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.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Darsath wrote:
I think we can all agree that Space Marines didn't need any new models from the end of 7th edition. Yes?

No faction needs models because 40k isn't needed at all, so this argument is bunk.

Your inability to understand context doesn't invalidate the argument. Clearly we're talking about a relative need within the context of 40k as a whole. I suspect you know that and just enjoy being contrarian.

Slipspace wrote:
Your inability to understand context doesn't invalidate the argument. Clearly we're talking about a relative need within the context of 40k as a whole. I suspect you know that and just enjoy being contrarian.

Is any faction with current rules unable to meet the requirements to build a legal list? No... Then no faction NEEDS anything. Do players of certain factions DESIRE new models, yeah of course they do and they always will.

Is any faction with current rules unable to meet the requirements to build a legal list? No... Then no faction NEEDS anything. Do players of certain factions DESIRE new models, yeah of course they do and they always will.

Why even bother participating if that's your stance ...

I genuinely want to hear from others. Who else agrees with Canadian's stance above?

I feel everyone's list needs to be somewhat tailored to kill space marines, especially newer primaris stuff, ie they should hate them with all their heart in hopes of killing as many marine poop heads as possible

Tycho wrote:
Why even bother participating if that's your stance ...

I could ask the same of you. If 40k is so broken and unbalanced and some factions never even get models but only lose them why do people that dislike the status quo stay? There are other games and other hobbies that can scratch the itch so why stay chained to a company you clearly dislike?

Darsath wrote:
I genuinely want to hear from others. Who else agrees with Canadian's stance above?

Complete miniature product lines don't need anything, that's just your opinion. I empathize with wanting stuff but if marines are what makes up the vast majority of sales then that's what we're all gonna get. Imo the creators who would agree with you are all dead, gone, or have lost any sort of passion for the game. All that's left is the corporate side that sees no reason not to make wave after wave of marines.

 Dysartes wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Spoiler:

 Dysartes wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
9th launches and we get the Marine - Necrons -Marines - Marines - Marines codexes.

No, we see:

SM, Necron, [long COVID gap], Death Guard, [shorter COVID gap], Dark Eldar...

Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Deathwatch didn't happen then? They didn't take up a release slot? Dark Angels aren't going to take up a whole month after GW announced they were slowing down?

That's weird, it wasn't all that long ago, memory must be playing tricks on me.

If your memory is telling you that, since the start of 9th edition, we have seen the release of Codex: Space Wolves, Codex: Blood Angels and Codex: Deathwatch, and that Codex: Dark Angels is on your mental list as coming soon - bearing in mind the original statement I addressed - then yes, your memory is playing tricks on you.

They said nothing about them being Codecs-only that they're taking up release space.

Again, look at the quote I responded to initially. The one at the root of that little quote pyramid.

See that last word?

My apologies - you are "technically correct, the best kind of correct" *adjusts pocket protector, pushes up thick poindexter glasses* You get 100 dakkabux redeemable at any BCB Franchise Location.

TECHNICALLY we have gotten since the launch of 9th merely ONE marine codex, three marine codex SUPPLEMENTS that are unlike codexes because...well they take up a book release slot...and they've got just as many datasheets in them as many of the other full codexes....more rules, usually....just as much lore...just as many plastic kits supported that are unique to them...but they have the word SUPPLEMENT after the word CODEX so you are right.

...Burn the internet to the fething ground please god.

 Dysartes wrote:


Again, look at the quote I responded to initially. The one at the root of that little quote pyramid.

See that last word?

Ok so because i called them codexes, my whole argument is invalid? I called them codex because even though theyre supplements, they have more stuff in them than some full-on codexes.

the_scotsman wrote:
My apologies - you are "technically correct, the best kind of correct" *adjusts pocket protector, pushes up thick poindexter glasses* You get 100 dakkabux redeemable at any BCB Franchise Location.

TECHNICALLY we have gotten since the launch of 9th merely ONE marine codex, three marine codex SUPPLEMENTS that are unlike codexes because...well they take up a book release slot...and they've got just as many datasheets in them as many of the other full codexes....more rules, usually....just as much lore...just as many plastic kits supported that are unique to them...but they have the word SUPPLEMENT after the word CODEX so you are right.

...Burn the internet to the fething ground please god.

Says the man who used the term 'avalanche of space marine garbage' in a thread where a new player asked about the current state of 40k. You're surely unbiased and in no way contribute to the problems you see within this community... Give your head a shake.

