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.

yeah at one time it seemed like they were going in the right direction mostly 3rd was a new thing since it changed 40K from skirmish to an army game. 4th improved on it a bit but overpowered skimmers to much. 5th seemed like an improvement overall with a few good rules from 4th that should have been left in.....then they murdered the entire thing with 6th. obviously they noticed since it only lasted 14 months compared to the previous 4 year runs of each of the prior editions. they started to save it in 7th before formation bloat became a thing.

FW at least did a decent job of saving 7th with HH. a big part of that was removing the formations and improving every unit in the game at a cost reduction in points.


When i play 30K i feel like i have a whole army on the table with the old FOC. it's a mix of a bit of everything including 35+ marines a flyer, skimmer, a couple dreads and a couple ground vehicles. all of which are good options.

 Murrax9 wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Another in the camp "I love Centurions but don't have them because DA can't use them"

I'm in the same camp for Blood Angels. I've never understood why they cannot be used by non-Codex marine factions? I could get like Grey Knights not using them but why not Space Wolves, DA and BA? Heck even Deathwatch should have them. Does anyone know if there is some lore reason for this? It makes no sense.

If people want super special Codexs for a few Chapters than thos Chapters can't have everything PLUS their own ponteially better units.

Its a problem which can be solvd by not pretending these Chapters are actually that different from the other 995 which ALL have their own cultures, idosycrancies and such like but are only refelcted to any large degree in the rules due to the legacy of the special needs codexes.

But no, any mention of this incurs panic and screaming that the world is going to end, even stating that all options would just be part of the base unit options has no effect on such hysteria

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Murrax9 wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Another in the camp "I love Centurions but don't have them because DA can't use them"

I'm in the same camp for Blood Angels. I've never understood why they cannot be used by non-Codex marine factions? I could get like Grey Knights not using them but why not Space Wolves, DA and BA? Heck even Deathwatch should have them. Does anyone know if there is some lore reason for this? It makes no sense.

If people want super special Codexs for a few Chapters than thos Chapters can't have everything PLUS their own ponteially better units.

Its a problem which can be solvd by not pretending these Chapters are actually that different from the other 995 which ALL have their own cultures, idosycrancies and such like but are only refelcted to any large degree in the rules due to the legacy of the special needs codexes.

But no, any mention of this incurs panic and screaming that the world is going to end, even stating that all options would just be part of the base unit options has no effect on such hysteria

dude give it a rest

BrianDavion wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Murrax9 wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Another in the camp "I love Centurions but don't have them because DA can't use them"

I'm in the same camp for Blood Angels. I've never understood why they cannot be used by non-Codex marine factions? I could get like Grey Knights not using them but why not Space Wolves, DA and BA? Heck even Deathwatch should have them. Does anyone know if there is some lore reason for this? It makes no sense.

If people want super special Codexs for a few Chapters than thos Chapters can't have everything PLUS their own ponteially better units.

Its a problem which can be solvd by not pretending these Chapters are actually that different from the other 995 which ALL have their own cultures, idosycrancies and such like but are only refelcted to any large degree in the rules due to the legacy of the special needs codexes.

But no, any mention of this incurs panic and screaming that the world is going to end, even stating that all options would just be part of the base unit options has no effect on such hysteria

dude give it a rest

I didn;t bring it up did I? Some one wanted to know why they can't have everything in the base Codex plus their own units.

TBH I'm of the opinion that ALL chapters (At least the ones with rules) should have special units. Ironhands should have special terminators and dreadnoughts (And their successors, etc...), White Scars with special bikers and land speeders, etc, etc...

Of course that would be bloat and you could play 30k if you want that but in the world of Nu-GW were Necromunda receives plastic kits I don't think having space marine releases impedes GW for releasing kits for other 40k factions. They just chose not to do it.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Well no, they have changed their modus operandi. you see they now got a PR department.

Riiiiiiight. That's why 8th ed i same mess like before.

PR dep just makes players think it's great and awesome to have mess of a rule and how awesome it is we get to buy new armies when they "fix balance" while still keeping game unbalanced.

The process is still same. Keep changing things just so things change and eventually create such a mess it's time for new edition and cycle begin new.

