On Primaris and the future of 40k

[Lord_Caerolion]

 

MkX looks like MkVII armour with an altered MkIV helmet. It's no more different to MkVII armour than MkIII is.

And if a swollen Mark III was meant to be a replacement design for Mk 7 and ate all of its development time and release schedule, then was passed off as the "new Mk 7" for multiple release schedules, I'd be livid about that- because that's not what it's supposed to be.

 

Mk X (Intercessors rather than the escaped concept art variants that made it into the other mk X types which should really be judged against the units that fill the same niches) looks like a game of mad libs with power armour features gone wrong.

 

It's AQUILA ARMOUR but with IRON ARMOUR LEGGINGS, EXTRA ARMOUR PLATES, PLATFORM SHOES, and A BOOTLEG MAXIMUS HELMET.

 

The end result is something with enough plausible deniability to not be used as/mistaken for the iconic power armour no matter how much players try to fix the design choices with increasingly creative conversions, but close enough that someone a few steps above designers in the GW food chain might feel emboldened to pass it off as an adequate "standard space marine design" at some point.

 

 

Ok, so... It's not Iron Armour leggings, because it doesn't have the segmented bands at the rear. Aquila Armour with extra plates is also known as Errant Armour, and also as the Aquila Armour included in the Devastator kit, and nobody has issues with those. Most boots don't have completely flat soles. Lastly, Maximus Armour is routinely described as being amongst the most advanced of all armours, with later versions being stripped back so as to not require as much resources to construct and repair.

 

You could give a model in Errant Armour a Maximus helmet, and it would look very, very similar to an Intercessor. It's not like any of the design changes in Intercessor armour haven't featured before.

[Lucerne]

 

 

 

 

I did speak with Jes Goodwin the day primaris were revealed. He did say that they were afraid of an outright scale change and that this way it felt more progressive and catering to current marine users.

 

It is a pity. It really felt from the conversation that we were a different outcome of a couple of meetings away from having true scale marines and primaris never being born. Sigh.

If you ever get the chance again, it'd be a huge favor for the hobby to express just how much people want updates for classic Marines rather than the frankensteined versions.

 

 

 

Basically, the current state of the true Marines being in limbo is an insult to everyone that likes them and a wasted opportunity for GW to make money. If fans don't know if their model line will even exist in any meaningful way within the next decade...

 

 

 

It's hard to say that categorically, if the remakes were done with old marks of armor at Primaris scaling then they might have sold better. As it is I didn't buy any of them because they may have been crisper in detail but were basically the same thing as the pile of marines I already had, but if they had fixed the scaling at the same time I may have replaced my entire army.

So much this, if they redid old armour marks with primaris scale I'd throw a bunch of money gw's way

 

This is literally what fans wanted all along and which GW perversely refuses to just follow through on.

 

I have a feeling that in the future you will see special releases or upgrade sprues for "relic armour" or some such, in Primaris scale. You will be able to have your cake and eat it. They'll be intercessors at a base design level, but for just a bit of extra cash you'll be able to make them look like they're wearing a mix of classic Crusade, Corvus and Aquila armour.

 

We already have special releases for marines wearing old fashioned heresy era armour, after all, right? And stuff like the beaky Corvus armour is itself a throwback to the original Rogue Trader design. Same thing in principle.

 

That would be the lazy, cynical cash grab approach...so yeah, pretty good odds. It'd be obnoxious for us to just have to take Intercessor chassis power armour as loyalists  as it's much less visually interesting than the classic aquila and looks like a third party "sky warrior" bootleg...But if that's what GW goes for, that'd be the unambiguous death of the classic marine design in a way that's more fan-friendly than just leaving everyone in limbo for half a decade.

 

 

All I can say is ... speak for yourself. There are plenty who like Primaris Marines and according to GW they sell even better than expected so far. Face it, you are part of a loud minority and if you stick with that mindset you aren't part of the future.

 

I mean, there's always going to be some members of the fandom that buy up any given GW release because their subjective tastes mean they consider something a well-designed and appealing product, especially when it's advertised constantly? I wish you, personally, every bit of enjoyment you can get out of Primaris releases as their own limited subfaction- as an individual fan. As you said, you only really speak for yourself.

 

But that doesn't actually mean Intercessors are a good design or that this is a customer-friendly way to handle fans of the iconic designs and factions. Releases like Shrike where the Primaris fan club's enthusiastic spending habits resulted in the loss of classic designs in favor of releases that frankly were below the standard set by basic kitbashing are...not a good omen of the way things will go if the "make it all Primaris and just throw away the classic designs" mindset wins out and is catered to over the rest of the hobby.