I could ask the same of you. If 40k is so broken and unbalanced and some factions never even get models but only lose them why do people that dislike the status quo stay? There are other games and other hobbies that can scratch the itch so why stay chained to a company you clearly dislike?

So I won't dodge your question like you dodged mine. If you look through my posts history, you'll see me both defend and criticize GW. In a thread less than an hour ago I actually stood up for both GW and the play testers. When they do things right I'm right there saying "nice work Gdubs". When I think they've screwed up, I will say it.

This is a far cry from entering every thread with a deliberately contrarion viewpoint that actually aims at making discussion almost pointless. For a game you haven't ....

I genuinely want to hear from others. Who else agrees with Canadian's stance above?

The fact that there's a discussion at all would seem to indicate few do ...

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
[Ok so because i called them codexes, my whole argument is invalid? I called them codex because even though theyre supplements, they have more stuff in them than some full-on codexes.

Correct terms are important so all parties in a debate know what the actual argument is about. You set the terms if you meant something else than what you typed that's on you. I suggest trying the term 'codex-like supplements' next time you want to complain about Marines getting support.

Tycho wrote:
So I won't dodge your question like you dodged mine. If you look through my posts history, you'll see me both defend and criticize GW. In a thread less than an hour ago I actually stood up for both GW and the play testers. When they do things right I'm right there saying "nice work Gdubs". When I think they've screwed up, I will say it.

None of that changes the fact that you seem to dislike the game enough to be here posting about it regularly. Now before you try to retort that I do the same, I'm currently at work killing time until I see my next customer and thus am getting paid for my time spent here, what's your excuse?

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
[Ok so because i called them codexes, my whole argument is invalid? I called them codex because even though theyre supplements, they have more stuff in them than some full-on codexes.

Correct terms are important so all parties in a debate know what the actual argument is about. You set the terms if you meant something else than what you typed that's on you. I suggest trying the term 'codex-like supplements' next time you want to complain about Marines getting support.

fair enough i guess. I thought people would understand what i meant but evidently they didn't. Or they decided to use a single word to go full-on "ACKTUALLYY" instead of addressing my actual argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

None of that changes the fact that you seem to dislike the game enough to be here posting about it regularly. Now before you try to retort that I do the same, I'm currently at work killing time until I see my next customer and thus am getting paid for my time spent here, what's your excuse?

Discussing about the games shortcoming isnt a sign of dislike. On the contrary, it shows engagement in the game to a point where you see the problems it has and what you wish was fixed.

When someone truly doesn't like a game, they stop talking about it or frequenting the forums dedicated to it (like i did with MTG when i switched to wargaming).
40K, despite its many flaws, is still a very enjoyable game to play as long as i have a quick talk with my opponents beforehand about what powerlevel we want to play the game at.

40k only truly becomes unfun when you end up with two players with different expectations of the game playing against each other.

Darsath wrote:
I think we can all agree that Space Marines didn't need any new models from the end of 7th edition. Yes?

No, I don't think I can agree to that. I am pretty sure I wouldn't have a legal space marine army if that was the case. But you tell me:



I know it wouldn't be able to play 2000pt games without post-7th edition models.

I really like Primaris space marines. They took my interest from zero with loyalist space marines to that collection in the spoiler above and beyond. I don't even think an enbiggening of the Firstborn sculpts to 'true scale' would have me bother. Primaris are the part I like about those models. You may believe that Primaris are superfluous and a waste of GW resources that could have been used to better promote other factions. I am not likely to change your mind. However, just for a moment, consider that maybe it could be possible part of the reason GW kicked their release schedule into overdrive is in part due in part to the success of Primaris space marines. They are obviously popular enough that GW keeps cranking them out at a break-neck speed to the point that even me as a fan of them has to wonder maybe they have over saturated their inventory with them. Maybe some other faction refresh coulda, woulda, shoulda done the same thing. That's always going to be an unknown.

I can agree to the idea that maybe GW could spread the wealth a little more toward older factions that have languished instead of creating the next big thing. Be it a new faction, a new tent-pole game, a bunch re-freshed and new specialist games, and yes, even a radical addition more akin to a new faction than a refresh of the company's most popular model line. I don't think anyone can here can say with certainty that Primaris releases are actively blocking other faction releases. At best, they are maybe slowing some progress due to the GW having the idea that a customer will buy both new Intercessors and new Eldar Guardians, just not in the same fiscal quarter.

I can say is I don't appreciate someone saying that one of my armies shouldn't exist any more than I think they would like it if they were told the same.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
fair enough i guess. I thought people would understand what i meant but evidently they didn't. Or they decided to use a single word to go full-on "ACKTUALLYY" instead of addressing my actual argument.

