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.

Karol wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
You really do expect the worst from people, don't you?

But just to prove you wrong: I'm an Ultramarine player mostly. And I can wholeheartedly say that Space Marines are the main faction in the game that needs consolidation. Including my own Ultramarines.

Yes, it is the only logical way expect stuff from others.

Only with your view of people, I'm afraid. As far as I'm concerned, it is entirely reductive, and doesn't take into account people not being selfish a-holes. You might have experience with only that, but I am fortunate enough to say I know people who transcend that.

Also it is easy to say for an ultramarine, because if GW would be streamlining and merging marines in to something, then it would be marines.

Because Marines are the most in need of streamlining?

I could also say that I am totaly for GW merging all marines and replacing them with one codex, well two one for chaos and loyalists. Because my GK don't share much with marines anyway, so GW would either have to squat my army whole or leave it unchanged. And I can put razorbacks on the altar of sacrifice, if it only means other armies get weaker and my gets more or less unchanged.

OR, and here's a novel concept, GK aren't merged with with Marines, but instead with a combined Inquisition codex. And what on earth do Razorbacks have to do with it?
Plus, that's not how "merging" works - you don't sacrifice one of your own things just to spite someone else, that implies that merging works on a "you lose something, I lose something" basis (which it doesn't), and the fact that you're so willing to use that basis to spite people other than you is just downright malicious.

SecondTime wrote:


I volunteer BA and SW for squatting. It's a worthy sacrifice.

Because you don't play those chapters. What about squatting all the chapters that don't have a considerable amount of dedicated kits? I mean just keep BA, SW, DA, maybe Ultramarines and squat all the other marines.

 Blackie wrote:

SecondTime wrote:


I volunteer BA and SW for squatting. It's a worthy sacrifice.

Because you don't play those chapters. What about squatting all the chapters that don't have a considerable amount of dedicated kits? I mean just keep BA, SW, DA, maybe Ultramarines and squat all the other marines.

How many of those kits cover units which couldn't be represented by a more generic set of rules?

Blood Angels have
Sanguinary Priest -> Apothecary
Chaplain -> Chaplain
Terminator Captain -> Captain (he's already been made more generic than he was at time of release)
Tactical Squad -> Tactical Squad
Terminator Squad -> Terminator Squad / Terminator Ancient
Sanguinary Guard -> either elite assault unit archetype or Command Squad/Honour Guard
Death Company -> elite assault unit archetype to also cover Wulfen, Cursed Founding Abominations etc.
Baal predator -> consolidated Predator entry. The flamer turrent is already covered by the Relic Infernus, and techpriests managed to work out how to bolt assault cannons onto Razorbacks and Land Raiders, so a Predator shouldn't be difficult to figure out...
Librarian Dreadnought -> consolidated Dreadnought entry. Why did Blood Angels get the psychic Dreadnought anyway?
Furioso Dreadnought -> consolidated Dreadnought entry. The pattern isn't unique to Blood Angels, and the Ironclad and multiple Space Wolves builds already cover melee Dreadnoughts
Death Company Dreadnought -> consolidated Dreadnought entry. See above but with black paint.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

How many of those kits cover units which couldn't be represented by a more generic set of rules?

Named characters alone are like 11 different dedicated models for SW..... What do chapters like Imperial Fists, White Scars or Iron Hands really have to deserve their own book of rules? They're all SM with one named character.

It's like advocating for Ork Deathskulls or Evil Sunz supplements, when all the clans have exactly the same models and the same combination of options barring 1 or 2 named characters.

IMHO the ideal scenario for the whole SM chapters issue would have been: a generic SM book with only primaris units and standalone SW, BA, DA books without any primaris. 4 books in total for SM and 4 quite different armies to play.

Playing a generic primaris army with the SW chapter tacts and eventually Ragnar is an abomination, that's a vanilla SM army, not a SW one.

 Blackie wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

How many of those kits cover units which couldn't be represented by a more generic set of rules?

Named characters alone are like 11 different dedicated models for SW.....