 

 

Saying people who enjoy Primaris are people who buy up any given GW release is just condescending. That's definitely not the case.

 

And the second paragraph is just again 100% your subjective opinion, don't try to sell it as facts.

 

You may not want to believe that, but it's simply fact that people tend to buy new releases and that the Primaris Marines have gotten a lot of GW attention. To pretend that's not a huge factor in their sales is just being contrarian for its own sake.

 

Again, you're more than welcome to disbelieve it.

 

 

 

 

MkX looks like MkVII armour with an altered MkIV helmet. It's no more different to MkVII armour than MkIII is.

And if a swollen Mark III was meant to be a replacement design for Mk 7 and ate all of its development time and release schedule, then was passed off as the "new Mk 7" for multiple release schedules, I'd be livid about that- because that's not what it's supposed to be.

 

Mk X (Intercessors rather than the escaped concept art variants that made it into the other mk X types which should really be judged against the units that fill the same niches) looks like a game of mad libs with power armour features gone wrong.

 

It's AQUILA ARMOUR but with IRON ARMOUR LEGGINGS, EXTRA ARMOUR PLATES, PLATFORM SHOES, and A BOOTLEG MAXIMUS HELMET.

 

The end result is something with enough plausible deniability to not be used as/mistaken for the iconic power armour no matter how much players try to fix the design choices with increasingly creative conversions, but close enough that someone a few steps above designers in the GW food chain might feel emboldened to pass it off as an adequate "standard space marine design" at some point.

 

 

Ok, so... It's not Iron Armour leggings, because it doesn't have the segmented bands at the rear. Aquila Armour with extra plates is also known as Errant Armour, and also as the Aquila Armour included in the Devastator kit, and nobody has issues with those. Most boots don't have completely flat soles. Lastly, Maximus Armour is routinely described as being amongst the most advanced of all armours, with later versions being stripped back so as to not require as much resources to construct and repair.

 

You could give a model in Errant Armour a Maximus helmet, and it would look very, very similar to an Intercessor. It's not like any of the design changes in Intercessor armour haven't featured before.

 

1. It's obviously meant to be a "callback"/ripoff of Iron Armor's leg approach. That's the point.

2. Errant armour's extra plating is different- much more limited and doesn't lose the classic leg or (mostly) torso shape. What the intercessor armour does is add those extra plates in such a way that it's near-impossible to restore to the classic look without losing detail or an absurd amount of conversion.

3. Intercessors have a "special" boot design that, again, is near-impossible to restore.

4.Maximus fluff doesn't matter. The point is it's a grab bag of design elements, most of which take away from conversion or any theoretical usage of Intercessor designs as "new Marines".

 

Errant armour with Maximus helmet, even the concept art version of Errant, would be far easier to restore to Aquila mark. The problem with Intercessor- and that gets worse with other Mk X- is that all these design decisions come together to make a model that's less than the sum of its parts.

[Lord_Caerolion]

"A grab bag of design elements" describes basically every existing armour mark. Iron Armour is up-armoured Crusade Armour. Heresy Armour is stripped-down Maximus. Errant Armour is literally Aquila Armour with a gorget and slightly different legs.

[Lucerne]

"A grab bag of design elements" describes basically every existing armour mark. Iron Armour is up-armoured Crusade Armour. Heresy Armour is stripped-down Maximus. Errant Armour is literally Aquila Armour with a gorget and slightly different legs.

The others are a)more visually coherent in that they obviously focus on one or two design elements- Iron is about the reinforced plates, Heresy is mostly about the armour studs etc etc, b)in the cases you cited have far better continuity with the other marks, as you yourself were kind enough to cite, c)most importantly, aren't being treated as the "new space marine armour" by GW to the detriment of those other options.

 

The day GW focuses on Aquila or Aquila-adjacent armour releases alongside the Primaris sub-subfaction, or makes a Primaris release that looks identical in all but size to the traditional designs is the day there's much less of a problem with Primaris releases basically eating the Marine factions from the inside out.

[Panzer]

 

 

 

 

 

All I can say is ... speak for yourself. There are plenty who like Primaris Marines and according to GW they sell even better than expected so far. Face it, you are part of a loud minority and if you stick with that mindset you aren't part of the future.

