PDA

View Full Version : Protesting About The New C:SM!



MasterGideon
17-10-2008, 17:19
Hello all! Been a long time since I have been on been busy getting made redundant!!

But on to the subject at hand, Codex: Space Marine's, now I see that there been posts about this so called "Codex" and about how inconsistent the errata concerning the other Imperial Forces and the new rule set.

Now I know there been a lot of moaning about the new codex and its effect on the Blood Angels and the Dark Angels and Space wolves, now seeing that both the Space Wolves and Blood Angels got decent replies to their Errata concerning the new rules, but after reading the reply the Dark Angels got concerning the "the 2nd rule is always to have fun" has totally slapped me in the face about how childish the management at GW think we are.

Now I am sorry but I for one am not a child, I accept that rules evolve and that the part of the errata is to fix the mistakes or rule updates, but as a paying customer for nearly 20 years I was totally offended by the statement, yes the game is meant to be fun, it’s a game after all, but at the same time there is a small thing called “balance” and being “fair” and to have fun in most games there has to be a balance, not inconsistency!!

Now before every pounces on me saying, your only moaning because you are a Dark Angel player, and yes I am, but it’s not just me affected its all the other loyal and paying customers who have chosen the Dark Angels as there Space Marine Chapter, and that they have potentially made a lot of customer want to stop playing with that statement they had given in the Dark Angels Errata.

I do not want everything thing from the new codex, I would like consistence to universal Wargear I.E. Storm Shields and Landraiders etc to apply to the Dark Angels, I do not care about relic blades or Thunderfire cannons or sternguard etc....Pff we have Deathwing!! Who needs them!

Now here is the point to this post, I have decided to write a letter to Games Workshop and enclose my copy of Codex Dark Angels, and will tell them that after reading that Errata I have decided to stop playing until either, they re-release Codex Dark Angels with up to date Rules (like they did with the Tau:Empire), or to release a new Errata explaining what we can and cannot have, not if the your opponent agree to let you use Codex Space Marine rules updates, or just re-lease a PDF copy of the new Dark Angels codex like they did with the Blood Angels, I am tired of their attitude to their customers.

So if anyone wishes to make a stand, not just for common sense but to make a statement about their attitude against their paying and loyal customers, then please do the same!

Many Thanks
Master Gideon

Inquisitor Engel
17-10-2008, 17:31
Tau Empire was a fulll, from-scratch rewrite. It was not an "update."

I did not work for eight months on testing a set of updated rules, please don't insult ME and the other hard-working playtesters and game designers by insinuating it was.

If you want to use all the fun stuff from Codex Space Marines, guess what, use it. Discuss it with your gaming friends. If they're cool with it, deal with it! 95% of gamers don't go to official tournaments anyway, so I'm entirely sure what the problem is.

Are your friends unwilling to break from the word of GW (when in the rulebook it actually encourages players to come up with house rules) and thus, probably no fun to play against?
Are you afraid to bring this possibility up to them?

The Dark Angels Codex did not get nerfed. The Blood Angels Codex did not get nerfed. They were both only DECENT to begin with, and got whined about when they were released, it died down and then SM brought it all back out again because "Wah, it isn't fair."

You don't see Eldar players complaining that they can't field forces quite as over-powered as the Old Craftworld: Eldar Codex allowed or IG Players moaning they can't use the old, hideously broken Steel Legion rules.

Come to think of it, I haven't really seen any BT players moaning about the new SM Codex and they missed out on a few things with it as well...

Grow up. Your protest isn't going to change a thing. It's great you have ideals and all but if you have such strong feelings of protest and civil disobedience, perhaps you should consider a worthier cause like breast cancer, Darfur or global warming.

PondaNagura
17-10-2008, 17:36
try a search function, people have already discussed sending in DA dexes.

crandall87
17-10-2008, 17:36
The reason that most DA players are angry is because they don't get the shiney new toys. The DA list is still pretty damn good as it is. I see where you are coming from on some things but like Engel said if you want to rules from C:SM then use it.

I like the fact that Dark Angels now are even more different from vanillas even if it means certain items of wargear are not as good.

Alessander
17-10-2008, 17:54
feel free to send in your dark angels codex, you'll just waste postage. It's not a defective product, the exact same product is still on shelves. You've already used the codex for games prior to the new SM codex, so you've already got some use from it. Everyone's products eventually start to pale in comparison to newer ones.

Democratus
17-10-2008, 18:00
I do not want everything thing from the new codex, I would like consistence to universal Wargear I.E. Storm Shields and Landraiders etc to apply to the Dark Angels, I do not care about relic blades or Thunderfire cannons or sternguard etc....Pff we have Deathwing!! Who needs them!

Where does it state in the rules that these wargear are "universal"? Quite the contrary, the new SM codex proves that they are not.

Cartographer
17-10-2008, 18:17
Where does it state in the rules that these wargear are "universal"? Quite the contrary, the new SM codex proves that they are not.

To paraphrase the argument that has raged since the codex was released:

"If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, why on earth does my duck not get the 3+ inv save that that duck does?"

caeanan
17-10-2008, 18:24
I am a BT player and the only problem I have is that now the gear is different depending on which army is being fielded. Some kind of consistancy would be nice. I think if the DA players like the codex marine rules better just use them.

==Me==
17-10-2008, 18:47
The Dark Angels codex was fine before, but the SM Codex showed us what GW is capable of when making a fun and balanced Codex. Needless to say, we get left with a bad taste in our mouths.

All it takes is a simple errata. Where options differ between the DA and SM Codex, refer to SM Codex for stats, options, rules, and points costs. That means the basic elements of the army (Tactical, Assault, Devastator, Scout) get brought into line and oddities like different transport capacities, wargear, and the like are corrected. They keep Sternguard, Chapter Tactics, Ironclad Dreads, and all the fancy characters. We'll happily keep just RW/DW as is if only the rest of the list was viable in comparison.

I'm using the new Codex, but GW won't see a dime from ==Me== until this problem is corrected. I will also be sending some snail mail their way, as it's one of the best ways to grab attention.

Democratus
17-10-2008, 18:51
To paraphrase the argument that has raged since the codex was released:

"If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, why on earth does my duck not get the 3+ inv save that that duck does?"

Because, just like in the real world, supposedly "identical" equipment manufactured in different places can be built with vastly different performance specifications.

For example, the AK-47 is manufactured in a variety of places (both with and without licencing). Some of them produce much higher quality guns than others resulting in differing effective range, reliability, and even power.

It's quite easy to imagine that some of the more unique chapters of the Adeptus (Dark Angels, Blood Angels, etc.) would have their own manufactoriums that produce equipment that is different in performance and ability. And even if the equipment is inferior in battle, they might easily keep using them for religious reasons - as is common for zealots like the SM. Results in combat are a distant second to questions of faith and tradition, even amongst their greatest warriors of the Empire.

BladeWalker
17-10-2008, 19:01
Inquisitor Engel is my new hero! Great post, unlike the OP. At this point any more whining about DA comes off only as whining. There is no cause to champion, play your book or adapt and overcome. If you can't possibly have fun with it, house rule it, switch armies, or quit. The bulk of the gaming population loves the new books that are coming out and happily adapts to change.

Emperor's Grace
17-10-2008, 19:09
Re: OP

Wouldn't the reissue/correction of the DA codex as "second edition" (for 3rd or 4th game edition) have been a better analogy?

OffT to Engel: I really liked Tau Empire, BTW.


Some kind of consistancy would be nice. I think if the DA players like the codex marine rules better just use them.

Both true. Consistency would be nice but, until then, I'll just use my DA successors as regular SM.

avatar of kaine
17-10-2008, 19:21
i'm sick of these n0ob rants i mean the DA were and are ok so were BTand BA but has anyone noticd the absence of a SW codex/ models in there local GW?

Plastic Parody
17-10-2008, 19:39
Nooo not another one. Its like the Chaos Marine dex all over again just with different whinges. There is no reason you cant play DA using the new dex.

Ok so there are a few nigles etc but who really cares. Almost all the other dexes are in the same boat re wargear that doesnt work anymore etc.

Also, if storm shields went to a 5+ save would everyone be moaning then?

shandy
17-10-2008, 19:44
As a Dark Angels player I am happy with sticking with the codex. Have fought against the new marine codex and didn't feel underpower, screwed over or at any point fighting a losing battle (and have yet to feel this against any of the other army types out there). I read all the complaints about how my army is screwed, weak, impossible to win with, nerfed etc but just don't see it. It is weak in some areas but very strong in others. Careful force selection (which can be done if you follow the fluff or decide not to) can give you an army that can face any opponent.
Would I like my Land Raider to be able to carry 12 models- yes but I can wait and not having it doesn't ruin my game or reduce my chances of winning.
Shandy

Mr. Smuckles
17-10-2008, 19:54
Whaaaat? Someone's complaining about a new codex?

THAT NEVER HAPPENS ON THE INTERNET!

arch_inquisitor
17-10-2008, 20:08
I love these 'calls to arms' threads, If you are seriously that emotionally invested in a games rule set or how the company that produces said rule set treats updates errata and new editions, then you need to take a step back and rethink things.

It's not as though new editions are going to stop. The core book will be redone in a few years as will supplement books and codices, and you won't always like it. If you want to deal with GW you have to learn to adapt and overcome, if you can't you will always be annoyed and left crying into your dice bag.

People seem to think that being a long time paying customer warrants some form of recognition, it simply does not. I've been shopping at Wal-Mart for years but I don't think they owe me any special treatment, and before anyone says that it is different it is not WH40K is a product from a company nothing more if you don't like it don't buy it.

Dealing with GW = Adapt and overcome. They often make mistakes, they often overlook things and they change things every few years to keep sales fresh. Consistency hasn't ever been GWs strong point and it never will.

shakespear
17-10-2008, 20:27
Maybe people are "emotionally invested" because of the expense? Imagine if your car company sent a signal to it one day and made it not work or made it unable to drive as well as the other cars on the road. You spent alot of money on that car, how does that make you feel?

I think people have hit the breaking point with prices and this is part of it. I really dont know how anyone could afford to get into this game now.

The Orange
17-10-2008, 20:30
Bahahaha, another one eh?



Grow up.

SM are not DA. And claims of "underpowered 'dex" don't mean squat. You got your codex when it came out. Why do you deserve an upgrade (to make you more powerful) when every other army out there (except other SM of course :rolleyes:) has to wait for there next 'dex?

Upgrading every SMs armory is a ridiculesly messy affair and I'm glad GW stemmed such nonsense at the bud. If you really want it, ask your friends. Is it really that hard to live without GWs official stamp of approval?

Evilhomer
17-10-2008, 20:32
Try playing a real army instead of an offshoot.

>cringe< wth?! :rolleyes:

Seriously most of these posts are flamebait, would it really be that hard to just let threads like this die off?

Lisiecki
17-10-2008, 20:35
try a search function, people have already discussed sending in DA dexes.

I still have no idea how this is supposed to work.

Step 1: Send Dex in
Step 2: Illigealy download codex
Step 3: Continue to play from your illegal torrent

How this accomplishes ANY THING boggles me
I am boggled

arch_inquisitor
17-10-2008, 20:44
Maybe people are "emotionally invested" because of the expense? Imagine if your car company sent a signal to it one day and made it not work or made it unable to drive as well as the other cars on the road. You spent alot of money on that car, how does that make you feel?

I think people have hit the breaking point with prices and this is part of it. I really dont know how anyone could afford to get into this game now.

Then don't play or just play with what you have or remodel what you already have, add models slowly, save up for a couple weeks to get the odd new thing. I can think of dozens of solutions to the price thing.

It is a LUXURY PRODUCT I have no sympathy at all for anyone that whinges on price. GW does not owe us anything!!! To bad. End of story. Thanks for playing, we have some lovely parting gifts for you.

No one NEEDs a new model every week nor do we NEED proper updates or FAQ.

ADAPT AND OVERCOME or get out of the way.

volair
17-10-2008, 20:45
Just face the fact that you are not playing a real army. Dark Angels, Imperial Guard, Witch Hunters, Demon Hunters, Dark Eldar, the old Storm of Chaos lists, Feral Orks, etc... You take a risk when you play a spin off or non-mainstream army. Thankfully there is a new trend to reinvigorate those that have the potential to become real armies, for example the Orks, which for the longest time were allowed to be rubbish and were fairly recently revived. Rumor has it that Imperial Guard are going to receive similar treatment as the Orks, becoming a real army. I guess my point is that Space Marine chapters are spinoffs and possibly, though not certainly, always will be, so get used to it or play a real army.

Evilhomer
17-10-2008, 20:58
I don't play any armies ;)

I do collect several (including IG) however. Simply assuming that I am a DA player because I disagreed with the attitude of your post is somewhat presumptuous - although I am a big fan (see other threads and posts).

DA have been mainstream for a long time, having had codex's since 2nd edition, and having had their own metal boxes since rogue trader. So they're a well established part of GW and won't be going away anytime soon.

orks2134
17-10-2008, 21:10
This happens every time a new codex comes out. Funny thing is, the original poster hasn't even bothered to check back in.
Perhaps he was... trollin', trollin', trollin'...

Vaktathi
17-10-2008, 21:10
Because, just like in the real world, supposedly "identical" equipment manufactured in different places can be built with vastly different performance specifications.

For example, the AK-47 is manufactured in a variety of places (both with and without licencing). Some of them produce much higher quality guns than others resulting in differing effective range, reliability, and even power.

It's quite easy to imagine that some of the more unique chapters of the Adeptus (Dark Angels, Blood Angels, etc.) would have their own manufactoriums that produce equipment that is different in performance and ability. And even if the equipment is inferior in battle, they might easily keep using them for religious reasons - as is common for zealots like the SM. Results in combat are a distant second to questions of faith and tradition, even amongst their greatest warriors of the Empire.

Even if thats the case, why do Mechanicus STC designs that are ubiquitous, and have been since 2nd Ed, all of a sudden have higher transport capacity, but only for some? Why does a Land Raider with lascannons in one army have a different capacity than another, given that they are manufactured identically?

also, lets be honest, whenever DA gets its update in 2012 or whenever, do you really think they won't get the new wargear, capacities and other things? I'm sure they will, so will Space Wolves and the other chapters when they get re-released. The only issue here is that GW is sticking to its asinine and strict "way its written in the codex" ruling for everything.

The fact that IG and BT don't get to use the new dedicated transport rules because their books had a copy-paste sentence from the core rulebook at the time of their release is proof. Expect both of those restrictions to be gone in their new book whenever they come out. It has nothing to do with fluff or balance, just Alessio on some asinine track for everything to play exactly as its written regardless of updates or common sense.





You don't see Eldar players complaining that they can't field forces quite as over-powered as the Old Craftworld: Eldar Codex allowed or IG Players moaning they can't use the old, hideously broken Steel Legion rules. What on earth was broken about the Armageddon Steel Legion rules? I'm honestly not seeing what was so broken about an IG list with Chimera's, especially given that the exact same army is doable with the current codex. I really don't see what was so off with the Steel Legion modifications.

Also, while the Craftworld Codex lost some of its power builds, I think most of the Eldar players that wanted ultra-power lists didn't have to look too far to find what they wanted in the new list.





Grow up. Your protest isn't going to change a thing. It's great you have ideals and all but if you have such strong feelings of protest and civil disobedience, perhaps you should consider a worthier cause like breast cancer, Darfur or global warming. A player/customer comes on an internet discussion forum to express a percieved problem with a new release and its effect on an older release that was considered mediocre when it was originally released to begin with, and you basically just tell him to shut up and worry about larger things and not tell the company that customers have an issue with this? From a posters standpoint, I don't think that was warranted, From GW's standpoint, if they had any marketing sense at all, they'd want to know about things like this, even if they don't take action immediately. This is *exactly* the kind of place to express such thoughts, thats part of what sites like Warseer, Dakka Dakka and others are here for.

Jack5h1t
17-10-2008, 21:18
Tau Empire was a fulll, from-scratch rewrite. It was not an "update."

I did not work for eight months on testing a set of updated rules, please don't insult ME and the other hard-working playtesters and game designers by insinuating it was.

If you want to use all the fun stuff from Codex Space Marines, guess what, use it. Discuss it with your gaming friends. If they're cool with it, deal with it! 95% of gamers don't go to official tournaments anyway, so I'm entirely sure what the problem is.

Are your friends unwilling to break from the word of GW (when in the rulebook it actually encourages players to come up with house rules) and thus, probably no fun to play against?
Are you afraid to bring this possibility up to them?

The Dark Angels Codex did not get nerfed. The Blood Angels Codex did not get nerfed. They were both only DECENT to begin with, and got whined about when they were released, it died down and then SM brought it all back out again because "Wah, it isn't fair."

You don't see Eldar players complaining that they can't field forces quite as over-powered as the Old Craftworld: Eldar Codex allowed or IG Players moaning they can't use the old, hideously broken Steel Legion rules.

Come to think of it, I haven't really seen any BT players moaning about the new SM Codex and they missed out on a few things with it as well...

Grow up. Your protest isn't going to change a thing. It's great you have ideals and all but if you have such strong feelings of protest and civil disobedience, perhaps you should consider a worthier cause like breast cancer, Darfur or global warming.

Thank you Engel, you saved me a lot of typing

gitburna
17-10-2008, 21:25
Maybe people are "emotionally invested" because of the expense? Imagine if your car company sent a signal to it one day and made it not work or made it unable to drive as well as the other cars on the road. You spent alot of money on that car, how does that make you feel?

I think people have hit the breaking point with prices and this is part of it. I really dont know how anyone could afford to get into this game now.

Ok, nice car analogy but i think this one is better :-

You buy your car, it works perfectly fine compared with all other cars available at the time and then several months later they bring out a new model which has new features or improvements (better fuel economy, more room inside, higher top speed, whatever). Does this instantly make your old car scrap and good for nothing?

shakespear
17-10-2008, 21:27
Ok, nice car analogy but i think this one is better :-

You buy your car, it works perfectly fine compared with all other cars available at the time and then several months later they bring out a new model which has new features or improvements (better fuel economy, more room inside, higher top speed, whatever). Does this instantly make your old car scrap and good for nothing?

It makes it useless for racing the newer cars.

volair
17-10-2008, 21:27
Ok, nice car analogy but i think this one is better :-

You buy your car, it works perfectly fine compared with all other cars available at the time and then several months later they bring out a new model which has new features or improvements (better fuel economy, more room inside, higher top speed, whatever). Does this instantly make your old car scrap and good for nothing?

No but it does mean that you are driving an inferior car.

orks2134
17-10-2008, 21:27
Ok, nice car analogy but i think this one is better :-

You buy your car, it works perfectly fine compared with all other cars available at the time and then several months later they bring out a new model which has new features or improvements (better fuel economy, more room inside, higher top speed, whatever). Does this instantly make your old car scrap and good for nothing?


Hilarious! Very good comeback. Very true too. DA is like an old VW City, while the new Marine codex is the new Rabbit. Both sit side by side on the lot. Only one is really new.

