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.

You could build a very "your dudes" unit of Chosen even back when MEQ only had 3 melee weapon profiles.

In fact, let's not even pretend this is about "your dudes" it's about min maxing.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
You could build a very "your dudes" unit of Chosen even back when MEQ only had 3 melee weapon profiles.

In fact, let's not even pretend this is about "your dudes" it's about min maxing.

And what's wrong with that?

I've noticed this in wargaming discourse, that min-maxing is some kind of bad thing.

Why are people not allowed to min-max? Why is that illegitimate? Why is the choice either causal-at-all-costs nightmareville, in which you have these cripple units with mixed weapon options that do nothing, or 'min maxing' - i.e., having an actually functional unit.

drbored wrote:
The solution that people want, just so that it can be said and on the record is this:

Give us a box with enough options to kit out the squad in interesting and varied ways.

ie, a Chosen box should have enough weapons to give them all chainswords and bolt pistols or bolters, to start.

There should be at least enough of 1 or 2 special weapons to kit the entire squad of 5 (ie, 5 power fists or 5 power swords) and a handful of special weapons that can be given to the champion (lightning claws, power axe, power maul).

It would be a whole extra sprue, add another 30 dollars to the kit, and make the 3rd party bits market swell, but it would be what people want, or closer to it than we currently have.

I don't think that we can assume that level of pricing sanity from gw. For example: Havocs are on 3 sprues and cost $55, Sword Brethren are on 3 sprues and cost $55, SoB Dominions are on three sprues and cost $60. This kit is on 2 sprues, and if you don't think it will be similarly priced, I have a bridge to sell you. Gw pricing has more to do with battlefield role than sprue count. They could have absolutely included another sprue without jacking the price into the stratosphere.

That said, I'm warming to these rules. It opens up modeling opportunities without worrying about in game effectiveness. It doesn't hurt that this profile is close to lightning claws in most cases, which is what I generally like on my Chosen because "Night Lords" . It does bother me though that they'll probably add stratagems to make them be "power fists for a turn" and the like, because there's already way way too many strategems in the game already. It also bothers me that with only 3 base attacks and no invul, Chosen will not be able to beat Bladeguard in a straight fight. And that just feels wrong.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
You could build a very "your dudes" unit of Chosen even back when MEQ only had 3 melee weapon profiles.

In fact, let's not even pretend this is about "your dudes" it's about min maxing.

But weapons are not only about what they look like but also how they "feel" like through their effect on the game. Like I had in my head that my raptors with the melta were those who had the higher pain threshold as they bared the searing heat leaking from the tired old weapon. And so on. Have it removed from the "crunch" of the game and only bound to the look of the weapon and it's lore makes it feels... distant ? Accessory ? Like they might as well be nondescript brutal melee weapons.

 Crimson wrote:

I'd do chainfists as power fists which have some special effect against vehicles, so you'd need to roll them separately only when fighting vehicles.

Am I the only one who actually enjoy rolling buttloads of dices ?

I'm trying to figure out why the chaos chosen they painted for "How to Paint" youtube video was built with a helmetless head but they painted it like it was a helmet? I'm pretty sure he's only got the lower part of a helmet, and everything beyond that's meant to be skin. Maybe he's a traitor Salamander?

 blood reaper wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
You could build a very "your dudes" unit of Chosen even back when MEQ only had 3 melee weapon profiles.

In fact, let's not even pretend this is about "your dudes" it's about min maxing.

And what's wrong with that?

I've noticed this in wargaming discourse, that min-maxing is some kind of bad thing.

Why are people not allowed to min-max? Why is that illegitimate? Why is the choice either causal-at-all-costs nightmareville, in which you have these cripple units with mixed weapon options that do nothing, or 'min maxing' - i.e., having an actually functional unit.

Because there shouldn't be a "best" or "wrong" way to build a unit. Min-max is a symptom of woeful balance a lot of the time. If there was no obvious best loadout before hitting diminishing returns, because it was balanced, min-maxing would go away to a large degree.

Yea if the only way your unit of ultra individualistic champions works is by having all dual wielding double combi plasmas or whatever the skew list of the month is, there's for sure a problem somewhere.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
In fact, let's not even pretend this is about "your dudes" it's about min maxing.