 

I mean, there's always going to be some members of the fandom that buy up any given GW release because their subjective tastes mean they consider something a well-designed and appealing product, especially when it's advertised constantly? I wish you, personally, every bit of enjoyment you can get out of Primaris releases as their own limited subfaction- as an individual fan. As you said, you only really speak for yourself.

 

But that doesn't actually mean Intercessors are a good design or that this is a customer-friendly way to handle fans of the iconic designs and factions. Releases like Shrike where the Primaris fan club's enthusiastic spending habits resulted in the loss of classic designs in favor of releases that frankly were below the standard set by basic kitbashing are...not a good omen of the way things will go if the "make it all Primaris and just throw away the classic designs" mindset wins out and is catered to over the rest of the hobby.

 

 

Saying people who enjoy Primaris are people who buy up any given GW release is just condescending. That's definitely not the case.

 

And the second paragraph is just again 100% your subjective opinion, don't try to sell it as facts.

 

You may not want to believe that, but it's simply fact that people tend to buy new releases and that the Primaris Marines have gotten a lot of GW attention. To pretend that's not a huge factor in their sales is just being contrarian for its own sake.

 

Again, you're more than welcome to disbelieve it.

 

 

 

 I never claimed otherwise. However you are simplifying it a lot because it's convenient to you. It's not like companies can do whatever and it'll get bought just because it's new. If it's objectively bad it doesn't sell well no matter what.

[Vermintide]

I think the vast majority of people think intercessors look straight up better than tactical marines. I don't have any facts to back me up, but then again neither do you with your assertion of the opposite.

 

GW on the other hand does have facts. They have sales figures and market research, and what they are doing would seem to support the former assertion rather than the latter.

 

At the end of the day it comes down to the fact we've had classic marines for over twenty years by now. We all love them, that's why we are here, but some people simply don't like change no matter what form it takes. I think in this case those people are outnumbered, not just by existing fans but by the attraction of new blood to the hobby.

 

I'm sure if the Internet had been more widespread in 1992 or whenever, we'd be sat here having the same debate about how the new taller MkVI marines look dumb compared to the old ones, and you hate it because you already have a full army of those.

 

Let's be honest- If anything they played it safe with the new designs, at least for the basic intercessor. They're so similar to classic marines in design that a newbie would have trouble distinguishing them and might just assume it's a more detailed newer sculpt- Because that's what it is. The only major difference is the helmet, collar, and knee pads. All easily fixed if you really want to be a purist.

[Lucerne]

I think the vast majority of people think intercessors look straight up better than tactical marines. I don't have any facts to back me up, but then again neither do you with your assertion of the opposite.

 

GW on the other hand does have facts. They have sales figures and market research, and what they are doing would seem to support the former assertion rather than the latter.

 

At the end of the day it comes down to the fact we've had classic marines for over twenty years by now. We all love them, that's why we are here, but some people simply don't like change no matter what form it takes. I think in this case those people are outnumbered, not just by existing fans but by the attraction of new blood to the hobby.

 

I'm sure if the Internet had been more widespread in 1992 or whenever, we'd be sat here having the same debate about how the new taller MkVI marines look dumb compared to the old ones, and you hate it because you already have a full army of those.

 

Let's be honest- If anything they played it safe with the new designs, at least for the basic intercessor. They're so similar to classic marines in design that a newbie would have trouble distinguishing them and might just assume it's a more detailed newer sculpt- Because that's what it is. The only major difference is the helmet, collar, and knee pads. All easily fixed if you really want to be a purist.

Well, as you say, you don't have facts. GW has a long and ignominious history of making bad business decisions so an appeal to authority fallacy doesn't actually help your case here.

 

There's a difference between updating and throwing an entire section of the fanbase under the bus in pursuit of low hanging fruit. This is definitely the latter- or was there an Aquila armour Primaris-scaled troop set that I never heard about? 

 

It seems a group of vocal fans are more interested in chasing the new hotness than in ensuring the Marine line proper gets the support it deserves. That's fine and their choice but let's not pretend it's anything but what it is.

 

Legs, torso, boots. All impossible to fix perfectly even for a dedicated converter with talent and time- and a LOT have tried. The Primaris framework flat out is a bad basis for completely accurate Aquila armour.

 

The only real improvement Primaris have is the better scale and proportion- which considering they cannibalized a truescale Marine release...isn't actually a point they have in their favor over how well a truescale Marine release would have sold.