Yeah. Merge away!
Canis and Harald each look a lot like a Wolf Lord on Thunderwolf...

 Blackie wrote:
What do chapters like Imperial Fists, White Scars or Iron Hands really have to deserve their own book of rules? They're all SM with one named character.

Yeah. Merge away!
There's no good reason for those Chapters to have additional books either.

 Blackie wrote:

SecondTime wrote:


I volunteer BA and SW for squatting. It's a worthy sacrifice.

Because you don't play those chapters. What about squatting all the chapters that don't have a considerable amount of dedicated kits? I mean just keep BA, SW, DA, maybe Ultramarines and squat all the other marines.

I have like 25K points of BA. I'm not playing them THIS edition. There's a difference. At this rate, I won't play them ever again.

If you squat marine that have dedicated kits, that's more shelf space for non-power armor units.

SecondTime wrote:
If you squat marine that have dedicated kits, that's more shelf space for non-power armor units.

Consolidating rules has nothing to do with needing to get rid of kits.

If all of the various different Terminator units shared a single rules entry, GW would still be able to sell the seven Terminator kits they currently do.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

SecondTime wrote:
If you squat marine that have dedicated kits, that's more shelf space for non-power armor units.

Consolidating rules has nothing to do with needing to get rid of kits.

If all of the various different Terminator units shared a single rules entry, GW would still be able to sell the seven Terminator kits they currently do.

I'm all in favor of consolidating units from the same book. It doesn't make any sense to have multiple terminators or dreads. I'm not in favor of merging standalone armies into the same book instead. I'd rather allow some specific units just to some specific chapters in order to give them their own flavor: primaris only for generic SM, bikes only for DA, etc... if you consolidate all chapters into one book you'll end up with a codex with 150 datasheets, which is wrong on any possible level and even consolidating the similar units into a single datasheet doesn't help.

Having 4 standalone SM books each with 40-50 datasheets at most, including some core shared units, a few slightly different units and some signature unique units would be much more interesting.

Currently I have to buy two books to play my army at the very beginning of the edition and 90% of the those codexes doesn't interest me at all. Not to mention the bloat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SecondTime wrote:


If you squat marine that have dedicated kits, that's more shelf space for non-power armor units.

No, there'd be more shelf space for newest power armor units. That's GW's politics, settle with that.

 Blackie wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

SecondTime wrote:
If you squat marine that have dedicated kits, that's more shelf space for non-power armor units.

Consolidating rules has nothing to do with needing to get rid of kits.

If all of the various different Terminator units shared a single rules entry, GW would still be able to sell the seven Terminator kits they currently do.

I'm all in favor of consolidating units from the same book. It doesn't make any sense to have multiple terminators or dreads. I'm not in favor of merging standalone armies into the same book instead. I'd rather allow some specific units just to some specific chapters in order to give them their own flavor: primaris only for generic SM, bikes only for DA, etc... if you consolidate all chapters into one book you'll end up with a codex with 150 datasheets, which is wrong on any possible level and even consolidating the similar units into a single datasheet doesn't help.

Having 4 standalone SM books each with 40-50 datasheets at most, including some core shared units, a few slightly different units and some signature unique units would be much more interesting.

Currently I have to buy two books to play my army at the very beginning of the edition and 90% of the those codexes doesn't interest me at all. Not to mention the bloat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SecondTime wrote:


If you squat marine that have dedicated kits, that's more shelf space for non-power armor units.

No, there'd be more shelf space for newest power armor units. That's GW's politics, settle with that.

You dare suggest that a sub faction should have unique rules for their unique kits !
They are ALL JUST MAHRINS and there is nothing special about the SW BA or DA units what so ever ! .
Don't you know if we just give vanilla marines all the options those units have or squat those units entirely it will be like the factions havn't lost any identity, units, or value at all ! you ll still have stuff ! Why do you want to think that your subfaction deserves to be unique ! don't you know that by rolling your subfactions stuff into a single vanilla marine codex there will be more room for MY faction to get stuff ? Don't you know how much easier it will be to balance marines when we have 3 page variable datasheets then it is to have 3 pages of seperate datasheets !

