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.

I haven't used them in 9th yet, but in 8th, I found that the way I used them depended a lot on how a given opponent wanted to play the doors. If lowered doors are treated as part of the model, then you can potentially introduce a serious speed bump by dropping a wall of doors between your opponent's army and the objectives he was planning on going for turn 1. And behind that wall (in my case) were a couple of squads of marines that get to shoot at your army through said wall of doors, probably while standing on the objective you expected to control on turn 1. Taking a pod hostage doesn't matter all that much if you're not standing on an objective while doing so.

If my opponent preferred to basically play the doors as being left closed (which is what I usually recommended as it's cleaner and less gimmicky), they're just an okay-but-not-great option. Which, in my casual league, was perfectly fine. The pod is a little pricey, but dumping it in the right place means that your opponent has to waste resources killing it to avoid giving me linebreaker, an objective, etc.

Complaints about drop pods are always a little weird to me. They're not an auto-take for my marines, but they're an okay second-stringer. And my craftworlders would have loved to have them back in 8th (when Strategic Reserves weren't a thing). Prior to 8th, drukhari could pay for a webway portal (in various forms) that more or less did what a drop pod did. Paying a couple extra points for a modest gun and an extra objective holder doesn't seem like such a bad deal in comparison.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 AngryAngel80 wrote:

Sad these days its just about min maxing and cookie cutter model lists.

Sorry nobody wants to play garbage "I'll take one of each unit with random wargear on everyone" games. Maybe you should be blaming the game designers instead of the players!

I know you have to be angry about all things that aren't bleeding edge but really, lighten up. Not every game has to be battle of the most broke all the time. Nor does taking some less than top tier units mean the person playing is all " hurr durr, wha dis ? " Where nothing makes sense and nothing has any teeth.

I was simply lamenting the fact flavor means nothing cast dead upon the alter of in game use that tends to roll in and out like the tides with the rules writers whimsy.

I blame in some regard the designers for pushing unknown agendas to keep this terrible flux of good/bad. I also blame the players who, even in confines of a friendly get together have to smash each other to pieces with only the best of the best and have no internal middle ground, as they drive the games direction as well in their own way.

So please, I say again, relax. My posts do not white knight on any level GWs blame in it, but to say they are the only ones to blame is also false. Perhaps my words struck a little too close to home ?

 AngryAngel80 wrote:

I know you have to be angry about all things that aren't bleeding edge but really, lighten up. Not every game has to be battle of the most broke all the time. Nor does taking some less than top tier units mean the person playing is all " hurr durr, wha dis ? " Where nothing makes sense and nothing has any teeth.

I think you seriously underestimate the gap between good and bad units for some armies, and the gap between what some armies consider bad and what some armies consider good.

Some armies casual and for fun lists require others to play their factions version of tournament list, and often even that is too good. Specially if the number of units accesible to a faction is limited.

Tau vs Custodes or Harlequins requires the non tau players to do some wierd stuff with their lists and how they are played. And players have no influance on that.

You think DPs are bad at their point cost... See the webway gate... It's supposed to have a similar function and is worse in every conceivable way... I use DPs in my FB wolves army and they are great. They can block charge lanes, perform some actions, capture objectives can block LOS, put a unit anywhere (to deploy teleports for example) on turn one, ignore point limitations, be used for look out sir, and act as a distraction carnefex for those foolish enough to tie up.

Compare that to how useless a webway gate is.... You know the thing that is supposed to, fluffwise, be more versitile and allow things to deeps trike in the blink of the eye... It's supposed to serve the same tactical function but does it way worse and costs way more points. Ya, I think DPs are fine.

Wyldhunt wrote:

Complaints about drop pods are always a little weird to me. They're not an auto-take for my marines, but they're an okay second-stringer. And my craftworlders would have loved to have them back in 8th (when Strategic Reserves weren't a thing). Prior to 8th, drukhari could pay for a webway portal (in various forms) that more or less did what a drop pod did. Paying a couple extra points for a modest gun and an extra objective holder doesn't seem like such a bad deal in comparison.

