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.

The harlies range is TINY, dude. Loads of Ork kits are really old, and even their plastics are covered with mold slip. Don't even try it, man, the release pattern is stupid, and you can tell how alienated people are getting with the increasing popularity of playing older editions and switching to AOS.

 posermcbogus wrote:
The harlies range is TINY, dude. Loads of Ork kits are really old, and even their plastics are covered with mold slip. Don't even try it, man, the release pattern is stupid, and you can tell how alienated people are getting with the increasing popularity of playing older editions and switching to AOS.

I couldn't care less about how many models a faction has or if they're a little soft on detail due to old molds. My favorite games were grey plastic on grey plastic with tons of proxying so we could try out any army or unit we were interested in.

As for the popularity of older editions, that's just nostalgia. It's a trend right now what with WoW classic and tons of old games releasing with minor updates every month.

 Canadian 5th wrote:


That's fair, but you could literally make up your own using the examples from the content that already exists. Narrative game modes are nice like that. You can't house rule your army into being good in a tournament or PUG setting where you may not be playing with a set group so I place greater value on that.

I take the point about it being more important to update the stuff that can't be homebrewed first; that's legit, and I say that as a crusade nut.

But it is also not as easy to homebrew it as you might think, because there is a real version coming. And when it hits, it invalidates everything you've worked to create. Believe me, I've been agonizing over whether or not to start Crusades for 4 different armies because we don't have our content but, but the edition clock is ticking. It really sucks that the team who gets the last dex will miss out on more than a year worth of growing their army.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

I couldn't care less about how many models a faction has or if they're a little soft on detail due to old molds.

Then why are you out here clogging up a thread about releases with your gak takes my man?

 Canadian 5th wrote:

As for the popularity of older editions, that's just nostalgia. It's a trend right now what with WoW classic and tons of old games releasing with minor updates every month.

Tell yourself that, then.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 posermcbogus wrote:
Then why are you out here clogging up a thread about releases with your gak takes my man?

Why so posters like yourself can have an echo chamber to host your pity party in?

"Hehehehe, I'm in a thread de-railing it because I don't like the idea of people being able to discuss a topic in a forum without also paying attention to me."

 posermcbogus wrote:
"Hehehehe, I'm in a thread de-railing it because I don't like the idea of people being able to discuss a topic in a forum without also paying attention to me."

Did you miss the OP:

"There seems to be some confusion about this idea in the community. Space marines get a little over 1/4 of all releases, and this confuses and angers some people. This must be based on the misconception that there are 3 super factionsl in the game (imperium, chaos, and xenos). But that is blatantly false.

Take a moment and head to the GW store. Check out the Sigmar section first, and notice how the models are divided 4 ways. (order, destruction, chaos, and death). 4 super factions. Now go to 40k. There are also 4 categories laid out in the exact same way. (space marines, imperium, chaos, and xenos). Space marines are not listed under imperium. Do not confuse this with the in game keyword. Space marines are NOT a subfaction of imperium, but a super faction of their own, complete with about as many sub factions as the other super factions.

Space marines gets about as many releases as it should get based on this. This is intentional, and how it has been for literal decades."

The entire thread is about laughing at the QQ brought about by their being 'too many' marine releases.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Yes, and? GW will always have a strong incentive to reset the game every 3 - 5 years because that generates sales. Stop thinking of 40k as a game seeking perfection and start thinking of it as a game seeking bursts of excitement and GWs strategy makes more sense.

They're not really succeeding, then. They had my excitement. At first. They managed to kill that pretty fast. I've got a post somewhere where the Hounds of Morkai - a token, meaningless, noncompetitive release that I think was just repackaged sprues for a Marine faction I don't even particularly dislike - were the straws that finally broke my camel.

I dunno if I characterized my stance on a 10th edition well, but I honestly don't know I'd be sad if they rebooted for 10th even next year. GW realistically wouldn't do it that fast. But I don't know that I'd be sad. 9th has ... issues, probably beyond the scope of this thread.

