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.

I won't be boycotting anybody outright, but if things are boring I will just end up stop playing and go play something else; whether AoS, BMG, or something entirely different.

Bosskelot does hit the nail on the head with one point. Faction prevalence does affect how obnoxious something can get. In my area we didn't have many Ynnari players during their height. Maybe 1 or 2 on a good day, so their dominance was very minimal and affected me little. In comparison I've always had a plethora of marine players around me and whenever I go to local Tourneys I am guaranteed that 2 out of 3 games will be against marine players. If they get stronger that will make it even more boring.

The codex release will be interesting and it will be curious to see if GW pulls it off.

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:
I don't play competitively, and thus don't feel compelled to play someone I don't know. As it stands I'm not particularly interested in playing (even if it were possible) against marine armies and won't do so unless it is an toned down list.

The "wait and see....we don't have the full picture of GW's genius" arguments are hilarious.

What is hilarious though is someone basing their entire point of view on speculation and rumours and nothing more.


If that were the case, squats would be back, plastic sisters would have been here years ago, a plastic thunderhawk would be released in several variations.

The only people that know the actual facts aren’t saying anything.
But if your crystal ball says other wise then by all means, crack on with half cocked assumptions.

Nope. I haven't been incined to play against marine armies since Marines 2.0. There is nothing in the leaks/rumours that have inclined me to change my mind. Nice try, and feel free to jog on.

I'm not going to boycott anything sight-unseen but towards the end of 8th I was getting so bored playing against SM I'd be much more likely to take up an offer of a game against anything that wasn't SM rather than play another game against an army that barely seemed to be using the same ruleset as everyone else. It's too early to say whether that will continue in 9th as we don't have nearly enough info yet about the new codex.

I've also pretty much shelved my own SM for the time being. A lot of the new models are great but I simply have no interest in playing them right now due to the balance issues.

 harlokin wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:
I don't play competitively, and thus don't feel compelled to play someone I don't know. As it stands I'm not particularly interested in playing (even if it were possible) against marine armies and won't do so unless it is an toned down list.

The "wait and see....we don't have the full picture of GW's genius" arguments are hilarious.

What is hilarious though is someone basing their entire point of view on speculation and rumours and nothing more.


If that were the case, squats would be back, plastic sisters would have been here years ago, a plastic thunderhawk would be released in several variations.

The only people that know the actual facts aren’t saying anything.
But if your crystal ball says other wise then by all means, crack on with half cocked assumptions.

Nope. I haven't been incined to play against marine armies since Marines 2.0. There is nothing in the leaks/rumours that have inclined me to change my mind. Nice try, and feel free to jog on.

Try reading my post this time.
I never made any mention of you playing the game or even wanting to.

I was simply pointing out that you’re using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than any actual facts.

How cute, ending it with a highly intellectual comment to try and make a point.

Karol wrote:
Yes, tell those GK players that went through 6th, 7th and 8th ed, that now when they army is actualy fun to play with, they should go out and either buy an orc or necron army, or they will never find anyone who wants to play them.

I wonder if in the future any other faction gets OP rules, the cries for ban of playing are going to come from those players that now call for a space marine boycott.

I have a feeling it may not happen, because I really can't remember Eldar soup players asking for Ynarri being baned from playing. Same with tau players and their shield drone armies. And if in any prior editions necron, tyranids or orcs were good, their players didn't ask for the boycott of their own armies too.

Thankfuly the number of marine players is large enough for marines to play against each other. And the platohora of rules makes it so, you don't play a mirror match every time.

Around here, people ABSOLUTELY asked Eldar players to not play Ynnari, especially during index era when Ynnari basically got all their bs for the low low price of...not being able to advance and shoot, lol.

People declaring that they now refuse to play against Eldar was a staple of 7th edition, and Tau hate crops up all the time as well. It's been 2 editions since they've released, and I have never yet seen someone actually turn up with an army of Knights and get anything but the most hostile of reactions.

There are styles of army that people just do not like. People just do not like special snowflake rules that nobody else in the game gets that make your special boys able to do things nobody else gets to do. People do not like static gunline armies. People do not like armies where it's not possible to kill anything. That is what goes into all the most commonly hated armies out there, and it is the current Space Marine competitive playstyle, all rolled into one.

At this point, frankly, it's old news. if it werne't for the looming possibility of marine buffs on the horizon, nobody would be talking about it nearly as much.

