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 22:10:12
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
H.B.M.C. wrote: 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.
you still play 40k and you started to play 9th
if you really expected that GW will do it right this time and does not mess it up, my sympathie is limited
I got thru is on my own and the only solution is to stop playing the new Edition
there is no other one
GW will never listen, and they will do it again
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
2021/01/18 22:12:14
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
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.
Death Guard came out under the "no model, no rules" paradigm. People had no reason to know better, as they should have been safe. As I said before, I've been through this malarkey several times before, but nothing on this level.
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 22:17:46
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Death Guard came out under the "no model, no rules" paradigm. People had no reason to know better, as they should have been safe. As I said before, I've been through this malarkey several times before, but nothing on this level.
GW not messing up at least one new book in the first year of an Edition would be something new
it was just the question who get hit by it
and now people complain because they thought they would have been save and someone else would be it?
we are still talking about GW here, they always find a way to make you buy more
I don't say you should not complain or that you should not be angry, it is just that I am not surprised and it is not unexpected (as this was the Posterboy Enemy of the last Edition)
I have here an invalid Space Wolves, Dark Angels, Daemons and Thousand Sons army
each one from a different Codex/Edition change
it does not matter how many armies you have or how large your collection is, you are never save and if you don't start a new Army with each Edition but expect to use you exiting army without buying something new or have to make major changes, you are either new to GW, were lucky in the past or are just gambling and hoping for the best
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/18 22:27:13
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
2021/01/18 22:22:38
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.
Gotta run with whatever reasoning is convenient for the moment.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
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.
Or I'll dig up couple of spare bolters & equip them to the guys with the now illegal weapons. Oh, look at that, a legal squad with a couple of guys carrying their buddies extra plasma gun etc around.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/18 22:32:18
2021/01/18 22:32:57
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.
The issue is not so much the invalidation, it is the invalidation without (1) any warning or (2) any acknowledgement of what they are doing. Especially when they didn't do it to Space Marines, so it isn't clear whether this is a new thing that is going to be applied to everyone, or just a "screw you deathguard players because <reasons>." GW has previous for both, so everyone is left scratching their heads, and Deathguard players are left feeling like GW perhaps didn't even realize what they were doing.
This is why communication is important. But GW still doesn't understand that. They think communication means putting up posts on social media every day trying to get people to buy more stuff.
It would be one thing if they had said at the start of 9th that this is a direction they were going in, and warning everyone that with the release of each new codex, you're going to be limited to what comes in the box, preferably with some sort of token offering to help players rebuild their models to make them legal. But GW being GW, not only didn't do that...they didn't make any sort of statement about the issue at all.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/18 22:33:40
2021/01/18 22:33:15
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Castozor wrote: 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.
Sure, but at the danger of being pedantic, "this is worse and I don't want it to be worse" is different from "I have these models and I literally can't put them on the table, oh wait I can if I move swap one model between squads".
As said, I think it will get FAQed. To go with the Scourge example, I can't believe GW would seriously want someone to turn up with each squad having say one heat lance, one splinter cannon, one dark lance, one haywire blaster etc. Or for every 3 Crisis Suits you can only have 3 flamers, 3 plasma guns, 4 burst cannons split between them etc.
They could prove me wrong though.
2021/01/18 22:38:22
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
This is why communication is important. But GW still doesn't understand that. They think communication means putting up posts on social media every day trying to get people to buy more stuff.
It would be one thing if they had said at the start of 9th that this is a direction they were going in, and warning everyone that with the release of each new codex, you're going to be limited to what comes in the box, preferably with some sort of token offering to help players rebuild their models to make them legal. But GW being GW, not only didn't do that...they didn't make any sort of statement about the issue at all.
but to do this, GW would need to understand what they do in the first place
they just put the first crazy idea they have into a book and don't think of it ever again, if there might be issues with older collections or what it means for other books
and as soon as they got another crazy idea the direction changes again
they cannot communicate that this will be the case for that Edition in general because they don't know it either
if they make an Errata to reverse it, it will because of the complains and not because they understand what they have done
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
2021/01/18 22:39:09
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
I wrote them an email explaining their design philosophy in this regard is bad as it stifles creativity and converting side of the hobby and has affected my local player base who have to break up models and remove converted models and units from play... (a lot of DG around here). I can see this is BS and im not even DG player.
We can see where this is heading.. Look at AOS and how bland stuff gets if you can only ever use whats in the box? Uggh.. thats not 40k..