That's a very good description of it imo - "second string". I think the issue (at least in 9th) is that Marines now have so many good first string options, there's almost never a reason to dip into the second string options (unless you simply want to because you like something there which is fair play of course). The other issue is that they can be kind of tough to use. If you get first turn, they can be great at dropping something onto an objective straight away. If you get second turn, you may find yourself very quickly with no good place to put them, or possibly, due to how small tables are in 9th, combined with how much terrain tends to be on the board, no place to put them at all for a turn or so. Everyone said hordes would be dead in 9th, and indeed they have drawbacks, but one of the advantages is that if you have, say, 100 Ork boys, it's suddenly very easy to make sure your opponent doesn't have a place to bring in reinforcements or to place large-ish models like drop pods.

Combined with the fact that marines now have more forward-deploying units than they have ever had, and the fact that a lot of those units are surprisingly strong, the drop pod just starts to lose its luster I think. I would agree it needs a points drop. If you're going out of your way to bring a "second-string" model, you shouldn't have to pay "starter" prices for it imo.

What's the width of a drop pod with the doors down? How does that compare to standard table width? And what are the rules about standing on terrain?

Seems to me, in a game that's all about mobility and objective grabbing, someone could find a way to use a unit that stops an opponent from moving out of their deployment zone.

 generalchaos34 wrote:
I do think its REALLY weird that primaris can't use drop pods. Or at least have their own version. Its kind of an iconic part of the army and how it works. As for pods now? I think they could use a bit of a point discount, maybe sit in the 50 point range. Then again I think all transports should get a discount. This edition charges too much for transport capacity when you can deep strike or outflank for CP. This does not jive well at all with things like Rhinos and Devilfish that do not have any substantial offensive capabilities. I feel like the only time we ever see transports is when they are also well armed and can hold their own after dropping off their contents.

^Yep.

Given that transports no longer provide any meaningful increase to mobility unless they're open topped transporting shooty units, because you'd be an idiot not to disembark turn 1 most of the time (this is microboardhammer 40,000 after all, what's maneuvering into position?) Many could use a fairly substantial points decrease.

Drop pods in this sense are solidly better than most pure transport vehicles. If I had access to them with all my armies, I'd use them with quite a few.

Chimeras, Rhinos, Devilfish, Ghost Arcs, the admech fuglyboat, Trukks, Drop Pods, Gribblepods, Rockgrinders and Goliaths, Land Raider Crusaders...all pretty overpriced across the board. What they're meaningfully buying you in 9th edition is just the ability to be slightly more inconvenient to shoot top of turn 1 if you don't get the first turn. If you actually try to keep a unit in a transport turn 1, move it into position, and don't get them out until turn 2 the tempo loss from that absolutely basic maneuver is just incredible, and odds are extremely good your opponent will be able to surround and gobble up the squad inside.

If GW had popped their heads out of their butts and realized "oh hey, we've made a game where it's ridiculously easy for a ton of mobile units to charge straight across no man's land and be in combat and a ton of long range units to just start in optimal range right from their deployment zone, it really wouldn't change much of the game state to allow units to disembark from transports after they move" things might have been different, but they didn't.

Seems to me, in a game that's all about mobility and objective grabbing, someone could find a way to use a unit that stops an opponent from moving out of their deployment zone.

Yep. Like I said - "Provided you go FIRST". And that's a pretty big gamble at this point ....

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Allow primaris to use them.

This. It is an iconic marine unit and they don't have access to it (or an equivalent.) They use it in the fluff; the restriction makes no sense.

 techsoldaten wrote:
What's the width of a drop pod with the doors down? How does that compare to standard table width? And what are the rules about standing on terrain?

Seems to me, in a game that's all about mobility and objective grabbing, someone could find a way to use a unit that stops an opponent from moving out of their deployment zone.

~9.5" from door tip to door tip, or a five pointed star with a 5" radius to point. A lot of area. If you're playing in a strictly by-the-book area you can build big walls with them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Allow primaris to use them.

This. It is an iconic marine unit and they don't have access to it (or an equivalent.) They use it in the fluff; the restriction makes no sense.