I've never heard of any real boycotting locally - however

When they drop the Predator/Rhino/old vehicles I feel like people we'll be salty

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:
I don't play competitively, and thus don't feel compelled to play someone I don't know. As it stands I'm not particularly interested in playing (even if it were possible) against marine armies and won't do so unless it is an toned down list.

The "wait and see....we don't have the full picture of GW's genius" arguments are hilarious.

What is hilarious though is someone basing their entire point of view on speculation and rumours and nothing more.


If that were the case, squats would be back, plastic sisters would have been here years ago, a plastic thunderhawk would be released in several variations.

The only people that know the actual facts aren’t saying anything.
But if your crystal ball says other wise then by all means, crack on with half cocked assumptions.

Nope. I haven't been incined to play against marine armies since Marines 2.0. There is nothing in the leaks/rumours that have inclined me to change my mind. Nice try, and feel free to jog on.

Try reading my post this time.
I never made any mention of you playing the game or even wanting to.

I was simply pointing out that you’re using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than any actual facts.

How cute, ending it with a highly intellectual comment to try and make a point.

Well, he's using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than actual facts except for where he can use the actual factual leaked statlines we have so far. Also, belittling and insulting aren't exactly noble comebacks. It's often more effective to take the high road if you feel offended.

shortymcnostrill wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:
I don't play competitively, and thus don't feel compelled to play someone I don't know. As it stands I'm not particularly interested in playing (even if it were possible) against marine armies and won't do so unless it is an toned down list.

The "wait and see....we don't have the full picture of GW's genius" arguments are hilarious.

What is hilarious though is someone basing their entire point of view on speculation and rumours and nothing more.


If that were the case, squats would be back, plastic sisters would have been here years ago, a plastic thunderhawk would be released in several variations.

The only people that know the actual facts aren’t saying anything.
But if your crystal ball says other wise then by all means, crack on with half cocked assumptions.

Nope. I haven't been incined to play against marine armies since Marines 2.0. There is nothing in the leaks/rumours that have inclined me to change my mind. Nice try, and feel free to jog on.

Try reading my post this time.
I never made any mention of you playing the game or even wanting to.

I was simply pointing out that you’re using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than any actual facts.

How cute, ending it with a highly intellectual comment to try and make a point.

Well, he's using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than actual facts except for where he can use the actual factual leaked statlines we have so far. Also, belittling and insulting aren't exactly noble comebacks. It's often more effective to take the high road if you feel offended.

And a leaked staline out the instructions with no context, points or rules is enough to determine not to play any list from a specific faction?

shortymcnostrill wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:
I don't play competitively, and thus don't feel compelled to play someone I don't know. As it stands I'm not particularly interested in playing (even if it were possible) against marine armies and won't do so unless it is an toned down list.

The "wait and see....we don't have the full picture of GW's genius" arguments are hilarious.

What is hilarious though is someone basing their entire point of view on speculation and rumours and nothing more.


If that were the case, squats would be back, plastic sisters would have been here years ago, a plastic thunderhawk would be released in several variations.

The only people that know the actual facts aren’t saying anything.
But if your crystal ball says other wise then by all means, crack on with half cocked assumptions.

Nope. I haven't been incined to play against marine armies since Marines 2.0. There is nothing in the leaks/rumours that have inclined me to change my mind. Nice try, and feel free to jog on.

Try reading my post this time.
I never made any mention of you playing the game or even wanting to.

I was simply pointing out that you’re using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than any actual facts.

How cute, ending it with a highly intellectual comment to try and make a point.

Well, he's using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than actual facts except for where he can use the actual factual leaked statlines we have so far. Also, belittling and insulting aren't exactly noble comebacks. It's often more effective to take the high road if you feel offended.

So we have a leaked stat line.
We also have:

0 context.
0 points indications.
0 rules to show anything more.

Quick, everyone throw a tantrum, wounds have gone up!
No one knows what bearing this will have or what other changes are with it, but panic first, worry about the rest later.

And I’m not insulted, I just treat others as they treat me.
It’s a simple principle in life to live by.

Dudeface wrote:

shortymcnostrill wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:
I don't play competitively, and thus don't feel compelled to play someone I don't know. As it stands I'm not particularly interested in playing (even if it were possible) against marine armies and won't do so unless it is an toned down list.

The "wait and see....we don't have the full picture of GW's genius" arguments are hilarious.

What is hilarious though is someone basing their entire point of view on speculation and rumours and nothing more.


If that were the case, squats would be back, plastic sisters would have been here years ago, a plastic thunderhawk would be released in several variations.

