The importance of subfaction variation

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

12 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

I am talking about in the lore. In the lore, they only have the codex number of assault squads.. It literally says that they don’t have more assault squads than any other codex compliant chapter. 

And in the lore they also have 25 sanguinary guard.

in the lore they have leaders who prefer using jump packs.

in the lore they have a psychic ability that allows them to fly.

 

in the lore they make it very clear that the sons of sanguinius have a strong affinity for flying and using jump packs.

[Arkangilos]

25 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

And in the lore they also have 25 sanguinary guard.

in the lore they have leaders who prefer using jump packs.

in the lore they have a psychic ability that allows them to fly.

 

in the lore they make it very clear that the sons of sanguinius have a strong affinity for flying and using jump packs.

Good thing I’m talking about Assault Squads then, right? As in unit as designated by the codex? ;) 

Like my argument was, “We shouldn’t have our rules limited to a detachment that forces us to have just assault squads, because according to the lore, we don’t have any more assault squads than the codex allows” which is an objective fact (per the codex itself).

 

the response was bringing up units that aren’t assault squads, and saying that we don’t follow codex organization.

So with or without the affinity for jump packs, our company structure is 6 tactical squads, 2 assault squads, and 2 devastator squads. We should be able to run that and have BA rules. 

 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[ThePenitentOne]

25 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

Good thing I’m talking about Assault Squads then, right? As in unit as designated by the codex? ;) 

Like my argument was, “We shouldn’t have our rules limited to a detachment that forces us to have just assault squads, because according to the lore, we don’t have any more assault squads than the codex allows” which is an objective fact (per the codex itself).

 

the response was bringing up units that aren’t assault squads, and saying that we don’t follow codex organization.

So with or without the affinity for jump packs, our company structure is 6 tactical squads, 2 assault squads, and 2 devastator squads. We should be able to run that and have BA rules. 

 

It's cool to get the context and sorry I misinterpreted your intent- I thought you were advocating FOR detachment based special rules and using the similar structure to justify that POV while conveniently ignoring the plethora of units who, while technically not Assault Squads actually function kinda like assault squads.

 

Now that I understand you WANT BA rules to continue to apply regardless of detachment, I apologize for any sort of antagonism that may have been perceived.

 

But serious Question: If there are 2 assault squads per company (including the first) and vets are likely in the first, along with the SG, then how many of the 100 Marines in the 1st are wearing Jump Packs? And which company is the death company, or is DC just a name and not a true company, in that any unit in any company can succumb to the thirst? And if a DC unit uses Jump Packs, does that mean the company they belong to has one fewer unit of Assault Marines so that the Jump gear can be given to the DC?

Edited April 6, 2023 by ThePenitentOne

[Arkangilos]

7 minutes ago, ThePenitentOne said:

But serious Question: If there are 2 assault squads per company (including the first) and vets are likely in the first, along with the SG, then how many of the 100 Marines in the 1st are wearing Jump Packs? And which company is the death company, or is DC just a name and not a true company, in that any unit in any company can succumb to the thirst? And if a DC unit uses Jump Packs, does that mean the company they belong to has one fewer unit of Assault Marines so that the Jump gear can be given to the DC?

Oh ok! That’s fair!

 

I was talking battle companies. First company follows different rules, and we have a lot play around as VV’s.

 

DC is adhoc for those who fall to the Black Rage before a battle, and not standard company. Someone falls and they “join the death company” led by the chaplain of the company they were in then and there

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

37 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

Good thing I’m talking about Assault Squads then, right? As in unit as designated by the codex? ;) 

Like my argument was, “We shouldn’t have our rules limited to a detachment that forces us to have just assault squads, because according to the lore, we don’t have any more assault squads than the codex allows” which is an objective fact (per the codex itself).

 

the response was bringing up units that aren’t assault squads, and saying that we don’t follow codex organization.

So with or without the affinity for jump packs, our company structure is 6 tactical squads, 2 assault squads, and 2 devastator squads. We should be able to run that and have BA rules. 

 

I mean sure we can narrow any argument arbitrarily to make a point.

 

it doesn’t matter if they have the same number of assault squads, it’s irrelevant how many they have.

 

what’s more relevant is do they utilize those squads more often and in situations where UM or IF or IH do or would?

what’s more relevant is do they have a higher general usage of jump infantry than most other chapters?

 

the number of RAS in a chapter is almost completely irrelevant.

 

but I do agree with the final point.

we should be able to run a standard battle company AND keep our BA flavor.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Arkangilos]

2 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

what’s more relevant is do they utilize those squads more often and in situations where UM or IF or IH do or would?

No, they don’t. That is the point. It literally says the deploy the same number of assault squads as the codex dictates. 

 

2 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

what’s more relevant is do they have a higher general usage of jump infantry than most other chapters?