CSM should get theirs first.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Allow primaris to use them.

This. It is an iconic marine unit and they don't have access to it (or an equivalent.) They use it in the fluff; the restriction makes no sense.

CSM should get theirs first.

We already have ours. They just need to fix their rules so that their passengers can get out on the turn they arrive from deep strike. Still no reason for a primaris specific drop pod though. Just let the big muscle heads use the current model.

The Kharbysomething claw thing? Do CSM have access to the standard Pod or something similar?

I absolutely concur about using pods to move block, one of the best ways to use them, and I have all my doors articulate so they block whole streets and provide a bigger base to shoot that deathwind launcher. Much better if you go first. Sometimes drop 2 empty pods intermingled on the same route to really clog it up. Charge away.

Transports have lost much of their functionality in 9th *IF* you play on the new MINIMUM sized board. I usually play on 4x6 (or 4x8 sometimes for 2500-3000). I haven't played a tournament since Star Fleet Battles was big and hate the new minimum size boards everyone somehow feels the need to play on. But if you play on bigger boards, transports are much more viable.

Ananiel

 Insectum7 wrote:
The Kharbysomething claw thing? Do CSM have access to the standard Pod or something similar?

We have Dreadclaws and the Karybdis Assault Claw. The Dreadclaw comes in from deep strike just like a loyalist drop pod, but after deploying it becomes a flying transport, with melee attacks and the ability to deliver MWs by burning enemy units with its engines when flying over them. The Karybdis is basically the same, but bigger (it's a LOW), has a greater transport capacity (20 vs Dreadclaw's 10), and has missile launchers. No standard drop pods available to CSM, which is fine by me, I don't want the Legions to just be loyalists with spikes. Renegades should maybe have standard drop pods though (but no Dreadclaws or Karybdis, because those are Heresy era units).

 Insectum7 wrote:
CSM should get theirs first.

CSM definitely should have drop pods. That will require a new model or at least a conversion sprue though. Drop pod for primaris just needs an one line of errata to remove the restriction.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
The Kharbysomething claw thing? Do CSM have access to the standard Pod or something similar?

We have Dreadclaws and the Karybdis Assault Claw. The Dreadclaw comes in from deep strike just like a loyalist drop pod, but after deploying it becomes a flying transport, with melee attacks and the ability to deliver MWs by burning enemy units with its engines when flying over them. The Karybdis is basically the same, but bigger (it's a LOW), has a greater transport capacity (20 vs Dreadclaw's 10), and has missile launchers. No standard drop pods available to CSM, which is fine by me, I don't want the Legions to just be loyalists with spikes. Renegades should maybe have standard drop pods though (but no Dreadclaws or Karybdis, because those are Heresy era units).

+1. Understood.

 Crimson wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
CSM should get theirs first.

CSM definitely should have drop pods. That will require a new model or at least a conversion sprue though. Drop pod for primaris just needs an one line of errata to remove the restriction.

You know I'm going to push back on this and say that trueborn should have some tricks that Primaris don't.

Or just wait a bit and GW will release a Primaris Pod that will be bigger, chunkier, more expensive, have a new weapon, etc.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:


We have Dreadclaws and the Karybdis Assault Claw. The Dreadclaw comes in from deep strike just like a loyalist drop pod, but after deploying it becomes a flying transport, with melee attacks and the ability to deliver MWs by burning enemy units with its engines when flying over them. The Karybdis is basically the same, but bigger (it's a LOW), has a greater transport capacity (20 vs Dreadclaw's 10), and has missile launchers. No standard drop pods available to CSM, which is fine by me, I don't want the Legions to just be loyalists with spikes. Renegades should maybe have standard drop pods though (but no Dreadclaws or Karybdis, because those are Heresy era units).

Still FW only though, right? Huge barrier for me personally, and a lot of others I'm sure.

FW makes the only miniatures that are more expensive than GW miniatures; they're resin instead of plastic, and they require additional IA books which are also more expensive than GW books (though far fewer in number).