Vanilla MAHRINS need MORE options !!!! Locking special units and rules behind restrictions is terrible for the game ! and it only stifles variability of what we see on the table. If we make sure EVERY MARHIN PLAYER has the exact same options then we will finally start to see different things on the table !!!!!! ! If we leave it the way it is we will only ever see the same lists played every time ... subfactions with diverse units means we will only see MAHRINES... if you get rid of them and roll them together we will get to see GW focus more on ALL 3 flavours of ELVES and alllll the orks ... dont you know this !

A power armor subfaction can't be unique ! and don't you dare compare SOB or another factions right to have unique units to your silly little subfaction ... they are completely different ! because your MAHRINS are just MAHRINS and my 3 kind of elves are completely different ! I don't know why I make the distinction here at sub factions but you are making a "Bad Faith" argument if you suggest that your SWs BA or DA deserve to be unique like MY faction deserves to be !


p.s. its fine, we already established in this thread that we are not interested in 40k as it is . The rules and fluff are terrible and we think we in this forum can do a better job. In a few months we ll bang out a completely new rules set for the game that dwarfs GWs game in 10 fold... and ALLL those pesky mahrines will be rolled into one set of consolidated datasheets and they will lose nothing ... its going to be very well balanced and have a tremendous user interface.

We are here discussing options for 40k except we have established that we are going to write a new game with different rules that uses consolidated data sheets, marines will be one codex AND THATS IT. Then we will pretend we are still talking about the same game.


But in all seriousness:
Honestly, if the people in this thread hate 40k so much and just want to write a different game anyways,,, why even bother getting pissed off that some people want to keep subfactions ... you hate how GW does things, you dont like how the game works, you don't like the fluff,,, why don't you guys just play a different game ? like,,, even before you try and re-write the GW rules and what ever you guys were discussing a few pages ago,,, why not just use an existing game that can use GW models,,,, they do exist ....



Automatically Appended Next Post:
p.s.@blackie , sorry for responding to your post in a sarcastic and factious way. I am just a bit fed up with the types of responses I have gotten in this thread for wanting to defend keeping the more fleshed out subfactions unique. So I thought i would sum up what the next onslaught of responses might look like.

"They are ALL JUST MAHRINS and there is nothing special about the SW BA or DA units what so ever ! ."

The chapters are just too small to believably have this kind of diversity. The IG, on the other hand...

Marines have way too many equipment options for entities that consist of so few bodies. GW did this to themselves by committing to an absurd number and neglecting other model lines in favor of MOAR power armor.

To be fair we need some more options for Guard, and the losing of Rough Riders to Legends was a catastrophe for modelers everywhere.

The IG, on the other hand, have less room to believably have this kind of diversity. Standard template constructs are the rule of thumb for the Guard's equipment--even if there are "localized variants" the equipment is the same thing within an acceptable margin of differences.

Where Guard regiments vary is their usage of that equipment and their employment of tactics from their homeworlds. A Cadian regiment isn't going to be stealthers or scouts, a Catachan regiment isn't going to be heavy infantry, etc.
But even with that said, the uniqueness of Guard Regiments can further be boiled down into their designated roles! Heavy infantry regiments tend to be lighter in numbers but higher in training and equipment plus armored support.
Light infantry regiments tend to be heavier in numbers and training varies wildly with equipment being man-portable with armored assets being available.
Specialist regiments are a thing too and they're difficult to digest or even quantify.

Marines having 'too many equipment options', unfortunately, is a bit more accurate than people seem to want to believe. Marines are an 'all-rounder' force, where troops are trained for multiple roles rather than permanently stuck in one. That's the whole point of the Company progression they go through.