This is the internet? When are people you're debating against ever that charitable. xD

Discussing about the games shortcoming isnt a sign of dislike. On the contrary, it shows engagement in the game to a point where you see the problems it has and what you wish was fixed.

When someone truly doesn't like a game, they stop talking about it or frequenting the forums dedicated to it (like i did with MTG when i switched to wargaming).

That is an excellent point!

40k only truly becomes unfun when you end up with two players with different expectations of the game playing against each other.

Or when the dice just go entirely cold for one player while staying hot/average for another. Those games always suck.

None of that changes the fact that you seem to dislike the game enough to be here posting about it regularly. Now before you try to retort that I do the same, I'm currently at work killing time until I see my next customer and thus am getting paid for my time spent here, what's your excuse?

Yes. I dislike it so much that I can't stop posting about it. In fact, I hate the company so much I went out of my way to complement them on releasing the Munitorum update for free, and have defended them like 3 times today.

and um ... we're pretty much all doing the same thing RE work right now.

Go outside dude.

Discussing about the games shortcoming isnt a sign of dislike. On the contrary, it shows engagement in the game to a point where you see the problems it has and what you wish was fixed.

When someone truly doesn't like a game, they stop talking about it or frequenting the forums dedicated to it (like i did with MTG when i switched to wargaming).

That is an excellent point!

He was actually referencing me ... lol

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Or when the dice just go entirely cold for one player while staying hot/average for another. Those games always suck.

Good thing that they don't happen that often statistically. Unless i'm playing prophets of flesh and rolling all the 4++.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tycho wrote:


He was actually referencing me ... lol

i know, i was just bringing up that complaining about a game online doesnt mean you hate the game at all.

Tycho wrote:
Go outside dude.

Did you miss the part where I am literally at my job right now. I'd love to go do something else, but seeing as I get paid to stand here I'll stay where I am for now.

Tycho wrote:


He was actually referencing me ... lol


i know, i was just bringing up that complaining about a game online doesnt mean you hate the game at all.

Sorry man. Sloppy quote on my part. That wasn't aimed at you! Mr 5th attacks me and two posts later says you have a good point for the same thing I just told him.

Was just pointing out how silly that is. He should probably start following what he wrote in his own sig ...

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
Good thing that they don't happen that often statistically. Unless i'm playing prophets of flesh and rolling all the 4++.

Whole games are blissfully rare. If only the bad rolls wouldn't save themselves for key units at key moments...

 Dysartes wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
SM haven't needed anything since 4th edition. The last unit that really had a place was the Drop Pod.

Eh, I'd include the Land Speeder Storm (to give a suitable transport for Scouts) and, when aircraft were added to the game, porting the Hunter from Epic: Armageddon (and even adding the Stalker variant) made sense too.

I'd disagree, as I've never had to field any of those units even once.

You don't see Eldar players complaining that they need a transport specifically designed for Rangers, for example. It's all extra.

Tycho wrote:
Sorry man. Sloppy quote on my part. That wasn't aimed at you! Mr 5th attacks me and two posts later says you have a good point for the same thing I just told him.

Was just pointing out how silly that is. He should probably start following what he wrote in his own sig ...

I am aware. I just think he said it better is all.

Slipspace wrote:


What do SM need? They already have by far the largest range of models of any GW army. I'd argue SM don't need any new models for the duration of 9th edition. The fact GW comes up with a whole host of new models for the new Codex doesn't mean SM needed them but apparently it's enough to make people think they did. Would we really have been complaining if GW hadn't decided that SM needed Heavy Intercessors as a whole new Troops choice? Or a Techmarine-crewed turret? Or yet another Captain variant?

If the needs of the army are your yardstick I don't think you've got a leg to stand on when it comes to SM.

If that's the yardstick then no one really needs any models. As much as people don't agree Primaris are a separate army that FB were allowed to join into. They're the primary driver of the narrative and the most recognizable face for the hobby. Do you think a Hive Tyrant would draw in more people? It makes nothing but sense for GW to renew the scale of the armies and do so with Marines at the fore.

 Irkjoe wrote:
Imo the creators who would agree with you are all dead, gone, or have lost any sort of passion for the game. All that's left is the corporate side that sees no reason not to make wave after wave of marines.

I play lots of armies - I wish they all would be updated. Marines did in fact NEED these updates because marines on the whole did not live up to their lore. Their size and proportions were off and it was anticlimatic for me. Now they actually look the part - it's great.

