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.

Vikings in space is an excellent identity for a space marine chapter, Wolfy McWolfface Wolfgang von Wolfenstein Canine Lupus Wolf Warriors of Wolfenheim is just comical.

SecondTime wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

SecondTime wrote:

I did put an "if" in there. Maybe I'm wrong. But I think their focus on power armor has to have some affect on the other factions, right?

Ah the old "just asking the question" bs. Nice try. Too bad you already tipped your hand at being interested only in gatekeeping what other people can play.

I don't really care what they play. So you're wrong there. I care that many model lines are neglected while GW makes more power armor.

This is no better as a line of attack. DW have an upgrade sprue, a single character blister and a vehicle, all of which have been out for years. You can't hang GW's neglect of other armies on a dizzying production schedule of DW minis! It's an absurd thing to say, I'm afraid.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Vikings in space is an excellent identity for a space marine chapter, Wolfy McWolfface Wolfgang von Wolfenstein Canine Lupus Wolf Warriors of Wolfenheim is just comical.

How else is GW suppose to claim the IP. If they call a squad Svensons Shinbreakers? But I get that it has to be different for people with primary english as their language.

Space Wolves are fine, they just need their theme cleaned up a bit and some of the wolfwolf units moved to Legends.

Deathwatch are also fine in a vacuum. I wish they had more Inquisition units to flesh out that organization more.

The *problem* is that the non-Astartes models that I want have been on back order for quite some time since GW is focusing on this stuff to the detriment of everything else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:
From the little expiriance I have, out of all the things I learned form 8th is that it seems like people hate all the armies they do not play, and don't realy care about the play quality of other armies, unless their close friend or family plays the army too. This was a big eye opener for me, because through out most of 8th ed I really believed that people do not think that way, but when the 2.0 marines droped it was all suddenly clear to me.

To be frank, you're wrong. People dislike it when armies receive so much support that it affects supply and support of other armies. There are some people that are as you described, but you seem to be intentionally conflating the two and pretending the former don't exist.

Honestly, I just have this thing of hating 5th edition. I'm not sure if its the people I was playing with - tbf it seemed much closer to the Karol experience than anything I've had in the last 5 years - but most of the armies who were good then just inspire this deep irrational hatred. So when people go "it was the best edition ever, how can you like this stuff" I'm always left wondering if we were just playing a different game.

I guess a similar feeling today is the enmity towards Knights. They are always crap or a hard gatekeeper list, I don't see how its possible to be anything else, and it just sucks. But since I don't want them to be a hard gatekeeper list, I'd prefer them to forever linger on the outskirts of awfulness. Sorry for those who like them.

Tyel wrote:
Honestly, I just have this thing of hating 5th edition. I'm not sure if its the people I was playing with - tbf it seemed much closer to the Karol experience than anything I've had in the last 5 years - but most of the armies who were good then just inspire this deep irrational hatred. So when people go "it was the best edition ever, how can you like this stuff" I'm always left wondering if we were just playing a different game.

I guess a similar feeling today is the enmity towards Knights. They are always crap or a hard gatekeeper list, I don't see how its possible to be anything else, and it just sucks. But since I don't want them to be a hard gatekeeper list, I'd prefer them to forever linger on the outskirts of awfulness. Sorry for those who like them.

I often look back on 5E as probably the best edition overall in terms of being able to pick any faction and at least have something minimally viable competitively and being easy for pickup games, and without as many deep inherent problems between certain classes of models as other editions. However it was absolutely not perfect and was deeply flawed in some core rules respects (hamfisting in silly KP's vs the older VP's that made empty drop pods worth as much as slaying a Land Raider, vehicle secondary weapons turning gun tanks into pillboxes, cheap transports that could ignore 5/6 glancing and 3/6 penetrating results and still do their job, wound allocation gimmickry, etc) with some dramatically absurd codex balance issues and kickstarted a lot of the sillier things we've started to see in 40k over the last decade, while still having a giant stick up its butt allowing FW stuff and having lots of older cool stuff sitting on ice.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Vikings in space is an excellent identity for a space marine chapter, Wolfy McWolfface Wolfgang von Wolfenstein Canine Lupus Wolf Warriors of Wolfenheim is just comical.

