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.

 Nevelon wrote:
Do we need more for 40k rules then a paint job on a guard force? While it might be nice to actually embed some marines into it, or special ally rules, if you want to get some basic human soldiers on the field, we have an army for that.

And if we want special models for them, I think we can get in line behind all the non-cadian/krieg/catachan IG regements.

Back in the day I had house rules for an IG army that used Rhinos and Predators and could take a Marine Squad as an elite and a Captain as HQ.

It would be a the sort of easy WD army list they did back in the 2000s.

What's being described is the Tyrant's Legion list from IA9.

 Pariah Press wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Do we need more for 40k rules then a paint job on a guard force? While it might be nice to actually embed some marines into it, or special ally rules, if you want to get some basic human soldiers on the field, we have an army for that.

And if we want special models for them, I think we can get in line behind all the non-cadian/krieg/catachan IG regements.

I'm not saying that I think it would be a good idea, just that I would like it (and buy it).

Though that does raise some questions: Are there more people who play Ultramarines than there are people who would play, say, Vostroyans? Are there more people who play Ultramarines than play Astra Militarum altogether?

I was just chatting with someone at the FLGS when picking up my Ultras about how many UM players there actually are.

As the poster boys, a lot of people probably start UM, and paint their first few marines blue. But as they get more into the game and dig deeper into the lore/factions, how many stick with them? And how many drop them in favor of another army? Another question it’s hard to answer is how many people collect Ultras vs. how many play Ultras? As the face of the franchise, people who collect and paint might vastly outnumber those who put plastic on the table and roll dice.

We both agreed that seeing actual established UM armies on the table was fairly uncommon.

In the back of this image, is this a conversion? Or a hidden reveal?

Which bit? The damaged obelisk/monolith on the left of Nekrosor, or the zappy arrangement with the crystal on the right?

The left is almost certainly a scratch build; plasticard and expanding foam maybe.

The right looks like a conversion with the old Monolith crystal and some of the spines from the new Monolith. Not sure about the bas though, might be the old Forgeworld Necron terrain.

 Crimson wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I for one am appreciating the irony and outright hypocrisy of Guilliman here.

Mr Codex Astartes, the Primarch that conceived of, argued for and arranged a decentralisation of Imperial Armed Forces. Because no individual should ever wield the sort of military power a Primarch during the Crusade wielded.

Except for me, with my little pocket empire and its mortal warriors being at my beck and call.

Yes! Guilliman being a power-hungry hypocritical despot is absolutely the best angle to that character and the only thing that makes me tolerate him even a little bit. But I don't think current GW writers are even aware of such nuance.

If he were actually a power-hungry despot, he'd surely devote himself to fully securing control of the Imperium Sanctus before he slapped together a crusading force to venture forth and save the Imperium Nihilus. And he'd have kept all the Primaris for himself, rather than gifting them to all the other chapters. No, I think he's pretty clear-cut good guy here.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I for one am appreciating the irony and outright hypocrisy of Guilliman here.

Mr Codex Astartes, the Primarch that conceived of, argued for and arranged a decentralisation of Imperial Armed Forces. Because no individual should ever wield the sort of military power a Primarch during the Crusade wielded.

Except for me, with my little pocket empire and its mortal warriors being at my beck and call.

Yes! Guilliman being a power-hungry hypocritical despot is absolutely the best angle to that character and the only thing that makes me tolerate him even a little bit. But I don't think current GW writers are even aware of such nuance.

If he were actually a power-hungry despot, he'd surely devote himself to fully securing control of the Imperium Sanctus before he slapped together a crusading force to venture forth and save the Imperium Nihilus. And he'd have kept all the Primaris for himself, rather than gifting them to all the other chapters. No, I think he's pretty clear-cut good guy here.

Like I said, the current writers are not getting it. They're too busy with their noble tortured hero being the glorious main character of their fascism apologia. But the facts are that Guilliman broke the legions and then made himself highest of the highlords and kept his 500 planet pocket fiefdom with all its forces and resources. Your "hero" being that sort of a power-hungry hypocrite is proper grimdark, proper satire. But we are not doing that any more. Just noble and shiny heroes protecting totalitarianism and being cool.

 kitch102 wrote:
In the back of this image, is this a conversion? Or a hidden reveal?

It's a conversion. It's showed up in several Necron promotional images, including at the start of 9th.