I do believe that's what Not Online!!! meant, that the big "change" GW has made has been mostly an illusion created by better PR engagement.

tneva82 wrote:
And the funny thing is if they did 9th ed complete streamline reset like 8th ed(not that they do) the same would happen again.

It's GW's modus operandi. GW hasn't changed in it's style at all.

Sure. But it is not just because GW wants to design games that way, it is what an overwhelming majority of the playerbase wants. They want all this stupid bloat, they want seven thousand different marine codices, they want bespoke rules for any mildly different weapon and doodah. Suggest combining codices, suggest streamlining rules, the shrieking will be unbearable. GW writes bloat because the players want it, simple as that.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
I do believe that's what Not Online!!! meant, that the big "change" GW has made has been mostly an illusion created by better PR engagement.

Which is kind of true, but they have done other things. They've split the dev studio into teams, they have the devs visting events like Adepticon and LVO to see the state of the game on a large number of levels all at once, and they're addressing issues far more often than they ever used to (I recall a time were 1 FAQ a year was what we'd get if we were lucky).

So yes, they have a good PR team, but they also have changed practices that are making the company better at what they're doing since the teams are more focused on a single system and not multiple.

I won't claim it's perfect of course, but it has improved considerably and they're on a good road.

Now if they'd just build in limits to everything from the outset we'd be doing super. I hate to say it, but if you want your rules to reflect the lore (such as having a flexible doctrine of rules that are followed dogmatically instead of being used flexibly as the situation demands) then the rules need to limit people to the lore appropriate choices. Bring back the 0-1, 0-2, 0-3 unit restrictions from 3rd for example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
And the funny thing is if they did 9th ed complete streamline reset like 8th ed(not that they do) the same would happen again.

It's GW's modus operandi. GW hasn't changed in it's style at all.

Sure. But it is not just because GW wants to design games that way, it is what an overwhelming majority of the playerbase wants. They want all this stupid bloat, they want seven thousand different marine codices, they want bespoke rules for any mildly different weapon and doodah. Suggest combining codices, suggest streamlining rules, the shrieking will be unbearable. GW writes bloat because the players want it, simple as that.

With Primaris I really do see Marines being more easilly streamlined to a main book and the supplements for the non-standard stuff that chapters have (you could even add restrictions into said supplements if you don't want certain chapters having certain things). This would allow Marines to have a main codex release that can be focused on and done for all the Marines (save Grey Knights obviously because they're too different. Deathwatch really should just be a different flavor of the standard ruleset with maybe a couple restrictions tossed in if you want to go nuts) and you'd only have to do supplement updates on a fare rarer scale.

And I feel -most- armies should be done this way (I would say all, but Talons of the Emperor, the Inquisition and Assassins really should be a single Agents of the Imperium book that covers all three). One main book for the core of the faction where all the new stuff everyone uses go, then supplements for subfactions that don't have to be updated as often (if ever if we never leave this edition) where we can keep the four or five bespoke things and special characters.

 Crimson wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
And the funny thing is if they did 9th ed complete streamline reset like 8th ed(not that they do) the same would happen again.

It's GW's modus operandi. GW hasn't changed in it's style at all.

Sure. But it is not just because GW wants to design games that way, it is what an overwhelming majority of the playerbase wants. They want all this stupid bloat, they want seven thousand different marine codices, they want bespoke rules for any mildly different weapon and doodah. Suggest combining codices, suggest streamlining rules, the shrieking will be unbearable. GW writes bloat because the players want it, simple as that.

I don't disagree, and this is why I don't believe the game can be "saved" or the eternal GW cycle of simplification followed by rapid overcomplication can ever be broken. The only winning move is not to play.

nfe wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

nfe wrote:
I get that few people have your world-leading eye for detail, but it took the entire competitive community several weeks (maybe a few months?) to come up with the all-killer wound-bouncing Leviathan list. Whilst dreadnought shenanigans were obvious, that mess of broken interactions wasn't screaming out from every page.

Give it a rest.

Irony shields to maximum, cap.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

nfe wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And again, it's not hundreds of eyes looking at it. We don't get a new Codex thread having 100 people going "Oh! Found this mistake on page XX". If it's more than 20 all at once it's impressive.

