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.

Smudge. Phobos is not gothic. Historically this style means something. It seems you are oblivious to this ...
Also your rationale for restartes not better fitting in ANY sci fi universe are surface shallow aesthetics. Back paks too large for Halo? WTF srsly?
Missing out? On what? The cheapening of what had been able to capture so much from so many myths and fantasies in a parody future fantasy, turning it into Halo with bigger backpacks? Yeah. Well I avoid also participating in the burning of books out of principle. Have fun tho. To each his own and all that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So many exalts my finger hurts:

changemod wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

changemod wrote:For what it’s worth on the heresy discussion, the emperor has historically had no say on the religion he never wanted to be a thing, gulliman explicitly isn’t a member of the religion (and thus by it’s principles is already heretical just for that), and Cawl couldn’t any more plainly be a heretek within the barely tolerated alternative human religion.

Primaris are extremely heretical within the standards of the imperial cult, it’s just orders have come down from on high within the totalitarian theocratic state that this week’s official doublethink is to ignore that. Cognitive dissonance isn’t exactly new to the imperium either.

As I see it, the Ecclesiarchy are the "real" heretics, by the Emperor's terms (obviously by being religious). But if Guilliman and Cawl have been explicitly told by the Emperor that what they're doing is what he wants, then from an OOC perspective, we know they're not heretical. Sure, some people within the setting may believe they are, but as you say, there's been enough people in high places who have vouched for them both, and thereby exonerate them of heresy charges.

Again, I don't really judge true in-universe heresy by the standard of the Imperial Cult, given how trigger happy they can be - hardly a good metre for judgement. If I'm talking about heresy from an OOC perspective looking in, then it would be something like ignoring/breaking the Emperor's will and edicts and directly supporting an entity other than the Imperium or Mars. Under those terms, Guilliman and Cawl and the Primaris are completely not heretics.

Bizzare post formatting that was a nightmare to undo on mobile aside,

Heresy can only be judged from the perspective of a religion because it’s an inherently religious concept. The emperor and gulliman are both atheists who want as little to do with the imperial cult as possible.

From an out of setting perspective I can’t fairly say that the primaris aren’t a heretical concept, because the more level headed voices in the room don’t have any use for or investment in the concept of heresy. Instead, I can only judge by taking the imperial cult in general terms, looking at what things they tend to hate, and recognising that Primaris fit the bill of heretics very thoroughly.

 Vankraken wrote:
That said I dislike the very busy poses they have which makes repeat model syndrome appear more prevalent unlike the more neutral poses for older sculpts.

I am not seeing this issue. The spoiler is all the Tacticus Primaris marines I have. The closest to repeat poses I can see is maybe third row, 3rd and 4th from the left which I think just looks like a fairly standard brace to shoot pose. The next closest is the standard Hellblasters (plasmaguns) which were from Know No Fear and were limited in posing by way of construction. Maybe I am bias being they are my models and/or liking Primaris, but I don't really see your repeat model syndrome over some 40+ marines which is should be more than enough even for a Primaris only 2000pt army and I can think a few more ways to model them and still not have repeaters.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jeff white wrote:
Phobos is not gothic.

Can you show me what in the Assault Squad model kit makes them Gothic?

I was content to lurk on this topic, reading all the responses while stuffing my fist in my mouth, but this wee bit jumped out at me.

the_scotsman wrote:My point is that GW tossed out the "Medieval knight techno-barbarian" aesthetic that space marines had for a cringe-inducing COD modern warfare edgy teen tacticool look on a ton of the primaris stuff

'Edgy teen'.

A thing for edgy teens.

No awareness that that's not just the 'medieval knight techno-barbarian aesthetic (rolled in spikez 'n' skullz)', but all of 40K, in a nutshell.

For me the problem with the primaris has little to do with gothic. I mainly dislike the new scale and the proportions. They are simply too big. If they were intended for that size they should be fatter, like power armoured ogryns. I dont see why marines have to be taller than humans though. I mean sure maybe a little because of thick boots and a helmet. But they ought to be just humans with more muscles and some added organs. The skeleton is already set when a human has become adult yes? What would even be the advantage of making taller soldiers? I came here to play 28mm damn it, not 35mm or whatever all new guys are.

Smaller irks:
-lack of vox grill is sad, I want that visual
-Flanged knee pads look out of place
-no variation in the armor pattern.
-the concept "marines but bigger" is stupid. It seems to be the general design approach when new people taking over a franchise. Like star wars starkiller base "its a death star, but bigger". Not very inspiring or cool...

I've seen some people online making newer armies of Rouge Trader and 2nd edition Space Marines; that's tempting.

If they were to stop production of "old" Marines wholesale, I'd be tempted to collect a bunch and make an Imperial Fist or White Scars army for 30k (Siege of Terra and all of that).