Not for me it ain't.

I want the game to have choices. I want my models to mean something. I don't want generic options.

Dudeface wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
You could build a very "your dudes" unit of Chosen even back when MEQ only had 3 melee weapon profiles.

In fact, let's not even pretend this is about "your dudes" it's about min maxing.

And what's wrong with that?

I've noticed this in wargaming discourse, that min-maxing is some kind of bad thing.

Why are people not allowed to min-max? Why is that illegitimate? Why is the choice either causal-at-all-costs nightmareville, in which you have these cripple units with mixed weapon options that do nothing, or 'min maxing' - i.e., having an actually functional unit.

Because there shouldn't be a "best" or "wrong" way to build a unit.

I agree to an extent. GW has no interest in fixing this, however.

Instead, you can't have a squad of five people armed with melta guns. They have to be a cripple unit that can notionally fight five different kinds of enemies, but they can't actually fight any of them, because a diluted selection of weaponry stops them from being able to apply force concentration meaningfully.

Min-max is a symptom of woeful balance a lot of the time. If there was no obvious best loadout before hitting diminishing returns, because it was balanced, min-maxing would go away to a large degree.

Min-maxing is also a symptom of a concept in real life called force concentration.

It really doesn't matter how well balanced something is; by virtue of how most statistics work, maximising one of a certain weapon tends to be the best way to go - in practically any game. It has been like this since 3rd edition.

So now most of my army is illegal, because I made this choice to concentrate weapon options, but for someone, somewhere it is balanced - maybe. It's cool that people argue for customisation until it starts to allow people to win - at that point it becomes an issue.

lord_blackfang wrote:Yea if the only way your unit of ultra individualistic champions works is by having all dual wielding double combi plasmas or whatever the skew list of the month is, there's for sure a problem somewhere.

Yeah my unit of ultra effective fighters instead should all have different weapons, making them a cripple unit that can do nothing. But at least some CAAC-esque players online, for who the concept of winning the game is pure anathema, can feel it matches their idea of the 'lore'.

One thing that kills me about these rumors is that somehow, I've built almost entirely invalid Chosen so far?


Built from CSM Kit. The plasma gun toting ones just in general are not valid any more. I think I have 3 valid dudemans out of this batch (combi-plasma/accursed weapon) but giving some bolt pistols was a huge error

Combi-plasma/Accursed Weapon
combi-plasma/AW?(small knife)
plasma
plasma
combi-plasma/AW?(small knife)
combi-plasma
bolt pistol/AW/combi-plasma
bolt pistol/AW/Combi-plasma

From Dark Vengeance(!!!? the bolt pistol on every model makes them illegal because you have to trade the boltgun that every model also has to get it?)

bolt pistol/AW/boltgun
bolt pistol/AW/boltgun
bolt pistol/AW/boltgun
bolt pistol/boltgun
bolt pistol/boltgun

Rihgu wrote:
One thing that kills me about these rumors is that somehow, I've built almost entirely invalid Chosen so far?


Built from CSM Kit. The plasma gun toting ones just in general are not valid any more. I think I have 3 valid dudemans out of this batch (combi-plasma/accursed weapon) but giving some bolt pistols was a huge error

Combi-plasma/Accursed Weapon
combi-plasma/AW?(small knife)
plasma
plasma
combi-plasma/AW?(small knife)
combi-plasma
bolt pistol/AW/combi-plasma
bolt pistol/AW/Combi-plasma

From Dark Vengeance(!!!? the bolt pistol on every model makes them illegal because you have to trade the boltgun that every model also has to get it?)

bolt pistol/AW/boltgun
bolt pistol/AW/boltgun
bolt pistol/AW/boltgun
bolt pistol/boltgun
bolt pistol/boltgun

But now you can buy new models to make up for it! You should've known not to minmax!

Honestly I didn't even build these models for years because it felt wrong to build so many samey loadouts for Chosen. Then my friend wanted to play a tournament prep game IRL so I had to throw together some models against my better judgement.

