Jump to content

CA leaks


Dusldorf

Recommended Posts

The biggest “missing links” in the Primaris line-up seems to be a lack of a real close-combat squad, the lack of a cavalry type unit, and the dearth of transport options.

Reivers are great, but they’re basically an alternative to Scouts. They don’t really do what Assault Marines and/or Vanguard Veterans do...

Inceptors actually play pretty similarly to Attack Bike Squads (esp. if played as White Scars), but they don’t really do the same job as Bike Squads: rapid response objective grabbers and fast flankers. Reivers can kinda do this, but not really.

As for transports, well, I’ve said it a thousand times before: I was genuinely shocked when the Repulsor kit was released that there wasn’t an option to build it without all the damn guns to make a different transport. A “flying Rhino” to match the “flying Razorback.”  Giving Primaris Marines the ability to use Rhinos and/or Drop Pods would be a huge boon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There honestly is no good reason at all that Primaris can't use Rhinos or Drop Pods. It's such an incredibly flimsy justification that makes what is supposed to be the new premiere units just really, really bad.

Reivers also aren't really much of a Scout replacement because they don't do any of the important things Scouts do, i.e. sneak onto the field before the first turn and claim territory. Aggressors are I guess supposed to be the "heavy close combat" primaris unit?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Dusldorf said:

@Ish: chapter approved will be allowing intercessors to take a powerfist on the sergeant

Yup! I asked GW this directly on Facebook and they confirmed it... The question I'm pondering now is if it will be worth it. I'm thinking it won't be worth it on bolt rifle or stalker rifle Intercessors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My goal is to eventually collect six full Intercessor squads: three with bolt rifles, two with assault bolt rifles, and one with stalker bolt rifles.

I’ll probably put power fists on the two assault rifle Sergeants, since I think they’ll be most useful there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’d wager we’ll see at least one hero from each of the “Big Four” cross the Rubicon Primaris in the next few years. My money is on Ragnar Blackmane (SW), Mephiston Calistarius (BA), Azrael of Kimmeria (DA), and Cato Sicarius (UM).  

I also imagine we’ll be also seeing Angron and Fulgrim making a comeback, giving a Daemon Primarch to each major Chaos God.

(Mind you, what I would like to see them do is create some new characters. It’s kinda silly that the Iron Hands still don’t have any named characters or that the Imperial Fists, Salamanders, and White Scars only have one.)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, AbusePuppy said:

Man, you poor, poor SM players with hardly any named characters at all. I mean there are, what, only like thirty-seven HQ choices in that book, more than the total unit in the Harlequin codex five times over? You really must be absolutely desperate for options. 😛

To be fair, my other primary army — the Ironjawz — has a grand total of nine unit options in their entire sub-faction. That’s actually one less than they had when AoS launched! 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a whole thread on this subject

I really have no clue what GW was thinking when they broke up the old WHFB armies into new sub-factions. Especially since some of the “old” became “new” without any separation of units (e.g., Lizardmen/Seraphim) and several others lost almost nothing (e.g., Slaves to Darkness, Beasts of Chaos). Meanwhile, several others got fractured into so many factions they’re essentially unplayable (e.g., Empire is now Free Guild, Collegiate Arcane, Ironweld Arsenal, and Devouted of Sigmar!) even after they added in Allies rules.

I just think that if Unique Named Special Characters are going to continue to do things in WH40k that you cannot do with a generic Character than GW needs to make a better effort at getting some parity between the factions. In the cases of Space Marines it could really be as simple as changing a name and a few keywords: Sgt. Telion has the [ Ultramarines ] keyword, but Sgt. Krähen has the [ Raven Guard ] keyword. Done.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's model sales. I think WHFB reached a point where they had too many kits for sale and the large line was killing their overall sales. So they slimmed down the line into AoS. Not well executed, but it's a bit too late to correct. 

As for special characters, I think we should make a fan-made special character generator and just houserule them in. Waiting for GW to balance the sub-factions is a lost cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, paxmiles said:

As  for special characters, I think we should make a fan-made special character generator and just houserule them in. Waiting for GW to balance the sub-factions is a lost cause.

There’s supposed to be a “do it yourself” heroic character option in the upcoming Chapter Approved. Narrative and Open Play only, but I imagine it will be commonplace to use the in “friendly” Matched Play games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ish said:

I really have no clue what GW was thinking when they broke up the old WHFB armies into new sub-factions. Especially since some of the “old” became “new” without any separation of units (e.g., Lizardmen/Seraphim) and several others lost almost nothing (e.g., Slaves to Darkness, Beasts of Chaos).

It's actually really simple: GW has to make money by selling models; existing players reusing their old models gains them nothing as a company. Add in the push to make AoS more unique and differentiated from the generic Tolkienesque fantasy world that was WFB and there's a very obvious impetus there to not only abandon some of the older factions that didn't have anything distinct about them while strongly pushing new factions that functionally replace them.

It makes a lot of sense if you look at which factions "survived" and which have been kicked to the curb. Seraphon already had a very unique aesthetic going on and had no real direct equivalents in other fantasy worlds; but dwarves, and high elves, and dark elves, and the Empire, and many of the others that vanished were really pretty boring and had little to distinguish them from the D&D equivalents. Similarly, the various servants of Chaos were already fairly distinct in character and had established gimmicks that set them apart from other generic bad guys, but things like Orks really didn't so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, AbusePuppy said:

It's actually really simple: GW has to make money by selling models; existing players reusing their old models gains them nothing as a company.

While I agree GW has to make money, I believe that players reusing their old models helps strengthen the brand. It creates the means for new players to justify an expensive hobby, via considering the models to be an investment in a longer term hobby. It's the difference between buying a bunch of overpriced model kits and just buying a board game with 1-piece miniatures (like Risk). 

As GW weakens their brand by depreciating player investments, the game loses value. Primaris marines phasing out regular marines, for example. We won't see the results of this any time soon, but it's one of those things that may have lasting consequences depending on how it's handled. WHFB was depreciated far quicker that GW strengthened AoS, which killed off most of the WHFB fanbase and left a longterm black mark on GW's reputation.

I will note, regarding primaris marines, if GW truly phased out regular marines, it would mean that every existing marine model could be used as a "count's as" primaris marine, not unlike players using metal squat models as Space Marines. So, at least for now, GW needs to keep both lines alive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, paxmiles said:

While I agree GW has to make money, I believe that players reusing their old models helps strengthen the brand. It creates the means for new players to justify an expensive hobby, via considering the models to be an investment in a longer term hobby. It's the difference between buying a bunch of overpriced model kits and just buying a board game with 1-piece miniatures (like Risk). 

I actually agree with this.  One of the reasons I chose tabletop games over CCGs was that the models would never be unplayable.  So I, of course, bought up a huge Snakebite Ork army that ceased to be useable 2 years later...

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...