If I were to start a Chaos Army, Chances are I'd go for Black Legion. Primary goal would be collecting every kind of cultist, or anything that could work as a cultist, that GW ever produced. Doing something similar for Chaos Marines sounds like a good goal as well.

Gitdakka wrote:
For me the problem with the primaris has little to do with gothic. I mainly dislike the new scale and the proportions. They are simply too big. If they were intended for that size they should be fatter, like power armoured ogryns. I dont see why marines have to be taller than humans though. I mean sure maybe a little because of thick boots and a helmet. But they ought to be just humans with more muscles and some added organs. The skeleton is already set when a human has become adult yes? What would even be the advantage of making taller soldiers? I came here to play 28mm damn it, not 35mm or whatever all new guys are.

Smaller irks:
-lack of vox grill is sad, I want that visual
-Flanged knee pads look out of place
-no variation in the armor pattern.
-the concept "marines but bigger" is stupid. It seems to be the general design approach when new people taking over a franchise. Like star wars starkiller base "its a death star, but bigger". Not very inspiring or cool...

1. Boy wait until you see Mks 2-6
2. The knee pads actually make sense being part of the calf armor
3. There is variation in the armors and helmets, and yet you complain about no vox grill, which not all the manlet Marines have.
4. In reality the models are just scaled better.

IOW, it is people not having actual complaints grounded in reality. The moment they make Mk3-4 dudes on the scale I'm tossing my current project.

I'm not a marine player, but I think The Primaris overall look better than the chimps-in-armour proportioned oldmarines. That said, they really need some upgrade sprues to enable decorative customisation.

The biggest loss IMO is the vehicles; land raiders and rhinos are realy iconic, while the new vehicles look like somebody's first attempt at a kitbash.

Also for those complaining that the armor "isn't gothic"

Marine armor has NEVER been gothic.


Gothic ARMOUR is a very partiuclar style of late medieval full plate noted for being rounded and having fluted surfaces



that doesn't look like mark 7 armor any more then it looks like mark 10 armor

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
IOW, it is people not having actual complaints grounded in reality. The moment they make Mk3-4 dudes on the scale I'm tossing my current project.

True scale mark III and IV? Hell yeah. Come on gw, shut up and take my money!

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
IOW, it is people not having actual complaints grounded in reality. The moment they make Mk3-4 dudes on the scale I'm tossing my current project.

True scale mark III and IV? Hell yeah. Come on gw, shut up and take my money!

Truth be told I absolutely hate the chest Aquila. Add on that Mk3-5 clearly look superior anyway and don't have that one annoying bit and you got gold.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
IOW, it is people not having actual complaints grounded in reality. The moment they make Mk3-4 dudes on the scale I'm tossing my current project.

True scale mark III and IV? Hell yeah. Come on gw, shut up and take my money!

There are plenty of 3d models you can scale up to the right size to get what you need.

 harlokin wrote:
I'm not a marine player, but I think The Primaris overall look better than the chimps-in-armour proportioned oldmarines. That said, they really need some upgrade sprues to enable decorative customisation.

The biggest loss IMO is the vehicles; land raiders and rhinos are realy iconic, while the new vehicles look like somebody's first attempt at a kitbash.

It isn't like Manlet Marines have to be present on the vehicles. That's why I tell everyone wanting a "pure" Primaris army to not worry about inconsistency if they add Predators or Stormtalons. I will say I don't like the Repulsor and friends, but the Impuslor actually looks decent. The FW super heavy ain't bad either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hellebore wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
IOW, it is people not having actual complaints grounded in reality. The moment they make Mk3-4 dudes on the scale I'm tossing my current project.

True scale mark III and IV? Hell yeah. Come on gw, shut up and take my money!

There are plenty of 3d models you can scale up to the right size to get what you need.

While probably true, the sculptors of GW actually deserve some money here and there. The rules writers can go feth themselves of course. However, outside maybe wanting a particular weapon I wouldn't do a lot of 3D printing.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
IOW, it is people not having actual complaints grounded in reality. The moment they make Mk3-4 dudes on the scale I'm tossing my current project.

True scale mark III and IV? Hell yeah. Come on gw, shut up and take my money!

Truth be told I absolutely hate the chest Aquila. Add on that Mk3-5 clearly look superior anyway and don't have that one annoying bit and you got gold.

The Aquila is ok, after a little work with a hobby knife for the proper defacement of course.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The FW super heavy ain't bad either.

That sicaran halo scorpion crossbreed abomination? Nope. Real super heavy tanks have treads.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Gitdakka wrote:
For me the problem with the primaris has little to do with gothic. I mainly dislike the new scale and the proportions. They are simply too big. If they were intended for that size they should be fatter, like power armoured ogryns. I dont see why marines have to be taller than humans though. I mean sure maybe a little because of thick boots and a helmet. But they ought to be just humans with more muscles and some added organs. The skeleton is already set when a human has become adult yes? What would even be the advantage of making taller soldiers? I came here to play 28mm damn it, not 35mm or whatever all new guys are.

