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.

Unit1126PLL wrote:It still doesn't let anyone do "your dudes" as they're locked behind some weird restrictions. Want a Techpriest Enginseer with a data-reader that regenerates Command Points (Kurov's Aquila)? Too bad - turns out your regiment's Tech-Priests aren't allowed to be cool. Want a Primaris Psyker with Manmorph Tuskblade, representing a weapon he took from his homeworld before he left for his sanctioning? Too bad, that's never happened to any psyker in the galaxy, idiot. The problem with relics is that they aren't really Your Dudes.

Sure, but I've also never been able to stick a bolter in the hands of a regular guardsman who picked one up in combat, or a Thunder Hammer and Jump Pack Senior Officer.

So much for "My Dudes"?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:It still doesn't let anyone do "your dudes" as they're locked behind some weird restrictions. Want a Techpriest Enginseer with a data-reader that regenerates Command Points (Kurov's Aquila)? Too bad - turns out your regiment's Tech-Priests aren't allowed to be cool. Want a Primaris Psyker with Manmorph Tuskblade, representing a weapon he took from his homeworld before he left for his sanctioning? Too bad, that's never happened to any psyker in the galaxy, idiot. The problem with relics is that they aren't really Your Dudes.

Sure, but I've also never been able to stick a bolter in the hands of a regular guardsman who picked one up in combat, or a Thunder Hammer and Jump Pack Senior Officer.

So much for "My Dudes"?

If you defined "your dudes" as "that one guardsman who picked up a bolter" or "a senior officer who has a jump pack and thunder hammer" then yes, so much for your dudes.

I'm not asking for any fluff changes like you are though (re: thunder hammers and jump packs). I'm asking for GW to bring back the in-line-with-the-fluff customization that they used to have, that they've now lost in favor of ... well, considerably unfluffy alternatives.

I mean everyone ignored my "Armageddon Steel Legion in 3.5 vs Armageddon Steel Legion now" example, but it's apt.

In one book, they're a force who:
- must take chimeras
- can take ratlings, unlike other regiments who cannot
- can take conscripts, who are also regiment restricted
- Xeno-Fighters Orks - i.e., are good at fighting orks
- can take storm troopers, which are ALSO regiment restricted

nowadays:
- vehicles ignore AP -1 (???)
- rapid fire at 18" (as we know, mechanized regiments absolutely love staying at medium range and firing on fully-automatic with nary a transport in sight).

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Toofast wrote:
If you aren't playing in tournaments, why does the tournament meta affect your garagehammer games?

For many people the way they play 40k is via pick-up games at gaming stores. These, by their very definition, are designed to be done in an ad-hoc/on the fly style method, meaning as little time spend organising them as possible. For that reason, there is a level of standardisation that is inherent in pick-up games in order for them to run smoothly and quickly. Tournament rules, meta, and changes filter through to the general populace and become 'standard' for pick-up games. It's why so many thought 'Rule of 3' was a general 40k rule in 8th when it wasn't, and why the recent changes to Patrols, despite "only" being for Nachmund Tournament missions, will filter through to regular 40k pick-up games.

That's why tournaments matter to more casual gamers, because more casual gamers are playing pick-up games more than anything else, especially in the US.

How many times must this be explained?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
As noted above - I guarantee you those old options weren't all good picks. Huskblade is either incredible or trash depending on when Eternal Warrior came out and what people used.

Put simply: Who cares if its good or not? Why is that the determining factor whether something gets to exist?

Did not know that the Patrol change rumour was confirmed?

My question is why a "casual" player who plays pickup games on Saturday with strangers would not want GW to attempt to balance off what happens in the tourney scene? Doesn't mean that the designers succeed, but the intent is good. Additionally, bleed over of lists/tactics from tournaments is still not a reason for a "casual" to throw shade at tourneys. Still, a casual being mad at the tournament scene doesn't really do anything at the end of the day.

I do feel a little bad for the lonely Narrative gamer who has a specific battle he wants to recreate that cannot find a like-minded opponent, but that's life sometimes. At least the GT 2022 system provides a common framework for players to have a game. A pre-game chat about expectations is still helpful, but you can get to dice throwing without too much negotiation.

I hear about "better" games out there, but I can only seem to find them in the 50% discount bin at the FLGS and not much actual game play. Maybe my area is the exception, but our 40K tourneys sell out on-line in a couple of hours while other systems (Bolt Action, Flames of War) might be lucky to get to half-capacity. Warmachine is dead. Infinity as well. That could change, but there it is.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I feel like part of the point of my OP was missed-40k is badly balanced, by pretty much any reasonable definition of balance.

But, while I'd like it to be otherwise, I'm fully capable of realizing that it will probably never be balanced.

However, what I'd like if that's the case is customization-Dark Eldar, again, are strong. But there's very minimal customization options.
Necrons-they're weak. And they have minimal customization.

I think part of the issue is that your definition of customization is specifically "Equipment customization at the unit level."

By that definition, yes, 9th has nowhere near the customization of previous editions. I think 9th SHOULD be stronger here than it is- I'm no more a fan of current trends in equipment lists at the unit level than most people. I always enjoyed the load out stage of list building and the modelling opportunities it provided.