 

To put it bluntly, the reason we have Primaris isn't because there's anything inherently more profitable or valuable about the designs on their own. It's because GW finds it easier to twist players arms to brand truescale as something new and add overpriced units while adding arbitrary restrictions on the already-sold vehicles and units the new kits work alongside. Playing it "Safe" design-wise (while failing to do so enough to make them adequate as replacement Marine sculpts) just means the Intercessors are now a threat to the main Marine line ever receiving updates, especially with the angle GW is pushing of them as the new "standard for Marines". Add in the usual GW pacing and we now have an ugly state of limbo where Primaris are neither the sole Marines- if that's the goal- nor are the iconic Marines given the support they deserve as the main Marines line.

[Closet Skeleton]

 

2. Errant armour's extra plating is different- much more limited and doesn't lose the classic leg or (mostly) torso shape. What the intercessor armour does is add those extra plates in such a way that it's near-impossible to restore to the classic look without losing detail or an absurd amount of conversion.

3. Intercessors have a "special" boot design that, again, is near-impossible to restore.

 

 

The classic space marine leg shape exists entirely to get around the limitations of 1980s plastic molding, its not some bastion of objectively superior design. Conversely the Primaris kits have some unnecessary detail that goes the other way but that's most extreme on the Phobos armour which is not a 'playing it safe' design.

 

The classic space marine torso shape is anatomical nonsense.

 

The Maximus suit would be basically unwearable in real life with its nonsensical over-sized breastplate. The Mark 2 and 3 Forgeworld released have helmet mobility that goes against the original designs. There's nothing sacrosanct about the original power armour mark designs, they were only ever intended for flavour and background.

 

 

 

I'd argue this lends support to my theory about the Marine updates in 2013 and 2015 not selling as well as projected leading to a belief that another resale wouldn't sell at the expected numbers.

 

 

Primaris would have been in concept art stages already by the 2015 release.

 

There are two main reasons for Primaris:

 

1. More stuff to try and convince people to buy.

 

2. The newer members of the design team got sick of cartoony 1980s sculpting limiting their ability to improve the anatomy and posing of the kits.

 

They tried to just upscale regular marines with the Deathwatch and at some point decided to abandon that approach. The Mark VIII Deathwatch are not the same scale as the boardgame Kill Team Cassius so they will have been experimenting a lot during that period.

 

 

It seems a group of vocal fans are more interested in chasing the new hotness than in ensuring the Marine line proper gets the support it deserves. That's fine and their choice but let's not pretend it's anything but what it is.

 

There are only 'vocal groups of fans' in this discussion, cut the 'silent majority' nonsense.

[Lucerne]

 

 

2. Errant armour's extra plating is different- much more limited and doesn't lose the classic leg or (mostly) torso shape. What the intercessor armour does is add those extra plates in such a way that it's near-impossible to restore to the classic look without losing detail or an absurd amount of conversion.

3. Intercessors have a "special" boot design that, again, is near-impossible to restore.

 

 

The classic space marine leg shape exists entirely to get around the limitations of 1980s plastic molding, its not some bastion of objectively superior design.

 

The classic space marine torso shape is anatomical nonsense.

 

The Maximus suit would be basically unwearable in real life with its nonsensical over-sized breastplate. The Mark 2 and 3 Forgeworld released have helmet mobility that goes against the original designs. There's nothing sacrosanct about the original power armour mark designs, they were only ever intended for flavour and background.

 

 

 

I'd argue this lends support to my theory about the Marine updates in 2013 and 2015 not selling as well as projected leading to a belief that another resale wouldn't sell at the expected numbers.

 

 

Primaris would have been in concept art stages already by the 2015 release.

 

There are two main reasons for Primaris:

 

1. More stuff to try and convince people to buy.

 

2. The newer members of the design team got sick of cartoony 1980s sculpting limiting their ability to improve the anatomy and posing of the kits.

 

They tried to just upscale regular marines with the Deathwatch and at some point decided to abandon that approach. The Mark VIII Deathwatch are not the same scale as the boardgame Kill Team Cassius so they will have been experimenting a lot during that period.

 

Depends on the artwork- there are basically 2 styles of classic Marine.

1)The sprues. These are pretty awful anatomy wise at this point and desperately need a resculpt. If there was never another release with this anatomy, I would not shed a single tear. The detail is squashed, the height is a joke, the proportions are ghastly.

2)The artwork. This tends to be more realistic, better proportioned, the detail looks more plausible etc etc. Notably, it doesn't need Primaris gimmicks to look good. The important factor is the design/detail, something a simple helmet swap will not adequately convey.

