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.

It's just you and Type40 who are adamantly against consolidating marine datasheets. It wouldn't be about marines if the marines were not fighting about it. I have provided examples of nids and other eldar players have said they would enjoy some consolidation too.

Oh man,,, did you keep a strait face while you wrote out that lie XD.

There are people arguing against the marine whine on every single thread... we just happen to be the ones on this one right now XD.
Ya, you have a little consolidated group of people who are good at teaming up and bullying people... but to suggest its just us two is hilarious XD.

 Lance845 wrote:
If they gave me better versions of everything I have with extra wounds, longer ranged guns with higher AP and more guns then ever on the bigger platforms...

sure. Yeah. Squat my old gak. Il take a 20w flyrant with 8 guns and more psychic powers a turn.

Absolutely would I use 2w hormagaunts with -1AP on their scytal and an extra attack. Please. Give me that kit and squat the old one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
I didn't ask for your army to get squatted. I asked for your army wide upgrade to get finished so we can move forward into whats next.

So this really is just "Dakka's Anti-Marine Whine Thread #443-A".

I mean, for feth's sake, 40K General has become a really boring place of late:

It's just you and Type40 who are adamantly against consolidating marine datasheets. It wouldn't be about marines if the marines were not fighting about it. I have provided examples of nids and other eldar players have said they would enjoy some consolidation too.

except I'm strongly opposed to it to. yeah you don't see a LOT of marine posters on this thread. I suspect the absolutely toxic additude has driven a LOT of them from the forums these days

 Lance845 wrote:
It's just you and Type40 who are adamantly against consolidating marine datasheets.

I'm against removing flavour and options from a book because I remember what it looks like to have your entire army sundered by consolidation.

3.5 to 4th Chaos.

 Type40 wrote:

It's just you and Type40 who are adamantly against consolidating marine datasheets. It wouldn't be about marines if the marines were not fighting about it. I have provided examples of nids and other eldar players have said they would enjoy some consolidation too.

Oh man,,, did you keep a strait face while you wrote out that lie XD.

There are people arguing against the marine whine on every single thread... we just happen to be the ones on this one right now XD.
Ya, you have a little consolidated group of people who are good at teaming up and bullying people... but to suggest its just us two is hilarious XD.

Disagreement is not bullying.

 Type40 wrote:

It's just you and Type40 who are adamantly against consolidating marine datasheets. It wouldn't be about marines if the marines were not fighting about it. I have provided examples of nids and other eldar players have said they would enjoy some consolidation too.

Oh man,,, did you keep a strait face while you wrote out that lie XD.

There are people arguing against the marine whine on every single thread... we just happen to be the ones on this one right now XD.
Ya, you have a little consolidated group of people who are good at teaming up and bullying people... but to suggest its just us two is hilarious XD.

THIS thread isn't about marines. It's about the whole game. The topic of discussion for pages has been marines because you are against the topic of the thread in relation to marines.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
It's just you and Type40 who are adamantly against consolidating marine datasheets.

I'm against removing flavour and options from a book because I remember what it looks like to have your entire army sundered by consolidation.

3.5 to 4th Chaos.

you have to keep in mind, many of the loudest voices don't care. judging by his gallery pictures, I'm pretty sure Lance doesn't even play space Marines, you think he cares if space marine fans have to put up with a boring flavorless codex with no passion behind it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

It's just you and Type40 who are adamantly against consolidating marine datasheets. It wouldn't be about marines if the marines were not fighting about it. I have provided examples of nids and other eldar players have said they would enjoy some consolidation too.

Oh man,,, did you keep a strait face while you wrote out that lie XD.

There are people arguing against the marine whine on every single thread... we just happen to be the ones on this one right now XD.
Ya, you have a little consolidated group of people who are good at teaming up and bullying people... but to suggest its just us two is hilarious XD.

THIS thread isn't about marines. It's about the whole game. The topic of discussion for pages has been marines because you are against the topic of the thread in relation to marines.

no dude, this thread is about Marines. it's transparently about marines

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

It's just you and Type40 who are adamantly against consolidating marine datasheets. It wouldn't be about marines if the marines were not fighting about it. I have provided examples of nids and other eldar players have said they would enjoy some consolidation too.

