40K: 8th Edition Demands

  • Posted by
  • at

8th Edition is going to be bringing an Imperial Ton of changes with it. Here are some we’d take over Nakatomi Plaza to see.

That’s right. It’s time for more wild speculation, hopes and dreams waiting to be crushed, rumormongering (the 3rd best kind of mongering), and quarterly benchmark blue-sky thinking as we get closer to release date. But this is no ordinary wishlist. Anybody can put together a wish list of things that would be “good for the game’ or that “make any kind of sense” or that “aren’t bad.”

But that’s not what I’m here for.

Today we’re penning a screed–a one page manifesto that’s made out of magazine clippings and the rantings and ravings of 40K players who haven’t picked up models since the Tau were still doing the Fish of Fury. Since the Astra Militarum were the Imperial Guard. When people still picked Predators.

With that in mind, let’s begin the crazy demands.


Vespids that Suck

They say one of the best ways to get your demands met is to start off with something reasonable. With that in mind, first on this list of demands is Vespids that maybe seem promising on paper at first glance. But the second you start to think about them for even a moment, you realize, no wait these are terrible. That’s how they’ve been in every iteration since their inception. So why not make it an official tradition. Instead of having a whole army like “the dark eldar” be the bad army that nobody picks, why not just make Vespids the thing that’s terrible–find new and inventive ways to make something terrible in the rules.

Maybe doing it on purpose will help figure out what a terrible unit looks like so that when it pops up on something “real” it can be fixed! Scapegoats are a fine tradition–and what’s the worst that could happen, you accidentally make Vespids that are good? Madness!

Xenos Faction Follies

As we all know, in 8th Edition there will be 3 different sides to the story. The Imperium vs. Chaos, and then over at the kids’ table, the Xenos. Expected to sit quietly while the grownups talk, the Xenos faction has the second stage–so why not make the most of it. You don’t want to ruin the main event by getting crazy–and look at what the big new rumored hotness is for the next wave. Biggerer Badderer Spacier Marines. More of the same.

But the Xenos are a chance to get weird.

Let’s have a Hrud Army. Or a consortium of allied xenos races–why should the Tau and their mind control hats be the only ones who can cooperate with the other species in the galaxy? Give me a pack of Jokaero getting up to some monkey business any day of the week.

Legions 2 and 11

As long as we’re talking heresies. And since we know that space marines are going to be needing something so that they don’t feel left out when the Indomitus Marines (or whatever they’re called) start hitting the table, maybe it’s time to have Guilliman keep digging into all the secrets at the heart of the Imperium. After all, he’s teamed up with Cawl to mess with the gene-seed (probably) why stop there?

Legions 2 and 11 were basically sentenced to damnatio memoriae, but man, what a time for them to come back. Things are already going to be tense enough with Guilliman working to pass his agenda through the Imperium’s tiers of bureaucracy (we know he had to clean house to get this far)–what would that do to his plans if the Forgotten Legions suddenly reappeared on the scene? I think it’d be a chance to explore fresh new ground. These guys were around before the Heresy–they may not care about Chaos at all. What would that look like in Newhamemr?

 

Exodite Titans

I mean, Dino Riders was a great cartoon. We already have big models making a comeback–and plus, having Eldar who were never “tainted” by the fall is an extra dimension to add to the battle against Chaos. It may be a great inroad for the Eldar to prove they’re mature enough to join the grownups conflict.

 

Squats

We’ve already talked about how you can make a Squat-themed list for Kharadron Overlords. We don’t really want Age of Sigmar to be the only ones getting in on that action, do we?

Bonus: Space Marines

Okay look, I just want one of these demands to have a remote chance of being met. So let’s just say Space Marines. Of some kind. There, done. Mission Accomplished.

What are your crazy demands for 8th Edition? Good rules? Bring back an old favorite model? Make Abbadon go away forever? Have him sit on the Throne? Let us know!

  • Balor

    Black Templars feeling a little closer in theme and essence to what made them enjoyable from the 2005 codex vs just being black marines.

    • Karru

      I agree. It was a massive bummer to see them getting rolled into SM codex and lose their individuality. They really deserver their own book in my opinion, especially since they have the “no Psykers” thingy going on, it would have made for an interesting army overall. Now they are nothing more than Marines In Black, Imperial Defenders.

      • Balor

        To be honest, I don’t think it would take that much work to reignite life into Black Templars again. They just got left behind with all the great 5th edition army re-launches and the Dev team did not really understand what made them interesting to people when they got rolled in the normal SM book. It really showed as they ignored the great lore pages out of that codex.

