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.
2020/10/29 22:58:05
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Because they're nearly all working from the same core units.
So you want to remove all variety from an army because their core units are the same?
What variety is this?
Just to illustrate my point - I am essentially in favour of nearly ALL unique units being made generic, available to everyone, without skimping on making them mechanically identical to their pre-merge counterpart. No rules are lost, no army or model is being made illegal.
Can we not trust players to regulate their OWN armies to foster their OWN variety? If a SW player or BT player believes they should take Apothecaries or Librarians because of their lore, do they need a rule saying they can't?
They/them
2020/10/29 23:01:03
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
"don't wory, we arn't taking anything from you, except your identity" lol "they are exactly the same anyways, except for all the things that make them different, so we ll make sure they arn't different anymore" lol .
"oh but this other datasheet, from this other faction, even though its as different as your datasheet is, I say its the same because, these bikes fly" lol.
"no non, wolves and bikes are too similar,,, not like flying bikes and driving bikes" lol.
The Cavalry sergeant may replace its chainsword with a storm shield or an item from the melee weapons list
The Cavalry sergeant may replace its bolt pistol with a boltgun, plasma pistol or an item from the Melee Weapons list.
(Veteran Space Marine Cavalry) : For an additionnal Xpts, you can treat all models in the unit as if they were Cavalry sergeants for their wargear options.
(Airborn Space Marine Cavalry) : For an additionnal Xpts, you may add the fly keyword and 2" of movement to this unit.
(Fast Space Marine Cavalry) : For an additionnal Xpts, you may add 2" to the movement of this unit and give it the "turbo boost" ability.
(Ferocious mount) : For an additionnal Xpts, you may attack with the mount after the rider has made all its attacks, make 3 attacks at 5 -2 1
(Gunner Space Marine Cavalry) For an additionnal Xpts, you can chose to replace the bolt pistol of Cavalry sergeants with any weapons from the special weapons list.
I see exactly your TWC in there. Just stop dude.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/29 23:02:39
2020/10/29 23:01:11
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Ok,.,,,, so remind me what that has to do with you wanting me to lose my rules ?
nothing
because youre not losing any fething rule
Except unique access to my faction unit...XD ?
One last time: You're not losing access to it. It's just that other people are getting the keys as well. You lose nothing except exclusivity.
"don't wory, we arn't taking anything from you, except your identity" lol
Sorry, your identity depends on exclusivity against other people? You identity revolves around "HAHA I HAVE THIS AND YOU DON'T!!"? My god that's shallow.
"they are exactly the same anyways, except for all the things that make them different, so we ll make sure they arn't different anymore" lol .
That's not what my proposal was, and you know it. My proposal was more than capable of replicating TWC mechanically identically. The only issue was that EVERYONE got it. But that was too much for you, huh?
The Cavalry sergeant may replace its chainsword with a storm shield or an item from the melee weapons list The Cavalry sergeant may replace its bolt pistol with a boltgun, plasma pistol or an item from the Melee Weapons list.
(Veteran Space Marine Cavalry) : For an additionnal Xpts, you can treat all models in the unit as if they were Cavalry sergeants for their wargear options. (Airborn Space Marine Cavalry) : For an additionnal Xpts, you may add the fly keyword and 2" of movement to this unit. (Fast Space Marine Cavalry) : For an additionnal Xpts, you may add 2" to the movement of this unit and give it the "turbo boost" ability. (Ferocious mount) : For an additionnal Xpts, you may attack with the mount after the rider has made all its attacks, make 3 attacks at 5 -2 1 (Gunner Space Marine Cavalry) For an additionnal Xpts, you can chose to replace the bolt pistol of Cavalry sergeants with any weapons from the special weapons list.
Not quite how I'd personally do it, but it has exactly the same mechanical effect, and that's the main thing.
Very well done.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/10/29 23:04:02
They/them
2020/10/29 23:05:50
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Because they're nearly all working from the same core units.
So you want to remove all variety from an army because their core units are the same?
What variety is this?
