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.
2021/01/18 19:15:12
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Wayniac wrote: The more I tthinka bout this, it's not really a nerf. It's actually pretty good unless you were one of the people spamming a single weapon.
You could take in a 10-man squad:
* 2 plasma guns AND 2 blight launchers, plus a plasma on the champion.
* 2 plague spewers and 2 plague belchers
* 2 flails of corruption AND 2 plague cleavers.
That is not a nerf at all Just what you can't do is take all the guys with one of the melee weapons (axe I think was popular)
now Blightlords yes it's a nerf you can't spam combi-plasma.
TIL wanting your units to have a focus instead of being forced to have a worthless mishmash of weapons is "spamming". I bet you also think taking a Devastator squad with 4 Lascannons to act as an anti-tank unit rather than taking 1 Lascannon, 1 Heavy Bolter, 1 Missile Launcher, and 1 Plasma Cannon is also "spam".
Also, Death Guard Terminators have been able to take multiple Combi-Plasma for years if not decades. This change makes units some people have had for years or decades unable to be used, all because of corporate greed. GW have a market value of £3b. They don't need you to defend them.
I guess US infantry forces need to learn from 40k and stop issuing squads with things like a designated marksman's rifle, squad automatic weapon, and grenade launcher and make sure their soldiers are focused rather than being flexible. They should also ensure that their anti-tank/anti-aircraft specialists stand in specifically 5 man units with exactly 4 of the same weapons and a sergeant who should also pack a special weapon because as we know winning means killing all the things!
I don't see any reason to frame this as anything but whining about a winning combination of weapons being removed.
2021/01/18 19:25:32
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
People have models they paid for, assembled, painted and played with in a 100% legal, 100% supported manner and now those units are against the rules. No, they were not all optimizing the best possible loadout; most of them were not, because tournament meta is only a small fraction of the player base. To punish optimization like that the method is to change points anyways, such that the options are more balanced. Note that relatively few complain when their min-maxed unit's weapon options become poor due to a point change.
I do not see how someone can look at this and not understand why it is upsetting to people. I can assume it happens when they themselves are not affected, but even then it takes a bare minimum of thought to imagine the circumstance. The only way someone does not understand the legitimacy of the complaint is if they do not want to understand.
Put simply: if someone does not get it, that is their failing.
NinthMusketeer wrote: People have models they paid for, assembled, painted and played with in a 100% legal, 100% supported manner and now those units are against the rules. No, they were not all optimizing the best possible loadout; most of them were not, because tournament meta is only a small fraction of the player base. To punish optimization like that the method is to change points anyways, such that the options are more balanced. Note that relatively few complain when their min-maxed unit's weapon options become poor due to a point change.
I do not see how someone can look at this and not understand why it is upsetting to people. I can assume it happens when they themselves are not affected, but even then it takes a bare minimum of thought to imagine the circumstance. The only way someone does not understand the legitimacy of the complaint is if they do not want to understand.
Put simply: if someone does not get it, that is their failing.
I understand why this is upsetting, but times change. Taking your logic to conclusion means that once something is introduced it can never be removed. That ends up with a system that is untenable in a matter of time.
We mortals are but shadows and dust...
6k
:harlequin: 2k
2k
2k
2021/01/18 19:34:13
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
I guess US infantry forces need to learn from 40k and stop issuing squads with things like a designated marksman's rifle, squad automatic weapon, and grenade launcher and make sure their soldiers are focused rather than being flexible. They should also ensure that their anti-tank/anti-aircraft specialists stand in specifically 5 man units with exactly 4 of the same weapons and a sergeant who should also pack a special weapon because as we know winning means killing all the things!
I don't see any reason to frame this as anything but whining about a winning combination of weapons being removed.
China and Russia do exactly that, and their armies were and are more succesful then the US army. Mortar sections, machine gun sections, Not-dragon anti tank Chinese infantry sections etc.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
2021/01/18 19:35:55
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
I guess US infantry forces need to learn from 40k and stop issuing squads with things like a designated marksman's rifle, squad automatic weapon, and grenade launcher and make sure their soldiers are focused rather than being flexible. They should also ensure that their anti-tank/anti-aircraft specialists stand in specifically 5 man units with exactly 4 of the same weapons and a sergeant who should also pack a special weapon because as we know winning means killing all the things!
I don't see any reason to frame this as anything but whining about a winning combination of weapons being removed.