Smaller irks:
-lack of vox grill is sad, I want that visual
-Flanged knee pads look out of place
-no variation in the armor pattern.
-the concept "marines but bigger" is stupid. It seems to be the general design approach when new people taking over a franchise. Like star wars starkiller base "its a death star, but bigger". Not very inspiring or cool...

1. Boy wait until you see Mks 2-6
2. The knee pads actually make sense being part of the calf armor
3. There is variation in the armors and helmets, and yet you complain about no vox grill, which not all the manlet Marines have.
4. In reality the models are just scaled better.

IOW, it is people not having actual complaints grounded in reality. The moment they make Mk3-4 dudes on the scale I'm tossing my current project.

Way to stick your head in the sand m8.
1. If you really think I have not seen the other armor marks 1000 times already you are naive.
2. it does not matter if they make sense or not. They look impractial and useless. They would lead any melee strike into a weakspot in the armor.
3. I know not all armors have them but they were cool.
4. I think I explained pretty thoroughly why I don't like them. It's subjective and based on silly things like wanting my miniatures to be proper small. I don't like size creep and i like heroic scale when excecuted well, like the modern tacticals.

My opponions are subjective, but i explained them as well as I could. You calling that delusional is not that cool in my book.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
The "tacticool" aesthetic is terrible and has no place in 40K.

They turned Space Marines from something unique and cool into something I will never buy. If I wanted tacticool I'd play any of the other countless futuristic soldiers game.

40K is fantasy in space. Lets keep it that way.

I don't recognize the lower model. Has the Halo franchise started producing minis?

 Strg Alt wrote:

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
The "tacticool" aesthetic is terrible and has no place in 40K.

They turned Space Marines from something unique and cool into something I will never buy. If I wanted tacticool I'd play any of the other countless futuristic soldiers game.

40K is fantasy in space. Lets keep it that way.

I don't recognize the lower model. Has the Halo franchise started producing minis?

that's the Primaris Incursor, a SINGLE varient of Primaris Marine. as you well know.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Like I said, none of the Primaris line outside a couple of Phobos is Tacticool.

Yeah, I'm sorry, but anyone saying that Tacticus or Gravis armoured Primaris look tacticool really need to learn what tacticool means. Phobos being more tacticool? Yeah, I can get where that's coming from - but I'd also like to point out that they look more "Space Marine-y" than Scouts. Like, please, for all the people hating on tacticool Marines, what was your opinion on Scout Squads? What about the Raptors Chapter?

If you're going to complain about tacticool models, at least ONLY talk about the Phobos Marines, not the rest of the range. That's be like me saying "I hate Space Marines because Scouts look dumb".

godardc wrote:There are really people here thinking primaris don't have a more streamlined and generic sci-fi design than the marines ?

Yeah. Between these two pictures, are you really telling me you don't think the Intercessor is the more blinged up and "gothic/ornate/grimdark/insert-buzzword-here" of the two?

Tabard, purity seals, decorative shield, something hanging from his shoulders? If you believed 40k was all about the walking cathedral aesthetic, the Intercessor has it. The Tactical? Aside from the chest aquila, and a few studs on his helmet, they're pretty much smooth and unmarked. Strange, that seems to be the reason given for why people dislike the Primaris. It's almost like streamlined Marines were already a thing.

Just because before we had one example of "modern" warfare marines (raptors / rg successors) isn't an excuse, it was an option left amongst hundreds of "medieval" chapters (like UM, BT, BA and most of the successor chapters who are definitely not generic sci-fi).

But for anyone to say "Real Space Marines aren't tacticool" is being wilfully ignorant. Yes, no-one's denying that the Raptors aren't the be-all-end-all of Chapters, but they prove that not all Chapters were blinged out. And, as my picture above shows, it's hardly like EVERY Space Marine in the more traditional Chapters (like Ultramarines) were all decked out in trinkets.
As you said, being tacticool was an option, just like how giving all your Marines trinkets and seals and tabards was an option. There's no definitive version of a Space Marine beyond big power armour with curved shoulder pads, a chunky rectangular bolter, and being genetically engineered. Primaris don't break that.

And yes, technically, every hobbyist can convert his models and blablabla. But the reality is they don't have even paint their models so no, the fact one in ten guys will convert their models isn't an excuse for GW laziness / lost of ip / whatever.

I don't see how. Again, I've posted a picture of an old Marine who has less ornamentation on him than most new models earlier in this thread. Does that mean GW lost their IP already?

Sorry, but if you're going to complain about GW's models not being exactly how you like them, and not put in any work yourself, that's on you. I want my Marines to already come pre-painted in the custom Chapter colour of my choice - it's GW's fault for not doing that! /s

And in addition it's badly executed: the scope is BEHIND the picatinny rail and marines have never needed them because they have scope and sensors in their helmet to hit target at normal range (have you seen Ultramarines movie ? The Dawn Of War Dark Crusade intro (against the necrons) ? ).