Just to illustrate my point - I am essentially in favour of nearly ALL unique units being made generic, available to everyone, without skimping on making them mechanically identical to their pre-merge counterpart. No rules are lost, no army or model is being made illegal.
Can we not trust players to regulate their OWN armies to foster their OWN variety? If a SW player or BT player believes they should take Apothecaries or Librarians because of their lore, do they need a rule saying they can't?
I'd like to play my TWC as though they could auto advance 6", move 16", have fly, rising cresendo, access to harlie strats, masque froms , haywire cannons and zepherglaives Lets do it ! lets consolidate those datasheets . Skyweavers are just like TWC if we make t hem do the same thing .
p.s. no, we can not trust players to regulate their OWN armies... that isn't 40k,,, that is a different game. In 40k you pick datasheets that represent your unit, that provide unique rules fluff and playstyles as the designers saw fit, because, in theory the designers create relatively balanced units for casual and up to tournament play... but sure,,, we could play BolterAction where we customly build our datasheets and play based completely on our own customized why of seeing fit... but that's a completely different game and that is going to require a complete rules overhaul to every army.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/10/29 23:08:01
As an aside, as "infinite" rolls is actually impossible even if the FAQ "allows" it, then it will always be a non-zero chance to pass them all. Eventually the two players will die. If they pass the game on to their decendents, they too will eventually die. And, at the end of it all, the universe will experience heat death and it, too, will die. In the instance of "infinite" hits, we're talking more of functional infinity, rather than literal.
RAW you can't pass the game onto descendants, permissive ruleset. Unless we get an FAQ from GW.
2020/10/29 23:08:04
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Because they're nearly all working from the same core units.
So you want to remove all variety from an army because their core units are the same?
What variety is this?
Just to illustrate my point - I am essentially in favour of nearly ALL unique units being made generic, available to everyone, without skimping on making them mechanically identical to their pre-merge counterpart. No rules are lost, no army or model is being made illegal.
Can we not trust players to regulate their OWN armies to foster their OWN variety? If a SW player or BT player believes they should take Apothecaries or Librarians because of their lore, do they need a rule saying they can't?
I'd like to play my TWC as though they could auto advance 6", move 16", have fly, rising cresendo, access to harlie strats, masque froms and haywire cannons. and zepherglaives .
p.s. no, we can not trust players to regulate their OWN armies... that isn't 40k,,, that is a different game. In 40k you pick datasheets that represent your unit, that provide unique rules fluff and playstyles as the designers saw fit, because, in theory the designers create relatively balanced units for casual and up to tournament play... but sure,,, we could play BolterAction where we customly build our datasheets and play based completely on our own customized why of seeing fit... but that's a completely different game and that is going to require a complete rules overhaul to every army.
Are you an alt account of BaconCatBug? Thats the type of ridiculus claims he would do.
"if you want to shoot your assault weapons after advancing then my marines are toughness 9000 with a 0+ save and get 350 attacks each"
2020/10/29 23:10:22
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Because they're nearly all working from the same core units.
So you want to remove all variety from an army because their core units are the same?
What variety is this?
Just to illustrate my point - I am essentially in favour of nearly ALL unique units being made generic, available to everyone, without skimping on making them mechanically identical to their pre-merge counterpart. No rules are lost, no army or model is being made illegal.
Can we not trust players to regulate their OWN armies to foster their OWN variety? If a SW player or BT player believes they should take Apothecaries or Librarians because of their lore, do they need a rule saying they can't?
I'd like to play my TWC as though they could auto advance 6", move 16", have fly, rising cresendo, access to harlie strats, masque froms and haywire cannons. and zepherglaives .
p.s. no, we can not trust players to regulate their OWN armies... that isn't 40k,,, that is a different game. In 40k you pick datasheets that represent your unit, that provide unique rules fluff and playstyles as the designers saw fit, because, in theory the designers create relatively balanced units for casual and up to tournament play... but sure,,, we could play BolterAction where we customly build our datasheets and play based completely on our own customized why of seeing fit... but that's a completely different game and that is going to require a complete rules overhaul to every army.