 Crimson wrote:
Like I said, the current writers are not getting it. They're too busy with their noble tortured hero being the glorious main character of their fascism apologia. But the facts are that Guilliman broke the legions and then made himself highest of the highlords and kept his 500 planet pocket fiefdom with all its forces and resources. Your "hero" being that sort of a power-hungry hypocrite is proper grimdark, proper satire. But we are not doing that any more. Just noble and shiny heroes protecting totalitarianism and being cool.

The novels in which he features do show that he's not cool with the approach the Imperium takes with its rulership, but that one man can't overcome ten thousand years of fascism overnight. If GW played Guilliman as being just as bad as the rest of the setting, there would be no satire, just an annoying reinforcement for those idiots that think the Imperium is in the right, as the returned hero agrees with the actions of the cruellest and most bloody regime imaginable.

Basically, good Guilliman shows that GW is in on the joke, as there is the one sane man that has to come to terms with the results of actions he performed centuries ago, refuting any claim that 40k is pro-fascist propaganda.

Not to mention he's clearly realised that in order to have any actual political power he has to have a military power behind him because that's basically what all the other power-players have achieved.
Whilst they've divided the power between them and each holds the others in check; they still have vast swathes of power and influence.

Whilst he's a "Son of God" on paper he needs actual power behind him otherwise he'll be swept away.

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Like I said, the current writers are not getting it. They're too busy with their noble tortured hero being the glorious main character of their fascism apologia. But the facts are that Guilliman broke the legions and then made himself highest of the highlords and kept his 500 planet pocket fiefdom with all its forces and resources. Your "hero" being that sort of a power-hungry hypocrite is proper grimdark, proper satire. But we are not doing that any more. Just noble and shiny heroes protecting totalitarianism and being cool.

The novels in which he features do show that he's not cool with the approach the Imperium takes with its rulership, but that one man can't overcome ten thousand years of fascism overnight. If GW played Guilliman as being just as bad as the rest of the setting, there would be no satire, just an annoying reinforcement for those idiots that think the Imperium is in the right, as the returned hero agrees with the actions of the cruellest and most bloody regime imaginable.

Basically, good Guilliman shows that GW is in on the joke, as there is the one sane man that has to come to terms with the results of actions he performed centuries ago, refuting any claim that 40k is pro-fascist propaganda.

No, exactly the opposite. He is de facto leader of a horrible fascist totalitarian state, but boohoo, he is suffering noble hero. Cry me a river, demigod dictator! And it is no wonder fascist idiots flock to 40K, as this sort of "hard men making hard choices" combined with power fantasy is central to their beliefs. Look, this fascist overlord really feels bad about all the genocide and totalitarianism that he authorises, he is not such a bad guy! GW needs to stop portraying Imperium as the good guys, and any heroism on part of Imperials must be limited to those without real power. You just might be able to have a noble mid-tier officer, who is doing his best under a terrible regime, but you cannot have a noble Führer and it not to come across as fascism apologia.

 Crimson wrote:

 Shakalooloo wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Like I said, the current writers are not getting it. They're too busy with their noble tortured hero being the glorious main character of their fascism apologia. But the facts are that Guilliman broke the legions and then made himself highest of the highlords and kept his 500 planet pocket fiefdom with all its forces and resources. Your "hero" being that sort of a power-hungry hypocrite is proper grimdark, proper satire. But we are not doing that any more. Just noble and shiny heroes protecting totalitarianism and being cool.

The novels in which he features do show that he's not cool with the approach the Imperium takes with its rulership, but that one man can't overcome ten thousand years of fascism overnight. If GW played Guilliman as being just as bad as the rest of the setting, there would be no satire, just an annoying reinforcement for those idiots that think the Imperium is in the right, as the returned hero agrees with the actions of the cruellest and most bloody regime imaginable.

Basically, good Guilliman shows that GW is in on the joke, as there is the one sane man that has to come to terms with the results of actions he performed centuries ago, refuting any claim that 40k is pro-fascist propaganda.