And I say this as someone who is predisposed to finding errors in things. It's a gift and a curse in some ways, but I'm very good at finding the problems in things very quickly. I've done it professionally as well: Was once given a Deathwatch sourcebook to look over and wrote up a 45 page report of everything I could find and it only took me 2 days. GW has more time than that.

I get that few people have your world-leading eye for detail, but it took the entire competitive community several weeks (maybe a few months?) to come up with the all-killer wound-bouncing Leviathan list. Whilst dreadnought shenanigans were obvious, that mess of broken interactions wasn't screaming out from every page.

LOL what are you talking about? It was pointed out in a day suicidal Intercessors affected character Dreads!

Maybe I remember wrong. Where did that list first show up? I recall a whole load of repulsor car parks and storm talon lists before we got round to the immortal
levi.

We got those Repulsor lists actually BEFORE the Supplement, because people wanted to take advantage of the wound chart doubling. When the supplement dropped, we figured out ASAP that Intercessors would be blocking Dread characters, ergo one like a Levi.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

nfe wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

nfe wrote:
I get that few people have your world-leading eye for detail, but it took the entire competitive community several weeks (maybe a few months?) to come up with the all-killer wound-bouncing Leviathan list. Whilst dreadnought shenanigans were obvious, that mess of broken interactions wasn't screaming out from every page.

Give it a rest.

Irony shields to maximum, cap.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

nfe wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And again, it's not hundreds of eyes looking at it. We don't get a new Codex thread having 100 people going "Oh! Found this mistake on page XX". If it's more than 20 all at once it's impressive.

And I say this as someone who is predisposed to finding errors in things. It's a gift and a curse in some ways, but I'm very good at finding the problems in things very quickly. I've done it professionally as well: Was once given a Deathwatch sourcebook to look over and wrote up a 45 page report of everything I could find and it only took me 2 days. GW has more time than that.

I get that few people have your world-leading eye for detail, but it took the entire competitive community several weeks (maybe a few months?) to come up with the all-killer wound-bouncing Leviathan list. Whilst dreadnought shenanigans were obvious, that mess of broken interactions wasn't screaming out from every page.

LOL what are you talking about? It was pointed out in a day suicidal Intercessors affected character Dreads!

Maybe I remember wrong. Where did that list first show up? I recall a whole load of repulsor car parks and storm talon lists before we got round to the immortal
levi.

We got those Repulsor lists actually BEFORE the Supplement, because people wanted to take advantage of the wound chart doubling. When the supplement dropped, we figured out ASAP that Intercessors would be blocking Dread characters, ergo one like a Levi.

Slayer has the right of it here. The moment we learned about supplement contents and rules, character Leviathans dominated the conversation.

 Crimson wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
And the funny thing is if they did 9th ed complete streamline reset like 8th ed(not that they do) the same would happen again.

It's GW's modus operandi. GW hasn't changed in it's style at all.

Sure. But it is not just because GW wants to design games that way, it is what an overwhelming majority of the playerbase wants. They want all this stupid bloat, they want seven thousand different marine codices, they want bespoke rules for any mildly different weapon and doodah. Suggest combining codices, suggest streamlining rules, the shrieking will be unbearable. GW writes bloat because the players want it, simple as that.

I disagree, for pretty much exactly the reason written up in this very FAQ- the designers are completely disengaged from what players want and how they play the game. To the point that they don't even comprehend that players will use the rules as written to try and win games rather than build 'GW proper' combined arms forces (or whatever their mental image is of marine armies, I honestly don't know anymore)

That they had to rewrite these rules to -force- compliance with how Marines are 'supposed' to act says they haven't the least idea in the world what the player base wants. They're just throwing loads of gak at the walls and finding out what's left after players grab the good bits.

I suspect The Bloat comes from the GW marketing and managers, and the design team just writes whatever they're told to so there is another string of books to sell.

Indexes to codexes to the PA codex updates in just a couple years is way too short a cycle for proper rules development. It's about selling short life span books as fast as possible.

I don't put much stock in what GW designers say, they've lied before and will lie again in the future. Their actions speak louder than their feeble excuses for being inept at their jobs.

