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.

 Ishagu wrote:
I can instantly describe an example of old lore more stupid than anything relating to the Primaris.

Yes, the return of Guilliman! That happened before the Primaris were Introduced! Also Perpetuals!

Crimson wrote:You asked why there was no uproar in these other instances, I explained it to you. Of course people not knowing about it, is pretty damn important reason for lack of uproar! Those events also not affecting the setting of the game is another. You ignored both of these obvious points.

If Primarchs coming back were such a big deal, then how come people don't know? I mean, if a Primarch coming back is such a big earth-shattering break for the setting, then not knowing about them should be practically impossible.

Yep. You're just taking your disingenuousness to absurd level. No one forces you to set your 40K games in any era of the setting, or even in that setting at all. You can set your 40K games in Star Wars universe or Equestria! Doesn't change the bloody and blatantly obvious fact that as presented the setting of the game is 41st millennium

But it really isn't. It's set in the 40k universe, but not necessarily M41.

which used to be an era of decline where Primarchs were barely remembered legends.

It was also an era of things like Sherlock Obi-Wan Closseau. I don't think the setting's changed from the same feeling it had, that's all.

And that s*** just doesn't work with a demigod, it makes mockery of it. It is like making Ollanius Pius a fething perpetual!

I don't see how it doesn't work with a demigod. I think it's working just fine.

Guess our opinions on this will have to differ.

Personally, I don't believe that superpowered characters are inherently uninteresting. They *can* be, but that's not true in my perception of Guilliman.

Guilliman is the President-Pope Superman, lamenting about how difficult his lot in life is. It is hard to get lamer than that.

If you genuinely can't see what his character's complaining about or how blatantly exaggerated your point is, I don't really think it's worth debating this.

 Crimson wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
I can instantly describe an example of old lore more stupid than anything relating to the Primaris.

Yes, the return of Guilliman! That happened before the Primaris were Introduced! Also Perpetuals!

Nah. Descent of Angels and the Blood Angels trilogy are all pretty bad older lore.

I think saying that the Primaris resemble the Tau more than the old marines do is technically true. The Primaris have slightly more high tech look, they have grav tanks and that one gun looks a bit like Tau gun.

I just don't think this is significant at all. The Primaris still resemble the old marines overwhelmingly more than they resemble anything else, and you can find trivial parallels between pretty much any two 40K factions if you start to look for them.

 Crimson wrote:
I think saying that the Primaris resemble the Tau more than the old marines do is technically true. The Primaris have slightly more high tech look, they have grav tanks and that one gun looks a bit like Tau gun.

I just don't think this is significant at all. The Primaris still resemble the old marines overwhelmingly more than they resemble anything else, and you can find trivial parallels between pretty much any two 40K factions if you start to look for them.

Agreed. The similarities between the two are tenuous, in the general scheme of things in 40k.

I'd argue that writing a demi-god struggling with keeping the Imperium makes whole thing feel like the problem is so far out of hand that the Primarch made for running the whole mess is buckling under it all.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If Primarchs coming back were such a big deal, then how come people don't know? I mean, if a Primarch coming back is such a big earth-shattering break for the setting, then not knowing about them should be practically impossible.

But they really did not come back. Vulcan did not come back to the current setting, he came briefly back in distant past and then vanished again. And Corax is being a shadow ghost in the Eye of Terror in unspecified era, or something bizarre like that, so he really hasn't come back either. And of course, as I said earlier, and you later essentially conceded that I was correct by admitting that most 40K players do not read BL books: happened in obscure BL books.

But it really isn't. It's set in the 40k universe, but not necessarily M41.

This is simply not true. Like at all. If you cannot be honest and distort the facts in such a blatant way then there is no point in discussing things with you.

It was also an era of things like Sherlock Obi-Wan Closseau. I don't think the setting's changed from the same feeling it had, that's all.

And if someone would argue that the themes and the tone of the setting didn't drastically change between RT and the setting revamp of the second edition they would be obviously and blatantly wrong as well.

