Predicting Primaris (Again): Will the generic range be "complete" in 10th Edition?

[WrathOfTheLion]

19 minutes ago, BLACK BLΠFLY said:

The stats are in line with BGV.

We'll have to see on that one. Either way, Terminators of some form are an inevitability.

 

My position is that they'll just redesign them, and there's evidence for this (Codex covers, etc.), but not doing anything is leaving that money on the table.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Source is fairly reliable.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

4 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

I'm totally pessimistic on this one. Terminators, which will make Aggressors obsolete? New Terminators that make Chaos Terminators 2nd rate?

 

I suppose they could get them right if they're made to be really heavy and large like Centurions? Kind of like Loyalist Obliterators?

 

But then they'll not look like Terminators if that's the case right?

 

I'm totally confused on this.

I don’t think it would be too hard to have a place for both terminators and aggressors.

 

id make the terminators focus more on the assault cannon missile launcher, or in primaris parlance, onslaught gatling cannon, and…Icarus rocket pod? With rapid fire1 primaris storm bolters.

 

this would give the terminator a role as more medium/long range firepower with T4 and better save.

 

compared to the aggressor’s close range fire power T5 and normal save.

 

honestly I think they’d be very complimentary that way.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

There are plenty of T5 units… it’s not something unique at all.

[Nephaston]

Not to mention that GW has absolutely no problem selling multiple units that cover the same niche for marines.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Not tear will be shed.

[Captain Idaho]

6 hours ago, Nephaston said:

Not to mention that GW has absolutely no problem selling multiple units that cover the same niche for marines.

 

This is true.

 

I just know there are folk who have said they like their Aggressors and wouldn't want them to be removed from relevance.

Edited January 11, 2023 by Captain Idaho

[Karhedron]

5 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

I just know there are folk who have said they like their Aggressors and wouldn't want them to be removed from relevance.

 

If they keep their price tag of 30ppm, I think Aggressors will still find a place in lists, even if Terminators++ are available. BGVs are already 35ppm so improved Terminators will probably need to be at least 40ppm (although we don't know how they will be armed).

 

If the new Terminators stick to the classic 5-man squad size, they will need to be at least 200 points. The ability to field MSU Aggressors at 90 points means they will probably still have a role, particularly for Chapters like Space Wolves who can leverage extra value out of their melee attacks.

[Marshal Reinhard]

Terminators have been my favourite marine infantry unit since when i first learned of the game in 2nd edition. They always had proportion issues though. It all came to a head for me with the release of Abbadon. Like primaris ruined classic marines for me (the miniatures, not the designs themselves), Abbadon ruined terminators. His anatomy just fully works within the armor. He's just built differently. Literally.

 

here's a link to a WIP shot of Abby by some hot shot painter I follow on instagram: https://www.instagram.com/p/CKvlUSLHM-U/ 

Missing most of the bits there, you can just see how the model was designed with having everything work around the inner physique. Not even the Chaos terminators that were released later, had this good proportions.

 

Terminators need all look this good, work this well. Abby showed that it was possible and I'm now loathe to settle for less. I really hope we can get it (But my wallet absolutely dreads it, think i had some 50ish terminators in my old crusade...)

 

[Sir Clausel]

10 minutes ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

Here's a link to a WIP shot of Abby by some hot shot painter I follow on instagram: https://www.instagram.com/p/CKvlUSLHM-U/ 

Missing most of the bits there, you can just see how the model was designed with having everything work around the inner physique. Not even the Chaos terminators that were released later, had this good proportions.

 

Terminators need all look this good, work this well. Abby showed that it was possible and I'm now loathe to settle for less. I really hope we can get it (But my wallet absolutely dreads it, think i had some 50ish terminators in my old crusade...)

 

I have my brothers Abbadon lying in wait exactly like that. When i assembled him i immediately thought of the same thing. This is how the new ones should be like!

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

10 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

 

This is true.

 

I just know there are folk who have said they like their Aggressors and wouldn't want them to be removed from relevance.

They’d have to either really nerf aggressors or make new terminators stupidly broken to make aggressors irrelevant imho.

[Captain Idaho]

More a matter of roles really. Why take 1 unit over another that is just better?

[Nephaston]

If the new detachment survives into tenth (tin foil hat on; I believe this due to the alleged starter box) we'll have 6 elite slots to play with regularly.

Meaning, if the rule of 2/3 remains intact, we can easily have three squads of aggressors and three units of new terminators even if they cover exactly the same niche and somehow manage to be roughly equal.

 

If one is massively more powerful or cheaper then this will of course not be the case.

Edited January 12, 2023 by Nephaston
spelling

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

@Nephaston I'd be shocked if they went away from 6 elite slots anytime soon the base battalion has had it for awhile.