It feels worse because there are more factions so every non-SM faction gets comparatively fewer releases and because GW isn't trickling out releases these days preferring to drop wholesale army changes all at once. So when you're not getting anything you're really not getting anything and when you are getting something it happens so quickly some players can't enjoy it fully. This doesn't affect everybody equally which is why many of us are fine with the situation and others feel like it's ruining the game.

If the release wave thing is how it's happening then that's definitely fatiguing.

If feels completely plausible that the change in proportional support is among the reasons. Definitely not mutually exclusive with the list above, though - and if the same absolute support is still more proportional support, well, isn't it still possible to call that too much?

That said, it's certainly been argued before - and I would completely agree - that more factions exist now than GW can reasonably support. What can be done about that... well, that's also its own thread, and that one doesn't end prettily.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 posermcbogus wrote:
"Hehehehe, I'm in a thread de-railing it because I don't like the idea of people being able to discuss a topic in a forum without also paying attention to me."

Did you miss the OP:

"There seems to be some confusion about this idea in the community. Space marines get a little over 1/4 of all releases, and this confuses and angers some people. This must be based on the misconception that there are 3 super factionsl in the game (imperium, chaos, and xenos). But that is blatantly false.

Take a moment and head to the GW store. Check out the Sigmar section first, and notice how the models are divided 4 ways. (order, destruction, chaos, and death). 4 super factions. Now go to 40k. There are also 4 categories laid out in the exact same way. (space marines, imperium, chaos, and xenos). Space marines are not listed under imperium. Do not confuse this with the in game keyword. Space marines are NOT a subfaction of imperium, but a super faction of their own, complete with about as many sub factions as the other super factions.

Space marines gets about as many releases as it should get based on this. This is intentional, and how it has been for literal decades."

The entire thread is about laughing at the QQ brought about by their being 'too many' marine releases.

Okay, but I'm not sure, despite OP's short-sightedness, how this makes you talking about rules any more relevant, but okay I guess? Not the first time you've yanked goalpoasts at me in a discussion.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Ok wait, I was with you until the second part of the post.

I agree with the 8.5 SM dex being all kind of OP, but the 9th one is generally regarded as a mild nerf over their previous incarnation.

Also, they are in no way dominating the game competitvely, and have so many trap options that a casual marine list isn't exactly that scary for another casual list. They may have 100+ datasheets but only a really small part of them gets used.

Ok, I'll bite. What loyalist units do you consider to be "trap options"?

Lol, this thread got on a tangent while I wasn't looking.

Anyway, to answer your question, the SM lists don't really spike that much in efficiency until they form some specific patterns and take some units that are vital to them right now.

Take a list like this one:



This is the typical list you could find in the hands of a new player. Focused on the new releases and a lot of rule of cool.
This is an IH list, so it is a bit more vehicle heavy than normal, and includes a tech marine.

Like all new lists, It manages to have all of these at the same time:

1) Cringe inducing choices like the equipment on those sergeants.
2) Choices that make sense until you know better (putting 10 assault intercessors in an impulsor)
3) A reasonably structured part of the list, like the Lt+Cpt combo and the 10 intercessors + 5 inflitrating troops.
4) A part of the list which is actually quite scary, which the player randomly managed to hit, like the 2 redemptors of this example.

Is little Timmy going to lose his games with that list? No, the list works decently well, the SM codex is well made afte all.
Will little Timmy trample the opposition with this list?

Well, let's look at the competition!



This a TS list, a faction which is commonly regarded as very underpowered at the moment.
Here too, you can see some good choices mixed with some terrible ones.

Now, who would win?
These 2 lists are actually fairly matched as far as lists go. 2 averagely experienced players facing each other with these lists, will have a good game.
Now, the SM would probably win the first games, because the SM are much much easier to play. They are designed as the noob faction, so if 2 players without experience were to face each other, then the SM would usually win.
That is not in the scope of this comparison though.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
For a fun laugh compare loyalist dreadnoughts to any of the various xenos 'similar to dreads' units.

