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.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Thanks, Catbarf, appreciated. I do try to have patience, as sometimes people who are wrong become angry, then they cool off and revisit the arguments later. As long as I am not angry, my points will still be clearly stated when they return with a clearer head to review them.

Sometimes, they get them and understand. Other times, they have more thoughtful refutations, but either way it becomes fruitful again.

and sometimes people think their subjective beliefs about what should and shouldn't be given unique and flavorful consideration trumps other gamers and the manufactures idea of what constitutes as unique and interesting playstyles. It seems to be an inability comprehend the uses for something that they themselves have not put the time into considering a need for... "

Unique and flavorful consideration would require the thing being considered to be unique and flavorful, unfortunately. If it has a unique and flavorful playstyle, maybe I could be convinced, but I haven't seen any evidence of that yet.

Otherwise it's just wasting time and release slots.

Again,,,

These are fething werewolves who fight before they die on the table.... are the BG Vangaurd Vets fething werewolves that fight before they die ? do you really not understand what you are comparing here ? do you really not understand how they might play differently on the table ? do you really not understand that wulfen should be allowed to have a unique mechanic for achieving a similar goal in a different way XD ?

I can not for the life me comprehend where your mental block is here ? they are different units, they do different things, they achieve a similar table top goal, sure, but so do bezerkers, are we goinfg to roll them into the same datasheet too ?

Tyel wrote:
The unique and flavorful playstyle is looking at your roster and seeing wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf and wolf.

It does nothing for me, but it does for other people.

Realistically this kit is an existing kit and an upgrade sprue, which may also already exist. The development time is therefore quite minimal.

On this specific kit, perhaps, but the entire SW supplement took time to write, I guarantee it.

Wulfen used to do more than just fight when they die. They buffed the rest of the army, too. I have no idea why this guy is comparing them to VVs when one is BS 3+ and the other is BS 5+. Plus, before the Great Wound Increase, they were W2 despite not being Primaris.

 Type40 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Thanks, Catbarf, appreciated. I do try to have patience, as sometimes people who are wrong become angry, then they cool off and revisit the arguments later. As long as I am not angry, my points will still be clearly stated when they return with a clearer head to review them.

Sometimes, they get them and understand. Other times, they have more thoughtful refutations, but either way it becomes fruitful again.

and sometimes people think their subjective beliefs about what should and shouldn't be given unique and flavorful consideration trumps other gamers and the manufactures idea of what constitutes as unique and interesting playstyles. It seems to be an inability comprehend the uses for something that they themselves have not put the time into considering a need for...

The thing is, neither side is "correct" since we're talking about subjective opinions about game design. It just seems one side in particular is getting quite worked up about the disagreement.

I could equally well characterise the arguments as "one side thinks the only way to differentiate armies is through excessive numbers of unique rules and units and is unable to understand that player creativity and more army-wide rules can create equally compelling differences, because they lack the imagination to comprehend such a scenario."

 RaptorusRex wrote:
Wulfen used to do more than just fight when they die. They buffed the rest of the army, too. I have no idea why this guy is comparing them to VVs when one is BS 3+ and the other is BS 5+. Plus, before the Great Wound Increase, they were W2 despite not being Primaris.

Yes. I actually think they were more unique in the past, but the BS thing is exactly what I am talking about with "fake options." It doesn't actually mean anything for either VV or Wulfen. They have like, some grenades (launcher on the wulfen, thrown by the VV) but that isn't a meaningful difference in terms of how they play on the table.

But I would agree that, back in the past, they were very different. Now? Not so much. One could knock GW for removing the meaningful difference as much as I am knocking them for being separate without having a meaningful difference. That I could agree with.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
On this specific kit, perhaps, but the entire SW supplement took time to write, I guarantee it.

*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*
*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*
*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*

Maybe. Writing books is pretty easy though. Could be a quick copy paste job "supplementalising" things that were in the 8th edition codex/PA that they wanted carried over.

Slipspace wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Thanks, Catbarf, appreciated. I do try to have patience, as sometimes people who are wrong become angry, then they cool off and revisit the arguments later. As long as I am not angry, my points will still be clearly stated when they return with a clearer head to review them.