Like the Death Guard, I suspect the bright high-contrast studio scheme isn't doing the models any favours either. To my mind, it pulls things too far into the realm of comically overblown.

ETA: The idea of things like the space-longboat lander, for example, are really neat. Less literal-wolf, more "wolves of the sea, er, space" kenning and such.

To be frank, you're wrong. People dislike it when armies receive so much support that it affects supply and support of other armies. There are some people that are as you described, but you seem to be intentionally conflating the two and pretending the former don't exist.

I have yet to see people call out for nerfs of their own army when they are powerful. All 8th I thought that it was my store that was bad, till 2.0 sm codex all those people with good armies suddenly become worse then some 2.0 lists. And all the people that were telling me for 3 years how they don't care about winning, how they don't play 7 flyers or use castellans suddenly were up in arms how GW dares to make IH better then their armies. And when we sliped in to 9th it only continued. Why are all those casual, friendly players that never play to win and only care for fun playing with their friends suddenly worried about marine win rates? Why not do what they were telling marines player when marines were bad, just ask the your casual friends to not play the marine power builds? Isn't painting and the lore more important to the hobby anywhere, why all those people suddenly care that their army is worse then it was in the past? And the real eye opener was the remove option X from marines threads. Marines are suppose to be one list with one codex, because they are all the same thing. But hey their armies are suppose to have pirate lists, CWE lists, harlis , renegade IG etc The only difference between people here is that here people are openly donkey-caves to each other, while in other places just pretend to be all about friendly play, but they want the same power for their lists, then WAAC players. Worse they make people with good rule set feel bad for having them. No one was carrying about the fun IH players before they got their 2.0 rules, but when they did it was automaticly IH player with primaris=WAAC and you tell them no if they want to play.

They feel very super hero movie at this point. They have suffered more than most imperium factions from the new GW design shift that is moving the Imperium away from fascist dictatorship towards something closer to "the good guys," IMO. Space Wolves are interesting as savage space vikings with a history of extremely questionable behavior; they are super boring as Thor and Wolverine in space.

Karol wrote:
I have yet to see people call out for nerfs of their own army when they are powerful.

I have, and actually it was an Iron Hands player a few years ago when they were at the peak of their dominance. Well, "Cry out" is a strong word, but it was like "This stuff is overpowered and should probably be nerfed."

Karol wrote:
Why are all those casual, friendly players that never play to win and only care for fun playing with their friends suddenly worried about marine win rates? Why not do what they were telling marines player when marines were bad, just ask the your casual friends to not play the marine power builds?

Because the power level problem with marines has to do with the basic units, not spamming one particular overtuned piece. Someone making a fluffy, casual list will almost certainly dramatically overpower someone trying to do the same thing with, say, Kabalite Dark Eldar. The balance is screwed up in a way that dramatically impacts even casual play.

Karol wrote:
And the real eye opener was the remove option X from marines threads.

Other factions are losing datasheets (warboss on bike etc), and you're ok with that. Why not Astartes? Astartes *gaining* options while other factions are *losing* them is infuriating for even a casual player.

Someone complained that deathwatch had too much design space. This is pretty silly, as their extremely small model line is pretty old, and they only received one actual rules update in the last.... like 10 years or something.

Someone else said they were boring cos they're too 'mary sue'. I'd say they'd have to get in line behind grey knights and custodes (hell, and ultramarines) before that becomes a factor.

Someone else said they're too powerful. Way too early to judge, but they were a bottom-tier army for the entirety of 8th and this supplement is decent, but I think it'll end up being a solid mid-tier. Which is all we ever wanted.

Someone else said they would have liked for the deathwatch to be folded into the inquisition codex, in order to make a larger inquisition/deathwatch faction possible. I can't say I would have disagreed with that, as inquisitors in a deathwatch force is perfect (if done properly).

Karol wrote:out of all the things I learned form 8th is that it seems like people hate all the armies they do not play

Then you learned badly, is all I can say.