Voss wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
And the funny thing is if they did 9th ed complete streamline reset like 8th ed(not that they do) the same would happen again.

It's GW's modus operandi. GW hasn't changed in it's style at all.

Sure. But it is not just because GW wants to design games that way, it is what an overwhelming majority of the playerbase wants. They want all this stupid bloat, they want seven thousand different marine codices, they want bespoke rules for any mildly different weapon and doodah. Suggest combining codices, suggest streamlining rules, the shrieking will be unbearable. GW writes bloat because the players want it, simple as that.

I disagree, for pretty much exactly the reason written up in this very FAQ- the designers are completely disengaged from what players want and how they play the game. To the point that they don't even comprehend that players will use the rules as written to try and win games rather than build 'GW proper' combined arms forces (or whatever their mental image is of marine armies, I honestly don't know anymore)

That they had to rewrite these rules to -force- compliance with how Marines are 'supposed' to act says they haven't the least idea in the world what the player base wants. They're just throwing loads of gak at the walls and finding out what's left after players grab the good bits.

I suspect The Bloat comes from the GW marketing and managers, and the design team just writes whatever they're told to so there is another string of books to sell.

Indexes to codexes to the PA codex updates in just a couple years is way too short a cycle for proper rules development. It's about selling short life span books as fast as possible.

Considering the narrative community outnumbers the competetive one (and I mean the truly competetive one, not the folks who go to tourneys for fun, but the folks trying to win top prize) I'm going to say they aren't that out of touch. Competetive play is about solving for a given problem: namely the mission pack. Redundancy and a lower number of moving parts makes that solution easier, but it isn't necessarily how most of the player base actually approaches the game.

And I'm not trying to say that reigning in the competetive side so both sides of the hobby are closer in how they play is bad. Nor am I saying there shouldn't be more balance. I am saying that just because you can do something doesn't make it automatically more valid than how other people play and that erasing a large portion of the player base isn't a valid arguement for anything.

I honestly hope this takes the design studio towards putting more restrictions on armies, paired with even tighter rules, so that given enough time the gap between narrative and competetive 40k becomes much, much smaller.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
I don't put much stock in what GW designers say, they've lied before and will lie again in the future. Their actions speak louder than their feeble excuses for being inept at their jobs.

Or, and this may be crazy, but the people who write the rules from the perspective of the lore might think of those rules in that context over the context of how it'll break ITC when paired with three or four other rules.

I'm not saying that the game doesn't need tightening, but accusing people of lying is a stretch.

Literally everyone lies. It amuses me when someone passes judgement on another person and labels them a "liar" as if we aren't all liars. Such hypocrisy (of course we're all hypocrites too, but at least most of us are capable of the basic levels of self-analysis required to reconcile these facts).

JWBS wrote:
Literally everyone lies. It amuses me when someone passes judgement on another person and labels them a "liar" as if we aren't all liars. Such hypocrisy (of course we're all hypocrites too, but at least most of us are capable of the basic levels of self-analysis required to reconcile these facts).

How dare you accuse everyone of being a liar and a hypocrite. Such a hypocritical lie.

On a serious note, you speak the truth. We all need to have some humility here and not get so worked up on a forum about playing a tabletop game. None of us are perfect and we all make mistakes.

When the Raven Guard stratagem was destroyed my SM models migrated to the garage. When it looked like nothing would change I started selling 40k stuff. I started collecting for a different game. Now, rule changes ahead of an event next month? I live six hours away. So glad I made such choices. So glad.

JWBS wrote:
Literally everyone lies. It amuses me when someone passes judgement on another person and labels them a "liar" as if we aren't all liars. Such hypocrisy (of course we're all hypocrites too, but at least most of us are capable of the basic levels of self-analysis required to reconcile these facts).

While true, the context is most lies are done to smooth social situations with people we know. I fail to see Cruddace's statement as a lie because it only serves to increase scrutiny of the design team, not lessen it. If he is lying it only served to make people more aware of a disconnect between the team and actual players.

It is more likely that this a factual statement made to convey the team recognizing they failed to properly convey intent.