Oh man,,, did you keep a strait face while you wrote out that lie XD.

There are people arguing against the marine whine on every single thread... we just happen to be the ones on this one right now XD.
Ya, you have a little consolidated group of people who are good at teaming up and bullying people... but to suggest its just us two is hilarious XD.

THIS thread isn't about marines. It's about the whole game. The topic of discussion for pages has been marines because you are against the topic of the thread in relation to marines.

Exactly! for once its not an anti marine thread but an actual 40k General thread yet you marine players just gotta keep playing the victim and derail threads for some god damn reason.

Marines are in most need of consolidation. But as I pointed out, so are carnifexes, mawlocks and the trygons, shrikes and warriors, the prime needing some upgrade options, and sky slasher/rippers.

Here is me in the first page. Answering the OP.

 Lance845 wrote:
The only value is emotional for the people who really like to have their own unique datasheet. Mechanically and practically there is none.

Further this can get applied to war gear as well. It has been argued that having power axe, power sword, power spear, etc etc... is a waste. Just have a singular stat line for power weapon and then the player is free to model whatever weapon they want onto the model to flavor it however they see fit.

The extra granularity isn't actually helping anything and doesn't actually make that big of a difference while the modeling options would become vastly better.

Yes. I use a power weapon as an example. But it is only an example.

BrianDavion wrote:

no dude, this thread is about Marines. it's transparently about marines

i made the thread and i specified many times that it wasnt about marines but that marines were used as an example because they were the only army i could think of that has these very similar units and because i got the idea from the hounds of morkai thread.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

It's just you and Type40 who are adamantly against consolidating marine datasheets. It wouldn't be about marines if the marines were not fighting about it. I have provided examples of nids and other eldar players have said they would enjoy some consolidation too.

Oh man,,, did you keep a strait face while you wrote out that lie XD.

There are people arguing against the marine whine on every single thread... we just happen to be the ones on this one right now XD.
Ya, you have a little consolidated group of people who are good at teaming up and bullying people... but to suggest its just us two is hilarious XD.

THIS thread isn't about marines. It's about the whole game. The topic of discussion for pages has been marines because you are against the topic of the thread in relation to marines.

Exactly! for once its not an anti marine thread but an actual 40k General thread yet you marine players just gotta keep playing the victim and derail threads for some god damn reason.

it's not about marines! we're just conveniantly using marines as the only examples! we're just conveniantly calling for a mass squating of marines, but we're really not discussing marines.

 Lance845 wrote:
THIS thread isn't about marines.

Bull gak it isn't.

 Lance845 wrote:
It's about the whole game. The topic of discussion for pages has been marines because you are against the topic of the thread in relation to marines.

So we just consolidate things huh?

So, maybe we do this?

Troops: Tyranid Gaunt - 4 points per model.

A unit of Gaunts must take one of the following:

1. Fleshborers & Living Ammo - +2 points per model.
2. Scything Talons & Bounding Leap - +3 points per model.
3. Fleshborers & Wings - +4 points per model*

*Gaunt units that take this option change to a Fast Attack slot.

Or maybe we do this:

Elite: Cult Chaos Space Marines - 16 points per model

A unit of Cult Chaos Space Marines must take one of the following:

1. Bolt Pistols, Chainaxes & [Some Khorne Rule] - +4 points per model.
2. Inferno Bolt Guns & [Some Tzeentch Rule] - +4 points per model.
3. Bolt Guns, Plague Knives & Disgustingly Resilient - +6 points per model
4. Sonic Blasters & [Some Slaanesh Rule] - +3 points per model

And on and on we go?

BrianDavion wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

It's just you and Type40 who are adamantly against consolidating marine datasheets. It wouldn't be about marines if the marines were not fighting about it. I have provided examples of nids and other eldar players have said they would enjoy some consolidation too.

Oh man,,, did you keep a strait face while you wrote out that lie XD.

There are people arguing against the marine whine on every single thread... we just happen to be the ones on this one right now XD.
Ya, you have a little consolidated group of people who are good at teaming up and bullying people... but to suggest its just us two is hilarious XD.

THIS thread isn't about marines. It's about the whole game. The topic of discussion for pages has been marines because you are against the topic of the thread in relation to marines.