        • Karru

          Oh I agree with you there. The problem is the Dev team and their laziness. Unless the Design team absolutely loves certain army, they won’t see any real effort into making it good or interesting. That’s why we saw such abysmal Tyranid books for example.

        • Son_of_Corax_XIX

          Jarvis Johnson said at warhammerfest 2 years ago that they don’t have enough models to warrant their own codex

      • Spacefrisian

        Marines are Marines, be it Templar, Angel or Wolf, if you ask me GW should have put them all in a astartes dex and give each there own couple of pages.

        • Shawn

          Except that you have certain chapters that deviate from the Codex Astartes significantly. For example, Space Wolves are essentially still a legion with 13 great companies, wolf mounts, and deployment variations (i.e. scouts are full on space-marines). Blood angels of the Death Company and Furioso dreads that are quite different, as well as a Sanguinary priest.) There are many differences that set these marines apart from those that adhere closely to Roboute’s codex.

          Now, I don’t know if the BT had any real significant deviances from the codex in 5th edition other than “no witches,” the command champion is named differently and the scouts and tacts squads hang out together, but if that’s the case, then they really didn’t need their own codex.

          • Karru

            They had about as much difference as Dark Angels did.

            They had Sword Brethren instead of Veterans which had different skills to choose from, Furious Charge, Tank Hunters, Counter-attack and Infiltrate.

            The Crusaders you already mentioned. Something else to note here, they were the only unit in the game capable of taking Land Raiders as a Dedicated Transport that didn’t wear Terminator Armour.

            Their Commanders were Ld buffers. A BT Commander gave all other BT units his Ld to use if he was on the table.

            Then there was the Emperor’s Champion which was his own thing.

            Finally, the special rules themselves. First of all, BT had the “Abhor the Witch” rule which meant no Psykers as allies. Black Templars were Fearless when in an Assault. Then there was the old 4th edition rule (at least I think it was) where you had to roll for Ld to see if you shot at the closest target. This was done with a -1.

            The big “unique” rule of BT was their Vows. If the Emperor’s Champion was taken, he can buy a Vow as part of his kit. These Vows affected the entire army and remained even if the Champion was slain.

            Suffer Not the Unclean To Live:
            BT units gain +1 Strength when in CC, but suffer -1 Initiative.

            Uphold the Honour of the Emperor:
            All BT units have a 6++ save. On top of that, they are immune to Pinning.

            Abhor the Witch, Destroy the Witch:
            If the enemy army includes any Psykers, all BT units must move D6″ towards the closest visible enemy unit. On top of that, they nullify enemy Psychic Powers targeted at them on a 5+. Minor Powers had no effect on BT units or Characters at all.

            Accept Any Challenge, No Matter the Odds:
            Any unit able to must charge in the Assault Phase towards the nearest unit. If successful, the unit gains Preferred Enemy against the enemy army. Neophytes do not gain this benefit.

            There were also some unique items only available to BT units.

          • Muninwing

            so… they had veterans with an extra option.

            they had rules instead of fluff reasons to not choose librarians.

            they had the Emperor’s Champion (who is still around)

            and they were leftovers from the 4th ed codexes that experimented with some new ideas, but needed a rewrite anyway and would cause them to lose some of their stuff anyway…

            sorry… it sounds like you’re a victim to “too long since an upgrade” creating a fixed idea of what the army is supposed to be, not a fundamental change past what everyone else got. you’re just needing to shoulder it in one go.

          • Karru

            As I said, they were in the same boat as Dark Angels. If you go check the old 4th edition Dark Angel Codex, you notice that they are very similar. Both have some minor unique units and rules, but neither has something that makes them extremely unique and different from regular Marines.

            It wasn’t until they dropped the new DA codex which gave them loads of new units that made them “unique”. Same could have been easily done with Black Templars as well.

          • Muninwing

            here’s the problem…

            BT are SM. they are codex astartes compliant, but have decided to organize themselves differently.

            there are about a thousand of them. they have different veterans, with slightly different abilities. all told, not counting the SCs, they need about two pages max to fold into the main codex, and a couple pages to illustrate what a ship-borne crusade does differently from a traditional chapter. their relics were interesting, but they’re so relatively new that it set a tricky precedent to give them their own and make everyone else choose from the base.

            but the DA…

            every “successor” is allegiant to the Supreme Grand Master. they are a legion that never actually split. they have a completely different makeup to two of their companies, 1/5 of the army. they have debatably more fluff than any other chapter. they have reduced access to certain new-waves of tech because they are not fully trusted by their peers or by the inquisition.

            they would need, pre-6th, not including SCs, 2-3 pages of additional pages to be included in the SM Codex (deathwing, ravenwing, interrogator-chaplains), and have a long tradition of their own unique relics. they have had their own special abilities — from unique psychic powers to beefing up their dreadnoughts to unique army structures — since before the BT had their own book.

            and it was easy to add new units for the DA — they already had the fluff and the blueprints for it. they got some extra goodies, but much of what they received were just exemplaries from earlier. what new unique units could the BT be given — dudes who run faster directly at trouble? they are mostly Astartes-compliant, seriously limiting their expansion options.