I have, yes. Isn't the Ultramarines movie widely panned? Also, in the Ultramarines movie, Brother Verenor *has a bolter with a scope behind the sight*. So the movie which you use as evidence of "Marines shouldn't have scopes" HAS A MARINE WITH A SCOPE.

So what, primaris helmets are just inferior ?

Inferior by what metric? Also, I'd like to point out that they share more in common with older Space Marine designs than even the Mark 7, both in-universe and out of it.
In-universe, they're a callback to Mark IV 'Maximus' plate (to the point where I've seen people outright using Mark IV helmets on Primaris and the difference being negligible), and out of universe, their flat shape and lack of a grille is closer in design to the original beaky Marines.
Like, sorry to say it, but Marines having mouth grilles is the exception, in terms of their historical armour.

Vankraken wrote:Most of the phobos stuff is too much Call of Duty like with stuff like the Eliminators... sniper scout 2.0 having bloody G36s for the front half of their snipers. Same issue with reavers... (The spooky Skelly Boyz) as they look like some "special" forces BS you see in a sci fi themed COD game.

Eh, CoD isn't nearly as heavily armoured. But I see what you mean with the front of bolt snipers (las-fusils are safe though?). As far as Reiver skull masks go, wouldn't Chaplains suffer similarly?

The jump pack guys and the centurions 2.0 are not tacticool or whatever but are just weak design in general.

Is that an objectively weak design, or just your opinion?

The stealth dread or whatever the gak it's suppose to be looks like the Walker mechs from Avatar

Like, kinda? But Dreadnights also have the same. And again, it's ONE vehicle. By all means, criticise that one vehicle, but it's not the entire Primaris range. Otherwise, that'd be like me saying "Orks are dumb and unoriginal GW are just copying Mad Max because look at the grot strapped to the front of that buggy", or some other stupid argument.

while the redeptor dread has a very Tau looking plasma cannon (similar weapon silhouette to a crisis suit/ghostkeel Ion Weapon).

How does it look Tau? It looks the same as practically any Dreadnought plasma cannon, especially the Contemptor design:

In general though the Primaris line shifts away from the sci fi fantasy knights (often with ornate stuff similar to stuff seen in ceremonial gothic armor) to a more sci fi COD or Master Chief look.

Alright, I'm curious. I'm seeing CoD and Master Chief thrown around a lot in terms of "what the Primaris look like". If you have the time, I'd REALLY appreciate if you can pull up a picture of Master Chief and a Primaris Marine, and show me what the similarities are that older Marines don't also have. Because I've been looking, and I cannot see a single new feature.

Also, just going back to the whole "sci-f fantasy knights (with ornate stuff...)" comment - in this same post, I've shown a Tactical Marine who is barely ornamented, and an Intercessor dressed to the nines. Rather defeats that line of logic, no?

It clashes a bit when they are in the same faction that has WW1/WW2 looking gear and vehicles for regular troops. Not to mention all the "definitely not the Catholic Church" forces that exist in the fluff.

Isn't clashing/contrasting designs always been a thing for 40k? I mean, you're telling me that even amongst the Guard alone that they all have a unified look? Catachans, Cadians, Tallarn, Vostroyan, Death Korps, Elysians, Armageddon, Scions, etc? In any other miniatures game, these would all be opposing factions!
Even between Space Marines, there's clashing aesthetics (Raptors with sleek, camouflaged, stripped down armour, compared to ostentatious Black Templars, rune-covered Space Wolves and robed, winged Dark Angels).

jeff white wrote:Smudge. Phobos is not gothic. Historically this style means something. It seems you are oblivious to this ...

Interesting - the actual *GOTHIC* armour posted by Slayer-fan is much closer in design to the Primaris Tacticus Armour, not Mark VII Aquila.

I'm also not saying that Phobos are exceptionally gothic. But Phobos Marines also aren't all Primaris Marines. By that same logic, old Marines aren't gothic, because Scouts have no gothic parts on their armour.

Also your rationale for restartes not better fitting in ANY sci fi universe are surface shallow aesthetics. Back paks too large for Halo? WTF srsly?

No, come on. If you're going to claim that Primaris Marines look like Halo or any other sci-fi setting more, show me another sci-fi setting, and how the Primaris Marines (the entire range, don't forget, because they're more than any single unit!) would fit in there better. Visual diagrams would be appreciated, ty.

Missing out? On what? The cheapening of what had been able to capture so much from so many myths and fantasies in a parody future fantasy, turning it into Halo with bigger backpacks? Yeah.

Still waiting for someone to elaborate on Primaris being closer to Halo than 40k, but do go on.

Well I avoid also participating in the burning of books out of principle.