 Crimson wrote:
I think saying that the Primaris resemble the Tau more than the old marines do is technically true. The Primaris have slightly more high tech look, they have grav tanks and that one gun looks a bit like Tau gun.

I just don't think this is significant at all. The Primaris still resemble the old marines overwhelmingly more than they resemble anything else, and you can find trivial parallels between pretty much any two 40K factions if you start to look for them.

Well, at least there's some common ground there that we can agree upon, even if we disagree about the importance of it. That's something.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Imo that tri-cowling on the front is not insignificant. It's got the heat coils which make it clearly Imperial Plasma, sure, but the front end of a gun is a pretty important element of gun design. You seem to be downplaying that.

Im not saying it looks like a Tau gun, but it's one of many elements among Primaris models that slide towards 'sleek tech'.

You're right, I did unintentionally downplay it because it's so forgettable that I had to go look at the model again just to remember it.

Huh. Guess it does have one element that is similar. I don't think it really makes it look like a Tau gun but yeah, I was wrong. There is a single Tau like element (though it's less boxy fins and more round lobes).

You know what? I didn't remember that detail either (not that I spend time staring at the Redemptor or anything). When it was pointed out I was genuinely surprised.

. . .

For me the Primaris thing comes close to the "uncanny valley" BrianDavion was talking about. Like they're marines but they're not quite marines, and the points of difference run the gammut from aesthetics to unit design to faction identity and balance. It's a bunch of perhaps not-obvious things that add up to a no-go. Neither one of them on their own would necessarily break the bank, it's all of them at once which get me.


Like the Assault Marine to Interceptor. My brain goes (roughly): Assault Marine - Chainsword + anime-fin = Tau-Marine. And I look closer and see, dual weapons, rounder design elements, the unit entry is based on 3s, it still has Space Marine "Tech-Brut" but the guns look oversized (even by 40K standards) and the foot-skii loses the classic foot silhouette. Each one of these things is minor, but the totality gets me. This is also before we get to other attributes of Primaris, like the all-flying-tanks or the stat-increases.

And the totality of that might be minor as well, or otherwise ingnorable, but it's on the heels of unprecedented setting changes, and the threat of potential replacement my army. It's a lot at once.

I keep drawing a parallel to the Transformers cartoon reboot. Where Optimus Prime died along with a bunch of other main characters, and they were reborn in lava-pools or something, presumably in order to sell new Transformers toys. . .And I don't remember any of the new stuff. All I remember is the original stuff. I don't think it's quite the same situation, but that's where my brain goes.

Regardless of which side you're on here, I think it's fascinating from a product perspective.

 Ishagu wrote:
Anyone who dislikes Primaris because of "sloppy writing" is a hypocrite. 40k is not Shakespeare, Austen or Hemingway. It's pulp SciFi.

Bad isn't a binary thing. It's not either bad or not bad it can be bad but not acceptably so or bad but acceptably so. For example Valedor is by no means a literary masterpiece but it's better than the idiocy in War of Secrets.

 Crimson wrote:
I think saying that the Primaris resemble the Tau more than the old marines do is technically true. The Primaris have slightly more high tech look, they have grav tanks and that one gun looks a bit like Tau gun.

I just don't think this is significant at all. The Primaris still resemble the old marines overwhelmingly more than they resemble anything else, and you can find trivial parallels between pretty much any two 40K factions if you start to look for them.

Major reason why I don't like Primaris (other than some of them being really derp looking models) is that they fundamentally change the way Imperium is described. In the old lore, Imperium was an entity in decline which struggled to maintain their position in the galaxy. They still had awesome military power and some really advanced technology, but very little new was being invented any more and much of the old was being gradually lost. In every setback they lost something they could not get back. It was mesmerizing to visualize your Space Marine army as some sort of living relic, yeah, it's very powerful but if this Dreadnought blows up, you're not going to get a replacement...