 

 

As far as comparing rumored statlines to existing units I think it's fair for the upcoming box. The starter set on the other hand signals a new marine codex. If GW wants to keep the elite feel they may add wounds to a lot of models with point increases to match.

[Nephaston]

I mean they kind of did with the AoO Detachment; Unless you pick compulsory Elites you only have three regular and three character specific slots.

Then again I don't see myself picking anything but compulsory Elites so it doesn't really change for me.

 

Regarding survivability they could do anything from giving out wounds, extra toughness, fnp, decreasing lethality, reintroducing AoC, blanket mini transhuman, etc. The question would be if they manage to balance it properly.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

I tend to think choosing elites as the compulsory is the default for most people. Still fairly confident it stays but who knows with a new edition.

 

Yeah they have a ton of options, which is why I'll just wait and see what happens. Just don't see the point of comparing things when we might be playing out if indexes soon.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

On 1/11/2023 at 4:10 PM, Captain Idaho said:

More a matter of roles really. Why take 1 unit over another that is just better?

A lot of players don’t play that way. They can be almost identical or even worse and some people will buy and play them just because they like one or the other.

[Lemondish]

2 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

A lot of players don’t play that way. They can be almost identical or even worse and some people will buy and play them just because they like one or the other.

Exactly.

 

Why take that unit? Because I have it, and don't have the other. Because I like it more. Because it looks cooler. Because it fits my army's theme better. Because...

 

Well, you get the idea. Countless different types of people play this game, and they do it without always picking the best of the best option for everything. I mean, for the longest time this edition anybody playing Marines was doing so without caring that they weren't selecting the best faction for a win. Why can't those same reasons extend to list building?

[Captain Idaho]

Yeah sure, I generally take stuff I enjoy. But then when the stuff I enjoy doesn't work, I stop playing because it isn't fun anymore. 

 

Proof is in the pudding I'm afraid. Most people don't take 2nd rate options which is why GW introduced the Balance Dataslate. And if people aren't playing, they're not buying.

 

(Of course if you never play anyway, then this doesn't affect you)

Edited January 13, 2023 by Captain Idaho

[phandaal]

4 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

Yeah sure, I generally take stuff I enjoy. But then when the stuff I enjoy doesn't work, I stop playing because it isn't fun anymore. 

 

Proof is in the pudding I'm afraid. Most people don't take 2nd rate options which is why GW introduced the Balance Dataslate. And if people aren't playing, they're not buying.

 

(Of course if you never play anyway, then this doesn't affect you)

 

That last category is a lot more prevalent than people think, but balance probably still affects their purchasing decision.

 

People mainly seem to want to think they can play with something before buying it.

 

95% of people snatching up the latest strongest box are either tossing it into their pile of shame, or painting it up for the shelf. My source for this data is: feels accurate.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

12 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

Yeah sure, I generally take stuff I enjoy. But then when the stuff I enjoy doesn't work, I stop playing because it isn't fun anymore. 

 

Proof is in the pudding I'm afraid. Most people don't take 2nd rate options which is why GW introduced the Balance Dataslate. And if people aren't playing, they're not buying.

 

(Of course if you never play anyway, then this doesn't affect you)

GW introduces the dataslate for the competitive community, not the general casual players.

 

it would be nice if GW did more surveys about how people interact with the hobby and published those.

 

id love to see results of a survey like that.

decided to make a poll asking how people primarily interact with the hobby

competitive tournament/meta chasing

casual play with what you have /like already

modelling only

other

 

im only in 3 40K FB groups and one of them doesn’t allow polls to be posted so we’ll see what those responses are.

Edited January 13, 2023 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Lord Nord in Gravis Armour]

Less than two weeks from LVO now - place your bets as to whether the Brutalis/Desolators/LT from the upcoming box are going to get completely leaked models-wise the same way the big Aeldari reveals were spoiled last year. Hopefully even if so, they've got a bit more in the chamber for this show and won't come close to the World Waffling Record again.

 

"Ka'bandha looks cool... those wings are going to be a nightmare if it's a resin model though..."

 

"Ka'bandha? It's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it's- it'saresinminiatureoopstimeforournextreveal..."

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

According to the two polls so far around 50% of those groups play casually/use things they like.

and 30% play tournaments or meta chase.

About 12% just model/collect 

about 8% selected the other option

 

thats so far, with only about 100 responses.

[Karhedron]

14 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

GW introduces the dataslate for the competitive community, not the general casual players.

 

True but better game balance benefits all players, competitive and casual alike. Even casual players don't get much fun out of being curb-stomped. Ideally, any non-narrative game should be equally balanced with victory being down to the skill of the players and the luck of the dice.

[Captain Idaho]

If the balance data lasted is only for competitive players then why do the vast majority of players use the rules changes then?