You want to argue for some more options for Guard? Do that. I've been doing it for years. I've even outlined how to setup supplements...but literally everything involved requires tearing the current garbage book down and ceasing this nonsensical prattle that IG have so much diversity in their regimental makeups. What IG have is not unlike what the 'big four' Marine factions(DA, SW, BA, DW) have: a select number of signature units tied to specific regiments. Catachan Devils, Cadian Kasrkin, and the Death Korps of Krieg's Death Riders/Grenadiers.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To be fair we need some more options for Guard, and the losing of Rough Riders to Legends was a catastrophe for modelers everywhere.

100% agree.

The chapters are just too small to believably have this kind of diversity.

10 000 custodes , approximately 10 000 SWs housed in the fang.... just because an organization is small doesn't mean they can't be believably diverse. Size of the organization in the fluff is no reason SWs can't be entitled to have unique units like any other army, especially considering there are other armies which fluffwise have the same amount or even less members,,,, this isn't a compelling argument,,,,,

 Type40 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To be fair we need some more options for Guard, and the losing of Rough Riders to Legends was a catastrophe for modelers everywhere.

100% agree.

The chapters are just too small to believably have this kind of diversity.

10 000 custodes , approximately 10 000 SWs housed in the fang.... just because an organization is small doesn't mean they can't be believably diverse. Size of the organization in the fluff is no reason SWs can't be entitled to have unique units like any other army, especially considering there are other armies which fluffwise have even less people,,,, this isn't a compelling argument,,,,,

Can you name a Codex that represents less bodies than Space Marines?

I can think of Custodes, maybe CSM, and that's about it.

SW are not their own army though. They are a SM subfaction. And subfactions can have their own unique units yes. But that doesn't make them their own army. And sometimes a "unique" unit for a subfaction is as simple as a reskin of a unit that already exists.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This is a DA tac squard. Otherwise known as a Tac Squad.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To be fair we need some more options for Guard, and the losing of Rough Riders to Legends was a catastrophe for modelers everywhere.

100% agree.

The chapters are just too small to believably have this kind of diversity.

10 000 custodes , approximately 10 000 SWs housed in the fang.... just because an organization is small doesn't mean they can't be believably diverse. Size of the organization in the fluff is no reason SWs can't be entitled to have unique units like any other army, especially considering there are other armies which fluffwise have even less people,,,, this isn't a compelling argument,,,,,

Can you name a Codex that represents less bodies than Space Marines?

I can think of Custodes, maybe CSM, and that's about it.

Again,,,, what the hell does this mater XD lol ?
and even if it does
Assassins,
CWE (fluff unclear)
DE (fluff unclear)
Necrons (currently, maybe more maybe less, who knows. For sure there will be more in the future as they wake up)
Harlequins
Ynari
Knights (both)
custodes
CSM

but again, number of members of an organization doesn't dictate capacity for diversity XD
Like,,, we do all understand this right?

Type40 wrote:You dare suggest that a sub faction should have unique rules for their unique kits !

Do Imperial Fist Intercessors need unique rules because they have the unique Primaris upgrade sprue? After all, that is a unique kit.

They are ALL JUST MAHRINS and there is nothing special about the SW BA or DA units what so ever ! .

SW, DA, and BA are special. So are UM, IF, RG, WS, and all the others Chapters. EVERY Chapter is special.

You don't need Codexes to reflect it. Look at what 30k does. One book covers ALL the core units, and a second book covers ALL unique additions, for practically every Legion.

Don't you know how much easier it will be to balance marines when we have 3 page variable datasheets then it is to have 3 pages of seperate datasheets !

Unironically, yes - and you're being exaggerative over how big datasheets would need to be. A single page would be more than enough.

But I know you'll keep crying about this, so I'm wasting my time.

@sgt and @lance.

Yes exactly, thank you for proving my point.

Precicely what I pointed out... you don't think the big fleshed out subfactions are there own army.
You don't understand the difference between sub factions with a few extra characters and sub factions that have been given extensive expansion.

