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.

 Daedalus81 wrote:


You're just making up rationalizations though to maintain your point of view, but they're not based on anything sound.

They got new rules. There is nothing that can change for Banshees now. They're bottom barrel pricing and they already have several special rules. S4 is incredibly unlikely so the only chance would be a point drop on power swords, but that won't convince anyone who hates wounding on 5s.

I do not agree. It is quite obvious that it is hard for them to release new rules for a single model.

I think my point is clear and I do believe it is spot on for large releases like sisters, or primaris.

Might not apply to absolutely everything they do, but I believe it holds as a general rule.

Feel free to disagree, but I have yet to see any convincing argument that makes me change my mind.

 Da Boss wrote:
Points drops turn them into a horde unit, rather than the elite combat blender they are supposed to be.

That's where people lose their sense of balance - when a unit doesn't do as they think the lore indicates.

People are also wearing rose colored glasses on Banshees since they have almost exactly the same rules now, as previous. They only exceptions being war shout was worse and they used to cause fear, which was also kind of useless. And they were I5/6, but charging now means going first anyway. Of course back then they only hit marines on 4s.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey40k wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


You're just making up rationalizations though to maintain your point of view, but they're not based on anything sound.

They got new rules. There is nothing that can change for Banshees now. They're bottom barrel pricing and they already have several special rules. S4 is incredibly unlikely so the only chance would be a point drop on power swords, but that won't convince anyone who hates wounding on 5s.

I do not agree. It is quite obvious that it is hard for them to release new rules for a single model.

I think my point is clear and I do believe it is spot on for large releases like sisters, or primaris.

Might not apply to absolutely everything they do, but I believe it holds as a general rule.

Feel free to disagree, but I have yet to see any convincing argument that makes me change my mind.

...CSM
They got Abaddon, Havocs, CSM, MoP, VC, GP, Oblits, Discordant, Haarken, and Terminators.

GW released a "new" codex that did nothing for those models. Then they got a PA book, which while containing some nice strats does not share the same design principles other armies have been seeing and only dealt with the legions and not the models themselves.

Where I would consider CSM to be "fine" it does not rise to the level of your standard.

Amusingly, the "Marines should be elites not hordes" thing is part of why GW keeps slapping on new stuff to Marines, like Doctrines. Which then had to be nerfed pretty quickly by GW's standards...

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Points drops turn them into a horde unit, rather than the elite combat blender they are supposed to be.

That's where people lose their sense of balance - when a unit doesn't do as they think the lore indicates.

People are also wearing rose colored glasses on Banshees since they have almost exactly the same rules now, as previous. They only exceptions being war shout was worse and they used to cause fear, which was also kind of useless. And they were I5/6, but charging now means going first anyway. Of course back then they only hit marines on 4s.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey40k wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


You're just making up rationalizations though to maintain your point of view, but they're not based on anything sound.

They got new rules. There is nothing that can change for Banshees now. They're bottom barrel pricing and they already have several special rules. S4 is incredibly unlikely so the only chance would be a point drop on power swords, but that won't convince anyone who hates wounding on 5s.

I do not agree. It is quite obvious that it is hard for them to release new rules for a single model.

I think my point is clear and I do believe it is spot on for large releases like sisters, or primaris.

Might not apply to absolutely everything they do, but I believe it holds as a general rule.

Feel free to disagree, but I have yet to see any convincing argument that makes me change my mind.

...CSM
They got Abaddon, Havocs, CSM, MoP, VC, GP, Oblits, Discordant, Haarken, and Terminators.

GW released a "new" codex that did nothing for those models. Then they got a PA book, which while containing some nice strats does not share the same design principles other armies have been seeing and only dealt with the legions and not the models themselves.

Where I would consider CSM to be "fine" it does not rise to the level of your standard.

Agreed. The new models are great but csm are still stuck with the same crap wombo combo and soup playstyle gw seems to think represents the faction. Sadly I fear we'll never again see the heady days of 3.5.

Oh well. Back to the salt mines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:
Amusingly, the "Marines should be elites not hordes" thing is part of why GW keeps slapping on new stuff to Marines, like Doctrines. Which then had to be nerfed pretty quickly by GW's standards...

Gw seems to be fine with hordes of marines as long as they have spikes....

The sadest Part ,it even works until Sm show up

Not Online!!! wrote:
The sadest Part ,it even works until Sm show up

It works on them too, some of the time, but it just doesn't feel satisfying. I don't understand why gw decided chaos should be the gimmick of the week brigade.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
The sadest Part ,it even works until Sm show up

It works on them too, some of the time, but it just doesn't feel satisfying. I don't understand why gw decided chaos should be the gimmick of the week brigade.