But I think that in terms of Army construction, there are more options than there have ever been. I really had to think about my army from top down in order to lock down "my dudes"

Specifically, I had to decide what my army represented:

Was it an alliance between equally powerful cults, kabals and covens?
Was it a powerful cult with kabal/ coven allies?
A powerful coven with cult and kabal allies?
A powerful kabal with cult and coven allies?

Is it primarily a realspace raiding force, or will you mostly be functioning as a raiding force? (Note, I wish the names for these two types of forces were more distinct)

The process I used was to start wit a cult patrol, a coven patrol and a kabal patrol. This because I'm not just building an army; I'm building a raoster from which many different armies can be built based on my needs for a particular game. Choosing to start with this as a baseline configuration will maximize the options available. I build each to 25 PL; this is only the baseline army, so I don't need to flesh out points yet; 25 PL is roughly 500 pts. At this point, what I've got is not one 1500 point army... I mean, yes, I have that- two actually, because I can build it as a realspace raid or a raiding force, and that is a very significant and "my dudes" level decision that has never before existed.

But in addition to those two distinct 1500 point armies, you've also got three distinct 1000 point armies (Kabal+ Cult, Kabal + Coven, Cult + Coven). And finally, of course, you also have 3 very distinct 500 point armies. And you should be keeping all of those build options in mind as you build- thinking only about the eventual 2k build is a really bad way to get the most out of a DE army. If each of your patrols is treated as an army unto itself, on the other hand, you're unlocking a lot of potential. Your first decision is to pick subfactions for each of your three patrols, and remember, it's best to think about this in terms of your specific needs- your choices on this might be different if you've chosen to depict a strong Kabal with Cult and Coven allies vs. A strong Cult with mostly Coven allies.

Other things to think about: when I build armies these days, I start each unit by thinking about the Kill Team potential within it. For DE, your fire teams are 5 kabalite or 5 wych models; you get one leader, one gunner and one heavy gunner in a kabal fireteam, or one leader and up to 3 fighters- each armed with a different wych weapon. And this is where I'm with you- I loved it when I used to be able to take 3 Shard net + Impalers instead of one of each- really miss that. But what I tend to do is optimize these models for Kill Team. and I put some thought into their basing because I want them to blend with the other five models in the unit, but I also want them to be identifiable as a team within a team. Now I have the five left over models to think about; If it was a fire team, how would I make it interesting? This is where I tend to put modeling flourishes- simple conversions like swapping in a head that is only available in a rider's kit or any other suitable Aedlari head from a normal kit. Again, their basing needs to be both consistent with and distinct from the basing of the other fire team. In particular, I want to model one of these five to be recognizable as leader, even though I can't actually equip it with a leader's load out.

When I'm figuring out my HQ, it helps to know the character's role in the larger army. So if I've decided that the Kabal is going to be assuming the leadership role at the Strikeforce level, I might build it as befitting a Master Archon, a Master Succubus or a Master Haemonculous. What I usually do is build it as I would build a Master- so again, distinctive basing, and simple subtle conversion work- usually limited to part swapping from other suitable kits. I think about what their warlord traits would be, even if I don't use them as warlords in every game. There's a lot that goes on with this- first consideration is usually synergy with the Subfaction trait, synergy with load out choice or equipped relic and then suitability to the lore, I tend to see the core units is being exemplars of the subfaction they represent, so in I often pick bespoke subfaction traits for these units when I can. Then I'll think about which relic I would equip the model with based on its various synergies, it's modelling potential, it's consistency with the lore and the story of "My dudes". With both the WL trait and relic known, I can determine how that informs the pose or loadout for modelling purposes.

So now I need to think about the next patrol- the one that will get me to 2k. What you want to do here to maximize play potential is pick which of your three sub factions will be in the leadership role of the assembled army, and build a second patrol for the faction. This is also where I tend to put any mercenaries. With these units, I'm putting in a little less thought- they don't need to be optimized as a standalone force, and they should be designed to synergize with the existing patrol that matches their subfaction. You want to think of how they would fit as both a second patrol and as a combined brigade. This HQ model is less likely to be used as a master model, so you don't need to think as deeply about customization or modelling.

So now that I've got my 100 PL army, I'll run a points count to see how close I am to that 2k mark. I can usually swap around a bit of load out to fine tune it to 2k. At this point, play it's time to play. This is where you figure out if you like realspace raid or raiding force. This is where you start to work toward optimization. I tend to do this by adding to existing detachments rather than building others- 4 is the maximum detachment size even in Onslaught games. At this point, I'm seeking primarily to fine tune competitiveness- all the other concerns about aesthetic and play style preferences have already been considered. You'll be looking for any unit substitutions you can make, as well as optimizing load out as much as you can.

Now with this army, what I recommend is that you try to get smaller games in addition to your regular 2k matched game nights. If you've got someone in your life- a sibling, spouse, room mate or kid, or even just a close friend who doesn't currently play warhammer, you should teach this person to play. Let them pick one of your patrols while you pick from what's left over. Play at home on a small board. Use PL, stick to simple missions- maybe even using the open war deck for the first few games; even though all of these patrols are technically battleforged, your friend is still learning, so secondaries and strats should take a back seat- since you're already using the open war deck anyway, just waive your battleforged bonusses. Technically, this means no CP (unless generated by your army) and therefore no strategems. What I do is start with no CPS, but still get 1 per turn and use only the strats from the BRB. I'd play enough of these to let each player play each patrol once.

