Warhammer 40k news and rumours - Rumored discontinued units page 340

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.

**Gert**

F in chat to the single greatest era of Ork models ever to grace this planet. 2000's Ork Boyz, you will be missed.

**Jidmah**

Burna boyz and lootas have also gone to last chance, so maybe just a repack for the new edition. According to rumors, only the 2018 boyz are getting the axe.

**Da Boss**

I remember seeing the 3UPs of those Nelson boyz in White Dwarf ages ago and waiting with increasing impatience for the new orks to come out. I loved the Ork background but didn't like the models until the Nelson refresh.

Luckily I have something like 300 of those suckers so I don't really need any more.

I do find it funny that they're obviously increasing the size of your average Ork now, after scale creep apologists said they were just rescaling the Marines to make them more lore accurate. Eventually, I'm sure people will be annoyed that the Marines don't quite tower above the Orks as they "should" and we'll need Secundus marines.

**Nevelon**

Da Boss wrote:
I remember seeing the 3UPs of those Nelson boyz in White Dwarf ages ago and waiting with increasing impatience for the new orks to come out. I loved the Ork background but didn't like the models until the Nelson refresh.

Luckily I have something like 300 of those suckers so I don't really need any more.

I do find it funny that they're obviously increasing the size of your average Ork now, after scale creep apologists said they were just rescaling the Marines to make them more lore accurate. Eventually, I'm sure people will be annoyed that the Marines don't quite tower above the Orks as they "should" and we'll need Secundus marines.

Were marines ever supposed to be bigger then orks? I always thought they were roughly equal in size, with orks having the edge is anything. Orks also being wildly variable in size anyway, with the bigger ones being stronger/tougher/etc.

Scale issues with marines was always how they compared to unaugmented humans. Not xenos. IMHO as I recall.

Scale creep on orks is backwards. The old minis, who’ve been on the warpath for multiple edtions, should be bigger grizzled vets. Not the new lads.

**Da Boss**

The main culprits were the old plastic cadian and catachan kits which were too big. The right thing to do would have been to scale them down a little bit and then everything could have stayed as it is. There's precedent - goblins got smaller between the first and second generation of plastics in wfb.

But the are scaling things up for non-background accuracy reasons.

**hotsauceman1**

Nazrak wrote:
Nevelon wrote:

For me it’s the history and continuity. I’ve put my first RTB01 tac squad on the table of every FLGS I’ve frequented. In every edition. They have been with us since the start. A core foundation of the setting. I’ve got a firstborn battle company of the shelf. Each squad a weapon loadout for different roles. Gives them more personality and flavor then just basic bolter guys (with a grenade launder per 5 guys)

Dropping tacs is throwing a huge part of the history of the game into the bin.

How many older players are going to look at legacy collections, have a good long thought about sunk cost fallacies, and walk?

Because dropping tacticals is ripping the heart and soul out of a lot of marine players.

Yeah, this is basically it for me. I've been at this on and off for 35 years and if it doesn't have Tactical, Devastator and Assault Marine squads, it ain't 40K. From here on, it's alternate/homebrew/old rules that don't lock out any of my existing models instead of the incessant and accelerating churn of the 'official' rules/models.

Tacticals assault and Devs exist in some way across the army. Devs got split into several units, while Tacticals are just intercessors and Assault squads are Jump pack intercessors

**Lord Damocles**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Tacticals assault and Devs exist in some way across the army. Devs got split into several units, while Tacticals are just intercessors and Assault squads are Jump pack intercessors

That's missing the point entirely.

**Tastyfish**

Dudeface wrote:
Ashiraya wrote:
Tastyfish wrote:

It's also probably about the right time for a new 'edition' of the rulebook, even if not a complete overhaul of the game. So that a new player isn't also needing to stick in the 35 pages covering the changes to movement like pivots and the various limits to deepstrike, surge moves, discounted strat use.

Oh, let's be real here, 11th edition will need piles and piles of PDF changes too. That is not changing. GW is not the kind of company that pushes out a healthy product day one.

They may be able to bake some things like the changes to towering and devastating wounds into the physical rulebook, but make no mistake, that physical rulebook will still be outdated in a blink.

Dysartes wrote:
LunarSol wrote:
Firestrikes are honestly the perfect Legends unit. They don't really have functional design space for a standard game, but can definitely be used well in custom scenarios that support them.

I don't have the current 'dex, so I'm going to have to ask - why don't the Firestrikes fit into a design space for a "standard" game?

Beats me. If Broadsides and Krieg artillery teams fit, I don't see the issue.

My main gripe with new edition rules this time is the release process. This is feeling like the least impressive box in a while, the big hitter rules changes have been shared and they're hitting radio silence 6-7 weeks out? They seemingly have too little in it to be worth hyping and started too early.

They're just going quiet to allow Armageddon space to breathe, probably be one more quiet week to get the Kill Team stuff out the way and then everyone Grotmasses come at once for the next month and a half after that once we get to the Detachment reveal phase (combined with the compuslory padding out how every army will benefit in the new edition articles).