The only people that know the actual facts aren’t saying anything.
But if your crystal ball says other wise then by all means, crack on with half cocked assumptions.

Nope. I haven't been incined to play against marine armies since Marines 2.0. There is nothing in the leaks/rumours that have inclined me to change my mind. Nice try, and feel free to jog on.

Try reading my post this time.
I never made any mention of you playing the game or even wanting to.

I was simply pointing out that you’re using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than any actual facts.

How cute, ending it with a highly intellectual comment to try and make a point.

Well, he's using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than actual facts except for where he can use the actual factual leaked statlines we have so far. Also, belittling and insulting aren't exactly noble comebacks. It's often more effective to take the high road if you feel offended.

And a leaked staline out the instructions with no context, points or rules is enough to determine not to play any list from a specific faction?

I mean, I feel like that's not whats being done here. People are having bad games against and avoiding marines as their rules are right now. They have been for over a year. There's only so many times you can go up against someone who gets three to four army-wide, impactful bonuses that you have no way to access with your faction and get stomped before you go "Well, you know what, I can probably just pick and choose my opponents a bit more carefully and have better games in my hobby."

Uh I think Marines are very beatable right now. This is especially true in my local meta where no one has full on WACC net lists. The less competitive chapters are represented, like black templar and ultramarines.

I play that ultramarines army actually. I've done better in RTTs with my xenos lists to be honest.

the_scotsman wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

shortymcnostrill wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:

 harlokin wrote:
I don't play competitively, and thus don't feel compelled to play someone I don't know. As it stands I'm not particularly interested in playing (even if it were possible) against marine armies and won't do so unless it is an toned down list.

The "wait and see....we don't have the full picture of GW's genius" arguments are hilarious.

What is hilarious though is someone basing their entire point of view on speculation and rumours and nothing more.


If that were the case, squats would be back, plastic sisters would have been here years ago, a plastic thunderhawk would be released in several variations.

The only people that know the actual facts aren’t saying anything.
But if your crystal ball says other wise then by all means, crack on with half cocked assumptions.

Nope. I haven't been incined to play against marine armies since Marines 2.0. There is nothing in the leaks/rumours that have inclined me to change my mind. Nice try, and feel free to jog on.

Try reading my post this time.
I never made any mention of you playing the game or even wanting to.

I was simply pointing out that you’re using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than any actual facts.

How cute, ending it with a highly intellectual comment to try and make a point.

Well, he's using a crystal ball to make assumptions rather than actual facts except for where he can use the actual factual leaked statlines we have so far. Also, belittling and insulting aren't exactly noble comebacks. It's often more effective to take the high road if you feel offended.

And a leaked staline out the instructions with no context, points or rules is enough to determine not to play any list from a specific faction?

I mean, I feel like that's not whats being done here. People are having bad games against and avoiding marines as their rules are right now. They have been for over a year. There's only so many times you can go up against someone who gets three to four army-wide, impactful bonuses that you have no way to access with your faction and get stomped before you go "Well, you know what, I can probably just pick and choose my opponents a bit more carefully and have better games in my hobby."

I think that's the intent, however if you reread the comments, they don't want to play against marines because they simply believe it won't be a fun game, they assume they're op and unfun and are continuing that judgement without experience of the new codex (not that anyone can have) based on some instruction leaks.

footfoe wrote:
Uh I think Marines are very beatable right now. This is especially true in my local meta where no one has full on WACC net lists. The less competitive chapters are represented, like black templar and ultramarines.

I play that ultramarines army actually. I've done better in RTTs with my xenos lists to be honest.

Don't you dare bring reason or granularity into this. We all know that every single Marine player out there is only playing the latest meta breaking net list, regardless of personal preferences. And not a single Marine player on this planet is interested in their opposing player having the slightest fun at all.

Marines were overwhelmingly the most popular army even at their lowest point(s?), so no I don't really see this happening beyond maybe the non-Marine players pooling their numbers together to only face off against one another.

I suppose the situation this time around is different to Tau/Eldar because those armies at a more casual level were still pretty damn rare compared to Imperials, especially Marines. There was always 'That Guy' but that guy was just that, one player to dozens who weren't. The problem is that with Marines being so popular even when they were crap, now pretty much everybody is rocking powerful, Xenos-stomping lists even if they aren't trying to build for WAAC. However something tells me GW probably don't mind too much, since Marine vs Marine has been an unfortunate staple for long enough that two guys playing the same overpowered armies against one another doesn't feel as busted as getting stomped by a couple of people with a different one. Hell, I bet the upper heads at GW would be happier if they could just squat non-Marine armies wholesale and focus on Heresy 2.0 when those Primaris moulds and books rake in so much cash.