Nice dogwhistle there.
If you think that Marines getting slightly bigger is akin to erasing entire cultures, I think you need to step away from the keyboard for a bit and breathe.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Strg Alt wrote:
Has the Halo franchise started producing minis?

Har-dee-har. Which version of MJOLNIR Armour does that look like? I don't think it does- oh. It's almost like people just cry out "it looks like Halo" without backing up that claim.


Just to repeat myself:
What are the gothic aesthetics for Space Marine Scouts?
What about the artwork of Tactical Marines I've posted that have no ornamentation?
What are the similar design features between Halo's Spartans and Primaris Marines *specifically*?

Basic Space Marines have never had anything gothic or blinged about them. Assault, tacticals, devastators, space scouts, etc...

The more elite and specialized boxes, and later kits, many of them loathed by the community for being too blinged, are the ones with more detail, as it should be.

Yeah, the Phobos line of units have more of a tactical aesthetic. And thats fine, is a new take on marines that DOESN'T replaces the more grounded basic one or the more elite one. So is basically more options.

GW has said that the first batches of primaris would be "basic" stuff. Intercessors, hellblasters, aggressors, inceptors, etc... are just like devastators, tacticals, assault squads, in that they have just plain armor without any kind of chapter specific variety or detail. In the future they said they would release more chapter specific and more elite and blinged primaris units.

Imagine if the basic intercessor squad was as "gothic" and blinged as, I don't know, Deathwing Knights. How would you go even more elite to represent other troops? Do you really want space marines to be all Sanguinary guard nipple-chest armor level of blinged? Thats enough gothic?

One can not like the design of certain space marine units, or even all space marine units. But trying to sell the whole primaris line as some giant departure from what space marines aesthetic is, when only the Vanguard line have a different aesthetic, is just wrong.

Well... I decided to implement any leftover CSM and Loyal models that survived the summer collection Purge last year, might be repurposed into a Fabius Bile warband (if rules allow)

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Vankraken wrote:Most of the phobos stuff is too much Call of Duty like with stuff like the Eliminators... sniper scout 2.0 having bloody G36s for the front half of their snipers. Same issue with reavers... (The spooky Skelly Boyz) as they look like some "special" forces BS you see in a sci fi themed COD game.

Eh, CoD isn't nearly as heavily armoured. But I see what you mean with the front of bolt snipers (las-fusils are safe though?). As far as Reiver skull masks go, wouldn't Chaplains suffer similarly?

Reivers aren't based on CoD, they're a rip off of Terror Squads. So once again going back to an example of the older armour designs (though infuriatingly so for Night Lords players) not based off of out of universe designs.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Vankraken wrote:Most of the phobos stuff is too much Call of Duty like with stuff like the Eliminators... sniper scout 2.0 having bloody G36s for the front half of their snipers. Same issue with reavers... (The spooky Skelly Boyz) as they look like some "special" forces BS you see in a sci fi themed COD game.

Eh, CoD isn't nearly as heavily armoured. But I see what you mean with the front of bolt snipers (las-fusils are safe though?). As far as Reiver skull masks go, wouldn't Chaplains suffer similarly?

Reivers aren't based on CoD, they're a rip off of Terror Squads. So once again going back to an example of the older armour designs (though infuriatingly so for Night Lords players) not based off of out of universe designs.

I've said as much in the past, but nope, apparently that's still not "Space Marine-y".

"No mouth grille!" - But what about Mark 2, 3, 4, and 6 armour?
"No squad special weapon!" - But what about 30k Tactical Squads?
"No bling and ornamentation!" - But what about both 30k and 40k Tacticals who have very little decoration?
"Shouldn't have power armoured snipers!" - But what about Legion Recon Squads?
A lot of the things that "aren't space marine-y" are things that the Legions did. Are we now saying that those weren't Space Marines?

Gitdakka wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Gitdakka wrote:
For me the problem with the primaris has little to do with gothic. I mainly dislike the new scale and the proportions. They are simply too big. If they were intended for that size they should be fatter, like power armoured ogryns. I dont see why marines have to be taller than humans though. I mean sure maybe a little because of thick boots and a helmet. But they ought to be just humans with more muscles and some added organs. The skeleton is already set when a human has become adult yes? What would even be the advantage of making taller soldiers? I came here to play 28mm damn it, not 35mm or whatever all new guys are.

Smaller irks:
-lack of vox grill is sad, I want that visual
-Flanged knee pads look out of place
-no variation in the armor pattern.
-the concept "marines but bigger" is stupid. It seems to be the general design approach when new people taking over a franchise. Like star wars starkiller base "its a death star, but bigger". Not very inspiring or cool...

1. Boy wait until you see Mks 2-6
2. The knee pads actually make sense being part of the calf armor
3. There is variation in the armors and helmets, and yet you complain about no vox grill, which not all the manlet Marines have.
4. In reality the models are just scaled better.

