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.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:


As to the "basic" fix argument, the point of my suggestion was that this issue is easily solved by the power of the wallet. Now, GW is only motivated by the power of the wallet. They are not in this to make sure the good guy wins in the fluff or that the lore is consistent. They aren't in this even to ensure you have a good time. They are only in this to serve the basic function of any company. To make profit.

I was more responding to the person (Galas, I think?) who said they 'should have just added an extra sprue'.

Space marines used to come with 25mm bases, and using those is still allowed as far as I know. Also cadians are about marine height.

 Galas wrote:

nataliereed1984 wrote:
If they "just" added an extra sprue, it would increase the manufacturing costs, box size, warehouse space, and shipping costs, all of which would have to result in a more expensive kit, that they undoubtedly determined would be beyond what the average person is willing to pay for five infantry.

It never ceases to amaze me how often people on the internet assume that people who's entire careers are devoted to understanding highly complicated and intricate issues and carefully balancing different needs should "just" do the suggestion they casually thought up in five minutes, at their computer, with zero experience and training, as though it just never occurred to those guys who's whole jobs are about thinking about this stuff and finding optimal solutions.

*siiiiiigh*

You assume all corporation decissions are always made by the guys that know about and not the guys that have the money to pay and many times ignore the guys that know about the stuff.

By your metric, no corporation would ever made a mistake, or be wrong or right in different ocassions because the "experts" would always reach the correct conclusions. And the reality is that GW is clearly prone to do many mistakes or just to be inconsistent in their politics and decissions.

I know an extra sprue would be more expensive for GW. Thats why they chose to made the kit on the cheap, and thats why is at a technical level a inferior kit compared with other terminator ones.

Do any of the other terminator kits have the level of flexibility of CSM terminators?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Galas wrote:

nataliereed1984 wrote:
If they "just" added an extra sprue, it would increase the manufacturing costs, box size, warehouse space, and shipping costs, all of which would have to result in a more expensive kit, that they undoubtedly determined would be beyond what the average person is willing to pay for five infantry.

It never ceases to amaze me how often people on the internet assume that people who's entire careers are devoted to understanding highly complicated and intricate issues and carefully balancing different needs should "just" do the suggestion they casually thought up in five minutes, at their computer, with zero experience and training, as though it just never occurred to those guys who's whole jobs are about thinking about this stuff and finding optimal solutions.

*siiiiiigh*

You assume all corporation decissions are always made by the guys that know about and not the guys that have the money to pay and many times ignore the guys that know about the stuff.

By your metric, no corporation would ever made a mistake, or be wrong or right in different ocassions because the "experts" would always reach the correct conclusions. And the reality is that GW is clearly prone to do many mistakes or just to be inconsistent in their politics and decissions.

I know an extra sprue would be more expensive for GW. Thats why they chose to made the kit on the cheap, and thats why is at a technical level a inferior kit compared with other terminator ones.

Do any of the other terminator kits have the level of flexibility of CSM terminators?

In an ironic twist, I think the Grey Knight Termy's have a stupid amount of options and their sprues have all the options on them.

 Crimson wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Way to miss the argument. I'm betting you didn't even bother so check how much space your precious trophy racks take up too.

They take the amount of space that is needed for them to be included, and as they're an essential part of Chaos Terminator aesthetic, not having them there is not an option. It is you who is missing the point. And not only of this discussion, but the whole hobby.

They are if you want to upgrade the unit with them. You don't purchase trophy racks as an upgrade.

Indeed. So trophy racks are always needed whereas the extra weapons are only needed if you make a choice to take them. And no one forces you to make such a choice.

They're NOT an essential part of the Chaos Terminator aesthetic, and you could've just said no that you didn't bother to look at the kit because it might hurt your argument. Seriously, look at the new kit and all the space your precious trophy racks take up. Just stop white knighting and admit not getting the actual BASE UNIT makes for a garbage kit.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Way to miss the argument. I'm betting you didn't even bother so check how much space your precious trophy racks take up too.