Not in battle line companies. They have the same number of jump squads as everyone else. Two.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Just now, Arkangilos said:

No, they don’t. That is the point. It literally says the deploy the same number of assault squads as the codex dictates. 

 

Not in battle line companies. They have the same number of jump squads as everyone else. Two.

First point has nothing to do with numbers of squads so not sure why you’re bringing that back up.

 

again how many they have in battle companies is irrelevant.

 

and honestly we don’t really know how many are currently utilized now that girlyman has essentially said chapters don’t need to worry about adhering to the codex astartes.

[spessmarine]

15 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

and honestly we don’t really know how many are currently utilized now that girlyman has essentially said chapters don’t need to worry about adhering to the codex astartes.

oops all meltas chapter when

no tacticals, no scouts, no intercessors or whatever the primaris chapter structure is, only meltas of all kinds and the guys shooting them

 

if GW won't refresh Fire Dragons, someone needs to make do

[Arkangilos]

8 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

First point has nothing to do with numbers of squads so not sure why you’re bringing that back up.

Fair, I misread it! 
And that is true.

 

27 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

and honestly we don’t really know how many are currently utilized

Also fair, but until I see the change made I’m going to assume they at least stick to it.

[Arkangilos]

35 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

again how many they have in battle companies is irrelevant

Except it isn’t irrelevant because that’s what we were talking about. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

29 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

Except it isn’t irrelevant because that’s what we were talking about. 

Who was?

as far as I can tell you took this one very narrow point of view and decided to make the discussion about that for no real apparent reason other than it supports what you were trying to say.

[Arkangilos]

22 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Who was?

as far as I can tell you took this one very narrow point of view and decided to make the discussion about that for no real apparent reason other than it supports what you were trying to say

Did you not see what I was responding to?

 

The first time I brought it up to as about detachments. I said that the BA are a codex chapter, and so I should be able to use codex formations and still get the rules without having to take just assault squads. You literally liked those posts yesterday without arguing against them. 
 

Penitent came in at the very tail end and missed the context, and in a misunderstanding thought I was saying the opposite of what I said, and he took my Assault Squads comment to be more broad than it was. (He equated Assault Squads to anyone with a jump pack).

 

Then you did the same thing, and in a strange twist you forgot that you and I were making the same arguments yesterday. 
 

Then I was saying that I was referring specifically to Assault Squads, of which there are only two in a battle company.

 

So, to start over, my argument is and was always this:

”BA have a standard codex organization. There is a battle company, and has 6 tactical squads, 2 assault squads, and 2 devastator squads. I should be allowed to take that battle company and still get the same red thirst rule. I should have the chapter rule without being locked into an Assault Squad only army.” That was the same argument I made yesterday that you agreed with. I have no idea why you changed today, Lmao.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

4 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

Did you not see what I was responding to?

 

The first time I brought it up to as about detachments. I said that the BA are a codex chapter, and so I should be able to use codex formations and still get the rules without having to take just assault squads. You literally liked those posts yesterday without arguing against them. 
 

Penitent came in at the very tail end and missed the context, and in a misunderstanding thought I was saying the opposite of what I said, and he took my Assault Squads comment to be more broad than it was. (He equated Assault Squads to anyone with a jump pack).

 

Then you did the same thing, and in a strange twist you forgot that you and I were making the same arguments yesterday. 
 

Then I was saying that I was referring specifically to Assault Squads, of which there are only two in a battle company.

 

So, to start over, my argument is and was always this:

”BA have a standard codex organization. There is a battle company, and has 6 tactical squads, 2 assault squads, and 2 devastator squads. I should be allowed to take that battle company and still get the same red thirst rule. I should have the chapter rule without being locked into an Assault Squad only army.” That was the same argument I made yesterday that you agreed with. I have no idea why you changed today, Lmao.

Being able to take a standard codex detachment and benefit from BA rules has nothing to do with how many assault marines are in the chapter.

 

more or fewer any chapter should be able to use a standard marine detachment. It doesn’t make a difference.

[Arkangilos]

On 4/4/2023 at 1:54 PM, Arkangilos said:

On 4/4/2023 at 1:39 PM, Crimson Longinus said:

There still will be a lot* of different detachments that cater to different playstyles.

Because BA and IF both use codex formations. BA don’t have more assault squads than the UM. They have the exact same company structure. They use the exact same Demi-company detachments.

 

 

On 4/4/2023 at 2:34 PM, Arkangilos said:

On 4/4/2023 at 2:32 PM, Crimson Longinus said:

So choose a detachment that has bonus for assault! Done!

Formations should not dictate whether your geneseed works or doesn’t.

@Inquisitor_Lensoventhis is what started the conversation today.

