonably standard a superior design to comparable old Marine units, I would not make that same argument about vehicles. I like the Repulsor, but I will not claim it is any way objectively better design than a Land Raider, merely different.
Yea @ Crimson you're right they're not directly comparable aesthetically, but i guess i meant from a unit role kind of perspective they are clearly (i think) designed to be the terminator equivalent.
Yea the vehicles thing is just being different for the sake of being different, and i think this is where GW are falling into error and having problems.
The starkest example of that is the supressor unit - what is it meant to be? It's just a jumble of different competing roles and aesthetic choices that seem off to me. So i kind of just wish they would go back and just say - here's the new tactical model, upsized. We're doing new terminators etc and upsizing the whole range but not messing around with the general aesthetic or basically creating whole new lines to replace what we already have.
I feel like they have made bad choices, poorly thought through, and now we are here with a discussion that is pretty much insoluble at this point. People just like different things.
I kind of feel going forward the only option for GW is to basically let the space marine faction split into two
I think GW made their design choices well, for them. They did this exactly so they could double dip. If it was just a rescale, people would still use the old models. They wanted to give people a reason to buy all new whole armies with new units.
It was a choice made to drain money, not one to please the fans or even give a clear direction. That is why in some aspects it fails to garner the kind of universal praise and love they perhaps wish it did. While also being utterly vague on their full intentions and leading to all the debates and arguing.
Which breaks down into arguing everything about them, including which looks better.
people I think generally display the interceptor next to a tac marine as they're the real obvious equivilants. agressors are not terminators, inceptors are not assault marines. Intercessors ARE "generic space marine troop with a bolter"
as for the dreadnought comparison, honestly thats a pretty poor comparison for the old stuff, people like to mock the p[ot belly, but by and large the redemptor dreadnought has a much better design.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
I generally like that they're not just redoing the old units but are trying new things instead, but even I have to agree that it hasn't quite worked every time. Suppressors in particular are a pretty damn bizarre design. Granted, they improve a lot with some reposing. Still, I would have probably preferred just walking autocannon guys.
puzzledust wrote: For what it's wort (which is $0 USD), I'm middle-aged but I love the Primaris stuff. I haven't played much 40k but have followed it for decades and I think the Primaris Marines make the old marines look silly in comparison. Honestly, it was one of the main reasons I started building a 40k army again and I'll be glad when Old Marines are gone. Primaris look how Marines were always supposed to look....cool. Not cartoon caricatures. I may be in the minority but I'm so glad GW did this.
You are not in the minority. This is how anyone who aren't looking the marines through nostalgia goggles so thinck that they could be used to measure unit coherency feel. The primaris design is clearly superior.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AngryAngel80 wrote: That's all very cool, glad you enjoy it. I just can't get why people are so hell bent on seeing models some do love tossed away so. Does the fact the old marines yet remain somehow bring you down ? I find that so funny a concept. That someone can't be happy with what they have, until what came before is gone.
I do not particularly want them gone, but they will be. And I just feel that Dakka denial brigade fosters a bit unhealthy attitude.
Except why is a primaris marine still way too short compaired to guardsmen?
Also why is your tac marine on a 25 mm base it should be on a 32mm.
Untrue their height in comparison to a scion is correct. If the scion is 6' the marine is roughly 7'4"
Crimson wrote: I generally like that they're not just redoing the old units but are trying new things instead, but even I have to agree that it hasn't quite worked every time. Suppressors in particular are a pretty damn bizarre design. Granted, they improve a lot with some reposing. Still, I would have probably preferred just walking autocannon guys.
maybe we'll see that type in the future, I actually think it's pretty neat that they're thinking a bit outside the box with some primaris stuff, supressors being the most obvious example. I can't think of any other army that has a Jump heavy weapons team
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
Maybe, but as said I think its by design there is really only one point for direct comparison, as they don't want to make it easy for you to simply use old models as new units. It's the double dip and was done with a clear point in mind. At the end of the day, they would love nothing more than all marine players to buy whole new armies at the new prices.
Though I want to believe they just want to sell both side by side which would be the great middle ground for most concerned.
Crimson wrote: I generally like that they're not just redoing the old units but are trying new things instead, but even I have to agree that it hasn't quite worked every time. Suppressors in particular are a pretty damn bizarre design. Granted, they improve a lot with some reposing. Still, I would have probably preferred just walking autocannon guys.
maybe we'll see that type in the future, I actually think it's pretty neat that they're thinking a bit outside the box with some primaris stuff, supressors being the most obvious example. I can't think of any other army that has a Jump heavy weapons team
Dark Eldar Scourges would like to say hello.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/08/28 00:46:54
Crimson wrote: I generally like that they're not just redoing the old units but are trying new things instead, but even I have to agree that it hasn't quite worked every time. Suppressors in particular are a pretty damn bizarre design. Granted, they improve a lot with some reposing. Still, I would have probably preferred just walking autocannon guys.
maybe we'll see that type in the future, I actually think it's pretty neat that they're thinking a bit outside the box with some primaris stuff, supressors being the most obvious example. I can't think of any other army that has a Jump heavy weapons team
I feel like the models would've been more successful if the Autocannon on them weren't so over the top.
Oh and if they could be taken in groups outside three I'd appreciate that.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
I kinda feel like there's two conversations going on and they're both missing each other, hence some of the aggro that happens. I'm not at all aggro so i hope my perspective is helpful and productive.
A lot of the pro primaris arguments i see are to do with their proportions and how their design is just 'better'. Now, i hope i'm not making assumptions about peoples backgrounds (although i kind of am) but i sort of feel this position implies a technical interest in the design, in the sense that this is a critical assessment of the primaris range. As in, they are better designed models from a technical standpoint.
Which is fair enough, but here's my perspective though - I don't care about their proportions. At all. Has no interest to me and to be honest i sometimes don't even really know what you guys are referring to.
I am here not from a critical standpoint at all, i make no critical assessment from a technical standpoint at all. I'm a consumer, and my judgement on what i like influences what i spend my money on.
To give an example (which will possibly make some peoples heads explode) my favourite model in my SW army and indeed the entire game is my TWC. I have two full packs of them, i run them all the time even though they suck, i don't care.
When i look at them on my shelf, i don't care about their proportions, or how silly they are, or how massively blinged up they are, or how realistic a representation of a power armored space viking riding a giant bionic wolf they are.
I care about them because looking at them gives me pleasure, because to my eyes they are an evocative and thrilling work of art
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/08/28 01:19:30