IOW, it is people not having actual complaints grounded in reality. The moment they make Mk3-4 dudes on the scale I'm tossing my current project.

Way to stick your head in the sand m8.
1. If you really think I have not seen the other armor marks 1000 times already you are naive.
2. it does not matter if they make sense or not. They look impractial and useless. They would lead any melee strike into a weakspot in the armor.
3. I know not all armors have them but they were cool.
4. I think I explained pretty thoroughly why I don't like them. It's subjective and based on silly things like wanting my miniatures to be proper small. I don't like size creep and i like heroic scale when excecuted well, like the modern tacticals.

My opponions are subjective, but i explained them as well as I could. You calling that delusional is not that cool in my book.

1. Your complaint goes off the basis those Mks don't exist. So either Vox Grill is not a real complaint, or you think any of the other helmets aren't for "real" Marines either. Pick one.
2. It's literally no more a weak point than the manlet Marines.
3. Which means you're just complaining to complain.
4. The minis are still small LOL you serious right now. So unless you're suggesting they make Guard Infantry or Eldar Guardians smaller than they already are, the Manlet Marines aren't well designed for the scale of the game.

Space Marine Mk7 Helmets are the one thing that's the worst constant aesthetic about the Space Marine line.
OldMarine infantry leaves a lot to be desired as is, but anything to not have the awful frowny helmet.

It is my opinion that the helmets without the grills already go a long way to looking better, and they'd look even better if they did away with the little eyes and maybe went for sensors, a eye slot, or a solid faceplate. I prefer mine helmetless, since I hate the helmets.

Brutus_Apex wrote:The "tacticool" aesthetic is terrible and has no place in 40K.

They turned Space Marines from something unique and cool into something I will never buy. If I wanted tacticool I'd play any of the other countless futuristic soldiers game.

40K is fantasy in space. Lets keep it that way.

That's you. I for welcome moving towards a more Sci Fi stance for the Space Marines [though they weren't particularly fantasy before either anyway].

Warhammer 40k isn't just fantasy in space any more than Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica, Mass Effect, Halo, Starcraft, etc. are. Necrons, Tau, Tyranids, and Imperial Guard aren't fantasy at all, and are classic sci-fi factions. Tyranids, Tau, and Imperial Guard aren't fantasy at all, and the Necrons only received a little bit of egyptian theming when they were retconned but it's just a little bit of character.
Even the supposed "fantasy factions", excepting the Chaos Daemons, have enough Sci-Fi in them to keep them in the sci-fi camp.

And the Space Marines are pretty "blank canvas". They're not intrinsically fantasy, unless you make yours fantasy. There's a long supported ability to play Raven Guard, Raptors, or Iron Hands if you don't want to play Black Templars or Space Wolves.


So I really like the Primaris Marines, especially the Vanguards.

I also like the silly tacticool theme they have. It's not just tacticool, it's in classic 40k sense done to a point where it's over the top and funny. It's an aesthetic that fits the Space Marine's primary lore tagline ["why should you play Space Marines? Because they're awesome 8ft tall super soldiers in power armor with guns that shoot exploding bullets!"], and is in the setting fairly unique to them [and to the Elysians, who are discontinued anyway and also awesome].

BrianDavion wrote:
Also for those complaining that the armor "isn't gothic"

Marine armor has NEVER been gothic.


Gothic ARMOUR is a very partiuclar style of late medieval full plate noted for being rounded and having fluted surfaces



that doesn't look like mark 7 armor any more then it looks like mark 10 armor

There is more to the term than armor of a period. There is the historical era before science rose when faith reigned... high vaulted stained glass ornate etc... with organs and ritual upon ritual.

Marine armor in its glory has these elements. Scouts not so much but this makes sense as they are not yet decorated.

Restartes have no such era. No call back to history in the aesthetic. If anything, the rise of Cawl represents the Renaissance... which is why the restartes are essentially heretical.

Anyways your strawman is dead now.

There is more to the term than armor of a period. There is the historical era before science rose when faith reigned... high vaulted stained glass ornate etc... with organs and ritual upon ritual.

Marine armor in its glory has these elements. Scouts not so much but this makes sense as they are not yet decorated.

You'll have to point out to me where marine armor has stained glass and pipe organs.

I mean after you're done moving that goalpost of course.

 ScarletRose wrote:

There is more to the term than armor of a period. There is the historical era before science rose when faith reigned... high vaulted stained glass ornate etc... with organs and ritual upon ritual.

Marine armor in its glory has these elements. Scouts not so much but this makes sense as they are not yet decorated.

You'll have to point out to me where marine armor has stained glass and pipe organs.

The Sisters of Battle have that covered.

jeff white wrote:There is more to the term than armor of a period. There is the historical era before science rose when faith reigned... high vaulted stained glass ornate etc... with organs and ritual upon ritual.