Indomitus changed all this. Imperium suddenly gets new technology (not just old and rediscovered but totally new), new forces, new weapons. It is simply not same premise anymore and it is not as interesting for me. If I want to play a faction which continuously keeps advancing technologically, I'd play Tau (I no longer do because they were also ruined, but that is another story).

Now if some people prefer the new premise, that's fine, but if you loved the old lore, it is understandable why the new one might not appeal to you.

 Crimson wrote:
I think saying that the Primaris resemble the Tau more than the old marines do is technically true. The Primaris have slightly more high tech look, they have grav tanks and that one gun looks a bit like Tau gun.

I just don't think this is significant at all. The Primaris still resemble the old marines overwhelmingly more than they resemble anything else, and you can find trivial parallels between pretty much any two 40K factions if you start to look for them.

More than anything they remind me of the Mark 14 Space Marines from the Empire of Ultramar as depicted in the Dornian Heresy fan project.

I think at the point we see some one the pro primaris side say there simply hasn't been any valid reason to dislike or they can't even imagine a valid reason to dislike them, can there be any real hope for a reasoned debate ?

It'll just end up as its been a round and round talk where each side places down their reasons, some may be steeped in bias on both sides.

I will add this keeping up the argument of " Well the Primaris haters were mean to us once " isn't ever a justification for doing the same thing back, not even close. Just because someone wronged me, do I have the right to wrong someone else who may have done nothing to me ?

If someone feels because someone just hated on what they love and were rude to them empowers them to be the same, that isn't reasonable or correct.

In this posting I've seen mostly the anti primaris crowd being pretty civil, I've seen none of them tell the other side to shut up or go away. In fact a few of them, myself included are kind of mixed in that we like the models but dislike the roll out and fluff. I even played a game with primaris and old marines side by side yesterday night, pretty wild eh ?

The point is, if one side won't ever accept anything as reasonable reason to dislike them, is it even really a talk being had ?

I would like to believe as well the reasonable members of both sides agree that love it or leave it or overly spiteful stances to each other won't help things at all and should be stopped.

Personally, for me, the only really good part of the primaris lore is the fact they seem to over time more be changing into old marines lore and history. Which isn't so much a primaris improvement to me as a return to what we knew.

Some issues I still dislike, the whole roll out is awful to me, I don't like their glossing over of the scout process to jump right into being marines. Some units feel, meh to me, like the Redemptor dreads fluff, the idea of melting out veteran marines because the machine is just " too strong " feels really dumb to me for instance.

Probably once they've had time to make primaris history the same as marines, I suppose that'll settle down then so in a way time may settle it out. I really doubt however the taste of their roll out will ever leave people who played through it.

Let's just be civil to each other while we stand on our sides of the line. No reason why we have to be hostile about. We can keep our likes and dislikes and maybe we can even all stay in the hobby, even if we hate primaris.

In this posting I've seen mostly the anti primaris crowd being pretty civil, I've seen none of them tell the other side to shut up or go away

Few pages back.. Since It's the one I remember most vividly.

Why do you think I have him on ignore? Stop quoting this clown so I don’t have to see his drivel and follow suit and let him scream into the void at no one.

Once again, this is the sort of thing I've noticed. People trying to paint their side as reasonable while trying to paint the rest as entirely unreasonable... It's certainly not helping in the least, because this discussion is certainly going on across the entire forum from News to General discussion. It's several discussions going on at once but it's all about the same topic, so it tends to paint together after a while at least for me.

I don't like their glossing over of the scout process to jump right into being marines

good thing they didn't o that then

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

In this posting I've seen mostly the anti primaris crowd being pretty civil, I've seen none of them tell the other side to shut up or go away

Few pages back.. Since It's the one I remember most vividly.

Why do you think I have him on ignore? Stop quoting this clown so I don’t have to see his drivel and follow suit and let him scream into the void at no one.

