The importance of subfaction variation

[Scribe]

5 minutes ago, ThePenitentOne said:

We didn't actually use the FOC. Yes, you can play without an FOC, but if you do, you aren't getting special rules- to get those, you must field a particular detachment, which is, you guessed it.... An FOC!

 

I hear you, and I've hated it since Formations/Detachments invaded the game from Apoc.

 

All the worst additions to the game, came from Apocalypse now that I think about it....

[DesuVult]

17 minutes ago, ThePenitentOne said:

@Scribe We didn't actually use the FOC. Yes, you can play without an FOC, but if you do, you aren't getting special rules- to get those, you must field a particular detachment, which is, you guessed it.... An FOC!

 

@DesuVult The pigeonholing thing is more a product of the competitive instinct to create the most synergized force- it is not a product of the way faction traits are supposed to work. To avoid using a marine example, let's talk sisters, Bloody Rose, whose trait is melee focused. What this CAN mean, and SHOULD mean, is that when the Bloody Rose find themselves faced with a battle that is likely to include a lot of hand to hand, they will be at an advantage over other Orders. But when they are faced with a battle that requires any other skill set, they will be no better or worse than any other Order, unless said Order is specialized in the skill set under consideration.

 

Even in casual games not playing into your niches resulted in rather punishing games.  The push for chapter tactics and strength of chapter doctrines made it so you played your niche or you got maybe half your rules.  Chapters without an effective niche within the rules got almost entirely written off.

Edited April 4, 2023 by DesuVult

[Scribe]

7 minutes ago, DesuVult said:

Even in casual games not playing into your niches resulted in rather punishing games.  The push for chapter tactics and strength of chapter doctrines made it so you played your niche or you got maybe half your rules.  Chapters without an effective niche within the rules got almost entirely written off.

 

The age of "counts as".

[DesuVult]

5 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

The age of "counts as".

Now that you mention it, I see it come up that people are saying lack of strong subfaction rules will make everyone different colored Ultramarines, but these strong subfaction rules we have seen thus far resulted in a lot black <insert flavor of the day> chapters.  

[Scribe]

1 minute ago, DesuVult said:

Now that you mention it, I see it come up that people are saying lack of strong subfaction rules will make everyone different colored Ultramarines, but these strong subfaction rules we have seen thus far resulted in a lot black <insert flavor of the day> chapters.  

 

Its totally a thing. Its happened countless times and will again, for the competitive types.

 

For people who just want the faction to reflect the fiction, they are going to lean towards units that make sense, and hope for rules that make sense.

 

I never wanted my World Eaters, to be Iron Warriors, I want them charging out of vehicles and smashing into people.

[DesuVult]

6 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

Its totally a thing. Its happened countless times and will again, for the competitive types.

 

For people who just want the faction to reflect the fiction, they are going to lean towards units that make sense, and hope for rules that make sense.

 

I never wanted my World Eaters, to be Iron Warriors, I want them charging out of vehicles and smashing into people.

I think a lot of it comes down to the rules design.  In 40k my Iron Warriors ignore cover and have Armor of Contempt, rather strong rules.  In 30k my Iron Warriors have +1S into vehicles, dreads, robots, and buildings, a much more situational and clearly weaker rule.  Despite that the way army building works and the rules function my 30k Iron Warriors feel much more like Iron Warriors.  You could strip away the legion traits in 30k and a lot of people's lists wouldn't change because they are built around a functioning force with thematic weapons and wargear using an RoW or are nearly defined by their lack of RoW use.  40k pushes much harder into doing one job and having a small number of other units for secondaries and 1 unit in the back holding a homefield objective.

[Magos Takatus]

Just to throw my hat in the ring, as someone who's custom Forge World symbol is this: 

Spoiler

 

Losing the ability to power up my Radium Carbines is going to make me very sad. It has no synergy with the vast majority of my army but just knowing that (Now that that contempt-worthy Armour of Contempt is gone) my Vanguard will have some nasty little Rad guns made me feel like my own personal Forge World fanfiction had some legitimacy. If they are cutting out the rules for Stygies, Lucius and Metalica, what chance does my poor Vanguard phalanx have of keeping their awesome guns? Especially if the Enriched Rounds stratagem is probably going to be culled as well. 

[DesuVult]

AdMech rules are so jank even if subfactions survive or come back I expect AdMech rules to have a hatchet taken to them.

[Emperor Ming]

16 minutes ago, DesuVult said:

AdMech rules are so jank even if subfactions survive or come back I expect AdMech rules to have a hatchet taken to them.

Probably same with any army that relies on lots of complex rules, eldar and Gcults come to mind. 