No, we'll try and kill anything.

What we really need are adjusted club rules to accommodate Space Marines. Eg:

When playing against Space Marines, you are allowed to roll d20s instead of d6s
When removing Space Marines that have be removed as a result of shooting or fighting, these models must be removed with a hammer
Space Marine models removed during the psychic phase must be eaten by the owner of the model (please note if loaning models, the actual owner must eat them, not you)
Terrain and objectives are placed entirely at the discretion of the non-Space Marine player
Said player can remove or add terrain at any point in the game
There are no restrictions to where terrain can be placed including down the pants of the Space Marine player.
Space Marine models must be painted to an ‘Eavy Metal Standard or they suffer -2 mofidier to their BS
The Space Marine player themselves must be painted to the same standard or are required to play with a blindfold.
The Space Marine player must both announce their entrance and exit from the building.

But seriously a boycott is just silly.

The design philosophy surrounding space marines is bad for the 40K game system. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves. Marines are not always the most game breaking faction, that is true, but they are consistently very difficult to fit into the game without damaging a more “ideal” meta which features a variety of factions and list builds for players to have a variety of competitive strategic games with.

My local group has seen most marine players move away from running their marine lists as it is impossible to command a marine army and not get the feeling that it feels a tad unfair. Because we are all friends, we work together to build armies and lists that make for compelling and strategic battles. For now marines are difficult to fit into that ecosystem.

I’m all for the continued prevalence of marines, but their rules and their function within 40K does need to be closely scrutinized in order to prevent it from completely stagnating the meta.

Dudeface wrote:

I think that's the intent, however if you reread the comments, they don't want to play against marines because they simply believe it won't be a fun game, they assume they're op and unfun and are continuing that judgement without experience of the new codex (not that anyone can have) based on some instruction leaks.

I don't know if I understand your argument.

The general, average marine list isn't fun to play against right now. Someone playing with the contents of the new starter box, added to the typical units that marine players were putting into their armies over the last few months, that is going to be a miserable game against most average not-marine armies. It's gonna include "your dudes fight last" abilties, it's going to include 12" you cant deep strike here abilities, it's going to include dreadnoughts that pop up 9" away in deployment and plow into your army before you've even taken your first move, it's going to include 100pt units with 6 multimelta shots, et cetera. That's not "OP WAAC tournament players only would bring stuff like this!" that's the general, normal list for someone who has bought into the last few marine releases and gotten excited about them and added them to their army.

The only thing people are looking at with the new stat leaks is that they're perceiving that, evidently, the current state of play vs marines is not in the eyes of GW any kind of problem. We haven't seen anything from these new rules that indicates that there's going to be any kind of adjustment to these units, and in fact we know that some units that are persistent sources of annoying, unfun games like the Invictor are getting stat improvements.

Yeah, it's only one VERY incomplete datapoint. Everyone gets that I would hope. But I'd bet you if GW released Codex Eldar in 7th edition and then right around the end of the edition leaks started coming out about Codex Eldar 2.0, and leaks showed Scatter Lasers going from 4 shots to 6, that would spur a lot of people to start saying "OK, I guess it's time to just flat out start refusing some games if I wasn't already, GW isn't going to fix this situation for me." It wouldn't be a natural assumption to think "ah, surely this indicates that the Scatter Laser is going to be tripled in cost, that's the natural assumption to make based on its new leaked statline."

We know the new statline. The new statline is improved, rather than nerfed. We do not know the new point cost (if there is one) and we don't know any changes to the core rules like doctrines etc.

What you have here is not people suddenly just now deciding marines are GOING to be frustrating and overpowered based on the leaks. What you have is people saying that they are RIGHT NOW, and have been since 2.0, and people aren't going to just sit and deal with it and accept their turn 3 turn 4 tablings because "oh well, the new codex is coming and it'll probably fix this" because we're not seeing indications of that fix coming.

If it does, great. If the new improved statlines result in more durable, less offensively oppressive marines so that people can enjoy long drawn out games against them, double great. that'd be awesome. I'd love that. I want marine armies to feel elite, for marines to feel tough, and for people who play against marines to feel like they have a chance and to play satisfying games that go 5 turns and end with both players having decent fractions of their armies on the table at the end so that the victor can be decided by the mission. Based on the information right now, I don't see where that comes in, and probably wont see where that comes in until we get the full leaks of what's in the book.

the_scotsman wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

I think that's the intent, however if you reread the comments, they don't want to play against marines because they simply believe it won't be a fun game, they assume they're op and unfun and are continuing that judgement without experience of the new codex (not that anyone can have) based on some instruction leaks.