Are you an alt account of BaconCatBug? Thats the type of ridiculus claims he would do.
"if you want to shoot your assault weapons after advancing then my marines are toughness 9000 with a 0+ save and get 350 attacks each"
LOL... what is the difference ?
We are letting players regulate their OWN armies... XD is it frustrating to see your logic in play.
You want to arbitrarily let other factions have a datasheet that does the same thing as a SW unique unit ... So now, I also propose we make the SW unique unit do things that a unit nothing like it does ?
What is the difference... wolf, bike , dinosaure, jet bike, whats the diference right ? a little paint, imagination and the ability to regulate my own army .
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/10/29 23:12:02
As an aside, as "infinite" rolls is actually impossible even if the FAQ "allows" it, then it will always be a non-zero chance to pass them all. Eventually the two players will die. If they pass the game on to their decendents, they too will eventually die. And, at the end of it all, the universe will experience heat death and it, too, will die. In the instance of "infinite" hits, we're talking more of functional infinity, rather than literal.
RAW you can't pass the game onto descendants, permissive ruleset. Unless we get an FAQ from GW.
2020/10/29 23:14:39
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
I'll be honest - I've completely lost track of what people are even arguing for/against at this point.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
2020/10/29 23:15:25
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
"Everyone TWC will not be unique to SWs , it will be way easier to balance the game if every SM faction can just do the same thing"
"oh, the TWC datasheet is nothing like any other datasheet in the SM range, that's fine, we'll make them same now"
"oh,,, not that datasheet, that datasheet is completely different in all the same ways,,, but that belongs to someone else, only SWs don't deserve a custom identity" lol
As an aside, as "infinite" rolls is actually impossible even if the FAQ "allows" it, then it will always be a non-zero chance to pass them all. Eventually the two players will die. If they pass the game on to their decendents, they too will eventually die. And, at the end of it all, the universe will experience heat death and it, too, will die. In the instance of "infinite" hits, we're talking more of functional infinity, rather than literal.
RAW you can't pass the game onto descendants, permissive ruleset. Unless we get an FAQ from GW.
2020/10/29 23:17:20
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
H.B.M.C. wrote: HQ:
Space Marine High Level Commander
Space Marine Low Level Commander
Space Marine Psyker
Elites:
Space Marine Terminator Unit
Space Marine Veteran Power Armour Unit
Space Marine Dreadnought
Space Marine Apothecary
Space Marine Tech-Marine
Troops:
Space Marine Troops Unit
Space Marine Heavy Troops Unit
Space Marine Scout Troops Unit
Fast Attack:
Space Marine Fast Assault Unit
Space Marine Bike
Space Marine Heavy Bike
Space Marine Land Speeder
Heavy Support:
Space Marine Tank
Space Marine Heavy Tank
Space Marine Artillery Tank
Transports:
Space Marine Transport
Space Marine Drop Pod
Flyers:
Space Marine Flying Transport
Space Marine Flying Gunship
Yeah. I could see this working. It just screams "fun" and "variety".
Totally fun and full of variance... you know what would be even "better" for balance and design function... why specify Space Marines at all
High Level Commander
Low Level Commander
Psyker
Elites:
Terminator Unit
Veteran Power Armour Unit
Dreadnought
Apothecary
Tech-Marine
Troops:
Troops Unit
Heavy Troops Unit
Scout Troops Unit
Fast Attack:
Fast Assault Unit
Bike
Heavy Bike
Land Speeder
Heavy Support:
Tank
Heavy Tank
Artillery Tank
Transports:
Transport
Drop Pod
Flyers:
Flying Transport
Flying Gunship
we can do the whole game this way.
Each one of these datasheets can have the option to become any unit in the game and the players can regulate their OWN army ? why not ? XD .
As an aside, as "infinite" rolls is actually impossible even if the FAQ "allows" it, then it will always be a non-zero chance to pass them all. Eventually the two players will die. If they pass the game on to their decendents, they too will eventually die. And, at the end of it all, the universe will experience heat death and it, too, will die. In the instance of "infinite" hits, we're talking more of functional infinity, rather than literal.