 

 

[Magos Takatus]

2 hours ago, DesuVult said:

AdMech rules are so jank even if subfactions survive or come back I expect AdMech rules to have a hatchet taken to them.

They are my mostly played faction and I still can't figure out how they work.  I just don't bother with the Holy Order stuff because it's just a bridge too far for me to be considering when trying to learn the base rules.

[Kastor Krieg]

I don't want my Templars to be "better than". We almost never were a top tier faction. We usually were middling within the SM dex along with it.

I want them to remain as unique as they were for the last six editions, ever since this Holy Book emerged.

 

We have history within the on-table game. We were the faction of an edition starter!
We have immense history within the setting as well.

I would be perfectly fine with either being able to "rebuild" Templar flavour via "pick your traits / Detachment" or getting a Templar-specific one-page swap in set of rules.

If this is completely stripped of us though and we're just a "black armoured chapter of whatever flavour of Detachment you picked Marines", then it's a loss for the entirety of the game. You will lose an interesting opponent faction with its very unique set of challenges among Marines.

[Kastor Krieg]

Reposting here since the thread I mistakenly posted in got closed right after.

-------

I don't want my Templars to be "better than". We almost never were a top tier faction. We usually were middling within the SM dex along with it.

I want them to remain as unique as they were for the last six editions, ever since this Holy Book emerged.

 

We have history within the on-table game. We were the faction of an edition starter!
We have immense history within the setting as well.

I would be perfectly fine with either being able to "rebuild" Templar flavour via "pick your traits / Detachment" or getting a Templar-specific one-page swap in set of rules.

If this is completely stripped of us though and we're just a "black armoured chapter of whatever flavour of Detachment you picked Marines", then it's a loss for the entirety of the game. You will lose an interesting opponent faction with its very unique set of challenges among Marines.

[MaximusTL]

i'm definitely a proponent for balance; games are most fun when it's neck and neck. however, i think you can have subfaction rules that are balanced. if you have online rules, you can update them quickly without invalidating rules in a physical book. i 100% think that if BA and UM assault marines are fighting hand to hand, the BA would have the advantage, and the rules should reflect that. someone earlier in the thread spoke about how its largely marine players complaining, and yes i am one, but i also think my Ulthwé's guardians should perform better than ones from iyanden. it's just that Marines more than any other faction are built around the distinction of their subfactions. even the two most 'generic' chapters, Ultramarines and Imperial fists, have very string identities. the whole structure of chapters make them blank templates so that you can take them in all sorts of different and unique directions. losing their unique rules makes them into a teneric template you can't fill in.

[Loishy]

Maybe I'm forgetting something, but is it really a big deal to lose chapter specific rules in exchange for generic marine detachment if we have the crusade game mode?

 

If you want chapter rules, with relics and warlord traits that match the lore, Crusade Mode is for you. Now it even uses points for army lists as well.

 

If you want to play in a tournament format, as the goal is no longer to respect a lore, we dispense with specific chapter rules. You only have the choice of units and the choice of detachment to customize your gameplay. It is then easier for GW to find a balance with less special rules and one marine faction instead of 9.

 

Maybe that's what they're planning for the 10th.

[Scribe]

4 minutes ago, Loishy said:

Maybe I'm forgetting something, but is it really a big deal to lose chapter specific rules in exchange for generic marine detachment if we have the crusade game mode?

 

Yes.

 

Crusade may as well not exist for many (most?) of us.

[Orange Knight]

Looking at that Terminator datasheet, there is no subfaction keyword.

 

A very positive change, and hopefully an end to locking out rules based on painting choice. 

 

There is a potential here to end some of the animosity and bad feelings associated with sub faction favouritism.

 

It is still very important to have armies that look and play as the theme of those factions suggests they should. I believe that certain chapter specific characters might be limited to certain detachment types - This could mean that an army that features Dante would look and play like a Blood Angels army.

 

But overall, this is thrilling. It allows GW to consolidate all Astartes under a single codex. No more waiting for years to get updated rules, or in the case of 9th edition - my army never got them!

[Scribe]

50 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

It is still very important to have armies that look and play as the theme of those factions suggests they should. I believe that certain chapter specific characters might be limited to certain detachment types - This could mean that an army that features Dante would look and play like a Blood Angels army.

 

This is honestly one of the worst solutions, but not an unlikely one as GW loves to shift those $50+ character models.

[Arkangilos]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

It is still very important to have armies that look and play as the theme of those factions suggests they should. I believe that certain chapter specific characters might be limited to certain detachment types - This could mean that an army that features Dante would look and play like a Blood Angels army.

Ah, so if that is the case, now to have the red thirst I have to pick a Blood Angel character (even though I play a successor chapter), or be stuck using a specific detachment. I mean, what if I want to have a BA successor devastator company doing a final hold out? Nope, out of luck. If you want that you get the quirks that the IF were known for.