In these games, you're learning about how to maximize auras through positioning, how to maximize the impact of terrain, how to make the most out of warlord trait and relic abilities, and how all of these factors interact with army-wide and subfaction bonusses. This is a really good way to learn these skills, as they often get lost in the noise of bespoke strats. You and your friend may like these small scale games, and you might decide to add them to your gaming schedule. Maybe not. Maybe you have another person with whom you may want to try the same approach. Maybe not.

You're still regularly playing your preferred game in your regular venue according to your regular schedule, still tweaking that army for event participation or just to do better in pick up games. The more you tweak, the more you may consider altering the structure of your army. In acquiring new units, you'll unlock the potential for battle beyond 2k as well, though depending upon the choices you've made along the way, there might not be much to add.

Back on the small scale, if your friend is into it, you might be thinking about crusade. I have to tell you, when you can crusade with a housemate, it really is a kind of magic- especially with DE because their fluff is so full of internal army strife and struggle for power. The bespoke Crusade rules are basically a DE version of Necromunda- it is seriously everything that old Gangs of Commorragh minigame was supposed to be and so much more.

It's great too, because you earn all this extra customization in the form of requisitions and battle honours by fighting against each other within Commoragh, but then when you get an opportunity for a bigger game, you can combing armies into a raiding force or a realspace raid and team play.

And just a few words about Crusade: a lot of people have a lot of legitimate and compelling objections or barriers to playing crusade, and I get that. I suggest it as a remedy for feeling like you've lost customization options. Not just choosing your upgrades and customization options, but actually earning them provides so much more satisfaction, and there's so much more to choose from than mere load out options. And the modelling potential! It's of the charts.

At a base level, by a box of skulls. Add a skull to the base of every unit when it levels; pick the skull that corresponds to the enemy you defeated to earn the battlehonour when and where possible. So even with this simple visual code, you're distinguishing units from one another- the whole army could be hroic, but the base would still tell a story by showing which armies the model has encountered. I take this a lot further with some models. For example both my Hospitaller and my Dialogus have magnetized back packs because at the lower levels they are still learning, so they just have standard back packs, getting their full back pack at Battlehardened. I'm doing the same with the Dialogus lectern and I'm going to see if it's possible to do it with the Hospitaller's casualty- that's the upgrade for Legendary. My GSC Patriarch is a Stealer with a blinged out base at Blooded, a conventional plastic patriarch at Battlehardend a Classic metal running partiarch at Heroic and a Classic Metal Throned Patriarch at Legendary.

Anyway, I agree with you that equipment options have certainly taken a hit in 9th. That bums me out, and I'm not sure it was necessary for GW to do it. However, despite the loss of this particular form of customization, I feel like we've never had some many opportunities for other types of customization. This is even more true of DE specifically, and of Crusade games of any army... but even disregarding army choice and play mode, I still feel like there are still a lot of non equipment options that offer a combination of interesting rules, modelling opportunities, lore expression and personal narrative.

I hear about "better" games out there, but I can only seem to find them in the 50% discount bin at the FLGS and not much actual game play. Maybe my area is the exception, but our 40K tourneys sell out on-line in a couple of hours while other systems (Bolt Action, Flames of War) might be lucky to get to half-capacity. Warmachine is dead. Infinity as well. That could change, but there it is.

The main draw of 40k is not that it is an awesome game, its that you can find a game literally in any location on the globe for the most part.

It is a nuclear reactor that feeds itself. People look at games and most tabletop games do cost a lot of money to get into, so the 40k choice is a no-brainer for most people because there is no need to have to drum up a community for it.

99 times out of 100 wherever you are the community already exists. That part is HUGE when it comes to deciding which game to play.

Sooo just gonna throw this out there, you know spaghetti against the wall see what sticks.

What it GW introduced into narrative game play, or a option to have/take a highly customizable "your dude" depending on the army you take that would let you equip him is any way you wanted including buying special rules with a limit on those special rules.
Like let's say If you wanted to equip your dude with 2 plasma pistols and buy gun slinger for him. And you only can do this for like 1 cp if it's a 5 would or less model
2cp 6-12 point model
3cp for 13+ wound models.

Not married to this idea, just throwing it out there.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Sooo just gonna throw this out there, you know spaghetti against the wall see what sticks.

What it GW introduced into narrative game play, or a option to have/take a highly customizable "your dude" depending on the army you take that would let you equip him is any way you wanted including buying special rules with a limit on those special rules.
Like let's say If you wanted to equip your dude with 2 plasma pistols and buy gun slinger for him. And you only can do this for like 1 cp if it's a 5 would or less model
2cp 6-12 point model
3cp for 13+ wound models.

Not married to this idea, just throwing it out there.

