Ideas and Hopes for the next Codex

[Jacques Corbin]

Ok, this one is out there, but hear me out. How about a stratagem where if you do not get first turn, you can shoot with a unit of Eliminators as long as they target a character. It would happen before your opponent's movement phase.

[ArielRSA]

I don’t remember what the turnaround time was on new tactical marine kits but with the 5 year mark appearing for intercessors I’d like to see a dual intercessors/tactical marine kit. It could include some options for both kits and have an upgrade sprue similar to the new HH ones so you could make hellblasters, assault intercsessors or devastators as required. I have no idea how you’d actually make this wishlist work Edited May 25, 2022 by ArielRSA

[Medjugorje]

Ok, this one is out there, but hear me out. How about a stratagem where if you do not get first turn, you can shoot with a unit of Eliminators as long as they target a character. It would happen before your opponent's movement phase.

would fit much more to Raven Guard and honestly it would be not good for the game because its really annoying to loose a character before the game. And when knowing this stratagem it leads to hide your characters against Marine Armies which is a very bad game design.

[Medjugorje]

 

This discussion shows how dramatically different we are. Not just what we prefer in special chases.

 

I thought this discussions is just about game play and formyself I really dont care the FB vs Primaris discussion. I really disappointed to talk about here because for myself the new codex dont adress this. It should be much more about game mechanics and rules, and therefore @Mike804 - you dont like restrictions in 40k but there are two things why I think they are really important:

 

1. Game balance.

The harder a list can be build the better the game system works.

the disadvanteges should be more very carefully handled.

 

2. more diversity

i

I think we agree on a lot here, mostly that there does need to be balance. But I feel like if we limit an army to its playstyle, like Fists being only shooty and Templars being only fighty, that can actually do more harm than good to the army, if that makes sense?

 

For example, when I started Templars back sometime around late '17 early '18, I wanted a fluffy army. Lots of melee. But when I asked what I should buy, it was unanimously "Intercessors, Redemptors, and Executioners". I didn't like that because it didn't fit how I wanted my army ton play. In fact, the current backbone of my Templars are SS/SB Company Veterans, because I wanted a unit that could shoot decent and have staying power to back up my BGV and Characters, that's how I want what I build to work. So I think restricting an army to one playstyle could be too limiting, but I do agree there needs to be a lot more balancing. I have an idea how that could be done, but that's a conversation for another day.

 

Oh, and hopes for the next codex, Marines finally getting to ride in Impulsors/Repulsors and vice versa. Oh, and make narrative play the #1 way to play again. Those are my biggest wishes for the new dex(s)

 

Maybe the better way is:

 

wealer unit statlines but improve them in their supplement.

I see that you dont like restrictions but I came from 3rd/4th edition when Tamplars could not field Infiltrators except you pay for the Sword brethren ability.

No Whirlwinds and no Devastors ( except tanks the only long range firepower) and a rule which made long range even harder. 

I loved that ruleset because it defines the playstyle even more. I think thats not a bad idea but many players would have to sell out a lot of their units they already bought so GW will never be that hard in restrictions. 

 

Maybe we could get along when armywide buffs are better on specific units. Like (as an example) Chapter tactic White Scars: +1 to movement for all units but +3 for bikes.

[DesuVult]

The codex needs to have units be good without stratagems. If units cannot stand on their own weaker chapters will end up like the Imperial Fists currently where most units cannot do anything.

 

I would like to see more HH units brought out such as breachers and for unique units in supplements for chapters currently lacking them. Imperial Fist Phalanx Warders would be cool to have. Chapters will also need good non-gimmick rules. By gimmick rules I mean things like the untargetable IH dread characters. Without something to lean into primaris will stay bad and play second fiddle to the generally cheaper and more efficient first born.

[Medjugorje]

Someone have a link to the current rumors about the Space Marine codex?

 

@DesuVult - Yes, i think so too. But GW did a good job not to make SM Supplements that OP in 9th in comparison to 8th where there are some stratagems that are too good not to take each turn like +1 to wound for example.

[Vermintide]

I was thinking about this the other day at work, and considered actually coming here to start a thread, but I think this thread suits it nicely.