Okay - where's all the ornate high vaulted stained glass with organs and rituals on this model?

Marine armor in its glory has these elements. Scouts not so much but this makes sense as they are not yet decorated.

Soooooo, Scouts aren't Space Marines then? They're not gothic, they're not ornate, they're more like - *gasp!* - TACTICOOL!!

Double standards much?

Restartes have no such era. No call back to history in the aesthetic.

Wrong on both counts of IRL and within 40k's own background - within their own background, you can clearly see inspiration from previous armour marks (Mark IV especially), and I'm sorry, but you're blind if you can't see the same pauldrons, the same backpack, the same and breastplate. I mean, in my above picture, what are these "call backs to history in the aesthetic"? Please, highlight them, be comprehensive.

Anyways your strawman is dead now.

You've not even touched it! In fact, you've just made the opposing argument stronger by outright admitting Scouts have a widely different aesthetic!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nevelon wrote:

 ScarletRose wrote:

There is more to the term than armor of a period. There is the historical era before science rose when faith reigned... high vaulted stained glass ornate etc... with organs and ritual upon ritual.

Marine armor in its glory has these elements. Scouts not so much but this makes sense as they are not yet decorated.

You'll have to point out to me where marine armor has stained glass and pipe organs.

The Sisters of Battle have that covered.

Oh, yes, but jeff here is implying that that's a Space Marine feature.

Sgt_Smudge 787175 10768582 wrote:

jeff white wrote:Smudge. Phobos is not gothic. Historically this style means something. It seems you are oblivious to this ...

Interesting - the actual *GOTHIC* armour posted by Slayer-fan is much closer in design to the Primaris Tacticus Armour, not Mark VII Aquila.

I'm also not saying that Phobos are exceptionally gothic. But Phobos Marines also aren't all Primaris Marines. By that same logic, old Marines aren't gothic, because Scouts have no gothic parts on their armour.

Also your rationale for restartes not better fitting in ANY sci fi universe are surface shallow aesthetics. Back paks too large for Halo? WTF srsly?

No, come on. If you're going to claim that Primaris Marines look like Halo or any other sci-fi setting more, show me another sci-fi setting, and how the Primaris Marines (the entire range, don't forget, because they're more than any single unit!) would fit in there better. Visual diagrams would be appreciated, ty.

Missing out? On what? The cheapening of what had been able to capture so much from so many myths and fantasies in a parody future fantasy, turning it into Halo with bigger backpacks? Yeah.

Still waiting for someone to elaborate on Primaris being closer to Halo than 40k, but do go on.

Well I avoid also participating in the burning of books out of principle.

Nice dogwhistle there.
If you think that Marines getting slightly bigger is akin to erasing entire cultures, I think you need to step away from the keyboard for a bit and breathe.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Strg Alt wrote:
Has the Halo franchise started producing minis?

Har-dee-har. Which version of MJOLNIR Armour does that look like? I don't think it does- oh. It's almost like people just cry out "it looks like Halo" without backing up that claim.


Just to repeat myself:
What are the gothic aesthetics for Space Marine Scouts?
What about the artwork of Tactical Marines I've posted that have no ornamentation?
What are the similar design features between Halo's Spartans and Primaris Marines *specifically*?

Smudge GW must pay you to produce straw men and bad faith arguments... cuz they are as bad as current background.

Gothic names an era 400years long. Armor existed in different styles. One constant was the role of faith in art culture architecture and limited tech burdened by ritual ... where are the sacred bolter rounds in a restartes bolter? Litanies? Yada? Zilch. Heretics.

Here is an example of gothic era armor in historical context:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4e/08/1a/4e081a85f23f9fe3295b0267712a9909.jpg
Note the 1300s... and that if you had to place restartes anywhere herein they look most like a modern cop.

Another dead strawman...



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

jeff white wrote:There is more to the term than armor of a period. There is the historical era before science rose when faith reigned... high vaulted stained glass ornate etc... with organs and ritual upon ritual.

Okay - where's all the ornate high vaulted stained glass with organs and rituals on this model?

Marine armor in its glory has these elements. Scouts not so much but this makes sense as they are not yet decorated.

Soooooo, Scouts aren't Space Marines then? They're not gothic, they're not ornate, they're more like - *gasp!* - TACTICOOL!!

Double standards much?

Restartes have no such era. No call back to history in the aesthetic.

Wrong on both counts of IRL and within 40k's own background - within their own background, you can clearly see inspiration from previous armour marks (Mark IV especially), and I'm sorry, but you're blind if you can't see the same pauldrons, the same backpack, the same and breastplate. I mean, in my above picture, what are these "call backs to history in the aesthetic"? Please, highlight them, be comprehensive.

Anyways your strawman is dead now.