Once again, this is the sort of thing I've noticed. People trying to paint their side as reasonable while trying to paint the rest as entirely unreasonable... It's certainly not helping in the least, because this discussion is certainly going on across the entire forum from News to General discussion. It's several discussions going on at once but it's all about the same topic, so it tends to paint together after a while at least for me.

That guy he's commenting on has been called out by at least one of the pro primaris crowd for being the most vocal and loudly rude of that camp with the love it or leave it mentality trying to bludgeon love of primaris into all. I'm not sure if defending him is the hill you want to fight on. He's proven to be quite vehement in his love of primaris and incapable of doing so without attacking anyone who hates them as factually wrong while he's of course the truth. I haven't ignored him, nor will I but to say he hasn't earned some hostility with his own is silly, the rest of us are pretty cordial with each other even if we don't see eye to eye.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:

I don't like their glossing over of the scout process to jump right into being marines

good thing they didn't o that then

I guess, but for the fact they do, one paragraph of scout training does not a deep look make. Of this I did have to go through and I still think it glosses over it. Of which you can say well we don't need it as we have all the old history of scouts but that doesn't hold water if primaris will one day by the only way. I like that history and that stage in marine development so having no model for it, when primaris take over will suck, and brushing that history under the rug with a throwaway paragraph of one operation or two isn't really a deep analysis or look which I dislike. Sorry, I like my scouts and don't think that stage is just a paragraph of importance in the great scheme of things.

BrianDavion wrote:

a picture that only proved how fething rediculas the argument was. seriously the argument was so weak iI didn't figure it needed to be rebutted beyond ".. beyond being kiiiinda the same shape if you squint they're not at all alike"

FYI - I refrain from answering you because you don't even try. You are reaching Ishagu levels.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

AngryAngel80 wrote:

Personally, for me, the only really good part of the primaris lore is the fact they seem to over time more be changing into old marines lore and history. Which isn't so much a primaris improvement to me as a return to what we knew.

Probably a sign of the things that will come (or re-ret-con).

I mean it makes sense right ? Wait for the dust to settle and move primaris in and just make their creation about the exact same as old marines and eventually hope people forget the freezer marines and hand wavium of all the new super tech and once they become the standard most new players remember. Like magic their fluff is perfect !

Perfect, because it'll be near the exact same as old marines they will have just quantum leaped into the place of the old marines baring squad set ups. I think they are banking on old players rotating out and influx of new blood where they can then act as if the roll out never happened or down play it.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I mean it makes sense right ? Wait for the dust to settle and move primaris in and just make their creation about the exact same as old marines and eventually hope people forget the freezer marines and hand wavium of all the new super tech and once they become the standard most new players remember. Like magic their fluff is perfect !

Perfect, because it'll be near the exact same as old marines they will have just quantum leaped into the place of the old marines baring squad set ups. I think they are banking on old players rotating out and influx of new blood where they can then act as if the roll out never happened or down play it.

I am 100% convinced you are right but even suggesting such it's considered extra-heresy with double cheese by some.

Well, you know what they say, a moment of laxity spawns a lifetime of heresy.

I see a claim of civility but how civil is it to keep making these threads week aftet while trotting out the same claims over and over despite many of them being refuted?

I can get not liking something, but the 40k community online has this bad habit of going down these negative spirals about how evil/incompet GW is with no evidence and acting like the company needs to please 100% of the fan base 100% of the time no matter what.

Primaris have been that spiral lately and honestly people should stop acting like it's a shock that they don't like people creating false claims about their preferred faction just to "prove" how bad it is.

No one (besides Ishagu) is trying to make people like Primaris, but we are very much trying to dispel the hyperbole and misinformation bandied about like it's fact.

Claims like they aren't like the old Marines, they look like Tau, the old lore was never impacted by the High Lords, ECT, ECT. People have been listening to this for the last two years and most of us are tired of it. And let's not even get into any of the "soul" claims.