The narrative players would take a skeptical sideways look, try it out in a few games, and decide that it was either too broken to use or kind of pointless. The competitive players would lose their gak and this would generate weeks of "look at this broken combo that happens if you're trying to play casually!" headlines/videos. The average casual player wouldn't bother because it'd either be a lot of extra modeling work, or it'd be $50 for one guy. Jokes about common proxies for various options would proliferate. This would get added to each army only as the 10e Codexes come out, so players wouldn't have equal access to it and it'd be another "wait until your new book comes out or just buy a different army!" point of contention. The sculpting team would rise up in revolt when asked to make customizable character sprues for a bunch of different armies, so the only ones that'd actually have models would be thirteen different Primaris Lieutenant sprues. Take your pick.

Those of us complaining about the loss of customizable stuff are very much in the minority and most of us have already quit 9th, it's not the kind of thing GW perceives much demand for in the current competitive-focused era.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Sooo just gonna throw this out there, you know spaghetti against the wall see what sticks.

What it GW introduced into narrative game play, or a option to have/take a highly customizable "your dude" depending on the army you take that would let you equip him is any way you wanted including buying special rules with a limit on those special rules.
Like let's say If you wanted to equip your dude with 2 plasma pistols and buy gun slinger for him. And you only can do this for like 1 cp if it's a 5 would or less model
2cp 6-12 point model
3cp for 13+ wound models.

Not married to this idea, just throwing it out there.

Well, if my army were just one dude, there might be some merit to that. I (and I assume Unit as well) focused on the wargear for officers since it provides one of the more stark examples of the loss of options, but the issue runs across the entire army (see: Unit's example of 3.5e Armageddon vs 8e Armageddon). Customizing one dude does not fix the other hundred or so dudes we'd have in the army.

the main thing with "your dudes" isn't the single dude (though that can be used as an exemplar) but rather the army.

In 3.5 my tank company might have:
Rare Troops: Vanquisher
Side Armor Skirts
Machine-God's Blessing
Reinforced Ceramite Armor
Anti-Tank Rounds

representing a well-equipped armored regiment fresh from the factory with the best tanks my wealthy world can buy.

Your tank company might have:
Crush and Grind
Evasive Driving
Ace Gunners
Ace Drivers
Ace Sponson Gunners

To represent a tank company with veteran crews, hard-bitten after years of war and unafraid of closing with enemy infantry and crushing them undertread. Their rare tanks have been lost, their armored plates (once the pinnacle of Imperial production methods) patched and roughly handled, and they've long since expended their precious augur antitank rounds.

Meanwhile, in 9th, I might have:
Valhallan doctrine
two tank aces (-1 damage and like Slow and Purposeful or something)

you might have:
Catachan doctrine
Old Grudges
Weapon Ace

And that's it.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
It's not just weapon options. There are other wargear options as well. Consider the following two IG HQ characters custom made from 3.5:

"Colonel Ivan Belinski, Commander of the 53rd Chortaxi Vanguard"
- Heroic Senior Officer
- Trademark Item (Golden Skull-Cane)
- Bionics
- Plasma Pistol (Master Crafted)
- Storm Bolter
- Refractor Field
- Carapace Armor
- Medallion Crimson

"Captain Tomas van Lourd of the 267th Armageddon Steel Legion"
- Senior Officer
- Refractor Field
- Plasma Pistol
- Power Sword
- Frag Grenades

Ivan holds the line rather than preferring to enter close-combat himself, positioned in the center of his defensive works likely with a company - or regimental - standard. He is a hero, a decorated veteran whose wounds have been patched by bionic replacement. His staff is a symbol to his men, held high and waving as he bellows orders to those around him.

Tomas, meanwhile, is a competent but unexceptional company captain, finding most of his time issuing orders from within his Armageddon Chimera. He doesn't wear bulky carapace armor, and carries close-combat equipment to see a mechanized assault home. He only disembarks when necessary however, and dispenses with the typical flair and flash of some of his more heroic and inspiring peers.

Consider them in 9th:
Colonel Ivan:
Company Commander with Bolter, Plasma Pistol

Captain Thomas: company Commander with power sword, plasma pistol

Woo, so distinct and different!

I really love that level of customization back then, really makes your dudes, your dudes. Behind the scenes I often wonder what caused GW to move away from that level of customization to being more cookie cutter. Trimming down weapons loadouts based on whats in the box is easy to understand even if I disagree with it, but I've always wondered why they got rid of the upgrades like Heroic Senior Officer or Trademark item. Sure there is always balance issues when you stack multiple things on one unit but I wonder what else drove that.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Telling "fluff hammer" players to feth off and find another game (or edition) to play is peak DakkaDakka.

You need some help with your reading comprehension. I never told them to find another game. I asked why the tournament meta matters to them if they aren't playing in tournaments. If competitive players are a tiny, vocal minority, surely it should be easy to find a local group that also doesn't care about tournaments. You can then play 9th crusades using power level, 5th edition with houserules, whatever you want. I don't complain about the rules for the local adult baseball league because I don't play in so they're irrelevant to me. Similar concept can be applied here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Toofast wrote:
If you aren't playing in tournaments, why does the tournament meta affect your garagehammer games?