Eadartri wrote:
When the Raven Guard stratagem was destroyed my SM models migrated to the garage. When it looked like nothing would change I started selling 40k stuff. I started collecting for a different game. Now, rule changes ahead of an event next month? I live six hours away. So glad I made such choices. So glad.

I'm just glad you didn't set them on fire!

 Alpharius wrote:

Eadartri wrote:
When the Raven Guard stratagem was destroyed my SM models migrated to the garage. When it looked like nothing would change I started selling 40k stuff. I started collecting for a different game. Now, rule changes ahead of an event next month? I live six hours away. So glad I made such choices. So glad.

I'm just glad you didn't set them on fire!

Please don't tell me there is an FAQ that...

 Alpharius wrote:

Eadartri wrote:
When the Raven Guard stratagem was destroyed my SM models migrated to the garage. When it looked like nothing would change I started selling 40k stuff. I started collecting for a different game. Now, rule changes ahead of an event next month? I live six hours away. So glad I made such choices. So glad.

I'm just glad you didn't set them on fire!

They're safe until "Warhammer 40,000: Age of Guilliman" arrives!

Eadartri wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:

Eadartri wrote:
When the Raven Guard stratagem was destroyed my SM models migrated to the garage. When it looked like nothing would change I started selling 40k stuff. I started collecting for a different game. Now, rule changes ahead of an event next month? I live six hours away. So glad I made such choices. So glad.

I'm just glad you didn't set them on fire!

Please don't tell me there is an FAQ that...

back when warhammer fantasy turned to age of sigmar a video surfaced on the net of a guy actually burning his army. needless to say it's been a mocked joke about fan over reaction ever since

 Galas wrote:
TBH I'm of the opinion that ALL chapters (At least the ones with rules) should have special units. Ironhands should have special terminators and dreadnoughts (And their successors, etc...), White Scars with special bikers and land speeders, etc, etc...

Yeah. Those new units should be, like, pay a CP to get a new keyword and maybe a special rule, pay more CP to activate stratagems that rely on the keyword.
The 8th edition way!!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH I'm of the opinion that ALL chapters (At least the ones with rules) should have special units. Ironhands should have special terminators and dreadnoughts (And their successors, etc...), White Scars with special bikers and land speeders, etc, etc...

Yeah. Those new units should be, like, pay a CP to get a new keyword and maybe a special rule, pay more CP to activate stratagems that rely on the keyword.
The 8th edition way!!

Like the Wolves and the Angels, they should have some elements that make them "special" but 90% of this was always lore or minor name/unit additions, once we got to the mass flanderisation of certian Chapters it (IMO) just got silly and at the same time reduced viability and options of all the other Chapters.

Wouldn't it be cool if you could equip your custom chapter marines with Chainswords - Oh no sorry ONLY Wolves do cos..well we have to make them different so they stay a bit different.
How about Psychic Dreadnoughts - OH no thats a super special Blood Angels thing...can;t possibly let anyone have those even if the lore says so.
Terminator Sergeants for Iron Hands - Nope Wolves only
Black Dragon Mutants - nope Wolves only
Elite Bikers - nope Dark Angels only.

All of the above should just be purchasable unit options for any/all Marine Chapters - don't like an option, don't use it same as I refuse to use the new Wulfen models, Thunder Wolves and Santa Logan. That was everyone gains and NO-ONE loses.

The whole thing reduces choice for everyone including Wolves and Angels as they can't have the OPTION of other vanilla Marines cos otehrwise they are just Marines +1

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH I'm of the opinion that ALL chapters (At least the ones with rules) should have special units. Ironhands should have special terminators and dreadnoughts (And their successors, etc...), White Scars with special bikers and land speeders, etc, etc...

Yeah. Those new units should be, like, pay a CP to get a new keyword and maybe a special rule, pay more CP to activate stratagems that rely on the keyword.
The 8th edition way!!

Like the Wolves and the Angels, they should have some elements that make them "special" but 90% of this was always lore or minor name/unit additions, once we got to the mass flanderisation of certian Chapters it (IMO) just got silly and at the same time reduced viability and options of all the other Chapters.

