Do you think firstborn marines will be discontinued?

[Orange Knight]

I would like to clarify that my opinion comes from a more logical place, looking at the health of the faction on the tabletop and it's accessibility of use as an army. It need to be streamlined.

 

And before I'm accused of hating the Firstborn, I would like to call attention to the 3k+ Horus Heresy army I completed recently:

 

https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/376732-well-here-it-is-the-horus-heresy-army-is-complete/#comment-5910897

 

Every models was bought recently with the exception of the Rhinos and the Librarian, so I have invested a great deal financially into classic Astartes models within the last 12 months.

 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Orange Knight

[Kallas]

6 minutes ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

Pfft. In your opinion.

 

Intercessors have the same role as tacticals - intercessors are bloat.

Intercessors have the same role as tacticals - tacticals are bloat.

 

Whichever side the axe falls is purely subjective. Your stubborn refusal to admit this means you are the one with the head in the sand.

One existed already, the new one is bloat - the new one adds nothing to the range, because it retreads the same ground.

See below for another prime example, the Techmarine.

 

7 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

Ok, so you don't want ANYTHING to be phased out or replaced, ever?

I don't want things phased out that don't need to be phased out.

Your example of the Techmarine is the perfect example. Why should we phase out the Techmarine? You stated because it's niche, but why is the FBTechmarine niche and not the PTechmarine? Simply, the PTechmarine did not need to be introduced at all.

 

So this is why I am angry about people who want to phase out the older units - these "new" units are entirely redundant and did not need to be created.

 

11 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

That's simply not a realistic expectation. I understand that you hate the Primaris, and you wish they didn't exist. At this point nothing can change the fact that they do.

The Primaris range is gradually replacing the old models in terms of function on the tabletop. They are not exactly the same -but that is the point!

I am well aware that they exist and will continue to replace Firstborn. I do not have to be happy about this, and I will continue to champion their continued existence. Simply, I want to continue using the models I have and love, and I have yet to see any good reason why other players demand my models become obsolete.

 

Thing is, GW said that Primaris were not going to replace Firstborn; Primaris players like yourself even said that they weren't going to replace them previously (not sure if you, personally, did, but more players that are very similar to yourself). Except they clearly are and always have been - I disagree with the notion that they should. Simply being new is not a good reason.

 

13 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

The older range, with it's granularity of wargear across units, is more suited to a skirmish game. The Primaris resemble Eldar aspects and are more suited to a wargame.

[...]

Marines are the gateway into the hobby for many. Handing a new player a codex book with 100+ units and 30 pages of wargear is not the way to do that. 

By this logic, are you suggesting we replace Chaos Legionnaires with Chaos Primaris? Because they have the same "issue" as Tacticals do with their wargear options.

I expect that you probably don't think that Chaos should replace Legionnaires with Primaris, and with good reason. But that's the point you're making, isn't it? That wargear = too complex for dumb dumb new players.

 

Starter boxes already provide a trimmed down set of rules and options, there is no need to make entire factions that are dumbed down to cater to new players: people will learn more as they progress in the hobby, a unit having the choice between one of four special weapons is not too hard to grasp for the majority of human beings.

 

18 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

It's not viable to expect a codex book to grow indefinitely, with over 100 datasheets. It becomes hard to balance, it becomes hard to use, it becomes daunting to collect, and it becomes more complex by virtue of the sheer volume. It can't continue to expand forever.

So the solution is to retread the same ground but marginally different? 

Primaris aren't, really, all that new. Their units do the same things as Firstborn - with minor changes, sure, but they really are minor. 

So the solution is to remove one unit and replace it with almost the exact same unit just with a gun that has a different number attached? Couldn't the same effect be done by, oh, I don't know: maybe they resculpt the models with better proportions instead of reinventing the wheel.

 

22 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

maybe they'll releagate a few units to Legends from one update to the next

Can you answer for me my previous question about Legends?