 

Basically, beyond "sell new things", the main reason for Primaris to exist is that they're bigger Marines that've gone through too many design tweaks after the fact. GW took what should have been an update to the iconic Marines and reworked it into something useless for fans of that faction.

 

Helmet mobility or not, the original armour designs have changed strangely little over the years.

 

Sure, a lot of the iconic designs were happy accidents, but each of the previous marks deserves support in the model range at least as much as the Primaris flavour of the month- and with new technology, it would take maybe 1-2 fewer Primaris Lieutenants or shoulderpad sets to make a 5 man squad- so it comes over as actively hostile to the fanbase to refuse to hit "upscale" in CAD for the legs, stretch the torso template a bit, and maybe do a few quality of life fixes for things like Marine arms before slapping a silly price tag on it and selling it as a "Veteran Astartes Tactical Squad, now only 60 USD" or whatever buzzwords they want to slap on the releases this month.

[Rik Lightstar]

Wow, after 10 years on here, someone has finally made it to my ignore list.

 

That was some high quality ranting.

 

Rik

[Vermintide]

Well you're entitled to your opinion of course, Ugolino.

 

I'm pretty sure you'd be unhappy whichever way they went. Marines already enjoy far more focus than any other faction, and the lineup is bloated beyond belief. Some kind of "reboot" was definitely needed.

 

Say what you want about the fluff and rules implementation- I think that was a total mess to be honest. They could have done far better. But on the other hand, you would have been just as unhappy if they scrapped it all over night and told you "Hey. These are the new tactical marines now."

 

Meanwhile I'm sure there are people out there weeping for their Elder Guardians while you insist GW should be supporting a "true scale" variant of every old power armour mark since 1989...

[Ishagu]

GW should absolutely not be supporting any true scales of older variants.

There are multiple existing kits, many of the relatively recent. A very bloated range.

 

Meanwhile the Primaris range, whilst more well rounded than before, is still lacking some units to fill specific roles.

 

Ugolino - we all know you hate Primaris with a passion. Maybe the lore is the reason (although I can think of a dozen things in the lore more stupid than anything relating to Primaris). Maybe you're upset because you fear your army will be replaced. Either way, you're not an objective or reasonable critic on the matter. It's been two years now, time to accept or move on.

[Lucerne]

Well you're entitled to your opinion of course, Ugolino.

 

I'm pretty sure you'd be unhappy whichever way they went. Marines already enjoy far more focus than any other faction, and the lineup is bloated beyond belief. Some kind of "reboot" was definitely needed.

 

Say what you want about the fluff and rules implementation- I think that was a total mess to be honest. They could have done far better. But on the other hand, you would have been just as unhappy if they scrapped it all over night and told you "Hey. These are the new tactical marines now."

 

Meanwhile I'm sure there are people out there weeping for their Elder Guardians while you insist GW should be supporting a "true scale" variant of every old power armour mark since 1989...

I'm fairly sure I'm a better authority on what I believe than you are.

 

Yes, a reboot was needed- in the form of properly scaled Marines. Even ditching the range overnight blatantly is an improvement over the current limbo and half measures.

 

And at this point, the Eldar Guardians are in a much better place prospects-wise than the actual Space Marines, with the Banshees showing GW will translate their sculpts faithfully into plastic.

[Ishagu]

But the classic Astartes have been supported with fantastic rules in the new codex?

Why should anything be ditched?

 

You're very angry on this matter.

[Volt]

But the classic Astartes have been supported with fantastic rules in the new codex?

Why should anything be ditched?

 

You're very angry on this matter.

No, they've been given a retirement plan with a deluxe 9mm plan awaiting them in the not-too-distant future. Proper supporting is actually just porting 1:1 current units over to be Primaris instead of the cockamamie ridiculous units they keep cramming into the game that don't even make sense until they massively boost them with re-roll auras or constantly upping the amount of shots so they stop sucking.

[Ishagu]

So you want upscaled copies?

 

I think most people prefer the new and exciting units which aren't just repetitions of the past and are designed for the current game from the ground up.

 

Looking at GWs success there's little reason to think otherwise.

[Marshal Rohr]

A revamp of old armor marks into scale with chaos would be just the trick to make everyone happy. Hopefully they will embrace this with upcoming Heresy plastic kits people can use to make 40k tactical squads.

[Ishagu]

Yeah it could happen in the HH line, especially if the kits are moving to plastic.

[Lucerne]

A revamp of old armor marks into scale with chaos would be just the trick to make everyone happy. Hopefully they will embrace this with upcoming Heresy plastic kits people can use to make 40k tactical squads.