And honestly, given your LGS? Can't say I blame you - but it's not a general thing. You just seem to be playing with people I wouldn't go near.

If I hated all the armies I didn't play, why would I start new ones?

Karol wrote:I have yet to see people call out for nerfs of their own army when they are powerful.

I'm a massive advocate for reducing SM power. I'm a Space Marine player first and foremost.

A game where my faction is winning easily is not a fun game. It's utterly dull.

Why are all those casual, friendly players that never play to win and only care for fun playing with their friends suddenly worried about marine win rates?

I'm not worried about SM win rates, except that they're winning too much.

Why not do what they were telling marines player when marines were bad, just ask the your casual friends to not play the marine power builds? Isn't painting and the lore more important to the hobby anywhere, why all those people suddenly care that their army is worse then it was in the past?

You realise that I've been saying all of this?

But that doesn't fit your skewed narrative.

And the real eye opener was the remove option X from marines threads. Marines are suppose to be one list with one codex, because they are all the same thing.

They are. And I support doing the same even with my own Ultramarines and their "unique" units.

The issue boils down to how widespread the power of Marines are. Power list vs Power list isn't the consideration here.

It's pick-up casual list, maybe with some bite to it, vs your pals similarly non-optimal, but still well-built list. Marines are currently overpowered, full stop. It's not just the tournament lists winning, it's any list you put together, will likely be stronger than your opponents list unless they're looking to play hardball and you're not.

I'm bored of playing my marines. I point at the enemy's models, and they may as well just take them off the table.

However, to actually take part in the point of the thread; no. Deathwatch are cool, part of the lore, and here to stay.

Deathwatch are fine. They’re more factions that are even more unnecessary than them but I don’t want less content and variety in this game system. At worst they’re the victims of GW’s incredibly unfocused design (as are space wolves).

 Vaktathi wrote:
That'd be fine if the Space Wolves didn't also want to be dark and brooding serious executioners, wild berzerkers, cunning tactical geniuses, unpredictable tricksters, pridefully belligerent individualists, disciplined troopers, big softies looking out for the little guy, pitiless supersoldiers, and often actual werewolves, all at the same time. It's trying to do all of the above (often directly contradictory) things that detract from the SW's, for me at least.

Gonna nod in agreement. I freaking love Space Wolves, and actually don't even dislike the "Wolf Lord Smashwolf Wolfsmash on Wolf with a side of Wolf served on a bed of Wolf and a tall glass of Wolf by Wolf extracted from free-range Wolf." But it can very easily come to the fore in exclusion of everything else they're trying to be because the rest of their identity can be so confused; it's just easier to boil it down to Lightly Wolfed Spring Wolf Wolfed with Wolf Cilantro, and that identity being stronger than everything else is a result of being diluted for broad appeal. In fact, I conjecture that some of this is the result of different writers going "See, they're not just about wolves!" while not fully agreeing on what not-wolf thing they're about.

And because of the "Not just about wolves" problem, even their Wolf Recursion isn't quite focused, either; they get a lot of flak for being furries, but speaking as someone who enjoys their anthropomorphs, I always feel they occupy this weird second-order uncanny valley where they're too animal-obsessed for nonfurries but not furry enough to actually appeal to furry fans, what with their half-assed movie werewolf Wulfen.

Either way, they need to boil down their chapter identity a bit; they'd be better off wearing fewer hats. Hell, I'd argue they need to go with fewer wolves, or go with full-on Power Fursuits, and either would be an improvement.


As for Deathwatch... Eh? Honestly, the release order bothers me more than their mere existence. Niche armies are a thing, but they're a thing you do in a lull season when you've got all the theoretically major players out of the way and I would have released just about anything else first to give some non-LSM armies a foot in the door.

 CEO Kasen wrote:


As for Deathwatch... Eh? Honestly, the release order bothers me more than their mere existence. Niche armies are a thing, but they're a thing you do in a lull season when you've got all the theoretically major players out of the way and I would have released just about anything else first to give some non-LSM armies a foot in the door.