Other armies do need updates.

IG and Eldar I think before everyone else. What IG needs is a new modern tank line. Have tanks resembling abrams/challenger tanks / leopards/ even that new Russian tank. These things would sell like hotcakes...sad thing is...there would be so much hatred at the same time...people complaining they liked the old WW1 look of things.

Eldar too need a complete visual overhaul...most of their stuff just looks dumb to me.

Those stick out to me as most needed at this time.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I play lots of armies - I wish they all would be updated. Marines did in fact NEED these updates because marines on the whole did not live up to their lore. Their size and proportions were off and it was anticlimatic for me. Now they actually look the part - it's great.

Other armies do need updates.

IG and Eldar I think before everyone else. What IG needs is a new modern tank line. Have tanks resembling abrams/challenger tanks / leopards/ even that new Russian tank. These things would sell like hotcakes...sad thing is...there would be so much hatred at the same time...people complaining they liked the old WW1 look of things.

Eldar too need a complete visual overhaul...most of their stuff just looks dumb to me.

Those stick out to me as most needed at this time.

The eldar aesthetic is fine and clearly defined. What is not fine is the % of the army that is still finecast from the original metal models.

40k suffers from a problem that it is basically 30k at this point. GW wants to make 40k the next 30k and we will all reap the benefits/loss depending on what we play. The future is very much marine and if you are not interested in a 30k match then 40k will most likely not be your game.

GW has spent, through its ancillaries, a lot of time and money in creating the Space Marine mythos and it reflects very much in the game now. No other faction has such a wide range of lore and fluff to sell itself and that will always be why Xenos factions will be the NPCs in this game. GW most likely realizes this problem but because they like money they will not move away from this path. However, you do see them trying to diversify in AoS and the lore and books reflect a much more richer universe with different factions. There is even more intrigue and darker stories being told in AoS now than I get from 40k due to the heroification of Marines as of late.

Which is why - and I have said this before - AoS is a much healthier game than 40k at the moment, warts and all.

IG and Eldar I think before everyone else. What IG needs is a new modern tank line. Have tanks resembling abrams/challenger tanks / leopards/ even that new Russian tank. These things would sell like hotcakes...sad thing is...there would be so much hatred at the same time...people complaining they liked the old WW1 look of things.

Eldar too need a complete visual overhaul...most of their stuff just looks dumb to me.

Those stick out to me as most needed at this time.

You leave Russ's alone! They're glorious and perfect! They just need good rules (I might have a soft spot for them).

For me it's Craftworld Eldar and Dark Eldar that need the most love. Would be amazing if Dark Eldar got Vect back as a cool centerpiece model imo.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
The eldar aesthetic is fine and clearly defined. What is not fine is the % of the army that is still finecast from the original metal models.

I think Eldar can end up looking pretty goofy if anybody who isn't a great painter does anything ambitious with them. They already have such off proportions and such a strong aesthetic that it can be easy to end up with a visual mess on the table.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Spoiler:

 Dysartes wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
9th launches and we get the Marine - Necrons -Marines - Marines - Marines codexes.

No, we see:

SM, Necron, [long COVID gap], Death Guard, [shorter COVID gap], Dark Eldar...

Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Deathwatch didn't happen then? They didn't take up a release slot? Dark Angels aren't going to take up a whole month after GW announced they were slowing down?

That's weird, it wasn't all that long ago, memory must be playing tricks on me.

If your memory is telling you that, since the start of 9th edition, we have seen the release of Codex: Space Wolves, Codex: Blood Angels and Codex: Deathwatch, and that Codex: Dark Angels is on your mental list as coming soon - bearing in mind the original statement I addressed - then yes, your memory is playing tricks on you.

They said nothing about them being Codecs-only that they're taking up release space.

Again, look at the quote I responded to initially. The one at the root of that little quote pyramid.

See that last word?

My apologies - you are "technically correct, the best kind of correct" *adjusts pocket protector, pushes up thick poindexter glasses* You get 100 dakkabux redeemable at any BCB Franchise Location.

TECHNICALLY we have gotten since the launch of 9th merely ONE marine codex, three marine codex SUPPLEMENTS that are unlike codexes because...well they take up a book release slot...and they've got just as many datasheets in them as many of the other full codexes....more rules, usually....just as much lore...just as many plastic kits supported that are unique to them...but they have the word SUPPLEMENT after the word CODEX so you are right.

...Burn the internet to the fething ground please god.

It would at least take care of the Q folk....