40k isnt real life....
And its obviously whining about loadouts being invalidated, it sucks for people that have minis built a certain way and it also sucks when you keep in mind that other armies that got 9th edition codex don't have these kind of restrictions.
I just wanted to run a squad of blightlord with combiflamers to unleash a miasma of disease on my opponents, guess i'm gak out of luck then.
oh yes daddy GW, deeper pls
2021/01/18 19:49:37
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Wayniac wrote: The more I tthinka bout this, it's not really a nerf. It's actually pretty good unless you were one of the people spamming a single weapon.
You could take in a 10-man squad:
* 2 plasma guns AND 2 blight launchers, plus a plasma on the champion.
* 2 plague spewers and 2 plague belchers
* 2 flails of corruption AND 2 plague cleavers.
That is not a nerf at all Just what you can't do is take all the guys with one of the melee weapons (axe I think was popular)
now Blightlords yes it's a nerf you can't spam combi-plasma.
TIL wanting your units to have a focus instead of being forced to have a worthless mishmash of weapons is "spamming". I bet you also think taking a Devastator squad with 4 Lascannons to act as an anti-tank unit rather than taking 1 Lascannon, 1 Heavy Bolter, 1 Missile Launcher, and 1 Plasma Cannon is also "spam".
Also, Death Guard Terminators have been able to take multiple Combi-Plasma for years if not decades. This change makes units some people have had for years or decades unable to be used, all because of corporate greed. GW have a market value of £3b. They don't need you to defend them.
I guess US infantry forces need to learn from 40k and stop issuing squads with things like a designated marksman's rifle, squad automatic weapon, and grenade launcher and make sure their soldiers are focused rather than being flexible. They should also ensure that their anti-tank/anti-aircraft specialists stand in specifically 5 man units with exactly 4 of the same weapons and a sergeant who should also pack a special weapon because as we know winning means killing all the things!
I don't see any reason to frame this as anything but whining about a winning combination of weapons being removed.
It's only flexible if you can use flexibly. Low saturation of weapons + a turn system where you have to take your shots with a squad and need to make said shots count in a concentration simply doesn't work unless the squad is dumb cheap to begin with.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2021/01/18 20:05:37
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
NinthMusketeer wrote: People have models they paid for, assembled, painted and played with in a 100% legal, 100% supported manner and now those units are against the rules. No, they were not all optimizing the best possible loadout; most of them were not, because tournament meta is only a small fraction of the player base. To punish optimization like that the method is to change points anyways, such that the options are more balanced. Note that relatively few complain when their min-maxed unit's weapon options become poor due to a point change.
I do not see how someone can look at this and not understand why it is upsetting to people. I can assume it happens when they themselves are not affected, but even then it takes a bare minimum of thought to imagine the circumstance. The only way someone does not understand the legitimacy of the complaint is if they do not want to understand.
Put simply: if someone does not get it, that is their failing.
I understand why this is upsetting, but times change. Taking your logic to conclusion means that once something is introduced it can never be removed. That ends up with a system that is untenable in a matter of time.
Not really. But it needs a reason to be removed.
There isn't any game or fluff reason for these changes. The game barely even comes into the apparent rationale here- only what the model team could fit on the sprues. From a sheer power standpoint, this is arguably _better_ as you can inexplicably pack in 3 plasma guns, 2 blight launchers and a plague spewer in a 10 man squad. But there isn't any reason for that, and no one was asking for a change to DG squad organization to accommodate that.
When orks got the overhaul from imperial standard weapons (and their big profile change), it was a major shift and invalidated a lot. But the army was thematically stronger and more 'orky' after the transition. It wasn't perfect, but there was a clear intent to work with the background and introduce new ideas that were beneficial to the orks as an army and a faction, even if more sales of the new ork stuff was also a goal.
This is _just_ to sell more boxes, and it shows in the disregard for existing collections and the background of the army. The only plan here is to invalidate models to sell more models.
It isn't like a meta shift, where people have the agency to decide if they want to chase the 'optimal' loadout, or make do with what they have. This forces a change where people with perfectly reasonable (and even fluffy!) squads have to go buy more if they want to field legal squads. (Or chop and rebuild models that really aren't designed for chopping and rebuilding)
Efficiency is the highest virtue.
2021/01/18 20:21:08
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Voss wrote: This is _just_ to sell more boxes, and it shows in the disregard for existing collections and the background of the army. The only plan here is to invalidate models to sell more models.