I think we all agree that the SM line-up is what we could charitably describe as bloated at this point. There really needs to be some kind of consolidation and trimming, the question is where and how you do it. I had a few ideas, but overall I think the most practical way is rolling a lot of datasheets into one, and essentially just making the differences into loadout choices. So for instance instead of Terminators, Assault Terminators, Relic Terminators, etc etc... Just Terminators and their various loadouts. Instead of Incursors, Insurectors, Intercecutors, Interlotrators, Interbla bla bla, just have Phobos Guys and their options.

I think there's also a bunch of archaic stuff that just needs ironing out in general, and that would make the process of rolling datasheets together easier- I mostly mean stuff like how Sergeants are always forced to be the odd guy out. Terminator Sergeants have to have the power sword, for instance, Devastator Sergeants have to be the only dude with a bolter, and so on... Update firstborn rules to allow them to be equipped uniformly, and suddenly I think a lot of the pain between Firstborn and Primaris would disappear, because it would be a lot easier to proxy them. You might not think it's the ideal solution, but I do think simply being able to proxy them would ease a lot of people's anxiety at their old army being "replaced"; and frankly, it would also ease my OCD at running a mixed army while the Primaris range still has these gaping holes.

 

Realistically though if any of this did happen I wouldn't expect it until 10th or even 11th, depending how much more crap they want to shovel onto us before the Primaris roster is "finished".

 

In general I'd also like to see doctrines simplified, if not simply outright removed and their benefits rolled into chapter tactics. I'm not a fan of having my rules arbitrarily change based on which turn it is. Feels far too game-y.

 

Stratagems too. Way too much bloat, lots of them really should just be part of the datasheet and cost points, not CP. Pre-game upgrades are the way to go for stratagems, IMO. Perhaps even just make it more like a rough equivalent of the old wargear system, call it Requisition Points instead.

 

And yes, the question of supplements... Another tricky one, but at this point I'd prefer if they were just rolled into the main book, and streamlined to fit in better. It's nice having unique options, but it;s just more bloat at the end of the day, and the bloat is what's really bogging this game (or at least, the Marine faction) down right now. You'd only need a couple of pages for the unique datasheets, and a keyword restriction to make sure they only get used in the appropriate armies. I'd be fine with Marine armies becoming a bit more "homogenous" so long as they made the unique chapter tactics/relics for each one more flavourful, not just little +1s here and there.

 

Anyway. I realise this has veered off into stuff that would require more of a reworking of the game in general, than just the codex, but I think that's just the state of things at the minute. It's all kind of a mess.

[Mike8404]

I was thinking about this the other day at work, and considered actually coming here to start a thread, but I think this thread suits it nicely.

 

I think we all agree that the SM line-up is what we could charitably describe as bloated at this point. There really needs to be some kind of consolidation and trimming, the question is where and how you do it. I had a few ideas, but overall I think the most practical way is rolling a lot of datasheets into one, and essentially just making the differences into loadout choices. So for instance instead of Terminators, Assault Terminators, Relic Terminators, etc etc... Just Terminators and their various loadouts. Instead of Incursors, Insurectors, Intercecutors, Interlotrators, Interbla bla bla, just have Phobos Guys and their options.

 

I think there's also a bunch of archaic stuff that just needs ironing out in general, and that would make the process of rolling datasheets together easier- I mostly mean stuff like how Sergeants are always forced to be the odd guy out. Terminator Sergeants have to have the power sword, for instance, Devastator Sergeants have to be the only dude with a bolter, and so on... Update firstborn rules to allow them to be equipped uniformly, and suddenly I think a lot of the pain between Firstborn and Primaris would disappear, because it would be a lot easier to proxy them. You might not think it's the ideal solution, but I do think simply being able to proxy them would ease a lot of people's anxiety at their old army being "replaced"; and frankly, it would also ease my OCD at running a mixed army while the Primaris range still has these gaping holes.

 

Realistically though if any of this did happen I wouldn't expect it until 10th or even 11th, depending how much more crap they want to shovel onto us before the Primaris roster is "finished".

 

In general I'd also like to see doctrines simplified, if not simply outright removed and their benefits rolled into chapter tactics. I'm not a fan of having my rules arbitrarily change based on which turn it is. Feels far too game-y.

 

Stratagems too. Way too much bloat, lots of them really should just be part of the datasheet and cost points, not CP. Pre-game upgrades are the way to go for stratagems, IMO. Perhaps even just make it more like a rough equivalent of the old wargear system, call it Requisition Points instead.