BOO-YA-SHAK-A!

Grandmaster Abael
17-10-2008, 21:40
Well, i dont believe, that codexdesign has anything to do with balanced and fair gaming anymore.

GW just makes rules to sell miniatures. They have stated it several times. The idea of delivering a qualityproduct is long gone now. Only cash counts.
And by their logic you should leave your DA and buy a new army, including many of the new UM-characters, as they are now "teh RoxxOrs !!!111". And then you should leave again and buy some SW... , and so on.

Welcome to the powercreep.

gitburna
17-10-2008, 21:40
It makes it useless for racing the newer cars.


No but it does mean that you are driving an inferior car.

What to do then, decide to harrass Ford until they've upgraded all the things that you dont get on your car (that you were perfectly happy with only yesterday) compared to Shiney New Ford? Oh No! Look, Honda just released a new Civic Type R, its just so amazing!. Why cant my ford have all the things that new Honda does . Bloody Fords, Im going to take it back (even though its now 2 years old) and demand they bring my model up to date with what all these other new cars can do.

Oh Noooo!!! I just traded in my ford for the new Civic , it cost me loads more but it was really cool and for like, a month i was the best thing on the streets!. But now the bloody government has decided that people with racing cars like mine with poor fuel economy, CO2 emissions and whatnot should have to pay more for the yearly Road Tax, and they've increased the price of fuel as well! That just totally sucks, life is just so unfair. And to cap it all, i just found out that toyota are researching Hydrogen powered cars. Frickin hydrogen powered ?! That just totally nerfs my Honda Civic.

shakespear
17-10-2008, 21:45
What to do then, decide to harrass Ford until they've upgraded all the things that you dont get on your car (that you were perfectly happy with only yesterday) compared to Shiney New Ford? Oh No! Look, Honda just released a new Civic Type R, its just so amazing!. Why cant my ford have all the things that new Honda does . Bloody Ford, all they do is rip me off, Im going to take it back (even though its now 2 years old) and demand they bring my model up to date with what all these other new cars can do, Ford must hate me.

Ford tells me all the cars they make are equal, regardless of "when" they come out. They regularly hold races and encourage people to race in them.

Turns out they lied to me.

So Im not allowed to be upset? Im just supposed to bite the pillow?

What do you play? I cant wait until they do it to you.

Vaktathi
17-10-2008, 21:47
What to do then, decide to harrass Ford until they've upgraded all the things that you dont get on your car (that you were perfectly happy with only yesterday) compared to Shiney New Ford? Oh No! Look, Honda just released a new Civic Type R, its just so amazing!. Why cant my ford have all the things that new Honda does . Bloody Ford, all they do is rip me off, Im going to take it back (even though its now 2 years old) and demand they bring my model up to date with what all these other new cars can do, Ford must hate me. If Shiney New Ford was supposed to be equal to Old Ford, I would be.

The problem with your analogy is assuming that the SM codex is "shiny new ford" and not "Different, but supposedly equal" ford. SM wargear and transport capacity really should be identical, and you can probably be sure that whenever older SM books get updated, they will get the new stuff. The problem is twofold. Those updates are a long way away, and the new SM's really don't see any cost increase for all the new stuff, in many cases cost *decreases*. You can make the exact same army with either the SM or DA codex, but the SM army will have a couple points extra to spare, Combat Tactics, and a some better Wargear. *That* is where the problem is. When one can make an identical army in terms of whats included, but one is better and cheaper for no real reason, that is a problem.

Durandal
17-10-2008, 21:48
I think people have hit the breaking point with prices and this is part of it. I really dont know how anyone could afford to get into this game now.

I am! :eyebrows: (Checks wallet.)

Actually I think the many complaints about cost are a bit OTT. Okay, I'm new, and haven't yet spent tons of dosh on GW products, but compared to many hobbies, Warhammer doesn't seem that expensive to get in to.

Grandmaster Abael
17-10-2008, 21:59
Well, according cars: You can still buy an old one for a few hundreds bucks drive around till it breaks down. But to find some, who plays 2nd edition 40k with you is a lot trickier. So your comparisation is a little bit flawed, especially when you consider all tuning opportunies, a car has.

gitburna
17-10-2008, 22:19
Ford tells me all the cars they make are equal, regardless of "when" they come out. They regularly hold races and encourage people to race in them.

Turns out they lied to me.

So Im not allowed to be upset? Im just supposed to bite the pillow?

What do you play? I cant wait until they do it to you.

In a game where you get to pick and choose the parts of an army and build them into a whole, things are never going to be the same. Do you demand that an all guardsmen lasgun army should play identically to a space marine army with 3 landraiders in it? GW is Formula 1, not Indy Car racing. There are certain rules, that everyone has to follow but having an identical car is not one of them

What do I Play? Try looking at my signature. Comparing having the rules for toy soldiers slightly changed to being raped ?How pleasant and grown up of you. Can't wait until they do it to me? So, you think I'll bleat about how one of my armies is screwed on the internet?

Vaktathi
17-10-2008, 22:29
In a game where you get to pick and choose the parts of an army and build them into a whole, things are never going to be the same. Do you demand that an all guardsmen lasgun army should play identically to a space marine army with 3 landraiders in it? GW is Formula 1, not Indy Car racing. There are certain rules, that everyone has to follow but having an identical car is not one of them No, but we would expect a Lasgun or Bolter to be identical in every army its in. That was the point.



What do I Play? Try looking at my signature. Comparing having the rules for toy soldiers slightly changed to being raped ?How pleasant and grown up of you. Can't wait until they do it to me? So, you think I'll bleat about how one of my armies is screwed on the internet? So, you come onto an internet discussion forum for a toy soldiers game, and then blast someone for discussing their feelings on the rules regarding said toy soldiers on said internet discussion forum?

Temprus
17-10-2008, 23:42
People do not understand the purpose of a codex. ;) They do not exist to make a game better (or worse). They do not exist to have "fair" or even consistent rules (or fluff). There is no balance within a codex, much less balance between codexes. They are just a medium to convince you to buy more models, nothing more or less. If you are not buying more and more models from the inspiration a codex provides, then you need to switch to a different codex! :angel:

All (semi-)kidding aside, GW won't admit to making "mistakes", so they will not properly/responsibly fix issues such as inconsistent stats/point costs for common wargear. GW seems to be on this weird kick that somehow hindering "the majority" who could benefit from a fix/update is better than not having that fix reach some mythological (and very small if it exists at all) minority that can't reach it through the internet or from GW directly. If I can buy GW product, then GW already has a channel that could reach me with any updates they need/want me to have, even if it is just putting it in White Dwarf or sending me out a photocopied/printed page or 10 if I call them up and ask for it (maybe it is too hard to put a blurb in books that says to call to see it there are any updates to these works if you don't have internet access :eyebrows: ).

MasterGideon
17-10-2008, 23:59
Opps! I have seem to have opened up a can of worms! my post was not intended to start a mass war of this nature.

I can tell from most people views that I am being a moaning B**tch, which in some ways I am, I admit that, and I admited that from the start.

I would just like some consistance that all, I aint aiming this at anyone at all, and I am sorry that I offended anyone in this post, I just find it very annoying thats all!

But as most of you said, I gotta suck it up! Hell Ill still go down fighting when playing my mates new Space Marine army!

Master Gideon

Vaktathi
18-10-2008, 00:12
Opps! I have seem to have opened up a can of worms! my post was not intended to start a mass war of this nature.

I can tell from most people views that I am being a moaning B**tch, which in some ways I am, I admit that, and I admited that from the start.

I would just like some consistance that all, I aint aiming this at anyone at all, and I am sorry that I offended anyone in this post, I just find it very annoying thats all!

But as most of you said, I gotta suck it up! Hell Ill still go down fighting when playing my mates new Space Marine army!

Master Gideon

You'll get that from a lot of people, but don't forget that the game environment is supposed to be a balanced one (even if in practice it certainly isn't) and that you should express such grieveances so long as they are reasonable (thats part of why these forums exist). The differences between older SM wargear and such and the new books are certainly reasonable enough to wish GW would fix, or wonder why SM's honestly needed it in the first place.

HsojVvad
18-10-2008, 00:20
Opps! I have seem to have opened up a can of worms! my post was not intended to start a mass war of this nature.

I can tell from most people views that I am being a moaning B**tch, which in some ways I am, I admit that, and I admited that from the start.

I would just like some consistance that all, I aint aiming this at anyone at all, and I am sorry that I offended anyone in this post, I just find it very annoying thats all!

But as most of you said, I gotta suck it up! Hell Ill still go down fighting when playing my mates new Space Marine army!

Master Gideon


Look at my posts, I flamed as well. Heaven forbid people talk about their unhappiess about a GW prodcut.

You know what the funny thing is? It was all the whinning and crying from SM players when Codex Dark Angels came out that caused the change of direction for GW. People complained too bland, too boring for it to be SM.

So it's ok for SM players to complain about DA and Chaos codex but when we do it, we are whiners.

ehlijen
18-10-2008, 00:41
Wah wha wah. The new marine codex totally ruined chaplains, librarians and techmarines. They totally can't do combat anymore and try giving them a 4+ invul save without the armoury. I'm totally sending in my new dex and demand they crayon over all their stats with what they were like up till codex DA! Who's with me?

But seriously:
You want DA to have a different codex? Deal with the fact that it is different!
You don't want DA to have a different codex? Throw it away if you have it and just use codex space marines!
The grass is always greener in the other codex? We know, pick one and deal with it.

Plastic Parody
18-10-2008, 00:47
There were a number of options open to them:

1. Release updated erata essentially modifying the whole army list making the DA book invalid. Que moaning about how people paid for the book and now its changed. Then what happens, all the Tau, Guard, Daemon Hunter, Witch Hunter, Eldar etc players will all start complaining about not getting more detailed erata. End result EVERYONE is unhappy, even some DA players!?!

2. Not make any changes to the new Marine dex and make it bland etc just like the DA one to keep them happy and disappoint ALL the other marine players.

3. Leave it as is and only annoy the DA players while leaving them in the same boat that a lot of other armies are in already and have been for some time - by far the smallest group to be affected.

In not saying Im happy with the way it has worked out. It made for one seriously weird close combat in an Apoc game recently.

Vaktathi
18-10-2008, 00:53
But seriously:
You want DA to have a different codex? Deal with the fact that it is different!
You don't want DA to have a different codex? Throw it away if you have it and just use codex space marines!
The grass is always greener in the other codex? We know, pick one and deal with it.
There's a difference between being different and different just for the sake of different.

While honestly I think DA should have simply been a part of the SM dex, given that they have their own book, their differences should come from different organizational structures and tactics (I.E Ravenwing/Deathwing style armies) and *not* through arbitrary and nonsensical wargear changes which should all be identical STC designs. Land Raiders and Drop Pods shouls have the same transport capacities, Storm Shields should be the same, just as Terminator Armor, Bolt Guns, etc should be the same. Now actual variants on these is one thing, but there's nothing to indicate other then wild conjecture on the part of random people to indicate this with respect to DA and other marines gear.

Kalec
18-10-2008, 00:58
I have always found it amazing how the Warseerites crawl out of the woodwork every time a marine player complains about something.

Sidstyler
18-10-2008, 01:23
Because, just like in the real world, supposedly "identical" equipment manufactured in different places can be built with vastly different performance specifications.

For example, the AK-47 is manufactured in a variety of places (both with and without licencing). Some of them produce much higher quality guns than others resulting in differing effective range, reliability, and even power.

It's quite easy to imagine that some of the more unique chapters of the Adeptus (Dark Angels, Blood Angels, etc.) would have their own manufactoriums that produce equipment that is different in performance and ability. And even if the equipment is inferior in battle, they might easily keep using them for religious reasons - as is common for zealots like the SM. Results in combat are a distant second to questions of faith and tradition, even amongst their greatest warriors of the Empire.

That was a damn good post, and a very convincing explanation for the differences in equipment. :p

ehlijen
18-10-2008, 01:38
Yes, it'd make more sense if gear was the same. But that's all background. Invoking background to justify rules changes can just as easily lead to movie marines as to a a balanced game.

Though I am sure when DA get redone (as much as I think there shouldn't be any varient codices I know that will eventually happen) this will be addressed, from a rules stand point, there is no reason one codex can't have different rules for something another codex also has under the same name.

If they want to change something, they have to start somewhere. And no matter where they start, someone is going to benefit earlier than the others. It's part of their one-dex-at-a-time program.

Eventually, change will filter down to everyone else.

FAQs aren't going to change this as the obvious answer is of course: use the new marine dex.

DA were balanced to work as they were written. So we are to use them as they are written (with better characters, worse termies and all the other differences).
SM were balanced as written, so we are supposed to use them as they are written.

Pick whichever you prefer and use it. Where is the problem?

Gutlord Grom
18-10-2008, 01:48
Umm... not to be rude... but ... well you could just maybe use the new SM rules if you want, to represent DA. But whatever you want.

robertsjf
18-10-2008, 01:54
But we complained enough to GW to change its entire "design philosophy" for the SM codex, and complaining about the 3rd Ed DA codex got a reprint. Kinda encourages whinning when GW can't make up its own mind.....

Vaktathi
18-10-2008, 01:54
Yes, it'd make more sense if gear was the same. But that's all background. Invoking background to justify rules changes can just as easily lead to movie marines as to a a balanced game. Sure, I agree, however both from a rules perspective and fluff perspective, there is nothing justifying *why* these things are different.



Though I am sure when DA get redone (as much as I think there shouldn't be any varient codices I know that will eventually happen) this will be addressed I agree, and thats what makes it so frustrating. If DA came out next week, instead of 2007, They'd get all the new wargear, probably without any adjustments to their current rules. the problem is GW is incapable of going back and revising anything, even when it would keep them from having to do a new release for a couple years to concentrate on other lines.


from a rules stand point, there is no reason one codex can't have different rules for something another codex also has under the same name. true, but there are multiple disconnects there in terms of thinking about it for players, and there certainly didn't seem to be a balance issue as all the new wargear/transports (and things like PotMS) in the SM codex are the same price or cheaper compared with the DA codex.



If they want to change something, they have to start somewhere. And no matter where they start, someone is going to benefit earlier than the others. It's part of their one-dex-at-a-time program. Thats the core problem. Their one-dex-at-a-time program is majorly flawed, there's a reason that other gaming companies don't do it that way.


FAQs aren't going to change this as the obvious answer is of course: use the new marine dex.



DA were balanced to work as they were written. So we are to use them as they are written (with better characters, worse termies and all the other differences).
SM were balanced as written, so we are supposed to use them as they are written. "Balanced" (verb form) is not something I would really say GW has done with either dex. DA was mostly a cut-paste job with a couple things that were attempted to get balanced by upcosting them, however didn't really do a good job of this either (Dreads for instance).

With SM's, I don't think they honestly did any real playtesting. Salamanders armies with 2+/3++ Inv saves and master crafted thunder hammer terminators is...silly at best, as is Fleeting Terminators with Shrike.



Pick whichever you prefer and use it. Where is the problem?The problem is GW's model takes far too long to address issues, has asinine FAQ rulings, and leads to far more inconsistencies than other game systems

arch_inquisitor
18-10-2008, 02:00
Umm... not to be rude... but ... well you could just maybe use the new SM rules if you want, to represent DA. But whatever you want.

Oh don't say that again the last few times this was suggested it only made things worse.:D

Ianos
18-10-2008, 10:43
yes the game is meant to be fun, it’s a game after all, but at the same time there is a small thing called “balance” and being “fair” and to have fun in most games there has to be a balance, not inconsistency!!


Inconsistency has nothing to do with imbalance. In the DA-SM comparison you (and all DA complainers) should take into account the entire codex not just some entries. DA can do things that vanilla cannot even dream of, maybe just maybe, the designers where not so inconsistent as they simply felt that SM should have a somewhat better gear in SOME of the cases so as to give them a better feel and better balance vs. the chapters.

BTW, i just opened my builder and made a list with 3 devastators, 2 termie troops, flying land-raider of doom, belial, and 1 troop bike squad at 1750. Except for the HQs (Which have awesome written all over), ALL the units can be combat squaded (when i realized DA devas can split i almost went nuts) and they all score! If they do not split they only yield 8 hard to kill points. Would i trade that for the new Sshield? NO CHANCE IN HELL:evilgrin:

Honestly, if i where to start a marine army now, it would definitely have some green in it...

Vaktathi
18-10-2008, 10:56
Inconsistency has nothing to do with imbalance. In the DA-SM comparison you (and all DA complainers) should take into account the entire codex not just some entries. DA can do things that vanilla cannot even dream of, maybe just maybe, the designers where not so inconsistent as they simply felt that SM should have a somewhat better gear in SOME of the cases so as to give them a better feel and better balance vs. the chapters. It's possible, but I really don't see it, especially given their ridiculous characters, and especially for no cost increase (and in some cases *decreases*)

Again, you can build the exact same army between the DA and SM books, but the SM army will be a little cheaper and have a little better wargear along with being able to retreat from CC. *that* is where the problem lies.

It's kinda ridiculous that the basic SM's got new gear for their basic troops while their cost went down (At least for 10man squads with weapons) coupled with then getting either buffs, cost decreases, or both on the majority of their vehicles (look at an SM Vindicator compared to the Chaos, DA,BA,BT one, cheaper and auto-passes terrain tests, or the basic Land Raider thats still the same cost, but has a better PoTMS and a greater transport capacity, and can now dump out 2+/3+sv terminators). The infantry changes by itself was one thing, even if it did make them cheaper (and better thanks to combat tactics) compared to those found in BA/DA lists, but then to get all the bunk SC's and the vehicle and wargear changes, and then say that none of those changes on STC and Codex equipment applies to the other SM lists is more than a bit silly.

borithan
18-10-2008, 11:16
1) GW is moving towards one book armies. They don't want Dark Angels, Blood Angels, and when they come out, Space Wolves, to have to refer to another codex to be workable. Therefore they are not going to make something saying "refer to SM codex to use it" as that will necessitate buying two codexes, when they only want you to require one for each army (they may want you to have more than one army, but they don't want people to have to buy more than one book to start an army... might turn people off choosing those armies). Also, the wargear in the book was pointed with that wargear in mind, in that army. If you choose to change the wargear how do you point it?

2) If they FAQ it, they are relying on people looking online for their resources... sure, I would know to try that, and I would imagine anyone here would, but what about the 9 year old and his mum who don't have experience with this kind of thing. Sure they use the internet, but the idea that you would need to go on line to find the latest things? Mind turn them off again, even if they understood the whole idea. Sure, they FAQ things that are internally broken, but then that is usually more finniky rules readers not going for what is intended, but what the rules could suggest if applied too literally.

3)The most likely would be to release a second edition of the codex, like with dark eldar, but that suffers from the problem that some people will have different versions, even though they are seemingly the same, would take time to redo, and would raise complaints from other races which have not had such recent codexes.