It isn't like a meta shift, where people have the agency to decide if they want to chase the 'optimal' loadout, or make do with what they have. This forces a change where people with perfectly reasonable (and even fluffy!) squads have to go buy more if they want to field legal squads. (Or chop and rebuild models that really aren't designed for chopping and rebuilding)
Really? They sell more boxes by ensuring you can't use weapon combinations the box doesn't support? Funny how the reasoning has flipped from the bad old days (aka before the Codex was revealed) when people said GW allowed weapon combinations the box didn't support to sell more boxes.
2021/01/18 20:34:36
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Wayniac wrote: The more I tthinka bout this, it's not really a nerf. It's actually pretty good unless you were one of the people spamming a single weapon.
You could take in a 10-man squad:
* 2 plasma guns AND 2 blight launchers, plus a plasma on the champion.
* 2 plague spewers and 2 plague belchers
* 2 flails of corruption AND 2 plague cleavers.
That is not a nerf at all Just what you can't do is take all the guys with one of the melee weapons (axe I think was popular)
now Blightlords yes it's a nerf you can't spam combi-plasma.
TIL wanting your units to have a focus instead of being forced to have a worthless mishmash of weapons is "spamming". I bet you also think taking a Devastator squad with 4 Lascannons to act as an anti-tank unit rather than taking 1 Lascannon, 1 Heavy Bolter, 1 Missile Launcher, and 1 Plasma Cannon is also "spam".
Also, Death Guard Terminators have been able to take multiple Combi-Plasma for years if not decades. This change makes units some people have had for years or decades unable to be used, all because of corporate greed. GW have a market value of £3b. They don't need you to defend them.
I guess US infantry forces need to learn from 40k and stop issuing squads with things like a designated marksman's rifle, squad automatic weapon, and grenade launcher and make sure their soldiers are focused rather than being flexible. They should also ensure that their anti-tank/anti-aircraft specialists stand in specifically 5 man units with exactly 4 of the same weapons and a sergeant who should also pack a special weapon because as we know winning means killing all the things!
I don't see any reason to frame this as anything but whining about a winning combination of weapons being removed.
False analogy is false.
Games Workshop Delenda Est.
Users on ignore- 53.
If you break apart my or anyone else's posts line by line I will not read them.
2021/01/18 20:34:52
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Voss wrote: This is _just_ to sell more boxes, and it shows in the disregard for existing collections and the background of the army. The only plan here is to invalidate models to sell more models.
It isn't like a meta shift, where people have the agency to decide if they want to chase the 'optimal' loadout, or make do with what they have. This forces a change where people with perfectly reasonable (and even fluffy!) squads have to go buy more if they want to field legal squads. (Or chop and rebuild models that really aren't designed for chopping and rebuilding)
Really? They sell more boxes by ensuring you can't use weapon combinations the box doesn't support? Funny how the reasoning has flipped from the bad old days (aka before the Codex was revealed) when people said GW allowed weapon combinations the box didn't support to sell more boxes.
I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.
Yes, this is trying to sell more boxes.
If you were an existing DG player with two 7 man squads (one with two blight launchers, one with 2 plasmaguns), that isn't legal anymore.
So GW's hope is that you'll go in and buy another box so you can field the now legal 10 man squads with 2 blight launchers (and various others bits), and etc. Its going beyond meta-chasing optimization (always optional) into 'But thou must...' territory.
The new rules _do_ support the old weapon combinations (and more besides) _IF_ you buy another box. Or two boxes (or more, depending on what you're existing collection is like).
If other people ever made the 'reasoning is flipped' argument, it wasn't me, so I don't care.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/01/18 20:36:09
Efficiency is the highest virtue.
2021/01/18 20:51:48
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Voss wrote: This is _just_ to sell more boxes, and it shows in the disregard for existing collections and the background of the army. The only plan here is to invalidate models to sell more models.
It isn't like a meta shift, where people have the agency to decide if they want to chase the 'optimal' loadout, or make do with what they have. This forces a change where people with perfectly reasonable (and even fluffy!) squads have to go buy more if they want to field legal squads. (Or chop and rebuild models that really aren't designed for chopping and rebuilding)
Really? They sell more boxes by ensuring you can't use weapon combinations the box doesn't support? Funny how the reasoning has flipped from the bad old days (aka before the Codex was revealed) when people said GW allowed weapon combinations the box didn't support to sell more boxes.