RAW you can't pass the game onto descendants, permissive ruleset. Unless we get an FAQ from GW.
2020/10/29 23:25:20
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Yeah. It does. You're describing exactly what other armies have.
So this is a good model to consolidate all 3 eldar armies ?
After putting in the enormous effort to create this rules overhaul, remove tons of players sense of identity and uniqueness, force players into a vanilfied situatiion, make choices meaningless, have the designer spend even more time ensuring all the new options and uprades synergize and are balanced with each chapter... do you think there will still be time to focus on other factions XD lol... do you think keeping the balance of this level of customization would be easy XD. You just turned SMs into an unbeatable super customizable faction OR you removed the flavour of 50% of power armor faction players who entered the game for that flavour OR you created a set of datasheets that will need complex flow charts just to use .
You are proposing the opposite of what you want... this isn't going to remove design space from marines, this is redesigning the entire faction and would probobly take the design team, at minimum another year, focused only on marines lol. Your basically proposing a new game.
As an aside, as "infinite" rolls is actually impossible even if the FAQ "allows" it, then it will always be a non-zero chance to pass them all. Eventually the two players will die. If they pass the game on to their decendents, they too will eventually die. And, at the end of it all, the universe will experience heat death and it, too, will die. In the instance of "infinite" hits, we're talking more of functional infinity, rather than literal.
RAW you can't pass the game onto descendants, permissive ruleset. Unless we get an FAQ from GW.
2020/10/29 23:26:25
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Gonna leave it now. We can agree to disagree; I'm cool with that.
Not sure any Blood Angels want BA on wolves, or DA on wolves, but if you think the dex needs to be rewritten for a 14th or 15th time to make that possible instead of just getting on with making all the non-marine dexes just to make that possible, well then nothing I can say is going to change your mind; I doubt there's much anyone could say to change mine, though Smudge came close on some stuff.
Keep on rockin in the free world y'all. Much respect all around, and I'll likely see you all again the next time the topic shows up. Rinse and repeat.
Peace.
2020/10/29 23:29:44
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
And for two, do you still not understand the difference between consolidating Marines and consolidating the entire game?
for the last time, this isn't a question of consolidating MARINES.
You are proposing the consolidation of specific sheets.
So NO consolidating TWC into outriders continues to be just as logical as consolidating skyweavers into outriders.
Two completely different units gaining all of each others abilities and rules to fit onto one datasheet will do nothing but create further balancing issues and force the design team to focus even more on ensuring balancing problems due to removal restriction and thus requiring the new upgrades and alternatives on this "new consolidated datasheet" is balanced in the context of all the new customizations it has all of a sudden gained.
As an aside, as "infinite" rolls is actually impossible even if the FAQ "allows" it, then it will always be a non-zero chance to pass them all. Eventually the two players will die. If they pass the game on to their decendents, they too will eventually die. And, at the end of it all, the universe will experience heat death and it, too, will die. In the instance of "infinite" hits, we're talking more of functional infinity, rather than literal.
RAW you can't pass the game onto descendants, permissive ruleset. Unless we get an FAQ from GW.
2020/10/29 23:30:49
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Troops:
Termagants - Troops Unit
Tyranid Warriors - Heavy Troops Unit
Hormagaunts - Scout Troops Unit?
Ripper Swarm - Joke Troops Unit
Fast Attack:
Raveners - Fast Assault Unit
Gargoyles - Bike
Trygon? Heavy Bike
And some spore mines and sky slasher swarms which will never be taken as fast attack.
Heavy Support:
Carnifex - Dred
Tyrannofex - Tank
Exocrine - Heavy Tank
Biovore - Artillery Tank
Mawlocs and Toxicrenes as specialists.