**Dudeface**

Tastyfish wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Ashiraya wrote:
Tastyfish wrote:

It's also probably about the right time for a new 'edition' of the rulebook, even if not a complete overhaul of the game. So that a new player isn't also needing to stick in the 35 pages covering the changes to movement like pivots and the various limits to deepstrike, surge moves, discounted strat use.

Oh, let's be real here, 11th edition will need piles and piles of PDF changes too. That is not changing. GW is not the kind of company that pushes out a healthy product day one.

They may be able to bake some things like the changes to towering and devastating wounds into the physical rulebook, but make no mistake, that physical rulebook will still be outdated in a blink.

Dysartes wrote:
LunarSol wrote:
Firestrikes are honestly the perfect Legends unit. They don't really have functional design space for a standard game, but can definitely be used well in custom scenarios that support them.

I don't have the current 'dex, so I'm going to have to ask - why don't the Firestrikes fit into a design space for a "standard" game?

Beats me. If Broadsides and Krieg artillery teams fit, I don't see the issue.

My main gripe with new edition rules this time is the release process. This is feeling like the least impressive box in a while, the big hitter rules changes have been shared and they're hitting radio silence 6-7 weeks out? They seemingly have too little in it to be worth hyping and started too early.

They're just going quiet to allow Armageddon space to breathe, probably be one more quiet week to get the Kill Team stuff out the way and then everyone Grotmasses come at once for the next month and a half after that once we get to the Detachment reveal phase (combined with the compuslory padding out how every army will benefit in the new edition articles).

Yes I anticipate there's going to be over a month of faction specific stuff + detachments. It's more that rules wise, 11th seemingly has: minor tweaks to charges, fights first, then a notable change to missions and terrain. Thats it.

It just seems very disjointed as an approach.

**Crimson**

Lord Damocles wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Tacticals assault and Devs exist in some way across the army. Devs got split into several units, while Tacticals are just intercessors and Assault squads are Jump pack intercessors

That's missing the point entirely.

Which is? Obsessing over the pointless minutiae and nomenclature over the general concepts and themes?

**Nevelon**

Assaults translated pretty well to primaris. While I’d like flamers back, can’t complain too much with them.

Devs are not horrible if you want to go mono weapon and there is an option for what you want. But if you want to mix, or to have some bullet sponge bolter boys you are out of luck. From a fluff POV dropping them also leaves a gap in the lifecycle of marines.

Intecessors are not tacticals. They lack the flexibility.

From a hyper specialist POV the loss of flexability from the tacs/devs is not a big deal. Many players never utilized it. For those pf use who traded some of the raw power of specialization for a more TAC build the primaris replacements don’t fit the bill.

**Tastyfish**

Dudeface wrote:

Yes I anticipate there's going to be over a month of faction specific stuff + detachments. It's more that rules wise, 11th seemingly has: minor tweaks to charges, fights first, then a notable change to missions and terrain. Thats it.

It just seems very disjointed as an approach.

More common than not I think, 3rd->5th and 6-7th generally being generally small changes to the core rules (almost always to terrain). Obviously comparing 3rd to 7th is mad, even if technically codices form an unbroken chain across those editions. (a 3rd might have fought a 5th, whilst that 5th might have fought a 7th ed one. Orks even had a 4th ed Codex all the way up into 7th ed).

6th and 7th even had the same Dark Vengeance starter set, just with a new sticker put on the front to let you know it had the updated rulebook!

**Dudeface**

Tastyfish wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

Yes I anticipate there's going to be over a month of faction specific stuff + detachments. It's more that rules wise, 11th seemingly has: minor tweaks to charges, fights first, then a notable change to missions and terrain. Thats it.

It just seems very disjointed as an approach.

More common than not I think, 3rd->5th and 6-7th generally being generally small changes to the core rules (almost always to terrain). Obviously comparing 3rd to 7th is mad, even if technically codices form an unbroken chain across those editions. (a 3rd might have fought a 5th, whilst that 5th might have fought a 7th ed one. Orks even had a 4th ed Codex all the way up into 7th ed).

6th and 7th even had the same Dark Vengeance starter set, just with a new sticker put on the front to let you know it had the updated rulebook!

It did but rhe changes from 6th to 7th were still noteworthy! They also didn't half-ass a content trickle for 2.5 months back then.

**Ashiraya**

Nevelon wrote:

Were marines ever supposed to be bigger then orks? I always thought they were roughly equal in size, with orks having the edge is anything. Orks also being wildly variable in size anyway, with the bigger ones being stronger/tougher/etc.

Yes. Orks were about human-height, normally (though naturally much bulkier, especially as their neck goes forward rather than up). This is just Boyz, they get bigger from there.

Boyz would be ~2m if they stood fully upright, per the 3e codex onwards, but they never actually stand even remotely upright - their upper body is heavily hunched over and their natural stance is broad-legged. (And besides, 2m is still shorter than all but an extremely rare few depictions of Space Marines).

**Shakalooloo**

Dudeface wrote:
It did but rhe changes from 6th to 7th were still noteworthy! They also didn't half-ass a content trickle for 2.5 months back then.

No, instead they made no announcements until WD dropped an article the month before.