DIsagree, as someone that actually runs a massed CSM army quite often nowadays, it works precisly until the SM player of any flavour turns to tactical doctrine and proceeds to wipe the floor with 2 squads + per turn.
Most xenos small arms fire aswell as most small arms fire from other factions in general i can pretty easily shrugg off the AP -1 though really hurts overall and i can often not recycle in enough backup. Which also leads to another point, in general CSM feel pretty decent against most infantry atm but get mostly cut out due to the codex dictating imo that thou shall not have less then 13 CP and place for a Hammer of some kind, usually obliterators and or nowadays possessed. Leaving you with alot less pts and overall enforcing that you pick cultists which at this point is only a real save on points off 5 / squad.

Is there a specific reason why GW can't make lets say a BA tactial without upgrades cost a different amount of points then say a salamander one, and both of those cost different a DA one. And then go even further with DA having cheaper plasma, Salamanders having cheap or free flamers, and something like ultramarines having everything a bit cheaper, but not as cheap as chapters that specialise in something?

This way it would be easier for GW to steer people in to a specific type of game play with a chapter, the option for playing something wierd would still technicly be there. And all comers like ultramarines could be rewarded by an over all discount on gear.

And they could do it for other subfactions too. So it is not like it would limit other factions in what they can get, or have GW sell fewer books.

Would also fix some of the over lap problem. Banshees in a regular codex would cost the way they are now, and if someone wants to be crazy and take them , they still would be able to. But there could be some aspect warrior focused list, where if you take nothing but aspects they are cheaper, or you get free exarchs for taking specific number of aspect warriors. It could even scale, so if you just mixed aspects up, they would only get cheaper. but if you had 3+ units of one aspect the exarchs could be buffed. And if you had 6+ they could get some special rule. And at 9+ you would get a free phoenix lord.

Not to disagree, but in general GW would mess it up.

The best case scenario would be, that we would have to actually pay for subfaction traits, because there is not reason that a WB CSM is equal to an AL CSM.


It also would reduce streamlining, which is not something GW seems to want atm considering CA 19 lowered Sorcerers and MoP's on foot to be excactly priced the same as librarians, even though atleast the sorcerer just has the better discipline.

With CSM I think what could help them is to add gear or chaos stuff on squad level to regular squads. Some sort of chaos icons that do something, and are different per legion. Maybe some ancient heresy era guns loyalists don't have. maybe gear from the chaos mechanicus, which again loyalist don't have. If loyalists can have cawl stuff and grav guns, chaos marines should have an option of their own too.

 Da Boss wrote:
They are definitely incompetent. They have also made their job harder, with faction bloat of lots of pretty much identical factions, but that is also part of the incompetence and lack of overall control and vision for the product.

They have improved, in that they now update the game every now and then with "FAQs" which are actually rules errata or balance fixes, but this is a cover for sloppy design and incompetence. It is better than NOT having errata, but I still find the the studio unprofessional and worthy of scorn and contempt.

People with low standards who are happy with this slop can continue to enjoy it of course. Good for them.

So incompetent they have made the most successful tabletop wargame of all time and post record success month after month.

Why don't you show us how it's done?

Not Online!!! wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
The sadest Part ,it even works until Sm show up

It works on them too, some of the time, but it just doesn't feel satisfying. I don't understand why gw decided chaos should be the gimmick of the week brigade.

DIsagree, as someone that actually runs a massed CSM army quite often nowadays, it works precisly until the SM player of any flavour turns to tactical doctrine and proceeds to wipe the floor with 2 squads + per turn.
Most xenos small arms fire aswell as most small arms fire from other factions in general i can pretty easily shrugg off the AP -1 though really hurts overall and i can often not recycle in enough backup. Which also leads to another point, in general CSM feel pretty decent against most infantry atm but get mostly cut out due to the codex dictating imo that thou shall not have less then 13 CP and place for a Hammer of some kind, usually obliterators and or nowadays possessed. Leaving you with alot less pts and overall enforcing that you pick cultists which at this point is only a real save on points off 5 / squad.

Sorry, thought you were talking about my wombo combo comment and not massed csm.

No, hordes of csm don't work against sm due to the cp hungry tactics we need to compete with them. That's what I hate about gw's current take on chaos. Combos combos combos. I hate having to plan on 2cp per turn just to keep their fething chapter masters in check.