          • Karru

            BT could have taken over the Sisters Pedestal as the zelous Power Armour army. Adding a handful of units, giving them some additional special rules and relics, boom. Now you have all you need to make them their own book, just like Dark Angels.

            If you like to use the argument, “they are Astartes-compliant”, then I guess Blood Angels should be rolled into SM book as well. They also happen to be Astartes-compliant. Their only “difference” is the inclusion of Sanquinary Guard and Death Company companies in addition to their normal Codex companies.

            They have a handful of units that are unique to them, but most are just re-named versions of the SM ones. Some unique units could be kept as BA only, but everything else can be just BA.

            Also, Black Templars in fact do not adhere to the Codex. They have figures that are similar to how a Codex chapter operates, but mostly they are their own thing.

          • Muninwing

            what a difference that Death Company makes though… not exactly an easy hurdle to get over, and a detriment to your argument. in fact, i was going to point that out but you did it for me.

            i did err in that you are right — the BT do have their own structures.

            i think it would be easier to put them into a book on “crusading chapters” in order to expand them. i don’t think it makes sense nor would yield decent results to try to jam them into the place held by the Sororitas.

            honestly, i just don’t see much of an option for them to expand into a full-codex army without serious repetition.

            but also honestly, i know that the only reason why the BA, DA, and SW have their books is because they have had their own for far longer than BT have even existed. i think they just weren’t popular enough to hold on to their individualized spot, whereas there are plenty of longtime players of the three alternate Astartes chapters.

          • Shawn

            Thanks Karru. Looks like they were experimenting with Chapter Tactics back then in some shape or form. I think a couple of them they should have kept like Abhor the Witch, the Vows, and maybe Suffer Not the Unclean to Live. Those I think would have given them enough of their original flavor, even if they were included in the 7th SM codex.

        • Karru

          While I partially agree with these, GW doesn’t because Money. That’s why I usually go with the idea that Chapters that deserve it, like Black Templars, should have their own book instead of being rolled into generic SM.

    • Muninwing

      my first SM army… i played them from the Armageddon codex. they were the only ones who could have more than one LR Crusader.

      they aren’t as unique as they were, but i don’t see too much difference between current and past. big marines. run at heresy, hit with axes. repeat.

  • Karru

    My crazy demand would be to see all armies become viable again, no matter who you are facing. I still miss how early to mid 5th edition worked, because I could play against a high-end tournament player and list with my casual list and still have a shot at winning.

    I’d also like to see much more variance within the game through army choices. Make elite armies more expensive in points while keeping Horde armies at a decent levels so you’d still be able to play them properly without having to buy 400+€ worth of models just for your core army.

    Basically I’d like to see balance and variance in 8th edition. Thus far unfortunately it would seem that neither is going to be happening in 8th. The rules favour Elite Power Armour Armies while Horde armies are going to get even less expensive in points thus they become even rarer.

    • Kinsman

      This. No matter who I wanna use or face, we should have a balanced match. You know, like most other successful games.

      • David

        If I ignor my armies strengths and take a list of pure scouts and no anti tank I should lose all day long. If I build to the strengths of my army I should have a decent chance against someone building to the strengths of theirs.

    • Shawn

      Not sure I follow Karru. What have you seen about 8th so far that has you concerned about balance and what kind of variance are you talking about, specifically?

      • Karru

        Things that are currently making it look like that Elite Power Armour armies are heavily favoured in this edition:

        Morale. High Morale and difficulty to kill makes it extremely hard to do anything to them. Ld 7 Marine Squad needs at least 2 deaths before they even have a chance to lose anything.

        Shooting changes. Moving and Shooting Heavy Weapons doesn’t hurt Elite armies with high BS because it’s only -1. This makes them more manoeuvrable and deadly, because they have no downside to moving around, avoiding melee units.

        AP changes and Cover. Since AP is now a modifier, a low one at that, Power Armour armies are one of the most powerful options one can take. Even the once dreaded Battle Cannon is now useless against Marines. They already mentioned that Cover is a modifier and since 8th is AoS but with minor differences, we can expect it to be +1 to saves. This means that Power Armour armies are rocking a 2+ save 99% of the time. Even against a -3 weapon, they are getting a 5+ save. Against an -2 weapon, which used to be a Marine killer, they are getting a 4+.