I get that FW works for some players, but it certainly isn't a solution that works for all of us.

PenitentJake wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:


We have Dreadclaws and the Karybdis Assault Claw. The Dreadclaw comes in from deep strike just like a loyalist drop pod, but after deploying it becomes a flying transport, with melee attacks and the ability to deliver MWs by burning enemy units with its engines when flying over them. The Karybdis is basically the same, but bigger (it's a LOW), has a greater transport capacity (20 vs Dreadclaw's 10), and has missile launchers. No standard drop pods available to CSM, which is fine by me, I don't want the Legions to just be loyalists with spikes. Renegades should maybe have standard drop pods though (but no Dreadclaws or Karybdis, because those are Heresy era units).

Still FW only though, right? Huge barrier for me personally, and a lot of others I'm sure.

FW makes the only miniatures that are more expensive than GW miniatures; they're resin instead of plastic, and they require additional IA books which are also more expensive than GW books (though far fewer in number).

I get that FW works for some players, but it certainly isn't a solution that works for all of us.

Yeah, I understand that. Dreadclaws would be easy for gw to do in full plastic. The kit is literally just the plastic drop pod kit with some resin conversion parts: The bottom engine/melta cutter/porthole section, upper engine, and the claws. Why they don't just do a full plastic kit and add it to the CSM codex is beyond me.

Oh, and fix the deployment rules so they work like a normal drop pod when first deploying, just like they have in every other edition since they were first introduced (3rd to 8th).

 Insectum7 wrote:

Or just wait a bit and GW will release a Primaris Pod that will be bigger, chunkier, more expensive, have a new weapon, etc.

Bigger, chunkier, AND blockier than the last!

In all seriousness I do except it. It's more of a when. I just want it to be a shell like the old one, but I'm sure they'll turn it into some point defence vehicle that shoots out barricades to hide behind or have heavy bolters everywhere

Karol wrote:

 AngryAngel80 wrote:

I know you have to be angry about all things that aren't bleeding edge but really, lighten up. Not every game has to be battle of the most broke all the time. Nor does taking some less than top tier units mean the person playing is all " hurr durr, wha dis ? " Where nothing makes sense and nothing has any teeth.

I think you seriously underestimate the gap between good and bad units for some armies, and the gap between what some armies consider bad and what some armies consider good.

Some armies casual and for fun lists require others to play their factions version of tournament list, and often even that is too good. Specially if the number of units accesible to a faction is limited.

Tau vs Custodes or Harlequins requires the non tau players to do some wierd stuff with their lists and how they are played. And players have no influance on that.

Karol, I play guard, as I'd say my primary army. I run Ogryns, lots of them. I am well aware what a crap unit is. I run rough riders, I'm well aware of the balance of good and bad in an army.

I played many lists against Eldar when even their most casual units were stomping on all before them. I've played this game since early 3rd edition, I'm not a sweet summer child of wargames. I'm just saying players can sometimes really skew the idea of " casual " we've had this talk for a long time in the community. The rule writers need to do a much better job but sometimes the players do go hog wild to smash each other in a " casual " setting that is also a problem as they then cry " game broken ! " because they choose to go out of the way to break it.

Some units, and armies are made so over the top OP, that is easy to see, others are relatively balanced with each other unless the players choose to go over the top. Drop pods are one of those things, that isn't a no brainer choice so its awful trash. I just don't think it's awful trash, could be much better and I hope it becomes so as I think its a flavorful choice.

I'm really not sure what some people take such offense to me liking drop pods, or saying some players do abuse the system to abuse each other and then throw all the blame on the designers. They have a lot of blame to handle but not all of it. Is all I am saying.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Allow primaris to use them.

This. It is an iconic marine unit and they don't have access to it (or an equivalent.) They use it in the fluff; the restriction makes no sense.

We get this problem because they want to force people to get new vehicles. No other reasonable cause exists, unless I'm missing something.

I quite like the restriction of vehicles for primaris. It helps make the two units unique. Other vice there are very few reasons not to take them. Primaris rules to point cost just pusheses them through the roof compared to old marines.