They take the amount of space that is needed for them to be included, and as they're an essential part of Chaos Terminator aesthetic, not having them there is not an option. It is you who is missing the point. And not only of this discussion, but the whole hobby.

They are if you want to upgrade the unit with them. You don't purchase trophy racks as an upgrade.

Indeed. So trophy racks are always needed whereas the extra weapons are only needed if you make a choice to take them. And no one forces you to make such a choice.

They're NOT an essential part of the Chaos Terminator aesthetic, and you could've just said no that you didn't bother to look at the kit because it might hurt your argument. Seriously, look at the new kit and all the space your precious trophy racks take up. Just stop white knighting and admit not getting the actual BASE UNIT makes for a garbage kit.

Ah, yes, the old "Any opinion that differs from my own automatically counts as White Knight-ing for GW" argument.

 Octopoid wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Way to miss the argument. I'm betting you didn't even bother so check how much space your precious trophy racks take up too.

They take the amount of space that is needed for them to be included, and as they're an essential part of Chaos Terminator aesthetic, not having them there is not an option. It is you who is missing the point. And not only of this discussion, but the whole hobby.

They are if you want to upgrade the unit with them. You don't purchase trophy racks as an upgrade.

Indeed. So trophy racks are always needed whereas the extra weapons are only needed if you make a choice to take them. And no one forces you to make such a choice.

They're NOT an essential part of the Chaos Terminator aesthetic, and you could've just said no that you didn't bother to look at the kit because it might hurt your argument. Seriously, look at the new kit and all the space your precious trophy racks take up. Just stop white knighting and admit not getting the actual BASE UNIT makes for a garbage kit.

Ah, yes, the old "Any opinion that differs from my own automatically counts as White Knight-ing for GW" argument.

It is white knighting. Did you look at the Chaos Terminator kit? Yes or no?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Octopoid wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Way to miss the argument. I'm betting you didn't even bother so check how much space your precious trophy racks take up too.

They take the amount of space that is needed for them to be included, and as they're an essential part of Chaos Terminator aesthetic, not having them there is not an option. It is you who is missing the point. And not only of this discussion, but the whole hobby.

They are if you want to upgrade the unit with them. You don't purchase trophy racks as an upgrade.

Indeed. So trophy racks are always needed whereas the extra weapons are only needed if you make a choice to take them. And no one forces you to make such a choice.

They're NOT an essential part of the Chaos Terminator aesthetic, and you could've just said no that you didn't bother to look at the kit because it might hurt your argument. Seriously, look at the new kit and all the space your precious trophy racks take up. Just stop white knighting and admit not getting the actual BASE UNIT makes for a garbage kit.

Ah, yes, the old "Any opinion that differs from my own automatically counts as White Knight-ing for GW" argument.

It is white knighting. Did you look at the Chaos Terminator kit? Yes or no?

I have looked at it. I own it. I disagree that the options on there make it a good kit. However, that doesn't mean that someone who disagrees with you is White Knight-ing, and repeating that it is doesn't make it true.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:They're NOT an essential part of the Chaos Terminator aesthetic

You're welcome to that opinion.

It doesn't make it correct.

 Tamwulf wrote:


In an ironic twist, I think the Grey Knight Termy's have a stupid amount of options and their sprues have all the options on them.

Not correct. It lacks daemonhammers and warding staves for every member . GK otherwise only have the option for a 1-in-5 special weapon and that's it.

And it still doesn't come close to what CTs can do for a loadout, which requires 5 combi-bolters, 5 combi-flamer, 5 combi-plasma, 5 combi-melta, reaper, h.flamer, 5 pairs of LC, 5 chainaxes, 5 chain fists, 5 p.fists, 5 p.mauls, 5 p.swords, and 5 p.axes.

Alkaline_Hound wrote:
Space marines used to come with 25mm bases, and using those is still allowed as far as I know. Also cadians are about marine height.