It sets a bad precedent for the future. Do you guys really want to play a game where every SINGLE UNIT AND SQUAD will always be the same? Whats even the point of having an army if they no longer are your dudes? That sounds utterly bland and terrible.. That sounds so mind bogglingly boring...
I don't want any more of that for my army. Its been gutted enough already.
Also, if they did that for Space marines the community would loose its gak..
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/18 22:40:04
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
Argive wrote: Also, if they did that for Space marines the community would loose its gak.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Flamer. Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Plasma. Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Grav. Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Melta. Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Storm Bolter. Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Plasma Gun. Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Meltagun. Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Gravgun. Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Flamer. Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Heavy Flamer. Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Heavy Bolter.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Bolter. Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Missile Launcher. Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Plasma Cannon. Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Lascannon. Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Multi-Melta. Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Grav-Cannon. (The unit may not contain more than 4 heavy weapons in any combination)
Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Bolter. Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Flamer. Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Multi-Melta. (The unit may not contain more than 4 heavy weapons in any combination)
One Havoc may take a Reaper Chaincannon. Up to two Havocs may take Lascannons. Up to two Havocs may take Autocannons. Up to two Havocs may take Missile Launchers. Up to two Havocs may take Heavy Bolters. (All Havocs must take a Heavy Weapon)
Up to 6 Chaos Space Marines may take a Heretic Astartes Chainsword. Up to 6 Chaos Space Marines may take a Bolter. Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Plasma Gun. Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Meltagun. Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Flamer. Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Missile Launcher. Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Heavy Bolter. (Only 1 heavy weapon can be included in a Chaos Space Marine squad)
Is this what we want people?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/01/18 23:15:44
Argive wrote: Also, if they did that for Space marines the community would loose its gak.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Flamer.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Plasma.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Grav.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Melta.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Storm Bolter.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Plasma Gun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Meltagun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Gravgun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Flamer.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Heavy Flamer.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Heavy Bolter.
And watch the sparks fly...
You forgot the "per 5 model in the unit" for each line along with limitation of only 4 models out of 5 being allowed combi-weapons.
Or they could just leave the datasheet the way it is since it is more limiting than the actual kit is, except for the lack of Combi-Weapon bits for every model (4 Combi-Weapon, with 2 of each type).
2021/01/18 23:13:15
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Argive wrote: I wrote them an email explaining their design philosophy in this regard is bad as it stifles creativity and converting side of the hobby and has affected my local player base who have to break up models and remove converted models and units from play... (a lot of DG around here). I can see this is BS and im not even DG player.
We can see where this is heading.. Look at AOS and how bland stuff gets if you can only ever use whats in the box? Uggh.. thats not 40k..
It sets a bad precedent for the future. Do you guys really want to play a game where every SINGLE UNIT AND SQUAD will always be the same? Whats even the point of having an army if they no longer are your dudes? That sounds utterly bland and terrible.. That sounds so mind bogglingly boring...
I don't want any more of that for my army. Its been gutted enough already.
Also, if they did that for Space marines the community would loose its gak..
90% of systems out there are exactly what you fear 40k becoming. Many have every model mono-pose, every squad with a single given loadout, heck many of them use the exact same rules for units in multiple factions with only army-wide special rules making them different.
I personally want 40k to keep its breadth of options and in that sense, the DG codex actually succeeds. No option was taken away, every weapon you could use before can still be used you just can't cram 'extra' weapons into 5-man units anymore, and given the need for board control limiting MSU spam from DG is a wise choice for game balance. GW didn't have a good option here but they picked the least bad option this time.
-----
For the cut options and balance 40k at all costs crowd, how do you feel about this change to DG?
2021/01/18 23:18:46
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
alextroy wrote: Or they could just leave the datasheet the way it is since it is more limiting than the actual kit is...
A literal falsehood.
"Any Space Marine Veteran may replace his special issue boltgun with a weapon from the Combi-Weapons list."
That's "more limiting than the actual kit" is it? The ability to take anything in any amount and combination is more limiting than the kit, which has 2 of each type?
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.
Yea, I see that high horse. You're going to force people to learn these skills and spend that money even if they have no interest in it? Not everyone is in the hobby for the same reasons and I'd wager the vast majority of people have done no conversions to their models and nor do they care to.
Argive wrote: Also, if they did that for Space marines the community would loose its gak.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Flamer.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Plasma.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Grav.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Melta.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Storm Bolter.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Plasma Gun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Meltagun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Gravgun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Flamer.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Heavy Flamer.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Heavy Bolter.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Bolter.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Missile Launcher.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Plasma Cannon.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Lascannon.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Multi-Melta.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Grav-Cannon.