 

And yes, the question of supplements... Another tricky one, but at this point I'd prefer if they were just rolled into the main book, and streamlined to fit in better. It's nice having unique options, but it;s just more bloat at the end of the day, and the bloat is what's really bogging this game (or at least, the Marine faction) down right now. You'd only need a couple of pages for the unique datasheets, and a keyword restriction to make sure they only get used in the appropriate armies. I'd be fine with Marine armies becoming a bit more "homogenous" so long as they made the unique chapter tactics/relics for each one more flavourful, not just little +1s here and there.

 

Anyway. I realise this has veered off into stuff that would require more of a reworking of the game in general, than just the codex, but I think that's just the state of things at the minute. It's all kind of a mess.

I completely agree. If they want FB to stick around, give them Primaris stats and limit their loadout as you said. Combine data sheets and put strats on them too. I like the Supplement idea too, which people are speculating is gonna happen with 2.0

[Lord Nord in Gravis Armour]

Again, as someone who plays an Ultima Founding chapter, I don't feel this "bloat" that people who play Firstborn keep wanting to project onto the Primaris. To the contrary, while I've seen plenty of missteps or headshake moments from GW in the last few years, I think the design of the Primaris line has been spectacular (I said "design", not "rules" - some of the latter have stunk to levels not previously thought possible).

 

But the fact that they clearly want people to be able to run a complete list of Phobos, Tacticus, OR Gravis units as their tastes dictate is one of the selling points of the line for me. I don't want to lose that because some people insist that they can't figure out that a Reiver isn't an Infiltrator.

 

Yes, I KNOW there will be people who insist that TRUST ME, BRO they also play Primaris and feel the line is somehow confusing and bloated, but I have yet to hear that from someone who ONLY plays Primaris and isn't operating under a clear conflict of interest, whether they are able to see and admit that or not.

 

Nah - weirdly, the only players who seem to feel there are too many Primaris options and that they need to be condensed have magically all arisen from the category of players with an extensive collection of Firstborn models they don't want to see legended. And obviously, one way to forestall the GREAT LEGENDING would be to keep constricting the portion of the codex that competes with those future legends.

 

Not transparent at all.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Again, as someone who plays an Ultima Founding chapter, I don't feel this "bloat" that people who play Firstborn keep wanting to project onto the Primaris. To the contrary, while I've seen plenty of missteps or headshake moments from GW in the last few years, I think the design of the Primaris line has been spectacular (I said "design", not "rules" - some of the latter have stunk to levels not previously thought possible).

 

But the fact that they clearly want people to be able to run a complete list of Phobos, Tacticus, OR Gravis units as their tastes dictate is one of the selling points of the line for me. I don't want to lose that because some people insist that they can't figure out that a Reiver isn't an Infiltrator.

 

Yes, I KNOW there will be people who insist that TRUST ME, BRO they also play Primaris and feel the line is somehow confusing and bloated, but I have yet to hear that from someone who ONLY plays Primaris and isn't operating under a clear conflict of interest, whether they are able to see and admit that or not.

 

Nah - weirdly, the only players who seem to feel there are too many Primaris options and that they need to be condensed have magically all arisen from the category of players with an extensive collection of Firstborn models they don't want to see legended. And obviously, one way to forestall the GREAT LEGENDING would be to keep constricting the portion of the codex that competes with those future legends.

 

Not transparent at all.

the bloat comes from the fact that there’s two whole lines in the codex, but let’s face a good portion of that bloat can be cut down by combining some primaris datasheets particularly in the HQ section. How many primaris captain datasheets are there currently? A lot, but there only needs to be one.

 

And this is the first time I’ve heard anyone say anything about confusion in regards to the primaris line.

It just doesn’t make sense that a primaris captain isn’t 1 datasheet with options for different loadouts. At the very least there should only be 1 datasheet per captain-armor type combo.

Edited May 30, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Mike8404]

I think a lot of the problem is GW wanted to go a particular route with Primaris and didn't forsee FB being around as long as they still are.

 

What I mean is, look at Primaris. Each unit is set up for a particular purpose. Gladiators and Speeders are a good example. You have your anti-armor version, anti-tank, and generalist. GW was clearly intending for Primaris to be the new range to help get new players into the game without worrying about loadout and the legality of their builds.