Now I do have my fair share of lore complaints since we're opening that can of worms:
+Cawl needed more build up in the lore before Gathering Storm. This was an event years in the making, there was time to drop hints about him.
+Yvrainne is a nice idea but she's too powerful as a character. She needs a narrative nerf.
+Primaris need to be tied to the cursed foundings yo give it a sense that the development had some rough patches
+ we need answers about how exactly Cawl managed to make it work (more brain stealing too)
+Guilliman's return should have been tied to the faith of the pilgrims thinking he's healing as it'd add more he has to deal with involving the Ecclesiarchy
+we need more details about the way the Primaris work (hell, learning the skids on the Inceptors are shock absorbers that allow them to hit the ground harder and faster and get back into the air just as fast improved how I view the model)

I can probably think of more but at the end of the day the lore has some issues, and I freely admit it. There have been steps to improve on the flaws, but we have a ways to go before it really fills out like the old lore has.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I mean it makes sense right ? Wait for the dust to settle and move primaris in and just make their creation about the exact same as old marines and eventually hope people forget the freezer marines and hand wavium of all the new super tech and once they become the standard most new players remember. Like magic their fluff is perfect !

Perfect, because it'll be near the exact same as old marines they will have just quantum leaped into the place of the old marines baring squad set ups. I think they are banking on old players rotating out and influx of new blood where they can then act as if the roll out never happened or down play it.

Sure, this is most likely their plan. And, eh, why not? Sounds fine to me. Faster we forget this awkward phase in the fluff the better, and we get excellent looking true scale marines in the process, so what's the problem?

Too bad we can't get rid of Guilliman as easily.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
people should stop acting like it's a shock that they don't like people creating false claims about their preferred faction just to "prove" how bad it is.

Because many of the complaints are not false.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
people should stop acting like it's a shock that they don't like people creating false claims about their preferred faction just to "prove" how bad it is.

Because many of the complaints are not false.

Let me lay a few out from threads I've just seen recently:
+Primaris aren't Marines because they can't take special or heavy weapons (not true)
+Vanguard don't like Marines (they look a lot like Scouts who are Marines)
+the High Lords were never important to the plot until Guilliman showed up(Vandire is the reason the Sisters of Battle and Ordo Hereticus exist, they were wiped out in the War of the Beast and then the replacement council founded the Deathwatch as a result of the conflict, and that's just naming two examples I can think of off the top of my head)
+Primaris look like Tau, this is usually followed up with talk about grav tanks, anime fins and the like. If anything they're more like the 30k Legions in how they have more advanced equipment, strategies and tools than those they fight. (Plus if you want to point at a Xenos faction they share things in common with Eldar are a better fit because at least they can weather melee somewhat decently unlike Tau)
+Cawl is a Mary Sue because he could improve the Emperor's Work (not how Mary Sues work, and considering it took 10k years and all he really did was finish what the Emperor set aside to try and rush through the Great Crusade it doesn't make him a Mary Sue. He is, however, poorly fleshed out and they should have worked him into the game at least during 7th before Gathering Storm happened).

Look, there are plenty of reasons to not like Primaris, but this is just some of the recent "proof" of what's wrong with them I've seen. And none of it is true.

Maybe Guilliman adds too much hope to the Imperium for your taste, or you don't like the look of stuff like the Vanguard (waiting for a Gravis update myself before I jump into Imperial Fists wholesale because that's more of what fits the chapter in my mind), or the load out options feel too restrictive. All valid complaints. As are complaints about poorly implemented lore (I complained about some myself and I -like- Primaris), and even the feeling that GW is taking away something you have a lot of emotional investment in. I get that too.

But claims that they aren't like Marines visually, or that the old lore didn't have Marines being given new tech (Razorbacks, Stalker tanks, Centurions, MkVIII Errant armour, Hellfire shells, Thunderfire Cannons, Landraider Redeemers and Crusaders, ECT, ECT) when they regulalrly were given new kit to try and bring more pain on the foe despite not being able to bring more troops to a given conflict, or any of the recent claims I posted above and it all sounds like there are a lot of claims being made to justify why we don't like things.