Honestly Mawloc should be a variation of or upgrade to the Trygon/prime
Transports:
Tyrannocyte Drop Pod
Flyers:
Harpy - Flying Gunship
Hive Crone - Flying Gunship
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
2020/10/29 23:30:52
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
I'd like to play my TWC as though they could auto advance 6", move 16", have fly, rising cresendo, access to harlie strats, masque froms , haywire cannons and zepherglaives Lets do it ! lets consolidate those datasheets . Skyweavers are just like TWC if we make t hem do the same thing .
I don't think that's what he was saying. It's not about players making up their own rules (although in an environment where all of the players are ok with that, it's totally fine) but about people making selections based on when fits their chosen theme. If your Chapter fluff says that they don't use Librarians, then you don't take Librarians. If your fluff says that your Chapter uses a lot of fast moving units, then you select as many fast moving units as you can. This stuff doesn't actually have to be restricted in the rules.
2020/10/29 23:33:10
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
So this is a good model to consolidate all 3 eldar armies ?
it would be if they had any units in common.[/quot]
What unit is the same as a TWC or a Wulfen.... lol but the two fighty elf units with shurriken weapopns are more different then a wolf and a bike XD.
PenitentJake wrote: Gonna leave it now. We can agree to disagree; I'm cool with that.
Not sure any Blood Angels want BA on wolves, or DA on wolves, but if you think the dex needs to be rewritten for a 14th or 15th time to make that possible instead of just getting on with making all the non-marine dexes just to make that possible, well then nothing I can say is going to change your mind; I doubt there's much anyone could say to change mine, though Smudge came close on some stuff.
Keep on rockin in the free world y'all. Much respect all around, and I'll likely see you all again the next time the topic shows up. Rinse and repeat.
Peace.
Ya, I got to dip on this too.
If you guys can't see the flaw in your proposals ,,, I don't know how else to explain it XD.
But I hope to god GW doesn't go with any of your plans... they ll be releasing marine updates for another year and the balance of the game will be so hard to keep up with it wont even be funny. not to mention all the players who will leave because they had their identities stolen...
Peace guys.
We had a good conversation while it lasted, but I really can't argue in these circles your leading me through anymore, I am re-answering questions asked of me days ago XD.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/10/29 23:44:37
As an aside, as "infinite" rolls is actually impossible even if the FAQ "allows" it, then it will always be a non-zero chance to pass them all. Eventually the two players will die. If they pass the game on to their decendents, they too will eventually die. And, at the end of it all, the universe will experience heat death and it, too, will die. In the instance of "infinite" hits, we're talking more of functional infinity, rather than literal.
RAW you can't pass the game onto descendants, permissive ruleset. Unless we get an FAQ from GW.
2020/10/29 23:34:57
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
We had a good conversation while it lasted, but I really can't argue in these circles your leading me through anymore, I am re-answering questions asked of me days ago XD.
we really didnt, mostly you shifting goalposts and appealing to extremes.
2020/10/29 23:35:22
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
We had a good conversation while it lasted, but I really can't argue in these circles your leading me through anymore, I am re-answering questions asked of me days ago XD.
we really didnt, mostly you shifting goalposts and appealing to extremes.
not even once lol XD not even once. I have repeated the same set of issues, concerns and problems with consolidation proposals through the entire argument. Arbitrarily accusing me of shifting the goal post doesn't actually make it true lol. You can't just accuse people of that because you don't know how to respond to their disputes with your proposals... I can't shift a goal post when I have been the one responding and disputing to YOUR proposals lol ,,, that's just not how discourse works XD... you propose it, I dispute it,,, you were incharge of the goal posts lol.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/10/29 23:38:44
As an aside, as "infinite" rolls is actually impossible even if the FAQ "allows" it, then it will always be a non-zero chance to pass them all. Eventually the two players will die. If they pass the game on to their decendents, they too will eventually die. And, at the end of it all, the universe will experience heat death and it, too, will die. In the instance of "infinite" hits, we're talking more of functional infinity, rather than literal.
RAW you can't pass the game onto descendants, permissive ruleset. Unless we get an FAQ from GW.
2020/10/29 23:35:31
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Because they're nearly all working from the same core units.
So you want to remove all variety from an army because their core units are the same?