You know

Triarch Stalkers
Talos Pain Engines
Deff Dreads
Wraithlords
Carnifexes
Broadsides

The basic MM+CCW dreadnought fething wipes the floor with any of them effortlessly for a suspiciously similar (sometimes less lol Wraithlords...) point cost. But it's a 'trap option' lol...

I notice that you're mostly focusing on armies that have yet to be updated this edition.

You're also doing that thing you like to do in comparing units in a vacuum and ignoring the fact that, for example, Tyranids should be fielding hierodules instead of Fexes right now. Or that a C'Tan or Ghazkul will mince a Dread and ask for seconds.

I listed the equivalent from literally the only non-marine army updated so far this edition so, tbh don't know what you're looking for here buddy For intellectual honesty do you want me to disclaim that helbrutes, in fact, perform identically to dreadnoughts? Or that dark angel dreadnoughts perform identically to dreadnoughts?

Also, yeah, I fething hope Ghazgkhull and a Ctan can mince a dreadnought, it's a 125pt model vs a 350pt model.

Those were the weirdest gotchas I've read on the internet in ages. "I notice you've just listed models that haven't been updated yet, you know, from all the armies except marines and necrons that exist in the game" and "Harlequins can't be overpowered, if you shoot them with a double gatling cannon chaos knight they die really good!"

Its probably fair to say replacing the dreadnought combat weapon for a missile launcher is a trap choice - but that's a reflection of how good the dreadnought combat weapon is and how bad the missile launcher is.

Yes its probably always worth 15 points to make him venerable - but at most you are gaining say 10 points, probably a few less.

All in all when I think of Marines, the trap choices are things like Assault Marines and Reivers. Even in the more assault-focused objective holding game these can easily end up being rubbish - and there are clearly superior options right next to them.

By contrast I feel say Repulsors or the new vehicles are very much like "Timmy" pieces rather than out and out traps. They are too fragile and easy for experienced players to play around. But if two new players face off, and the Marine player is rolling hot, they can do a lot of damage to the opponent's army. Whereas I don't think anyone's ever been annihilated by Reivers.

Scouts too are very trappy, but indeed SM entries are more Timmy than trap, you are right in that.

The problem with SM in 8th was that it was said that you could take random units in a list and it would be a competitive list. Now, that was clearly an hyperbole... but not so far from truth.

In 9th the percentage of the SM dex which can make it onto a table against an experienced opponent, is actually quite scarce.

 harlokin wrote:
I think that the division of factions on the website has more to do with guiding consumers to their chosen poison, than 'the facts on the ground'.

Space Marines are part of the Imperium superfaction, they simply have so many models that it makes sense to give them their own section of the store.

The only other superfactions in the game (as far as I can recall) are Aeldari, Chaos.....and the Hivemind (?)

Xenos is not a superfaction, just a convenient catchall for "the other guys" on the GW website.

Yeah, thats my reasoning as well. Imperium and Xenos don't have the same rules baggage.
Admech, Guard, sisters, Custodes, knights are all also "subfactions" in my mind.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

There is no "Xenos" in the actual game. It mostly exists as a term for people to use to either ask for something, anything other than a space marine, or to claim that because soemthing has been released for anything other than a space marine, people who play a totally unrelated faction should be happy.

Thats what i meant.

 CEO Kasen wrote:


I dunno if I characterized my stance on a 10th edition well, but I honestly don't know I'd be sad if they rebooted for 10th even next year. GW realistically wouldn't do it that fast. But I don't know that I'd be sad. 9th has ... issues, probably beyond the scope of this thread.

You may feel there are enough problems with the game that you think you want a 10th. Within the context of this thread though, everyone who is frustrated feels that way because of an addition reset. You see, an edition reset is always the first float in a marine parade. The only way that marine parade can end is if the edition lasts more than 5 years.