I’m trying to be very general here, my location is in my profile and there’s people from my GW on this board (if not in this thread). I’m trying not to call out a few people in particular by keeping this general so let’s say the examples I’ve used in this thread aren’t actually hypothetical what-ifs but actual games. I have seen half a marine army represented by half assembled eBayed guardsmen. I have lost a deep striking terminator squad to a bunch of bolters who looked like objective squatters but were actually a plasma-toting command squad who I would’ve avoided. I have seen a predator with TL las/ dual ACs represented by a 2nd edition rhino with a lascannon devastator on the roof.

On the other extreme I’ve seen a guy who refuses to play against hidden models like NG Fanatics in WHFB. He expected us to tell him how many Fanatics were in each of our units so he can plan accordingly - the secret nature of Fanatics or DE assassins was built into their points cost. Fanatics were 25 pts/model because your opponent had to carefully approach any NG unit. If you know where my Fanatics are you can just move your cav in around them and gut my army. Not fun :(

My GW is pretty nice now and I think the population has aged, the armies look really good, and WYSIWYG isn’t that much of a problem there. Dismissing a tradition that was implemented in the spirit of sportsmanship and making things clear to your opponent as just corporate greed is seeing the devil where he isn’t. There’s tons of things GW does for greed - I was told I can’t bring a 3rd party 4’x4’ gaming mat for AT to my store when GW doesn’t sell a 4’x4’ sci-fi mat anymore - but this is the tiniest form of greed if that was their motivation.

Maybe you’re the player who always reminds people what you’re proxying throughout the game and maybe you’re a really fun person to play against. I still think having the correct models represent what you’ve chosen after you play test it is a reasonable expectation without being labeled as intolerant simply because I don’t want to bring post it notes to stick on your models for clarity.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

They're NOT an essential part of the Chaos Terminator aesthetic,

Yes they are.

and you could've just said no that you didn't bother to look at the kit because it might hurt your argument. Seriously, look at the new kit and all the space your precious trophy racks take up. Just stop white knighting and admit not getting the actual BASE UNIT makes for a garbage kit.

I have looked at the sprues. It probably is not the best layout they could have gone with. This doesn't mean jettisoning the trophy racks was an option. (There are six pairs though, so an argument could be made that one could be sacrificed.) They also could have added a third sprue to cover all the options, but then it would have increased the cost and people would have complained about that. And units are rarely fielded in their base layout, the options exist to be taken. Why would you want to have all your Chaos terminator with the stock equipment anyway? Giving them variety of weapons makes the unit look much more interesting and befits their individualistic chaotic nature.

Alkaline_Hound wrote:
We have established that wysiwyg is not necessary to keep track of each model, as there are other methods to do it, and also using different datasheets for identical models is in general accepted, like for example with conscripts and relic options for HQ units. Also the distinction of what is acceptable proxying and what isn't is wholly arbitrary because nobody has justified why tactical marines can be used as a proxy for devastators but why guardsmen cannot be used as proxies for tactical marines, since in both cases just telling your opponent is all the clarity that is needed. Therefore trying to enforce wysiwyg on other people is done purely because of one's personal tastes. I don't see how that is different from refusing to play someone just because you don't like their paint scheme, and I don't see how that is acceptable behaviour.

That WYSIWYG is not a finely detailed rule doesn't mean it is fully arbitrary, and you probably actually know that when coming up with these disingenuous examples. Devastator marines for example are Space Marines just like tacticals, and share an identical statline. Furthemore, historically they have often shared the same basic bits for the body, the current kit is an exception. Guardsmesn are completely different both rules wise and visually. And yes, people are indeed fully within their rights to not play against anyone for any reason. I for one have no interest playing against someone's unpainted and half assembled proxy trash. Sorry for having modicum of aesthetic standards.

 Crimson wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

They're NOT an essential part of the Chaos Terminator aesthetic,

Yes they are.

and you could've just said no that you didn't bother to look at the kit because it might hurt your argument. Seriously, look at the new kit and all the space your precious trophy racks take up. Just stop white knighting and admit not getting the actual BASE UNIT makes for a garbage kit.