I just don't see the reason for the push for this is, what possiable use is there to focus on weather or not space wolves have a datasheet for TWC or not?.... other then to fill the dakkadakka "marine complaints" quota.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
2020/10/29 23:38:46
Subject: Re:What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Also, if your wondering why I don't advocate for all marine units to get access to TWC clones or a datasheet that CAN function as a TWC clone... see my points above. I'd rather have my unique flavour and I'd rather SMs didn't get options they have been previously restricted from arbitrarily because people do not want me to have unique things. The game is now fundamentally different because A: I am not being rewarded for choosing to restrict my self by playing my faction v.s. another and now SM players have access to a slew of new options that may synergize in unintended and unbalanced ways. This increases potential for imbalance and time working out correct balancing and does not decrease it.
I really can not understand why the argument for they are giving too much time to marine design seems to be "spend time overhauling the marines, give the general marines access to even more, and create new min/max balancing issues whilst simultaneously removing the occasional variety and variance that comes with a players choice to restrict themselves to a specific faction/subfaction.
I want other factions to have attention... giving marines a rule overhaul is not what is going to accomplish that. Removing my unique units from the game by allowing a generic SM unit to do all the stuff mine does will free up as much design space as doing that with any datasheet from any faction (aka, none, they will still focus on the marine stuff, you just lose your unique stuff in the process and a ton of marine players gain even more customization) ...
Getting rid of what exists doesnt magically make the space that it took to make that thing in the past appear as if it was never used, that space has already been spent,,, i am not saying it has always deserved to be spent there, i am saying it is ilogical think you can unspend it by puting in way more effort, time, and resources into removing it , rebalancing it and doing an overall rules infastructure re-work for all the power armor factions as a whole.
None of the other factions are ever going to get that level of support. Isn't going to happen. Simple as. We can end that line of thought. Many lines are in fact losing, or have already lost, a whole lot more than anyone is proposing here. Dark Eldar, Renegades and Heretics, etc.
Space Marines, one of the smallest and ostensibly one of the most tightly disciplined and mostly codex-bound forces in the entire galaxy, have more variety and rules and unit support than the entirety of the forces of Chaos, more subtle RPG level distinction and nuance than the fighting force that encompasses the great mass of humanity in all its stripes that is the Imperial Guard, more subfaction rules support than the ancient Eldar, etc ad nauseum. We have Codex adherent chapters with more dedicated rules support for their subtle distinctions than the entirety of mortal chaos armies have, or for any single Chaos Legion.
And hell, I have marine armies. I play Iron Warriors and just finished painting a Grey Knights army. I get and like that there are differences between subfactions.
But I'm also aware that a ton of this stuff all treads on each others toes, a lot of it is just different interpretations and visual portrayals of the same thing. I don't demand that I need special rules of Possessed Iron Warriors who would be wielding daemonically powered cybernetics instead of allowing Daemons to infest their bodies for example, the generic Possessed unit statline will work for that.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Does losing some of the DKOK unique datasheets or losing the Elysium unique datasheets somehow free up extra design space ? no, and it is really gakky for the people who lost their unique datasheets.
Sure they can just use generic gaurd datasheets and imagine their models behave the same way, and look fondly at their nice paint job... but thats not the same as having unique rules. Imagination and paint isn't the same as having a flavourful ruleset that represents your unit. Removing one that already exists does not free up space... the space is spent.
As a DKoK player, I'm 100% ok with not needing unique datasheets for Death Korps specific infantry and just using a Doctrine applied to the basic Infantry Squad instead. I have zero problems with that. There was never any benefit to the DKoK having a unique infantry entry, all it ever meant was that they were notably more expensive for no reason with fewer options and a smaller array of weapons upgrades, with worse Orders functionality and constantly lagging rules support. Honestly, the Catachan doctrine works as a DKoK doctrine for me, reflects enhanced CC emphasis, greater morale (at least when near officers), and some bonus to the big guns, touches all the DKoK buttons, what's not to like? That works for me better than the traditional 20% points premium for slightly enhanced WS and Morale rules with no ability to take heavy weapons.