I don't know if I understand your argument.

The general, average marine list isn't fun to play against right now. Someone playing with the contents of the new starter box, added to the typical units that marine players were putting into their armies over the last few months, that is going to be a miserable game against most average not-marine armies. It's gonna include "your dudes fight last" abilties, it's going to include 12" you cant deep strike here abilities, it's going to include dreadnoughts that pop up 9" away in deployment and plow into your army before you've even taken your first move, it's going to include 100pt units with 6 multimelta shots, et cetera. That's not "OP WAAC tournament players only would bring stuff like this!" that's the general, normal list for someone who has bought into the last few marine releases and gotten excited about them and added them to their army.

The only thing people are looking at with the new stat leaks is that they're perceiving that, evidently, the current state of play vs marines is not in the eyes of GW any kind of problem. We haven't seen anything from these new rules that indicates that there's going to be any kind of adjustment to these units, and in fact we know that some units that are persistent sources of annoying, unfun games like the Invictor are getting stat improvements.

Yeah, it's only one VERY incomplete datapoint. Everyone gets that I would hope. But I'd bet you if GW released Codex Eldar in 7th edition and then right around the end of the edition leaks started coming out about Codex Eldar 2.0, and leaks showed Scatter Lasers going from 4 shots to 6, that would spur a lot of people to start saying "OK, I guess it's time to just flat out start refusing some games if I wasn't already, GW isn't going to fix this situation for me." It wouldn't be a natural assumption to think "ah, surely this indicates that the Scatter Laser is going to be tripled in cost, that's the natural assumption to make based on its new leaked statline."

We know the new statline. The new statline is improved, rather than nerfed. We do not know the new point cost (if there is one) and we don't know any changes to the core rules like doctrines etc.

What you have here is not people suddenly just now deciding marines are GOING to be frustrating and overpowered based on the leaks. What you have is people saying that they are RIGHT NOW, and have been since 2.0, and people aren't going to just sit and deal with it and accept their turn 3 turn 4 tablings because "oh well, the new codex is coming and it'll probably fix this" because we're not seeing indications of that fix coming.

If it does, great. If the new improved statlines result in more durable, less offensively oppressive marines so that people can enjoy long drawn out games against them, double great. that'd be awesome. I'd love that. I want marine armies to feel elite, for marines to feel tough, and for people who play against marines to feel like they have a chance and to play satisfying games that go 5 turns and end with both players having decent fractions of their armies on the table at the end so that the victor can be decided by the mission. Based on the information right now, I don't see where that comes in, and probably wont see where that comes in until we get the full leaks of what's in the book.

You've made the post far more eloquently than the Harlokin, who was probably trying to channel this message. I can understand that but it was previously presented as "I don't play randomers, I don't want to play against marines unless it's a super easy list, nothing will change that and I don't care if they change it *insert random potshot at GW's intelligence*" which is neither informative or constructive.

 Bosskelot wrote:
The prevalence of Marines amplifies any balance issues (perceived or actual) that people have.

Yeah, I said this earlier in the thread too, and I think it's the real issue.

It's bad for player morale when any faction is overpowered, but it's much worse when the faction that 50% of the playerbase plays is overpowered, and it's even worse when when it's overpowered in the specific way space marines are overpowered - not with one specific unit, but just based on the underlying rules, and in a passive way. Unlike when other races have been overpowered in past editions, Space Marines after SM 2.0 don't rely on some specific gimmick combo of overtuned units, the faction is just overtuned as a whole by its base rules (doctrines + superdoctrines + faction rules + extreme reroll potential).

This has two different effects, both of which are toxic to player enthusiasm. First, it means that the SM player can't just not take a unit or two and fix the problem, the way that Eldar could be fixed by not taking WKs and bikes. Short of deliberately going out to take the few dud units in the codex, you can't create a SM army currently that doesn't have a baseline of power beyond other factions. Second, and almost as important, while it IS possible to compete with Space Marine lists, it requires taking very specific, competitively tuned lists from other factions to do so. This means that Little Timmy showing up with his random collection is going to get roflstomped by Little Jimmy's Space Marine collection at the FLGS, even if at a tournament level the imbalance may not be so bad because there's a very specific Chaos soup list (before 9th) that can compete, for example.

tl;dr: Space Marines are too popular to be overtuned in a passive, faction-wide way without creating significant toxic effects for local gaming scenes.

 p5freak wrote:

 MinscS2 wrote:
Don't think I've ever seen this amount of hyperbole on dakkadakka before.