It's almost like it's not good enough to just say "I don't like X" anymore but we have to keep flogging a dead horse over why X is bad and ruining everything.

I don't particularly like Tau, parts of MkIV armour (the helmet is neat but I hate the jump packs), and beakie helmets never really gelled for me. But none of those things are "ruining" 40k, and I don't really feel a need to shout down people for liking Tau, Mkiv jump packs or beakie helms.

And honestly, if after all this time you still need tomake up claims to justify why you don't like something it might be time to take a step back and realize that you don't have to justify those feelings. They don't need reasons constantly being posted in thread after thread dragging in controversy with people who don't appreciate the misrepresentation of the things they like.

I mean if you constantly need to justify your feelings like that arenyou trying to convince others that your feelings are right, or are you trying to convince yourself? Because it feels more like the latter to see the same people posting about the same topic again and again in thread after thread.

And honestly, if after all this time you still need tomake up claims to justify why you don't like something it might be time to take a step back and realize that you don't have to justify those feelings. They don't need reasons constantly being posted in thread after thread dragging in controversy with people who don't appreciate the misrepresentation of the things they like.

I mean if you constantly need to justify your feelings like that arenyou trying to convince others that your feelings are right, or are you trying to convince yourself? Because it feels more like the latter to see the same people posting about the same topic again and again in thread after thread.

But isn't this a weak argument. Because the same kind of people are saying that primaris are great, over and over again. And with your logic we could as well say that they are also trying to convince themselfs that the primaris are good, or they are paid for by GW to write that over and over again.

Saying that primaris don't destory w40k seems bit strange too. The lore does not include a spot for old marines or old lore, other then slowly dieing out. The esthetics are different. The implementation is also suddeny, I think. Now if for 20-30 years there would be a lot of material, about marine upgrade project, Cawl was a known character etc the Reception of final implementation of primaris could have been different. And no retro activly writing down that this was the plan all along, and Cawl is big and important and right hand mechanicus man of the Emperor does not help.

And then there is the outside of the game stuff. Like the primaris coming to existance, because of market saturation with normal marines and some bizzar trade mark law stuff, I don't fully get. Coupled with GW clearly wanting to do a reset, but being kind of a worried how bad the Warhammer AoS reset being recived.
Now this of course doesn't mean that all primaris models are bad and ugly. That it should be forbiden to like the new models. That GW is evil Procter&Gamble tier of company, that wants everyone to die. Of course not. But the primaris changes to the lore, mean that if someone liked the pre primaris lore, and do not like for objective reasons the new lore, w40k more or less ended for them. Sure they maybe new models, that are primaris, sure there is new lore, which they will not like. But their w40k is dead. Same way if someone like Poland in the 30s, he can't go back to it, because that world is gone and never going back.

Most of the people defending Primaris aren't saying they're great, they're saying the claims presented aren't true. "Great" is a very subjective thing and most people don't try and push things as "Great".

I don't agree as much about the ecstatics claim (and adding pouches and grenades isn't a break in design simce they've been an option in past kits as well). The core features of Marine design are still there, but some of the details around those features have seen some tweaks (like the flaired knees of Intercessors, or giving th Vanguard models bucket boots to mimic the regular boots of the scout models). Heck, now 10th company arguably matches the marine esthetic more so than before since even the trainees filling scout type roles are wearing power armou which visually ties them more into the army's core design than the carapace armour did.

The setting isn't being destroyed. It's still a miserable place to live, war exists on more fronts than ever before and the in fighting in the Imperium os so rampant that a Primarch can't even get a firm grasp on the mess. In a lot of ways they've actuslly made the setting darker by showing that it's so bad that not even a demi-god can straighten things out.

The implementation was very sudden, and the studio missed a lot of good lore they could have tied this all into (see my complaints earlier about the lore), but often the way it's complained about fails to point out the real issues the lore has in favor of making claims that are very easilly researched (impact of the High Lorda in the setting for example, od how Marines never got new wargear despite a large part of M40 was them constantly getting new equipment).