Now that Chosen have a set of rules I feel comfortable building them by... nooooo!

(I'm probably fine using the plasma gunners in CSM squads and distributing the combi-plasma's among 3 units of otherwise properly loaded-out Chosen, and ignoring the bolt pistols on all of them. It's not like anybody has ever used bolt pistols on Chosen in the history of the game)

 blood reaper wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
You could build a very "your dudes" unit of Chosen even back when MEQ only had 3 melee weapon profiles.

In fact, let's not even pretend this is about "your dudes" it's about min maxing.

And what's wrong with that?

I've noticed this in wargaming discourse, that min-maxing is some kind of bad thing.

Why are people not allowed to min-max? Why is that illegitimate? Why is the choice either causal-at-all-costs nightmareville, in which you have these cripple units with mixed weapon options that do nothing, or 'min maxing' - i.e., having an actually functional unit.

Because there shouldn't be a "best" or "wrong" way to build a unit.

I agree to an extent. GW has no interest in fixing this, however.

Instead, you can't have a squad of five people armed with melta guns. They have to be a cripple unit that can notionally fight five different kinds of enemies, but they can't actually fight any of them, because a diluted selection of weaponry stops them from being able to apply force concentration meaningfully.

Min-max is a symptom of woeful balance a lot of the time. If there was no obvious best loadout before hitting diminishing returns, because it was balanced, min-maxing would go away to a large degree.

Min-maxing is also a symptom of a concept in real life called force concentration.

It really doesn't matter how well balanced something is; by virtue of how most statistics work, maximising one of a certain weapon tends to be the best way to go - in practically any game. It has been like this since 3rd edition.

So now most of my army is illegal, because I made this choice to concentrate weapon options, but for someone, somewhere it is balanced - maybe. It's cool that people argue for customisation until it starts to allow people to win - at that point it becomes an issue.

lord_blackfang wrote:Yea if the only way your unit of ultra individualistic champions works is by having all dual wielding double combi plasmas or whatever the skew list of the month is, there's for sure a problem somewhere.

Yeah my unit of ultra effective fighters instead should all have different weapons, making them a cripple unit that can do nothing. But at least some CAAC-esque players online, for who the concept of winning the game is pure anathema, can feel it matches their idea of the 'lore'.

Nope I'm sorry, there's nothing "better" about having to buy and convert precisely X number of models with the most point efficient loadout for a precise damage profile. Wanting a unit to work well regardless how it looks isn't CAAC.

I'm curious why all the veterans in your army, magically carry the exact same loadout with 0 personal preference. "Welcome to the Blood Reapers, here we only craft combi plasmas and powerfists!"

Rihgu wrote:
One thing that kills me about these rumors is that somehow, I've built almost entirely invalid Chosen so far?


Built from CSM Kit. The plasma gun toting ones just in general are not valid any more. I think I have 3 valid dudemans out of this batch (combi-plasma/accursed weapon) but giving some bolt pistols was a huge error

Combi-plasma/Accursed Weapon
combi-plasma/AW?(small knife)
plasma
plasma
combi-plasma/AW?(small knife)
combi-plasma
bolt pistol/AW/combi-plasma
bolt pistol/AW/Combi-plasma

From Dark Vengeance(!!!? the bolt pistol on every model makes them illegal because you have to trade the boltgun that every model also has to get it?)

bolt pistol/AW/boltgun
bolt pistol/AW/boltgun
bolt pistol/AW/boltgun
bolt pistol/boltgun
bolt pistol/boltgun

I'm wondering if the "trade up to 2 bolters for pistols" bit is an error in the game of "telephone" that's happening between the actual leaker and the poster on B&C that's actually telling us this stuff. Most of the models have pistol holsters on them, and why would anyone trade a boltgun for a bolt pistol? I'm thinking it might actually be "trade 2 bolters for 2 plasma pistols". That would make more sense. Remember, they've already gotten some stuff wrong. Originally everything got a trait, now Cultists don't, I wouldn't be surprised to see that extended to daemon engines to match Death Guard. As for the plasma guns, anyone that doesn't let you "counts as" them as combi-plasma is an .