Sometimes, they get them and understand. Other times, they have more thoughtful refutations, but either way it becomes fruitful again.

and sometimes people think their subjective beliefs about what should and shouldn't be given unique and flavorful consideration trumps other gamers and the manufactures idea of what constitutes as unique and interesting playstyles. It seems to be an inability comprehend the uses for something that they themselves have not put the time into considering a need for...

The thing is, neither side is "correct" since we're talking about subjective opinions about game design. It just seems one side in particular is getting quite worked up about the disagreement.

I could equally well characterise the arguments as "one side thinks the only way to differentiate armies is through excessive numbers of unique rules and units and is unable to understand that player creativity and more army-wide rules can create equally compelling differences, because they lack the imagination to comprehend such a scenario."

Frankly SW beeing SM doesn't strengthen their cause. Neither does the fact that they still have more datasheets then whole other factions alone nor the excessive time devoted to any kind of SM release associated. Meanwhile we had 2 far more unique armies squatted recently with the full corresponding rulesets and units , so that people are right fully mad at what they percive as blatant favouritsm on gw's side is justified, imo atleast. That they also get mad at people complaining for beeing now "only a supplement" is especially for those that lost armies quite frankly extremely shallow and insulting.

Doubly so when these posters now so avidly beeing angry (also justifyable) for beeing supplemented have however forgone any and all support of the armies now completely gone . ( and no legends is not really a valid army anymore much less in the sense of the unit once was intended to be there)

Tyel wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
On this specific kit, perhaps, but the entire SW supplement took time to write, I guarantee it.

*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*
*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*
*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*

Maybe. Writing books is pretty easy though. Could be a quick copy paste job "supplementalising" things that were in the 8th edition codex/PA that they wanted carried over.

Could be, but if GW took no time to do it at all, then I feel bad for SW players and they deserve better.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I hope their rule sucks so no-one misses them when they get dropped in the next codex/supplement, so we can stop the chapter specific units.

"I don't play this army so I hope those who do get screwed over"

When your one hundredth datasheet suck, it's not "You being screwed over", it's you having access to more good datasheet than I have access to in my entire codex.
Stop it playing the victim because someone hopes the extra stuff on top of the extra stuff on top of the extra stuff that you get over other people might be bad.

And please, people, stop doing the "Space Wolves are not Space Marines and cannot use the Space Marines rules", everyone knows that Space Wolves are Space Marines!

"Yes. I actually think they were more unique in the past, but the BS thing is exactly what I am talking about with "fake options." It doesn't actually mean anything for either VV or Wulfen. They have like, some grenades (launcher on the wulfen, thrown by the VV) but that isn't a meaningful difference in terms of how they play on the table.

But I would agree that, back in the past, they were very different. Now? Not so much. One could knock GW for removing the meaningful difference as much as I am knocking them for being separate without having a meaningful difference. That I could agree with."

oh, you saw the new wulfen datasheet that comes out next week ?

Is it exactly the same as BG VV ?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I hope their rule sucks so no-one misses them when they get dropped in the next codex/supplement, so we can stop the chapter specific units.

"I don't play this army so I hope those who do get screwed over"

When your one hundredth datasheet suck, it's not "You being screwed over", it's you having access to more good datasheet than I have access to in my entire codex.
Stop it playing the victim because someone hopes the extra stuff on top of the extra stuff on top of the extra stuff that you get over other people might be bad.

And please, people, stop doing the "Space Wolves are not Space Marines and cannot use the Space Marines rules", everyone knows that Space Wolves are Space Marines!

The fact that so many people argue that they arn't just regular marines means your wrong about the whole "everyone" thing.

What people are arguing is that we shouldn't arbitrarily squat the uniqueness of one army because some people simply do not like that two guys wearing power armor can have different rules. Or even that a guy riding a dire wolf should be treated differently then a guy riding a bike... these arguments are ridiculous.

There is no reason to remove SWs uniqueness. I do see a valid point on not giving them attention for a while however but putting time into literally removing their unique flavor from the rules is counter intuitive. It not only upsets people who like that their choice to play them gives them access to interesting diffrences but it also wastes time figuring out the logistics of making sure GW can still sell their very active and popular spacewolf kits while allowing them to still have all their unique load outs, weapon options, and unit numbers. (because they arnt just gonna throw those kits out)

 Type40 wrote:
oh, you saw the new wulfen datasheet that comes out next week ?