And that's ok I was just warning @blackie that this would be exactly what you guys argue and I was warning them that you guys are unable to explain why these armies don't deserve to be treated uniquely and other armies in the game do deserve to be. Well outside of the following arguments:

"because Mahrines"
"because Subfaction"
"because they don't deserve it"

unfortunately for you guys, both GW and many players do think they deserve to stay unique and keep their army specific rules/units... now I know you can't grasp why or even fathom why anyone would allow armies who wear power armor could possibly be represented differently then a generic codex with datasheets that represent general concepts rather then specific units. they do wear the same hats after all, and anyone who wears the same hat is obviously exactly like anyone else wearing that hat.. and that's ok... you just need to understand that there are people do think that way, people who do view them as separate army factions, who do view them as unique, whether you like it or not.

Then explain why Ulthwe 'deserve' to be their own army while Dark Angels don't or why Raven Guard 'deserve' to only have the one character while Ultramarines have a veritable book full?
Why should Renegades & Heretics have this huuuuuuuuuuge reason to be their own army while Cadians don't?

The long and short of it is that anyone can make an argument for or against something...but very rarely are they actually giving compelling reasons.

 Type40 wrote:
@sgt and @lance.

Yes exactly, thank you for proving my point.

Precicely what I pointed out... you don't think the big fleshed out subfactions are there own army.
You don't understand the difference between sub factions with a few extra characters and sub factions that have been given extensive expansion.

And that's ok I was just warning @blackie that this would be exactly what you guys argue and I was warning them that you guys are unable to explain why these armies don't deserve to be treated uniquely and other armies in the game do deserve to be. Well outside of the following arguments:

"because Mahrines"
"because Subfaction"
"because they don't deserve it"

Lets not begin mischaracterizing other peoples arguments again. We all know how that turned out last time. A subfaction is not an army. It doesn't get treated uniquely because it is not unique. Having some unique units is not the same as being a whole new army. Thats simple logic. It has nothing to do with marines and never has. It DOES have to do with subfactions, but only in that they are a part of their core army. It has nothing to do with deserve, it has everything to do with both justifying why it needs to be it's own datasheet and asking why it can't be consolidated.

unfortunately for you guys, both GW and many players do think they deserve to stay unique and keep their army specific rules/units... now I know you can't grasp why or even fathom why anyone would allow armies who wear power armor could possibly be represented differently then a generic codex with datasheets that represent general concepts rather then specific units. they do wear the same hats after all, and anyone who wears the same hat is obviously exactly like anyone else wearing that hat.. and that's ok... you just need to understand that there are people do think that way, people who do view them as separate army factions, who do view them as unique, whether you like it or not.

Again, lets back off those personal attacks where "we cannot fathom or understand" while misscharacterizing us again. I GET why you want to have unique sheets. It's because you like them. However, GW has deemed that these subfactions are not in fact armies so it would be good if you didn't refer to them as such. I DO understand that you view them that way. As I said before I GET your position. I just don't place any value on it. You wanting things to be unique does not in fact make them unique.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Then explain why Ulthwe 'deserve' to be their own army while Dark Angels don't or why Raven Guard 'deserve' to only have the one character while Ultramarines have a veritable book full?
Why should Renegades & Heretics have this huuuuuuuuuuge reason to be their own army while Cadians don't?

The long and short of it is that anyone can make an argument for or against something...but very rarely are they actually giving compelling reasons.

Precisely.
So my question is why everyone thinks they should just rob existing factions from having unique identity without giving compelling reasons XD ... like I am all for giving other armies subfactions more unique units... why are people helbent on removing some .

I really don't think there is a reason why Ulthwe doesn't deserve to be their own army.... I honestly think the bigger concern here is that other people don't think existing armies 'deserve' to exist and can't really explain why in much detail other then that they can't/refuse to understand the differences... its so weird because the circular justification is

"THEY ARE EXACTLY THE SAME SO WE SHOULD GET RID OF OR MERGE EVERYTYHING THAT MAKES THEM DIFFERENT"

are they the same,,, or are they different ?
I am not trying to say Ulthwe doesn't deserve to exist as an army.
But thats not the same as saying an existing unique army DOESN'T deserve to exist.