For many people the way they play 40k is via pick-up games at gaming stores. These, by their very definition, are designed to be done in an ad-hoc/on the fly style method, meaning as little time spend organising them as possible. For that reason, there is a level of standardisation that is inherent in pick-up games in order for them to run smoothly and quickly. Tournament rules, meta, and changes filter through to the general populace and become 'standard' for pick-up games. It's why so many thought 'Rule of 3' was a general 40k rule in 8th when it wasn't, and why the recent changes to Patrols, despite "only" being for Nachmund Tournament missions, will filter through to regular 40k pick-up games.

That's why tournaments matter to more casual gamers, because more casual gamers are playing pick-up games more than anything else, especially in the US.

How many times must this be explained?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
As noted above - I guarantee you those old options weren't all good picks. Huskblade is either incredible or trash depending on when Eternal Warrior came out and what people used.

Put simply: Who cares if its good or not? Why is that the determining factor whether something gets to exist?

The same people claim that competitive players are a teeny tiny minority and the vast majority are super casual and don't care about building a strong list or even playing evenly matched games with points. You can't have it both ways. IMO most people in the United States are more competitive and that's why pickup games use tournament missions, 2k points, 44x60 tables, etc. They also make up most of the revenue because they're constantly buying new units or even whole armies based on what's powerful in the meta at the time, while a more casual player might pick up 1 new kit a month because he wants to paint it. People playing PL crusades and not caring about winning games are the tiny minority, they just make up the majority of forum users on this and similar forums because the younger/more competitive players are on reddit and in discord groups.

He very obviously isn't asking to have it both ways. He's explaining the reality to you- that it does affect pick-up games in stores.

Supposed minorities and majorities don't matter- they're effectively a straw man.

Voss wrote:
He very obviously isn't asking to have it both ways. He's explaining the reality to you- that it does affect pick-up games in stores.

Supposed minorities and majorities don't matter- they're effectively a straw man.

"Why are they designing this game for a tiny minority of the playerbase?" is a question you see quite often on this forum and others. If pickup games are mostly played to tournament standard, it's because that's the way most people want to play. Otherwise the pickup game standard would be power level and crusade missions.

Toofast wrote:

Voss wrote:
He very obviously isn't asking to have it both ways. He's explaining the reality to you- that it does affect pick-up games in stores.

Supposed minorities and majorities don't matter- they're effectively a straw man.

"Why are they designing this game for a tiny minority of the playerbase?" is a question you see quite often on this forum and others. If pickup games are mostly played to tournament standard, it's because that's the way most people want to play. Otherwise the pickup game standard would be power level and crusade missions.

The problem is the bell has already been rung with regards to tourneyhammer being the only best way to play. It purposefully makes it the default.

The real, not strawmanned claim is that a game should feasibly be able to support both narrative and competitive play within the same system, if it is well balanced and the background/setting/lore is well-abstracted (instead of the utterly unhelpful "Three Ways To Play (Because One Way To Play Is Hard To Design And We're Lazy And/Or Bad At It.)."

There are myriad examples of games (even some from GW) that:

1) are balanced better than 40k (not perfect, but better)
2) match whatever setting they're trying to portray in both: 2a) army building and 2b) army employment on the tabletop (better than 40k at any rate)
3) are easier to remember the rules for than 40k (by virtue of being intuitive; if the interaction works like you'd expect it to in reality, then all you have to remember is it works like you'd expect it to)
4) require less "planning in advance" than 40k whether one is playing to tell a story with their dudes or practice for a tournament - the game is well balanced enough that the two types of armies can co-exist on the tabletop without it being a wipe.

The whole "Narrative, Matched, and Open" thing is just a cop-out so GW doesn't have to balance a system while also sticking to a narrative. Some may say "it's liberating" because the lore no longer has to be balanced too, but that's just lazy.

"Oh yeah, in our lore Space Marines win all the time. They just don't on the tabletop because hey, who said the game had to match the lore anyways amirite?"

 The Red Hobbit wrote:

I really love that level of customization back then, really makes your dudes, your dudes. Behind the scenes I often wonder what caused GW to move away from that level of customization to being more cookie cutter. Trimming down weapons loadouts based on whats in the box is easy to understand even if I disagree with it, but I've always wondered why they got rid of the upgrades like Heroic Senior Officer or Trademark item. Sure there is always balance issues when you stack multiple things on one unit but I wonder what else drove that.

Cruddace is lazy and/or bad at his job. Probably both. Prior to 8th his codexes in 40k were generally bland to play and lacked options or any sense of passion. Now he's been put in charge of the whole ship and its spread to the rest of the game and it shows.

Keen observation Sim.
Exalted.

If Cruddace were a book he'd be two books, if he were a spice he'd be flour. In the world of 31 flavours he's the bucket you wash the ice cream scoop in.

And he messed up Tyranids.

Twice.

The second time after he was specifically called out for and acknowledged that he messed up the first time.

I will never not be bitter that he removed EIGHTEEN options from the carnifex.

Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:It still doesn't let anyone do "your dudes" as they're locked behind some weird restrictions. Want a Techpriest Enginseer with a data-reader that regenerates Command Points (Kurov's Aquila)? Too bad - turns out your regiment's Tech-Priests aren't allowed to be cool. Want a Primaris Psyker with Manmorph Tuskblade, representing a weapon he took from his homeworld before he left for his sanctioning? Too bad, that's never happened to any psyker in the galaxy, idiot. The problem with relics is that they aren't really Your Dudes.

Sure, but I've also never been able to stick a bolter in the hands of a regular guardsman who picked one up in combat, or a Thunder Hammer and Jump Pack Senior Officer.

So much for "My Dudes"?

If you defined "your dudes" as "that one guardsman who picked up a bolter" or "a senior officer who has a jump pack and thunder hammer" then yes, so much for your dudes.

Nah, I'm defining my dudes as Streb Garnsky, a guardsman weary of war, scrambling through the piles of the dead and wounded for something, anything, better than the lasgun that they've seen can't do anything meaningful towards the utterly terrifying alien abominations that have wiped out platoon after platoon, and grabbed a hold of their late Sergeant's bolter.

I'm defining my dudes as Captain Vaness Kalliga, a hot-headed senior officer inspired by the myths of avenging angels she grew up with, and leads her platoon of drop troops from the front with a two-handed hammer, and using her modified drop pack as a way to tactically reposition herself in the heat of combat. Despite the concern for her safety from the troops under her command, she always seems to pull through, against all odds.

Just so we're being fair with your very flavourful descriptions.

I'm not asking for any fluff changes like you are though (re: thunder hammers and jump packs).

Jump packs aren't actually a fluff change, considering Guardsmen used to have them, and the Tanith are shown to use them in their assault on Phantine. And why can't guardsmen carry hammers? Seems like a pretty arbitrary restriction.

I'm asking for GW to bring back the in-line-with-the-fluff customization that they used to have, that they've now lost in favor of ... well, considerably unfluffy alternatives.

You can have your fluff customisation. It's called modelling and fiction. If you want to represent your forces being worn down and weary, you can model them like that. If I want my Space Marines carrying power katanas, I'll model them like it. I don't need bespoke rules for it.

My stance on this point has changed over the years, but I think I prefer the idea of more basic rules, and leave the flavour of minor aspects to the players to build for themselves.

Your armoured column specialises in full frontal assaults? Then deploy them in a frontal formation on the tabletop. Your Space Marines specialise in using bikes? Then take bikes. Your Tyranids prefer the use of Carnifex battering rams? Then take lots of Carnifexes.

This, of course, comes with the understanding that I'd want all options to be viable on tabletop.

I mean everyone ignored my "Armageddon Steel Legion in 3.5 vs Armageddon Steel Legion now" example, but it's apt.

In one book, they're a force who:
- must take chimeras
- can take ratlings, unlike other regiments who cannot
- can take conscripts, who are also regiment restricted
- Xeno-Fighters Orks - i.e., are good at fighting orks
- can take storm troopers, which are ALSO regiment restricted

nowadays:
- vehicles ignore AP -1 (???)
- rapid fire at 18" (as we know, mechanized regiments absolutely love staying at medium range and firing on fully-automatic with nary a transport in sight).

Amazing. So take Chimeras, take Ratlings, take Conscripts, and take Storm Troopers.

If you want a fluffy army, build one. You don't need GW to force you into it.

 Grimtuff wrote:
If Cruddace were a book he'd be two books, if he were a spice he'd be flour. In the world of 31 flavours he's the bucket you wash the ice cream scoop in.

 Sim-Life wrote:
I will never not be bitter that he removed EIGHTEEN options from the carnifex.

Wait, 18, really? I knew his Tyranid books were bad but I'd forgotten they were that bad.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:It still doesn't let anyone do "your dudes" as they're locked behind some weird restrictions. Want a Techpriest Enginseer with a data-reader that regenerates Command Points (Kurov's Aquila)? Too bad - turns out your regiment's Tech-Priests aren't allowed to be cool. Want a Primaris Psyker with Manmorph Tuskblade, representing a weapon he took from his homeworld before he left for his sanctioning? Too bad, that's never happened to any psyker in the galaxy, idiot. The problem with relics is that they aren't really Your Dudes.

Sure, but I've also never been able to stick a bolter in the hands of a regular guardsman who picked one up in combat, or a Thunder Hammer and Jump Pack Senior Officer.

So much for "My Dudes"?

If you defined "your dudes" as "that one guardsman who picked up a bolter" or "a senior officer who has a jump pack and thunder hammer" then yes, so much for your dudes.

Nah, I'm defining my dudes as Streb Garnsky, a guardsman weary of war, scrambling through the piles of the dead and wounded for something, anything, better than the lasgun that they've seen can't do anything meaningful towards the utterly terrifying alien abominations that have wiped out platoon after platoon, and grabbed a hold of their late Sergeant's bolter.

I don't really understand what you want here, other than rules for squad members to pick up the weapons of their fallen comrades. I personally wouldn't be too miffed by such a rule and if it existed I would absolutely be annoyed if a Guardsman couldn't pick up his sergeant's bolter. But this seems tangential to the discussion, unless you are claiming you should be able to give Guardsmen bolters at army creation... so again, fluff.