[Arkangilos]

45 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

more or fewer any chapter should be able to use a standard marine detachment. It doesn’t make a difference.

I’m sorry, what? That isn’t how math works.

 

45 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Being able to take a standard codex detachment and benefit from BA rules has nothing to do with how many assault marines are in the chapter.

How are you still missing the argument? Did you really forget all of yesterday?

 

Are you saying that you think in order to get Blood Angel rules, they should have to take specific BA detachments, and that they shouldn’t get the rule unless they have so many assault marines? Or that you shouldn’t get the rule if you select a standard codex template?

 

If you answer no, then you answer the same way I do. I just prove it with lore, because BA have the same company structure, and because the lore says they have the same company structure as the UM and Imperial Fist, but have the flaw, they should have the flaw even if they pick a standard formation that the UM and IF take.

 

So I have no idea why you are arguing with me, unless you think they have more Assault Squads than everyone else and think that they should be restricted to specific formations for the special rules.

 

 

So just to reiterate: I was replying to someone tell us we should just take a special detachment if we wanted special rules for our chapter. 
 

My reply was that was stupid because we are a codex chapter but with a flaw, and that we should have that flaw represented no matter which codex detachment we take.

 

Then you replied to me arguing against me for saying we were a codex chapter, and then you said, “make the discussion about that for no real apparent reason” while ignoring what I was replying to, which was saying if we wanted our special rule we should just take an assault specific detachment. 
 

So how you believe that me bringing up that we are a codex chapter is irrelevant is beyond me to understand unless you either forgot the conversation or you deliberately did not read what I was replying to. It was entirely relevant, because it was literally about which detachments should have what.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[Interrogator Stobz]

+++TIME TO CALM DOWN AGAIN BROTHERS+++

 

If you cannot agree then state that and stop. Circular arguments do not help anyone. 

We do not always get what we want every Edition, that's life.

Discuss with perspective, it's only temporary. 

[spessmarine]

8 minutes ago, Interrogator Stobz said:

+++TIME TO CALM DOWN AGAIN BROTHERS+++

 

If you cannot agree then state that and stop. Circular arguments do not help anyone. 

We do not always get what we want every Edition, that's life.

Discuss with perspective, it's only temporary. 

we've already had like what, three threads closed off this argument?

the factions in 10th article can't come soon enough

[Crimson Longinus]

7 hours ago, Cactus said:

I think some people are assuming that detachments are something like the force org chart and basing their conclusions on that. Is it possible that detachments are more like the current sub-faction rules? So a Blood Angels detachment, for example, doesn't necessarily mean 'moah jump tr00pz' and could include rules representing the Red Thirst that are applicable to all units.

Exactly this. Based on admittedly limited information we have, I don't assume there is any sort of FOC involved. Detachment is merely the set of special rules, stratagems and enhancements that you get. Very much like subfactions used to be. It is mostly a change in nomenclature. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

9 hours ago, Arkangilos said:

I’m sorry, what? That isn’t how math works.

 

How are you still missing the argument? Did you really forget all of yesterday?

 

Are you saying that you think in order to get Blood Angel rules, they should have to take specific BA detachments, and that they shouldn’t get the rule unless they have so many assault marines? Or that you shouldn’t get the rule if you select a standard codex template?

 

If you answer no, then you answer the same way I do. I just prove it with lore, because BA have the same company structure, and because the lore says they have the same company structure as the UM and Imperial Fist, but have the flaw, they should have the flaw even if they pick a standard formation that the UM and IF take.

 

So I have no idea why you are arguing with me, unless you think they have more Assault Squads than everyone else and think that they should be restricted to specific formations for the special rules.

 

 

So just to reiterate: I was replying to someone tell us we should just take a special detachment if we wanted special rules for our chapter. 
 

My reply was that was stupid because we are a codex chapter but with a flaw, and that we should have that flaw represented no matter which codex detachment we take.

 

Then you replied to me arguing against me for saying we were a codex chapter, and then you said, “make the discussion about that for no real apparent reason” while ignoring what I was replying to, which was saying if we wanted our special rule we should just take an assault specific detachment. 
 

So how you believe that me bringing up that we are a codex chapter is irrelevant is beyond me to understand unless you either forgot the conversation or you deliberately did not read what I was replying to. It was entirely relevant, because it was literally about which detachments should have what.

If UM have 2 squads per company and another chapter have 4 squads per company both can deploy 3 or 4 assault squads to a war zone with no problem since companies are not typically deployed in their full force or if they are they may well be supported by elements from other companies.

the geography of the theater or war may also dictate what portions of multiple companies will be best used, so assault squads from multiple companies may be deployed with only one or two tactical squads to create a company sized force

Edited April 6, 2023 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Arkangilos]

41 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

If UM have 2 squads per company and another chapter have 4 squads per company both can deploy 3 or 4 assault squads to a war zone with no problem since companies are not typically deployed in their full force or if they are they may well be supported by elements from other companies.