No, exactly the opposite. He is de facto leader of a horrible fascist totalitarian state, but boohoo, he is suffering noble hero. Cry me a river, demigod dictator! And it is no wonder fascist idiots flock to 40K, as this sort of "hard men making hard choices" combined with power fantasy is central to their beliefs. Look, this fascist overlord really feels bad about all the genocide and totalitarianism that he authorises, he is not such a bad guy! GW needs to stop portraying Imperium as the good guys, and any heroism on part of Imperials must be limited to those without real power. You just might be able to have a noble mid-tier officer, who is doing his best under a terrible regime, but you cannot have a noble Führer and it not to come across as fascism apologia.

We see him both internally and externally express disagreement with the direction of the 40K Imperium. He is the "sane" man in an insane age. However, and this is the key point, he goes along with it despite his disagreement, all under the excuse of being pragmatic. Instead of trying to take on the Ecclesiarchy, he concedes to giving it a place, especially since in the 40K universe faith has real power against Chaos and daemons. He delays reform of the Administratum except for the bits necessary to get his Indomitus Crusade off the ground. He does a stalling shadow war against the conservative factions of the Inquisition instead of outright taking them on. He delays reform of the calendar. Over and over again we see the same pattern: He espouses high ideals and disagreement with the Imperium's policies. Then he decides he has to go along with it in order to deal with the immediate threat of Chaos and the Rift, so he turns a blind eye (sometimes with a bit of ineffectual protest). Aside from military related matters, Guilliman has actually failed to implement any truly meaningful reform for the wider Imperium or the average Imperial civilian.

The overall theme is not of noble hero going out to reform the Imperium, but somebody who makes repeated moral compromises for the sake of immediate short term gain (or avoidance of pain). It is the same story as the Imperium. Over time, sacrifices and compromises, maybe initially made with the intent of being temporary or deplorable but necessary, become habit and accepted, then even lauded. All of his compromises can even have a seemingly reasonable case made for them individually, but over time his original reformist stance is whittled away.

That is what one of the High Lords even said. He aided Guilliman even though he disagreed with him (since this High Lord believed the Imperium is the way it is because the Emperor wanted it this way, otherwise it would not have happened), because he thinks Guilliman needs to be humbled and that the task of trying and failing to reform the Imperium would be this humbling.

So the revived Guilliman story arc is more of the idealist from 30K being worn down and becoming jaded, and having his ideals erode to the point he accepts the very things he initially wanted to change. His POV is different from that of the frothing zealot from the Ecclesiarchy who thinks everything they do is righteous. Guilliman knows that some of the things done are bad but he chooses to go along with them for the sake of pragmatism, and that is a different sort of moral lesson: the moral decay that is the tolerance of evil by those that can see it as evil for the sake of not rocking the boat or for the sake of pragmatic short term gains

He also can't just reform the Imperium or the existing powerbase will declare him a heretic. Considering his relations with Xenos (Eldar) they'd find it easy to prove that he's tainted in some way and thus not the true Son of the Emperor and had fallen like his brothers in Chaos. Thus to be excommunicated and killed.

He basically has to work with the madness or risk being swept away by it.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
Do we need more for 40k rules then a paint job on a guard force? While it might be nice to actually embed some marines into it, or special ally rules, if you want to get some basic human soldiers on the field, we have an army for that.

And if we want special models for them, I think we can get in line behind all the non-cadian/krieg/catachan IG regements.

Back in the day I had house rules for an IG army that used Rhinos and Predators and could take a Marine Squad as an elite and a Captain as HQ.

It would be a the sort of easy WD army list they did back in the 2000s.

The book comes with a bunch of detachments, so I wouldn't be surprised to see something that allows a mix of Marines and Guard.

Weren't they going to release the rules for the Ultramarine special detachment and the points for the new ultra units?

Its weird for them to announce the next big narrative campaign and just include 2 factions (utltramarines not even beeing a faction by itself).
Anyway, bevare of any "end of edition" narrative detachments. They wont survive for long, and even if they do it will be nerfed so no one would want to field them.

It is but its also riding the coat tails of Space Marine 2 being insanely popular.

 Fayric wrote:
Its weird for them to announce the next big narrative campaign and just include 2 factions (utltramarines not even beeing a faction by itself).
Anyway, bevare of any "end of edition" narrative detachments. They wont survive for long, and even if they do it will be nerfed so no one would want to field them.

Pretty sure they said the campaign is actually a three-way.