If i showed up at your house with chocolate and strawberry ice cream. If you to throw out the strawberry ice cream or mix it together with chocolate because "its all ice cream" or because "chocolate icecream and vanilla icecream are just subcatagories of icecream", I am going to call you a dick and be really upset. but if you start telling me how much you wished I brought vanilla cake because I always bring ice cream and you are tired of having it... sure i could have, nothing says i have anything against vanilla cake. but thats clearly not the same as if you are ruining the the ice cream we have, its not going to magically make vanilla cake appear.

A subfaction is not an army. It doesn't get treated uniquely because it is not unique. Having some unique units is not the same as being a whole new army. Thats simple logic.

Except space wolves have more unique units then some armies have units in existence ... Are you saying lesser deamons should be folded into together... do you not realize the fact that you don't think it is unique 'enough' is entirely your opinion and isn't actually based in anything... you don't get get to pick what is unique enough, sorry. You think that because SWs have been a subfaction for 1.5 months (and lost none of their unique rules or units) they are somehow different then a full faction which they were 2 months ago ...

Anyways, lets not keep this up... we know you don't think they deserve to be treated that way ,,, and we know you claim it is because "subfaction."
Fine man... but you can keep repeating "subfactions arnt unique armies" all you want... but it doesn't change that what yo are saying a completely subjective opinion which both GW and many players disagree with ... and its fine that you think that way, its all good,,, its just not going to change anything.

ya know maybe people should justr stop calling for peoples armies to be squatted. seriously guys it's childish. could some dataslates be consoliudated? sure there's no reason for the two seperate gravis captain entries. (the best I can figure for why they did that BTW is if they're not planning on making the DI gravis captain avaliable down the road it'll be easier to quietly squat in 10th or 11th edition if it has it's own dataslate) but calling for some entire subfactions to be eliminated because you don't see a differance between sanguiary guard and victrix guard is just silly.

Type40 wrote:Precicely what I pointed out... you don't think the big fleshed out subfactions are there own army.

That's because they're not their own army. YOU even recognise that they're not "true" armies, as you've just defined them as SUBfactions.

And that's ok I was just warning @blackie that this would be exactly what you guys argue and I was warning them that you guys are unable to explain why these armies don't deserve to be treated uniquely and other armies in the game do deserve to be.

Actually, I think we've given more than enough reasons why. Just because you're incapable of letting go of SW privilege doesn't mean we're wrong.

"because Mahrines"

Specifically because Marines are oversaturated.

"because Subfaction"

Because subfactions don't need Codexes.

"because they don't deserve it"

Because nothing "deserves" anything without justifying it. And most of your arguments "justifying" SW getting their own Codex are "WELL IT'S BEEN LIKE THAT FOR YEARS!!!" which isn't justification, it's an argument to inertia.

unfortunately for you guys, both GW and many players do think they deserve to stay unique and keep their army specific rules/units...

Really? Is that why GW are moving SW into supplements, like every other Space Marine Chapter? Sooooo unique.

BrianDavion wrote:ya know maybe people should justr stop calling for peoples armies to be squatted.

Did you see someone calling for someone's army to be squatted? I didn't.

I saw plenty of arguments for consolidation, but consolidation isn't the same as squatting, and you know that. Where are the squatting arguments?

but calling for some entire subfactions to be eliminated because you don't see a differance between sanguiary guard and victrix guard is just silly.

Oh, I can tell the difference between a Sanguinary Guard and a Victrix Guard. What I'm asking is why those units aren't generic?

Why do the Ultramarines have a monopoly on 2 man elite swordsmen with shields? Why aren't Victrix Guard just Bladeguard Vets?
Why do the Blood Angels have a monopoly on elite jump pack swordsmen honour guards? Why aren't they just "Honour Guard" with a Jump Pack option - and speaking of Honour Guard, why are only the Ultramarines allowed them? I seem to remember the Red Scorpions having them, what happened there?

And this is what I mean - are you really saying that the Blood Angels are only as unique as their Sanguinary Guard, a unit that realistically should be open to everyone? Is their entire identity centred on a few additional units that don't even make sense being faction specific? If BA stopped having Sanguinary Guard all to themselves, are they still unique?