Is it exactly the same as BG VV ?

No, I haven't seen the one next week. But unless it's SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT than the one in 8th (which means GW spent more time on it) then I'm going to continue to essentially treat them like Black Templar's VVs with a few bits stickytacked to them.

Tyel 793315 10966435 wrote:

*Don't make sarcastic comments about Dark Eldar and GSC in PA*

Weren't scyths of the emperor GSC space marines in power armour, until they got killed off by primaris .

 Type40 wrote:


Again,,,

These are fething werewolves who fight before they die on the table.... are the BG Vangaurd Vets fething werewolves that fight before they die ?

He keeps asking what makes them different in role or purpose and you keep replying by pointing out mechanical differences, without providing any argument as to how these mechanical differences lend them a different role on the tabletop.

In other words, if you were forced to take melee VanVets instead of Wulfen, what would change about your army? Not 'they wouldn't get to fight before they die', but what would actually change in terms of strategy or the composition of the rest of your army to compensate?

 Type40 wrote:
The fact that so many people argue that they arn't just regular marines means your wrong about the whole "everyone" thing.

How many people argue that space wolves aren't space marines?
Certainly not GW, who correctly identifies Space Wolves as Space Marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Type40 wrote:
What people are arguing is that we shouldn't arbitrarily squat the uniqueness of one army because some people simply do not like that two guys wearing power armor can have different rules.

Two guys in power armor should have different rules if they are different. An Inquisitor in Power Armor (we SHOULD have this one, instead we have stupid gray marines) should not have the same rules as a tactical marines. Even different marines wearing power armor should have different rules if they are different. For instance, an apothecary shouldn't have the same rules as a chapter master.
But Space Wolves should not have different rules though, sorry .

"How many people argue that space wolves aren't space marines?"

Arn't REGULAR space marines is not thesame as saying not space marines.

don't be facetious.

lol and sure, the guys who literally have wolf genetics spliced into their genetic make up, are trained differently and have different weapons can't be represented differently then their vanilla counter parts XD lol

. But unless it's SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT than the one in 8th (which means GW spent more time on it) then I'm going to continue to essentially treat them like Black Templar's VVs with a few bits stickytacked to them.

You mean when they had armor 5+, had +1 attack aura, re-roll charge aura, could advance and charge, could atatck when they died, had significant wargear no one else had access too, 2 Ws vs 1 w, 7" mvm, str 5, 3/4 attacks and a 5+++ ? you mean those guys in 8th edition wern't different enough from BG Van Vets for you ??? !!! oh man,,, here I was thinking you were talking about the current ones in the FAQ index, but your talking about the ones from 8th ! woww... ok ... if you can not see the difference between those two units,,, you really need to step back and re-evaluate how you paly this game XD lol .
Did you even read the 8th edition Space Wolves codex ? do you have any idea what they are trying to stuff into the supplement lol

 Type40 wrote:

Did you even read the 8th edition Space Wolves codex ? do you have any idea what they are trying to stuff into the supplement lol

Well that is how it is. You have people playing xeno claiming that marines should be one codex with SG vets, DC, wulfen be represented by the same unit, and at the same time saying that they should get R&H, eldar corsairs etc.

The point is not "What makes them different in the rules" it's "What makes them PLAY different".

Both are a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast.

 JNAProductions wrote:
The point is not "What makes them different in the rules" it's "What makes them PLAY different".

Both are a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast.

Yes, and i will point out again they obviously PLAY different.
Are you really not seeing that you would paly a unit that can fight back as it dies in a different way then you would play a unit that can't ?

Are you really saying that you would play a unit that can advance and charge but not shoot riding a wolf in a different way then you play a unit that can not advance and charge but CAN shoot and is riding a bike in the exact same way ?

That is what people are saying we should be doing ? XD ?

Sriously.

Just because they are hard hitting melee units that move relatively fast does not mean they do those things in the EXACT same way or even that you would use them in the EXACT same way.

My harlies Troupe are also a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast, why arnt we rolling them into the same datasheet too ? Do you think I would play my harlies in the exact same way as i would wulfen or BG Van Vets ?