If 10th comes, it will be wall to wall space marines for a minimum of six months before we even get to talk about anyone else, except for the one adversary lucky enough to get picked to round out the other half of the box.

Any mechanics are always better fixed by things like CA or FAQ's because they tend to not lead to a marine parade.

PenitentJake wrote:

 CEO Kasen wrote:


I dunno if I characterized my stance on a 10th edition well, but I honestly don't know I'd be sad if they rebooted for 10th even next year. GW realistically wouldn't do it that fast. But I don't know that I'd be sad. 9th has ... issues, probably beyond the scope of this thread.

You may feel there are enough problems with the game that you think you want a 10th. Within the context of this thread though, everyone who is frustrated feels that way because of an addition reset. You see, an edition reset is always the first float in a marine parade. The only way that marine parade can end is if the edition lasts more than 5 years.

If 10th comes, it will be wall to wall space marines for a minimum of six months before we even get to talk about anyone else, except for the one adversary lucky enough to get picked to round out the other half of the box.

Any mechanics are always better fixed by things like CA or FAQ's because they tend to not lead to a marine parade.

Yeah, like in 8th edition when the edition got old enough GW didn't put out a whole gak ton of space marines.

Oh wait, no, they did that anyway because aint no brakes on the marine train baby.

The edition also didn't last five years.

Really though, you are probably right- even if it had, we'd still be spammed.

PenitentJake wrote:
The edition also didn't last five years.

Really though, you are probably right- even if it had, we'd still be spammed.

At this stage i kinda expect when GW releases a faction update for non marines that marines nonchalantly will get more kits at the same time.

Spoletta 796430 11064386 wrote:[This is the typical list you could find in the hands of a new player. Focused on the new releases and a lot of rule of cool.
This is an IH list, so it is a bit more vehicle heavy than normal, and includes a tech marine.

That is some might inefficient, money wise, units this new players have bought. Ton of singles, vehicles etc.

There is more chance to see new player marines armies being build out of something like 2 patrol boxs and something, or DI halfs back in the past. And I assume in places where you can actualy buy indomitus in stores, people use those models a lot.

Yeah, like in 8th edition when the edition got old enough GW didn't put out a whole gak ton of space marines

How to you update the whole space marine model line, without upseting all the older model users and buyers, without doing it bit by bit? Specially now that GW seems to be in a mind set where a load out requires to be a box of its own.

 CEO Kasen wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Yes, and? GW will always have a strong incentive to reset the game every 3 - 5 years because that generates sales. Stop thinking of 40k as a game seeking perfection and start thinking of it as a game seeking bursts of excitement and GWs strategy makes more sense.

They're not really succeeding, then. They had my excitement. At first. They managed to kill that pretty fast. I've got a post somewhere where the Hounds of Morkai - a token, meaningless, noncompetitive release that I think was just repackaged sprues for a Marine faction I don't even particularly dislike - were the straws that finally broke my camel.

Your camel broke because we SW players got a non-competitive release? And that's killed your enthusiasm for the game/edition?
Um, that's weird, but ok....

But, assuming you aren't a SW player, WhyTF do you care?

1) Most people get upset about new units that are:
Non-competitive in forces they play.
Competitive in armies they play against. "Oh no, x will break the game/I must take this unit into account when I build my lists" - things that'll never be said of the Hounds.....
What might eventually be said? "Oh cool, The Hounds of Morkai. I've never seen anyone use those before."


2) Is it that overall another SM unit has been released? If that's the case, are you aware that GW tends to release something related for each force alongside their book? In this case the kind of "meh" Hounds were one of the SW releases. So it's not like it was ever going to be something not SM/SW related. No Eldar were harmed here. If you aren't a SW player then you weren't going to be spending $ that week anyways on the new release....