Dudeface wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
You could build a very "your dudes" unit of Chosen even back when MEQ only had 3 melee weapon profiles.

In fact, let's not even pretend this is about "your dudes" it's about min maxing.

And what's wrong with that?

I've noticed this in wargaming discourse, that min-maxing is some kind of bad thing.

Why are people not allowed to min-max? Why is that illegitimate? Why is the choice either causal-at-all-costs nightmareville, in which you have these cripple units with mixed weapon options that do nothing, or 'min maxing' - i.e., having an actually functional unit.

Because there shouldn't be a "best" or "wrong" way to build a unit.

I agree to an extent. GW has no interest in fixing this, however.

Instead, you can't have a squad of five people armed with melta guns. They have to be a cripple unit that can notionally fight five different kinds of enemies, but they can't actually fight any of them, because a diluted selection of weaponry stops them from being able to apply force concentration meaningfully.

Min-max is a symptom of woeful balance a lot of the time. If there was no obvious best loadout before hitting diminishing returns, because it was balanced, min-maxing would go away to a large degree.

Min-maxing is also a symptom of a concept in real life called force concentration.

It really doesn't matter how well balanced something is; by virtue of how most statistics work, maximising one of a certain weapon tends to be the best way to go - in practically any game. It has been like this since 3rd edition.

So now most of my army is illegal, because I made this choice to concentrate weapon options, but for someone, somewhere it is balanced - maybe. It's cool that people argue for customisation until it starts to allow people to win - at that point it becomes an issue.

lord_blackfang wrote:Yea if the only way your unit of ultra individualistic champions works is by having all dual wielding double combi plasmas or whatever the skew list of the month is, there's for sure a problem somewhere.

Yeah my unit of ultra effective fighters instead should all have different weapons, making them a cripple unit that can do nothing. But at least some CAAC-esque players online, for who the concept of winning the game is pure anathema, can feel it matches their idea of the 'lore'.

Nope I'm sorry, there's nothing "better" about having to buy and convert precisely X number of models with the most point efficient loadout for a precise damage profile. Wanting a unit to work well regardless how it looks isn't CAAC.

I'm curious why all the veterans in your army, magically carry the exact same loadout with 0 personal preference. "Welcome to the Blood Reapers, here we only craft combi plasmas and powerfists!"

Then maybe GW should sell other weapon options, or perhaps even include them all in the box.

I agree - but I don't see why that should restrict the choice of people who want to concentrate weapons.

Because it's by far the most effective build to concentrate weapons. Usually either plasma guns or combi bolters do a good job (power fists and close quarters is a bit of a waste of time).

Interesting that effort converting miniatures doesn't matter if they don't meet a certain nebulous idea of the lore. What does the personal preference of plastic figures matter? Are you telling me Alpha Legion, with their doctrine of 'everyone looks the same and dresses to avoid drawing attention' would have unique weapon load outs for every member?

Casuals live in this ridiculous world where everything is subject to the lore; unless the lore disagrees with them (because it's incredibly nebulous). Every Chosen is an individual! Individual to the point of being a cripple unit.

It's simply impossible to balance 'every load out should be effective'. Even in games a lot more balanced than 40k, like Bolt Action, mixing weapon ranges is a plea for death.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
And as a brief question; what if you had it that your Chaos Space Marines were well organised renegades who followed in fairly classic legion traditions of concentrating weapons.

I guess that doesn't count? It doesn't fit a nebulous understanding of the lore.

Instead, you have to be an individual, and join the other individuals who have to have a specific weapon option. Chosen are so individual that only one in five Chosen ever has lightning claws. Two other dudes have chainswords (they aren't the individuals in the unit), but two others guys can have unique weapons. They're the real individuals.

 blood reaper wrote:

I agree - but I don't see why that should restrict the choice of people who want to concentrate weapons.

Because it's by far the most effective build to concentrate weapons. Usually either plasma guns or combi bolters do a good job (power fists and close quarters is a bit of a waste of time).

And allowing ridiculous concentrations of firepower was one of the main stepping stones of the gameplay dumbification of 40k.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

I agree - but I don't see why that should restrict the choice of people who want to concentrate weapons.