I have looked at the sprues. It probably is not the best layout they could have gone with. This doesn't mean jettisoning the trophy racks was an option. (There are six pairs though, so an argument could be made that one could be sacrificed.) They also could have added a third sprue to cover all the options, but then it would have increased the cost and people would have complained about that. And units are rarely fielded in their base layout, the options exist to be taken. Why would you want to have all your Chaos terminator with the stock equipment anyway? Giving them variety of weapons makes the unit look much more interesting and befits their individualistic chaotic nature.

Alkaline_Hound wrote:
We have established that wysiwyg is not necessary to keep track of each model, as there are other methods to do it, and also using different datasheets for identical models is in general accepted, like for example with conscripts and relic options for HQ units. Also the distinction of what is acceptable proxying and what isn't is wholly arbitrary because nobody has justified why tactical marines can be used as a proxy for devastators but why guardsmen cannot be used as proxies for tactical marines, since in both cases just telling your opponent is all the clarity that is needed. Therefore trying to enforce wysiwyg on other people is done purely because of one's personal tastes. I don't see how that is different from refusing to play someone just because you don't like their paint scheme, and I don't see how that is acceptable behaviour.

That WYSIWYG is not a finely detailed rule doesn't mean it is fully arbitrary, and you probably actually know that when coming up with these disingenuous examples. Devastator marines for example are Space Marines just like tacticals, and share an identical statline. Furthemore, historically they have often shared the same basic bits for the body, the current kit is an exception. Guardsmesn are completely different both rules wise and visually. And yes, people are indeed fully within their rights to not play against anyone for any reason. I for one have no interest playing against someone's unpainted and half assembled proxy trash. Sorry for having modicum of aesthetic standards.

IOW: Chaos Terminators are just like Chaos Marines: Spiky Marines! That's the army!
Also one of the best loadouts IS the stock equipment. You seem to forget that Chaos Terminators were more expensive than the stock Loyalist ones for literally no good reason, so there were issues already being discussed on procuring Chainaxes! Hodgepodge garbage of "every guy looks different" doesn't look good anyway and doesn't perform in the game either. The fact you defend this garbage when the Grey Knight Terminator kit exists is also mind boggling as well, since that kit just about gives you the default loadout too!

I can understand that special and optional ... options, are limited in a box. But for a box to not allow you to build a unit with the base equipement is just ... it doesn't make any sense.

It does not matter how one tryes to justify it.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Do any of the other terminator kits have the level of flexibility of CSM terminators?

Space Wolf Guard Terminators, I believe.
- 4 Wolf Claw sets
- 1 Assault Cannon
- 4 Thunder Hammers/Storm Shields
- 1 Heavy Flamer
- 5 Storm Bolters
- 3 Power Fists
- 2 Chainfists
- 1 Frost Axe
- 1 Power Sword

versus Chaos Terminator's:
- 1 chain axe
- 1 chainfist
- 1 power sword
- 1 power axe
- 1 power maul
- 2 power fists
- 2 lightning claws
- 1 heavy flamer
- 1 reaper autocannon
- 5 combi-weapons

You forgot Grey Knight Terminators

Not try holding GW’s water here with respect to CSM terminator spruce layout but y’all realize that loyal marine terminators are split between shooty and assault units. Loyalist players don’t get to mix and match their shooty and assault models like Chaos or DA so they have two different boxes with 2 frames.

If Chaos termies could be built in box with 5 combi bolters, Reaper AC, heavy flamer, 10 lightning claws, 5 powerfists (and just make 5 chainfist addons), and 5 power weapons you’d probably be looking at 3 frames for the box. They’d probably charge $75 USD for that box in that case because they’re typically $25-30 a frame.

They're charging you for a box you can't even build the base unit with, so they shouldn't be charging anything for it at all!

What’s the base loadout you’re trying to build? No offense here but they’d charge you more to include every option for a 5 man unit that can mix/match shooty and assault units. Would you prefer to have two separate boxes for ranged and assault terminators like loyalists?

This goes back to the larger point people keep making in this thread: because of GW’s panicked fear of 3rd party bits companies you will find more and more the unit entry being limited by what’s in the box rather that having codex options not in the box. In 5 years this won’t be much of a problem as they get rid of regular marines and we have Primarishammer 41k.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Do any of the other terminator kits have the level of flexibility of CSM terminators?