If it is that critical, just say he got promoted to sergeant the next battle, and buy him a bolter (though adding bolters as a special weapon option would be rad!).

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

I'm defining my dudes as Captain Vaness Kalliga, a hot-headed senior officer inspired by the myths of avenging angels she grew up with, and leads her platoon of drop troops from the front with a two-handed hammer, and using her modified drop pack as a way to tactically reposition herself in the heat of combat. Despite the concern for her safety from the troops under her command, she always seems to pull through, against all odds.

Just so we're being fair with your very flavourful descriptions.

That is a great description and a perfect argument for why Sororitas need jump packs. Unfortunately, the Imperial Guard cannot have them (in the lore)... And if they did, things would be at serious risk of flanderization between factions.

Preserving faction identity is important.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

I'm not asking for any fluff changes like you are though (re: thunder hammers and jump packs).

Jump packs aren't actually a fluff change, considering Guardsmen used to have them, and the Tanith are shown to use them in their assault on Phantine. And why can't guardsmen carry hammers? Seems like a pretty arbitrary restriction.

Guardsmen had jump packs in the era that Space Marines had shuriken catapults. We can talk about that era if you want, but it isn't really what I want - which fluff is better is a matter of opinion though.

Oh, and you confused Grav Chutes (which the guard have, including entire regiments of them) with Jump Packs. The Tanith used grave chutes at Phantine iirc. And Grav Chutes absolutely were an option until - guess what - GW killed them.

This is literally my point. In 3.5ed, you could buy Drop Troops, which literally gave your lads drop troops. Some form/way of playing drop troops lasted all they way until 9th, where GW outright killed the models with Grav Chutes (Elysians) and removed drop troops/deep strike as a regiment ability unless you don't play a regular regiment at all (Scions have it if you just wanted to play Storm Troopers).

Oh and they took the corpse out back and strung it up with the flyers nerf - now you can't even have the regiment drop out of Valkyries.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

I'm asking for GW to bring back the in-line-with-the-fluff customization that they used to have, that they've now lost in favor of ... well, considerably unfluffy alternatives.

You can have your fluff customisation. It's called modelling and fiction. If you want to represent your forces being worn down and weary, you can model them like that. If I want my Space Marines carrying power katanas, I'll model them like it. I don't need bespoke rules for it.

No, but this is a silly argument. Why even play a Warhammer game? Why not just play chess and just have the fiction of the battle be that it's in the 41st millennium?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
My stance on this point has changed over the years, but I think I prefer the idea of more basic rules, and leave the flavour of minor aspects to the players to build for themselves.

I think this is a fine idea too, and worthy of discussion. However, that isn't what's happening in 9th at all. What's happening in 9th is a huge, voracious, carcinogenic growth of rules bloat to try to get every faction under the sun to have rules - and yet it is still failing worse than earlier editions did, because the rules aren't written that well.

What you want has merit and I would love to discuss it in another thread.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Your armoured column specialises in full frontal assaults? Then deploy them in a frontal formation on the tabletop. Your Space Marines specialise in using bikes? Then take bikes. Your Tyranids prefer the use of Carnifex battering rams? Then take lots of Carnifexes.

This, of course, comes with the understanding that I'd want all options to be viable on tabletop.

Which gets back to balancing for narrative vs balancing for competitive. Something I think you and I would agree on.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

I mean everyone ignored my "Armageddon Steel Legion in 3.5 vs Armageddon Steel Legion now" example, but it's apt.

In one book, they're a force who:
- must take chimeras
- can take ratlings, unlike other regiments who cannot
- can take conscripts, who are also regiment restricted
- Xeno-Fighters Orks - i.e., are good at fighting orks
- can take storm troopers, which are ALSO regiment restricted

nowadays:
- vehicles ignore AP -1 (???)
- rapid fire at 18" (as we know, mechanized regiments absolutely love staying at medium range and firing on fully-automatic with nary a transport in sight).

Amazing. So take Chimeras, take Ratlings, take Conscripts, and take Storm Troopers.

If you want a fluffy army, build one. You don't need GW to force you into it.

I think you are missing the discussion here somewhat. I was attempting to prove that 9th did faction identity worse than earlier editions.

I was not attempting to prove that you need faction identity to be present in the rules at all, which is a separate and more lengthy discussion that probably deserves its own thread.

My $0.02 is that I prefer there to be faction identity represented in rules - the game is cooler when Saim-Hainn and Alaitoc play differently rather than just being different paint-schemes. I say that because army composition is only part of reflecting an army's lore on the tabletop.

 Grimtuff wrote:
If Cruddace were a book he'd be two books, if he were a spice he'd be flour. In the world of 31 flavours he's the bucket you wash the ice cream scoop in.

This gave me a hearty chuckle, thank you.

Hell's bell's there are quite a few Bees in quite a few bonnets.
I ain't gonna go through the many posts but I will give some generic responses.

1 - Stop comparing an outdated Codex with the new system where it doesn't have the content from the new system. At least use updated Codexes as examples.
2 - If you are going to use the outdated Codex, at least be able to correctly reference the material you are mad at. Don't make generalisations to prove a point that end up being flat-out wrong.
3 - Don't pretend that restrictions = better army character.