I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.
Yes, this is trying to sell more boxes.
If you were an existing DG player with two 7 man squads (one with two blight launchers, one with 2 plasmaguns), that isn't legal anymore.
So GW's hope is that you'll go in and buy another box so you can field the now legal 10 man squads with 2 blight launchers (and various others bits), and etc. Its going beyond meta-chasing optimization (always optional) into 'But thou must...' territory.
The new rules _do_ support the old weapon combinations (and more besides) _IF_ you buy another box. Or two boxes (or more, depending on what you're existing collection is like).
If other people ever made the 'reasoning is flipped' argument, it wasn't me, so I don't care.
Actually, if you just don't take the extra Blight Launcher and Plasma, you've got a legal 5 man squad. Sure, you end up with extra models that you cannot legally use, but they didn't invalidate your squad like they did to people who min/max'd Blightlord Terminators. You just have new restrictions that end up preventing you from using those extra special weapons without adding more generic PM.
I have two custom Daemon Prince's which got hosed by this Codex.I added wings to a heavily customized DP of Nurgle (I replaced his legs with the bottom section of a plague drone), and that model cannot use its Plaguespitter anymore as it has wings. It sucks, but such is life.If I really want to use the Plaguespitter, I just won't pay for the wings and use it as a proxy foot variant.
We mortals are but shadows and dust...
6k
:harlequin: 2k
2k
2k
2021/01/18 20:55:20
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Voss wrote: This is _just_ to sell more boxes, and it shows in the disregard for existing collections and the background of the army. The only plan here is to invalidate models to sell more models.
It isn't like a meta shift, where people have the agency to decide if they want to chase the 'optimal' loadout, or make do with what they have. This forces a change where people with perfectly reasonable (and even fluffy!) squads have to go buy more if they want to field legal squads. (Or chop and rebuild models that really aren't designed for chopping and rebuilding)
Really? They sell more boxes by ensuring you can't use weapon combinations the box doesn't support? Funny how the reasoning has flipped from the bad old days (aka before the Codex was revealed) when people said GW allowed weapon combinations the box didn't support to sell more boxes.
I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.
Yes, this is trying to sell more boxes.
If you were an existing DG player with two 7 man squads (one with two blight launchers, one with 2 plasmaguns), that isn't legal anymore.
So GW's hope is that you'll go in and buy another box so you can field the now legal 10 man squads with 2 blight launchers (and various others bits), and etc. Its going beyond meta-chasing optimization (always optional) into 'But thou must...' territory.
The new rules _do_ support the old weapon combinations (and more besides) _IF_ you buy another box. Or two boxes (or more, depending on what you're existing collection is like).
If other people ever made the 'reasoning is flipped' argument, it wasn't me, so I don't care.
Actually, if you just don't take the extra Blight Launcher and Plasma, you've got a legal 5 man squad. Sure, you end up with extra models that you cannot legally use, but they didn't invalidate your squad like they did to people who min/max'd Blightlord Terminators. You just have new restrictions that end up preventing you from using those extra special weapons without adding more generic PM.
I have two custom Daemon Prince's which got hosed by this Codex.I added wings to a heavily customized DP of Nurgle (I replaced his legs with the bottom section of a plague drone), and that model cannot use its Plaguespitter anymore as it has wings. It sucks, but such is life.If I really want to use the Plaguespitter, I just won't pay for the wings and use it as a proxy foot variant.
Or, instead of just accepting it, since you're a paying customer, you can email them saying this is ridiculous. The amount of laying back and just accepting it is awful for a consumer to do.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2021/01/18 21:07:21
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Voss wrote: This is _just_ to sell more boxes, and it shows in the disregard for existing collections and the background of the army. The only plan here is to invalidate models to sell more models.
It isn't like a meta shift, where people have the agency to decide if they want to chase the 'optimal' loadout, or make do with what they have. This forces a change where people with perfectly reasonable (and even fluffy!) squads have to go buy more if they want to field legal squads. (Or chop and rebuild models that really aren't designed for chopping and rebuilding)
Really? They sell more boxes by ensuring you can't use weapon combinations the box doesn't support? Funny how the reasoning has flipped from the bad old days (aka before the Codex was revealed) when people said GW allowed weapon combinations the box didn't support to sell more boxes.
I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.
Yes, this is trying to sell more boxes.