The problem with their handling of the Grenadiers is that Tempestus Scions don't have ways to replicate the Grenadier entry, like access to Chimeras. If they fixed that, I'd have no issue just using the Tempestus Scion unit entry for Grenadiers.
You are claiming that the being defensive about the theft of the units that make a faction unique makes people entitled and you expect people who have invested time, money and a massive amount of energy into that faction shouldn't take this as some sort of insult?
Because it's a game, with shifting design and lore paradigms, where the things being proclaimed as unique pillars of identity shift and change over the editions and often are relatively new additions to decades old lore, and because I acknowledge that there's limits to D6 based design space in a game that's basically got a total of 3 or 4 meaningful unit actions (move, shoot, charge, psychic powers) and the fact that similar concepts are adopted by many different factions which reflect them in their own unique visual manner without inherently being fundamentally different things. If you're getting that insulted over a post about game design on an internet message board, you're taking it a wee bit too seriously.
Your the one calling us entitled for thinking it wouldn't be fair to lose our unique units XD.
Only if you insist on the defining "losing unique units" by simply not having a unique datasheet. I will, again, repeat my point, with its qualifications.
I'm perfectly happy to use to consolidate unit entry if that entry is constructed in such a way as to allow those options. If people have a consolidated entry that does those things and are just mad that it's not broken out into separate entries, that's what I consider entitled.
If the consolidated entry cannot be constructed to reasonably portray the unit and its options, then no, it shouldn't be part of a consolidated unit, but if it can, and you just want a separate entry just because, that's silly, and we could easily have tens of thousands of different units in the game otherwise.
A wolf is less of a bike then an elf jet bike isnt a space marine bike...
As I've pointed out several times, the SM biker units are, in terms of rules design and heritage, reskinned Warhammer Fantasy heavy cavalry. They don't actually operate the way bikes do, they're not used the way motorcyles actually are, nobody fights from the seat of a motorcycle in reality, SM bikes act and function like cavalry with a scifi skin.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/29 23:39:21
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2020/10/29 23:40:43
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Because they're nearly all working from the same core units.
So you want to remove all variety from an army because their core units are the same?
I just don't see the reason for the push for this is, what possiable use is there to focus on weather or not space wolves have a datasheet for TWC or not?.... other then to fill the dakkadakka "marine complaints" quota.
the thread originally used TWC as an example because i got the idea from the hounds of morkai thread. This could be applied to many other units (mostly space marines because of the sheer number of datasheet they have) but if any other army has redundant or very similar units, they could be used as an example. Its about reducing the bloat more than nerfing marines in particular
2020/10/29 23:43:11
Subject: Re:What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
I'm still completely confused. Is the problem with generic names? Like, would it be better if every name was Faux-Latin gibberish?
Or is this a problem with having a separate dataslate for e.g. 'Captain' and 'Captain with Gravis Armour', as opposed to a single Captain dataslate who also has the option of Gravis Armour?
Sorry if I'm just being thick here. I did try to read the last 4 or so pages, but everyone seemed to be talking at cross-purposes and I realised my eyes had started skipping whole paragraphs in self-defence.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
2020/10/29 23:45:33
Subject: Re:What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
A wolf is less of a bike then an elf jet bike isnt a space marine bike...
As I've pointed out several times, the SM biker units are, in terms of rules design and heritage, reskinned Warhammer Fantasy heavy cavalry. They don't actually operate the way bikes do, they're not used the way motorcyles actually are, nobody fights from the seat of a motorcycle in reality, SM bikes act and function like cavalry with a scifi skin.
On a historical note - in the days before TWC were a thing, people were converting Space Marine 'Bikers' riding WHFB Cold Ones, and nobody ever batted an eyelid at it.
2020/10/29 23:45:58
Subject: Re:What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
vipoid wrote: I'm still completely confused. Is the problem with generic names? Like, would it be better if every name was Faux-Latin gibberish?