Gazak Blacktoof
18-10-2008, 11:41
I still don't understand why people persist in arguing that placing FAQs on the website would confuse people. FAQs and Errata are already placed on the website. Once you've been told once you know where to look in the future and if nobody you play with uses the FAQs or Errata documents it doesn't matter anyway.

What will cause confusion is having two seemingly identical pieces of equipment with the same name having different sets of rules and the occasional player switching between codexes to get the optimum from his army. Visual representation is a key feature of miniature war gaming but its becoming frayed around the edges as a concept in 40K at the moment.

ChrisMurray
18-10-2008, 11:59
Would someone clear something up for me about the DA's.
Ravenwing armies are all bike armies so use the DA:Codex-no one seems to complain about this.
Deathwing armies are all termies so use te DA:Codex. No one finds anything wrong with this.

A battle company\normal DA armie people complain about using the C:SM rules.

My question is why? If your not using the deathwing\ravenwing armie then your armie is effectively a codex force so why not use the "smurfs" rulebook.

And just to note about the FAQ's\errater change's, I never look at them. I have the rulebook and my codex's, thats all I need. I know people who don't have access to the net and don't buy WD, so for tese people these living documents would be no use. (and getting GW stores to print them for people would get costly)

Lame Duck
18-10-2008, 12:30
1) The inconsistencies shouldn't of happened.
2) They did happen.
3) Yes, it is fairly annoying/unfair.
4) Get over it, you'll manage.

borithan
18-10-2008, 12:46
I still don't understand why people persist in arguing that placing FAQs on the website would confuse people. FAQs and Errata are already placed on the website. Once you've been told once you know where to look in the future and if nobody you play with uses the FAQs or Errata documents it doesn't matter anyway.Some people don't have the internet, or are not that at home on the internet. You may not confused, but then you (and I) use the internet to have discussions about wargames, a very minority activity, one which would require being comfortable on the net. It is not about being confused as such, but not understanding why someone should have to look that up online.

Just using compute r games as an example. I (and I presume many here) am used to playing computer games. I understand the conventions, about what is usually possible and whatnot. I have had those that don't have as much computer games experience ask questions about why you cannot do something (say "Why not go through that door?" "Because you cannot open it" or "How did you know to do that?"). To you, and to a lesser extent, me, online FAQs are perfectly natural thing. But just because you find it an obvious principle doesn't mean it is to those with no or little experience of it. Think about people used to playing something no more complicated then monopoly. If you buy the rules (ok, they come with the game in that case, but you still get the rules) you don't expect rules to change, let alone new things being brought in and so complicating it and needing explanation because they cause a clash with a minor rule if that minor rule is read exactly as written and not just taking the common place answer, or there being clashes existing between existing things that were designed for older rules. You don't expect this to happen at all, let alone have to go onto a website you have never visited before, find where the FAQs are stored and then download them.

Sure, online FAQs are fine for established customers who are comfortable with computers, but for newcomers and for those without computer skills?



What will cause confusion is having two seemingly identical pieces of equipment with the same name having different sets of rules and the occasional player switching between codexes to get the optimum from his army.It is simple enough. The Codexes are meant to be self contained. If it says something in the Codex that is how it works, no matter how it is named. In fact that is simpler than having to rely on someone else buying another codex to go along with it, or having downloaded the online FAQ. If someone switches Codex, who cares. They use that codex, even if it is Codex Marines that are painted dark green or red. Confusion only occurs when people try to use things that are not in their Codex. It might not be fair, but it is not confusing.

Gazak Blacktoof
18-10-2008, 12:51
@Chris Murray

There's nobody in the UK that doesn't have internet access AFAIK. You can even go into your local library to download documents and put them on a stick drive or CD/ DVD, most places with web access have a printer or you can take them to a print shop and get all the documents printed off for about £5.

If nobody in your group uses FAQs though it doesn't really affect your gaming group if GW does or doesn't publish online errata or faqs you'll be playing the same game either way.

EDIT:

@borithan

My point was visual representation. Sure its easy enough to understand that there's a difference but there shouldn't be one for the sake of consistency. 40K works on WYSIWYG, they've even extended this to LOS. Having two identical models have two sets of rules is terrible. The same player can switch between codexes and use the same model with two sets of rules, that's a bit weird.

taffeh
18-10-2008, 12:53
I love the power of the internet when your not on a internal professional's site - anyone who voices any opinion is shot down by 101 other peoples opinion!

Any form of creative discussion is not going to happen here unfortinatly....

Any 13 year old or yokle will just turn on their burna and put your thread down in a series of flames. Especially as the DA dex issues is a very hot topic at the moment, but as people have said, theres been many, many, many of them!

borithan
18-10-2008, 12:59
There's nobody in the UK that doesn't have internet access AFAIK. You can even go into your local library to download documents and put them on a stick drive or CD/ DVD, most places with web access have a printer or you can take them to a print shop and get all the documents printed off for about £5.Still adds complications to getting the information, rather than having it as said in the book, and still needs computer skills and being comfortable online.



My point was visual representation. Sure its easy enough to understand that there's a difference but there shouldn't be one for the sake of consistency. 40K works on WYSIWYG, they've even extended this to LOS.Which I think was a bad idea anyway, but thats off topic.



Having two identical models have two sets of rules is terrible. The same player can switch between codexes and sue the same model with two sets of rules, that's a bit weird.A bit weird, sure, but I don't actually see a serious problem.

ChrisMurray
18-10-2008, 13:08
@Chris Murray

There's nobody in the UK that doesn't have internet access AFAIK. You can even go into your local library to download documents and put them on a stick drive or CD/ DVD, most places with web access have a printer or you can take them to a print shop and get all the documents printed off for about £5.



It may be possible for everyone to have access to it, but where in the rulebook\codex's does it say "Thank you for purchasing this product for £x now please go to your local library every week,pay to use the internet so you can see if there are any updates, if there are pay to print them off."

Thats alot of hassle and extra expense. Everyone has access to a car\house-not everyone owns one\has the use of one(well the house they usually do but not the car)

Gazak Blacktoof
18-10-2008, 13:26
I don't think I'd say it was a "lot" of hassle, as you've already pointed out you don't even use the current errata so its not going to be any hassle for you. I'd rather have consistency in my games.

I'm playing devil's advocate here, I don't use the official 40K rules, so I don't want to get into a big debate on the subject. I've had my say so I'll leave it at that.

==Me==
18-10-2008, 14:22
Inconsistency has nothing to do with imbalance. In the DA-SM comparison you (and all DA complainers) should take into account the entire codex not just some entries. DA can do things that vanilla cannot even dream of, maybe just maybe, the designers where not so inconsistent as they simply felt that SM should have a somewhat better gear in SOME of the cases so as to give them a better feel and better balance vs. the chapters.

If that were the case I'd agree with you. The problem is that DA and SM share the vast majority of their units, barring Deathwing and Ravenwing. We get scoring overpriced Terminators, better stats on Scouts and Chaplains (both not scoring), while SM get all their new units, everything they share with us is cheaper, has more options, and is better and they can even take Bikes as Troops. Bikes that are cheaper, come in larger squads, and are arguably more useful. RW have Fearless, Scouts, and Teleport Homers. Fearless is terrible for them, Scouts is awesome, and Teleport Homers are only useful if you take DW. SM Bikes get combat tactics, a vastly superior ability for what they do, more bikes per squad, a lower cost than RW, and have the option for teleport homers. All they're missing is scouts, and taking Khan gives them the next best thing. GW tried to change their design with DA and Chaos, but the negative backlash was so great they switched to the design in the SM Codex. And DA/BA/Chaos are left with their books, which are very poor quality when compared to the SM book.


BTW, i just opened my builder and made a list with 3 devastators, 2 termie troops, flying land-raider of doom, belial, and 1 troop bike squad at 1750. Except for the HQs (Which have awesome written all over), ALL the units can be combat squaded (when i realized DA devas can split i almost went nuts) and they all score! If they do not split they only yield 8 hard to kill points. Would i trade that for the new Sshield? NO CHANCE IN HELL:evilgrin:

Combat Squads are not scoring, the FAQ got rid of that stupid exploit. And the one-trick pony Death/Raven build is very good, but I don't see why we should be forced to use one build to remain viable. The DW/RW are only 2 companies out of 10, why do we get punished for wanting to run a Battle company or mixed army?


Honestly, if i where to start a marine army now, it would definitely have some green in it...

w00t Invaders!:angel:

Helveticus
18-10-2008, 15:09
I agree, and thats what makes it so frustrating. If DA came out next week, instead of 2007, They'd get all the new wargear, probably without any adjustments to their current rules.

I would tend to disagree. I doubt they'd get Terminator Command Squads with 3+ Storm Shields and 4+ Feel No Pain. I also doubt their non-commander characters would have more than 2 Attacks base, or more than two wounds.

Bassik
18-10-2008, 15:41
The new space marines are awesome.
The space marine variants are also awesome, because they're unique.

Wheee!

WLBjork
18-10-2008, 16:05
The DA codex is fine. No, scratch that - it's great.

The problem is that the current SM codex is a pile of junk that should never have seen the light of day in it's current format.

GW should be ashamed and release a new, decent SM codex to replace it with.




Because, just like in the real world, supposedly "identical" equipment manufactured in different places can be built with vastly different performance specifications.

For example, the AK-47 is manufactured in a variety of places (both with and without licencing). Some of them produce much higher quality guns than others resulting in differing effective range, reliability, and even power.

It's quite easy to imagine that some of the more unique chapters of the Adeptus (Dark Angels, Blood Angels, etc.) would have their own manufactoriums that produce equipment that is different in performance and ability. And even if the equipment is inferior in battle, they might easily keep using them for religious reasons - as is common for zealots like the SM. Results in combat are a distant second to questions of faith and tradition, even amongst their greatest warriors of the Empire.

GW have established elsewhere that things don't work that way.

Mars Alpha Pattern Leman Russ hulls look different to a regular Russ hull, but have no differences in the rules. There's no difference in rules between a Lucius and a Mars pattern Baneblade.

GW seem to have forgotten/neglected the principle of KISS.

Arhalius
18-10-2008, 16:21
As a Blood angels player the only thing i am annoyed at is that codex chapters captains and commanders now have a ws of 6. Surely from a fluff and gameplay point it would make sense for a BA captain to have ws6, as they are supposed to be an assault minded army.
The new units in the codex I don't really care about as i like playing ba for there unique fluff and units anyway but i would like my captain to have ws6 like the codex ones.

HsojVvad
18-10-2008, 16:45
Umm... not to be rude... but ... well you could just maybe use the new SM rules if you want, to represent DA. But whatever you want.

Not sounding to be rude myself, why should I have to buy the SM codex if I don't want too? I don't buy the story that DA should never have had their own codex or what ever. I saw DA codex, I bought it, I spent money collecting it. I would at least think they would support it better.

As someone said something about people not having internet connection so those people wouldn't have access to the FAQ. So what is this suppose to mean? Does it mean they should never put out an FAQ? Well it's quite funny they have numerous FAQ out, and just made one for 5th edtion rules. So does that mean all FAQ out now are null and void?

Or does this mean they should take more time, in creating rules, and playtesting before release? There are thousands of people throughout the whole world that would gladly playtest rules and codicies for GW for free and give them feedback in what is wrong. But GW dosn't do this, and it seems from reading posts from the guy who did TAU that they only spend 8 months. I am not trying to say the Tau guy is bad but it seems who ever does the playtesting are not that compitent since too many spelling mistakes are made, things are unclear and lot's of broken forces emerge. Maybe more time needs to be spend in playtest or get new people play testing.

Too many complaints are made for DA, (witch was said at the time, this was the way things were going to be, so we sucked it up, and find out later that it wasn't true.) Chaos, (lashwhip. non chaos players are crying about this. If this is true shouldn't have playtesters cought this "cheese" rule?)

I take this that GW is such an incompetent company that they can't make a good product. Right now GW is like a software company. They release a computer game and just patch it later.

Bjorn
18-10-2008, 17:05
I take this that GW is such an incompetent company that they can't make a good product.

Well then don't play.

I personally have no problem with the way GW are doing things atm, so I will continue to play.

No one is holding a gun to your head saying you must play.

Kahadras
18-10-2008, 17:19
Look at my posts, I flamed as well. Heaven forbid people talk about their unhappiess about a GW product.

I think people are just getting fed up with the sheer amount of complaining that goes on. The new codex comes out and suddenly there's a ton of threads going up complaining that the new book is broken, the old books are no longer competitive, GW don't know what they are doing etc etc.

Kahadras

Madfool2
18-10-2008, 17:24
Yeah the whole "Complain power over 9000" thing is boring and tiring, and well, eugh. I'd rather be working!

Victomorga
18-10-2008, 17:47
I am a DA player. I have been playing / collecting them since RT.

I didn't particularly like the DA codex when it came out, but I was excited about the RW and DW possibilities, and have been playing with that codex since it came out. I bought, and like, the new C:SM. I plan on using it whenever I am not trying to run a list with scoring terminator units or any of the DA characters.

the DA book was balanced in regards to its own contents when it was released. if you feel it was unbalanced, it was unbalanced to begin with; the new book didn't change the way the DA book works at all. I understand the call for standardized equipment, but by that logic other SM players should be complaining about not having terminator apothecaries or terms as troops, or mindworm, or some other DA exclusive piece of kit. the books aren't the same. use the one you prefer.

yes, the stormshields in the new C:SM are better than the ones in the DA book. but the terms in the DA book are SCORING UNITS. this is all part of an attempt to BALANCE the army lists. orks are only S3, which is the same strength as a guardsman. orks are, without question, stronger than humans. why then, aren't they S4? balance, that's why. their base points cost and special rules are too much of an advantage to beef up their baseline S characteristic, so they're S3. so it goes.

furthermore, I don't see why more people don't see this as a step forward. people complain that GW don't do enough to fix problems with their games and the supporting publications, but then when something is changed, they complain that that it wasn't instantly changed across the board. I know, I know, people just want an FAQ that "sets things straight," but really this "setting things straight" only involves giving the DA more advantages, while not giving them any new set backs. how is that fair? the only people who should be complaining about the DA 'dex being unbalanced are those who felt that way from the day they bought it.

honestly, I think the first post in this thread said it all. it should have been closed after that, and kept on the first page for everyone to see who might be thinking of starting up a new thread on this subject.

everyone complains when a new book comes out, but the dramatics surrounding this issue have reached new heights. people saying the hobby is ruined for them, they're going to send their army books back to GW, they're going to boycott, insisting that the DA book is unusable.

how is the DA book unusable? how does the new SM book effect the way the DA play against anyone other than people playing codex marines? I think we can all agree that it doesn't. so what lies at the heart of these complaints? what is the primary motivation? people claim they want things to be "fair," but as I mentioned above making things "fair" only involves improving them.

DA are a specialized SM sub-group. they have special rules that allow them to do things regular codex marines can't do. as a result, they also have a unique set of drawbacks. the army lists are balanced with respect to their own components; DA don't have the standard SM stormshields. but guess what? standard SM terminators aren't scoring units.

The Base
18-10-2008, 18:06
OK here is a question for all the people in the topic crying.

What about people who play Grey Knights? They haven't had an update in years and have been inconsistent with Codex: Space Marines for about 5 years now. Same goes for Space Wolves.

You have your own codex with tons of bonuses limited only to your army, the down side of that is that it might not always match the main codex. Live with it.

Overt_Spy
18-10-2008, 18:14
w00t Invaders!:angel:

Nay! Aurora Chapter! Tread-head marines FTW

Anyways, I don't think they respond well to protests. Truly, the only way to take it to GW is to use their own tactics against them. I think if you started a crusade, brought GW headquarters under siege, and take the citadel, you'll be able to influence some change for the DA. Until then, you're boned.

Helveticus
18-10-2008, 18:21
OK here is a question for all the people in the topic crying.

What about people who play Grey Knights? They haven't had an update in years and have been inconsistent with Codex: Space Marines for about 5 years now. Same goes for Space Wolves.

You have your own codex with tons of bonuses limited only to your army, the down side of that is that it might not always match the main codex. Live with it.

Technically, Wolves both have their own codex, and point to the SM C a little more than half the time.

Gazak Blacktoof
18-10-2008, 19:12
What about people who play Grey Knights? They haven't had an update in years and have been inconsistent with Codex: Space Marines for about 5 years now. Same goes for Space Wolves.


Those inconsistencies should have been fixed a long time ago.

==Me==
18-10-2008, 19:13
furthermore, I don't see why more people don't see this as a step forward. people complain that GW don't do enough to fix problems with their games and the supporting publications, but then when something is changed, they complain that that it wasn't instantly changed across the board. I know, I know, people just want an FAQ that "sets things straight," but really this "setting things straight" only involves giving the DA more advantages, while not giving them any new set backs. how is that fair? the only people who should be complaining about the DA 'dex being unbalanced are those who felt that way from the day they bought it.


Nobody is saying they want every advantage with no downsides, that would be unbalanced. We'll take nerfed Chaplains, Librarians, Scouts, and the like. I don't buy DW being overpowered with new gear. The squads are too expensive, too small, and too limited in terms of firepower. DWA is a really good way to get your Terminators hit by templates and get assaulted sooner. FNP and 3+ inv? There's only 5 of them, and said unit costs upwards of 300 points when properly equipped. With Fearless they're stuck in combat until they win, die, or get dragged down by No Retreat. Marines keep all their new shiny units, special characters, and all that junk. We want parity and some damn consistency.


OK here is a question for all the people in the topic crying.

What about people who play Grey Knights? They haven't had an update in years and have been inconsistent with Codex: Space Marines for about 5 years now. Same goes for Space Wolves.

You have your own codex with tons of bonuses limited only to your army, the down side of that is that it might not always match the main codex. Live with it.

Honestly, I never really paid much attention to DH, but I always assumed that any wargear they had operated the same as ==My== stuff. There wasn't as much of an uproar because there aren't as many DH/GK players. When a significant chunk of the biggest player base gets this sort of treatment it tends to generate a lot more discussion. And I shouldn't have to live with it, nor shall I. We pay GW for a product and service, and if they don't live up to expectations we have a right, as consumers, to let them know of our dissatisfaction. That's the only way to change things. The new SM Codex is a result of complaints from the player base to add some more "oomph" to the Codices after DA and Chaos came out. The DA FAQ they said they wouldn't make came out after players got vocal about it. It's all a step in the right direction, and it's directly caused by unsatisfied customers making themselves heard.

I urge anyone, DA player or not, who feels strongly about their hobby to write GW a letter. That's the best way to get your point across, whatever it is, and will hopefully give them a nudge in the right direction.

Helveticus
18-10-2008, 19:24
FNP and 3+ inv? =



That is much bigger than you realize. The biggest threat to terminators is really a hundred thousand lasguns. Overwhelm the 2+ with saves, rather than punching a couple AP2 shots per turn at them. Usually the FNP won't work on anything that gets through their 3+ invul, however vs those Lasguns.. 3 in 6 hit, of those 1 wounds. So averages say it takes 6 shots to deal one wound, if 1 in 6 get through, you need 36 lasguns to deal an unsaved wound. If half of those are now saved by FNP, you now need 72 lasguns per turn to deal an unsaved wound. Which, by the way, carries over into CC. Up against a tactical guardsman- you would need 72 engaged basic guardsmen to deal 1 unsaved wound to the terminator. 3+SS and FNP would be broken.

