Cpt_Reaper

You and I remember 5th very differently then. Which I think is the crux of the whole thread. I started in 4th, and had a great time, then in 5th up until 7th I had a lousy time. Partly because the people I could play against were the types of people to abuse mechanics like scatter dice and vehicle facings. A potentially good mechanic that can be abused is worse than an average or poor mechanic that cannot, and that's a lesson I learned the hard way. I'm going to say this and leave the thread. I disagree that older editions were better than what we have now. I disagree that titanic units changed anything for the worse. I disagree that named characters of any stature aren't a good thing.

You keep saying previous editions were better. I wholeheartedly disagree. Templates were awful and easily abused, vehicle facings were finicky and when formations came in the game had to be hard reset with 8th. The only two things I'd bring back is being unable to harm something more with toughness more than double the strength of the attack, and still winning on objective points if you got wiped out. That's it. Apocalypse is a terrible idea to bring back, because just like when Imperial Armour had the "ask for permission" line most people just say no. Why play this whole other game system when 40k is enough? Yay for titanic units. Yay for primarchs. Yay for 10th edition.

Knights haven't altered anything. At all. They're big, tough and have 2-3 big guns. Back in the day a Land Raider was big, tough and had 2-3 big guns. Bringing one was could have been an auto-win if your opponent wasn't prepared for AV14 and two independently targeting twin-linked lascannons, or it could have been an auto-loss if they were very prepared for exactly that when you lose 250 points out of the gate. Knights being introduced didn't do anything to any mechanic. The phases haven't changed because knights exist. Objectives haven't changed because knights exist. Winning or losing hasn't been influenced by knights existing, unless you are playing "who has the coolest big stompy robot?". The game has faults. None of which are the fault of knights existing.

Counterpoint: Titanic units and Primarchs should not go away. I see these lines of thought over and over by the same handful of people. It's by no means a majority, because every time I see it I recognise the same usernames online and hear the same phases from the same 4-5 people IRL. "The game is ruined. It was better in X previous edition. Y unit type ruined the game and I want it gone." I own the Lion, and I own a growing household of Chaos Knights. I am glad I am not forced to play another game that nobody else plays in my city and lock them onto the shelf. Now, I accept that certain unit types might not gel with everyone. That's fine, but I hate the immediate stance of "remove it from the game!". Eldar as a whole were not fun for me for the last few editions, am I then not justified to ask for their removal from the game? Psykers have caused great frustration to me in the past so should psykers be removed? Just because you don't like something isn't a reason to take my toy soldiers away. Just because I don't like it doesn't give me right to take away yours.

I do hope someone picks up that phone... BECAUSE I CALLED IT

10th edition is in a weird point of "we'll split the difference" in terms of gameplay representing "our guys". It's kind of like 5th edition where you took a named Character to show you were playing that Sub-faction, but it's more open ended in that Detachments represent a fighting style rather than any one force. The issue lies in armies with codexes versus armies with an index, with the latter only having a single generic detachment. Using your example, a Vanguard Spearhead could represent the Raven Guard's preference for stealth and speed but it could also represent a taskforce of Imperial Fists sent to undermine enemy siege emplacements. In the Guard squads might be named after famous regiments, but they don't have to be that regiment. Ignore the Regiment name and it makes more sense. Shock Troopers are for rapidly taking objectives and moving on, so don't come with heavy weapons, while a Death Korp unit brings 3 special weapons and is designed to hold ground with many defensive abilities. Nothing says you can't have Cadian "Death Korp" or Krieg "Shock Troopers". When the codex comes out with more detachments it'll make more sense.

Things Chaos Marines need: Chaos Lord (Walking, Jump Pack and Terminator) Sorcerer in Terminator Armour New bikers new raptors new warp talons new Defiler (possibly dual kit for artillery engine?) Named character for Alpha Legion, Night Lords, Word Bearers and Iron Warriors and a new Huron sculpt What I expect: new Chaos Lord model with more options than we have now, but still very few

Seeing as us 40k players having heresy-era stuff doesn't take away from 30k players then there is no reason for us to not have heresy-era stuff. I had no intention of playing 30k. Now, I have very little reason to buy 30k tanks because I don't own shelf queens.

I was thinking that by the general sentiment of this thread that 11th will be another full reset, which I was opposed to 10th being a full reset and I am opposed to 11th being a full reset. But it doesn't have to be a full reset, invalidating codexes and the like. The answer is the same thing causing issue - the Field Manual. GW can literally print a field manual that adds back in granular points for wargear. The codexes stay the same, until their new edition book includes the same granular points.

I noticed a few Imperial Armour updates, but for the life of me I cannot work out what was changed. Orks Chaos Knights Astra Militarum part 1 (no malcador vanquisher added ) aeldari

This concerns me greatly. I mean, they did write legends rules for Astartes stuff, so I hope we get legends rules for auxilia stuff. My two Malcadors pre-date Horus Heresy as a game system, and I am not losing them without a fight.

PLASTIC MALCADOR LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reject Leman Russ Battle Tank. Embrace Malcador Assault Tank. Gonna need at least two. An Malcador Annihilator and Malcador Vanquisher. Absolutely some Draconsans if they're plastic. Dare I hope for a Minotaur?

So, in theory, we could see my beloved Malcador in plastic by Feb 24... I CHOOSE HYPE

I think it's neither Yarrick nor Belial. It matches neither current model. Even taking into account potential updates. Winged skull historically a Guard emblem, ruling out Belial (Also Belial's current storm bolter doesn't have a symbol on that side) lack of wreath under the "foregrip" rules out Yarrick I predict a generic character model for the rumoured Krieg update.

I said exactly that. That particular kit, being Space Marine Terminators, have been replaced by an in production version. Thus piracy and not preserving something that has no available equivalent. I was wrong. You aren't moving the goal posts and inserting clauses into my statements. You aren't even reading my statements. You just see a shill defending GW because you are upset at GW for entirely understandable reasons, and not my point that piracy is theft, and I will not condone it.