3) GW often makes additional non-competitive/competitive neutral units. They've been doing it for many years & across all editions of WHFB, 40k, & AoS. So we SW players got one this time, to the rest of you, so what?

They tend to release something related to the force....... except when they don't and the book just comes out.

 BlackoCatto wrote:
They tend to release something related to the force....... except when they don't and the book just comes out.

Yes, that's how tendencies work.

ccs wrote:

 BlackoCatto wrote:
They tend to release something related to the force....... except when they don't and the book just comes out.

Yes, that's how tendencies work.

Less a tendency and more 3/4ths of all armies in game just get a book and overpriced confusing dice.

ccs wrote:

 CEO Kasen wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Yes, and? GW will always have a strong incentive to reset the game every 3 - 5 years because that generates sales. Stop thinking of 40k as a game seeking perfection and start thinking of it as a game seeking bursts of excitement and GWs strategy makes more sense.

They're not really succeeding, then. They had my excitement. At first. They managed to kill that pretty fast. I've got a post somewhere where the Hounds of Morkai - a token, meaningless, noncompetitive release that I think was just repackaged sprues for a Marine faction I don't even particularly dislike - were the straws that finally broke my camel.

Your camel broke because we SW players got a non-competitive release? And that's killed your enthusiasm for the game/edition?
Um, that's weird, but ok....

But, assuming you aren't a SW player, WhyTF do you care?

1) Most people get upset about new units that are:
Non-competitive in forces they play.
Competitive in armies they play against. "Oh no, x will break the game/I must take this unit into account when I build my lists" - things that'll never be said of the Hounds.....
What might eventually be said? "Oh cool, The Hounds of Morkai. I've never seen anyone use those before."


2) Is it that overall another SM unit has been released? If that's the case, are you aware that GW tends to release something related for each force alongside their book? In this case the kind of "meh" Hounds were one of the SW releases. So it's not like it was ever going to be something not SM/SW related. No Eldar were harmed here. If you aren't a SW player then you weren't going to be spending $ that week anyways on the new release....

3) GW often makes additional non-competitive/competitive neutral units. They've been doing it for many years & across all editions of WHFB, 40k, & AoS. So we SW players got one this time, to the rest of you, so what?

Honestly, dunno. I really wish they'd do that MORE OFTEN with MORE ARMIES - but otherwise it doesn't annoy me.

I really don't know why GW doesn't make "Veteran Intercessors" and "HQ on *easily available GW item, brainless kitbash*" and "hounds of Morkai (just an existing unit with the space wolf upgrade heads)" for every army.

Accompany them with an 'official picture' of what the model is supposed to look like when kitbashed, and I just...do not understand how that's not exactly as legally defensible/copyright valid as, for example, a 30-strong unit of ork boyz.

GW doesn't sell a kit of 30 ork boyz miniatures, you have to take the miniatures from 3 boyz boxes, set 2 of them aside, and put them together to make that unit.

IN WHAT WAY is that legally distinct from telling me "You can give a Big Mek a Warbike" and showing me a picture of a warbike from the warbiker kit, with the mek head and KFF bit from the Meganobz kit right there on the page?

I feel like I am beating my head against a wall here, but it seems like these discussions boil down to (apart from the troll posts, which we should all ignore)
- GW does something that is not very customer friendly
- But that thing is good for GW's bottom line.

And like, you guys come in to explain it to us every time like "Yeah but GW are doing that to make money!"
We KNOW. We know they are doing it because it is profitable.
You don't have to like stuff that is profitable.

Personally, I have calmed down completely on this score. I don't care what GW release and I'm happy just getting minis I want for the projects I am working on. No worries. But I am capable of empathy with people who are frustrated because they are not in my position.

 CEO Kasen wrote:
They're not really succeeding, then. They had my excitement. At first. They managed to kill that pretty fast. I've got a post somewhere where the Hounds of Morkai - a token, meaningless, noncompetitive release that I think was just repackaged sprues for a Marine faction I don't even particularly dislike - were the straws that finally broke my camel.