 Ishagu wrote:

So incompetent they have made the most successful tabletop wargame of all time and post record success month after month.

Why don't you show us how it's done?

you don't have to be competent, when your a monopolist. This works in trade, politics, academia and sports.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
The sadest Part ,it even works until Sm show up

It works on them too, some of the time, but it just doesn't feel satisfying. I don't understand why gw decided chaos should be the gimmick of the week brigade.

DIsagree, as someone that actually runs a massed CSM army quite often nowadays, it works precisly until the SM player of any flavour turns to tactical doctrine and proceeds to wipe the floor with 2 squads + per turn.
Most xenos small arms fire aswell as most small arms fire from other factions in general i can pretty easily shrugg off the AP -1 though really hurts overall and i can often not recycle in enough backup. Which also leads to another point, in general CSM feel pretty decent against most infantry atm but get mostly cut out due to the codex dictating imo that thou shall not have less then 13 CP and place for a Hammer of some kind, usually obliterators and or nowadays possessed. Leaving you with alot less pts and overall enforcing that you pick cultists which at this point is only a real save on points off 5 / squad.

Sorry, thought you were talking about my wombo combo comment and not massed csm.

No, hordes of csm don't work against sm due to the cp hungry tactics we need to compete with them. That's what I hate about gw's current take on chaos. Combos combos combos. I hate having to plan on 2cp per turn just to keep their fething chapter masters in check.

Honestly, my issue with my horde is more that i can just cacophony/ recycle once per turn. severly limiting my capabilities down comparatively to the allways on Doctrines and superior traits of SM. Remember it's based on RC to work meaning that i run around with 16 + CP depending on how i set up. that is more then enough for 3-4 times recycling and one or the other cacophony.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:

So incompetent they have made the most successful tabletop wargame of all time and post record success month after month.

Why don't you show us how it's done?

you don't have to be competent, when your a monopolist. This works in trade, politics, academia and sports.

Oligopolist* but yes, Karol has a point.

If GW would release 40k now in this state, it would be probably a pretty minute margin of market that it would achieve if not outright fail.

Karol wrote:
With CSM I think what could help them is to add gear or chaos stuff on squad level to regular squads. Some sort of chaos icons that do something, and are different per legion. Maybe some ancient heresy era guns loyalists don't have. maybe gear from the chaos mechanicus, which again loyalist don't have. If loyalists can have cawl stuff and grav guns, chaos marines should have an option of their own too.

Good idea. Perhaps csm could purchase special abilities for points. We could call them "veteran abilities ".

Sounds familiar somehow.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Karol wrote:
With CSM I think what could help them is to add gear or chaos stuff on squad level to regular squads. Some sort of chaos icons that do something, and are different per legion. Maybe some ancient heresy era guns loyalists don't have. maybe gear from the chaos mechanicus, which again loyalist don't have. If loyalists can have cawl stuff and grav guns, chaos marines should have an option of their own too.

Good idea. Perhaps csm could purchase special abilities for points. We could call them "veteran abilities ".

Sounds familiar somehow.

i Miss my marks.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Karol wrote:

you don't have to be competent, when your a monopolist. This works in trade, politics, academia and sports.

Oligopolist* but yes, Karol has a point.

If GW would release 40k now in this state, it would be probably a pretty minute margin of market that it would achieve if not outright fail.

He doesn't really. It's not like GW have priced their competition out of the market given their models are some of, if not the most expensive. While there exist barriers to entry to the miniature wargame market, GW have not really influenced this in a negative way.

What they have done is create an incredible setting with some of the best models and their success stems from here, rather than a deep and structured rule set.

GW is a very competent business, as evidenced by their sales, continued growth and market domination. Their competence is more to do with models and setting than rules, however.

Gadzilla666 wrote:


...CSM
They got Abaddon, Havocs, CSM, MoP, VC, GP, Oblits, Discordant, Haarken, and Terminators.

GW released a "new" codex that did nothing for those models. Then they got a PA book, which while containing some nice strats does not share the same design principles other armies have been seeing and only dealt with the legions and not the models themselves.

Where I would consider CSM to be "fine" it does not rise to the level of your standard.

What I said is that GW has an incentive to update the rules for models they want to sell (e.g. after a big release of new sculpts). Primaris and sisters do work well with that theory, although of course at different power levels.

You tell me that there were releases that didn't see any boost in power whatsoever. I wasn't there, so I'll trust you opinion on it.