What? They deploy as just battle companies all the time. They also deploy as Demi companies all the time. But that isn’t the point, and was never the point of the argument. You forced the argument into that.

 

To help you out: 

Person A says that Codex Faction 1 should be restricted to detachment Assault if they want their chapter special rule.

Person B said that does not fit the fluff, because Codex Faction 1 is a codex faction, and therefore should have their special rule even if they take codex faction formations (like Demi company, company, etc.) 

 

 

41 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

the geography of the theater or war may also dictate what portions of multiple companies will be best used, so assault squads from multiple companies may be deployed with only one or two tactical squads to create a company sized force

Again, not really how Battle Companies work. 

Let’s say Second Battle company gets deployed to Omicron Percii 8. 
 

It is deployed by itself, as often happens. 
 

It can use a Demi company detachment. It can use a full battle company detachment. But it cannot use any detachment that has more than two assault squads.

 

Based on who I was arguing with… tough luck, we don’t get our special rule.

 

Based on what I was arguing: we should because it is a blood angel army, and if the fluff shows us deploying as standard codex armies deploy, we should get the rules even when we deploy as standard codex armies deploy.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

18 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

What? They deploy as just battle companies all the time. They also deploy as Demi companies all the time. But that isn’t the point, and was never the point of the argument. You forced the argument into that.

 

To help you out: 

Person A says that Codex Faction 1 should be restricted to detachment Assault if they want their chapter special rule.

Person B said that does not fit the fluff, because Codex Faction 1 is a codex faction, and therefore should have their special rule even if they take codex faction formations (like Demi company, company, etc.) 

 

 

Again, not really how Battle Companies work. 

Let’s say Second Battle company gets deployed to Omicron Percii 8. 
 

It is deployed by itself, as often happens. 
 

It can use a Demi company detachment. It can use a full battle company detachment. But it cannot use any detachment that has more than two assault squads.

 

Based on who I was arguing with… tough luck, we don’t get our special rule.

 

Based on what I was arguing: we should because it is a blood angel army, and if the fluff shows us deploying as standard codex armies deploy, we should get the rules even when we deploy as standard codex armies deploy.

If a planet‘a geography is not conducive to land travel or if the location of hostilities isn’t conducive to land travel a chapter would be stupid to deploy a battle company or demicompany.

 

a chapter has the ability to deploy whatever assets will best do the job, so a theater with large deep steep/sheer sided river beds, and soft loose dirt/sand, or marshlands would be tactically poor places to deploy tactical squads and devastator squads in, meanwhile it makes perfect tactical sense to deploy assault squads and speeders.

 

sure codex compliant chapters obey the codex astartes, but as far as I am aware GW has never really fleshed out the contents of the codex in a way that would make what I describe deviant and thus potentially heretical.

[Scribe]

I dont see why getting caught up in totals of organization is particularly meaningful.

 

A BA Tactical marine should be different from a UM Tactical marine should be different from a Dark Angel Tactical Marine.

[Arkangilos]

5 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

If a planet‘a geography is not conducive to land travel or if the location of hostilities isn’t conducive to land travel a chapter would be stupid to deploy a battle company or demicompany.

 

a chapter has the ability to deploy whatever assets will best do the job, so a theater with large deep steep/sheer sided river beds, and soft loose dirt/sand, or marshlands would be tactically poor places to deploy tactical squads and devastator squads in, meanwhile it makes perfect tactical sense to deploy assault squads and speeders.

 

sure codex compliant chapters obey the codex astartes, but as far as I am aware GW has never really fleshed out the contents of the codex in a way that would make what I describe deviant and thus potentially heretical.

The argument is that BA would use the same formations as the UM and IF, but should maintain the special rule regardless. 
That’s all. If you have a problem with that then I don’t know what to tell you. 
 

I recommend going back to two days ago and reading what I was saying, and then slowly reading what I said earlier.

 

The Blood Angels use the same formations and detachments as other codex chapters: Companies, Demi Companies, etc. 

They should not be limited to a detachment that forces them into something that requires them to have eight assault squads or whatever. 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[DesuVult]

4 minutes ago, Scribe said:

I dont see why getting caught up in totals of organization is particularly meaningful.

 

A BA Tactical marine should be different from a UM Tactical marine should be different from a Dark Angel Tactical Marine.

How different though?

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

4 minutes ago, Scribe said:

I dont see why getting caught up in totals of organization is particularly meaningful.

 

A BA Tactical marine should be different from a UM Tactical marine should be different from a Dark Angel Tactical Marine.

Which is why I’ve been telling him it’s fairly irrelevant.