Vaktathi
18-10-2008, 20:02
That is much bigger than you realize. The biggest threat to terminators is really a hundred thousand lasguns. Overwhelm the 2+ with saves, rather than punching a couple AP2 shots per turn at them. Usually the FNP won't work on anything that gets through their 3+ invul, however vs those Lasguns.. 3 in 6 hit, of those 1 wounds. So averages say it takes 6 shots to deal one wound, if 1 in 6 get through, you need 36 lasguns to deal an unsaved wound. If half of those are now saved by FNP, you now need 72 lasguns per turn to deal an unsaved wound. Which, by the way, carries over into CC. Up against a tactical guardsman- you would need 72 engaged basic guardsmen to deal 1 unsaved wound to the terminator. 3+SS and FNP would be broken.

I have to agree. The only really broken thing would be FNP, as it would simply make terminators for all intents and purposes invulnerable to normal weapons. Making only 1/12 wounds stick is simply beyond what any unit really should be able to take and not be approaching a triple digit points value per model.

Elios Harg
18-10-2008, 20:13
That is much bigger than you realize. The biggest threat to terminators is really a hundred thousand lasguns. Overwhelm the 2+ with saves, rather than punching a couple AP2 shots per turn at them. Usually the FNP won't work on anything that gets through their 3+ invul, however vs those Lasguns.. 3 in 6 hit, of those 1 wounds. So averages say it takes 6 shots to deal one wound, if 1 in 6 get through, you need 36 lasguns to deal an unsaved wound. If half of those are now saved by FNP, you now need 72 lasguns per turn to deal an unsaved wound. Which, by the way, carries over into CC. Up against a tactical guardsman- you would need 72 engaged basic guardsmen to deal 1 unsaved wound to the terminator. 3+SS and FNP would be broken.

The small size of Deathwing is it's mitigating factor.

Let's take a tactical squad with flamer and missile launcher. We'll say the missile launcher gets a hit on 2 terminators, the flamer catches 3, the 8 bolters fire 16 shots, 10 hit for a total of 15 hits, wound on 4+, so we'll say 7 score wounds, that's 1 wound each allocated on the apothecary and the standard bearer (we'll assume that the apothecary has the heavy weapon as he's the most important model in the unit, a cyclone, so he can keep his stormshield).

Necrons... 20 man warrior squad, 40 shots, 26 hit on average, of those, 13 wound, that's 2 saves to make on the apothecary. 5 man destroyer squad, 15 shots, 9 hit on average, 2+ to wound, so we'll assume 7 wound, again, that's a forced save on the apothecary.

Deathwing's command squad would die the same way it always does, through wound allocation. It will just be a little tougher, which, isn't a bad thing since it costs more than a 7 man assault terminator squad with TH/SS from C: SM and only gets 5 men.

If someone were to do a unit by unit and army list by army list comparison of Codex: Dark Angels and Codex: Space Marines, I'm sure they'd find that Codex: Space Marines is superior in every way. Codex: Space Marines is even better at Terminator heavy armies, the only thing they can't do is an ALL terminator army, though I'd argue that a terminator heavy space marine army (30+ termies) ignoring player skill would outperform a pure deathwing list.

Darth Ovious
18-10-2008, 20:27
Then don't play or just play with what you have or remodel what you already have, add models slowly, save up for a couple weeks to get the odd new thing. I can think of dozens of solutions to the price thing.

It is a LUXURY PRODUCT I have no sympathy at all for anyone that whinges on price. GW does not owe us anything!!! To bad. End of story. Thanks for playing, we have some lovely parting gifts for you.

No one NEEDs a new model every week nor do we NEED proper updates or FAQ.

ADAPT AND OVERCOME or get out of the way.

So GW don't owe us anything?

I beg to differ, afterall we are the paying customers who keep them in buisness. If you keep the customer happy, they'll come back for more. It's called Customer Satisfaction.

I'm a BA player, but what I'm most annoyed about is the fact that there has been 2 full SM codices out since ours. All we got was a WD army list with no background in it and limited wargear. People keep telling us to wait until our codex is out, but when exactly is that going to be? How long should I wait for, when other players are getting their goods more often. Before you start telling me to use the Marine Codex, I will tell you that I do use the marine codex, I'm using Space Marines right now.

The trouble is I actually have less right to complain that other players, considering the state of the Space Wolves codex and also Dark Eldar.

Darth Ovious
18-10-2008, 20:38
Ok, nice car analogy but i think this one is better :-

You buy your car, it works perfectly fine compared with all other cars available at the time and then several months later they bring out a new model which has new features or improvements (better fuel economy, more room inside, higher top speed, whatever). Does this instantly make your old car scrap and good for nothing?

Lol, I can see a problem in your comment. Considering that 40k is a gaming system and that all the armies should be relatively even (well as much as possible), then your comment just shows that the new marine codex is better than the DA one.

Nice way to show those DA players whose boss. I think telling them to be patient for a new release would have been a more valuable comment than what you said.

Elios Harg
18-10-2008, 20:40
The thing that sucks hard for Dark Angels and Blood Angels, is that because we have a list and it came so late in the edition, we'll be on the tail end of new books. I'd be surprised if we see new codices within the next 6 years.

Arhalius
18-10-2008, 20:47
The thing that sucks hard for Dark Angels and Blood Angels, is that because we have a list and it came so late in the edition, we'll be on the tail end of new books. I'd be surprised if we see new codices within the next 6 years.

Surely GW will update the Da/Ba codices, its pretty stupid that Blood Angels now have better scouts then any codex chapter for one thing. I dont know why they just can't make 2 books for marines, one for codex another for non codex.

EmperorEternalXIX
18-10-2008, 20:50
Ridiculous!

I do not know how many times I have to tell the forum this, but to ask them to release PDF updates is to invite madness. Number one they would lose a HORRIBLE amount of money, as printing Codex releases is expensive as all hell and paying developers to constantly twitter with old rules instead of designing new ones will just slow the codex creep to a complete crawl. That aside, it is also a pretty awful idea as I don't know about you but I don't like the idea of having a book that says one thing and a printout that says another. It is a slippery slope and it's easy to lose track, whether you believe it or not.

The gear inconsistency is minor, and their could be plenty of fluff justifications for it. The DA are the first legion, FFS...I'm sure they use the oldest storm shields in the imperium.

I still do not understand the gripe, either. If you do not like it, you do not have to use it, nor play against it. No one is making you buy the book, use it, or play against it...the bit in the DA FAQ you referenced is more or less for those bogarting ship-jumpers who want Land Raider Redeemers with Azrael and an Honour Guard squad, etc.

The DA army and BA army are all perfectly capable of fighting and winning just the same. I still think the Blood Angels, when played well, are even better than the bog-standard marines even with this new dex. I won with DA for a year or so before this book came out, sometimes with ease. Don't act like the DA dex is completely useless now. It isn't. The SM one just has new toys.

Remember: Pretty much none of the other armies in the game have a 3+ invulnerable save wargear item either, and they still manage to win just fine. Deal with it or wait for an update; if nothing else, we have seen a thousand times that things like these "protests" accomplish nothing but starting arguments and looking foolish.

Darth Ovious
18-10-2008, 20:58
Inconsistency has nothing to do with imbalance. In the DA-SM comparison you (and all DA complainers) should take into account the entire codex not just some entries. DA can do things that vanilla cannot even dream of, maybe just maybe, the designers where not so inconsistent as they simply felt that SM should have a somewhat better gear in SOME of the cases so as to give them a better feel and better balance vs. the chapters.

BTW, i just opened my builder and made a list with 3 devastators, 2 termie troops, flying land-raider of doom, belial, and 1 troop bike squad at 1750. Except for the HQs (Which have awesome written all over), ALL the units can be combat squaded (when i realized DA devas can split i almost went nuts) and they all score! If they do not split they only yield 8 hard to kill points. Would i trade that for the new Sshield? NO CHANCE IN HELL:evilgrin:

Honestly, if i where to start a marine army now, it would definitely have some green in it...

Just thought you would like to know that the DA received an FAQ basically saying that you can only score with troops. So DA devastators can longer take objectives.

Gutlord Grom
18-10-2008, 21:04
Just thought you would like to know that the DA received an FAQ basically saying that you can only score with troops. So DA devastators can longer take objectives. Isn't that like every other Heavy Support unit in the game?

I mean unless DA get Devastators in their troops slots.

Vaktathi
18-10-2008, 21:05
I do not know how many times I have to tell the forum this, but to ask them to release PDF updates is to invite madness. Number one they would lose a HORRIBLE amount of money, as printing Codex releases is expensive as all hell and paying developers to constantly twitter with old rules instead of designing new ones will just slow the codex creep to a complete crawl. Again, given that fan made updates and FAQ's are done in an informal manner in peoples free time but still turn out far better reasoned, detailed, and comprehensive leads me to believe that this argument is simply flat out false. If GW's paid full time development staff can't match that, then they need a new design team. It's as simple as that. The rules portion isn't what takes them so long, if they wanted to, they could re-release every army in 3 months with brand new rules. What takes forever is art, fiction, and model development, and the fact that they stagger releases so as to not overlap one army with anothers release.

Furthermore, if they update their rules constantly, they won't *NEED* to release new codex's. Look at BFG. They haven't released any new material for that in a while, but they update the rules every year and the game plays better than ever.


That aside, it is also a pretty awful idea as I don't know about you but I don't like the idea of having a book that says one thing and a printout that says another. It is a slippery slope and it's easy to lose track, whether you believe it or not. It's better than dealing with a bunk list for 10 years. And given that we *already* have to carry around FAQ's, I don't see where the issue is.

Furthermore, GW could just release a yearly update packet, charge $10 for it, it would contain all the rules and codex updates, and then they wouldn't need to spend anywhere near the time on such supposedly strenuous codex development that they do.




The gear inconsistency is minor, and their could be plenty of fluff justifications for it. The DA are the first legion, FFS...I'm sure they use the oldest storm shields in the imperium. They aren't *that* old that all their gear would be so inferior, especially considering most of the other First Founding Legions have the same stuff the newest ones do. Also, Storm Shields weren't exactly a big thing during the Heresy, Terminator Armor was just beginning to come out. As for all the other stuff like inferior PotMS, transport capacity, etc, there really isn't any reason for that either, especially with STC gear.


the bit in the DA FAQ you referenced is more or less for those bogarting ship-jumpers who want Land Raider Redeemers with Azrael and an Honour Guard squad, etc. Honestly, I don't think 99% of DA players care about the stuff like Honor Guards and Redeemers, they just want their transport capacities, wargear, and other such things to be identical.


Don't act like the DA dex is completely useless now. It isn't. The SM one just has new toys. Not just *new* toys, but better (and in many cases *cheaper*) versions of the same stuff. *That* is the problem. Again, one can make the same list with either book, but the SM book will come out a bit cheaper and its stuff will be a bit better, for the exact same list.

Elios Harg
18-10-2008, 21:17
Well, I wouldn't mind the reduced prices for my tacticals, devs and assault squads, but then, I can better represent my battle company with the new dex anyway, so it's a moot point.

Darth Ovious
18-10-2008, 21:21
Isn't that like every other Heavy Support unit in the game?

I mean unless DA get Devastators in their troops slots.

Well what happened was that it said in the DA codex that combat squads counted as scoring units. THey were basically saying that although you've split your ten man squad they still count as scoring units. But of course when 40k 5th edition came out, they made it that only troops can score.

Now because the Codex takes precedence over the rule book when it comes to rules, DA players took this to mean that there combat squads were all scoring, even assault squads and devastators.

However a FAQ has been released stating that DA players can not do this and that only troop choices can score objectives.

So in other words, GW took the time to tell DA what they can't do, however they didn't mention anything about what they CAN do with regards to the wargear and such.

Elios Harg
18-10-2008, 21:24
Actually, they did. We get none of the new wargear. Oh... that and they made our Company Veterans slightly better, though it was likely by accident and will be changed in a future FAQ. But now, we can have any number of models with the upgraded weapon options. Kind of a ghetto version of Vanguard.

HsojVvad
18-10-2008, 21:24
Well, I wouldn't mind the reduced prices for my tacticals, devs and assault squads, but then, I can better represent my battle company with the new dex anyway, so it's a moot point.

How is it a moot point? Oh you are playing Fallen, I understand now.

*edit* sorry for that. I didn't mean to sound like that, but that was my reaction when I read your post.

What I wanted to say, was why did you dish out $80 bucks to play DA then? Well if you are ok with that then kudos to you. I guess each to our own, but don't lamblast us when our opnions differ from yours.


Well what happened was that it said in the DA codex that combat squads counted as scoring units. THey were basically saying that although you've split your ten man squad they still count as scoring units. But of course when 40K 5th edition came out, they made it that only troops can score.

Now because the Codex takes precedence over the rule book when it comes to rules, DA players took this to mean that there combat squads were all scoring, even assault squads and devastators.

However a FAQ has been released stating that DA players can not do this and that only troop choices can score objectives.

So in other words, GW took the time to tell DA what they can't do, however they didn't mention anything about what they CAN do with regards to the wargear and such.

But it's ok for Non DA to cry about our scoring units so GW takes them away. This just goes to show you how C:DA was made horribly. If C:DA was suppose to be made for 5th in mind, why did they put combat squads in?

Kahadras
18-10-2008, 21:30
So GW don't owe us anything?

I beg to differ, afterall we are the paying customers who keep them in buisness. If you keep the customer happy, they'll come back for more. It's called Customer Satisfaction.


GW don't owe you anything I'm afraid. No company can keep everybody happy all the time. If the company pandered to everything people wanted they'd never get anywhere.

Kahadras

Vaktathi
18-10-2008, 21:36
GW don't owe you anything I'm afraid. No company can keep everybody happy all the time. If the company pandered to everything people wanted they'd never get anywhere.

Kahadras

They *should* however endeavor to keep their target market happy. They don't need to keep everyone happy, but if they are upsetting a large portion of their segment, then thats a very bad thing.

Elios Harg
18-10-2008, 21:36
How is it a moot point? Oh you are playing Fallen, I understand now.

*edit* sorry for that. I didn't mean to sound like that, but that was my reaction when I read your post.

What I wanted to say, was why did you dish out $80 bucks to play DA then? Well if you are ok with that then kudos to you. I guess each to our own, but don't lamblast us when our opnions differ from yours.



But it's ok for Non DA to cry about our scoring units so GW takes them away. This just goes to show you how C:DA was made horribly. If C:DA was suppose to be made for 5th in mind, why did they put combat squads in?
Wow, you're one of those types that give Dark Angels players a bad name, I guess...

I've written a letter explaining my take of the situation to Jervis and received a (somewhat canned) reply essentially saying that essentially, we won't get anything until a new codex comes out. I've championed the need for an update many times since the rumors regarding the new book started trickling out. But, knowing a little bit about GW's track record, I also know that the most likely solution is to use C: DA when you need to and use C: SM when you don't.

Lastly, my comment was in direct response to the one above it which says most DA players just want the identical wargear, PotMS and transport capacities.

Kahadras
18-10-2008, 21:54
They *should* however endeavor to keep their target market happy. They don't need to keep everyone happy, but if they are upsetting a large portion of their segment, then thats a very bad thing.


Are DA players a large segment? Seriously I don't think they are. Like BA and SW they're a fairly niche army. At the end of the day though I think GW should just give up because no matter what they do people complain. The old Chaos Marine codex was complained about because it was over powered so GW fixed it and then people complained that it wasn't powerful enough. GW could go back and fix all of the old non codex Marines (my Space Wolves need some attention) but all that does is bring complaints from IG players who want a new codex.

Kahadras

Vaktathi
18-10-2008, 21:59
Are DA players a large segment? Seriously I don't think they are. If they are large enough to have their own product line, they are large enough to worry about.



At the end of the day though I think GW should just give up because no matter what they do people complain. Well, they certainly could be doing a much better job, for a paid, full time development staff, others do it much better.


The old Chaos Marine codex was complained about because it was over powered so GW fixed it and then people complained that it wasn't powerful enough. Most people don't necessarily complain about the power difference, rather that they gutted the book and the fluff.


GW could go back and fix all of the old non codex Marines (my Space Wolves need some attention) but all that does is bring complaints from IG players who want a new codex.
Or they could spend a couple afternoons writing up a decent FAQ and not have it impact the upcoming IG codex which should already be finished and written.

HsojVvad
18-10-2008, 22:39
Wow, you're one of those types that give Dark Angels players a bad name, I guess...

I've written a letter explaining my take of the situation to Jervis and received a (somewhat canned) reply essentially saying that essentially, we won't get anything until a new codex comes out. I've championed the need for an update many times since the rumors regarding the new book started trickling out. But, knowing a little bit about GW's track record, I also know that the most likely solution is to use C: DA when you need to and use C: SM when you don't.

Lastly, my comment was in direct response to the one above it which says most DA players just want the identical wargear, PotMS and transport capacities.


As I said, I am sorry for the comment.

The Hobo Hunter
19-10-2008, 03:07
I only play IG, but I know if GW came out with a new, spinoff codex for the IG, something like catachans or drop troops, that had different stats for lasguns or different rules for a chimera (not points costs, but actual changes to the armour vlaues, weapons, etc), I'd be damned pissed off.

The idea of changing universal gear unevenly is just plain retarded.

Remember, aside from the DW/RW, and their lack of social skills, the Dark Angels chapter is effectively a 'codex' chapter. I'm pretty sure Blood Ravens are fleet-based, and they get full benefits of C: SM. Why shouldn't Dark Angels get the same Land Raiders or Storm Shields?

The Orange
19-10-2008, 10:38
If they are large enough to have their own product line, they are large enough to worry about.

:p are you serious? so by your logic...

"Insert army here" have their own product line, therefore they are a large segment. So every army is large segment. Yea... :rolleyes:

Having GW put out regular FAQs "balancing" each army has it's ups and downs. As as nice as it would be for equating the battlefield, we'd also have a problem of having to carry out a whole new tome of FAQs that match our rulebooks in size. EmperorEternalXIX has it right, that's just madness. In the end it just causes massive confusion and GW are already sick of such nonsense, they made sure to tell us that after the fiasco of the 3rd edition FAQs.

DA are not that gimped. Yea they may be a little gimped compared to their blue brothers but are they unplayable? Is it that BIG of a difference? I have yet to hear anyone one moan that DA are the weakest codex out so I think not. If they were playable before the SM codex came out there still playable now. And if there still playable then why can't people just play the game?

shabbadoo
19-10-2008, 11:12
I'd love to play Belial cruising around in his standard lascannon-equipped command Land Raider with a Deathwing command squad along with him, but I can't as, unfortunately, Dark Angels vehicles were made by the Watchers to suit their size and so they can't hold as many Marines as other chapters' vehicles do.