No, all three units are fast hard hitting melee units, but they don't play the same way, I don't make the same choices when playing any of them, I have to make different tactical considerations with all of them. Just because they fit a similar role doesnt make them "play the same" that is just ridiculous and its stupid that people keep suggesting that.

There is more nuance to this game then just "this unit moves fast and is fighty" and "this unit shoots well"

we can't just pretend that they play exactly the same because we can sum up their battlefield role with the same 5 -7 words.
If that's how you think of the game, you can't be winning very many matches.

 Type40 wrote:
My harlies Troupe are also a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast, why arnt we rolling them into the same datasheet too ?

You know, the reason everyone is finding your posts so obnoxious is because you either don't seem to have the slightest idea why these comparisons are strawmen, or do and are making them anyways.

If there are two Harlequin units where the only difference rules-wise is that one can fight after it dies... Yeah, roll them together.

I'll ask it again: If you were forced to take melee VanVets instead of Wulfen, what would change about your army? Not 'they wouldn't get to fight before they die', but what would actually change in terms of strategy or the composition of the rest of your army to compensate?

 JNAProductions wrote:
The point is not "What makes them different in the rules" it's "What makes them PLAY different".

Both are a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast.

Lets be fair to the guy. You all are trying too hard to arguee that Wulfen dont have a place and are just Vanguard Veterans when literally they never had the same statlines, weapon options or special rules like... never . Probably they are one of the most non-normal marines unit marines have (Before this codex, Wulfen were more similar to ork nobz than to vanguard veterans) , even if they end up playing similarly, just like Khorne Berzerkers and Meele Chosen do. But thats fine. Reiskguard, Knights of the Wolf and Blazing Sun Knights weren't all that different ones from the others, or from Bretonian and Grail Knights. They had a couple special rules but they were all different flavours or heavy shock cavalry and it was fine.

I'm not really sure why Space Wolves are getting a slightly different box of Reivers.

Do they want to soft squat Firstborn by giving similar chapter specific units? I guess Wulfen and stuff like that are not getting new models then.

 catbarf wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
My harlies Troupe are also a hard hitting melee unit that moves relatively fast, why arnt we rolling them into the same datasheet too ?

You know, the reason everyone is finding your posts so obnoxious is because you either don't seem to have the slightest idea why these comparisons are strawmen, or do and are making them anyways.

If there are two Harlequin units where the only difference rules-wise is that one can fight after it dies... Yeah, roll them together.

I'll ask it again: If you were forced to take melee VanVets instead of Wulfen, what would change about your army? Not 'they wouldn't get to fight before they die', but what would actually change in terms of strategy or the composition of the rest of your army to compensate?

Also a re-roll charge aura, a diffrence in armor save, a difference to speed, diffrence tough, diffrent strenghth, different wargear options .... hmmm ...
lol sooo, ya,,, a fast hard hitting unit,,, that does completely different things..

You know what I find so obnoxious.
That people keep saying things like "it's just a fast hard hiting unit and so is the other one" and then when i bring up another fast hard hiting unit from another faction people are like "OMG STRAWMAN THEY ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT"
even though they have as many differences as these two units... like,,, its absolutely ridiculous XD ... different armour save, toughness, strength, speed, warhear, abilities... but they are a fast hard hiting unit... yup all three fit into that catagory...

this isn't comparing a harlequin troupe that fights back when it dies to one that doesnt. This is comparing a harlequin unit to BG Van Vets XD lol because they have as different of a statline as wulfen do to BG Van Vets and just as many different rules AND different wargear options LOL . Are people really this daft that they can't read the different numbers on the different datasheets ? the only thing that is the same between the two units AT ALL is their WS and number of attacks.

then when it comes to game play , yes, i would treat harlies that attack back when they die differently then harlies that don't... sure they wouldnt need seperate datasheets... but that's not what this is XD they have completely different stat lines, rules, AND wargear XD comparing the two based only off of having one abilitiy and not the rest of their datasheet is ridiculous.

Type40, a question you ignored is this:

What would change if you had to replace your Wulfen with Vanguard Vets armed similarly, in terms of your army comp and strategy?

