The importance of subfaction variation

[Scribe]

17 minutes ago, DesuVult said:

How different though?

 

A special rule worth.

 

+1 A/+1 S in Assault.

Bonus to Objective holding.

Whatever.

 

I dont even care that they are balanced, just get into spitting distance.

[jaxom]

Moving beyond the Space Marine niche, I think the real question is more about what is the appropriate level within the rules for representing subfaction variation (given the restrictions of 40k's scale of granularity)?

 

There are unique units (I'm including special characters here, because that's what they are); fairly straightforward differentiation. An army with a unique unit should (ideally) work differently because of the presence of that unit. I don't think these are going away any time soon.

 

Then we've got non-unique units, and I'd split those into two categories. We've got units with options, like weapon choices or exarch powers, and we've got units with no options. Certain subfactions are associated with certain weapons, so that's place: plasma vs flamer, lascannon vs rocket launcher, shuriken catapult or scatterlaser, arc rifle or transuranic arquevus, etc.

 

But what about those identical units? Is there enough deviation from the mean for a subfaction to raise a unit above an otherwise identical unit? I think that's a lore question, but lore is malleable. It often changes based on perspective, or at least is exaggerated based on perspective. 

[Arikel]

This is getting kind of off topic, but space marines are supposed to one of the most flexible and well equipped forces in the imperium. This means that while a battle company will typically deploy as 6 tactical, 2 assault, and 2 devastator squads, they will flex to deal with different situations as long as they have sufficient equipment available. In a situation that requires mobile close quarter fighting for example, the devastator squads are certainly capable of taking up chainswords, pistols and jump packs while leaving their heavy weapons on the ship, assuming the armory has enough in stock. Not every company will have enough bikes or jet packs for all 100 to be at up with them at once, but almost all will carry more than the bare minimum required.

 

Let’s not forget that every space marine in a battle company, while not necessarily a veteran, is supposed to be fully trained and proficient in all of the possible roles, and with all the equipment those roles might require. They may have a preference for a squad type, in which they excel, but they are expected to be able to perform to an acceptable standard in all 3.

 

As a small addendum, the addition of primaris to the game somewhat mussed up this lore, as both the primaris squads and the equipment they used tend to be highly specialized towards a single form of combat (not just a heavy weapons squad but oops all plasma, no other option, as an example).  Part of what felt sour about them originally, apart from the “space marines but better” vibe they were introduced with.

 

back on topic, I was wondering if you all had any thoughts on my previous speculation regarding how the subfactions might be represented?

[Arkangilos]

2 minutes ago, jaxom said:

But what about those identical units? Is there enough deviation from the mean for a subfaction to raise a unit above an otherwise identical unit? I think that's a lore question, but lore is malleable. It often changes based on perspective, or at least is exaggerated based on perspective. 

I think there is a large enough difference between a Mordian Iron Guard squad and Cadian Squad, in both training, tactics, and traditions, to warrant them having different rules.

They are both “identical units” when looking on a roster, but they fight in entirely different manners.

[Scribe]

4 minutes ago, jaxom said:

But what about those identical units? Is there enough deviation from the mean for a subfaction to raise a unit above an otherwise identical unit? I think that's a lore question, but lore is malleable. It often changes based on perspective, or at least is exaggerated based on perspective. 

 

Its ebbed back and forth, but I would argue that yes, an identical unit, across different subfactions, should be slightly different.

 

Yes, the mighty D6 is an issue, as is the stat ranges in play, but I think there is an issue in how GW has managed variance in the last few editions (to say the least) and we just need to get away from the concept of 'perfect balance'. Its not going to happen.

[Arkangilos]

15 minutes ago, Arikel said:

This is getting kind of off topic, but space marines are supposed to one of the most flexible and well equipped forces in the imperium. This means that while a battle company will typically deploy as 6 tactical, 2 assault, and 2 devastator squads, they will flex to deal with different situations as long as they have sufficient equipment available. In a situation that requires mobile close quarter fighting for example, the devastator squads are certainly capable of taking up chainswords, pistols and jump packs while leaving their heavy weapons on the ship, assuming the armory has enough in stock. Not every company will have enough bikes or jet packs for all 100 to be at up with them at once, but almost all will carry more than the bare minimum required.