        The final problem is that they already revealed that Marines are getting cheaper once again. This means that Horde armies will too “to compensate” the change. This means they will be even more expensive and no doubt that GW will force people to use large units due to the Morale changes and the like, no one will play them. It’s already difficult to find anyone else playing Orks, Tyranids or Guard. It’s Marines, Marines, Marines, Eldar, Marines, Tau, Necrons, Marines, Marines, Ad Mech and Marines.

        I used to see all types of armies back in 5th. I’d regularly face Guard armies, Tyranid swarms, Ork hordes, Tau gunlines, Necron phalanxes, Daemonic incursion and so on. No longer because some of those armies suffered the fate of Fantasy. They kept increasing the price of the models €€€-wise and decreasing their price point-wise. On top of that, they were supported by weak to mediocre rules while Marines and Co. was getting rock solid rules and the best models to boot.

        From what we have seen, it doesn’t look like we’ll be seeing any increase, but rather a decrease, in horde armies.

        • Shawn Pero

          I have like 150 Ork boyz – the more I can field and have points left over for things like lootas and walkers, the happier I’ll be. I imagine Nid players feel the same.

    • David

      So a high end player stands an equal chance with a casual player.

      So you want to eliminate skill.

      Why not flip a coin and declare the winner.

      I do not want to play that game

      • Karru

        Amazing Straw man there dude!

        Let’s make it clearer for you since it seems you don’t understand what I want. In 5th edition, I could play my casual list which included units I enjoyed playing and having. The list wasn’t ultra-optimised nor tested out in dozen games. It was something I whipped up the night before, thinking this sounds like something I want to play. I am skilled player, at least I like to think so, so I am not talking something like an army Grots winning the game here.

        Basically the idea is that if you take a balanced army of units, you can have a decent shot at winning the game THROUGH SKILL. Currently if I brought my balanced list against a high-end tournament player and his list, I would lose as soon as I deployed. The list is optimised to the point where only a list of similar calibre has any shot at winning.

        I want to remove that massive gap between lists. This can be done easily with the following changes:

        Restrict army building and remove extremely broken combos

        Encourage balanced armies through rules

        Make spamming less effective, make people have to use a combination of units instead of relying on a handful

        None of these will harm the complexity or remove “skill” from the game. Since we are doing a straw men here, I take it your idea of “skill” is the ability to copy/paste a tournament winning list that uses loopholes, rule twisting, game breaking mechanics/oversights and extremely bad attitude to win the day?

        • David

          If you took a balanced list now you would be fine if you take a bad list of units you enjoy playing but are bad your list isn’t balanced and reflects poor skill in unit selection. Because list writing should be a big part of the skill in any war game. Yes some units are weaker and yes they should work to make some better sanguinary guard for example

          You identify why you would lose so you have the skill to make the judgement about what works if you still wish to play a bad list and you lose that’s your call when you deliberately write an underpowered list but don’t moan when you then lose

          Combos and synergy any reason any reason big part of skill in list building and skill in list building and one of the big differences between new and experienced player. However no single combo should be unanswerable. Although if you write a bad list you might not have the answer
          Allies let army’s not having an answer in there codex borrow from another sloving this problem

          Encourageing balanced armies means restricting diversity in lists damaging creativity and meaning that armies by army’s large become the same. Most armies should be able to compete if they play to there strengths see skill in list building but not all lists should be equal that’s bland.

          Spamming is fine I have no problem coming up against a list of pure scouts its original and adds to diversity and isn’t overpowered/ can’t deal with vehicles however if every time I face that army it’s a list of pure scouts then the scouts are unbalanced. So nothe a problem with spam just unit balance within codex

          All of those harm the game because they reduce list diversity restrict player options and eliminate skill in list construction

          What one person considers to be an oversite amother considers intentional. A skilled list is one that synergises through its rules because the units complement each other this can mean spam, this can multiple units combining different rules, this can mean one combo that works none of this is a problem if there are answers you lacking the skill to answer them is not a problem

          One of my last two tournaments I ran a double ik war con came middle ( and yes I found it to many special rules for my taste )so the next I ran

          The other I ran an astronomy telapathica/inquisition/admech list which came 2nd

          You seem to want to play bad lists and then want others to play bad lists so you can have fun but that denys their fun

          • Muninwing

            if you take a list of thing you like you’ll do fine?

            let’s say i’m an Iron Warriors player, and i like Obliterators and Mutilators… or a Night Lords player pre-traitor’s hate and i like warptalons…

            let’s say i’m a tyranid player.

            let’s say i like Deathwing (and there are Eldar players, and Astartes grav in the midst)

            are you saying that they can contend?