Or is this a problem with having a separate dataslate for e.g. 'Captain' and 'Captain with Gravis Armour', as opposed to a single Captain dataslate who also has the option of Gravis Armour?
Sorry if I'm just being thick here. I did try to read the last 4 or so pages, but everyone seemed to be talking at cross-purposes and I realised my eyes had started skipping whole paragraphs in self-defence.
the bolded part is what i had in mind. and its not necessarily a problem, it was more of thought experiment about the pros and cons of the idea.
2020/10/29 23:46:37
Subject: Re:What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
vipoid wrote: I'm still completely confused. Is the problem with generic names? Like, would it be better if every name was Faux-Latin gibberish?
Or is this a problem with having a separate dataslate for e.g. 'Captain' and 'Captain with Gravis Armour', as opposed to a single Captain dataslate who also has the option of Gravis Armour?
Sorry if I'm just being thick here. I did try to read the last 4 or so pages, but everyone seemed to be talking at cross-purposes and I realised my eyes had started skipping whole paragraphs in self-defence.
It's not the names, it's about having multiple datasheets that do the same thing, just for the sake of artificial variety.
2020/10/29 23:47:36
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Because they're nearly all working from the same core units.
So you want to remove all variety from an army because their core units are the same?
I just don't see the reason for the push for this is, what possiable use is there to focus on weather or not space wolves have a datasheet for TWC or not?.... other then to fill the dakkadakka "marine complaints" quota.
the thread originally used TWC as an example because i got the idea from the hounds of morkai thread. This could be applied to many other units (mostly space marines because of the sheer number of datasheet they have) but if any other army has redundant or very similar units, they could be used as an example. Its about reducing the bloat more than nerfing marines in particular
Agreed. The 4 types of carnifex (including the FW stone crusher) should be a single datasheet. The codex can have some fluffy foot notes about how to build classic fexes like the screamer killer.
The Trygon should be one data sheet with a points cost to add a mawloc head and it's reburrow ability or upgrade to a prime and gain it's electric thing. Also can the prime be a damn synapse creature? Id appreciate it and pay for it.
The warriors should have a purchasable upgrade to be shrikes. And instead of the red terror the Tyranid prime should have upgrade options to gain wings to function with shrikes or a tail and burrowing to act as the new red terror.
I guess is sky slasher swarms are going to stick around they should be an upgrade to rippers.
I think thats about all the consolidating Nids can do. Im happy to have it done.
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
2020/10/29 23:50:24
Subject: What is the benefit of ultra precise datasheet over generic ones?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Because they're nearly all working from the same core units.
So you want to remove all variety from an army because their core units are the same?
I just don't see the reason for the push for this is, what possiable use is there to focus on weather or not space wolves have a datasheet for TWC or not?.... other then to fill the dakkadakka "marine complaints" quota.
the thread originally used TWC as an example because i got the idea from the hounds of morkai thread. This could be applied to many other units (mostly space marines because of the sheer number of datasheet they have) but if any other army has redundant or very similar units, they could be used as an example. Its about reducing the bloat more than nerfing marines in particular
Agreed. The 4 types of carnifex (including the FW stone crusher) should be a single datasheet. The codex can have some fluffy foot notes about how to build classic fexes like the screamer killer.
The Trygon should be one data sheet with a points cost to add a mawloc head and it's reburrow ability or upgrade to a prime and gain it's electric thing. Also can the prime be a damn synapse creature? Id appreciate it and pay for it.
The warriors should have a purchasable upgrade to be shrikes. And instead of the red terror the Tyranid prime should have upgrade options to gain wings to function with shrikes or a tail and burrowing to act as the new red terror.
I guess is sky slasher swarms are going to stick around they should be an upgrade to rippers.
I think thats about all the consolidating Nids can do. Im happy to have it done.
Thats the thing i was missing as an example, i think the fact that i used SW instead of Nids as an example made the thread go full-on into peoples emotions
A tip for you guys : just because marines are mentionned doesnt immediately make it a marine complain thread
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/10/29 23:51:04
Lets do it ! lets consolidate those datasheets . Skyweavers are just like 