1 hour ago, Kallas said:

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

From the classic range there are a lot of units that are niche or simply not very worthwhile.

 

Assault Marines (Vanguard are the same unit but better), the Whirlwind (A desolator Sgt has the same weapon), Hunter and Stalker, the tiny landspeeders, Scouts (ugly!), Techmarines and Servitors, the old command squad, the Squat Dreads etc, the Relic Terminators (these belong in the HH). All these models can be sent to legends.

If these can go to Legends because they're "niche or simply not very worthwhile" then let's send Suppressors there too; or Bolter Inceptors and just leave the Plasma Inceptors; or Veteran Intercessors...

 

For "not very worthwhile" units, why does that immediately strike you as Legends material, and not improvement to their Datasheet material? Also, why is the Firstborn Techmarine a candidate for Legends? It does something that nothing else in the Firstborn line can do (heal/buff vehicles). By that logic, the Primaris Techmarine should also go to Legends.

If units can go to Legends for being "niche" or "not very worthwhile" why is the scope limited to Firstborn only? Primaris are new, yes, but that is hardly a good reason to do something - 'just because' is not sound reasoning.

11 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

It need to be streamlined.

The problem I have is that it was more streamlined before the introduction of Primaris - it was less bloated. Which is what I was saying earlier: Primaris are the cause of a lot of the bloat that is currently the perceived problem.

[Orange Knight]

I would argue that everything that has functionally been replaced by a Primaris kit should be phased out.

 

As for the topic of the Chaos marines - you would have noticed that the options for the kits have been reduced, they are now generally only able to equip what comes in the box. In a thematic way this does fit Chaos quite well, as they would grab whatever happens to be available to them.

 

If Vanguard Vets and Devastators are limited in terms of wargear and becomes less specialised, their effectiveness will drop. These are basically the only "firstborn" kit that people are running now, in addition to Terminators with free wargear. Apparently these are being refreshed and we'll see what happens.

 

Primaris are only adding to the codex bloat if the old range is also maintained. A Primaris only book will be quite elegant, with specific units filling clear roles within an army.

A codex book with 100 datasheets is simply becoming unreasonable, especially as armies can function perfectly well with 15 different kits or even less in some cases. We have to look at the game as a whole.

 

You wish that the Primaris were simply a re-sculpt of old kits. In my opinion that would be extremely lazy. You do make one good point - Primaris are 5 years old at this point and aren't even that new. This kind of topic pops up from time to time and we can take one thing away from it; It's clear that no one is entirely happy with the current situation, and that is why GW shouldn't try to please everyone. Rip that Band-Aid off and make Primaris the sole focus of Astartes in 40k.

 

 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Orange Knight

[Kallas]

6 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

As for the topic of the Chaos marines - you would have noticed that the options for the kits have been reduced, they are now generally only able to equip what comes in the box. In a thematic way this does fit Chaos quite well, as they would grab whatever happens to be available to them.

So we reduce the options for the Datasheets, that's pretty reasonable. It doesn't even affect many units by that much - ok, so Tacticals can only equip a Missile Launcher; but now they can make the Missile Launcher more balanced because it's not competing with Multi-meltas and Heavy Bolters at the same time.

 

But the point remains that Tactical Marines would still have options, which new players are apparently too stupid to understand. How on earth are they supposed to choose between a Power Sword or a Power Fist on the Sergeant?! How could we possibly expect them to choose between a Plasma Gun or a Flamer?!

 

It's not like Intercessors come with entirely different guns, and it would be possible for a new player to misunderstand the difference between the magazine/scopes and have a unit that is technically unfieldable because they have 3 Bolt Rifles, 4 Auto Bolt Rifles and 3 Stalker Bolt Rifles - oh wait, that actually is possible! Let's trim down the Intercessor box, so it's only a single weapon type, so new players can't possibly be confused!

 

That's the logical conclusion of treating new players like idiots.