          • Muninwing

            i can take a balanced list and have my butt handed to me every time, and i’m an experienced player.

            list writing is one thing. looking for advantage in loopholes because you’re more interesting in winning than in playing a game is…

            well, you fill in the blank.

          • David

            A flaw in gw rules writing and sensible to use because if one player does and one doesn’t the game is bad if both do its balanced

          • Karru

            The core of your entire argument seems to be that if something is broken, it isn’t because anyone can use it.

            I’m here to tell you that the problem seems to be your way of thinking. Let’s look at the situation you gave me in your comment earlier (I can’t answer to it because it is under moderation).

            A good game has no massive oversights, such as the dreaded Wolfstar and Screamer Star, for example. I mean, the Screamer Star was absolutely broken and statistically impossible to kill in a normal game. To you this one sounds completely OK, because other players could have taken it of course.

            I do not want to remove the skill requirement from list building. I just want to make it more diverse. I want to see people having to react to multiple different combinations of units from multiple different armies, be it Orks, Tyranids, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons and so on.

            You don’t seem to mind that the game has a handful of builds that are utterly broken to the point where if you take them against anyone who doesn’t bring the same army or some extremely specific that is meant to hard counter it will win automatically. Most of the top tier armies are made with two different tactics in mind. One is made statistically impossible to kill, so it can forever do whatever it wants. The other is an army meant to wipe out the enemy before turn 3 gets around. Neither one requires any skill and is purely based on luck.

            I want to see how things were done back in early 5th edition. People would have to think about movement and conserving their troops for the final rounds. People couldn’t rely on a single mega unit to win the day, because even if it got into combat, it would take it too long to wipe out the enemy army that could focus on something else and even the mega unit wasn’t unkillable.

            Again, I don’t want to see a game where only a handful of armies are viable, period. That is the core of the issue that you completely ignore. You say that restricting army construction and balancing the game out is bad for “skill” and would remove “diversity” from the game. It would do the exact opposite.

            Since now it would fall down to player skill to play the game, the lists themselves would become much more diverse. Currently vast majority of tournament lists are exactly the same lists with extremely minor differences. This is because other options are not as optimal or just not powerful enough to matter. This also happens to extend to certain armies being completely unusable in high level play.

            So instead of facing the same armies and lists over and over again, one would face against other armies and completely new lists with units that never take the table. At that point, it will fall to the hands of the players who will win, through skill and not the ability to copy/paste a list someone else made where you did one or two unit/character changes and now call your “show of list building skills”.

          • David

            You describe intended designs as oversights. The stars are ok because there are counters – sisters of silence to turn off psychic shinnanigans for example remove invisibility and most are manageable.

            There being certain overy strong units is a problem with unit balance why do tau play riptides cos there better than kroot.

            Yes this leads to some army’s being restricted in what they can build and do well with i may think sanguinary guard are pretty but their bad.
            if I want to play admech I’d be a fool not to war-con because it enhances my army

            the reason most of these armies ended up being the same was formations not combos – to take the war con 3/4 of my pts were spent just meeting requirements leaving little room for variation. Let’s look at the gladius same thing

            Other than ynnari-eldar to powered
            Orks, tyranids, BA, underpowered all armies could compete and I’ve seen do well in a tournament/ league (I have seen BA and Orks do well but I acknowledge there codex handicaps and they didn’t win)

            It it’s silly to expect gw to achieve balance on a unit level with their track record but on an army level most had an option your problem is you define the option as an oversight don’t play it and lose and then moan at people that do

          • Karru

            Something GW has mentioned countless times in the past, they didn’t aim for a competitive game in the past. Only now with 8th edition they have started to realise where the money lies.

            Anyway, because the game was not intended for competitive play to begin with, things like Stars were and oversight. They expected that people would do thematic forces with allies, not some overpowered, rule-combining death ball that cannot be stopped. Those are all oversights.

            The entire point of my original comment was aimed at the question asked in the article. “What is your crazy demand for 8th edition.” My crazy demand is to see balance restored and the game made fun again for all armies and many builds, not just a few lucky ones and even then you are restricted to a handful of units.

          • Muninwing

            “You describe intended designs as oversights. The stars are ok because there are counters – sisters of silence to turn off psychic shinnanigans for example remove invisibility and most are manageable.”

            yeah… if that were the case, they’d have been around for far longer.

            and they wouldn’t add their own huge problems into the balance.

            you’re giving too much credit to a system that has been the “kludge of the month” for longer than the existence of the iphone. that’s not design, that’s equal parts happenstance and the panicked slapping-out of fires.