Some exceptions are blood claws and grey hunters. Marines in transports. And a few cheap attack bikes (also blood claws) and kittet out jump pack units.

Primaris intersessors have better range, ap, stratagem, more close combat attacks. They can just not ride regular transports. Either increase their points or nerf them somehow (loosing one melee attack would go a long way) and perhaps they could ride regular transports. But for now I clearly see it as a balance justefication. And one that I am quite happy with.

 Niiai wrote:
I quite like the restriction of vehicles for primaris. It helps make the two units unique. Other vice there are very few reasons not to take them. Primaris rules to point cost just pusheses them through the roof compared to old marines.

Some exceptions are blood claws and grey hunters. Marines in transports. And a few cheap attack bikes (also blood claws) and kittet out jump pack units.

Primaris intersessors have better range, ap, stratagem, more close combat attacks. They can just not ride regular transports. Either increase their points or nerf them somehow (loosing one melee attack would go a long way) and perhaps they could ride regular transports. But for now I clearly see it as a balance justefication. And one that I am quite happy with.

Balance is literally not the reason LOL. Have you seen the Impulsor vs the Rhino and Razorback?

That's pure delusional thinking on your end.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists. So many great units that one that offers an ability only available to them and CSM (through fw) still isn't good enough. At least your drop pods didn't have their deployment rules screwed up so that their passengers can't get out on the turn they arrive from deep strike. *grumble grumble *

Dude. CSM has many unique units too. I'm pretty envious of daemon princes and defilers but it's not even about that. It is just the points cost. 70 points is far to much to make a unit deep strike turn 1 and put a frontline bunker into your opponents frontline they can hide in. The issue is points. Kind of like how we both have access to predators but both aren't useable because the points are bad.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists. So many great units that one that offers an ability only available to them and CSM (through fw) still isn't good enough. At least your drop pods didn't have their deployment rules screwed up so that their passengers can't get out on the turn they arrive from deep strike. *grumble grumble *

Dude. CSM has many unique units too. I'm pretty envious of daemon princes and defilers but it's not even about that. It is just the points cost. 70 points is far to much to make a unit deep strike turn 1 and put a frontline bunker into your opponents frontline they can hide in. The issue is points. Kind of like how we both have access to predators but both aren't useable because the points are bad.

I'd like you to compare the unit list in the CSM codex to the unit list in the loyalist one.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists. So many great units that one that offers an ability only available to them and CSM (through fw) still isn't good enough. At least your drop pods didn't have their deployment rules screwed up so that their passengers can't get out on the turn they arrive from deep strike. *grumble grumble *

Dude. CSM has many unique units too. I'm pretty envious of daemon princes and defilers but it's not even about that. It is just the points cost. 70 points is far to much to make a unit deep strike turn 1 and put a frontline bunker into your opponents frontline they can hide in. The issue is points. Kind of like how we both have access to predators but both aren't useable because the points are bad.

Yes, we do, including the two other units in the entire game (unless there's something else I'm unaware of) that can ignore the matched play reserve deployment rules. Deep Strikeing turn one, and ignoring the points limits for reserves, is something only loyalists and CSM can do, and loyalists do it better because gw didn't screw up the wording of your rules. And you're complaining that having an ability only available to one other faction in the game isn't good enough.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Niiai wrote:
I quite like the restriction of vehicles for primaris. It helps make the two units unique. Other vice there are very few reasons not to take them. Primaris rules to point cost just pusheses them through the roof compared to old marines.

Some exceptions are blood claws and grey hunters. Marines in transports. And a few cheap attack bikes (also blood claws) and kittet out jump pack units.

Primaris intersessors have better range, ap, stratagem, more close combat attacks. They can just not ride regular transports. Either increase their points or nerf them somehow (loosing one melee attack would go a long way) and perhaps they could ride regular transports. But for now I clearly see it as a balance justefication. And one that I am quite happy with.

Balance is literally not the reason LOL. Have you seen the Impulsor vs the Rhino and Razorback?

That's pure delusional thinking on your end.