(The unit may not contain more than 4 heavy weapons in any combination)
Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Bolter.
Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Flamer.
Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Multi-Melta.
(The unit may not contain more than 4 heavy weapons in any combination)
One Havoc may take a Reaper Chaincannon.
Up to two Havocs may take Lascannons.
Up to two Havocs may take Autocannons.
Up to two Havocs may take Missile Launchers.
Up to two Havocs may take Heavy Bolters.
(All Havocs must take a Heavy Weapon)
Up to 6 Chaos Space Marines may take a Heretic Astartes Chainsword.
Up to 6 Chaos Space Marines may take a Bolter.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Plasma Gun.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Meltagun.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Flamer.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Missile Launcher.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Heavy Bolter.
(Only 1 heavy weapon can be included in a Chaos Space Marine squad)
Is this what we want people?
Ah, slippery slope. Thy name is ridiculous.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/18 23:27:13
2021/01/18 23:28:28
Subject: Re:As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
I don't know how to feel about this. I was angry, but now I'm more just disappointed because 9th seemed to be doing so much right. The biggest stinger is that they didn't do this to the loyalist codices, but couldn't wait to pounce on the latest Chaos one.
I'm not a power gamer, but now I'm looking at my 2 regular traitor marines with reaper chain cannons and thinking, 'are they next?' Given how in advance the codices are, and the likelihood plans are already in motion, it'll be more of the same for the Tzeentchian, CSM, and probably Xenos factions.
It's just so ugly, so debilitating, and so uninspired. Now it's not even about balance, but about how much they can fit onto a sprue dictating weapon choice. Dual-kits have just become a bane to army planning. Couple this with more stuff getting put into 'legends', which sounds like a Logan's Run tier euphemism, and I start to feel the same way I did about the 4.0-5.0 chaos codex terror... where I walked away, bought a ton of heroclix, flames of war, bolt action, and board games. I'd hate to do that. I love supporting my local GW, my hobby, and my fellow gamer community.
Hunger...
2021/01/18 23:40:37
Subject: Re:As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
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.
Yea, I see that high horse. You're going to force people to learn these skills and spend that money even if they have no interest in it? Not everyone is in the hobby for the same reasons and I'd wager the vast majority of people have done no conversions to their models and nor do they care to.
Argive wrote: Also, if they did that for Space marines the community would loose its gak.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Flamer.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Plasma.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Grav.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Melta.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Storm Bolter.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Plasma Gun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Meltagun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Gravgun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Flamer.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Heavy Flamer.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Heavy Bolter.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Bolter.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Missile Launcher.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Plasma Cannon.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Lascannon.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Multi-Melta.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Grav-Cannon.
(The unit may not contain more than 4 heavy weapons in any combination)
Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Bolter.
Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Flamer.
Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Multi-Melta.
(The unit may not contain more than 4 heavy weapons in any combination)
One Havoc may take a Reaper Chaincannon.
Up to two Havocs may take Lascannons.
Up to two Havocs may take Autocannons.
Up to two Havocs may take Missile Launchers.
Up to two Havocs may take Heavy Bolters.
(All Havocs must take a Heavy Weapon)
Up to 6 Chaos Space Marines may take a Heretic Astartes Chainsword.
Up to 6 Chaos Space Marines may take a Bolter.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Plasma Gun.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Meltagun.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Flamer.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Missile Launcher.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Heavy Bolter.
(Only 1 heavy weapon can be included in a Chaos Space Marine squad)
Is this what we want people?
Ah, slippery slope. Thy name is ridiculous.
What's slippery slope about it? This literally happened and that's why I made the thread. Do you even know what you're defending?
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 23:41:51
Subject: Re:As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
That's not what a slippery slope argument is. And until a week ago, no one would have imagined the changes to the Death Guard this thread is about.
"This type of argument is sometimes used as a form of fearmongering in which the probable consequences of a given action are exaggerated in an attempt to scare the audience."
Seems about right to me.
2021/01/18 23:42:42
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Why do people insist that this isn't a big deal, or isn't worth worrying about, or is something we are wrong for not being happy about.
To two units in a codex that has dozens. We literally only have 3 of 28 codices released and Necrons never had special weapons mixed into their units to start so we really only have 2 codices to compare which isn't enough to predict a trend. If we get Codex DE and it's had exactly the same changes to the same style of mono-pose models then we can tag the start of a trend.