Then you're not GWs current target audience. Even then, I'd be willing to bet you'll at least spend (or have already spent) money on your new rules so GW will get money from you either way.

If the release wave thing is how it's happening then that's definitely fatiguing.

What fatigues you excites others.

If feels completely plausible that the change in proportional support is among the reasons. Definitely not mutually exclusive with the list above, though - and if the same absolute support is still more proportional support, well, isn't it still possible to call that too much?

SM might be under-served in terms of support if it's actually true that they make up >33% of the player base.

the_scotsman wrote:
I listed the equivalent from literally the only non-marine army updated so far this edition so, tbh don't know what you're looking for here buddy

You ignored that units don't stand in a vacuum. Yes, some of those units are just bad, but most of them are fine in the context of their army.

Also, yeah, I fething hope Ghazgkhull and a Ctan can mince a dreadnought, it's a 125pt model vs a 350pt model.

You should probably compare models that armies actually take against one another, rather than trying to prove that Dreads are OP just because a list mainly comprised of units that haven't been updated for 9th are underpowered in a vacuum.

Mainly, I'm not trying to prove dreads are OP. Mainly I'm just pointing out that, once again, marine players have a thing that's better than everybody else's thing and they're still bitching and moaning that it's a 'trap unit.'

it's like that drop pod thread from earlier. "Waaaah, my unit with a super special ability that literally no other unit in the entire fething game gets to have isn't undercosted enough to get used often in competitive play (though it does turn up in some lists), I demand a buff! I demand additional design team attention! Plenty of factions are still playing with basically index rules but this unit that's had 3 redesigns in the past two years still isn't good enough for me!"

There's still a lot of denial going on here. I'm not stating how it should be, but merely what is. We are not playing the perfect version of 40k that exists in your head.

It is clearly GW's intention to have the number of releases, rules support, and representation in the player base to be roughly 1/4. This means Space marines intentionally get as much "stuff" as all xenos armies combined for example.

It doesn't matter if you think that's how it should or shouldn't be. I'm stating how it is. Arguing against it, is a lot like arguing that 40k shouldn't be a dice game, or shouldn't be set in the future.

the_scotsman wrote:
Mainly, I'm not trying to prove dreads are OP. Mainly I'm just pointing out that, once again, marine players have a thing that's better than everybody else's thing and they're still bitching and moaning that it's a 'trap unit.'

*looks at who the_scotsman is arguing with*

...marine players?

I think the best thing out of all of this Space Marine Mania is that I finally caved in and got myself a force in Star Wars Legion.

I am actually quite optimistic about the Space Marine Mania as it will push away non-Marine players and maybe into other games that deserve more attention. So you never know, this might end up being healthy for the hobby in the long run. The last time GW did the stupid we had some strong contenders coming from various corners of the globe, and now with 3D printing and more it is much easier for new entries into the wargaming hobby.

Spoletta wrote:
Scouts too are very trappy, but indeed SM entries are more Timmy than trap, you are right in that.

The problem with SM in 8th was that it was said that you could take random units in a list and it would be a competitive list. Now, that was clearly an hyperbole... but not so far from truth.

In 9th the percentage of the SM dex which can make it onto a table against an experienced opponent, is actually quite scarce.

Thing is, these are only "trap" choices because of how many good units marines have access to.

Once you place them in another codex it's different. Reivers, if placed in the Ork codex, would basically be mega-armored kommando nobz with superior movement. They'd be an incredibly potent and versatile unit which had a combination of durability, movement, deployment shenanigans, and damage output. Even Assault Marines would be solid in other codex's.

Which is the entire point. While other armies are having their options slashed, receiving no releases, and being given plenty of gimp stuff... Marines have multiple squads which all accomplish the same thing, with the worst of them merely being "bad by marine standards," which still puts them head-and-shoulders above what other armies have access to.