Impulsor can only carry 6 dudes compared to the Rhinos 10, while the Razorback can mount more firepower.

anyone wanna claim over/under on Primaris Drop pods by end of Fiscal year 2021? That also invalidate all sorts of rules and are in need of a day one FAQ?

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists. So many great units that one that offers an ability only available to them and CSM (through fw) still isn't good enough. At least your drop pods didn't have their deployment rules screwed up so that their passengers can't get out on the turn they arrive from deep strike. *grumble grumble *

Dude. CSM has many unique units too. I'm pretty envious of daemon princes and defilers but it's not even about that. It is just the points cost. 70 points is far to much to make a unit deep strike turn 1 and put a frontline bunker into your opponents frontline they can hide in. The issue is points. Kind of like how we both have access to predators but both aren't useable because the points are bad.

I'd like you to compare the unit list in the CSM codex to the unit list in the loyalist one.

That has nothing to do with my point. Bad units are bad even if they are or aren't unique. What you want me to do is shut up and let a bad unit be bad because marines have lots of good units. That is something I can not do. I want all units to be good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists. So many great units that one that offers an ability only available to them and CSM (through fw) still isn't good enough. At least your drop pods didn't have their deployment rules screwed up so that their passengers can't get out on the turn they arrive from deep strike. *grumble grumble *

Dude. CSM has many unique units too. I'm pretty envious of daemon princes and defilers but it's not even about that. It is just the points cost. 70 points is far to much to make a unit deep strike turn 1 and put a frontline bunker into your opponents frontline they can hide in. The issue is points. Kind of like how we both have access to predators but both aren't useable because the points are bad.

Yes, we do, including the two other units in the entire game (unless there's something else I'm unaware of) that can ignore the matched play reserve deployment rules. Deep Strikeing turn one, and ignoring the points limits for reserves, is something only loyalists and CSM can do, and loyalists do it better because gw didn't screw up the wording of your rules. And you're complaining that having an ability only available to one other faction in the game isn't good enough.

My necrons do it for free with 21 models 0 < 70 points. Abilities that allow you to move twice accomplish basically the same thing with higher upside. Your arguement is not very good. Most armies have access to some sort of gimick that gets them up the table really fast turn 1 out of all of these abilties - the drop pod is probably the worst of the bunch because its literally 70 points for the ability an nothing else. A choas sorcerer with warptime for example can deny powers and buff units with prescience all game - compared to shooting a storm bolter once and then turning into a bunker for your opponent it is not even close.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
anyone wanna claim over/under on Primaris Drop pods by end of Fiscal year 2021? That also invalidate all sorts of rules and are in need of a day one FAQ?

What is funny in this case is. I am sure the primaris version will be more expensive and have lots of guns. Which will actually make it a great choice as it will just increase the alpha strike of the unit you put in it. Heopfully though it's not like...extremely overcoated like most primaris vehicles that aren't named redemptor dreadnought.

So how come you aren’t clamoring for improvements to IG?
Or GSC?
Or Khorne Daemons?

Why did you make a thread just for one specific SM unit that has an entirely unique and damn useful ability, but nothing for any of the entire factions that aren’t good?

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists. So many great units that one that offers an ability only available to them and CSM (through fw) still isn't good enough. At least your drop pods didn't have their deployment rules screwed up so that their passengers can't get out on the turn they arrive from deep strike. *grumble grumble *

Dude. CSM has many unique units too. I'm pretty envious of daemon princes and defilers but it's not even about that. It is just the points cost. 70 points is far to much to make a unit deep strike turn 1 and put a frontline bunker into your opponents frontline they can hide in. The issue is points. Kind of like how we both have access to predators but both aren't useable because the points are bad.

I'd like you to compare the unit list in the CSM codex to the unit list in the loyalist one.

That has nothing to do with my point. Bad units are bad even if they are or aren't unique. What you want me to do is shut up and let a bad unit be bad because marines have lots of good units. That is something I can not do. I want all units to be good.

The point being made was CSM Drop Pods are even worse than the loyalist ones you say are so bad. Don't you want all units to be good?