 

I don't think they'll combine datasheets because that'll work against what they want Primaris data sheets to do. I also think, without getting back into this argument, that the issue with bloat lies entirely on FB. Until something is done with either aligning their rules with Primaris, moving the FB range to CSM, and/or putting more models into Legends, there's going to be a lot of unnecessary over-lap and bloat.

 

Another aspect of all this is, from what I think, GW is trying to separate CSM and LSM. Before the biggest difference was one army had a spikey kink, but both played relatively the same. That's not the case now with Primaris being tanky and specialized and CSM playing as FB do, more customized and, as of now, cheaper (mostly because they lack a wound). I think GW is trying to contrast the armies and Primaris are how they plan on doing it

Edited May 30, 2022 by Mike8404

[phandaal]

Thread's gonna get locked again - nice!

[DesuVult]

Doctrines are bad, it is not good to lose rules as the game progresses. I do not think GW is going to do anything about "bloat" because GW does not appear to view it as an issue. Codex size is used in marketing and there are clear choices to increase page and unit count.

[Orange Knight]

Doctrines are bad, it is not good to lose rules as the game progresses. I do not think GW is going to do anything about "bloat" because GW does not appear to view it as an issue. Codex size is used in marketing and there are clear choices to increase page and unit count.

I think the idea of Doctrines is nice in principle, but wasn't executed particularly well in my opinion.

 

I agree with the sentiment that too many rules have arbitrary limitations or requirements, and this also extends to the missions design, but that's another topic entirely.

 

The Doctrines should either be rolled into the Chapter tactics, or a single effect that remains for the duration of the game should be awarded to armies that meet the necessary requirements.

 

I can safely say that there are stratagems that I have literally never used, and will never use. I think the main codex can be reduced to 12 generic stratagems, and each supplement can unlock 6 additional strats that are all effective and thematic. This kind of streamlining should apply to all the factions, and not just Astartes. Unfortunately we know this will not be the case, at least not in this edition.

[DesuVult]

 

Doctrines are bad, it is not good to lose rules as the game progresses. I do not think GW is going to do anything about "bloat" because GW does not appear to view it as an issue. Codex size is used in marketing and there are clear choices to increase page and unit count.

I think the idea of Doctrines is nice in principle, but wasn't executed particularly well in my opinion.

 

I agree with the sentiment that too many rules have arbitrary limitations or requirements, and this also extends to the missions design, but that's another topic entirely.

 

The Doctrines should either be rolled into the Chapter tactics, or a single effect that remains for the duration of the game should be awarded to armies that meet the necessary requirements.

 

I can safely say that there are stratagems that I have literally never used, and will never use. I think the main codex can be reduced to 12 generic stratagems, and each supplement can unlock 6 additional strats that are all effective and thematic. This kind of streamlining should apply to all the factions, and not just Astartes. Unfortunately we know this will not be the case, at least not in this edition.

I feel marines highlight that 40k is currently in a poor middle ground between the 30k and AoS rules design styles and somehow ended up with units doing less on their own overall as a result. In AoS you have a small CP pool that refreshes and most of what you can spend it on is generic abilities to enhance unit traits with some factions specific command abilities. In 30k 2e you have reactions where all legions have the same generic pool intended for interactivity during your opponent's turn and once per game you can use your sole legion specific reaction.

 

In 40k I will stack like 3 stratagems on a unit of Imperial Fist intercessors so my other units die less slowly. It is always the same 3 though. I have access to the generic stratagems, the massive marine codex, a chapter supplement, successor supplements, and Armies of Renown. I think you could build a marine army with access to a hundred stratagems. I use maybe 6 different stratagems a month and some of that is because I go out of my way to get terminators in melee and then use close range bolter fire. I don't even know what most of the stratagems in my supplement are anymore, I spend most of my CP on making a stronger chaplain and handing out relics. A man can only say "Bolter Drill" so many times.

[Kallas]

[strawman argument]

 

There's not bloat because people are confused: there is bloat because there are entirely separate Datasheets that simply don't need to be separate.

 

Incursors and Infiltrators are a perfect example: both are Phobos units with Bolters that are effectively the same with different attachments; they have similar battlefield functions with their forward deployment. They have basically two pieces of wargear different (Helix Gauntlet and Comms Array vs Haywire Mine) and one different special rule (Omni-scramblers vs Multi-spectrum Array).