If you were an existing DG player with two 7 man squads (one with two blight launchers, one with 2 plasmaguns), that isn't legal anymore.
So GW's hope is that you'll go in and buy another box so you can field the now legal 10 man squads with 2 blight launchers (and various others bits), and etc. Its going beyond meta-chasing optimization (always optional) into 'But thou must...' territory.
The new rules _do_ support the old weapon combinations (and more besides) _IF_ you buy another box. Or two boxes (or more, depending on what you're existing collection is like).
If other people ever made the 'reasoning is flipped' argument, it wasn't me, so I don't care.
Actually, if you just don't take the extra Blight Launcher and Plasma, you've got a legal 5 man squad. Sure, you end up with extra models that you cannot legally use, but they didn't invalidate your squad like they did to people who min/max'd Blightlord Terminators. You just have new restrictions that end up preventing you from using those extra special weapons without adding more generic PM.
I have two custom Daemon Prince's which got hosed by this Codex.I added wings to a heavily customized DP of Nurgle (I replaced his legs with the bottom section of a plague drone), and that model cannot use its Plaguespitter anymore as it has wings. It sucks, but such is life.If I really want to use the Plaguespitter, I just won't pay for the wings and use it as a proxy foot variant.
Or, instead of just accepting it, since you're a paying customer, you can email them saying this is ridiculous. The amount of laying back and just accepting it is awful for a consumer to do.
I paid for that model and I used it for an entire edition. I got a bunch of use out of it as it was, and now I have to pivot. GW did not sell me a kit last week, and then turn around this week and say "Nope, you cannot use that." I'm sure I'll be attacked as some sort of apologist, but I don't really care that much. Small incremental changes like this are rough, but it is better than waiting for something like the end times to happen which invalidates an entire game because they let things get past the point of no return.
We mortals are but shadows and dust...
6k
:harlequin: 2k
2k
2k
2021/01/18 21:12:25
Subject: Re:As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
yeah, and people were asking for the exact opposite of what GW did. We wanted the kits to have all the weapons options, not the options to be stripped out.
Yea, man. I get it. You should be able to do that if you're crazy enough to tackle that project and GW might yet change its mind. But I do think it might be unfair to those without the same means to accomplish those conversions.
The horse left the barn a while ago with the mono-pose stuff. It seems to me that DG got the shaft in that regard, because a lot of other new kits haven't had that same treatment. GW may have had to push stylized out kits fast for the release of 8th.
I do not look forward to CSM Terminators and chain axes ( the lack of monopose may save them - we'll see soon enough I suppose ).
Where is it written it has to be fair in terms of capability ? I know plenty of people so rich they just toss money at any issue, even this game. I can't hope to keep up with all the variety and having like 3 of any unit in every configuration expertly painted for them. For them, this is no issue at all. If we all have the wargear options, we at least have the choice to scrounge up the bits, do the hobby work for our units and make them what we want. Equality of opportunity not equality of outcomes. I have been behind the 8 ball because I don't put limitless funds into the game but I have put in time and patience to search for those options I wanted, when I can.
Defending these dumb choices is really daft to me. They make the squad feel lame, it feels bad and it's overly penalizing for no reason other than someone feeling we are unable to find, get, craft or otherwise understand how to make the units we want. Disrespecting time, effort and desire. Like you still end up with two specials in 5-9 man squads, but it can't be the same one because, someone would feel bad I found another plasma and they didn't ? So why can't these same people get two boxes and and then run one with 2 blight launchers and one with 2 plasma at 7 man ? Is that really over the top amazing ?
It's a dumb idea they had, and people are right to be annoyed, me included.
I'm not posting to remove your right to be annoyed. I just oppose the histrionics and chicken little assertions paraded as fact.
This isn't the first some valid loadouts ( or models ) got axed and if they change them back it won't be the first time they do that, either.
In regards to fairness - the Blightlords kit has four regular combis. There is a fairly small percentage of folks who would buy jewler's saw and then have the knowledge to cast the bits from the sprue to get something that fits the model appropriately. In the present situation If a poor hobbyist buys Blightlords and a rich one buys them and has them painted - they're both still operating under the same guidelines where previously the rich hobbyist could afford the tools and knowledge it takes to make those conversions. I'm not asserting this to be GW's motive. It is just my own thought.
Would the game be massively up-ended by PGPMs? I don't know. I don't have the book to process everything else it has.