I agree with this in theory, though only if Deathwatch were in a place where they were already playable. They hadn't actually received a proper rules update since... well, 7th edition, pretty much. So I actually think they deserved to be one of the factions to get an early release. Genuinely surprised GW did it though, as there was no model update and they massively nerfed or removed the unique wargear options.

But the next three releases being SW, BA and DA... I'd agree that there's should be a couple more xenos codex releases before these get big updates.

 CEO Kasen wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
That'd be fine if the Space Wolves didn't also want to be dark and brooding serious executioners, wild berzerkers, cunning tactical geniuses, unpredictable tricksters, pridefully belligerent individualists, disciplined troopers, big softies looking out for the little guy, pitiless supersoldiers, and often actual werewolves, all at the same time. It's trying to do all of the above (often directly contradictory) things that detract from the SW's, for me at least.

Gonna nod in agreement. I freaking love Space Wolves, and actually don't even dislike the "Wolf Lord Smashwolf Wolfsmash on Wolf with a side of Wolf served on a bed of Wolf and a tall glass of Wolf by Wolf extracted from free-range Wolf." But it can very easily come to the fore in exclusion of everything else they're trying to be because the rest of their identity can be so confused; it's just easier to boil it down to Lightly Wolfed Spring Wolf Wolfed with Wolf Cilantro, and that identity being stronger than everything else is a result of being diluted for broad appeal. In fact, I conjecture that some of this is the result of different writers going "See, they're not just about wolves!" while not fully agreeing on what not-wolf thing they're about.

And because of the "Not just about wolves" problem, even their Wolf Recursion isn't quite focused, either; they get a lot of flak for being furries, but speaking as someone who enjoys their anthropomorphs, I always feel they occupy this weird second-order uncanny valley where they're too animal-obsessed for nonfurries but not furry enough to actually appeal to furry fans, what with their half-assed movie werewolf Wulfen.

Either way, they need to boil down their chapter identity a bit; they'd be better off wearing fewer hats. Hell, I'd argue they need to go with fewer wolves, or go with full-on Power Fursuits, and either would be an improvement.


As for Deathwatch... Eh? Honestly, the release order bothers me more than their mere existence. Niche armies are a thing, but they're a thing you do in a lull season when you've got all the theoretically major players out of the way and I would have released just about anything else first to give some non-LSM armies a foot in the door.

on the other hand, generally if you get released after those first 2 or 3 codices of an edition you don't seem to get much if anything these days. grey knights and CSMs come to mind, if you want a large model release for an army I'd not want it immediataly as realisticly it'll not happen.

I'm hoping for eldar or Orks to get a spring 2021 release because that'd be about the right time for the next BIG 40k release.

You know what I would really like? The ability to take a single Kill Team without breaking a detachment ala the useless Single Inquisitor rule, except for a unit that is actually worth taking.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
You know what I would really like? The ability to take a single Kill Team without breaking a detachment ala the useless Single Inquisitor rule, except for a unit that is actually worth taking.

I like the idea of detachment special rules etc, but yeah it'd be nice if there was some narrative support for limited support from death watch, grey knights etc.

even if just as a special narrative rule

BrianDavion wrote:

on the other hand, generally if you get released after those first 2 or 3 codices of an edition you don't seem to get much if anything these days. grey knights and CSMs come to mind, if you want a large model release for an army I'd not want it immediataly as realisticly it'll not happen.

I'm hoping for eldar or Orks to get a spring 2021 release because that'd be about the right time for the next BIG 40k release.

I'll clarify: When it comes to CSM, I'm not even particularly hungry for models - I just want a goddamn codex that isn't so flatly inferior to the LSM version that they couldn't even be bothered to FAQ in the second wound they gave the Firstborn. I want the game to be in something other than a state so awfully half-born that the game might as well be set to the backdrop of a pregnant woman screaming for the next 12 months on end.

And if two codexes or supplements a month is the limit on the schedule (which is itself really dumb, but its own discussion) then each Marine codex in place of a Xenos, Chaos, or non-LSM Imperium codex extends the screaming by another half a month. I certainly wouldn't put Deathwatch high on the priority list for all that.