 

A simple solution would be to have all of this on one single Datasheet instead of two. Hell, if you want to go even further, these units could be combined entirely (ie, you could have Multi-spectrum Array and Omni-scramblers be paid upgrades instead of specific to Incursors/Infiltrators respectively) but that isn't what was being advocated.

 

To come back around to your strawman that "Firstborn players are trying to restrict Primaris so FB don't get Legends'ed", the point was originally posted by a Primaris advocate: that FB have bloat, citing Land Speeders as an example (who have three Datasheets in the Codex) but completely ignoring the Primaris repetition (eg, the Storm Speeders, who also have three Datasheets).

 

There is Datasheet bloat, because there are clashes between existing Firstborn units (eg, Land Speeders) and newly introduced Primaris units that fill the same function (eg, Storm Speeders), as well as other things, such as the mentioned Terminators/Assault Terminators/Relic Terminators; and things like the Infiltrator/Incursor/Reivers (because let's be honest, Reivers could be Troops and it wouldn't hurt any kind of balance) and the various HQs (both Firstborn and Primaris).

 

There is bloat in both lines. But please don't try and put this on Firstborn enjoyers as some kind of reactionary crying.

[Guest Triszin]

I think we can all agree that there is bloat in the books from like units.

 

I do think, book improvement, like units should be rolled into one.

 

Storm speeder as mentioned, has 3 data sheets, when it should have 1. (With load options for the 3 builds).

 

Incursors and infiltrators should also be on the same sheet.

 

 

I hope for 10th they give all loyalists the primaris keyword. And/or all marine transports the ability to transport them both.

 

 

As I mentioned before, for vehicles, weapon consolidations (looking at you repulsor chasis).

 

Marine vehicles need more help than other vehicles this edition.

I'm for shield dome option for all marine vehicles.

Consolidation of defensive systems into 1-2 profiles.

Price adjustments, and removal of transport abilities from the rep ex.

 

(We all know vehicles in general this edition are in a bad spot).

 

 

Reivers:

- move to troop

 

 

Roll certain strats back into rules for specific units and remove the strat.

[GenerationTerrorist]

The worry about combining Datasheets (Storm Speeders, Gladiators, etc) is the dreaded "Rule of 3" severely limiting what you can take....For example, how could a Dark Angels player reasonably take a Deathwing force if every single Terminator unit (bar Knights) is all from the same Datasheet, thusly limiting you to 3 units.

 

Unless they do something radical like saying that one non-Troops Core unit in your army can ignore the "Rule of 3" for example.

[phandaal]

The worry about combining Datasheets (Storm Speeders, Gladiators, etc) is the dreaded "Rule of 3" severely limiting what you can take....For example, how could a Dark Angels player reasonably take a Deathwing force if every single Terminator unit (bar Knights) is all from the same Datasheet, thusly limiting you to 3 units.

 

Unless they do something radical like saying that one non-Troops Core unit in your army can ignore the "Rule of 3" for example.

 

Deathwing Terminators would probably stay as a separate datasheet in their own codex like they are today. So you would still have "Terminators" and then "Deathwing Terminators."

[UnkyHamHam]

The worry about combining Datasheets (Storm Speeders, Gladiators, etc) is the dreaded "Rule of 3" severely limiting what you can take....For example, how could a Dark Angels player reasonably take a Deathwing force if every single Terminator unit (bar Knights) is all from the same Datasheet, thusly limiting you to 3 units.

 

Unless they do something radical like saying that one non-Troops Core unit in your army can ignore the "Rule of 3" for example.

The "Rule of 3" was a bandaid for a previous era and needs discarded anyhow. We have built into codexes now rules for limiting the biggest offenders. Things like 1 Captain per detachment, and others like it for Tau Commanders and Tyrants.

 

Edit: I do think it's weird that Terminators and Assault Terminators haven't been combined yet. They should have like 3 editions ago.

 

Fluff wise it doesn't make sense to restrict the elite of the chapter to fight in such limited ways. Plus there's all sorts of precedent in the fluff for allowing them to mix and match.

 

Also, the excuse of two separate model boxes doesn't hold up either. Otherwise, we'd have two Scout Squads. One squad with knives/bolters/shotguns that can take a heavy Bolter. And one Sniper Squad with cloaks and missile launcher.