 

3 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

Primaris are only adding to the codex bloat if the old range is also maintained. A Primaris only book will be quite elegant, with specific units filling clear roles within an army.

This is the crux: if Primaris were never added, there wouldn't be the same bloat, and the Codex would be "quite elegant" already. Instead it is bloated because Primaris made it so.

 

4 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

A codex book with 100 datasheets is simply becoming unreasonable, especially as armies can function perfectly well with 15 different kits or even less in some cases. We have to look at the game as a whole.

Alright - let's stop adding units that bloat the Codex. We don't need more MEQ bodies with a basic Bolter, so let's stop adding more Primaris Troops, because they are simply bloat.

 

13 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

You wish that the Primaris were simply a re-sculpt of old kits. In my opinion that would be extremely lazy.

I actually think they could have had the best of both worlds. Guilliman's reawakening and reformations could have heralded much of the tech changes (eg, he could order Astartes Chapters to begin actually innovating instead of remaining stagnant) and weapon improvements could appear, such as the Gladiator weapon-types but more likely equipped as new Predator turrets instead of entirely new vehicles (which could either be repackaged Predators with the new options, or an upgrade sprue to build the new option: either of which would result in new players buying things, as well as veterans being incentivised to buy more, as they can continue to fill their collection). For the armour, fresh boxes for the relevant squads with updated armour and weapons (eg, the Desolator weapons, as much as I personally dislike them, could be introduced via an updated Devastator boxset, which contains the various previous weapons as well as the new with rescaled/reposed Marine bodies).

 

The whole debacle and divide could have been avoided, or at least made less obnoxious while maintaining a similar theme of updating and improving models and gear. But that ship sailed about 10 years ago.

 

19 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

It's clear that no one is entirely happy with the current situation, and that is why GW shouldn't try to please everyone. Rip that Band-Aid off and make Primaris the sole focus of Astartes in 40k.

Nah, they should can the Primaris. No point trying to please everyone, might as well continue with what has proven to be successful over the past 30 years.

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

I can understand why Kallas' posts are getting progressively more frustrated as this thread continues. Marshal Reinhard is actually flatly incorrect here, as a newer option being added to an existing product is what creates bloat. That isn't opinion, it's fact. You can then reduce bloat by removing older options, but that isn't the argument being made. It is an issue of cause, and Primaris is the cause of the problem. Removing either one would be a solution, as would combining them.

 

So then we have to look at our options, removing vs combining. Removing Firstborn angers FB players. Removing Primaris angers Primaris players. Combining them, only seems to anger Primaris players. I don't understand why, but it does. This is a generalization, but generalizations are what you use when weighing options that affect everyone, so let's not get lost in arguing that angle please.

 

Everyone reading this should be able to figure out what removing either side looks like. So I'll focus on combining, as it's the only real angle for discussion.

 

What would be lost by combining Primaris and Firstborn captains into Adeptus Astartes Captain? Take the word Primaris out, Adeptus Astartes is already trademarkable. Have the stat line of a Primaris Captain, drop the Primaris Keyword, and let the Captain take wargear for Gravis, Terminator Armor, Fobos Armor, A Jump Pack, or a Bike. Under the weapons section have a heading for wargear that has the options listed as follows:

 

Bike: Add +1T and +1W, increase the movement to 14", Replace Infantry with Biker.

Terminator: Add +1W, Save becomes 2+/5++, Movement becomes 5", gain Teleporter keyword.

 

Etc etc.

 

Nothing is lost aside from a keyword that doesn't need to exist. Space Marine Captains are SM Captains. Full stop. Model it from whatever kit you like, it doesn't matter. Some people might even say that the above option looks very much the same as axing Firstborn, and in practice, it nearly is. Unless people are really fond of the word Primaris, in which case we should probably just have Primaris Leaders, Primaris Fighters, whatever. They don't need to be Space Marines if it isn't the important part...

 

It's a joke, but man it doesn't feel like one anymore.