I can see that 5 PMs with 3 PG creates a unit that is stupidly great. With Ferric Blight they'll be Intercessors that move and double tap ( bolters ) and have AP4 PGs. That unit would do 4 wounds to Primaris for 135 and Intercessors would do 1 back for 100 points. If Primaris had the same loadout they'd do just about the same damage as with bolters, so....yea. That isn't even considering 1/10 of the book.
So here's my prediction. This book is so fething cool and fun that literally no one is going to give a gak in a month.
Be faster to just say you don't know.
Jeweler's saw? They're 2 piece combis.
And milliput for casting is something like $10 at a craft store. It's just practice. If you can afford the kit, you can afford that 5-6 times.
I am sorry you apparently resent other people out in the ether somewhere who simultaneously pay to have their stuff done while mastering the skills to do masterwork themselves.
Think your logic through, please.
2021/01/18 21:15:23
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
kirotheavenger wrote: I actually view major updates as a negative. Relaunching a product should be a last resort for when the product is not good enough and cannot be easily fixed.
However, for 40k it's standard operating procedure.
I'm not that familiar with other games, but I can't think of another major game that's on higher than the 4th edition.
Battletech comes to mind. It's a pretty stable system overall but every few years they reissue the core book. And sometimes there are minor changes lurking within the pages.
And in a few more years I predict that Flames of War will get a 5th edition.
And of course there's RPGs - D&D etc. Some of them have 4+ editions
I could be wrong but hasn't BattleTech gone through some seriously rough times since it came to exist. To start with there have been what 3 owners of the rules IP (FASA, WizKids, Topps) with multiple different publishers. The IP lawsuits... It's successful but not a model any company would want to follow.
2021/01/18 21:16:21
Subject: Re:As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
I ran all Axe/knife units for combat in a Rhino. Are you even going to attempt to call that cheesy?
Now, it's illegal. I can't play my army without either ripping my beautifully painted models apart, or buying all new models.
If you are not affected by this change, or don't care that it has changed that means you don't deserve to have an opinion on this because it never affected you to begin with. Please stop posting. Nothing you say makes sense, and there is no legitimate counter argument here. You are just posting to be inflammatory.
Everyone who is affected. I hope you will write in to GW and give them a piece of your mind. This is absolute bs on the highest level.
Square Bases for Life!
AoS is pure garbage
Kill Primaris, Kill the Primarchs. They don't belong in 40K
40K is fantasy in space, not sci-fi
2021/01/18 21:20:57
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
I guess US infantry forces need to learn from 40k and stop issuing squads with things like a designated marksman's rifle, squad automatic weapon, and grenade launcher and make sure their soldiers are focused rather than being flexible. They should also ensure that their anti-tank/anti-aircraft specialists stand in specifically 5 man units with exactly 4 of the same weapons and a sergeant who should also pack a special weapon because as we know winning means killing all the things!
I don't see any reason to frame this as anything but whining about a winning combination of weapons being removed.
40k isnt real life....
And its obviously whining about loadouts being invalidated, it sucks for people that have minis built a certain way and it also sucks when you keep in mind that other armies that got 9th edition codex don't have these kind of restrictions.
I just wanted to run a squad of blightlord with combiflamers to unleash a miasma of disease on my opponents, guess i'm gak out of luck then.
oh yes daddy GW, deeper pls
We have what 3 released codices Codex: SM, Codex: Necrons, and now Codex: DG. Necrons didn't have unique weapons in their units to fold in. Space Marines kept rules for multi-pose models and have this entire line of mono-pose models with incredibly restrictive loadouts. It is far too early to say that DG are being treated unfairly.
I ran all Axe/knife units for combat in a Rhino. Are you even going to attempt to call that cheesy?
Now, it's illegal. I can't play my army without either ripping my beautifully painted models apart, or buying all new models.
If you are not affected by this change, or don't care that it has changed that means you don't deserve to have an opinion on this because it never affected you to begin with. Please stop posting. Nothing you say makes sense, and there is no legitimate counter argument here. You are just posting to be inflammatory.
Everyone who is affected. I hope you will write in to GW and give them a piece of your mind. This is absolute bs on the highest level.
Welcome to the game. If this is your first time having options removed I suggest you see a DE, Ork, Squat, or Tyranid player for some counseling.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/01/18 21:22:51
2021/01/18 21:24:30
Subject: Re:As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Brutus_Apex wrote: If you are not affected by this change, or don't care that it has changed that means you don't deserve to have an opinion on this because it never affected you to begin with. Please stop posting. Nothing you say makes sense, and there is no legitimate counter argument here. You are just posting to be inflammatory.