Do people genuinely believe that several marine-units will get +1W without any changes to their pointcost? That we'll see 15 ppm Tacticals, 17 ppm Sternguard, etc, with 2 wounds?

Yes, because points dont change when a new codex comes out. The current points will be valid until december, when CA 2020 comes out.

That aged well.

 MinscS2 wrote:
Do people genuinely believe that several marine-units will get +1W without any changes to their pointcost? That we'll see 15 ppm Tacticals, 17 ppm Sternguard, etc, with 2 wounds?

That exact thing happened with a Marine unit, not sure which one, might have been Aggressors or Decessors or something.

 vict0988 wrote:

 MinscS2 wrote:
Do people genuinely believe that several marine-units will get +1W without any changes to their pointcost? That we'll see 15 ppm Tacticals, 17 ppm Sternguard, etc, with 2 wounds?

That exact thing happened with Aggressors.

Well Tacs are now 18.

Of course, all these updates will also come with a suitable points adjustment. The aforementioned Tactical Marine will clock in at 18pts for his extra Wound (20% more than he is today). And it means Space Marine forces will be compact, elite, durable and utterly deadly – just as they should be.

 vict0988 wrote:

 MinscS2 wrote:
Do people genuinely believe that several marine-units will get +1W without any changes to their pointcost? That we'll see 15 ppm Tacticals, 17 ppm Sternguard, etc, with 2 wounds?

That exact thing happened with a Marine unit, not sure which one, might have been Aggressors or Decessors or something.

It happened to Assault Centurions and Aggressors, IIRC, and they were underperforming at the time.

Something something don't blame the player for having picked the army something something blame GW for their gak rules that are expensive something something if you ACTUALLY want to make a difference boycott all GW printed materials not just the Marine codex something something complete.

Well, based on their announcement that they're inflating stats across the game, but codex by codex, I think we are definitely going to see a situation develop where people play New Codex 9th against New Codex 9th, and people playing factions without the new Super Saiyan Stats will probably only want to play one another while they wait.

I have spurious unresearched suspicion that GW isn't just profiting from people jumping on the Marine bandwagon, they're also profiting from people thinking "nobody is going to want to play against my Marines until this nonsense gets sorted out, maybe it's time for that second army everyone but me seems to own" and then jumping off that same bandwagon.

I'm looking at a fourth faction at this point, partially because the people willing to garage-hammer around here don't want to play against my WS, and partially because my other options (Custodes and Slanneshi Daemons) have pretty limited options in plastic. ...and I've got this lovely box of Necrons that I don't particularly have an interest in to trade while I'm at it.

The Newman wrote:
I have spurious unresearched suspicion that GW isn't just profiting from people jumping on the Marine bandwagon, they're also profiting from people thinking "nobody is going to want to play against my Marines until this nonsense gets sorted out, maybe it's time for that second army everyone but me seems to own" and then jumping off that same bandwagon.

I'm looking at a fourth faction at this point, partially because the people willing to garage-hammer around here don't want to play against my WS, and partially because my other options (Custodes and Slanneshi Daemons) have pretty limited options in plastic. ...and I've got this lovely box of Necrons that I don't particularly have an interest in to trade while I'm at it.

Introduce them to 30k, Slaanesh Daemons and Custodes are both fun to play! (And WS are getting their new update real soon). If they're veteran 40kers, it'll be old hat stuff to them.

All the people being salty here are playing the game since 6 months or have a VERY bad memory.

EVERY 40k edition had a codex who was WAY above the others (Haines chaos codex, necron flying spam, SW, not ever mentioning Eldars who were ALWAYS in top 3 no matter the edition), but no one ever called for a boycott so what the heck?

The truth is, it's more of a SM haters band wagon thing here...

 Arko wrote:
All the people being salty here are playing the game since 6 months or have a VERY bad memory.

EVERY 40k edition had a codex who was WAY above the others (Haines chaos codex, necron flying spam, SW, not ever mentioning Eldars who were ALWAYS in top 3 no matter the edition), but no one ever called for a boycott so what the heck?

The truth is, it's more of a SM haters band wagon thing here...

Oh, I've seen games refused against Tau and Eldar in their respective heydeys.