 

Second for combining units would be, say, Intercessors and Tactical Marines. Right off the bat, Intercessors is a worse name. Anyone who is supporting the Primaris naming scheme needs their head checked, as I could take them, combine them with AoS Sigmar names, and a stranger would never be able to tell which is which. They're generic, bad, and not very evocative of the army's identity. So let's say these are just Adeptus Astartes Tactical Marines. My opinion, of course, but one with some marketing weight behind it.

 

For combining Tacticals and Intercessors, all we do is take the Intercessor stat line, and migrate the Tactical Special and Heavy weapon choices onto it. Done. Drop the Primaris keyword as it's not needed, play them as Space Marines, and in the fluff and on the table they are now whatever you want them to be, not limited to this weird new mono loadout system, and still Primaris. However, if you want to run them as Mono Loadout you can, with all the Intercessor options. Done.

 

Next, Fobos. Combine them all into one troup choice. Call them Adeptus Astartes Infiltrators as that is actually a good name for what they do and perfectly usable. Remove the Primaris Keyword. Customize them with all the sniper rifles and other loadouts to do what you want them to. Boom, done. Move on.

 

As you can see, the only thing I'm actually against with this system is the idea that Marines need to be combined to simple loadouts. I think that flies in the face of what Marines are in 40K. They are supposed to be an elite to semi-elite force with lots of tactical flexibility that you can build to fit your vision of what your force does. That is traditionally what they have been, and I see no reason to change that. There are plenty of other armies locked into squad wide weapon choices, and that's fine. It does not mean that Marines should be the same. The argument for complexity or new players is a bad one that doesn't hold actual water. All of us were new players at one point and we all seem to understand how the game works. Adding options in no way prevents you from ignoring them and keeping your army simple. 

 

Moving on, and keepint it brief:

 

Hellblasters, Aggressors, Terminators, Company Vets, Vanguard Vets, Sternguard Vets all get combined into a single Adeptus Astartes Veterans datasheet. You then have lists of Gravis, Terminator, Special, and Melee weapons. You can put the squad into any of these you want, but you have to buy it for the whole squad, as Jump Packs are currently done. If you allow Jump Packs on Aggressor units then you can even build your Inceptors and Suppressors from this squad.

 

I don't actually see what the problem is. This is how it was done in 2nd edition, and it worked fine.

[Orange Knight]

Combining them as in "merge units"? No thank you.

 

I have no interest in migrating wargear across from one unit to another. I like the elegance of the Intercessors - they mirror a Legion Tactical squad. The unit has a singular job and purpose and does not need to muddy the water. The same applies for all the units in the Primaris range.

 

Also this idea of making a singular massive datasheet with 4/5 armour options, each with further weapon options? No. Simply No. This is the exact opposite of a streamlined and elegant unit and will be impossible to balance on top of that. GW are un-able to balance the wargear on a single HQ model, never mind a squad with more variation than anything that exists currently.

 

I don't want Primaris Tactical Marines. I want Intercessors. This obsession with holding on to the old units is exactly why we find ourselves unhappy 5 years into the introduction of a new line of models.

 

A new line of models. I think people need to come to terms with that. 

 

 

[Evil Eye]

No, they don't need to "come to terms" with it. People don't like that existing, iconic units are being shoved aside in favour of NEW NEW NEW stuff that is just different enough to not quite fit in with the older units in a shallow attempt to make everyone buy their army all over again. I'd argue GW and the people that defend them tooth and nail need to come to terms with the fact that there's a large amount of people who don't like the new stuff and won't buy it, and aren't exactly thrilled by suggestions that units they've used and loved for years should be put on the chopping block for often uglier replacements, because...new!

 

New =/= better.

[Captain Idaho]

I think there's nothing wrong with GW combining Firstborn and Primaris into "Space Marines", even if the Firstborn models become the older models (I still use a 2nd edition Techmarine after all).