Because it's by far the most effective build to concentrate weapons. Usually either plasma guns or combi bolters do a good job (power fists and close quarters is a bit of a waste of time).

And allowing ridiculous concentrations of firepower was one of the main stepping stones of the gameplay dumbification of 40k.

Fire power concentration is going to exist in any game where more than a single model has a ranged attack.

 blood reaper wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

I agree - but I don't see why that should restrict the choice of people who want to concentrate weapons.

Because it's by far the most effective build to concentrate weapons. Usually either plasma guns or combi bolters do a good job (power fists and close quarters is a bit of a waste of time).

And allowing ridiculous concentrations of firepower was one of the main stepping stones of the gameplay dumbification of 40k.

Fire power concentration is going to exist in any game where more than a single model has a ranged attack.

You're thinking concentration of bullets, I mean concentration of guns. Smart games don't allow whole squads of identical hyperspecialized ultraeffective weapons that leave zero room for tactics other than choosing the squishiest target. I promise you there was more game in 40k when you had units of 8 bolters, 1 plasma and 1 lascannon.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

I agree - but I don't see why that should restrict the choice of people who want to concentrate weapons.

Because it's by far the most effective build to concentrate weapons. Usually either plasma guns or combi bolters do a good job (power fists and close quarters is a bit of a waste of time).

And allowing ridiculous concentrations of firepower was one of the main stepping stones of the gameplay dumbification of 40k.

Fire power concentration is going to exist in any game where more than a single model has a ranged attack.

You're thinking concentration of bullets, I mean concentration of guns. Smart games don't allow whole squads of identical hyperspecialized ultraeffective weapons that leave zero room for tactics other than choosing the squishiest target. I promise you there was more game in 40k when you had units of 8 bolters, 1 plasma and 1 lascannon.

What 'tactics' are there to mixed weapons? It's interesting that people try to act like specialised units should be more effective on some tactical merit, but 40k is neither at the scale or complexity to allow for that.

And no one in warfare has EVER concentrated specific kinds of weapons! We don't have long periods of history in which certain firearms were concentrated in elite units for the specific purpose of achieving certain objectives.

How is bringing multiple melta guns to blow up tanks not a legitimate strategy? How is it less tactical? How is bringing multiple plasma guns to destroy a terminator unit not a tactical approach? Why is a mixed selection of weapons tactical?

There is this fantasy in the heads of certain people that unless you leap through several hoops and have some kind of specialised approach towards something, you didn't really achieve that goal. Ambushing an enemy unit with a mass of anti-tank weapons isn't legitimate; you have to fight him with three different units, most of whom can't harm him.

I remember playing with one las cannon and one plasma gun. It fething sucked. The units were worthless. They contributed nothing to the game. They were not more tactical - except in that you desperately had to figure out the best way for them to do more than just sit on an objective.

Causals live in a fantasy realm where games should revolve around specific conceptions of fluff.

 blood reaper wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:

I agree - but I don't see why that should restrict the choice of people who want to concentrate weapons.

Because it's by far the most effective build to concentrate weapons. Usually either plasma guns or combi bolters do a good job (power fists and close quarters is a bit of a waste of time).

And allowing ridiculous concentrations of firepower was one of the main stepping stones of the gameplay dumbification of 40k.

Fire power concentration is going to exist in any game where more than a single model has a ranged attack.

You're thinking concentration of bullets, I mean concentration of guns. Smart games don't allow whole squads of identical hyperspecialized ultraeffective weapons that leave zero room for tactics other than choosing the squishiest target. I promise you there was more game in 40k when you had units of 8 bolters, 1 plasma and 1 lascannon.

What 'tactics' are there to mixed weapons? It's interesting that people try to act like specialised units should be more effective on some tactical merit, but 40k is neither at the scale or complexity to allow for that.

And no one in warfare has EVER concentrated [url=https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/world-war-2/images/d/da/StG_44-8.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120706194132]specific kinds of weapons!
[/url]
How is bringing multiple melta guns to blow up tanks not a legitimate strategy? How is bringing multiple plasma guns to destroy a terminator unit not a tactical approach? Why is a mixed selection of weapons tactical?