That is of course just one example. There a quite few tactics and basic army builds based on what should be universal equipment that DA are gimped by. Then there are the codex specific rules for units. That is a whole other level of retardedness that was apparently purposely left unaddressed in the FAQ.

And the 3e codexes are playable under the 5e rules, but does that mean we should use them and just play the game? Yes, the gimping is a big difference. You have a Tau avatar. If somebody told you that your Tau sept used the previous Tau codex and that the new one wasn't for you, even though most of the changes were in equipment effects that any Tau would have the same verions of, would you feel good about it? There are nearly as many fundamental differences between C: DA and C: SM as there are between those two codexes. You sure as well know that the previous Tau codex is certainly playable, but do you use it? I hazard to guess that you do not.

Temprus
19-10-2008, 17:22
DA are not that gimped. Yea they may be a little gimped compared to their blue brothers but are they unplayable? Is it that BIG of a difference? I have yet to hear anyone one moan that DA are the weakest codex out so I think not. If they were playable before the SM codex came out there still playable now. And if there still playable then why can't people just play the game?
Many people that are "whining" now were "whining" before C:SM came out about the "lackluster" DA codex. That release just added more fuel to their fire. Many that complained before about DA had already "sucked it up" because they were told that C:SM would be similar and DA was just a taste of how SM would be from now on. GW then gave C:SM a lot of better stuff/options than DA (as a whole) and people feel lied to. Big surprise that they want to "whine". :p

Vaktathi
19-10-2008, 18:47
:p are you serious? so by your logic...

"Insert army here" have their own product line, therefore they are a large segment. So every army is large segment. Yea... :rolleyes: Any segment that has essentially been tied to a product line is one large enough to worry about, as long as that segment is has the potential to be profitable. Any business/marketing person will tell you that. Just because DA aren't as big a segment as Ultramarines players, doesn't mean GW should just sit there and ignore them, that is *extremely* poor business, as ultimately what keeps GW in business is providing a product that adds value for the customer. If the customer does not perceive any value, they will cease or scale back purchases from the firm.




Having GW put out regular FAQs "balancing" each army has it's ups and downs. As as nice as it would be for equating the battlefield, we'd also have a problem of having to carry out a whole new tome of FAQs that match our rulebooks in size. EmperorEternalXIX has it right, that's just madness. In the end it just causes massive confusion and GW are already sick of such nonsense, they made sure to tell us that after the fiasco of the 3rd edition FAQs. Don't we already have to carry a bunch of FAQ's around however anyway? And isn't that better than simply waiting 5-9 years for the next release to fix problems? The problem with GW's previous FAQ and update issues is that they were piecemeal updates in various sources and weren't very well organized. A decent yearly update packet available for download or as a $10 mini-codex type book in the store would work just fine.


And if there still playable then why can't people just play the game? If a Farsight Enclave codex came out tomorrow that kept just about everything in the Tau codex the same, but made Crisis suits, pathfinders and Fire Warriors BS4, Railguns Heavy 3, Gun Drones a 3+ armor save and made them *not* worth a kill point, and did all this with no cost increases in any of the units nor any restrictions on the number you could take, how would you feel? I don't play DA, but I understand where they are coming from, GW's current rules paradigm is asinine is so many ways.

HsojVvad
19-10-2008, 19:13
Many people that are "whining" now were "whining" before C:SM came out about the "lackluster" DA codex. That release just added more fuel to their fire. Many that complained before about DA had already "sucked it up" because they were told that C:SM would be similar and DA was just a taste of how SM would be from now on. GW then gave C:SM a lot of better stuff/options than DA (as a whole) and people feel lied to. Big surprise that they want to "whine". :p

So while we cried at first when DA codex was released we were told it was the way it was going to be so we sucked it up. But I find it funny it was the SM players that were whining and crying about the C:DA that it was bland no options more expensive etc etc. So GW listented to them and gave them what they got now.

So how come it's ok for SM to cry about the C:DA but it's not ok for DA players to cry about being lied to?

The Orange
20-10-2008, 02:15
Any segment that has essentially been tied to a product line is one large enough to worry about
That does not make them a large segment. By your logic everyone is a large segment. But what is the point in calling something large/important/etc. if this does not define them from others in the same segment? DA are one of 5 variant SM list. 1/5th is not significant, not considering all the other armies there are. So unless you can come up with some real figures lets not use misleading words like "largest by this specific definition" .



Don't we already have to carry a bunch of FAQ's around however anyway?
1-3 pages is nothing compared to some of the stuff I've seen out there. PP bless their heart put out such a comprehensive FAQ. But I sure as hell can't remember all the stuff they put in there. Though not for a lack of trying their FAQs remain rather difficult to commit to memory and confusing. And a confusing FAQ is rather contradictory to the purpose of a FAQ.


If a Farsight Enclave codex came out tomorrow ... how would you feel?
OH NO'z 2 different army books that I could use my one set of models to represent, how utterly terrible? :rolleyes:

Thanks for such a fair example. I was under the impression that DA at least provided a few things that can't be got in codex SM but if your analogy is so "spot on" I guess codex SM is everything and more then codex DA. Thus there is no point in using the DA codex is there? Thank god there's nothing wrong with just using the SM book.

Lets get something straight here. I would absolutely love it if GW put out another "variant" Tau codex, or an Eldar codex, or what have you. What you seem to forget is that you SM players have a choice. If you don't like codex DA you can chose codex BA, or codex SW, or codex SM for gods sakes. Where as I (in analogy) am stuck with codex DA till they make another codex DA. Sorry but why are you so worse off now? Especially considering that GW FAQ'ed it asking other players to let you have your cake and eat it too (i.e. let you have those changes unofficially)?

Sorry but as I see it GW pretty much resolved the issue as best they could without simply giving in to SM player demands. I'm no GW fanboy but they honestly handled this pretty well IMO. The fact that they went that far to appease DA players (talking about the FAQ recommendations) and 40k players still want more just shows what a whiny and unappreciable lot we are. :angel:

Occulto
20-10-2008, 02:43
And the one-trick pony Death/Raven build is very good, but I don't see why we should be forced to use one build to remain viable. The DW/RW are only 2 companies out of 10, why do we get punished for wanting to run a Battle company or mixed army?

*shrugs*

How's that different to any other codex where: "viable" seems to mean taking the same narrow range of options as everyone else?


We'll take nerfed Chaplains, Librarians, Scouts, and the like.

Speak for yourself. :p

I'll keep my superior characters and scouts thank you very much. Oh, I also enjoy being able to field 5 man squads with a special weapon, and Ld10 across the board with a non-named character.

Vaktathi
20-10-2008, 02:46
That does not make them a large segment. By your logic everyone is a large segment. But what is the point in calling something large/important/etc. if this does not define them from others in the same segment? DA are one of 5 variant SM list. 1/5th is not significant, not considering all the other armies there are. So unless you can come up with some real figures lets not use misleading words like "largest by this specific definition" . I didn't say they were the largest segment, but I did say they were big enough for it to be worth not pissing them off. *That* was the point.



1-3 pages is nothing compared to some of the stuff I've seen out there. PP bless their heart put out such a comprehensive FAQ. But I sure as hell can't remember all the stuff they put in there. Though not for a lack of trying their FAQs remain rather difficult to commit to memory and confusing. And a confusing FAQ is rather contradictory to the purpose of a FAQ. 1-3 pages? I've got print outs of every FAQ for each codex and the rulebook, it's practically a mini-codex already. If you just want to carry around your *own* FAQ and the rulebook, thats generally 5-6 pages, granted not too much, but a real honest to god update wouldn't be much more, especially if it's not including fluff or pictures.



OH NO'z 2 different army books that I could use my one set of models to represent, how utterly terrible? :rolleyes: wasn't my point...:eyebrows:




Thanks for such a fair example. I was under the impression that DA at least provided a few things that can't be got in codex SM
Sure, the DA can take Termi's or FA units as troops if they take a specific SC. That's really not enough to justify the differences between the two codex's, especially when Vanilla marines can still have a scoring Elites unit if they wish with their own (I'd argue probably even better) SC.


but if your analogy is so "spot on" I guess codex SM is everything and more then codex DA. I didn't go into great detail, I apologize, but you still whiffed the point. The point was that Land Raiders, PotMS, Drop Pods, etc... should be identical in every SM army, especially as GW hasn't provided any explanation at all as to why all of a sudden 4 of 1000 chapters all of a sudden have crappier wargear and equipment than the other 996, including other first founding legions. The fact that they drastically improved (without any real reason to do so) so much ubiquitous SM equipment that should be identical in every SM army, but then turn around and state only the basic SM codex gets it, doesn't really make sense. No other SM army really has such a huge unique *something* to warrant not getting access to them, and in fact the basic SM book is probably able to abuse these the best. From both a balance and fluff perspective, the reasoning falls short.


Thus there is no point in using the DA codex is there? If they aren't using Ravenwing/Deathwing (or only like 1 or 2 units) then there isn't really. I'm not going to argue that DA provide a unique build, but I'm not seeing how normal SM's not having access to such a build warrants all the better wargear and much improved vehicles.




Lets get something straight here. I would absolutely love it if GW put out another "variant" Tau codex, or an Eldar codex, or what have you. I'm sure, I'd like to see some new Tau stuff too, but thats again tanget to the point.


What you seem to forget is that you SM players have a choice. If you don't like codex DA you can chose codex BA, or codex SW, or codex SM for gods sakes. True, but they shouldn't be forced to just to use the latest version of what *should* be identical units and options across every SM army.


Especially considering that GW FAQ'ed it asking other players to let you have your cake and eat it too (i.e. let you have those changes unofficially)? They didn't give players anything, they just said to do what people were already doing, their FAQ didn't do crap except reinforce what was already being done, and in effect was a waste of space.




Sorry but as I see it GW pretty much resolved the issue as best they could without simply giving in to SM player demands. I'm no GW fanboy but they honestly handled this pretty well IMO. The fact that they went that far to appease DA players (talking about the FAQ recommendations) and 40k players still want more just shows what a whiny and unappreciable lot we are. :angel:Given that their FAQ didn't introduce anything that wasn't being done already, I fail to see why or how this is so. Furthermore given that their FAQ's are by and large far inferior in terms of reasoning, explanations, clarity, and breadth compared to other companies and Fan made FAQ's like the Adepticon and dakka dakka FAQ's, I really don't see how it is the *customer* that is whiny, especially when GW has a paid and full time development team with access to more funding than any other tabletop gaming team save for maybe those at WotC. Given that the core purpose of any company is to satisfy customers, providing crappy FAQ's doesn't go very far and accusing the customer of being whiny (granted there are examples of this, but thats really not what this is, this is wanting identical things in different armies to be the same) isn't a good practice of staying in business in the long run.

Also, just to clarify, I don't even play DA, but I do find GW's reasoning and methods to be highly asinine and/or show, especially with respect to their recent FAQ's.

The Orange
20-10-2008, 03:44
they were big enough for it to be worth not pissing them off. *That* was the point.
By the mere fact that GW went out and made models for them? That's an illogical statement and I'm just pointing it out.


but a real honest to god update wouldn't be much more
You base this on what? Sounds more like pure speculation to me.


GW hasn't provided any explanation at all as to why all of a sudden 4 of 1000 chapters all of a sudden have crappier wargear and equipment than the other 996
They have, it just has nothing to do with 40k background. Their moto is simple, use your own codex. That's why DA didn't get any goodies from the SM codex. Balancing and all that is irreverent. The point is GW want's everyone using their own codex, not using spinets of several.



True, but they shouldn't be forced to just to use the latest version of what *should* be identical units and options across every SM army.
1. you aren't forced to use the most recent released rules.
2. Who said they have to be identical?


They didn't give players anything, they just said to do what people were already doing
If that's the case, then whats all the uproar about? If everyone's using the SM armory anyways (as they should be), then who cares what GW thinks?


Given that their FAQ didn't introduce anything that wasn't being done already
They gave their nod to people house ruling the issue. They responded to the community. That's more then the usually do. And people are just pissed off because they didn't get what they wanted even though it was entirely expected.


Given that the core purpose of any company is to satisfy customers, providing crappy FAQ's doesn't go very far
So because DA players didn't get what they wanted it's a crappy FAQ? These arguments never fail to astound me. The core purpose of the developers is to develop products. FAQs are a very small part of this. A much larger part is obviously the development of new codices, etc. Considering the range of models (and all the rules they encompass) GW has to upkeep with each release, I would not do them the disservice of calling them lazy buggers. I could do with better work on the FAQs sure, but I'm well aware that their focus is on whatever project is in their hands.


I do find GW's reasoning and methods to be highly asinine and/or show, especially with respect to their recent FAQ's.
I don't see why. FAQ's are meant to clarify issues. GW have in the past used them as a vehicle to make important changes, but for the most part this has been sparingly. They were not meant to rewrite codices to buff them against new release. Which is what this uproar is about.

The issue has been resolved. GW said officially stick with the codex. This leaves little confusion to new players. I'm sure kids can put 2 and 2 together. Why does that guy have a 3+ SS? Oh because he has a different codex, okay. That way GW doesn't have to deal with either overly complicated FAQs cutting and pasting god knows how much into a perfectly okay book, or having to reprint a codex DA 2.0. Meanwhile they FAQ'ed the issue for mature players saying basically if you know what your doing go ahead and change the rules. They did the whole "lets change the FAQ to balance stuff" stint, and it left a bad taste in their mouth. I'm not at all surprised their trying to avoid that headache all together by letting players try to police themselves. Because while group 1 may come up with their own rules that their happy with, group 2 will come up with something totally different. But by mutual agreement group 1 and group 2 will be happy with their own rules without GW forcing down a FAQ that both groups might object too. And if players from group 1 ever run into players of group 2, well they can stick with the codex which is something everyone can agree with because it's official. The issue is clean, simple, and easy, and the reasoning are just as.

People are just finding any and every issue to whine about this because they aren't happy with DA not officially getting the gear they wanted them to get. The problem of "universal equipment" will be resolved over time (as has always been the case), and all this bull hokey about crappy FAQs is nothing new or specific to DA.

Miggidy Mack
20-10-2008, 04:34
Because, just like in the real world, supposedly "identical" equipment manufactured in different places can be built with vastly different performance specifications.

So every single Ultramarine now has a DIFFERENT storm shield and not one that is a 1000 year old relic? Well then they should be using Codex: Chaos Marines cus now they are heretics.

Oh look... it says in the codex fluff that they are old old relics... So why did it work differently in august?

The rules changed. The world did not. The old codex's will one day HAVE a 3+ save. Trying to claim that they all use different gear is silly.

Miggidy Mack
20-10-2008, 04:43
Ok, nice car analogy but i think this one is better :-

You buy your car, it works perfectly fine compared with all other cars available at the time and then several months later they bring out a new model which has new features or improvements (better fuel economy, more room inside, higher top speed, whatever). Does this instantly make your old car scrap and good for nothing?

Actually, its more like this.

You buy a car. It works great and perfectly fine compared with all other cars available at the time. Then the company builds a new tire for your car that makes it get twice the gas mileage. Then they won't sell them to you (even though they would fit) because your car is green and has the moon roof option and they only want blue cars with a hatchback to have this new tire.

The Orange
20-10-2008, 04:52
Except because no one gives a rat's **** about what the company says and someone sells you those tires under the table anyways (ala the FAQ).

Miggidy Mack
20-10-2008, 05:02
Except because no one gives a rat's **** about what the company says and someone sells you those tires under the table anyways (ala the FAQ).

True dat. There is, however, no translation for that. The FAQ in this case was the guy with the tires NOT selling them to you under the table and instead tell you to ask everyone else on the road for permission to use the tires. It's why we are building a new "universal homebrew" site that fixes all these issues for those players who want to use them.

Really GW should have just put the BA, DA and BT special characters in the new codex. It would have taken up like 10 pages and they could have forced way more people to buy the codex.

Occulto
20-10-2008, 05:05
Really GW should have just put the BA, DA and BT special characters in the new codex. It would have taken up like 10 pages and they could have forced way more people to buy the codex.

Mmm... I could see that going down well. :p

ehlijen
20-10-2008, 05:05
To go with the car analogy:

You've got your Ford Dark and it works great. Now Ford releases the new Ford Ultra. It's got a newer engine that can pull more weight at the same speed for the same fuel. It can't go any faster due to road speed limits, and it doesn't acutally save fuel as the extra weight us used to add a dvd player instead of the radio your old Ford Dark has. Apart from that they rearranged all the bits and sods.

Your old car still works and it's still just as good. You just have to listen to radio while it reliably gets you from A to B while the new ultra drivers can listen to music from a DVD player.

Sure the new options in C:SM may be fun, but due to their costs it's still just:

A few of the basic squads with your chosen flavour of cool stuff. The most effective armies will still be mostly made up of basic marines.

Eventually, the DA will get their new codex with the new gear. Until then, enjoy the stuff you will loose when that day comes!

Vaktathi
20-10-2008, 05:09
By the mere fact that GW went out and made models for them? That's an illogical statement and I'm just pointing it out. Made models, rules, and created an army around them. It's not illogical at all.



You base this on what? Sounds more like pure speculation to me. Based on experience with other games and actually looking at how much space rules actually take up. Look at a codex, out of a ~100page codex, to get just the rules, no pictures, fluff, etc, you need what, 10-15 pages? Looking at updates that are simply an addendum of changes, thats a couple pages at most?

Honestly, why would it be much more?



They have, it just has nothing to do with 40k background. Their moto is simple, use your own codex. That's why DA didn't get any goodies from the SM codex. Balancing and all that is irreverent. The point is GW want's everyone using their own codex, not using spinets of several. I know, I understand that, but its an asinine explanation. That's a huge problem with 40k today, is that they want everything to be played exactly as it is written in every codex, nevermind how it was originally intended, or how the game has changed since then, or that we still have many armies written for two editions ago.




1. you aren't forced to use the most recent released rules. No, true, but if you want to use the most updated versions of things one does



2. Who said they have to be identical? Fluff, player perception, precedence, etc...? We have many examples of the Imperium and its mass standardization, especially among Astartes equipment. These things have been identical across SM armies since the beginning of 2nd Ed (with the exception of the Assault Cannon for GK's, simply because they haven't been updated yet), and its odd that they all of a sudden now change, but not for everyone...



If that's the case, then whats all the uproar about? If everyone's using the SM armory anyways (as they should be), then who cares what GW thinks? The problem is their FAQ's are a waste of paper, they don't bring anything new to the table, they just basically tell people "sure, you can ask to do this, its not technically what the rules say, and you can't do it in any official even, and you shouldn't do it if you think it gives you and advantage, and your opponent can say no, but you can ask to do it".



They gave their nod to people house ruling the issue. They responded to the community. That's more then the usually do. And people are just pissed off because they didn't get what they wanted even though it was entirely expected. Nobody expected any different, its just disappointing that GW basically issued a cop-out FAQ. They didn't actually *answer* anything, just basically said "work it out".