Exactly! for once its not an anti marine thread but an actual 40k General thread yet you marine players just gotta keep playing the victim and derail threads for some god damn reason.

it's not about marines! we're just conveniantly using marines as the only examples! we're just conveniantly calling for a mass squating of marines, but we're really not discussing marines.

im not calling for a fething marine squat, i said after carnifexes were pointed out to me that i very well couldve used them as an example (and evidently shouldve) but im not as familiar with the tyrannids codex as with the SM one.

Yes. Carnifexes and Aspect warriors are totally marine examples.

 Lance845 wrote:
Why would I loose any fluff or flavor on the table? Nids are constantly evolving to face new threats. With the emergence of primaris the hive mind decided to bolster the strains. Once new strains of Nid are viable for mass production why would they produce weaker less effective forms?

Thats full of fluff and flavor

Lol,,, you really just do not comprehend do you XD.

that's not what I meant lol XD... yes the "cannon story" fluff, I am sure will justify why your nids get replaced LOL.

but again, you arn't the same kind of player as me,,,, and that is fine, you enjoy the game and use the best unit for the best role and make the spiky tactically charged list you want... That's fine. The game is all about tactics for you, and using the best unit for the job is the right call, right down to the numbers. That's fine, that's your game.

But my Wolfgaurd FB marine who leads a unit of blood claws is palyed , rules wise, in a way that is unique from any new vanilla primaris,,, even though he isn't as good, I play him because I like and enjoy the unique nature of his alternative rules. The same with my TWC, they cross the field doing things differently from any Vanilla Primaris, even though the outriders may be the better otpion , I choose their unique style of play due to their alternative rules... I am not just going to replace them for the best unit for the job... I don't want that, I want my rules flavour to stay in tact until the FB apocalypes... which seems like it wont be at least until the next SM codex... so lets hope you all get your wish and its xenos factions releases for the next two years XD

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
THIS thread isn't about marines.

Bull gak it isn't.

 Lance845 wrote:
It's about the whole game. The topic of discussion for pages has been marines because you are against the topic of the thread in relation to marines.

So we just consolidate things huh?

So, maybe we do this?

Troops: Tyranid Gaunt - 4 points per model.

A unit of Gaunts must take one of the following:

1. Fleshborers & Living Ammo - +2 points per model.
2. Scything Talons & Bounding Leap - +3 points per model.
3. Fleshborers & Wings - +4 points per model*

*Gaunt units that take this option change to a Fast Attack slot.

Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

 Lance845 wrote:
Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

Why are you cool with this?

As to your point about power wepaons, 40K did that once. It was the change to 2nd and 3rd Ed. Eventually they brought back the variety as they wanted to have an axe perform differently to a sword/mace/whatever. What is wrong with doing that? Why is adding granularity a bad thing?

 Lance845 wrote:
Yes. Carnifexes and Aspect warriors are totally marine examples.

Imagine consolidated aspect warriors... lets get warp spider movement shenanigan's on those guys with fire warrior guns. Honestly though, I guess it would be good for balance,,, but giving that kind of customization to marines XD ... please no.

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Yes. Carnifexes and Aspect warriors are totally marine examples.

Imagine consolidated aspect warriors... lets get warp spider movement shenanigan's on those guys with fire warrior guns. Honestly though, I guess it would be good for balance,,, but giving that kind of customization to marines XD ... please no.

woah, imagine if it was allowed and correct pts cost were attributed to every wargear option

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

Why are you cool with this?

As to your point about power wepaons, 40K did that once. It was the change to 2nd and 3rd Ed. Eventually they brought back the variety as they wanted to have an axe perform differently to a sword/mace/whatever. What is wrong with doing that? Why is adding granularity a bad thing?

Why would I not be? The kit still exists. I still get all the units on the table. They still have all their options. Does calling the gargoyles gargoyles mean much? Not even a little bit. Know what got squatted for nids with legends? Weapon options for the termagants. Wanna know why nobody complained? Because those weapons sucked and nobody took them anyway. Having weapon options wasting space on the data sheet was just that. Wasted data sheet. That is a concise datasheet that I could fit on a regular playing card and represents what used to take 3 pages.

 Lance845 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

Why are you cool with this?