The question is then whether this means GW is not tweaking rules to sell models, or perhaps there is another reason why this wasn't done in the case you point out.

Chaos seems middle of the pack at the moment, perhaps they didn't feel they needed to raise the level for them, or that it would limit them in their ability to launch other lines if they did that.

As I said, I am not familiar with the case at all.

But you do know that in some parts of the world, GW is not going to sell you their stuff, if your also running other table tops. And shops that did try to do it or order their stuff from germany instead of UK, had their shipments coming late, with missing important popular items to sell. Even now GW is late delivering stuff like codex, starter sets etc. They are not a fun company to be around, but they are the only ones that can make a store run. while stuff like warmachine that was popular in Poland at a time, just doesn't get send new or any stuff to europe. A store can't run a game, when it has no models people are willing to buy.


As models goes, I think they are producing more then a few dudes and ugly models that have extra stuff put on the model just so people don't see how flat their plastic models are. French and spanish companies make a lot better looking models.

And while I understand that in countries where buying an amry every 3 months rules ain't a problem, if that was 100% true, then we would not have the crying over IH rule set and AoS wouldn't have done bad without points and proper rules.

GW is just a big company that can kill a store, by being late with delivery once or twice, and no store has the free money to take them to court over it. So people comply.

Same with new games, it is too much a risk to grow a new one, when the store owner may not let you play with the models.

so I call bs on GW not influencing the market in a negative way.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Karol wrote:

you don't have to be competent, when your a monopolist. This works in trade, politics, academia and sports.

Oligopolist* but yes, Karol has a point.

If GW would release 40k now in this state, it would be probably a pretty minute margin of market that it would achieve if not outright fail.

He doesn't really. It's not like GW have priced their competition out of the market given their models are some of, if not the most expensive. While there exist barriers to entry to the miniature wargame market, GW have not really influenced this in a negative way.

What they have done is create an incredible setting with some of the best models and their success stems from here, rather than a deep and structured rule set.

GW is a very competent business, as evidenced by their sales, continued growth and market domination. Their competence is more to do with models and setting than rules, however.

Well, they benefited mostly from first mover advantage. A lot of it seems snowballing to me, after that.

I'd say the biggest factors GW has going for them, atm, are market presence and dominance.

GW did not create very much original, to begin with, rather they stole ideas left and right. No one cared too much at that time and I suspect it was seen more as a satire of current (at the time) sci fi and fantasy themes than anything. Then, they are big enough now to sustain the creation of fluff.

Finally, people want a game they can play (potentially) anywhere and that will continue to exist in the next few years; GW provides that better than the competitors simply base on size.

I do not find the game to be particularly well balanced, the sculpts to be significantly better than the competition, or the prices to be lower than alternatives. But the package they offer (big community, sustainable future, expanding universe) is hard to beat by other companies, even if the other games and sculpts are better. Also, it kills potential entry into its niche. I wouldn't say it is surprising that similar games have gone for different battle sizs (number of minis). Up until now, at least, these smaller games didn't do well fo GW.

I think some people literally can't comprehend the fact that GW never made their success around rules. It's funny how single minded some people are.

They are better than the past, but the rules are only one of the things they focus on, and it's not their main focus.

The real fault actually lies with people who can't recognise what 40k is, and judge it against what they THINK it should be.

Agreed. It's all about the setting. I fell in love with 40k when I discovered wd 120. That was 1st edition. I didn't actually get to play until 3rd. Lots of people read the books but never play, and many discover the game through the books.

 Ishagu wrote:
I think some people literally can't comprehend the fact that GW never made their success around rules. It's funny how single minded some people are.

They are better than the past, but the ruled are only one of the things they focus on, and it's not their main focus.

Which loops nicely back into "why treat something where rules are secondary/for funsies as the ultimate competitive game".

A final note for me and this thread.

How Elite is a marine supposed to feel?

How Elite did you feel when you playing as Captain Titus?

That's how Elite a Marine is supposed to feel. (From a fluff POV of course).

 Melissia wrote:
Amusingly, the "Marines should be elites not hordes" thing is part of why GW keeps slapping on new stuff to Marines, like Doctrines. Which then had to be nerfed pretty quickly by GW's standards...

I'd say that's more an issue with 8th's core rules, which are very shallow and don't really have any in-built mechanics for the different factions to expand on. It's just a war of spreadsheets.