Causals live in a fantasy realm where games should revolve around specific conceptions of fluff.

And since you like to tag people as "casuals", what fun label do you associate with yourself?

The vast bulk of people in this hobby aren't sweaty cheese mongering tournament dwellers, they're casual. They play... casually.

I would describe myself as semi competitive.

My primary interest in the game is playing it as a game. I enjoy the lore and universe, but the lore is nebulous, and pretty much 99.99% of people don't know what the feth they're talking about when it comes to it. A majority of people understand 40k based on memes and gak, and then try to judge how the game runs on that stuff (like a game of Chinese Whispers).

But I don't go to tournaments, and I exclusively play with my friends.

My interest when it comes to games is to build the most effective fighting force possible, while still having it try to make sense on some level (i.e., no Khorne Bezerkers in my Emperor's Children army). I don't buy units that don't interest me (I don't really like the Discolord, for example, and I don't feel that having three of them would ever really be cool). I also don't chase the 'new hot thing', because t now I have 2,000pts of models, I don't like to have to keep updating my collection.

I believe certain things are important; I would rather people's models not become invalid (under any circumstances). I am against any miniature ceasing to be usable, and I am a proud absolutist in this regard. I would rather conversions and custom stuff remain a key part of the game. It annoys me that these things are curtailed, when they negatively impact all groups of players.

New leaks from the B&C poster:

Accursed Weapons are for Chosen and Terminators only. Additionally: power fists and chainfists are NOT Accursed Weapons, and retain their individual rules.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
New leaks from the B&C poster:

Accursed Weapons are for Chosen and Terminators only. Additionally: power fists and chainfists are NOT Accursed Weapons, and retain their individual rules.

Folding chain axes and power swords and such into one profile makes some sense imo because as far as I could tell, chain axes had lost any uniqueness after the changes to power swords, and weren't much different from chain swords either.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
New leaks from the B&C poster:

Accursed Weapons are for Chosen and Terminators only. Additionally: power fists and chainfists are NOT Accursed Weapons, and retain their individual rules.

This is making my brain hurt. I feel like that Datasheet is going to be a nightmare. I'mg oing to assume Lightning Claws are also not accursed?

 Sasori wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
New leaks from the B&C poster:

Accursed Weapons are for Chosen and Terminators only. Additionally: power fists and chainfists are NOT Accursed Weapons, and retain their individual rules.

This is making my brain hurt. I feel like that Datasheet is going to be a nightmare. I'mg oing to assume Lightning Claws are also not accursed?

I don't see why the datasheet is going to be a nightmare. Folding chainaxes, chainswords and their power weapons equivalent into a single profile can only translate into a less nightmarish datasheet because there will be less options.

 Sasori wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
New leaks from the B&C poster:

Accursed Weapons are for Chosen and Terminators only. Additionally: power fists and chainfists are NOT Accursed Weapons, and retain their individual rules.

This is making my brain hurt. I feel like that Datasheet is going to be a nightmare. I'mg oing to assume Lightning Claws are also not accursed?

Powerfist / claws are probably for the unit champion only looking at the sprue quantities. Then all the all various weapon types (chain weapons, sword, axe, etc) fall under the same profile.

The vast bulk of people in this hobby aren't sweaty cheese mongering tournament dwellers, they're casual. They play... casually.

I play casual all the time and even I hate this proliferation of options that make you feel like you are throwing wet noodles at an enemy. It's why I'd rather pick consolidation of profiles and give me freedom to do whatever I want when modeling my heroes than sit an edition out because GW decided that the profile I picked is the worst one.

Trap unit/weapon options just create feel bad moments for everyone, regardless of whether they are casuals or competitive.

I do however think that going forward ranged weapons will keep all their distinctiveness so anyone afraid of plasma and melta becoming the same can probably relax. I think consolidation is much more likely to happen with melee weapons as it appears to be a rising pattern in GW game development. Especially since many melee weapons have weird availability depending on box and edition and is a part of a phase that has return actions. Ie. it can easily be the slowest phase in the game if every model has bespoke melee weaponry.