Actually the best games have units that are mostly the same with a couple of differences in stats or 1-2 special rules that add or even just weapon options to cather for other kind of lists, uses, or enemies, even if tactically they are similar. Using just GW games as examples, both Fantasy and LOTR have many units across factions that are the same with just a single change in 1 stat , or with +1 extra attack.

The biggest difference between Wulfen and Vanguard Veterans is that Wulfen are a more elite unit, with support auras and habilities that work best when working with other units were Vanguard Veterans are much more independent, less resilient and put out less damage, a much cheaper option. I would say Vanguard Veteran are much more redundant in Blood Angels basically because they were a specific BA unit that got superseeded with Sanguinary Guard and Death Company.

In this case, Vanguard Veterans are probably the unit that should not exist, because assault marines allready exist. But I would arguee the three units have a place, they are different gradients of power in the "fast space marine meele unit" and eliteness. Now one could arguee, why do Jumpack marines exist when you have biker marines? They are, tactically, units that do the same with slighly different interactions with terrain, if we go down to the logical conclusion of that route.

 Type40 wrote:
Also a re-roll charge aura, a diffrence in armor save, a difference to speed, diffrence tough, diffrent strenghth, different wargear options .... hmmm ...
lol sooo, ya,,, a fast hard hitting unit,,, that does completely different things..

Incredible.

'How would your strategy change if you had X unit instead of Y unit?'
'X HAS ABILITY Y HAS WEAPON MIGHT AS WELL MAKE HARLEQUINS COUNT AS SPACE MARINES LMAO GOTTEM'


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galas wrote:
Actually the best games have units that are mostly the same with a couple of differences in stats or 1-2 special rules that add or even just weapon options to cather for other kind of lists, uses, or enemies, even if tactically they are similar. Using just GW games as examples, both Fantasy and LOTR have many units across factions that are the same with just a single change in 1 stat , or with +1 extra attack.

FWIW I actually really like this approach, especially how LotR did it. With a minimum of special rules, those individual stat changes or different wargear feel pretty meaningful, as they actually impact what you can do with a unit- Haldir's elves with bows and swords can actually function as multirole units just on account of their wargear. Meanwhile in 40K it really doesn't matter what melee weapon you have if you're a shooting unit; you're still going to get dumpstered by a tricked-out melee unit with four attacks each and a pharmacy receipt's worth of special rules.

Horus Heresy has a lot more chrome than LotR, and that provides scope for differentiating changes beyond statlines. A unit of Tactical Marines under Imperial Fists versus Night Lords play very differently; the former is incentivized to play defensively and maximize the effectiveness of their boltguns, while the latter wants to get into melee while outnumbering the target. See, these are the exact same unit, but because of limited and flavorful army-wide rules, I can describe the different tactical function on the battlefield.

What you don't want is having two units with different statlines, but only in minute ways that don't really impact how they behave on the table. That's the sort of detail that's called 'chrome' in game design, and while a bit of chrome to convey themes can be a good thing, it adds to the bloat and cognitive load associated with the system.

A good example of excessive chrome is the Death Korps Infantry Squad. Death Korps Infantry Squads are WS3+, codex Infantry Squads can be S4. Death Korps sergeants have lasguns, codex sergeants can take bolters. Death Korps have access to a different set of orders, but in most cases they're functionally identical. These are two separate units with separate datasheets and a lot of nitpicky little differences... but functionally, they're both infantry squads, and the really relevant difference between the two is the DKoK's resilience to morale loss. Based on the table of contents of the new Imperial Armour book, it seems that the DKoK-specific Infantry Squad entry is going away, and despite being a long-time DKoK player I'm completely fine with that. The new Cult of Sacrifice rule conveys the theme and flavor of the Death Korps, without needing its own unit entry. This is Good Design™.

 Type40 wrote:
Arn't REGULAR space marines is not thesame as saying not space marines.

don't be facetious.

lol and sure, the guys who literally have wolf genetics spliced into their genetic make up, are trained differently and have different weapons can't be represented differently then their vanilla counter parts XD lol

Iron Hands have massively replaced their flesh with bionics, are organized and trained massively differently from Ultramarines, etc.
Still regular marines.