This thread was a bad idea. The fact it’s still open says a lot about Dakka.

 CEO Kasen wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

on the other hand, generally if you get released after those first 2 or 3 codices of an edition you don't seem to get much if anything these days. grey knights and CSMs come to mind, if you want a large model release for an army I'd not want it immediataly as realisticly it'll not happen.

I'm hoping for eldar or Orks to get a spring 2021 release because that'd be about the right time for the next BIG 40k release.

I'll clarify: When it comes to CSM, I'm not even particularly hungry for models - I just want a goddamn codex that isn't so flatly inferior to the LSM version that they couldn't even be bothered to FAQ in the second wound they gave the Firstborn. I want the game to be in something other than a state so awfully half-born that the game might as well be set to the backdrop of a pregnant woman screaming for the next 12 months on end.

And if two codexes or supplements a month is the limit on the schedule (which is itself really dumb, but its own discussion) then each Marine codex in place of a Xenos, Chaos, or non-LSM Imperium codex extends the screaming by another half a month. I certainly wouldn't put Deathwatch high on the priority list for all that.

Sure but a death watch player might argue otherwise, frankly death watch was the marine supplement MOST needed (note I don't even play death watch) as it's so radically differant from any other marine army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Quasistellar wrote:
This thread was a bad idea. The fact it’s still open says a lot about Dakka.

just about every dakkadakka post can be summed up with "I hate that your army gets something, MY army deserves all the things, and yours should be squatted so it never gets a new thing again"

Quasistellar wrote:
This thread was a bad idea. The fact it’s still open says a lot about Dakka.

Why?

BrianDavion wrote:

 CEO Kasen wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

on the other hand, generally if you get released after those first 2 or 3 codices of an edition you don't seem to get much if anything these days. grey knights and CSMs come to mind, if you want a large model release for an army I'd not want it immediataly as realisticly it'll not happen.

I'm hoping for eldar or Orks to get a spring 2021 release because that'd be about the right time for the next BIG 40k release.

I'll clarify: When it comes to CSM, I'm not even particularly hungry for models - I just want a goddamn codex that isn't so flatly inferior to the LSM version that they couldn't even be bothered to FAQ in the second wound they gave the Firstborn. I want the game to be in something other than a state so awfully half-born that the game might as well be set to the backdrop of a pregnant woman screaming for the next 12 months on end.

And if two codexes or supplements a month is the limit on the schedule (which is itself really dumb, but its own discussion) then each Marine codex in place of a Xenos, Chaos, or non-LSM Imperium codex extends the screaming by another half a month. I certainly wouldn't put Deathwatch high on the priority list for all that.

Sure but a death watch player might argue otherwise, frankly death watch was the marine supplement MOST needed (note I don't even play death watch) as it's so radically differant from any other marine army.

Wouldn't the radically diffrent and tie in with the inquisition and inqusitiorial taskforces lend itself to a propper separate dex? Same with GK.
I think the question asked should be posed in a manner as to WHY death watch were a dex / are now a supplement, and the answer seems to me atleast pretty clear kirbynomics with separete rules selling as a vocal point whilest also in the meantime minimaly invest to grant separate upgrade sprues. A model GW to this day still follows and expands economics of scale benefits for them first and foremost.

Quasistellar wrote:
This thread was a bad idea. The fact it’s still open says a lot about Dakka.

just about every dakkadakka post can be summed up with "I hate that your army gets something, MY army deserves all the things, and yours should be squatted so it never gets a new thing again"

mrFickle wrote:

Quasistellar wrote:
This thread was a bad idea. The fact it’s still open says a lot about Dakka.

Why?

because threads like this are typically nothing but blatent faction bashing and it's inecrediably dischouraging when you log onto a website eager to discuss 40k etc and the first thing you see is a thread basicly saying your beloved army is a horriable blight on the game?

I think the problem with a lot of SM factions is that they struggle to have their own identity without just being 'Marines +1'. Especially given that 40k is a pretty shallow game, and so there are relatively few ways in which two elite factions can be differentiated mechanically without just making one more elite than the other.