          • Muninwing

            “I do not want to remove the skill requirement from list building. I just want to make it more diverse. I want to see people having to react to multiple different combinations of units from multiple different armies, be it Orks, Tyranids, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons and so on.”

            yes. exactly.

            i want the game to be more than a handful of netlists.

            i want something that’s fun because it’s interesting. not the same boring builds because nothing else works.

            and taking a less synergistic or optimized build now has a mechanic to balance the playing somewhat. same with experience. because winning every game is boring too — doubly so if it’s my army doing it for me.

            but it’s not compulsory.

          • Karru

            Indeed. A good game offers a lot of variety and customisation to its players. No one wants to face the same army over and over again. That’s the problem with 40k currently. There is no point in trying to get creative, because the gap between the top list and a balanced one is way too large to the point where the balanced list doesn’t stand a chance, no matter how good the player is.

            I’m not looking to bring the game down to the point where EVERYTHING is viable no matter what. An army of Grots shouldn’t be able to win against a balanced army. You still need to think what your army consists of, but you are no longer restricted to a handful of units due to massive power gap.

          • Muninwing

            see, i think we are about on the same page. i’d love to see someone field a grot army, with all grot tanks and maybe counts-as conversions of grots standing on each others shoulders with a trenchcoat around them as Kommandos, or the like. i would not expect such an army to be a top-spot competitor, but i would give it due respect.

            i once toyed with making a “Deffwing Oi!” army, nothing but Meganobz and Deff Dreads, slap-painted with white, all just for fun. and while they might have been somehow reasonably competitive in 5th i would have no illusions about winning with them today.

            my issue with the game is that this “wouldn’t it be cool if…” kind of army design around a theme is just not supported when everyone is looking for the next super-combo. and that gets boring.

          • Muninwing

            no.

            see, there are (like many things) two schools of thought here.

            the first one i like to think of as the classical wargames version, the second i have seen a huge increase of when there have been crossovers between Wargamers and CCG gamers.

            the first idea is that the game is a game, a simulation, and rarely are wars equal. it is more interesting to play a “what if” kind of game, to come up with ways of balancing them to show off skill (such as objectives to meet, etc), and generally to think of the game as an experience and a fun activity rather than a head-to-head contest.

            in this kind of thinking, a “bad” list would be a superfriends, taudar, deathstar, min/maxxed cheezefest. it’s got no place in the fluff nor bearing on the actual setting of the game. a “good” list would be a double-demi just as much as it would be a 6th ed DE list that didn’t have the Baron rubbing shoulders with and giving orders to the Trueborn that are supposedly hunting for him.

            but you seem to be solidly on the other side. the one influenced by games like M:tG, where the game is half over before the first card is drawn, based on deckbuilding. where looking for the “synergies and combos” is praised rather than knowing how disparate parts function and playing them well in concert with each other.

            where the army plays part of the game for you, if done right.

            that’s not a test of playing skill. and it is important, up to a certain point where it takes over. then, that’s a test of lawyering skill.

            the bigger picture is that neither one is “wrong” so much as they are different. it’s mostly personal preference and local meta. but in theory the rules (and more important, points) should be balanced enough that i can take a fluffy accurate list with an interesting theme, and be able to compensate for the loss in “synergies and combos” if i’m a better or more experienced player than someone else. that way, more than one playstyle is accounted for.

      • Muninwing

        a high end player should not always win against a casual player.

        some casual players are really good, but do not like the tournament scene.

        a “high end” player may experiment with a new list, or self-handicap with a fluffier less-competitive list.

        this is not the elimination of skill, but the acknowledgment of skill and utilizing this acknowledgment to modify the game.

        if i were playing against a less-skilled friend with less experience, i can in this edition give them more Command Points. and maybe if there was an evaluation of skill levels, this could be a further balancing device used to make sure everyone has fun playing. then, it’s the skill level of play that matters the most.

        far more than your terrible logical fallacies.