As to your point about power wepaons, 40K did that once. It was the change to 2nd and 3rd Ed. Eventually they brought back the variety as they wanted to have an axe perform differently to a sword/mace/whatever. What is wrong with doing that? Why is adding granularity a bad thing?

Why would I not be? The kit still exists. I still get all the units on the table. They still have all their options. Does calling the gargoyles gargoyles mean much? Not even a little bit. Know what got squatted for nids with legends? Weapon options for the termagants. Wanna know why nobody complained? Because those weapons sucked and nobody took them anyway. Having weapon options wasting space on the data sheet was just that. Wasted data sheet. That is a concise datasheet that I could fit on a regular playing card and represents what used to take 3 pages.

100% wrong LOL.

I personally know two people who complained... They shared the same army and were hoping their gear options that they painstakingly custom built and magnetized would get better and you know,,, not squated XD... not everyone is so happy to lose options,,, even bad ones XD.

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

Why are you cool with this?

As to your point about power wepaons, 40K did that once. It was the change to 2nd and 3rd Ed. Eventually they brought back the variety as they wanted to have an axe perform differently to a sword/mace/whatever. What is wrong with doing that? Why is adding granularity a bad thing?

Why would I not be? The kit still exists. I still get all the units on the table. They still have all their options. Does calling the gargoyles gargoyles mean much? Not even a little bit. Know what got squatted for nids with legends? Weapon options for the termagants. Wanna know why nobody complained? Because those weapons sucked and nobody took them anyway. Having weapon options wasting space on the data sheet was just that. Wasted data sheet. That is a concise datasheet that I could fit on a regular playing card and represents what used to take 3 pages.

100% wrong LOL.

I personally know two people who complained... They shared the same army and were hoping their gear options that they painstakingly custom built and magnetized would get better and you know,,, not squated XD... not everyone is so happy to lose options,,, even bad ones XD.

Yeah, these forums were overflowing with rage over the strangleweb. SO MANY players custom built that gun that did no damage. No literally. It dealt no damage.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Yes. Carnifexes and Aspect warriors are totally marine examples.

Imagine consolidated aspect warriors... lets get warp spider movement shenanigan's on those guys with fire warrior guns. Honestly though, I guess it would be good for balance,,, but giving that kind of customization to marines XD ... please no.

woah, imagine if it was allowed and correct pts cost were attributed to every wargear option

The game would be an entire mess.
Balancing the game would for every little change would be a nightmare XD .
You would have to change pt costs with every detail change on any army ability, chapter tactic or when ever there was a new strat.
When one abuse was found you would trigger a series of events where EVERY SINGLE point cost would have to be adjusted.
The access and potential to min/max paly would be atrocious. You would constantly be struggling to keep up with the meta because every time you changed somethin, some other imbalance would emerge...

You understand that restrictions make balance easier not harder right ? XD

I can't believe this is the argument XD. This isn't even game design 101 ...

I do admit that you could field what ever fluffy thing you wanted though... It would just never be unique... because for total balance you'd need to give every faction access to everything otherwise you are looking at even more balancing issues... imagine the time that would have to be wasted by the designers on absolutely every detail in this complex machine constantly changing and shift .... oh man.... I really hope that mess never comes to pass.

The game is an entire mess now.

Balancing the game for every little change would be exactly like balancing the game for every little datasheet now. Nobody changes point costs for chapter tactics now. So on and so forth.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

Why are you cool with this?

As to your point about power wepaons, 40K did that once. It was the change to 2nd and 3rd Ed. Eventually they brought back the variety as they wanted to have an axe perform differently to a sword/mace/whatever. What is wrong with doing that? Why is adding granularity a bad thing?

Why would I not be? The kit still exists. I still get all the units on the table. They still have all their options. Does calling the gargoyles gargoyles mean much? Not even a little bit. Know what got squatted for nids with legends? Weapon options for the termagants. Wanna know why nobody complained? Because those weapons sucked and nobody took them anyway. Having weapon options wasting space on the data sheet was just that. Wasted data sheet. That is a concise datasheet that I could fit on a regular playing card and represents what used to take 3 pages.

100% wrong LOL.

I personally know two people who complained... They shared the same army and were hoping their gear options that they painstakingly custom built and magnetized would get better and you know,,, not squated XD... not everyone is so happy to lose options,,, even bad ones XD.