So because DA players didn't get what they wanted it's a crappy FAQ? No, its because it didn't actually give a decent answer. See above reasoning.



The core purpose of the developers is to develop products. FAQs are a very small part of this. They are, but a very important part, and one in which they show a much poorer standard than most other game companies.

I don't hate GW, in fact I rather like GW, hell I don't even have too much of a problem with their pricing even (although their store staff tend to be rather sycophantic). But I *do* have a problem with their development team. Hell, specialist games manages to get out *amazing* FAQ's and rules updates with (for all intents and purposes other than a quick nod) no design studio support. Look at how BFG has changed since it was released, its a much better game and all one needs is the rulebook, the FAQ, and a couple pages of fleet list off the SG site.


A much larger part is obviously the development of new codices, etc. Considering the range of models (and all the rules they encompass) GW has to upkeep with each release, I would not do them the disservice of calling them lazy buggers. Given the sheer amount of vague wording, typo's, inconsistent design paradigms, poor scheduling of releases (3 vanilla SM books in the same timeframe as 1 DE book?) and their below standard FAQ's, if not lazy, then simply not up to the job.


I could do with better work on the FAQs sure, but I'm well aware that their focus is on whatever project is in their hands. Given that they are *paid* to work on these things *full time* and that *fans* are putting out better FAQ work, thats not good, and not acceptable. If I had provided such poor errata for my work at my last job, I'd have been out of there very quickly.



I don't see why. FAQ's are meant to clarify issues. GW have in the past used them as a vehicle to make important changes, but for the most part this has been sparingly. They were not meant to rewrite codices to buff them against new release. Which is what this uproar is about. I can understand that, however their refusal to do *any* changes/updates any more, in any format, coupled with their asinine clarifications (such as the IG/BT dedicated transport thing in the BRB FAQ) leads to much frustration.




The issue has been resolved. GW said officially stick with the codex. This leaves little confusion to new players. I'm sure kids can put 2 and 2 together. Why does that guy have a 3+ SS? Oh because he has a different codex, okay.maybe (or they may just default to using the latest versions, which is what we did until GW came around and went with its strict RAW thing), but that doesn't mean its a very good way of doing it, or that its justified. If I was just getting into 40k, my first thought would be "thats retared, these guys are all supposed to have the same stuff".


Meanwhile they FAQ'ed the issue for mature players saying basically if you know what your doing go ahead and change the rules. They did the whole "lets change the FAQ to balance stuff" stint, and it left a bad taste in their mouth. A while ago, but then they also did it willy-nilly, with some things in White Dwarf, some things in FAQ's, etc...



People are just finding any and every issue to whine about this because they aren't happy with DA not officially getting the gear they wanted them to get. The DA book was never seen as anything to write home about, but it was intimated by GW that 5th ed would do all sorts of wonderful things for it, but alas, the new SM codex comes out and basically trumps everything in the DA book save for the ability to field Terminators as troops (not as powerful or amazing as it initially sounds) and does it *cheaper* as well.


The problem of "universal equipment" will be resolved over time (as has always been the case) The problem is the amount of time is rather considerable...


and all this bull hokey about crappy FAQs is nothing new or specific to DA.Correct its not, but its still a relevant issue.

Miggidy Mack
20-10-2008, 05:12
You guys aren't doing the car analogy right. There are NO NEW CARS. NOBODY GETS A NEW CAR. SOME old cars suddenly work better because they are blue. Or everyone who bought a blue car gets a BRAND NEW CAR!

If everyone with blue fords was allowed to trade them in for new cars... that's a closer analogy.

Vaktathi
20-10-2008, 05:17
Sure the new options in C:SM may be fun, but due to their costs it's still just: except that Predators, Vindicators, Dreadnoughts, Razorbacks, Tac Squads (after weapons) Assault Marines, Land Raiders, Termi's with Stormshields, Techmarines, and more, even *with* new upgrades (such as better PotMS, more weapons options, Bolster Defenses, vindi's auto-passing terrain tests, etc) are either the same cost, or in most cases *cheaper* than their DA (and CSM, BA, BT, DH) equivalents, and they don't get Combat Tactics either.

Ronin_eX
20-10-2008, 07:06
Vaktathi you are my hero. :D

My big problem is the lower/same prices for better gear and the needless difference between units/wargear.

GW have simply gone to show me they work less efficiently than a small company containing around ten people in it which isn't exactly enamouring me to their business at this point.

Corvus Belli, a small Spanish developer, who puts out a squad-level skirmish game called Infinity have, just this month, after only two years of their game being on the market, have released an army and rules revision for the game. This includes a re-print of the rulebook with rules changes as well as updates and rebalances to all army lists in the game (by the way all armies are available in the main book and these are full lists, not just ones to get you by).

In addition they've uploaded all the new rules, armylists and all other info up onto the website for free. This includes a full rules pdf with updated rules, within the next week or so an updated document going over all the changes in detail (essentially an errata for players with the first edition book), then there are all the armylists and weapon summaries online as well (for free).

Add to that that when they make a release every month (always for multiple factions so they keep a large amount of their customers excited from week to week) if a new unit is created its rules, equipment and stats are added to ever growing change documents and by the end of the year all of the new material will be included (along with whatever they haven't released yet) in the game's first expansion!

And this is a team of people with a handful of developers and a freelance staff of sculptors.

So in the face of a company that I can talk to (they often answer rules questions themselves and as new questions are answered they are added to a living FAQ kept on the rules board of the forum), a company that cares enough about their product to actually improve it to keep it logical and consistent, will put their rules online for free to encourage more players to play and who, despite making a game based around playing fun narrative scenarios, show that they care about keeping the game balanced why should I still buy GW products?

Right now I've simply stopped buying anything new from them, I'll keep my old DA army around to play 2nd with and I still enjoy playing Fantasy and Epic every so often but as far as actually giving them money? It doesn't seem worth it when a company barely even one-one-hundredth their size can keep their game balanced and updated across the board while still producing top-notch products.

Last year when the DA codex came out I gave it a chance and was willing to wait for the other codices to get up to speed with the new balance point they had found. After waiting though it is obvious that they have gone back to their old method of developing in a vacuum with no regard for balance. The DA codex was not the shape of things to come and much to my chagrin it got me back in the game for all of a year before I saw that they hadn't changed. So it's fool me once etc. etc. at this point.

Other companies deserve my dollar far more than GW because other companies don't have their own market share clouding their heads and making them think they no longer need happy customers to make a buck. GW wont be the first or last company to find out how bad an idea that is in the long run.

Darkstar2586
20-10-2008, 09:26
To paraphrase the argument that has raged since the codex was released:

"If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, why on earth does my duck not get the 3+ inv save that that duck does?"

Because one duck is a mallard and the other Red-crested Pochard?
(i had to wiki ducks to find that name)

This protest wont really prove anything and all you've done is wasted a codex.

Way i see it....We dont get deathwing, we dont get death company, we get 3+ ducks and can bring redeemers to the BBQ.

In fluff this doesn't really stand up, but its primarily a game and then the fluff follows.

Other hand, do what everyone else is and ask permission, doubt many would object... just say your fielding them as allies. GW is big on the different chapters working together now.

borithan
20-10-2008, 11:53
These things have been identical across SM armies since the beginning of 2nd Ed (with the exception of the Assault Cannon for GK's, simply because they haven't been updated yet), and its odd that they all of a sudden now change, but not for everyone...Well, yes they have been the same, but until the recent codices they have all used the base codex. Now with moving towards self contained codices they don't want people to use another one alongside it.

And the same reason that it has happened to DA and BT is the same reason GKs have less impressive assault cannons (and probably why they have better force weapons). They haven't been updated yet. Just happens they are more recent than GKs, and so it may be more obvious.



Hell, specialist games manages to get out *amazing* FAQ's and rules updates with (for all intents and purposes other than a quick nod) no design studio support. Look at how BFG has changed since it was released, its a much better game and all one needs is the rulebook, the FAQ, and a couple pages of fleet list off the SG site.But then they are specialist games. If you want to play them you either need to have bought them a while ago, or get them online. The presumption is that you are online. For 40k they are wanting a product that mum (or dad, or grandparents etc) can bring their kids in, pick something up and be ready to play. Needing to get something else, or having to get something from online, will get in the way of that intention.



maybe (or they may just default to using the latest versions, which is what we did until GW came around and went with its strict RAW thing), but that doesn't mean its a very good way of doing it, or that its justified. If I was just getting into 40k, my first thought would be "thats retared, these guys are all supposed to have the same stuff".But you might easily, especially if you are an adult paying for their kids stuff, be very irritated that you have to buy two books for the same army, or that everything you need is not provided in the shop. "Use what is in the book" is far simpler from that regard.



The problem is the amount of time is rather considerable...Yes. That is unfortunate (but imagine the scream if they set about updating DA and BT before the others, just to get them to match up with the current SM codex). Its just the way it is going to be.



You guys aren't doing the car analogy right. There are NO NEW CARS. NOBODY GETS A NEW CAR. SOME old cars suddenly work better because they are blue. Or everyone who bought a blue car gets a BRAND NEW CAR!

If everyone with blue fords was allowed to trade them in for new cars... that's a closer analogy.No, people have bought a new car (codex). Then the people with the older but similar car (codex) are complaining. The new car analogy works fine in that regard.

Miggidy Mack
20-10-2008, 14:18
I too have stopped buying GW product. I'm going to continue playing (because I still have a few friends who play) and podcasting (because I really enjoy podcasting). I just don't get excited or even enthusiastic over anything GW does now.

My primary army is IG and I just don't care if they are gonna get a new codex. Maybe our new 40k updates project (I talk about it on the show) will change things for me.

I don't even own a single marine and this treatment annoys me. From a pure game design standpoint this is just lazy. It isn't good business practice, it isn't good game design. It's just lazy. So I guess we customers have to do it for them if we want their game supported as well as nearly every other company does.

It makes me not want to play or support the game. I don't really know why some of us still play. Maybe it's cus we are so close to a battle bunker and it's something to do on a Sunday afternoon. Maybe it's because I spent so much time and money buying and painting these armies.

I was really enjoying this game going into 5th edition when we were assured that the FAQ's would make sure no codex was left behind. They even used wargear as an example, saying nothing would suddenly become useless. I was there. Now I know that everything I hear a GW rep say has to be recorded and put on youtube so we can prove it later.

That enjoyment and faith is gone. I do still have fun playing against my friends, but I have no desire to buy or paint. This game is now more like Risk in my mind. I play it with my friends cus I'm playing with my friends, NOT because I want to play Warhammer 40k. I'd be just as happy doing anything else with the gang. I really thought they were working hard to make a better game in 5th edition. Now I know they were really working hard to get people to buy a $50 book before Black Reach came out.

Vaktathi
20-10-2008, 17:02
Well, yes they have been the same, but until the recent codices they have all used the base codex. Now with moving towards self contained codices they don't want people to use another one alongside it.

And the same reason that it has happened to DA and BT is the same reason GKs have less impressive assault cannons (and probably why they have better force weapons). They haven't been updated yet. Just happens they are more recent than GKs, and so it may be more obvious. Oh I agree, but if they are going to get all the new stuff when they get updated anyway, I don't see why they don't make the changes retroactive




But then they are specialist games. If you want to play them you either need to have bought them a while ago, or get them online. The presumption is that you are online. For 40k they are wanting a product that mum (or dad, or grandparents etc) can bring their kids in, pick something up and be ready to play. Needing to get something else, or having to get something from online, will get in the way of that intention. This may be where we have a disconnect. At least here on the West Coast (never played anywhere else yet), It's not little kids playing this game, it's almost all people in roughly college age and older (half the 40k/WFB players at both of the games stores I've regularly played at have been in their 30's/40's), with the occasional high school kid, the little kids are all playing Yugioh, Pokemon and Magic. The only exception to this was the one GW bunker I've been to, and even then that was still mainly high school kids, paying for their own stuff.



But you might easily, especially if you are an adult paying for their kids stuff, be very irritated that you have to buy two books for the same army, or that everything you need is not provided in the shop. "Use what is in the book" is far simpler from that regard. Sure, but again, what is the intended market? From my experience, it really isn't the little kids, although that may be different in the UK.



Yes. That is unfortunate (but imagine the scream if they set about updating DA and BT before the others, just to get them to match up with the current SM codex). Its just the way it is going to be. Oh I agree that only just updating the SM chapters would irritate a lot of people, the problem is GW's release timetable as a whole. It really doesn't take them that long to re-write the army rules, what takes all the time is model development, layout and art, and then they stagger the releases. While thats all find and dandy from a product standpoint, it does result in unacceptable wait times for updated rules for *every* army unfortunately, its certainly not a problem unique in any way to SM's.



No, people have bought a new car (codex). Then the people with the older but similar car (codex) are complaining. The new car analogy works fine in that regard.The problem is that Old Car is theoretically supposed to be on par with New Car, New Car is simply supposed to be different, but about the same, that was the promise made to people who bought Old Car. Now New Car has a ton of new stuff and much of the same stuff is either better or made to allow more stuff in addition, or both.

The Orange
20-10-2008, 19:15
My big problem is the lower/same prices for better gear and the needless difference between units/wargear.

Has this not always been the case? Didn't devastators pay more for las cannons then tac marines. Didn't DA get plasma weapons cheaper then SM? Pts cost has also been used by GW to make some builds more efficient then others for variet SM list have they not? I'm not saying that this is an excuse for the current state of changes, but who are we to say that equipment in the DA codex should be the same cost as equipment in the SM codex?


Oh I agree, but if they are going to get all the new stuff when they get updated anyway, I don't see why they don't make the changes retroactive
That doesn't work because it goes against their principle of using one book. Like it or hate it, that's GWs stance and (unfortunately) their not changing it anytime soon.

As veteran players, however, we can easily mash the rules from 2 codices. We already have most everything memorized and don't have to refer to our books to remember rules. This is not as easy for new players and throwing in a FAQ that give them another list of things to remember, does not help them take in the game. Especially as they will also have to remember not to use the old listings of this things in their original book.

This is why I accept the FAQ GW put out. They are trying to make the game as easy to pick up as possible (to entice new players). This includes the principle of everyone using their own codex. Weather for good or bad, this is a business resolution, not a army balancing one. For those players mentally ready for such shenanigans they said, "go change them yourselves". This is not at all a bad idea, just not perfect.


The problem is that Old Car is theoretically supposed to be on par with New Car, New Car is simply supposed to be different, but about the same
Theoretically yes, but has this ever been true? Has there ever been a time when every army has truly been on par with each other? I imagine maybe in the wake of switching from 2nd to 3rd edition where every codex was rushed out, maybe. But given GWs release schedule I doubt we'll ever see that theoretical dream achieved.

And just giving DA/BA/etc. the armory is not a step towards balancing, as this does not take into account the SM strength vs. every other army out there. This only puts DA/etc. on par with SM (maybe), and we have yet to see if the new SM codex proves codex creep, or truly is balanced against every other army. That's the one thing that many complaining seem to forget. How fair is it for other armies that variant SM get updated out of turn just because one of them got a new book? :eyebrows:

FigureFour
20-10-2008, 19:34
I might feel some sympathy when my Chaos Marines stop forcing new recruits to turn their assault cannons and storm bolters in at the door and trade them for autocannons and combi bolters.

Oh wait . . .

No I won't.

The codex hasn't changed, you didn't complain then, why complain now?

Besides, you're playing Dark Angels because you want to be DIFFERENT from Vanilla Marines right? Part of playing a different army is having to wait for yours to get updated. I don't expect to get new toys every time some random army gets a new codex.

Darth Ovious
20-10-2008, 21:50
I might feel some sympathy when my Chaos Marines stop forcing new recruits to turn their assault cannons and storm bolters in at the door and trade them for autocannons and combi bolters.

Oh wait . . .

No I won't.

The codex hasn't changed, you didn't complain then, why complain now?

Besides, you're playing Dark Angels because you want to be DIFFERENT from Vanilla Marines right? Part of playing a different army is having to wait for yours to get updated. I don't expect to get new toys every time some random army gets a new codex.

Erm, just a point here, but it probably help if most codices got updated when it was turn to do so. Like I've stated before 2 SM codices before a proper BA, SW, Necrons, Dark Eldar, etc. Please feel free to write the list.

If GW is going to take this stance where you need to play your own codex and will just have to wait for the next update then they had better update the armies in order then, hadn't they?

It doesn't matter how you look at it. GW havn't done a great job here. it's clear favouritism towards the smurfs because they are the best selling armies. How do they expect anybody to buy other armies when it's obvious that C:SM is certain to get updated on a regular basis while other armies HAVE to play the waiting game all the time.

Here's a question. What was wrong with the Codex before this one. What warranted this codex an rewrite over SW, GK, Dark Eldar, etc? I'll tell you. Nothing. Thats what.

You can't just say "wait your turn", when we know fine well that we'll be waiting a considerable time and it's already been posted that a company about ten times smaller than GW staff wise have done a better job.

And for all the people who say that it's people own fault for playing a "cliche" army, well then, thats fine. I tell you what everybody. Lets all just play Space Marines instead. Just plain blue Space Marines. I'm sure GW will be able to write some fluff about a second heresy or something to explain why most people playing each other are using Space Marine armies.

Darth Ovious
20-10-2008, 21:59
except that Predators, Vindicators, Dreadnoughts, Razorbacks, Tac Squads (after weapons) Assault Marines, Land Raiders, Termi's with Stormshields, Techmarines, and more, even *with* new upgrades (such as better PotMS, more weapons options, Bolster Defenses, vindi's auto-passing terrain tests, etc) are either the same cost, or in most cases *cheaper* than their DA (and CSM, BA, BT, DH) equivalents, and they don't get Combat Tactics either.


Not just this post but all your posts have been brilliant and I have agreed on most of what you have said. Now I know that Codex creep is inevitable and although I like the new space marine book, codex creep wise it is miles better than the DA one and I can tell that even though I'm not a DA player.I thought an update would have been just fine.

Darth Ovious
20-10-2008, 22:31
Has this not always been the case? Didn't devastators pay more for las cannons then tac marines. Didn't DA get plasma weapons cheaper then SM? Pts cost has also been used by GW to make some builds more efficient then others for variet SM list have they not? I'm not saying that this is an excuse for the current state of changes, but who are we to say that equipment in the DA codex should be the same cost as equipment in the SM codex?


That doesn't work because it goes against their principle of using one book. Like it or hate it, that's GWs stance and (unfortunately) their not changing it anytime soon.

As veteran players, however, we can easily mash the rules from 2 codices. We already have most everything memorized and don't have to refer to our books to remember rules. This is not as easy for new players and throwing in a FAQ that give them another list of things to remember, does not help them take in the game. Especially as they will also have to remember not to use the old listings of this things in their original book.

This is why I accept the FAQ GW put out. They are trying to make the game as easy to pick up as possible (to entice new players). This includes the principle of everyone using their own codex. Weather for good or bad, this is a business resolution, not a army balancing one. For those players mentally ready for such shenanigans they said, "go change them yourselves". This is not at all a bad idea, just not perfect.