Remember when Salamanders had a lower initiative stat? I do.

Meanwhile, Cadians with flak armor and a heavily militaristic and industrial culture, Catachans with t-shirts and a pure machoman culture, and Savlar Chem Dogs, eqquiped with whatever they can find on the battlefield and with a culture of "I'm a dirty criminal doing whatever it takes to survive, including running or stabbing my commanding officer" share the same codex.
I'm pretty sure those three armies don't share the same weapons, aren't trained the same, and frankly given the muscle on the catachan, borderline don't share the same genetics!

Hey Zeus this forum is becoming unreadable with every thread becoming derailed around the same things by the same people.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Type40, a question you ignored is this:

What would change if you had to replace your Wulfen with Vanguard Vets armed similarly, in terms of your army comp and strategy?

They are a completely different unit, with a different statline, different wargear, different access to transports, different unit size, and very different rules.... I do not even understnad how someone would play them the same way XD other then dedicating them to do melee damage at some point in the match.

Honestly it isn't my responsibility to try and theory craft different comp and stratagy for wulfen v.s. Van Vets,,, all I can say is there stat line, abilities and synergies are totally different... but in the same way a unit a of Harlie troupes are fast and good at fighting, these two units are also fast and good at fighting,,, doesnt mean i am going to play them the same way at all XD.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Arn't REGULAR space marines is not thesame as saying not space marines.

don't be facetious.

lol and sure, the guys who literally have wolf genetics spliced into their genetic make up, are trained differently and have different weapons can't be represented differently then their vanilla counter parts XD lol

Iron Hands have massively replaced their flesh with bionics, are organized and trained massively differently from Ultramarines, etc.
Still regular marines.

Remember when Salamanders had a lower initiative stat? I do.

Meanwhile, Cadians with flak armor and a heavily militaristic and industrial culture, Catachans with t-shirts and a pure machoman culture, and Savlar Chem Dogs, eqquiped with whatever they can find on the battlefield and with a culture of "I'm a dirty criminal doing whatever it takes to survive, including running or stabbing my commanding officer" share the same codex.
I'm pretty sure those three armies don't share the same weapons, aren't trained the same, and frankly given the muscle on the catachan, borderline don't share the same genetics!

where is the iron hands 30+ unique datasheets and their 2nd edition codex and do you really think their unique stuff should also be squatted ? XD


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 catbarf wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Also a re-roll charge aura, a diffrence in armor save, a difference to speed, diffrence tough, diffrent strenghth, different wargear options .... hmmm ...
lol sooo, ya,,, a fast hard hitting unit,,, that does completely different things..

Incredible.

'How would your strategy change if you had X unit instead of Y unit?'
'X HAS ABILITY Y HAS WEAPON MIGHT AS WELL MAKE HARLEQUINS COUNT AS SPACE MARINES LMAO GOTTEM'

So can you actually explain how a harlequin troupe is less different from BG Van Vets then wulfen are from BG Van Vets ? XD lol ...

or are you just gonna mock my position like it has no weight. When people in this thread keep repeating "they are just fast fighty units and completely interchangeable" lol. why not swap em out with harlies then ,,, just another "fast fighty unit" with completely different rules and stats as well.

Karol wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

Did you even read the 8th edition Space Wolves codex ? do you have any idea what they are trying to stuff into the supplement lol

Well that is how it is. You have people playing xeno claiming that marines should be one codex with SG vets, DC, wulfen be represented by the same unit, and at the same time saying that they should get R&H, eldar corsairs etc.

Because Marines should and are now in one Codex but of course get their own super special supplements for each sub-sub faction unlike any other faction in the game.

Saying that say Grey Hunters only have minor differences to a Tac Marine squad is not saying BS like all Imperials should be represented by one squad - which is incredably insulting to anyone with any ounce of objective interlect.

You actually believe that Space Wolves needed a super special new reivers unit other than in the lore.

Probably going to get the same rules as Sisters of Silence - cos the constantly evolving Mary Sue Wolves.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Type40 wrote:
Why do so many people want this game to be less unique and less interesting.

Because you don't need every unit to have a unique datasheet for the smallest difference for the game to be unique and interesting?

Yet somehow it seems that only Marine subfactions *need* unique non-character units...