2021/01/18 23:58:34
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Why do people insist that this isn't a big deal, or isn't worth worrying about, or is something we are wrong for not being happy about.
To two units in a codex that has dozens. We literally only have 3 of 28 codices released and Necrons never had special weapons mixed into their units to start so we really only have 2 codices to compare which isn't enough to predict a trend. If we get Codex DE and it's had exactly the same changes to the same style of mono-pose models then we can tag the start of a trend.
The two units that had means of equipping other items?
Also don't forget the Lord of Contagion that can't carry around a ball if he chooses the incorrect Scythe to use!
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.
2021/01/19 00:01:06
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Also don't forget the Lord of Contagion that can't carry around a ball if he chooses the incorrect Scythe to use!
Space Marine HQ options are likewise limited to oddly specific load outs based on extant sculpts. That shows a trend among HQ and other single model units but not a trend among multi-model units.
2021/01/19 00:02:02
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
The only way that's a slippery slope argument is if you are working on the assumption that the same thing that happened to DG happening to Space Marines would be a worse outcome, rather than the same outcome.
In other words, you have to be a Space Marine supremacist to call that a slippery slope argument.
2021/01/19 00:04:40
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Argive wrote: I wrote them an email explaining their design philosophy in this regard is bad as it stifles creativity and converting side of the hobby and has affected my local player base who have to break up models and remove converted models and units from play... (a lot of DG around here). I can see this is BS and im not even DG player.
We can see where this is heading.. Look at AOS and how bland stuff gets if you can only ever use whats in the box? Uggh.. thats not 40k..
It sets a bad precedent for the future. Do you guys really want to play a game where every SINGLE UNIT AND SQUAD will always be the same? Whats even the point of having an army if they no longer are your dudes? That sounds utterly bland and terrible.. That sounds so mind bogglingly boring...
I don't want any more of that for my army. Its been gutted enough already.
Also, if they did that for Space marines the community would loose its gak..
90% of systems out there are exactly what you fear 40k becoming. Many have every model mono-pose, every squad with a single given loadout, heck many of them use the exact same rules for units in multiple factions with only army-wide special rules making them different.
I personally want 40k to keep its breadth of options and in that sense, the DG codex actually succeeds. No option was taken away, every weapon you could use before can still be used you just can't cram 'extra' weapons into 5-man units anymore, and given the need for board control limiting MSU spam from DG is a wise choice for game balance. GW didn't have a good option here but they picked the least bad option this time.
-----
For the cut options and balance 40k at all costs crowd, how do you feel about this change to DG?
If somebody wanted to build a dedicated large blob CC themed DG army and equipped them with knives, bubonic axes and flails they could.. If they wanted a blobby shooty squad they could.
Now they HAVE to do what's in the box.. As you say 90% of other games do this. So why pay 90% more for that GW premium cheddar if it tastes like other cheddar?
"Like you know that squad there ? Well they don't all have the same weapon oh no no no.. they all come with different one in the box you see... Let me declare all of these 5 models at different targets and resolve and roll all of these separately one at a time and cause no effect rather than roll 5 dice at once at one target coz that's good game design"
Nobody knows if this stupid trend will continue.. We can only guess and speculste worse case scenario and try to do something about it. (My bet is it does because 40k needs to be AOS clone because GW). So unless people feedback how this is bad design it will absolutely become a trend where every army will be exactly the same and you will be limited to play it the same way.. Like why would anyone want this? Why people dislike options and creativity so much ? Baffling..
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/19 00:12:36
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Also don't forget the Lord of Contagion that can't carry around a ball if he chooses the incorrect Scythe to use!
Space Marine HQ options are likewise limited to oddly specific load outs based on extant sculpts. That shows a trend among HQ and other single model units but not a trend among multi-model units.
Yeah and I hate how the Primaris HQs have been handled overall.
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.
2021/01/19 00:33:52
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
alextroy wrote:Or they could just leave the datasheet the way it is since it is more limiting than the actual kit is, except for the lack of Combi-Weapon bits for every model (4 Combi-Weapon, with 2 of each type).
alextroy wrote: Or they could just leave the datasheet the way it is since it is more limiting than the actual kit is...
A literal falsehood.
"Any Space Marine Veteran may replace his special issue boltgun with a weapon from the Combi-Weapons list."