Wouldn't it be cool if you could equip your custom chapter marines with Chainswords - Oh no sorry ONLY Wolves do cos..well we have to make them different so they stay a bit different.
How about Psychic Dreadnoughts - OH no thats a super special Blood Angels thing...can;t possibly let anyone have those even if the lore says so.
Terminator Sergeants for Iron Hands - Nope Wolves only
Black Dragon Mutants - nope Wolves only
Elite Bikers - nope Dark Angels only.

All of the above should just be purchasable unit options for any/all Marine Chapters - don't like an option, don't use it same as I refuse to use the new Wulfen models, Thunder Wolves and Santa Logan. That was everyone gains and NO-ONE loses.

The whole thing reduces choice for everyone including Wolves and Angels as they can't have the OPTION of other vanilla Marines cos otehrwise they are just Marines +1

I agree with you about more options for everyone. There is no reasons why some of those options are book locked into a specific sub-faction, where they should be available to everyone. This would enable people to make their chapters play they way they want, and help personalize fluffy armies.

However,

If you just pool all the options into one spot, people are just going to cherry pick the most broken stuff from all of the new options available, and make marines disgustingly powerful in competitive circles. What would be a boon for casual players (who tend to self-restrict themselves based on fluff) would be a blank check to min/max for the power gamers.

I remember the time were all Chapters could equip Chainswords but the special thing with Wolves were that they got the +1 Attack Bonus always and not only if the charged

Same as Veteran Bikers and Terminator Sergeants for Vanilla Marines were a thing

A lot of those options are legacy options, left were they are because not all books were updated in each edition in something survived the "streamlining" of one edition and became "this is the feature of this chapter" the next edition


But this is what we have now, GW made a big reset and streamlining for the Core Rules without doing the same for the Faction Rules.
Chance is gone, next one will be when all will be Primaris only

Its teetering now - everytime a new unit comes out for any Marine subfaction or the main Marine Faction - there are immediate demands to include them in all the other subfacition and to be honest there is no lore reason why they would not be.

I agree Primaris was the perfect opportunity to clear up all this crap but sadly did not happen and rather than supplements for certain Marine subfactions we had pretend campaign books which did a similar sapce and reprinted page after page of the same datasheets.

I doubt many of the Options would make much difference to the competative element but its not an area i am involved with these days

Of the few I menitoned above would any of them be a big issue / power boost?

 Mr Morden wrote:
Its teeting now - evertime a new unit comes out for any Marine subfaction or the main Marine Faction - there arer immediate demands to include them in all the other subfacitions.

I agree Primaris was the perfect opportunity to clear up all this crap but sadly did not happen and rather than supplements for certain Marine subfactions we had pretend campaign books which did a similar sapce and reprinted page after page of the same datasheets.

I doubt many of the Options would make much difference to the competative element but its not an area i am involved with these days

Of the few I menitoned above would any of them be a big issue / power boost?

It’s one of those things where the more moving parts there are, the more things can be potentially broken. I’m not going to sift through all the codexes (which I don’t own) to try to find broken stuff. That’s not me. Would it be fluffy to have an Iron Hands librarian dreadnought? Yes, absolutely. Flesh is weak and all that. How do the psychic powers they have interact with their stratagems/chapter tactics/etc on a dread-scaled character? Would ravenwing bikers pulling White Scar’s tricks be evil? No idea, but all it takes is one broken combo and you’ve got the latest table-crushing netlist.

It’s similar to the issues people have with FW. They are not any more broken than the stuff found in the normal codex. But with a larger pool of units to choose from, there are more broken options. People don’t see the crappy units, they see the IH leviathan dreads kicking their teeth in.

There will always be the top level broken stuff. GW does not balance that well, and when they nerf something, the 2nd best option becomes the new hotness. I would love the reversal of flanderization and more options for all marines. But I fear giving us that open sandbox to play in would be catastrophic for non-marine players. Just having so many things to choose from will mean something is going to be broken at any given time. It’s bad enough as it is now.

I don't remember alternatives in normal books to a 2+, T8, dreadnaught with an invulnerable save with a pair of feth you cannons at 2+ BS.

Why in a bloody hell a 2+ model needs an invul?