Good! It should have never existed as anything more than a specialist sprinkles you can season an Imperial army with.
Should do similarly with the Grey Knights, seeing how they keep not updating the range!
I should stop caring about 40k
- He/him
- barreldrill.com/
Military history, video games and miniature wargaming.
RPGs, single player FPS, RTS and 4X, grog games.
Passionate about complaining about Warhammer.
Catholic, socialist, and an LGBT+ ally.
FORUM SIGNATURE:
///
Fortified Niche: a podcast covering indie miniature wargames
www.anchor.fm/fortified-nicheGrognardia: the current place to order my t-shirt designs [until I find a better one]
www.zazzle.com/store/grognardiaHellsite 2 account:
bsky.app/profile/jcdent.bsky.socialYou must log in to comment.
in reply to @JcDent's post:
As much as it might be a good decision, this is a pretty cruel rug-pull for people with a full Deathwatch army. They got an index at the start of 10th and their combat patrol wasn't retired, so they had every reason to believe DW would continue to be playable as a standalone army until the weeks prior to the Agents codex announcement.
The smallest saving grace might be that for players with a DW army with only a few DW-specific units, this update opens up the non-codex ranges to pick units from while still allying their DW units in.
Man, I've thought about how to respond to this comment for a few days, even considered writing a blog post to get it out of my system finally (hopefully), but my one reaction to this is schadenfreude.
Deathwatch should have never been an army. DW intercessors are a travesty against DW kill teams the same way intercessors are a travesty to Tacticals: a stupid mono-weapon replacement for a unit that's supposed to be flexibly armed elites that GW couldn't write rules for. I'm happy DW Primaris are now gone.
By buying into DW armies, were directly supporting something I was against.
Yes, it's cruel on the side of GW, but I can't find it in me to empathize. The only only people I feel less sympathy to are the ones buying all the rulebooks that get immediately invalidated via patches because holy shit talk about not having pattern recognition.
I don't disagree that DW shouldn't have existed as a standalone marine army to begin with, but the way in which GW misled players in the earlier part of the edition is what puts me off. It's not just the sudden consolidation that happened here, but GW misleading DW players into thinking they'd be okay in 10th. If an army with an index, data cards, a combat patrol, primaris upgrades, etc. can just be consolidated like this and make people's armies invalid, it's going to discourage people exploring a wider range of factions. Unless you're playing something with an expensive range and a lot of precedent, what's to stop GW from getting rid of your faction too?
It is shitass behaviour on GW part, esp. when you compare it to, say, CB still maintaining Merovingians as legal to play.
I guess armies that haven't seen updates in ages can start fearing the axe after this and Beastmen getting bonked in AoS.
Personally, as a guy who loves Space Marines above all else, I think they should have, at most, a single base codex and then a book providing rules and maybe a special unit or two for chapters.
Marines should also have half as many units as they have now.
Agreed, the Marines range is horribly bloated with more than enough units filling the same niches. There's a balance to be struck between Marines obviously warranting more attention than other factions (they ultimately do have the largest playerbase and earn GW the most money) and the point of excess we're at right now.
The thing Marines need the most are rules that make them play like the hypercompetent [if their own idiosyncrasies don't get in the way] murder badasses they have been depicted as since... 4e or something.
As far as various vhapter tactics go, nothing beats the flavor of FW letting Carcharadon Tacs take chainswords in 5/6e.
Granted, GW always hated chainswords, they didn't have any special rules for like 7 editions. And bolters have always been lasgun+1...
yep. deathwatch should've always been a super-fancy veteran squad with unique weapons, there's perhaps more of a case (narratively) for Grey Knights to be their own army but faction bloat is already a thing, so any steps that reduce it are good
Yes, Harlequins exactly the same as Deathwatch! (in terms of how they should function rules-wise) A specialist elite unit that can be put into any faction where it makes sense for them to be, have the leader be hard as nails, give them three specialists with weird weapons, the whole shebang.
Deathwatch are an all-stars team who come together for a series of games and then disperse back to their club-league, they're not supposed to stay put for exhibition matches
At some point, maybe in 6E, GW got bit by the idea of spinning off elites - Death Watch, Tempestus, etc. - into their own factions and the closest they got to success are the Chaos Legions (though I don't think that's a good idea, and only DG, the most boring ones, got a full roster).
They somehow didn't drop it when capitalist carricature Tom Kirby stepped down from CEO.
Didn't work in AoS, either, I don't think Fyreslayers had any new units (outside of Warcry et al) in three editions.
Weird how you don't have the time or resources to support every faction if you keep adding ones to the roster
like, I understand it for devoted chaos god factions? but then they should've made cut the daemon codex and folded them into each chaos codex (recently bought the 3.5 CSM codex and wept at the beauty)
Shit yes! Demon armies running around is whack and I too think they should be allies at most.
And 3.5e CSM dex is a beaut.
Back on the Imperium, Custodes and Sisters. CHOP