        • David

          In a good war game skill in list construction and piloting an army on the table should win consistently. Yes luck should modify the result but 99% of the time the best player with the best list should win if these are matched yes it should be close but if your just bad at the game i should be able to beat you every time.

          list building is a big function of skill in a war game. If a high end player plays a bad list they are either handicapping themselves or not as good at list building as they think. Or trying something situational good based on perceived meta eg pure AV which then hasn’t worked in actual matchups

          What you suggest with command pts is no different to playing 7th and me taking 10% less pts to balance for you being bad and is usually bad unless you reliable play one person

          • Muninwing

            yes. exactly. if i’m playing a new player who has not yet earned their spurs, instead of being a jerk and crushing them, i could make it more fun for both of us and give him a “handicap” so to speak.

            not unlike golf, or fencing in Hamlet, or a number of other places.

            in an ideal, balanced game, the list-building would be less of a factor — there’s the hope for 8th that they will fix the balance issues and you can play a number of different builds for your army without needing to find the optimized competitive build in an extreme ridiculous meta. and again, if your local club finds that there’s an obvious imbalance of a certain build, this is a quick and easy way of patching it with some balance.

            i’m not saying it’s a necessity — though your group may decide such, or not. i’m saying that if you’re playing for fun instead of needing to stroke your ego with wins, you have a mechanism for equalizing the game so that it’s a challenge for a better player and not a foregone conclusion for the newer one.

            but, you do you. if you need the ego-stroking, just tell me before we throw down because neither of us will have fun if that’s the case, and i can find a better sport to play against who will be worth the time.

          • David

            Except list building is a big factor of skill instead of insulting your opponent by playing a half size force why not teach them to play better and why certain units don’t work and what does and why taking a diminished army is not a sport it’s an excuse when you lose
            in a sport if I’m bad my opponent win’s. They don’t let bad football teams have an extra player on the pitch cos they suck to make the game fairer to the bad teams

            I enjoy close matches you get that if you both play competitive lists equally well if you choose to build badly you should lose every game which is not fun for your opponent but you should certainly let them know you intend to choose to throw the game because you don’t like how’s it written you certainly shouldn’t then insult your open when you lose because you took a bad list that just makes you a bad sport and bad at the game

  • Omnia Incendent

    The primarchs of legion 2 and 11 are named “Rick” and “Morty” respectively.

  • ZeeLobby

    I’ll take fixed current factions over 10 new ones plz.

    • Troy G

      It’s been such an epic mistake in my opinion to spend so much time introducing new factions when the rules for so many existing factions were in such a crappy state. Get all the existing stuff working before trying to add something new.

      • Matthew Pomeroy

        concur completely

  • joetwocrows

    My crazy deamd is that the Dark Kin are recognized as the true masters.

    With an entire sub-universe to plun, errrr, expand in; millions of victims and slaves taken each day, cunning and intellect to match anything, they have all the resources needed to simply wave their hands and watch everything in Real Space fade away.

    Now, if they could only quit bickering amongst themselves……

  • Nyyppä

    All factions being able to bring their fluff on the table and still having a reasonable shot at winning is what I’m expecting. Or at least a legitimate effort to make that possible.

    • Muninwing

      a reasonable effort is all anyone has ever asked.

      now that GW is trying to seem as if they care, maybe we’ll get closer to that.

  • Marcus Langdale

    I think GW should have a 12-Month period in which they are banned from releasing Imperial products and must build on the other factions. I’ve seen enough frikin Space Marines for a lifetime.

    • Karru

      Personally, I would like to see GW have one rule to follow. Current factions must be updated BEFORE any new ones are released. This way we avoid the problem that AoS currently has where they are dropping new factions all the time while leaving old factions to rot. With Chaos at least they are doing the God-specific books, and thus making older models get more use, but the remaining factions are completely left to gather dust.

      I mean, it shouldn’t be too difficult to release a book that contains rules to play all Elves as one giant faction or Dwarves. The Grand Alliance books are nice and all, but giving an old faction a way to play using thematic rules and equipment would go a long way to get more people into the game.

      • Shawn

        I’d like to see something similar to Privateer press where a book releases and everyone gets an update.

  • Nilok

    Not Squats, Demiurg.

    • Muninwing

      just not squats period. they were a one-dimensional army without real depth or distinct complexity.

      • Lord Blacksteel

        What? Nowadays they’d get all of that wild Epic stuff they had modeled for 40K. You think a Squat Land Train, gyrocopters, and bikes and trikes would be bland? Seems like a pretty solid start to me.

        • Muninwing

          gyrocopters are either orky or not sci-fi

          bikes and trikes are already done

          the land train is… not really that applicable.

          that’s really what i mean. they might even occasionally seem like a good idea, but they just have no real depth nor uniqueness.

          • Tiernoc

            That’s actually the biggest problem I have with GW introducing new factions. They have a hard enough time as-is just creating variety and differing playstyles with the armies that exist already.

            I’d rather they work out their existing issues than try to introduce new half cocked ideas for how a new Sisters codex can totally work out this time.