Hence, the only way GW can meaningfully differentiate the different factions (especially when it comes to the twenty-billion SM subfactions) is by adding more and more special rules. You need special rules to differentiate the faction from other factions, then you need more special rules to differentiate most unit from other units, then (in the case of SMs) you need more special rules to show how elite they are, and then finally you need some extra special rules to differentiate their particular subfaction from all the other Marine subfactions.


What's more, there's the additional problem that 8th edition is a vastly different scale to, say, 5th edition. Back in 5th, the largest things you could expect to face were Trygons and Dreadknights. The former had 6 wounds and 3+ armour but no invulnerable save, the latter had only 4 wounds but a superior 2+/5++ save.

Obviously both of these outclassed individual Marines but they were far from insurmountable. The lack of any invulnerable meant that the Trygon was pretty vulnerable to missiles, Lascannons and plasma. Those 6 wounds could disappear pretty quickly. The Dreadknight with it's 2+/5++ was probably harder to kill overall, but at the end of the day is only had 4 wounds. What's more, neither of these were built to win fire-fights. The Dreadknight had some impressive mid-range shooting but it was unlikely to actually out-range its targets. And the Trygon was basically just a big, melee beast. Hence, neither of these could expect to blow enemies off the table from beyond their maximum range.

Now fast forward to 8th edition and suddenly those models are nowhere near the strongest individual models. Not when we have Baneblades and Imperial Knights wandering around. And Imperial Knights have far more wounds than Trygons whilst also boasting the protection of Dreadknights, not to mention enough firepower to challenge small armies from the other side of the table.

The reason I bring this up is because when you add new elite models at the top of the curve, it invariably squashes together all the units below them.

To put it another way, we're basically using standard 40k rules to play out Apocalypse-scale battles. And at that scale, infantry - even elite infantry like Marines - just aren't going to be significantly different from Guardsmen or Kabalites or any other infantry.

If you really want Marines to feel elite again, then the first step is to remove Fliers, super-heavies, Primarchs, Knights, and everything else that belongs in Apocalypse games. Otherwise, it's like differentiating between combat-knives on individual soldiers during a battle between aircraft carriers and battleships. It's just not relevant to the scale.

I don't really agree with the idea GW is a monopoly - or that 8th is doom and gloom.

GW was sinking without a trace from about 2012-2016. The share price went nowhere, the revenue went nowhere.
This was the time when games like X-Wing and Warmahordes and others gobbled up market share. Arguably it was a healthy time - as you saw huge numbers of games appear and have a go - but it also saw the death of Warhammer Fantasy, something which should have been incomprehensible to the supposedly monopolistic behemoth. 40k was still dominant but going nowhere fast.

Then GW got rid of Kirby, started making models people wanted to buy, with game systems they wanted to play, and profits and market share surged as they did before the weird paranoia kicked in and GW stopped. This turn around was not inevitable.

Dudeface wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
I think some people literally can't comprehend the fact that GW never made their success around rules. It's funny how single minded some people are.

They are better than the past, but the ruled are only one of the things they focus on, and it's not their main focus.

Which loops nicely back into "why treat something where rules are secondary/for funsies as the ultimate competitive game".

Then why have rules for sale at all if you can just go "pewpew" and remove models as necessary?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
I think some people literally can't comprehend the fact that GW never made their success around rules. It's funny how single minded some people are.

They are better than the past, but the ruled are only one of the things they focus on, and it's not their main focus.

Which loops nicely back into "why treat something where rules are secondary/for funsies as the ultimate competitive game".

Then why have rules for sale at all if you can just go "pewpew" and remove models as necessary?

Not everything has to be 100% one way or another.

Rules are a part of their product. They aren't the main focus of it.

I don't think 40k is the game for you. Sell your models and find a different hobby.

 Ishagu wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
I think some people literally can't comprehend the fact that GW never made their success around rules. It's funny how single minded some people are.

They are better than the past, but the ruled are only one of the things they focus on, and it's not their main focus.

Which loops nicely back into "why treat something where rules are secondary/for funsies as the ultimate competitive game".

Then why have rules for sale at all if you can just go "pewpew" and remove models as necessary?

Not everything has to be 100% one way or another.

Rules are a part of their product. They aren't the main focus of it.

I don't think 40k is the game for you. Sell your models and find a different hobby.

Love it or leave it fallacy. GW should 100% outsource the rules. Theyve proven for eight editions now that they dont have a clue.

They know how to make a successful product.

Perfectly balanced rules don't really mean as much as you think in that equation. The game is fun, but it might not be for you.

Maybe find a different hobby.

Also this is a completely optional, luxury product. Yes. Love it or leave it. It's not mandatory for you life.