So because I am affected but shrug my shoulders and carry on, it means I don't deserve to have an opinion? That makes no sense. Some people view this as world ending stuff, and others don't. If you can't respect other viewpoints, and I don't mean the views of trolls intentionally trying to stir up trouble, then that's on you. I have a DG army, I am affected by some of the data sheet changes, but I just don't care enough to make a huge deal out of it. The book looks like it is going to a ton of fun, and I cannot wait for it. I'm sorry this has you and others so upset.
We mortals are but shadows and dust...
6k
:harlequin: 2k
2k
2k
2021/01/18 21:30:35
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
I don't respect the viewpoint of, oh well too bad, carry on.
No, you don't get to have the opinion of "that sucks for you because it doesn't affect me".
You should all be supporting those who are losing out, not being actively against them.
Because it may be me left out in the cold today, but if you don't stand up for what is right now, it will be you tomorrow.
I just don't care enough to make a huge deal out of it
Then don't post.
Welcome to the game. If this is your first time having options removed I suggest you see a DE, Ork, Squat, or Tyranid player for some counseling.
How does any of this make what just happens right? It's all wrong. I've sat through enough of GW gaking on my armies. So now I'm saying something. I thought I might be safe with an army that was only 4 years old. Guess not.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/01/18 21:33:47
Square Bases for Life!
AoS is pure garbage
Kill Primaris, Kill the Primarchs. They don't belong in 40K
40K is fantasy in space, not sci-fi
Plague marines that are assembled with now illegal combination would likely still be legit models, although not strictly WYSIWYG.
In older editions both Trukks and Battlewagons could be equipped with rokkits but since their kits come with big shootas only GW decided to remove the rokkit option. Guess what? Those original BWs and Trukks modeled with rokkits are still 100% legit models.
The scenario I described for Scourges is way worse: imagine they'd be force to play with only the exact weapons that are included in the box when EVERY player modelled their dudes with one basic and 4 special/heavy weapons of the same kind. Now their unit is actually invalidated as that combination is illegal, but singularly taken those models AREN'T illegal. Unlike those plague marines it would be harder to let 3 of them count as something else (a legal combination of weapons) because they're all equipped with the same weapon!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/18 21:39:21
2021/01/18 21:42:45
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
I used to run 9 CC dudes in a Rhino with a Tallyman to tag along. Was it good. Oh yes! Was it broken? Very much no.
CCDG is pretty much dead now with Tallyman sucking ass and can't go with my 10 dudes in the Rhino.
I basically HAVE to start using Blightlords now, and 10 man CC squads in a Rhino with Morty as support. And with only one DP per detachment...
And I have to buy another box of Marines now so I can make my -now- 10 man CC unit legal.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/18 21:44:26
Nurgle protects. Kinda.
2021/01/18 21:44:37
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
and everyone who played it for more than 1 Edition should know better
if you were playing in 8th and bought into 9th you should have known the risk that your army ends up on the shelf as soon as the Codex hit
yes the complains are valid and you should shout out to GW for it
but you also should have known better and staying with 8th or any other older Edition is a valid option for now (as if pandemic continous, we see 10th Edition before it is really relevant what version people are playing)
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
2021/01/18 21:48:24
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Blackie wrote: The scenario I described for Scourges is way worse: imagine they'd be force to play with only the exact weapons that are included in the box when EVERY player modelled their dudes with one basic and 4 special/heavy weapons of the same kind.
So, like what people did with DG Terminator Combi-Weapons?
Your example isn't unique. DE wouldn't be any more or less 'hard done by' were this to happen to them.
kodos wrote: and everyone who played it for more than 1 Edition should know better
I was trying to figure out which was the more toxic attitude to have. Originally I thought it was the "don't care, got mine" attitude, but it seems that the "it's your fault really - you should know better" might be the winner here.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/01/18 21:50:26
mokoshkana wrote: Actually, if you just don't take the extra Blight Launcher and Plasma, you've got a legal 5 man squad. Sure, you end up with extra models that you cannot legally use, but they didn't invalidate your squad like they did to people who min/max'd Blightlord Terminators. You just have new restrictions that end up preventing you from using those extra special weapons without adding more generic PM.