That's "more limiting than the actual kit" is it? The ability to take anything in any amount and combination is more limiting than the kit, which has 2 of each type?
You must be from an alternate reality.
Do you always criticize in bad faith or am I special? I literally mentioned Combi-Weapons in my response, but you had to cut that out to attempt to make a point.
2021/01/19 00:41:26
Subject: As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
Argive wrote: If somebody wanted to build a dedicated large blob CC themed DG army and equipped them with knives, bubonic axes and flails they could.. If they wanted a blobby shooty squad they could.
Now they HAVE to do what's in the box.. As you say 90% of other games do this. So why pay 90% more for that GW premium cheddar if it tastes like other cheddar?
Because GW cheddar will never taste like other cheddar. The quality difference between GW sculpts and the field is still vast and no other game in the genre has the same themes and depths of lore as 40k. You may not like the change but the ability to equip a single model with a specific weapon isn't the main draw of 40k.
"Like you know that squad there ? Well they don't all have the same weapon oh no no no.. they all come with different one in the box you see... Let me declare all of these 5 models at different targets and resolve and roll all of these separately one at a time and cause no effect rather than roll 5 dice at once at one target coz that's good game design"
If you're not having any effect with your shots you're likely making bad choices on the table. Also, you probably shouldn't build a PM unit with all the fixings anyway just due to the points cost. In fact, this is exactly what this type of change targets, you can get your toys on the table if you spend a premium in points but you can't take the most efficient load out at minimum unit sizes. How is this not a win for game balance if it continues as a trend?
2021/01/19 00:44:47
Subject: Re:As of the new Death Guard codex, GW has taken No Model = No Rules to its extreme conclusion
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.
Yea, I see that high horse. You're going to force people to learn these skills and spend that money even if they have no interest in it? Not everyone is in the hobby for the same reasons and I'd wager the vast majority of people have done no conversions to their models and nor do they care to.
Argive wrote: Also, if they did that for Space marines the community would loose its gak.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Flamer.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Plasma.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Grav.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Combi-Melta.
Up to two Sternguard may replace their Bolters with a Storm Bolter.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Plasma Gun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Meltagun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Gravgun.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Flamer.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Heavy Flamer.
Up to one Sternguard may replace his Bolter with a Heavy Bolter.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Bolter.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Missile Launcher.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Plasma Cannon.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Lascannon.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Multi-Melta.
Up to two Devastators may replace their Bolters with a Grav-Cannon.
(The unit may not contain more than 4 heavy weapons in any combination)
Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Bolter.
Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Heavy Flamer.
Up to two Retributors may replace their Bolters with a Multi-Melta.
(The unit may not contain more than 4 heavy weapons in any combination)
One Havoc may take a Reaper Chaincannon.
Up to two Havocs may take Lascannons.
Up to two Havocs may take Autocannons.
Up to two Havocs may take Missile Launchers.
Up to two Havocs may take Heavy Bolters.
(All Havocs must take a Heavy Weapon)
Up to 6 Chaos Space Marines may take a Heretic Astartes Chainsword.
Up to 6 Chaos Space Marines may take a Bolter.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Plasma Gun.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Meltagun.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Flamer.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Missile Launcher.
Up to 1 Chaos Space Marines may take a Heavy Bolter.
(Only 1 heavy weapon can be included in a Chaos Space Marine squad)
Is this what we want people?
Ah, slippery slope. Thy name is ridiculous.
The situation prior to this: If you are unwilling to invest more time and or money, you can create something beyond the box.
If you aren't, you can build the box.
Your argument is essentially no different than "The guy who gies above and beyond is making the other guy feel bad, so he has to have his options taken away."
It's firing the guy who has a job because the guy who won't work is angry the working guy has more money. It's nonsense.
Painting, modelling- part of the game since firever. Use Vassal if all you want is the rules, or chits.
Tell me, do you keep 100% of your bits once done building a unit, and never toss them out or use them for an alternate project?
This is needlessly penalizing to those that aren't paranoid. If you magbetize-way more expensive than milliput, say- you are OK.
GW is cutting their own ties here. If units aren't customizable, how many will lose interest or become negative word of mouth?
EDIT: Fundamentally, the guy who has more has put in more, whether time, effort, or cash. Everyone is free to do so.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/19 00:52:10
Eldar- 4436 pts
Do you always criticize in bad faith or am I special? I literally mentioned Combi-Weapons in my response, but you had to cut that out to attempt to make a point. 