 

I still don't think it'll be done, as GW just doesn't operate like that. They're removing rules for things they don't have models for - the idea of a Primaris Space Marine loaded out as Tactical squads just won't happen if it relies on kitbashing or conversions. 

 

What's more, there does need to be a division between Primaris and Firstborn as otherwise What's the excuse for bigger Loyalist Marines than Chaos?

[Orange Knight]

Primaris are 5 years old at this point. Not exactly new.

 

Things get replaced. Cars, Houses, Hobby things, etc. The Imperium is a cautionary tale against stagnation and dogma, yet it seems people have fallen into the mentality in the real world. 

 

No one is taking your models away from you. No one is suggesting their rules should be erased. Legends exists precisely for this purpose, even if GW haven't utilised it fully or properly.

 

After seeing some of the crazy suggestions here, that we should have a codex with 100+ datasheets because nothing should be abandoned, or that we should merge elegant units into messy combined squads, I am more convinced than ever that people simply can't see things objectively.

 

Let me put it this way: I have spent more money on "Firstborn" models in the last 12 months than 90% of people in the hobby. I have invested in Forgeworld kits, GW plastic, etc and put together a 4k worth of models from scratch, and painted them! Despite this significant investment of effort, money and time, I still recognise that the current situation is not good for anyone and GW should take some decisive steps. There are new Primaris releases with every edition, the range is starting to fill all the gaps, I expect BA, DA and SW to eventually get the Black Templar treatment. If we have any interest in an elegant army that can be balanced and easily approached by new and old players alike, we have to accept that the faction is moving on with a new range of models.

[Blindhamster]

2 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

I think there's nothing wrong with GW combining Firstborn and Primaris into "Space Marines", even if the Firstborn models become the older models (I still use a 2nd edition Techmarine after all).

 

I still don't think it'll be done, as GW just doesn't operate like that. They're removing rules for things they don't have models for - the idea of a Primaris Space Marine loaded out as Tactical squads just won't happen if it relies on kitbashing or conversions. 

 

What's more, there does need to be a division between Primaris and Firstborn as otherwise What's the excuse for bigger Loyalist Marines than Chaos?

Merging the two and merging some of their units, whilst removing some firstborn and some primaris units really does feel like it's the way forward.

If we had tactical intercessors that had the base gun profiles of intercessors, and the special/heavy weapon options of tacticals. You could represent the squad with either kind of model (or even a mix!!) and it would be cool.

assault intercessors and assault marines could get merged if they were to go ahead and add a jump pack option to the assault intercessors, and again, you could then run using old or new models or a mix. Give them all the stats of heavy bolt pistols rather than normal ones, regardless of model.

merge sternguard, vanguard and veteran intercessors, i.e. go back to what veterans were before vanguard and sternguard became distinct units, it makes sense as neither unit has their fancy special rules that made there be a point to them anymore anyway. Again, you could mix and match primaris and firstborn models then too if you so desire, or just use firstborn or primaris if you prefer one kind for whatever reason. 

 

I'm not going to get too into the opinion pieces above, its true nothing new NEEDED to be made, that part is fact, but its also true that GW have struggled to make core marine units relevant and it was part of an attempt to "fix" that. It's also true that they wanted to do something new with the models, and it was something that still appealed to a huge portion of the community.

                       Fact is, people that are happy are statistically less likely to comment/post about things than people that aren't. You get exceptions, some people will fight tooth and nail to highlight why they're happy and why you should be too, but they can't force it.

 

Anyway, dropping primaris stuff is unlikely to happen, and probably shouldn't happen, they're newer, and people have now invested a lot into them too, many people have actually likely invested more in primaris than they ever did in firstborn at this point, purely because the models are so much more expensive :P. Equally, "dropping" firstborn units is going to upset a different subset of the playerbase. That said, there does feel like there is potential for consolidation, I don't remotely agree with "eradicators are cenurions" kind of angle, but there's definitely more clearly direct "replacements" that could be consilidated in a way that would keep everyone happy. (again, see my suggestion for "tactical intercessors")

 

[Kallas]

22 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

I don't want Primaris Tactical Marines. I want Intercessors.