You've not even touched it! In fact, you've just made the opposing argument stronger by outright admitting Scouts have a widely different aesthetic!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nevelon wrote:

 ScarletRose wrote:

There is more to the term than armor of a period. There is the historical era before science rose when faith reigned... high vaulted stained glass ornate etc... with organs and ritual upon ritual.

Marine armor in its glory has these elements. Scouts not so much but this makes sense as they are not yet decorated.

You'll have to point out to me where marine armor has stained glass and pipe organs.

The Sisters of Battle have that covered.

Oh, yes, but jeff here is implying that that's a Space Marine feature.

Not every soldier is decorated. He prays says his ritual things goes through his ritual motions... asks for his bolter to be blessed.

Restartes check their social media. Magic cards. Moms credit card... and time to play GI Joe wannabe

You say widely different aesthetic as if everyone wore the same uniform for 20 generations.
Just weak bad faith arguments Smudge. Tiresome.

Not widely different ... not decorated. Gothic means most had nothing. Servants. ... a failing empire. You just cannot get it.

K Smudge. Bad faith is the game i guess but i dont play that. Another reason to hate restartes. GW showed bad faith and still suffer for it. GI Joe wannabes for Hasbro wannabe fanboiz.

Enjoy your self Smudge. Authenticity trumps poseur off table and on where I game.

jeff white wrote:Smudge GW must pay you to produce straw men and bad faith arguments... cuz they are as bad as current background.

If my arguments are so bad, why can't you disprove them? Because so far, your efforts have been less than stellar.

Gothic names an era 400years long. Armor existed in different styles. One constant was the role of faith in art culture architecture and limited tech burdened by ritual ... where are the sacred bolter rounds in a restartes bolter? Litanies? Yada? Zilch. Heretics.

Um, what? Where have we been told that their bolt rounds are produced any differently to the ones by normal Astartes? Where have we been told anywhere that the Primaris arsenal isn't similarly meticulously blessed, prayed over, etc etc? I mean, for christ's sakes, they have Chaplains! The Aggressor Squads are sculpted with reliquaries and sacred bones on their belts! Purity seals are freely supplied in the kits, alongside various trinkets and badges!

Where on earth are you getting this "Primaris Marines don't bless their bolters" nonsense from?!

Here is an example of gothic era armor in historical context:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4e/08/1a/4e081a85f23f9fe3295b0267712a9909.jpg
Note the 13th century...

You mean the 1200s?
Now, looking at the *14th* Century to the 16th Century - well, I don't know about you, but that armour looks like it would be perfect for both Tactical Marines and Intercessors.

and that if you had to place restartes anywhere herein they look most like a modern cop.

How? Please, point to your breakdown of the design, as comprehensively as possible.
Obviously, the Primaris don't look anything like a modern police officer. But you know what do?
Scouts. I mean, look - cloth armour on the limbs, exposed neck, even a more exposed face!

So, just to confirm, you would agree then that Scouts aren't PROPER Space Marines, and they'd be more at home in any other sci-fi setting, yes?

Another dead strawman...

You've answered literally nothing. It's not even a strawman argument!

 jeff white wrote:
Not every soldier is decorated. He prays says his ritual things goes through his ritual motions... asks for his bolter to be blessed.

Well, that concept makes a bit of a mockery of "SPACE MARINES ARE SOOPER GOTHIC AND RELIGIOUS AND ORNATE AND SO FAITHFUL" when you're also saying that they... don't all have ornate armour? Weren't you also complaining that Primaris Marines don't have ornate armour? If that's the case, why can't we assume that that particular Primaris is decorated?

I'm not asking much from your argument, but I do expect a basic level of consistency.
You said you disliked Primaris because their armour was plain and had no decorations (in itself a false statement, as proven by artwork above). Then, when faced with a non-Primaris Marine with no ornamentation, you say that it's okay?

Again, what's your source for Primaris not being religious/doing their daily devotions? They have Chaplains, Masters of Sanctity, wear purity seals, reliquaries, badges of honour. What's your source for them not doing all the same?

Oh, yeah. You don't have any.

Restartes check their social media. Magic cards. Moms credit card... and time to play GI Joe wannabe

Har-dee-har.
Now, if you're done being childish, where's your ACTUAL argument?

Not widely different ... not decorated.

Pardon? As YOU said, you disliked Primaris because their armour was bare. Why don't you complain about that bare Tactical Marine?

Gothic means most had nothing.

No, it's not. Read a dictionary, get a basic grasp of gothic art, and then tell me that with a straight face.

K Smudge. Bad faith is the game i guess bug i dont play that.

Bad faith? I'm the one citing sources, elaborating on my points, and highlighting your double standards. Your contribution to the intelligence of this debate can be summed up as "Restartes check their social media. Magic cards. Moms credit card... and time to play GI Joe wannabe".

Do you actually *have* an argument beyond blind dislike?

Authenticity trumps poseur off table and on where I game.

If your comments in this thread are any indication of "authenticity" in your local area, thank god I'm not playing there.