Honestly chaos, while not perfect, is basically a case study in what should have happened in the first place re: tacticals- I wouldn't say no to a little more covert scale creep from Chaos's scale with, say, Khorne or the Heresy sets either. Death Guard are, amusingly, very easy to lorescale against the new human minis and make excellent Mk 3- if you don't mind removing boils, filling in gaps, and a certain rather chaotic look.

 

Loyalists may be in limbo but for Chaos we have a solidly useable set of minis with new CSM even in a worst case scenario where Khorne and Slaanesh don't happen for years and aren't any larger. The fans have something to play around with for their basic troop unit and oddly enough they still sold fairly well. Funny, that.

[Marshal Reinhard]

I don't think this thread is long for the world anymore...

[Volt]

So you want upscaled copies?

 

I think most people prefer the new and exciting units which aren't just repetitions of the past and are designed for the current game from the ground up.

 

Looking at GWs success there's little reason to think otherwise.

Why do we need new and exciting units? To be terse (and meaning it inoffensively), I am no longer a child. I do not need fresh baubles dangled in front of me to hold my interest and prevent it wandering; I want what is traditional and in keeping with the aesthetic of the setting. New for the sake of new is not good design, rather it is the hallmark of creative bankruptcy. Warhammer is Warhammer because it has maintained a definitive aesthetic and design for decades, changing little over the course of its entire history. Aborting that history abandons what makes Warhammer special in the first place and merely leaves it in the same artistically bankrupt ballpark as most modern nerd orientated media. The only way I'm ever hopping on the Primaris hype train is if I get Primaris Terminators and Primaris Jetbikes, as it's Deathwing and Ravenwing or the highway. I don't demand that Bolt Action invent some strange new units that are ahistorical just to keep me interested, just as I see zero need for new units in 40k.

[Marshal Reinhard]

If you do not require anything new, and you can already get all that is old, then why would anyone care about your input on anything new ever? Or more succintly, you don't want new things. Alright, why should this matter to anyone who does? Your want boxes are already all ticked.

 

I'm not even gonna bother with the abandoning design argument, it never holds any water.

[Ishagu]

@Volt

 

Because a fresh start in needed sometimes. You have some subjective views that you are entitled to, but as I said above it has now been two years.

Nothing should be a surprise at this point - You're either on board or you're not. Your collection is still perfectly usable and will continue to be so in the future. If you want some grand guarantee of perpetual support that won't be coming, not even for the Primaris.

 

I love the look of the Primaris and consider them to be more true to the original spirit of Astartes than the overly bloated and excessively decorated range that was ultimately completed in 7th edition. But that is my subjective opinion.

[Vermintide]

Hypothetical question:

 

How would you have felt if they did just upscale old designs completely faithfully, and then released a new codex that changed their name from Tactical Marines to Intercessors, and gave them the appropriate stats?

 

Part of the issue, wether you'd like to admit it or not, is that supporting squads and load-out options that have been part of the game since second edition really restricts what they can do with an army, and the bloat has got to the point that they're really not a "beginner army" (which they have always supposed to be) at all any more. Would you have felt better or worse if they took a sledgehammer to those rules without the associated Primaris overlap?

 

Really I think the way things are now is great for players. If you don't like Primaris you can safely ignore them. If you do you can use them.

 

So long as there is always a way to use your old models in the newest editions of the game, I don't see a reason to complain. I can understand being upset if your 5,000 points of Salamanders becomes legitimately unusable- But I don't think it ever will. Even if the worst comes to worst I think we will end up in a situation where you're running old marines as "counts as" for Primaris equivalents.

 

Time will tell. I'm on your side to some extent- if they really do phase out old marines in such a way as to force you to reinvest in the new replacement, yeah, that will be pretty :cussty.

[Leif Bearclaw]

On the ever present 'the old Marine range is so bloated' line, how are Primaris better?

 

The range is 'only' 2 years old, yet we're already up to 3.5 units (and 3 kits iirc) of 'dude in power armour with bolter', namely Intercessors, Infiltrators, Incursors and Carbine Reivers (the 0.5). We've also got 2 different types of 'sneaky knife dudes' with Incursors and Reivers. Plus how many Lieutenant sculpts? It may be smaller overall atm, but the Primaris range isn't exactly shaping up to be less 'bloated' than the old Marine range (and the real 'bloat' there only came in relatively recently with the plastic HH alternate Tac and Terminator armour marks).