[Orange Knight]

No, that's not what I said.

 

I said a specific character might be limited to a specific detachment type. Not that the detachment type is limited to a specific character that is required.

 

What I'm suggesting is that if you want to run Blood Angels or Dark Angel or Ultramarine heroes, the army will end up operating in a way that reflects the lore of those chapters.

 

But GW doesn't have to do this at all. I'm happy with the scrapping of the sub faction separations completely. They've never been able to balance the rules, and unless they plan on putting a warning down on some paints such as: "warning, if you paint your Marines yellow they will not be as strong as those painted Green, and they will not receive as much model support" then I don't see any better solutions lol

[Arkangilos]

4 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

What I'm suggesting is that if you want to run Blood Angels or Dark Angel or Ultramarine heroes, the army will end up operating in a way that reflects the lore of those chapters.

Blood Angels, in the Lore, operate in codex compliant formations with the exception of one (DC) It even specifically states that they don’t have more assault squads than anyone else.

 

That is my point. I want to be able to play BA as the lore says: a Codex compliant chapter that suffers from the red thirst and black rage, and is therefore far more aggressive, will abandon their positions to charge, and have better charges than most others. 
I don’t want to break the character of my chapter and say “these guys are an all jump pack army” just so I can get the red thirst. 
 

They aren’t an all jump pack army. They are space marines that try to be standard but they have a flaw.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Arkangilos

[Orange Knight]

Nothing will stop you from playing your army that way. If you want to be aggressive be aggressive. Pick fast moving melee units and rush them forward.

 

Thematic games are within our power to do, and no one can stop you from building a specific type of force. Better army balance is up to GW, and consolidating all Astartes under one flexible banner will create more internal balance. 

 

 

 

 

[Arkangilos]

5 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

Nothing will stop you from playing your army that way. If you want to be aggressive be aggressive. Pick fast moving melee units and rush them forward.

That isn’t the point. Literally every chapter can be aggressive by command. Would you say that to a world eater? “Just pretend they are berserkers and move them more aggressively! They don’t need rules to show they are world eaters!”

 

But not all chapters are actually affected by it. Blood Angels are actually, objectively different in combat when they charge. 

Edited April 4, 2023 by Arkangilos

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

2 hours ago, Loishy said:

Maybe I'm forgetting something, but is it really a big deal to lose chapter specific rules in exchange for generic marine detachment if we have the crusade game mode?

 

If you want chapter rules, with relics and warlord traits that match the lore, Crusade Mode is for you. Now it even uses points for army lists as well.

 

If you want to play in a tournament format, as the goal is no longer to respect a lore, we dispense with specific chapter rules. You only have the choice of units and the choice of detachment to customize your gameplay. It is then easier for GW to find a balance with less special rules and one marine faction instead of 9.

 

Maybe that's what they're planning for the 10th.

Crusade rules only really exist for those who have their own private groups, or who have game stores who actively cultivate their gaming scene.

 

my LGSes one no longer hosts game nights, one does gaming but it BYOT, the other does minor competitive leagues.

 

i came back in the last 3-6 months of 8th and only just found a few people to play with fairly regularly, and just got offered to join a group for some crusade play, but im moving cross country in about 4 months or so, so I’ll have to start all over.

 

crusade games are very uncommon, there’s a reason essentially none of the 40k YT channels examine crusade rules, I don’t think I’ve seen a single crusade batrep (im sure they’re out there but they’re not common by any means)

[Arkangilos]

6 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

Pick fast moving melee units and rush them forward.

I am sorry, I missed this. Did you not read what I said?

10 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

They aren’t an all jump pack army. They are space marines that try to be standard but they have a flaw.

 

10 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

I don’t want to break the character of my chapter and say “these guys are an all jump pack army” just so I can get the red thirst. 

 

[Orange Knight]

OK, so is this a case of hobbyists who have enjoyed getting more model and rule support for decades, that are now unhappy that their rules won't be more shiny and more special than everyone else? Let's all be honest with ourselves and each other.

 

GW are putting the game first, and still allowing individuals to create armies that fit the theme they envisage for them.

 

The only thing that has changes is that these themed lists and bonus rules might not be unique to a few sub factions going forward.

 

Why can't we be happy that we all get nice things? There is definitely an element of sub-faction elitism that is either conscious or unconscious, but has been more evident since details of 10th began to drop.

Remember that you will have control over your own army and can still make it work the way you want. The only concern you should have for your opponent's army is how nice it looks, if it's legal, and if it's fun to play against.

 

Be happy that the opponent won't be punished or rewarded arbitrarily for the choice of paints they used when they started the hobby.