Yeah, these forums were overflowing with rage over the strangleweb. SO MANY players custom built that gun that did no damage. No literally. It dealt no damage.

I'll ask them for a picture.

p.s. just because your friends in your echo chamber don't think a certain way,,, doesn't mean your the majority lol.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:
The game is an entire mess now.

Balancing the game for every little change would be exactly like balancing the game for every little datasheet now. Nobody changes point costs for chapter tactics now. So on and so forth.

100% not true. when PA came out,,, new point costs... when the marine dex came out ,,, new point cost,,, new eddition,,, new point cost.... they might not have done a good job of it,,, but there is a reason the point costs changed and that was because the balance of the units changed with introduction new stratagems, abilties and etc...

They are having enough trouble keeping up whilst some restrictions ARE in place, you think they ll be able to keep balance sans restrictions and with total customization ? you got to be kidding me.

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

Why are you cool with this?

As to your point about power wepaons, 40K did that once. It was the change to 2nd and 3rd Ed. Eventually they brought back the variety as they wanted to have an axe perform differently to a sword/mace/whatever. What is wrong with doing that? Why is adding granularity a bad thing?

Why would I not be? The kit still exists. I still get all the units on the table. They still have all their options. Does calling the gargoyles gargoyles mean much? Not even a little bit. Know what got squatted for nids with legends? Weapon options for the termagants. Wanna know why nobody complained? Because those weapons sucked and nobody took them anyway. Having weapon options wasting space on the data sheet was just that. Wasted data sheet. That is a concise datasheet that I could fit on a regular playing card and represents what used to take 3 pages.

100% wrong LOL.

I personally know two people who complained... They shared the same army and were hoping their gear options that they painstakingly custom built and magnetized would get better and you know,,, not squated XD... not everyone is so happy to lose options,,, even bad ones XD.

Yeah, these forums were overflowing with rage over the strangleweb. SO MANY players custom built that gun that did no damage. No literally. It dealt no damage.

I'll ask them for a picture.

p.s. just because your friends in your echo chamber don't think a certain way,,, doesn't mean your the majority lol.

And vice versa. I am not claiming to be a majority. I am using logic. H.B.M.C. can't understand why I would be cool with a single datasheet for gaunts gants and gargs despite me loosing nothing. What the hell sense does that make?

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

Why are you cool with this?

As to your point about power wepaons, 40K did that once. It was the change to 2nd and 3rd Ed. Eventually they brought back the variety as they wanted to have an axe perform differently to a sword/mace/whatever. What is wrong with doing that? Why is adding granularity a bad thing?

Why would I not be? The kit still exists. I still get all the units on the table. They still have all their options. Does calling the gargoyles gargoyles mean much? Not even a little bit. Know what got squatted for nids with legends? Weapon options for the termagants. Wanna know why nobody complained? Because those weapons sucked and nobody took them anyway. Having weapon options wasting space on the data sheet was just that. Wasted data sheet. That is a concise datasheet that I could fit on a regular playing card and represents what used to take 3 pages.

100% wrong LOL.

I personally know two people who complained... They shared the same army and were hoping their gear options that they painstakingly custom built and magnetized would get better and you know,,, not squated XD... not everyone is so happy to lose options,,, even bad ones XD.

Yeah, these forums were overflowing with rage over the strangleweb. SO MANY players custom built that gun that did no damage. No literally. It dealt no damage.

dakkadakka is hardly the entire 40k community dude.

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
The game is an entire mess now.

Balancing the game for every little change would be exactly like balancing the game for every little datasheet now. Nobody changes point costs for chapter tactics now. So on and so forth.

100% not true. when PA came out,,, new point costs... when the marine dex came out ,,, new point cost,,, new eddition,,, new point cost.... they might not have done a good job of it,,, but there is a reason the point costs changed and that was because the balance of the units changed with introduction new stratagems, abilties and etc...

They are having enough trouble keeping up whilst some restrictions ARE in place, you think they ll be able to keep balance sans restrictions and with total customization ? you got to be kidding me.

The workload is either equal (less datasheets more options) or less (with less datasheets and more options you likely are consolidating duplicate options so there are actually less lines of data to adjust.)

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

Why are you cool with this?