You don't even need to do that do you? If you have two squads of 7 Plague Marines, one with two plasma guns and one with two blight launchers, you literally just have to swap one plasma gun from one squad and a blight launcher from another, and voila, two legal units.
Melee are worse off because if you made a two knife/axe guys or double knife guys (2 for every 7 models) you have potentially got quite a few more than 1 in 5 that there isn't an obvious way to dilute down. Also a hard ban on double knife icon holding seems a bit strange and unnecessary.
Tbh I'd give it a 50/50 chance they'll reword the datasheet in a FAQ. Maybe Blightlords too. But I do think there has to be some divide on "I've paid GW money angry angry face, they owe me" and "okay actually yeah, I bought a load of combi plasmas from a bits site/ebay/printed my own for sub $10."
2021/01/18 22:02:36
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
mokoshkana wrote: Actually, if you just don't take the extra Blight Launcher and Plasma, you've got a legal 5 man squad. Sure, you end up with extra models that you cannot legally use, but they didn't invalidate your squad like they did to people who min/max'd Blightlord Terminators. You just have new restrictions that end up preventing you from using those extra special weapons without adding more generic PM.
You don't even need to do that do you? If you have two squads of 7 Plague Marines, one with two plasma guns and one with two blight launchers, you literally just have to swap one plasma gun from one squad and a blight launcher from another, and voila, two legal units.
But why would I want to mix plasma and blightlaunchers? One unit basically NEEDS a reroll 1's aura (access to which has been severely nerfed I might add) the other is fine without, which is why I liked splitting out my launchers from my plasma squads. Yes the nerfs to melee squads are even worse but there are (well were) good reasons to specialize your squads all of which as been arbitrarily thrown out of the window.
2021/01/18 22:06:00
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Voss wrote: This is _just_ to sell more boxes, and it shows in the disregard for existing collections and the background of the army. The only plan here is to invalidate models to sell more models.
It isn't like a meta shift, where people have the agency to decide if they want to chase the 'optimal' loadout, or make do with what they have. This forces a change where people with perfectly reasonable (and even fluffy!) squads have to go buy more if they want to field legal squads. (Or chop and rebuild models that really aren't designed for chopping and rebuilding)
Really? They sell more boxes by ensuring you can't use weapon combinations the box doesn't support? Funny how the reasoning has flipped from the bad old days (aka before the Codex was revealed) when people said GW allowed weapon combinations the box didn't support to sell more boxes.
I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.
Yes, this is trying to sell more boxes.
If you were an existing DG player with two 7 man squads (one with two blight launchers, one with 2 plasmaguns), that isn't legal anymore.
So GW's hope is that you'll go in and buy another box so you can field the now legal 10 man squads with 2 blight launchers (and various others bits), and etc. Its going beyond meta-chasing optimization (always optional) into 'But thou must...' territory.
The new rules _do_ support the old weapon combinations (and more besides) _IF_ you buy another box. Or two boxes (or more, depending on what you're existing collection is like).
If other people ever made the 'reasoning is flipped' argument, it wasn't me, so I don't care.
Actually, if you just don't take the extra Blight Launcher and Plasma, you've got a legal 5 man squad. Sure, you end up with extra models that you cannot legally use, but they didn't invalidate your squad like they did to people who min/max'd Blightlord Terminators. You just have new restrictions that end up preventing you from using those extra special weapons without adding more generic PM.
I have two custom Daemon Prince's which got hosed by this Codex.I added wings to a heavily customized DP of Nurgle (I replaced his legs with the bottom section of a plague drone), and that model cannot use its Plaguespitter anymore as it has wings. It sucks, but such is life.If I really want to use the Plaguespitter, I just won't pay for the wings and use it as a proxy foot variant.
Or, instead of just accepting it, since you're a paying customer, you can email them saying this is ridiculous. The amount of laying back and just accepting it is awful for a consumer to do.
I paid for that model and I used it for an entire edition. I got a bunch of use out of it as it was, and now I have to pivot. GW did not sell me a kit last week, and then turn around this week and say "Nope, you cannot use that." I'm sure I'll be attacked as some sort of apologist, but I don't really care that much. Small incremental changes like this are rough, but it is better than waiting for something like the end times to happen which invalidates an entire game because they let things get past the point of no return.
That's literally the worst attitude you could have since it affects the future in ways you're not thinking about, whether it's your own army or the army of someone else.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
6k
2k
2k 