Dudeface wrote:
I'm curious why all the veterans in your army, magically carry the exact same loadout with 0 personal preference. "Welcome to the Blood Reapers, here we only craft combi plasmas and powerfists!"

I can just see the scene. A few Blood Reapers are standing around waiting for the next raid. Sgt. Ralph comes in with a new recruit. "Alright son let's get you equipped so you can go out on the next raid."
"Thanks Sarge. What do I need?"
"Well you get this wonderful bolt pistol and chain sword combo. It's been a favorite for years."
"Wow! Thanks again Sarge. By the way what's the next raid going to be against?"
"I'm pretty sure I heard the Captain say something about some lousy bug ship that's getting to close to our turf."
"Gee Sarge, I'm not sure that I want to go toe to claw with some tyranids. Can I have a heavy bolter like that guy over there?"
"Sorry son. we're all individualist here. Fred already has a heavy weapon. Charlie over there has a special weapon. I have a plasma pistol and power axe. So I'm afraid you'll have to make do."

Now that's CAAC.

How to spot WAACers, they say they're not WAAC but blame "CAAC" for all their problems

 blood reaper wrote:
Interesting that effort converting miniatures doesn't matter if they don't meet a certain nebulous idea of the lore. What does the personal preference of plastic figures matter? Are you telling me Alpha Legion, with their doctrine of 'everyone looks the same and dresses to avoid drawing attention' would have unique weapon load outs for every member?

Maybe you should look at actual AL models, not your straw fanfictiony ones. Both HH and 40K. Unless you're telling me Armillus Dynat, Alpha Legion Praetor, and Autilon Skor look the same and have identical loadouts?

And as a brief question; what if you had it that your Chaos Space Marines were well organised renegades who followed in fairly classic legion traditions of concentrating weapons.

Seeing they don't have their homeworlds or subject forge worlds anymore, it's about as valid question as asking what if they were still loyalist or pretending to be one of the current chapters.

Incidentally, in all 3 cases the answer would be the same - you'd use Codex: SM, because that's what would fit their fluff and organization. Not try to invent some laughable excuse for minmaxing and expect people to just roll with it. And hell, why stop here? What if they all had looted custodes gear? Or stole eldar wraith technology and all had wraith bodies? Or local necron lord fell in love with them and gifted them a truck of phase swords?

 blood reaper wrote:
And no one in warfare has EVER concentrated specific kinds of weapons! We don't have long periods of history in which certain firearms were concentrated in elite units for the specific purpose of achieving certain objectives.

Is this serious argument of a troll? but fine, let's unpack these photos. On the first one, you see a few soviet soldiers holding SMGs. You know, your basic, light infantry weapon. Yes, they also hold a few captured german guns, but they are notably not in combat, not on the front lines, not using them, and for all we know it's just a propaganda photo showing off spoils of battle.

The second photo is even more comical, as it's just a squad armed with STGs. Your basic assault rifle, light infantry weapon, again. You can see they don't all hold panzerfausts, HMGs like MG-42, sniper rifles, flamethrowers or whatever gak that even Hollywood would call stupid and over the top, that you are trying to call 'sensible'. Gee, I wonder why?

There is this fantasy in the heads of certain people that unless you leap through several hoops and have some kind of specialised approach towards something, you didn't really achieve that goal. Ambushing an enemy unit with a mass of anti-tank weapons isn't legitimate; you have to fight him with three different units, most of whom can't harm him.

No, there is this comical fantasy in the heads of munchkin min-maxers that looks, fluff, realism, and all that silly stuff don't count, must WAAAC harder. Who cares about dumb gak like weapon costs and ammo logistics, your renegades on the run MUST be regimented like IG, pee on fluff, logic, and common sense, because anyone who follows these is [insert whatever slur for people who like setting/balance is 'in' this week], eh?

But hey, feel free to prove me wrong and show how US army, richest organization on the planet, gives every soldier in basic platoon a Javelin anti-tank launcher and two heavy machine guns, one for each arm. What? They don't? Maybe you should write them angry mail saying how dumb they are because they just give them something "wimpy" like M4 glorified SMG, and without a grenade launcher at that