I don't, but you get to choose (by supporting GW's Primarisification)? That's the problem.

 

I don't want my models to be retired. I'm not (genuinely) advocating for the removal of Primaris, I know full well that they're here to stay (personally would have never introduced them the way they are, but that's ultimately irrelevant now) but why shouldn't I be allowed to continue using my Firstborn? That's kind of the problem and always is: one side wants to "move on", ditching all of the old stuff; and the other side wants to continue using their stuff.

 

25 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

A new line of models. I think people need to come to terms with that. 

No, we don't. I accept that Primaris are here to stay, and even will become the dominant Astartes, but I do not have to like it, and I will not stop pushing back against them. They have awful lore, an affront to what came before; their models are at least as hit-or-miss as Firstborn with aesthetics very much dividing peoples' opinions; and their rules are a mess of overpowered and underpowered (despite their "elegance", which you'd think would make them easier to balance, funny how that hasn't happened ).

 

But when folks like you keep pushing to have peoples' stuff removed from the game, do you seriously not understand why some of us getting so  annoyed?

7 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

The Imperium is a cautionary tale against stagnation and dogma, yet it seems people have fallen into the mentality in the real world. 

It's almost like this is a fictional setting - the stagnation is part of that setting. Much of the Imperium is a cautionary tale: Primaris are removing part of that.

[Arikel]

15 minutes ago, Kallas said:

Nah, they should can the Primaris. No point trying to please everyone, might as well continue with what has proven to be successful over the past 30 years.

 

If the rumour about the primaris keyword going away in the next edition is true, then effectively this what is being done. Marines would be marines again, and ruleswise there would be no difference between firstborn and primaris . We could then simply combine all redundant data sheets. Ideally, this would include all current loadouts for that unit type. As an example, even if they only do this with the charcater units, it would be a huge improvement (7 captains, 4 lieutenants, 4 librarians, 4 chaplains and 2 techmarines would go from 21 data sheets to 5). There are some elite characters this could be done with as well, as  Apothecaries and Ancients could also become single data sheets with different load out choices. Just this would reduce codex bloat quite a bit on it's own, especially if combined with previous suggestions to combine vehicle data sheets.

 

[WrathOfTheLion]

9 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

Anyway, dropping primaris stuff is unlikely to happen, and probably shouldn't happen, they're newer, and people have now invested a lot into them too, many people have actually likely invested more in primaris than they ever did in firstborn at this point, purely because the models are so much more expensive :P. Equally, "dropping" firstborn units is going to upset a different subset of the playerbase. That said, there does feel like there is potential for consolidation, I don't remotely agree with "eradicators are cenurions" kind of angle, but there's definitely more clearly direct "replacements" that could be consilidated in a way that would keep everyone happy. (again, see my suggestion for "tactical intercessors")

I think a couple of those units will actually get dropped, Suppressors probably being the most likely once they decide to retire the other half of the Shadowspear sprues. Greater Possessed for CSM got dropped, although I guess you can still use them as Possessed. My general expectation is that they're going to see what sticks, and the things that didn't do so well will get cleaned out later once they finalize a roster.

[Orange Knight]

1 minute ago, Arikel said:

 

If the rumour about the primaris keyword going away in the next edition is true, then effectively this what is being done. Marines would be marines again, and ruleswise there would be no difference between firstborn and primaris . We could then simply combine all redundant data sheets. Ideally, this would include all current loadouts for that unit type. As an example, even if they only do this with the charcater units, it would be a huge improvement (7 captains, 4 lieutenants, 4 librarians, 4 chaplains and 2 techmarines would go from 21 data sheets to 5). There are some elite characters this could be done with as well, as  Apothecaries and Ancients could also become single data sheets with different load out choices. Just this would reduce codex bloat quite a bit on it's own, especially if combined with previous suggestions to combine vehicle data sheets.