 BorderCountess wrote:

 Fayric wrote:
Its weird for them to announce the next big narrative campaign and just include 2 factions (utltramarines not even beeing a faction by itself).
Anyway, bevare of any "end of edition" narrative detachments. They wont survive for long, and even if they do it will be nerfed so no one would want to field them.

Pretty sure they said the campaign is actually a three-way.

You are correct. Must be something really special that they dont want to mention or put in any picture. Would be a fun time to bring out Dark Mech.

Usually they try to make these big campaigns as all inclusive as they can, so everyone with an army can play.

Retake all 500 worlds? Who holds them? Guessing more then just Necrons. Can it be done with one company of marines? He could use a hand.

There may be a couple of “big” players in the story, but if it follows previous patterns there will be room for all.

The good thing about the Galactic East is that all factions are present there. If you set something elsewhere, it's always a headscratcher how Tau might be involved, and until fairly recently Tyranids were also mostly confined to the east.

Every faction would reasonably be involved in a campaign spanning 500 worlds though. There are threats from every faction in Ultramar, it's a microcosm of the entire setting.

 Da Boss wrote:
The good thing about the Galactic East is that all factions are present there. If you set something elsewhere, it's always a headscratcher how Tau might be involved, and until fairly recently Tyranids were also mostly confined to the east.

Every faction would reasonably be involved in a campaign spanning 500 worlds though. There are threats from every faction in Ultramar, it's a microcosm of the entire setting.

Well for the Titus box they say "War on the Vespator Front, a complete campaign system for Warhammer 40,000 that pits three alliances against each other". So the first installaion of the campaign hold 3 forces, agains each other, Implying its not just Guard beeing meat shields for Ultramarines. Yet, there is no clue or indication för the third force in this article or in the pictures on the actual books.

They did mention that the Death Guard are still lingering in the 500 worlds somewhere in the promotional material (can't remember where). Maybe it's them?

Xmas boxes up next week.

Vorian wrote:
They did mention that the Death Guard are still lingering in the 500 worlds somewhere in the promotional material (can't remember where). Maybe it's them?

Would be a nice return to 8th edition fluff development that was all about DGs attack on Ultramar/ Konor and carving out their "Scourge Stars" in the area.

Dudeface wrote:
Xmas boxes up next week.

My local store just told me the price it's the same for all boxes around 200ish Euro btw

 Fayric wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
The good thing about the Galactic East is that all factions are present there. If you set something elsewhere, it's always a headscratcher how Tau might be involved, and until fairly recently Tyranids were also mostly confined to the east.

Every faction would reasonably be involved in a campaign spanning 500 worlds though. There are threats from every faction in Ultramar, it's a microcosm of the entire setting.

Well for the Titus box they say "War on the Vespator Front, a complete campaign system for Warhammer 40,000 that pits three alliances against each other". So the first installaion of the campaign hold 3 forces, agains each other, Implying its not just Guard beeing meat shields for Ultramarines. Yet, there is no clue or indication för the third force in this article or in the pictures on the actual books.

Don't all the crusade books use 3 alliances for the players to join? I can imagine them running this in the same way, i.e. Ultramarines + allies, Necrons + other nasties, then the third 'misc' alliance for the armies they couldn't think of a reason to be there.

A store owner replied to the pricing sheet on Reddit and they'd been told by their rep that the quantity produced this year is the lowest ever and not to expect much as a heads up.

Dudeface wrote:
A store owner replied to the pricing sheet on Reddit and they'd been told by their rep that the quantity produced this year is the lowest ever and not to expect much as a heads up.

If thats the case its such bad marketing and PR...

We are at the point of, why hype something for weeks to sell in seconds and leave people just perplexed at all of this nonsense. It reached a point to why do I even care about any box, not going to get it... so it was just a waste of my attention and time.

 NAVARRO wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
A store owner replied to the pricing sheet on Reddit and they'd been told by their rep that the quantity produced this year is the lowest ever and not to expect much as a heads up.

If thats the case its such bad marketing and PR...

We are at the point of, why hype something for weeks to sell in seconds and leave people just perplexed at all of this nonsense. It reached a point to why do I even care about any box, not going to get it... so it was just a waste of my attention and time.

I was down for the farsight box on register of interest etc. But it's been enough of a gap between being announced and released I've sort of filled my plate of to-dos anyway. So really not fussed myself about it all any more, as you say they're rarely so good to be worth fighting over anyway now when they fly out.