Peace out broskis.

1) updated codexes don't have options either - just Crusade content, which is a progression system. They don't allow for any different changes between two fresh-from-the-factory forces.

2) k, lemme know if you see this

3) why not? Restrictions define an army. It is the height of the absurd to suggest everyone should be able to take everything ever without restriction. An Imperial Guard army with 3 guardian squads, a space marine Terminator squad, a Helldrake, and 4 hammerheads would be pretty hilarious though.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) updated codexes don't have options either - just Crusade content, which is a progression system. They don't allow for any different changes between two fresh-from-the-factory forces.

Tonight I was going to sit down with my dex and my PA and try to respond to some of the stuff you've posted recently with some specific examples... And then it occurred to me that sometimes, writing the detailed posts prevents me from painting, modelling and playing as much as I'd like to- I'm a terribly slow painter, but I should be able to finish a civilian team for my campaign tonight.

So I thought I'd respond quickly to just this piece.

The first differentiation that 9th will provide is picking you subfaction. So for both of your fresh from the factory forces, perhaps one subfaction trait is a good match and for the other, a different trait is a better match. Next, you'll look at characters within the force- do they have auras that support the play style? If there is a choice of HQ, and each offers different aura options, which character offers the aura most in tune with force you are trying to create? Next, what are the WL trait options for those characters- specifically, are there any that affect units, or do they all affect only the character. Can any of these support the type of army you are trying to create? Don't be afraid to use a requisition strat to get an extra warlord trait in play if that will help you reflect the characteristics of the army you are trying to portray. Ask the same questions about relics.

Now are there ways to use the detachment system to express the character of your army? So rather than organizing your troops into one detachment, are there subgroups within the army that tend to function well together? Would the army, or any of the detachments in it, be likely to work with particular Imperial Agents or allies? If you're avoiding the Nachmund GT Mission Pack, this is a place to think about whether allying in another subfaction would allow you to better represent the army you're trying to create. Even with the Nachmund GT pack, it is still an appropriate place to look at an ally with a different selectable Keyword, like Scions for Guard.

By now you've got your detachments, your warlord(s) with their trait(s) and relic(s), you subfaction abilities. Now you can look at the options available to individual units- and again, I'll be the first to admit there won't be as many as there once were for most units. But there are still some choices at this level, and a handful of those choices can have a significant impact.

Once all of that's done, go through the strats in your book and pick the five that are fluffiest for the force you want to represent. You can put these on colour coded cards so that you can see at a glance that they are fluff and flavour based strats. Later, you'll do another pass to look for a few offensive must-have strats that are chosen more for their impact on the game than consistency with your fluff- these get a different colour; then do another pass for defensive strats and a third colour. How many go into the offensive and defensive categories will vary according to where your fluff stats fall on that spectrum and how impactful they can be.

Either way, you should now have a deck of no more than 15 strats- and you won't have to worry about any of the others in the book really. Theoretically, army a and army b will have at least some degree of variety in their decks. One or two of the offensive and defensive must haves that you've chosen are probably a big enough deal that you'd use them with any army from this faction, while the rest might synergize better with one army or the other based on its subfaction trait(s), its auras, it WL Trait(s) and Relic(s), its unit load-outs and upgrades, or its unit selection/ detachment structure.

Now I'm not saying that's AS detailed as it was in previous editions; I'm certainly not saying it's MORE detailed than previous editions. I'm comfortable saying that I think it provides more customization than you are giving it credit for; and it's very important to point out that if we're going to use Guard as an example, they don't have their 9th ed dex yet, and their options are really going to increase once they get it. I provided quite a walkthrough on building a fluffy DE army from the 9th dex earlier in this thread.

The other thing I'll say is that if the armies you've created using this process don't seem distinct enough yet, there are further options that you can use to distinguish them if you have in interest in playing crusade and can find a group who will play it with you. By the time your units become legendary, or even battle hardened, you'll have a lot of opportunities to customize further. I know that isn't an option for everyone, and I know that it isn't a preference for everyone. But if what you want most out of the game is customization, it does provide more opportunities than any other way to play.

9th has “customization” but it’s very block cut. Thou shalt take bad moons, with the gobshot, and the best armor teef can buy, and not one bit else. All that customization is just picking like a different skin, it does nothing for your dudes. Let me put a shokk attack gun on a biker mek so I can mishap teleport them into an assault morkdamnit.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 The Red Hobbit wrote:

I really love that level of customization back then, really makes your dudes, your dudes. Behind the scenes I often wonder what caused GW to move away from that level of customization to being more cookie cutter. Trimming down weapons loadouts based on whats in the box is easy to understand even if I disagree with it, but I've always wondered why they got rid of the upgrades like Heroic Senior Officer or Trademark item. Sure there is always balance issues when you stack multiple things on one unit but I wonder what else drove that.

Cruddace is lazy and/or bad at his job. Probably both. Prior to 8th his codexes in 40k were generally bland to play and lacked options or any sense of passion. Now he's been put in charge of the whole ship and its spread to the rest of the game and it shows.

He's almost certainly good at playing the corporate politics game.

Behold!

9th Ed "customisation":