To be clear, I'm not saying that Deathwatch should be removed (though consolidating them with one or two other factions might be nice). Rather, if the game is going to contain a multitude of very similar factions competing for similar rules and design space, then the game really shouldn't be based around the exceptionally shallow core rules that 8th and 9th have introduced.

 CEO Kasen wrote:

And because of the "Not just about wolves" problem, even their Wolf Recursion isn't quite focused, either; they get a lot of flak for being furries, but speaking as someone who enjoys their anthropomorphs, I always feel they occupy this weird second-order uncanny valley where they're too animal-obsessed for nonfurries but not furry enough to actually appeal to furry fans, what with their half-assed movie werewolf Wulfen.

I think this is a very good point.

With regard to Wulfen, it would probably be more interesting (at least visually, if not lore-wise) if they went all-out and made them much closer to werewolves. Even if they still had some normal flesh, they could at least have furred hands (similar to their feet) and more wolf-like heads. I know it's seen as a horror classic, but I've always hated the 'Wolfman' style of werewolf, and seeing it in 40k has not changed that.

They also seem weirdly over-muscled, to the point where they remind me of the ancient and badly-disproportioned Catachan models. To me they look more like werebears or even were-ogryns than werewolves.

BrianDavion wrote:

mrFickle wrote:

Quasistellar wrote:
This thread was a bad idea. The fact it’s still open says a lot about Dakka.

Why?

because threads like this are typically nothing but blatent faction bashing and it's inecrediably dischouraging when you log onto a website eager to discuss 40k etc and the first thing you see is a thread basicly saying your beloved army is a horriable blight on the game?

eager to discuss 40k also includes questioning as to why certain factions exist or not anymore.

The issue is that GW with it's recent spam of marines, with a hint of (High quality allbeit pricy) necron , and the removal of 3 non marine rulesets spark the debate once again.
questioning the motifs behind a faction with dex /supplement is in such a situation qualified to be brought up. And should in the community be a discussion that should happen, if only to actually be in a position to demand change, if necessary, from GW. (like the community did with SoB) .

BrianDavion wrote:

mrFickle wrote:

Quasistellar wrote:
This thread was a bad idea. The fact it’s still open says a lot about Dakka.

Why?

because threads like this are typically nothing but blatent faction bashing and it's inecrediably dischouraging when you log onto a website eager to discuss 40k etc and the first thing you see is a thread basicly saying your beloved army is a horriable blight on the game?

The OP was basically asking if their concept made sense as a coherent distinct faction and how truly different they actually are. In and of itself, that's not faction bashing, that's a perfectly legitimate discussion to be had as long as its respectful, and there's basically only one poster who went through actively bashing DW. If you don't like the topic, you don't have to read the thread, much less repeatedly post in it to feed the discussion.

BrianDavion wrote:


just about every dakkadakka post can be summed up with "I hate that your army gets something, MY army deserves all the things, and yours should be squatted so it never gets a new thing again"

If that's how you see every post here, this explains a lot of posting, but it genuinely isn't true for 99% of posts around here. There are a lot of calls for more spreading of the love, because the game is in an awful balance state, but no one is saying anything on the order of Space Marines should be squatted outright.

mrFickle wrote:
Are they just an example of GW having their cake and eating it with imperial armies.

I don’t know in what edition the became a full chapter. The idea of a combined special opps TEAM makes sense but a chapter made of the the best of the best is like an army made of special forces.

Now I think about it I just feel like it’s another lenses to look through at space marines and call the the universes finest warriors.

Or is it there are so many chapters I want to pay them all. It I can’t so I’ll make a special chapter with all of them in it?

Same problem I have with inquisitors having xenos tech and helpers, but that was a different thread

In some ways, yes they’re a bad idea, in some ways no.

They and the Indomitus Grey Shields have the same problem. No Doctrine/Trait that represents/replaces all the doctrine/traits. If they could figure out how to do that in a balanced way it would be great.

The other issue is - Preferred Enemy. Be it The Falen,Tyranic War Vets, DTTFE, etc those abilities are just too hit and miss. It should be some sort of ability that transfers to some extent vs any opponent.