As to your point about power wepaons, 40K did that once. It was the change to 2nd and 3rd Ed. Eventually they brought back the variety as they wanted to have an axe perform differently to a sword/mace/whatever. What is wrong with doing that? Why is adding granularity a bad thing?

Why would I not be? The kit still exists. I still get all the units on the table. They still have all their options. Does calling the gargoyles gargoyles mean much? Not even a little bit. Know what got squatted for nids with legends? Weapon options for the termagants. Wanna know why nobody complained? Because those weapons sucked and nobody took them anyway. Having weapon options wasting space on the data sheet was just that. Wasted data sheet. That is a concise datasheet that I could fit on a regular playing card and represents what used to take 3 pages.

100% wrong LOL.

I personally know two people who complained... They shared the same army and were hoping their gear options that they painstakingly custom built and magnetized would get better and you know,,, not squated XD... not everyone is so happy to lose options,,, even bad ones XD.

Yeah, these forums were overflowing with rage over the strangleweb. SO MANY players custom built that gun that did no damage. No literally. It dealt no damage.

I'll ask them for a picture.

p.s. just because your friends in your echo chamber don't think a certain way,,, doesn't mean your the majority lol.

And vice versa. I am not claiming to be a majority. I am using logic. H.B.M.C. can't understand why I would be cool with a single datasheet for gaunts gants and gargs despite me loosing nothing. What the hell sense does that make?

Sure if you lose nothing AND gain no new customization options,,, then there is literally no change... just a user interfacing difference... and in that case... what's the point.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Give the Gargs their blinding venom and yeah I am pretty cool with that.

Why are you cool with this?

As to your point about power wepaons, 40K did that once. It was the change to 2nd and 3rd Ed. Eventually they brought back the variety as they wanted to have an axe perform differently to a sword/mace/whatever. What is wrong with doing that? Why is adding granularity a bad thing?

Why would I not be? The kit still exists. I still get all the units on the table. They still have all their options. Does calling the gargoyles gargoyles mean much? Not even a little bit. Know what got squatted for nids with legends? Weapon options for the termagants. Wanna know why nobody complained? Because those weapons sucked and nobody took them anyway. Having weapon options wasting space on the data sheet was just that. Wasted data sheet. That is a concise datasheet that I could fit on a regular playing card and represents what used to take 3 pages.

100% wrong LOL.

I personally know two people who complained... They shared the same army and were hoping their gear options that they painstakingly custom built and magnetized would get better and you know,,, not squated XD... not everyone is so happy to lose options,,, even bad ones XD.

Yeah, these forums were overflowing with rage over the strangleweb. SO MANY players custom built that gun that did no damage. No literally. It dealt no damage.

dakkadakka is hardly the entire 40k community dude.

Correct. By all means, find me some rage about the strangleweb. I would love to see it.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
8th Edition - All the Marines have different books, or supplements.

"There are too many Marine books!"

9th Edition - Consolidates Marines into a single book, with supplements for anything that's unique to various Chapters.

"There are too many Marine books!"

So which is it?

Whether you have 6 standalone books, or 1 core book and 5 supplements that refer back to the core book, you still have 6 books. If 6 books is too many in scenario 1, it's still too many in scenario 2.


To be clear, I'm not saying that choices should be taken away. I'm saying that they should be consolidated, but that, if combined with a robust Trait system, doesn't have to mean losing options. If anything, it opens up options, because it means that the things that currently make a particular Chapter 'unique' (just like all of the other Chapters that use the same rules because they're using the same codex!) can't only be taken in specific combinations. When the system allows for you to make 'The Totes Not Space Wolves' Chapter using the Space Wolf codex, the idea that rolling the Space Wolf-only goodies into the basic Marine book removes their uniqueness goes straight out the window. When you only have Thunderwolves in the Space Wolf Codex, they're not actually unique to Space Wolves... they're just unique to Space Wolves and any other chapter that is unique in the exact same way as Space Wolves.

Instead, you have a single Marine codex, which has a cavalry option, and traits that can be taken to make your army more Space Wolfy. So people can make Space Wolf Thunderwolf cavalry, or they can make Space Gheckos Lizard Rider Cavalry, or they can make White Scar Bikers... all by taking the same generic unit with optional modifications via the traits. The end result is more choice, not less.