 

 

So they can just scrap the old units and models at that point?

 

Marines are just Marine after all.

[WrathOfTheLion]

5 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

So they can just scrap the old units and models at that point?

 

Marines are just Marine after all.

That's basically what has been advocated there the whole time. If they want, they can drop some old resin characters at that point. Then if you want a new one Techmarine or whatever, the new Primaris sculpt (or a MtO run of the old one if it comes up) is the way for you.

 

For those with existing collections, there's a datasheet that still represents their miniature. That's functionally what would happen if Firstborn were removed from the Codex anyways, people would just run their Tacticals as Intercessors, or Assault Marines as the new jump pack dudes, or their chaplain as a Primaris Chaplain, and only people of lesser character would insist that they need to use invalidated legends rules instead of just using the new datasheets. Basically similar to when Farsight gets replaced for instance, normal folks won't have a problem with using the old Farsight model with the new profile.

Edited February 22, 2023 by WrathOfTheLion

[Marshal Reinhard]

4 hours ago, Marshal Valkenhayn said:

I can understand why Kallas' posts are getting progressively more frustrated as this thread continues. Marshal Reinhard is actually flatly incorrect here, as a newer option being added to an existing product is what creates bloat. That isn't opinion, it's fact. You can then reduce bloat by removing older options, but that isn't the argument being made. It is an issue of cause, and Primaris is the cause of the problem. Removing either one would be a solution, as would combining them.

I beg to differ. A new option added gives bloat - fine only if we take for granted we cannot have both at once. And even if we do, where the axe falls is subjective. Classic fans want to axe primaris, primaris fans want axe classics. The reasoning for axing either option presented has been nothing but subjective. "Classic existed first!" is not an argument to keep them over primaris or vice versa. And that IS the argument I have been making ever since I started posting here.

Edited February 22, 2023 by Marshal Reinhard
grammar

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

This is another of those situations where a dislike would be useful. I've read Orange Knight's contributions here, and I think they're off base. I don't agree, and further I think this reasoning of being more objective is nonsense. The use of the word Elegant to describe Primaris simplicity is, not at all objective. It's very much subjective, as is everything else mentioned.

 

I personally find taking a single unit that can be customized into many options to be an Elegant solution. It's only messy if it's badly done, and 40K being balanced or not has nothing to do with how complex the sheets are. The game is deliberately not balanced to sell units with more efficient options, and applying those options to existing units rather than new ones will actually cut back on GW's tendency to do this as people can start to magnetize their troupes.

 

Frankly, most of Orange Knight's last contribution are bad faith arguments, capped off by an assumption that his recent purchase is more than 90 percent of us have invested, which is pretty damn presumptuous. In my case, it's false.

[Evil Eye]

The irony is I don't even particularly hate Primaris; their introduction was a bit of a mess for certain, and there's a lot of not very good looking models in the range, but there's good ones too and I feel like with a little bit of narrative expansion and the occasional retcon, they could be made into a respectable part of the fluff. But I don't want them to replace Firstborn. They don't have even a fraction of the history that Firstborn have, and the fact people seem to want Primaris-flavoured knockoffs of existing Firstborn units rather than new concepts to complement the existing range suggests they'd be better off with just rescaled Firstborn.

 

Now, personally I'd be happy if Space Marines of either flavour never got another kit ever again, given how they've completely dominated 40K's release schedule for the past 15 years. But GW needs to sell Marines, and if they're going to, I'd rather Firstborn got some more love rather than having their roles and concepts "stolen" and crammed into Primaris. The Primaris range is already pretty full, and all the suggestions for new units for them are just Firstborn units in Mk. X armour.

 

I actually don't mind the idea of having Primaris and Firstborn being indistinguishable on a tabletop level, and certainly as far as Intercessors and Tactical Marines being made into the same unit goes I think it could work. Having the variation between Firstborn and Primaris in a squad would be aesthetically pleasing, and given that Intercessors were basically just Tacticals with no special weapons anyway (I maintain the different types of bolters was a silly idea and hopefully gets removed for the next Codex) they don't really have enough identity of their own to justify their own datasheet.