Lol. @smudge. Reiterating that you don't think subfactions can be considered armies and that you don't think they are unique enough isn't going to change that all you keep saying is "subfaction"is not a real army... Repeating it over and over again won't make it true.

Also, the units exist already, you say they don't deserve to, I say they do. But can you tell me why IG deserves to exist XD. Like, your kind of reaching here. I am not the one proposing a change here so I am not going to try to defend the existence of an army to you, some guy on the internet, because you hate that they exist... You don't like that they exist, that's your problem, unfortunately for you, they do exist XD.

GW did what you wanted and made the army a subfaction in order to consolidate datasheets. And now your like *it's not good enough, make everything vanilla*

Relax. There is no reason for you to try and eradicate/vanilify someone else's army...i sti can not understand why you are so adamantly against them but arnt against anything else... Does the word "subfaction" really bring you so much anxiety that you believe that can only be implemented in ine homogenous way and... You know... Not how it is actually being implemented XD


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The worst part is when we bring up the same type of logic you use for other armies. .. All of sudden it's "bad faith" or "not the same thing" or "they are different" lol.

Rangers = scouts, merge them? Lol... But noooooo CWE are a different army and elves arnt the same as marines.... But wolves arnt bikes and warewolves arnt veteran soldiers etc etc etc...."ooohhhh I didn't say wolves are bikes I said generic cavalry datasheet", and I didn't say elves are marines I siad generic sniper unit.... We can totally have this conversation again and again... But it still doesn't change the fact that all this is, is some people not being able to grasp that some subfactions are considered to be fleshed out armies by other people and it is your subjective opinion that they are not.

Making BA and SW into red and grey marines would be both fine and essentially squatting them as we know them.

There's just way too much effort on GW's part that goes into a statistically insignificant faction or set of factions. Power armor vs power armor matches aren't even fun to play imo, but I guess they made a whole game about it.

SecondTime wrote:
Making BA and SW into red and grey marines would be both fine and essentially squatting them as we know them.

There's just way too much effort on GW's part that goes into a statistically insignificant faction or set of factions. Power armor vs power armor matches aren't even fun to play imo, but I guess they made a whole game about it.

Who said anything about colour or even "play as."

I am talking about unit rules, gear, stats and abilities.
But again, just because you don't have fun playing these armies against each other doesn't mean no one does it also doesn't mean we ONLY like playing these ones.
Making BA and SW into just red and grey marines WOULD be squatting them from a rules/tabletop play standpoint and for many people that is NOT fine.

Again, its ok that you don't like them, and its ok that you don't want to paly them... but why advocate to squat or merge other peoples armies ? no one wants to do that to yours in fact most of the power armor players WANT the other factions to get way way more attention... why spend time removing one factions stuff when you can spend that same time adding to other armies?

"why spend time removing one factions stuff when you can spend that same time adding to other armies?"

I get the distinct impression from GW that these events are tied to each other. They are so busy patting themselves on the back about the latest primaris lieutenant that there's not much time for other factions.

Marines have just taken over the game in a way never seen before and I think everyone suffers one way or another.

 Type40 wrote:

Making BA and SW into just red and grey marines WOULD be squatting them from a rules/tabletop play standpoint and for many people that is NOT fine.

By this logic, every non-Marine faction in the game has been squatted already.

The only person interested in "like" is you right now. Nobodies argument is centered around personal feelings about a given subfaction.

The arguments being made at not emotional and have no basis in how anyone "feels" about the subfaction. Its basically just math. Are these 2 units pretty much the same unit doing the same job? Is there a reason they cant share wargear? No. Then why is it another datasheet reserved for this subfaction?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also type pvnp. Is it good for development time to make another 11 datasheets for every subfaction in the game?

 vipoid wrote:

 Type40 wrote:

Making BA and SW into just red and grey marines WOULD be squatting them from a rules/tabletop play standpoint and for many people that is NOT fine.

By this logic, every non-Marine faction in the game has been squatted already.

I honestly don't follow your logic...