Theoretically yes, but has this ever been true? Has there ever been a time when every army has truly been on par with each other? I imagine maybe in the wake of switching from 2nd to 3rd edition where every codex was rushed out, maybe. But given GWs release schedule I doubt we'll ever see that theoretical dream achieved.

And just giving DA/BA/etc. the armory is not a step towards balancing, as this does not take into account the SM strength vs. every other army out there. This only puts DA/etc. on par with SM (maybe), and we have yet to see if the new SM codex proves codex creep, or truly is balanced against every other army. That's the one thing that many complaining seem to forget. How fair is it for other armies that variant SM get updated out of turn just because one of them got a new book? :eyebrows:

You seem to be defending GW to the hills here, and I'll admit they're not totally stupid or whatever but you have to admit that this time they made a balls up.

The new space marine book is good and everything but the problem is just that. It's so much better than any of the other chapters and while you and other people are defending them and so forth, we players from the other chapters are forced into a situation to choose where to go.

I have 2 points to state.

1) They're are people on this thread telling DA players just to use the SM Codex for their army. The problem with this is that GW really wants to stay away from this area. In the past it was always that SM were the most popular army and best selling but thats my point. Too many players play just plain blue space marines.

2) Why wouldn't GW want to give DA players etc updates. Without these updates the number of sales of their goods drop. Now I know the orange has stated that maybe DA arn't big enough to warrant an update but I think this is totally untrue. GW won't want to see their DA stock drop in sales. They wouldn't want any of their sales to drop. I think it shows that this new codex was simply just to pick up space marine sales again, but I think they should be aiming to sell other armies, luckily IG is next. So maybe they'll be a few WWII hobbyists about to buy the next release. Also I like to point out that the number of DA players is actually very healthy. I honestly think that GW must be counting on these players to play with C:SM for the foreseeable future, but I expect that the number of Ravenwing boxes sold will drop.

Now don't get me wrong, I love the new SM book, I think it's great but it's now a new class above the rest of the chapters. Anybody who doesn't think so, please read thro both books. After that please write an army list using the two books. You'll find that.

1) The New C:SM has cheaper wargear.

2) The New C:SM has better wargear of the same type while remaining true to point one above.

3) Several units in the space marine codex are cheaper, by quite a margin

4) The new C:SM has more variability

5) SM units have more rules now. e.g. Combat Tactics

6) More S10 weapons in New Codex SM. e.g. Orbital Bombardment & Conversion Beamer. Before anybody starts, that Orbital Bombardment was my saving grace against a Monolith.

7) Better Special Characters

8) Better Psychic powers for cheaper points. You mean, come on! How much is a librarian? and how many powers does he get?

9) DA do NOT get scoring units other than troops thanks to the update.

Now I can't really be bothered thinking of anything else. Please bear in mind that I'm not even a DA player and I still know all this. OK, I do have the DA codex, but I do have a tendency to buy codices. I also have the chaos & eldar codices as well as various fantasy armybooks. I justlike to read the fluff sometimes and just to see what the new armies are like.

The Orange
21-10-2008, 06:16
You can't just say "wait your turn", when we know fine well that we'll be waiting a considerable time

:eyebrows: Everyone has too, why can't you? God forbid a DE player comes in on this. :p



1) They're are people on this thread telling DA players just to use the SM Codex for their army.
Completely and utterly untrue. There are people on this thread saying take the FAQs advice and house rule the issue. To those people who complain that its not official enough, well then the answer is simple. Use the official codex you like then. If codex SM is such a great dream boat then just use it already. For those that say they don't want too, well then stick with the DA.



1) The New C:SM has cheaper wargear.

3) Several units [transports] in the space marine codex are cheaper, by quite a margin

These were somewhat true of DA over the older SM codex, too.



5) SM units have more rules now. e.g. Combat Tactics

6) More S10 weapons in New Codex SM. e.g. Orbital Bombardment & Conversion Beamer. Before anybody starts, that Orbital Bombardment was my saving grace against a Monolith.

7) Better Special Characters

8) Better Psychic powers for cheaper points. You mean, come on! How much is a librarian? and how many powers does he get?

9) DA do NOT get scoring units other than troops thanks to the update.

These are pleas to be exactly like SM. Does no one see a problem here? What is the point of having a variant list (your own book) if the only difference is basically special characters and their associated special rules? Do you DA players just want to be the one page insert in Codex SM like the Imperial Fists, etc.? Granted I haven't built them yet, but if they made a Codex IF, I'd sure as hell jump on that boat instead of going with the shiny new codex SM.

Darth Ovious
21-10-2008, 12:30
:eyebrows: Everyone has too, why can't you? God forbid a DE player comes in on this. :p


1) Completely and utterly untrue. There are people on this thread saying take the FAQs advice and house rule the issue. To those people who complain that its not official enough, well then the answer is simple. Use the official codex you like then. If codex SM is such a great dream boat then just use it already. For those that say they don't want too, well then stick with the DA.


2) These were somewhat true of DA over the older SM codex, too.


3) These are pleas to be exactly like SM. Does no one see a problem here? What is the point of having a variant list (your own book) if the only difference is basically special characters and their associated special rules? Do you DA players just want to be the one page insert in Codex SM like the Imperial Fists, etc.? Granted I haven't built them yet, but if they made a Codex IF, I'd sure as hell jump on that boat instead of going with the shiny new codex SM.

1) Thats what I mean, some people are saying to use codex SM as a solution to DA players who don't like their book anymore. I think this is an issue because GW shouldn't want everyone to abandon their current army for SM. GW need their customers to keep buying things for their current armies and not just the new releases of the month. If GW are in so much trouble financially then they need as many sales as possible even current sales.

2) Yes but the difference was little. It wasn't big enough for SM players to suddenly say "thats it, I'm going to be DA instead now". SM players retained their 3 wound characters in the last codex amonst other things after the release of Codex DA.

3) No, that wasn't my point. My point was for YOU to write an army list using the two books and then see where the balance strikes. What I'm saying is that C:SM generally gets everything better and cheaper than DA. I will admit that BA were not left as bad, but we are still left in a bad place.

Also commented was "heaven forbid that a DE player should join in this disscussion", but as I have already stated they are also one of the armies that are left in a bad place just now. I'm only really talking about DA just now because that seems to be what the main topic is about, but if you ask me a lot of armies have been left with little attention to them. This actually makes the situation worse.

Madfool2
21-10-2008, 12:52
Don't ALL businesses need their customers though? At least that was what I was taught in Business studies.

Miggidy Mack
21-10-2008, 14:22
Don't ALL businesses need their customers though? At least that was what I was taught in Business studies.

Yes, but GW thinks that if they irritate you with your current army you will simply buy another one. They think that by doing rolling codex's and not updating the old ones for years they can convince people to spend $400 every 3 months on totally new armies.

It's probably why they only posted 1.47 million in profit last year. They will tell you it's cus of Magic The Gathering... and then when you try to tell them why they need to update their game and make rules that are a tightly written as magic's they will tell you they are different games.

That's actually what happened btw. Their letter to shareholders explaining profits routinely sites Magic The Gathering. When you talk to anyone at the studio about WHY Magic does so well and HOW GW can get some of those customers back... they act like they are totally different. YES, they are totally different. But there are still things that a company can do. There are still comparisons that can be made!

Those same people will try to tell you that WARMACHINE is totally different and you can't compare the two games. That cracks me up too.

Captain Marius
21-10-2008, 17:22
As a regular opponent of the Dark Angels, I've noticed that there are still a number of benefits in addition to DW/RW that they have over C:SM, such as Rites of Battle, Interrogator Chaplains, unlimited range Psychic Hoods, 5+ Inv combat shields, and the option to take five man TAc squads with a special weapon. They're just as competitive as they were before the new Marines.

However, I do think that it might be sensible for GW to put DA (and Black Templars) back on the slate for Codex updates. No need for model releases, but just bringing both of these books into line with the Marines ruleswise (and releasing a PDF for players who already own their Codices) would certainly solve a number of problems. I'd even prefer this to occur ahead of the Space Wolves and Blood Angels updates (only the DE have had to wait longer than the BA for new models, but I'm confident that when they're done they'll be done right).

MadParr
22-10-2008, 15:23
To paraphrase the argument that has raged since the codex was released:

"If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, why on earth does my duck not get the 3+ inv save that that duck does?"


I only have one response...

"HOLY CRAP! A TALKING DUCK!" :D

x-esiv-4c
22-10-2008, 15:51
In a Red-Dwarfian logic set, pumping out ****** 'dexs is good for business! For example.

Lister has a formidable (albeit badly painted) IG force. New codex comes out that is to the IG what C:CSM was to chaos players. Lister figures that it's about time to switch to Space Marines. Buys an entire new SM army where as he would have bought just a few models to update his IG force.

borithan
23-10-2008, 14:22
Oh I agree, but if they are going to get all the new stuff when they get updated anyway, I don't see why they don't make the changes retroactiveBut that still leaves the problems of needing more than one book.



This may be where we have a disconnect. At least here on the West Coast (never played anywhere else yet), It's not little kids playing this game, it's almost all people in roughly college age and older (half the 40k/WFB players at both of the games stores I've regularly played at have been in their 30's/40's), with the occasional high school kid, the little kids are all playing Yugioh, Pokemon and Magic. The only exception to this was the one GW bunker I've been to, and even then that was still mainly high school kids, paying for their own stuff.Well, yes, many of the people playing are older, but most of the people I have seen in the shop are high school children at the oldest, and I have seen many 7-12 year olds come in with their parents, who then drop a rather large amount of money on product (once in when a mother was buying over £100 worth of stuff, in one go, and was still asking whether the kid wanted anymore, who in a surprisingly restrained manner decided he didn't). Those are the people they want to attract in. They probably presume that older games are either already hooked in, or are not going to change system to theirs, and regardless it is largely older teenagers that seem to be playing in the shops.



Sure, but again, what is the intended market? From my experience, it really isn't the little kids, although that may be different in the UK.The market they want to attract into the hobby with how they provide the stuff. Yes, many 40kers are not kids, but most of the new customers are.



Oh I agree that only just updating the SM chapters would irritate a lot of people, the problem is GW's release timetable as a whole. It really doesn't take them that long to re-write the army rules,They would need to playtest the army with all the new costings and rules, as just because they think it is ok for the C:SM, that does not mean that it should be identically pointed to those, as certain items might interact very differently within the DA codex than they do for the C:SM codex. True, it won't be exactly the same as doing a totally new codex, but they can't just type in the new options and points costs and presume everything would be fine.

Vaktathi
23-10-2008, 14:34
But that still leaves the problems of needing more than one book. True, but they've already done that in the past as well and we already have to bring FAQ's around with us.



Well, yes, many of the people playing are older, but most of the people I have seen in the shop are high school children at the oldest, and I have seen many 7-12 year olds come in with their parents, who then drop a rather large amount of money on product (once in when a mother was buying over £100 worth of stuff, in one go, and was still asking whether the kid wanted anymore, who in a surprisingly restrained manner decided he didn't). Those are the people they want to attract in. They probably presume that older games are either already hooked in, or are not going to change system to theirs, and regardless it is largely older teenagers that seem to be playing in the shops. See, this just isn't the case over here then, most of the new guys that are just getting into it are late teens to mid 20's, definitely not 7-12 year olds (you see one or two every blue moon, buy like two things, play once, and are never seen again outside the Pokemon tables) and the average age for players is generally mid 20's-30's.



The market they want to attract into the hobby with how they provide the stuff. Yes, many 40kers are not kids, but most of the new customers are. again, that seems to be a disconnect then based on location, so I guess in the UK the younger players may be more prevalent than in the US (or at least the west coast). There people that were looking to start up 40k over the last couple weeks at my FLGS (since I can't remember much past that :p) have been a couple guys in their early 20's, and a guy who was about 30.



They would need to playtest the army with all the new costings and rules, as just because they think it is ok for the C:SM, that does not mean that it should be identically pointed to those, as certain items might interact very differently within the DA codex than they do for the C:SM codex. Well yes, but in all honesty I don't think several of the upgrades were really playtested at all (something GW has had a problem doing with multiple books) and given the only real differences past wargear (and characters) between the DA and SM books is a possible FoC swap, it should be a minor issue at best.


True, it won't be exactly the same as doing a totally new codex, but they can't just type in the new options and points costs and presume everything would be fine.I agree, but given how GW has done most space marine books over time, that seems to be exactly how they have done it until quite recently. That said, going from the SM to the DA book, I don't think it would require all that much.

Gazak Blacktoof
23-10-2008, 16:10
Well yes, but in all honesty I don't think several of the upgrades were really playtested at all (something GW has had a problem doing with multiple books)


There are a lot of myths surrounding GW play-testing and I've never been involved in it. From my understanding changes are often made last minute, after the last round of feedback from the play-test groups has been submitted to the studio.

This seems to result in the current situation where the majority of an army book or codex is fine but they often include a few "what were they smoking?" choices. These are probably the result of last minute fixes that haven't undergone the same level of scrutiny as the rest of the book's content.

Helveticus
23-10-2008, 16:29
I think it would require more than you think.

How would you balance Drop Pod Assault And Deathwing Assault in the same army?

And what about Terminator Command Squads with 2+ Armor Saves, 3+ Invulnerable, 4+ Feel No Pain, One extra attack, and the Sacred Standard, And X and Y, and Z, plus the three attached characters, Command, Libby, and Chappie?

Brother Loki
23-10-2008, 17:25
UK sales account for something like half of GW's worldwide turnover, and primarily come from their own stores, which are aimed at acquiring new customers, where the target market is something like 11-14. They themselves say that they only expect to retain around 80% of their customers for around 2 years.

Therefore, their business model is built very much around packaging the products as they can be used in game - for example re-boxing units into standard squad sizes (eldar guardians and aspect warriors, chaos marines etc). This is being extended to the codexes - hence you will likely never see an add-on like the 3rd ed spacewolves, or the ability to mix codexes like the inquisition ones. It's all about being able to give a simple answer to the question "little Timmy wants to start space marines for christmas. I want to spend £X. What should I get him?" Answer: "AoBR, Marine Codex, Hobby Starter Set, battleforce".

For whatever reason, they don't seem to place a great deal of value on catering to the 'vet' market - perhaps figuring they're old enough and smart enough to make the rules fit their own wishes.

In the US, where their sales are driven more by indies, there doesn't seem to be this preponderance of young children entering the hobby, especially via the FLGS route - or maybe they're there, but they don't hang out at the same places as older players.

90% of people will never download or use a FAQ or errata. (I played in a D&D 3e campaign for 5+ years without ever bothering to look at an errata, although I knew one came out almost immediately after the books were printed. I simply didn't care - the rules aren't why I play the games anyway.) 80% of customers won't even know one exists, and the others do but won't care. The only people who do are the ones who play in a formal/competitive setting, or who talk on forums like warseer, who make up at most 5-10% of customers . Warseer's pretty much the biggest GW forum by quite a margin, and has less than 50,000 members, and only a tiny fraction of them (no more than a few dozen) have chosen to express disapproval of the new SM codex (and we're some of the most vocal players, both for and against). Most people just don't care.

Even if they do a comprehensive FAQ which makes all those envious dark angels happy it won't change the fact that most people will just use whats in the book, blissfully unaware that their storm shields now work differently from what their codex says.

Miggidy Mack
23-10-2008, 18:10
While I know you aren't quoting EXACT numbers (giving estimates from your experience) I have had a different experience.

I play a lot of pick up games. The day after the FAQ dropped I was down at the Chicago Battle Bunker playing an apocalypse game with 4 of my friends. Everyone one of them had already read it. That isn't unlikely, they are my friends after all.

What struck me was the sheer number of people talking about it. Guys who don't even have a 40k army were offended and worried it would happen to fantasy.

A couple kids (like 12 or 13) were looking at the Space Marine codex trying to see what few models they had could be used to count as "Space Marines" instead of Dark Angels.

One guy even convinced a new customer to NOT buy 40k. That kinda angered me frankly (I don't poop where I eat, I have a podcast for that) but he seriously told the guy to not buy Warhammer because it wasn't properly supported!

Maybe that's the battle bunker, but I've even had Warmachine players use this as a great example of why I should switch to warmachine without me even mentioning it!

In the end there are a LOT of lurkers on forums, they aren't going to post if they are angry, but they will talk about it down at the shop or to their friends. It will effect their purchasing even if they don't post.

Jim
23-10-2008, 19:01
UK sales account for something like half of GW's worldwide turnover, and primarily come from their own stores, which are aimed at acquiring new customers, where the target market is something like 11-14. They themselves say that they only expect to retain around 80% of their customers for around 2 years.

Therefore, their business model is built very much around packaging the products as they can be used in game - for example re-boxing units into standard squad sizes (eldar guardians and aspect warriors, chaos marines etc). This is being extended to the codexes - hence you will likely never see an add-on like the 3rd ed spacewolves, or the ability to mix codexes like the inquisition ones. It's all about being able to give a simple answer to the question "little Timmy wants to start space marines for christmas. I want to spend £X. What should I get him?" Answer: "AoBR, Marine Codex, Hobby Starter Set, battleforce".

For whatever reason, they don't seem to place a great deal of value on catering to the 'vet' market - perhaps figuring they're old enough and smart enough to make the rules fit their own wishes.

In the US, where their sales are driven more by indies, there doesn't seem to be this preponderance of young children entering the hobby, especially via the FLGS route - or maybe they're there, but they don't hang out at the same places as older players.

90% of people will never download or use a FAQ or errata. (I played in a D&D 3e campaign for 5+ years without ever bothering to look at an errata, although I knew one came out almost immediately after the books were printed. I simply didn't care - the rules aren't why I play the games anyway.) 80% of customers won't even know one exists, and the others do but won't care. The only people who do are the ones who play in a formal/competitive setting, or who talk on forums like warseer, who make up at most 5-10% of customers . Warseer's pretty much the biggest GW forum by quite a margin, and has less than 50,000 members, and only a tiny fraction of them (no more than a few dozen) have chosen to express disapproval of the new SM codex (and we're some of the most vocal players, both for and against). Most people just don't care.

Even if they do a comprehensive FAQ which makes all those envious dark angels happy it won't change the fact that most people will just use whats in the book, blissfully unaware that their storm shields now work differently from what their codex says.

*stands up and applauds*...Couldn't have put it better myself...I think we are all guilty of thinking we represent all of GW customer base....where as we really don't!

Jim

Helveticus
23-10-2008, 19:14
So what you're saying is that you should be able to buy the new and improved Narthecium at the old and not as good prices? And that your drop pods should come with Drop Pod Assault? So you can take Belial, and his Deathwing squad with The company banner that works like a chapter banner, a pair of lightning claw Terminators, a pair of Better-than-codex Thunder Hammers, equal to codex Storm Shields, and either an Assault Cannon or 2LC + New and Improved Cyclone Missile Launcher, another 2-4 Terminator squads more or less equally decked out, followed by a few squads of cheaper Tac Marines, each with a drop pod using the new and improved Drop Pods for Drop Pod Assault.. so you'll have 3 or so Terminator Squads, and 2 Tactical squads landing on Turn 1, one tactical squad sitting on your objective, and an additional 2 or so Terminator squads, plus an empty drop pod landing on turn 2+?