          • Muninwing

            sadly, Sisters isn’t the hard one.

            go back to the Witch Hunters codex, adapt all the Inquisition stuff to be used by Sororitas. Add the Repressor. make the Repentia less “creepy teen boy fantasy” and the Penitent Engines scarier.

            then look at Acts of Faith as something like the KDK blood tithe.

            and price them appropriately… sure they’re power armor, but they’re unaugmented humans, S3T3, and should be points appropriate.

            far harder to make Squats distinct from other armies. they’re dwarves… cool… so…?

  • Spacefrisian

    Legion 2 and 11…The 2 legions that can be made up by us cause GW said so.

    • Matthew Hoag

      Actually there is official fluff that they were destroyed during the Great Crusade.

  • Darth Bumbles

    A rule for the Alpha Legion allowing us to declare a random mini Alpharius, who now has a Primarchs stat lines etc.
    At any time.
    Even after that mini was destroyed.

    Including minis on the opposition side.
    Even if they’re tyrsnids.

  • piglette

    Let’s just get an entire Vespid army with complete plastic kits. It can be the permanent bottom army, and everyone can say “Well at least I don’t play Vespids!”

  • Shawn

    Humorous article. I would like to see legions 2 & 11 show up, that would be cool. And once you mentioned Exodite Titans, I thought, yeah a T-rex the size of an Imperial knight with a tiny figure on it for moral support. I’d gladly get that, through some ork bits on him and call him Grimlock! LOL. Oh, and I want squats to return too.

    • Matthew Hoag

      Legions 2 and 11 were officially wiped out and their primarchs killed during the Great Crusade according to the fluff. They can’t come back.

      • Muninwing

        yeah, i get the sentiment but it’s just not aligned with the actual fluff…

      • Shawn

        Oh, I didn’t know that. I didn’t think concrete evidence was available, other than they were stricken from the records. I’m probably one of the few folks that haven’t actually read the HH trilogy (and it should have stayed with just three books too.)

        • Matthew Hoag

          It is confirmed in the Forge World book Inferno. Both legions were destroyed between 100-200 years before the Heresy. The details of their destruction are not given but it is suggested that one was wiped out during a mass xenos invasion (the only one to threaten the Imperium during the Great Crusade) and the other may have been corrupted by the same xenos as were hundreds of human worlds. All of those corrupted worlds were purged by the Space Wolves with support from the Dark Angels. Whatever happened, apparently it was so terrible that the memories of everyone involved, even primarchs, had to be altered. Only the Emperor and Russ know the whole truth.

          • Shawn

            Thanks Matthew.

  • memitchell

    Plastic Sisters. So that everyone who wants them will buy them. And paint them. And, then finally figure out they really kind of suck. But, imagine the Legions of female gamers who will join the hobby. Game nights will be “Lady’s Nights.” As a thinly veiled show of solidarity, guys will decry “Boob Armor.” Fist fights will break out as guys take sides in the “Adepta vs Adeptas” Great Debate. Yahoo News will report, “Is that a Simulacrum Imperialis, or are you just happy to see me?” has become THE most popular pickup line.

  • pokemastercube .

    release plastic sisters of battle

    • Muninwing

      i’ll respond to your actual comment, not the troll above…

      i know that Sisters as an army have been hit or miss. i know that the over-embellished ornate armor and vehicles are not everyone’s thing. i know that their current rules are a joke.

      but i’d love to see them as a serious faction, given a real update with actual models instead of just the thrown bone they’ve gotten. i think that the religious crusade army, the SM-lite differences, the zealotry — it’s something that works, or should.

      and we can talk about the lack of female models, but it’s pretty obvious. it wouldn’t make immediate change to include them better, but it would maybe take away some of the negatives that many female gamers experience.

      plastic sisters are a kit that GW could do really well with.

      what i wish they’d do is subcontract a Kickstarter. come up with a line, a teaser of units, a fully fleshed out force with no fewer unit choices than any other army (so if the lowest number of fast options is four, they would have at least that many).

      even at standard prices, if a fraction of the “i’d totally start a Sisters army” people invested in the campaign, they’d fund within a week and it would prove the possible economic success of such a line.

      • pokemastercube .

        they do have so much potential,its just gw’s allmost lack of intrest in dealign with them holds them back. and we have seen they can do deacently designed female power armour model with the sisters of silence so in a way half the work is done

  • SteelMaelstorm

    No more F-ing flavors of Marines until the 12 month re-balance happens. I play Marines and even I’m tired of GW’s high school fetish with skulls and variety/flavors of Marines.

  • danutzfreeman

    In all honesty i would like to see GW put out more starter sets,like what Death Masque was,it was such a great value box that i bought it twice. I wanna see more like that like tau vs tyranids and eldar vs necrons.