[Marshal Reinhard]

Speaking solely for myself, you can trace back when I started to bring up the word "objective". It was wholly in response to someone thinking the opinion they sprouted was holy objective fact. "Primaris are X. It's categorical. The argument cannot be defended against". It's the only beef I had with anything said in this conversation since I left it alone X hours ago

 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Marshal Reinhard

[Kallas]

Just now, Marshal Reinhard said:

Speaking solely for myself, you can trace back when I started to bring up the word "objective". It was wholly in response to someone thinking the opinion they sprouted was holy objective fact. "Primaris are X. It's categorical. The argument cannot be defended against". It's the only beef I had with anything said in this conversation since i left alone X hours ago

That would be because "new thing that does same thing as old thing is bloat" is 'holy objective fact'. It has nothing to do with whether I like Primaris or not, it's about what is bloat: bloat is new thing doing the same thing as the old thing.

[Marshal Reinhard]

1 minute ago, Kallas said:

That would be because "new thing that does same thing as old thing is bloat" is 'holy objective fact'. It has nothing to do with whether I like Primaris or not, it's about what is bloat: bloat is new thing doing the same thing as the old thing.

Incorrect. Either could be considered bloat or even neither. You just convienently like to jump the gun and claim the new one as the bloat. There is no holy written rule by God that when a new thing is added that is redundant with old thing then new thing = the bad one. It could just as well be that the bad one is the old one. 

 

But it suits your primaris hating narrative that "Primaris is the bad"

[Kallas]

Just now, Marshal Reinhard said:

Incorrect.

No you 

 

1 minute ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

Either could be considered bloat or even neither.

No, it isn't. If a new Eldar unit comes out, the Flame Drakes, and they have the exact same stats are Fire Dragons, but Mv6", T3 and Damage D6+3 guns instead of the original units' Mv7"/T4/Damage D6+2 guns...the new unit has caused bloat.

 

That is exactly what is happening with Primaris units.

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

Incorrect. He isn't using the word bad, you are. I think you should probably go back and read my original response to you again, Reinhard. If you're going to argue from a point of logic then your logic has to track, and yours does not.

 

Neither of us are saying Primaris being added is bad in this context, but they are the cause of the book being so much larger and messier. And I state very clearly that the solution to this could be axing either one, or combining them. But the solution does not excuse the cause.

 

Further, it's pointless either way. But unless you can go back in time and change what Space Marines were before other things got added to them, you can't really argue what is causing the problem of the book being huge.

[Marshal Reinhard]

1 minute ago, Kallas said:

No you 

 

No, it isn't. If a new Eldar unit comes out, the Flame Drakes, and they have the exact same stats are Fire Dragons, but Mv6", T3 and Damage D6+3 guns instead of the original units' Mv7"/T4/Damage D6+2 guns...the new unit has caused bloat.

 

That is exactly what is happening with Primaris units.

Adding another unit caused bloat, sure if you can't have both. Bloat is both units being in the codex together at the same time. But then you make a leap from there to which one needs to be axed as a result. Canning the old is as valid as canning the new one. Saying anything else is just favoritism.

[Kallas]

2 minutes ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

But then you make a leap from there to which one needs to be axed as a result.

Except the topic being discussed at that point in the thread was what caused the bloat.

 

Primaris caused the bloat.

 

As Valkenhayn said, either can be removed to resolve the issue, but the issue was created by the introduction of Primaris.

 

2 minutes ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

Canning the old is as valid as canning the new one.

Here's the thing: I don't disagree, and I never did. Of course you can remove either and we each have our preference as to which should get removed, but you were arguing entirely the wrong thing and claiming some moral high ground while you were doing it.

Edited February 22, 2023 by Kallas