I agree the real world implications are pretty dire for the old libe and it's why I don't fault people for being upset because their emotional investment is basically being ignored. But at the same time I don't see anything GW could have realistically done other than a sprt of reboot when the redone kits seem to have meet sales goals and the studio was tunning out of ways to rework the standard Marine design.

I don't fault people for not liking things, but if you need to constantly invent reasons why you can't like something, them I have to wonder who really needs convincing of why you don't like something.

You know, unless you're arguing with Ishagu.

Just because you don't understand the reasons given, does not make them 'invented'. We're back to square one, I guess. You are failing to assimilate the fact that small changes add up to a big change.

There is a marine 'core'. It is not made up, and it has been expressed fairly consistently for decades. You can mess around with it to a degree, but add up too many deviations and you're too far from the 'core'. Stray too far and lose that 'core', and the identity/flavor that goes with it.

How many times are the people who subjectively don't like something going to post that they don't like it?

That's the issue.

This same topic repeats all the time. Nothing new is revealed, no enlightening criticism are outlined beyond some opinions, often incorrect, hyperbolic or misguided.

If this was the first topic about the dislike of Primaris I wouldn't even respond. It's not the first, and the same people keep making the same complaints. It has simply become incessant whining at this point, two full years after the release of Primaris.

If you don't like them that's fine! I don't like everything GW makes or writes. You've said your peace. Don't derail any further discussions in the future, and don't keep repeating yourself. Don't be a whinger, it's as simple as that.

 Ishagu wrote:
How many times are the people who subjectively don't like something going to post that they don't like it?

That's the issue.

This same topic repeats all the time. Nothing new is revealed, no enlightening criticism are outlined beyond some opinions, often incorrect, hyperbolic or misguided.

But, but then people.....might not be aware of my opinion on a matter!

For every bit of good work zion does, here comes captain priamris PR to destroy it.

For what it's worth, Clockwork Zion, I hear what you're saying. I do think however some of the complaints are valid , however saying it'll get better just wait doesn't do anything for right now.

You are correct in time I'm sure most of this will smooth out, and in all honesty I don't see any primaris haters telling people not to love the primaris. They are just saying why they don't love them or they detract from the setting for them.

I think anyone on the fence can easily read through all the offered insights and make up their own mind at this point.

Just for Ishagu though I will say I hope every whinger keeps whinging so hard they blot out my happiness with their rage.

As I doubt any reason ever given would be considered good enough for him to even indulge in the slightest bit of consideration they may have a point.

If, Ishagu is even reading this, for the love of all that is holy, just stop. All you do by telling people to stop so heavy handed as you are is promise they will keep it up, or might even invent reasons to complain about primaris at this point. If you can't handle their dislike, just look away, or cease to comment you won't ever shut someone up telling them they are wrong and should feel bad/be quiet.

The reasons they don't like them are just as important to them as your devotion is to the primaris, your even arguing against people who actually like the models and just hate some elements on their fluff making enemies of people who would meet you half way at least.

Feel free to ignore me with this but keep trying to squash any hate and all you'll find is two more rise to take their place. Hail hydra.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
If, Ishagu is even reading this, for the love of all that is holy, just stop. All you do by telling people to stop so heavy handed as you are is promise they will keep it up, or might even invent reasons to complain about primaris at this point. If you can't handle their dislike, just look away, or cease to comment you won't ever shut someone up telling them they are wrong and should feel bad/be quiet.

The reasons they don't like them are just as important to them as your devotion is to the primaris, your even arguing against people who actually like the models and just hate some elements on their fluff making enemies of people who would meet you half way at least.

Feel free to ignore me with this but keep trying to squash any hate and all you'll find is two more rise to take their place. Hail hydra.

Why would he stop? Dude's just here to gargle as much smug as he possibly can. It would probably have been more effective to just remind him this isn't 4chan.