Space Wolf Guard Terminators, I believe.

You got me there. So, GW *is* doing the right thing?

Is GW doing the right thing and they just hate Chaos or is there some other factor at play (like they want to fit all new kits on to two sprues)?

Can we stop the cavetching about models literally no one uses or has used for all of 8th? Until very recently is was an extremely overcosted and weak unit that was basically replaced by aggressors and primaris. They are now some of the worst units around. We might as well be complaining about how there is only one psycannon in the Grey knights paladin box. Who cares? No one uses them.

If we want to legitimately argue WYSIWYG then we need to argue current models being hamstrung by this. Here's an example:

Custodes have to buy a 100$ worth of models to make flags and shield captains with axes. Two Models.

To keep the boxes small and costs down (those sprue molds cost tens of thousands of dollars each) sure they want to keep things on two frames. That's why I had to buy better cutters to get into those TEENY TINY LITTLE gaps to cut things out now because the sprues contain 1,395 pieces each.

Look at the entry for Black Orcs back in the day and now. They used to count as being armed with everything, now it's literally WYSIWYG. The box does't have enough great weapons or shields for every model to count as having them so you end up having to make separate rolls for different weapons.

 Fajita Fan wrote:
That's why I had to buy better cutters to get into those TEENY TINY LITTLE gaps to cut things out now because the sprues contain 1,395 pieces each.

God, seriously. You ever gone through the nightmare of trying to cut out and assemble skitarii or sicarian infiltrators without snapping or bending any antennae?

I don’t know that I broke the antennae but I’m mostly using that box for Adeptus Titanicus conversions like my Shadow Thief freeblade. Something about a dagger wielding ninja Imperial Knight makes me giggle.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:You forgot Grey Knight Terminators

Someone else already mentioned them, I'll let them bring it up with the same standard if they so choose.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Do any of the other terminator kits have the level of flexibility of CSM terminators?

Space Wolf Guard Terminators, I believe.

You got me there. So, GW *is* doing the right thing?

Is GW doing the right thing and they just hate Chaos or is there some other factor at play (like they want to fit all new kits on to two sprues)?

Not saying GW is doing the right thing, just pointing out that there is a unit of similar complexity out there to CMT.

Honestly, I think the only army which has it easy is Necrons, where only the Lords have any real issues, but they are rather boring in terms of building for options. They were the last 40K army I collected for that ease of building, actually.

Public Service Announcement:

If you'd like to play a GW game that's 1) fun 2) has great models 3) has everything available for WYSIWYG and 4) needs some new players then you should check out Adeptus Titanicus. Great stuff.

 Fajita Fan wrote:
I don’t know that I broke the antennae but I’m mostly using that box for Adeptus Titanicus conversions like my Shadow Thief freeblade. Something about a dagger wielding ninja Imperial Knight makes me giggle.

Heh. That IS fun.

"Oh, you have a huge giant mecha scout eh? Well I'VE got a huge giant mecha NINJA!!!"

I love the idea of him stabbing a titan in the dangly bits with a pair of knives and if I ever get around to building my own 40k knight it'll be to recreate this guy. He's also fully WYSIWYG to boot, dual close combat weapons.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
They're charging you for a box you can't even build the base unit with, so they shouldn't be charging anything for it at all!

CSM Players to GW: We can't construct all the various weapon options, including the default, from the CSM Terminator Kit.

GW to CSM Players: Noted. We will update the rules in the next version of the Codex to only allow you to arm the unit based on the option quantities actually in the kit.

 alextroy wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
They're charging you for a box you can't even build the base unit with, so they shouldn't be charging anything for it at all!

CSM Players to GW: We can't construct all the various weapon options, including the default, from the CSM Terminator Kit.

GW to CSM Players: Noted. We will update the rules in the next version of the Codex to only allow you to arm the unit based on the option quantities actually in the kit.

This is exactly the only thing this whining will accomplish.