Different rules usually mean different point costs. Some of the changes are in SM's favor, some are in DA's favor.

Your TH are better. Your SS are worse.
Your RAzorbacks cost more, the TLLC option is cheaper.
Your drop Pods don't have drop pod assault. Your Terminators have Deathwing Assault.
Your Libbie powers probably aren't as good. Their(and their Chaplain friends') stat lines are infinitely better.

Vaktathi
23-10-2008, 20:31
I think it would require more than you think.

How would you balance Drop Pod Assault And Deathwing Assault in the same army? Given that you'd be dropping what, 3 units at most in an average game? I wouldn't worry about it, I'm not seeing where it would be any different than in the SM book other than you can bring Terminators on turn 1 and likely won't have Tac Squads.



And what about Terminator Command Squads with 2+ Armor Saves, 3+ Invulnerable, 4+ Feel No Pain, One extra attack, and the Sacred Standard, And X and Y, and Z, plus the three attached characters, Command, Libby, and Chappie?Simple, addendum a cost increase for some of the wargear. Currently the unit you are talking about is roughly 700points (Belial, Terminator squad w/apothecary and standard, plus Chappy and Libby), I'd be fine facing that even with the new wargear, but say bump the cost of some of those wargear upgrades for Belials squad by 20% and it'd be fine in any regard. If someone wants to waste 33-50% of their points on a single squad and like 8 models, thats fine by me. I can drop 9 plasma cannons on it a turn and still have points to spare for other stuff.

Regardless, how balanced do you think it is that you can get a 2+/3+ save terminator squad with MC'd thunderhammers assaulting out of Land Raiders with TL'd AP3 superheavy flamers and an MC that gets to re-roll attacks and wounds in the SM codex by comparison and still grant the benefit of the *entire* army getting to re-roll flamer wounds and melta weapon hits even if you manage to kill off the character?



So what you're saying is that you should be able to buy the new and improved Narthecium at the old and not as good prices? And that your drop pods should come with Drop Pod Assault? So you can take Belial, and his Deathwing squad with The company banner that works like a chapter banner, a pair of lightning claw Terminators, a pair of Better-than-codex Thunder Hammers, equal to codex Storm Shields, and either an Assault Cannon or 2LC + New and Improved Cyclone Missile Launcher, another 2-4 Terminator squads more or less equally decked out, followed by a few squads of cheaper Tac Marines, each with a drop pod using the new and improved Drop Pods for Drop Pod Assault.. so you'll have 3 or so Terminator Squads, and 2 Tactical squads landing on Turn 1, one tactical squad sitting on your objective, and an additional 2 or so Terminator squads, plus an empty drop pod landing on turn 2+?[/quote] For the cost for all that, you are talking about the entire army right there. 4 termi squads, Belial and his decked out squad, and two drop pod tac squads? thats what, assuming 240pt termi squads, 235pt tac squads, 270pt HQ and 130pt Belial, 1830points? Nasty yes, but far from the most abuseable thing out there. Should some points costs be adjusted? Without a doubt yes, but probably not super severly, maybe enough to bump that to 1900 points? With my CSM army I could toss out 20 terminators, 9 Oblits, a powereweapon Khornate lord and 20 CSM's at 2000pts against the above army plus what, an Assault Cannon land speeder? I wouldn't have a problem with that.




Your TH are better. How are the thunderhammers any different? Just the thing about vehicles with Init values versus those that don't? A minor difference at best.


Your SS are worse. A lot worse. For the same cost.



Your RAzorbacks cost more, the TLLC option is cheaper. And the SM one still ends up being 5pts cheaper *with* the same TL Lascannon.



Your drop Pods don't have drop pod assault. Your Terminators have Deathwing Assault. I don't think most DA players would care if this didn't change, mainly just homogenized weapons, wargear and transport capacities.



Your Libbie powers probably aren't as good. Their(and their Chaplain friends') stat lines are infinitely better. They still have two different versions yes, but the cheaper version is identical to the one in the SM codex for all intents and purposes, while the better version costs almost as much as Cassius and is nowhere near as good. I don't think thats a huge deal.

Helveticus
23-10-2008, 20:44
Your TH victims strike After I1 next round, as opposed to AT I1 next round. Subtle but strong difference.

As for TL'ed Super Heavy Flamers- Vulkan doesn't TL the Flamestorm Cannons. They're not Flamers. They're Flamestorm cannons.

"MC that gets to re-roll attacks and wounds in the SM codex by comparison and still grant the benefit of the *entire* army getting to re-roll flamer wounds and melta weapon hits even if you manage to kill off the character?"

The problem is that to alter the points costs, and homogenize the two codexes would require someone to go through it point by point and adjust everything, essentially making a new Codex:DA supplement for Codex:Codex Marines.

Not entirely sure what that's referring to. I'm not aware of any of the SC's being able to reroll both hits and wounds.

And comparing a SC to a DIY IC is hardly equivalent. Try your Chaps/Libs/Commanders vs the basic ones.

I think the Transport Capacities could and should be FAQ'ed over. I think the wargear, rules, etc. should be left alone until they redo the DA codex.

The Orange
23-10-2008, 21:20
Simple, addendum a cost increase for some of the wargear.

And how much work do you think that will be? What should be changed in price, and what shouldn't? DA terminators are not the same as SM Terminators so should TH/SS Termies cost the same if given the same equipment? The list of possible areas for pt's changes goes on and on, and this only lead to a complete rewrite of the codex to balance it. That is not a simple FAQ by any means, so its no wonder GW decided not to do it.

Vaktathi
23-10-2008, 21:45
Your TH victims strike After I1 next round, as opposed to AT I1 next round. Subtle but strong difference. How do you get that? Sure both have different wording, but the both essentially say "you hit at init 1", unless one is interpreting the DA wording to mean "after I1", which I don't think is how that was meant to be read, I certainly didn't read it like that.



As for TL'ed Super Heavy Flamers- Vulkan doesn't TL the Flamestorm Cannons. They're not Flamers. They're Flamestorm cannons. Ah ok, your right, true. That aside however, it doesn't take a whole lot away from the rest of the example.



The problem is that to alter the points costs, and homogenize the two codexes would require someone to go through it point by point and adjust everything, essentially making a new Codex:DA supplement for Codex:Codex Marines. I really don't think so



Not entirely sure what that's referring to. I'm not aware of any of the SC's being able to reroll both hits and wounds. Vulkan has an MC'd relic blade *and* digital weapons, allowing him one re-roll to wound (which with S6, is usually all you need)



And comparing a SC to a DIY IC is hardly equivalent. Try your Chaps/Libs/Commanders vs the basic ones. Again, comparing the basic ones in the DA book the to SM book ones, they are identical save for the Librarians invul and Rites of Battle on the Company Master (which doesn't get Combat Tactics). The more expensive ones are better yes, but are also proportionately more expensive.




And how much work do you think that will be? What should be changed in price, and what shouldn't?

DA terminators are not the same as SM Terminators so should TH/SS Termies cost the same if given the same equipment? If a paid, full time development staff can't get that done in relatively small amount of time, then they have other problems.

The only difference (between the termi's) is that they can be taken as troops if an SC is taken (unique yes, but hardly broken, and loyalists can still field for all practical purposes, as many Termi's, they just don't get to be Scoring), and they have Fearless which is in every respect that I can think of, inferior to ATSKNF+Combat Tactics, and they are more expensive than normal SM terminators already. Honestly, if the terminators in the SM list are currently seen as balanced, then DA's shouldn't have any problem (save for maybe Belials command squad) simply porting over the rules for the new wargear as is with the exception of a cost increase for Cyclones (as well as a decrease for AC's).


The list of possible areas for pt's changes goes on and on, and this only lead to a complete rewrite of the codex to balance it. See above.

Helveticus
23-10-2008, 22:41
How do you get that? Sure both have different wording, but the both essentially say "you hit at init 1", unless one is interpreting the DA wording to mean "after I1", which I don't think is how that was meant to be read, I certainly didn't read it like that.

"may not attack again until I1 blows are struck" Definitely means after I1 to me. If you're going simultaneously with my TH crew, that means you're not going after, you're going WHILE... thus you go after I1. So if I wount your Flyrant on Turn 1, on turn 2, I get a chance to kill the thing off at I1 before it gets a chance to strike back. With that said I believe Storm Shields should be 4+ all the time, and TH victims should go after I1. Having played with 3+ SS they're a little too potent, and a merging of the two rule sets would be the best option.


Ah ok, your right, true. That aside however, it doesn't take a whole lot away from the rest of the example.

I really don't think so

Vulkan has an MC'd relic blade *and* digital weapons, allowing him one re-roll to wound (which with S6, is usually all you need)

Again, comparing the basic ones in the DA book the to SM book ones, they are identical save for the Librarians invul and Rites of Battle on the Company Master (which doesn't get Combat Tactics). The more expensive ones are better yes, but are also proportionately more expensive.



An option I'd love to have. Upgrading from a Lexicanum to an Epistolary doesn't get me +1A or +1W. It does get me a second power per turn though. Probably a wash.



If a paid, full time development staff can't get that done in relatively small amount of time, then they have other problems.


Like Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar, Tau, Orks, Necrons, Sisters, and a few other armies even more behind in their codex than DA?



The only difference (between the termi's) is that they can be taken as troops if an SC is taken (unique yes, but hardly broken, and loyalists can still field for all practical purposes, as many Termi's, they just don't get to be Scoring), and they have Fearless which is in every respect that I can think of, inferior to ATSKNF+Combat Tactics, and they are more expensive than normal SM terminators already. Honestly, if the terminators in the SM list are currently seen as balanced, then DA's shouldn't have any problem (save for maybe Belials command squad) simply porting over the rules for the new wargear as is with the exception of a cost increase for Cyclones (as well as a decrease for AC's).


There are more differences than that. Deathwing assault. Mix and Match Shooting and Assault weapons. TH/SS + Cyclone on one model no less. The fact that they can then be scoring! You glossed over that, but a 2+,3+,4+ 2 S8 PWA x5 + 2+,5+,4+ 3PW A x5 man scoring unit on an objective, when more than half the games you play should theoretically be objective based is huge.

If you'll notice, there's no way, no how, of ever getting a Narthecium in a Terminator squad for codex marines. It can't happen. They specifically removed our Terminator Command Squads to prevent it. They don't want 2+,3+,4+ terminators. For that matter, we can't get a Narthecium in any scoring unit. Playing Combi-wing you can get two scoring units with Nartheciums.. one 2+,3+,4+, the other 3+, 3+, 4+, T5, 18" moving contesting/capturing unit.

As for how I'd compare Vulkan? I personally think he's pretty potent, but that a lot of his power was a moderate to major "oops" and will get FAQ'ed back. At the very least, I think the Sisters combo is going to be nuked. I think he'll be very strong as an individual, but I don't see many armies being able to get much bang for their buck from his Chapter Tactics.

As for comparing him to Azrael, Samael, or Belial.. Azrael has some interesting applications in an objective based game, but I now feel he's not quite dark angel'ish. His rules have more of an Imperial Fists feel to me now, as I see him more often sitting on an objective leading the defense and bestowing his 4+ invul on the scoring unit defending it. Although, he does have a one handed Relic Blade... the Sword of Secrets is S6, and does allow +1A for his bolt pistol. 3+invul vs 4+ for him and his entire squad... Relic blade, S6 power weapon...

And there's not a doubt in my mind that Samael would smoke Vulkan 1v1.

Belial is a closer fight, but mathematically should win, as he should get one TH wound through to insta-kill Vulkan. That one may come down to who gets the charge.

And comparing Scoring Bikes and Termies vs Twin linked massively short range firepower.. would still rather play combi-wing than Vulkan.

Vaktathi
24-10-2008, 00:02
"may not attack again until I1 blows are struck" Definitely means after I1 to me. If you're going simultaneously with my TH crew, that means you're not going after, you're going WHILE... thus you go after I1. So if I wount your Flyrant on Turn 1, on turn 2, I get a chance to kill the thing off at I1 before it gets a chance to strike back. I guess it depends on whether "Until" is being used as a conjunction (thus: when X happens, Y happens, When Init 1 attacks occur, thats when you get to strike) or a preposition ( X, then Y, init 1 attacks occur, then thunderhammer'd dudes)

Either way, it shouldn't be an issue with a unit full of thunderhammers, if it survives 10-15 TH attacks, you've got other problems :p and doesn't come up against most targets.


With that said I believe Storm Shields should be 4+ all the time That I totally agree with. I really don't think the 3+ was warranted.


and TH victims should go after I1. Having played with 3+ SS they're a little too potent, and a merging of the two rule sets would be the best option.well, GW seems to want to make I1 (at least to me) be the absolute last attack step, I can't really think of anything (besides above issue) that would strike after Init1.




An option I'd love to have. Upgrading from a Lexicanum to an Epistolary doesn't get me +1A or +1W. It does get me a second power per turn though. Probably a wash. That's kinda what I meant, in terms of power balance there isn't much to talk about, its just the option for the character differentiation is lacking for such HQ's in comparison.




Like Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar, Tau, Orks, Necrons, Sisters, and a few other armies even more behind in their codex than DA? I won't argue there (hell I don't even play DA, I just find their present situation very dumb) and I think my comments on DA matters could apply to any one of these armies. It's not the rules that take so long to develop, its the fluff, print layout, mini's, marketing, and of course the intentionally staggered release schedule.




There are more differences than that. Deathwing assault. [/qoute] Yes, however other than coming in a turn earlier from DS Mix and Match Shooting and Assault weapons. Yes, these are advantages that DA have, however they also have the drawback of being more expensive base, coupled with Fearless not being as good as Combat Tactics+ATSKNF. Also, given that SM's now have drop pod assault, I don't think its as unique as Deathwing assault used to be, especially given the mandatory squad sized.


TH/SS + Cyclone on one model no less. How? The terminator must replace his weapons to do this. I would have assumed this meant all of them?


The fact that they can then be scoring! You glossed over that, but a 2+,3+,4+ 2 S8 PWA x5 + 2+,5+,4+ 3PW A x5 man scoring unit on an objective, when more than half the games you play should theoretically be objective based is huge. Its a very cool scoring unit, however its also very small. Granted I think the 3+SS is excessive, but I think that of the normal SM's too, a points increase for this combo is warranted I believe. That said, having to rely on 5 models living a whole game to claim an objective isn't always a good thing, even when they are ridiculously hard to kill.



If you'll notice, there's no way, no how, of ever getting a Narthecium in a Terminator squad for codex marines. It can't happen. They specifically removed our Terminator Command Squads to prevent it. They don't want 2+,3+,4+ terminators. For that matter, we can't get a Narthecium in any scoring unit. Playing Combi-wing you can get two scoring units with Nartheciums.. one 2+,3+,4+, the other 3+, 3+, 4+, T5, 18" moving contesting/capturing unit. Neither of which are scoring units however. I agree that FNP on these units would be silly however. I'm not sure off the top of my head right this moment what could be changed, hell, maybe just leaving it as is for the termi squad may be warranted in that case, but for the vast majority of the new wargear options I don't think this is the case.



As for how I'd compare Vulkan? I personally think he's pretty potent, but that a lot of his power was a moderate to major "oops" and will get FAQ'ed back. At the very least, I think the Sisters combo is going to be nuked. I think he'll be very strong as an individual, but I don't see many armies being able to get much bang for their buck from his Chapter Tactics. Unfortunately I don't think he'll get toned down in an FAQ, as they just aren't doing that in FAQ's these days.




And there's not a doubt in my mind that Samael would smoke Vulkan 1v1. Me either, but he's also much more expensive.



Belial is a closer fight, but mathematically should win, as he should get one TH wound through to insta-kill Vulkan. That one may come down to who gets the charge. If he was carrying a TH yes, but if not it would be in Vulkan's favor.



And comparing Scoring Bikes and Termies vs Twin linked massively short range firepower.. would still rather play combi-wing than Vulkan. You also have to look at the numbers involved there however. You're talking what, 15-25 scoring models as a huge chunk of your army as compared with say, 40 for fewer points? Granted those 40 aren't as hard, but they have greater target versatility, can potentially comprise many more scoring units, etc...

Helveticus
24-10-2008, 00:30
I believe Until is after I1, as that makes it an actual advantage for TH over Power Fists.

And actually at its very base, DA are slightly cheaper. When you add in the basic TO&E i.e. Flamer + ML, DA climb up and over, but a pure cost per basic trooper, DA tac marines are cheaper. I'm 90+16, they're 90+15.


He has to replace his Storm Bolter for the Assault Cannon, or the Heavy Flamer. He may just plain take the Cyclone. The Assault Cannon is cheaper as well.

In my 2K Combi-wing I had 15 Scoring Terminators, 12 scoring bikes, 2 scoring attack bikes, and 2 scoring land speeders. 31 scoring models.

IJW
24-10-2008, 09:44
I believe Until is after I1, as that makes it an actual advantage for TH over Power Fists.
'Until' is 'until', not 'after'.

Darth Ovious
24-10-2008, 12:54
In my 2K Combi-wing I had 15 Scoring Terminators, 12 scoring bikes, 2 scoring attack bikes, and 2 scoring land speeders. 31 scoring models.

I take it these are all troop choices you're taken with the special characters. Just remember that the FAQ for DA stated that only troops choices can claim objectives.

Helveticus
24-10-2008, 15:16
Right Darth.
And IJW if you can't leave the room until I unlock the door, can you leave it as I put the key in the lock, or after I actually unlock the door? If you can't strike until I1 blows are struck, you have to strike after they're struck.

Black-Tooth
24-10-2008, 15:26
I don't really see how the original poster can complain. Space Marines have several codex's that cater for even more variety in their armies, yet every other army only gets 1 book. Tell me how that's fair? I can't see how Space Marine players can complain about ANYTHING!

Durath
28-10-2008, 00:02
I am a Chaos player, and I support your protest.

Storm Shields should be Storm Shields, Land Raiders should be Land Raiders, Vindicators should be Vindicators.

Codex support from GW is at an all time low.

Durath
28-10-2008, 00:06
I don't really see how the original poster can complain. Space Marines have several codex's that cater for even more variety in their armies, yet every other army only gets 1 book. Tell me how that's fair? I can't see how Space Marine players can complain about ANYTHING!

Sternguard, Vanguard, Ironclads, Thunderfire, Land Speeders with troop capacity, Grenade Launchers...

All those things are unique to the new Space Marines, and is fine.

Where the problem is the cross-over units. Like Terminators (cyclones & storm shields), land raider changes, vindicator special rules.

It doesn't make a damn bit of sense that a BA/DA Land Raider would carry fewer people, or that a BA Vindicator would be any less able to plow through terrain than a UM one....