Edited May 30, 2022 by UnkyHamHam

[Medjugorje]

I think this would be a bad idea to change the datasheets. 

[Vermintide]

Again, as someone who plays an Ultima Founding chapter, I don't feel this "bloat" that people who play Firstborn keep wanting to project onto the Primaris. To the contrary, while I've seen plenty of missteps or headshake moments from GW in the last few years, I think the design of the Primaris line has been spectacular (I said "design", not "rules" - some of the latter have stunk to levels not previously thought possible).

 

But the fact that they clearly want people to be able to run a complete list of Phobos, Tacticus, OR Gravis units as their tastes dictate is one of the selling points of the line for me. I don't want to lose that because some people insist that they can't figure out that a Reiver isn't an Infiltrator.

 

Yes, I KNOW there will be people who insist that TRUST ME, BRO they also play Primaris and feel the line is somehow confusing and bloated, but I have yet to hear that from someone who ONLY plays Primaris and isn't operating under a clear conflict of interest, whether they are able to see and admit that or not.

 

Nah - weirdly, the only players who seem to feel there are too many Primaris options and that they need to be condensed have magically all arisen from the category of players with an extensive collection of Firstborn models they don't want to see legended. And obviously, one way to forestall the GREAT LEGENDING would be to keep constricting the portion of the codex that competes with those future legends.

 

Not transparent at all.

Bro, take a look at my gallery. I'm the one making that point, and with the exception of terminators, my army is full of Primaris. Primaris was literally what got me back into the hobby after 15 years of absence, because I saw the Intercessor and thought they looked incredible. They finally got Marines truly right. I am sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong on that assumption.

 

The bloat is real, but I think you're misunderstanding what people mean by it. It's not a bloat of redundancy and overlap, it's a bloat of "why are there 4 different units which could easily just be variations of the same one?" Take your Reivers example. It's perfectly easy to distinguish a Reiver from an Incursor from an Infiltrator, but are they actually different enough for it to matter? Would it make any real difference if it was just a loadout option for a generic Phobos Marine?

 

Then you have the general disjointed and awkward way they have spread the heavy weapons teams out, forcing Tacticus into plasma, Gravis into melta, etc... But do we honestly not expect there to be a big primaris-lascannon equipped Eradicator released in the next couple of years? So that's gonna be another datasheet, instead of a weapon option for the current one. And it goes on and on... We'll have as many datasheets in one slot as entire codexes had back in the day.

 

It hurts the overall feeling of consistency within the army. Sure you don't have to buy them all, you don't have to like them all, whatever, but it would be nice if they made sense.

[phandaal]

I think this would be a bad idea to change the datasheets.

There are definitely some that can be consolidated though. Phobos is always the obvious one, and we have more Lieutenant datasheets than some factions have in their entire HQ section.

[UnkyHamHam]

Man, the flak do get thick when you're over the target.

I mean it's also an indication if you get a lot of pushback, that your opinion just isn't a popular one. Trust me, I know haha.

 

Combining datasheets, as I and others suggested, is just an easy win to help clean up a decent chunk of the "bloat" without flat out eliminating or Legending units. There are also offenders that could be easily combined in both Primaris and Firstborn. It's really not a one-sided issue.

 

I will devil's advocate till the cows come home for Firstborn, because they are so often discarded as wasted space by the the modern space marine player base. But I'm looking for solutions that satisfy everyone to some extent. Combining datasheets of like minded units is just a very simple and elegant way to do this across the board. Rule of 3 be damned.

[Mike8404]

It's not even just a FB/Primaris issue as much a it's "why was this unit discontinued for this Primaris unit, but this one, which does the same thing, wasn't". That causes a lot of bloat too, why do we have 8 different speeders, when 2 are relics no one takes and the 3 FB speeders do everything the Primaris Speeders do, but they're cheaper. Wouldn't be an issue of there was just the 3 Storm Speeders instead of the 6 or so we have in the dex. I agree, Phobos units should be combined, though.

 

We don't need a FB version of a Primaris unit and vice versa if GW is going to continue to replace the range.

 

It doesn't do anything but make the army feel bipolar. Either split the army, or focus on finishing the Primaris range so the army can be cohesive

Edited May 30, 2022 by Mike8404