Then why does the codex explicitly mention what I am saying? It specially calls out that the BA don’t have any more assault squads than the codex allows, but when a guy in the Assault Squad dies they are more likely to find a replacement and fill it.

No where in the lore does it just have devastators equipping themselves like assault squads. No where.

 

an analogue would be this:

 

A light infantry company has 3-4 platoons in it. 
a platoon has 3 rifle squads and a weapons squad.

 

All of us were trained how to operate in the weapons squad, but that doesn’t mean we would all of a sudden decide to all arm ourselves as weapons squads. True, we can all, at a moments notice, take up the 240 and act as the fire support. But if we need more fire support, we don’t just all become weapon w aid because that isn’t the doctrine. 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[DesuVult]

59 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

What do you mean? Everyone arguing for the difference has been arguing in favor of some rule that boosts close combat for the BA. Not sure about the others because they haven’t been the focus point.

 

Also they have had furious charge in some form since 3rd Edition

How much of a difference is what I am asking.

 

53 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

A special rule worth.

 

+1 A/+1 S in Assault.

Bonus to Objective holding.

Whatever.

 

I dont even care that they are balanced, just get into spitting distance.

How close is spitting distance and how close those rules then are to lore feels very subjective.  What rules could you give BA for fighting in melee that couldn't also be argued to be given to BT or other melee chapters?  What difference can you give in rules and explain in lore that couldn't instead just be a formation?  If +1A/1

+1S is reasonable for an assault chapter why isn't it reasonable for an assault company?  What rule can you point to and say that goes to one chapter and one chapter only and nobody else can touch it with clear lore reasons why?

[DesuVult]

Just now, Arkangilos said:

The same rule that has consistently been given to the BA since third edition: +1S on charge, +1 Init on charge (no longer relevant). 
 

It has to do with their geneseed. That is what we keep saying. It isn’t because they are an “assault chapter” and so deserve the rule. It is because they have the red thirst (represented by the rule), and are therefore an assault chapter.

 

We literally told you this for pages. It isn’t because they are “assault” it is because they are genetically predisposed to it.

WHY would it not be reasonable for BT to have +1S on the charge?

[Scribe]

1 minute ago, DesuVult said:

How much of a difference is what I am asking.

 

How close is spitting distance and how close those rules then are to lore feels very subjective.  What rules could you give BA for fighting in melee that couldn't also be argued to be given to BT or other melee chapters?  What difference can you give in rules and explain in lore that couldn't instead just be a formation?  If +1A/1

+1S is reasonable for an assault chapter why isn't it reasonable for an assault company?  What rule can you point to and say that goes to one chapter and one chapter only and nobody else can touch it with clear lore reasons why?

 

Its not reasonable because it's not just training.

 

BA are genetically predisposed to their behaviors. World Eaters also are, and then have their brains hacked up. BT, are training, organization, and history. Wolves are a combination of genetics, organization and history.

 

It comes down to if you like the concept of the Primarches, and therefore Legions and Chapters, being intentionally designed to be different.

 

There is also a question of abstraction.

 

Now, if you want a break down for each chapter, point me to PDFs over the history of the game, and an SRD of 10th, and PayPal me some cash as a rules consultant. ;)

[DesuVult]

That isn't answering the question.  Why doesn't +1S work for BTs?  BT are known for aggression and have aggression from their geneseed.  They are known to be genetically predisposed towards aggression, melee, and striking hard at the enemy.

[Arkangilos]

16 minutes ago, DesuVult said:

BT are known for aggression and have aggression from their geneseed. 

Citation needed.

 

16 minutes ago, DesuVult said:

They are known to be genetically predisposed towards aggression, melee, and striking hard at the enemy.

Citation needed. They have the same geneseed as the Imperial Fists.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[Arkangilos]

@ArbedarkWhat was confusing about that? That I would ask for citations, or that I would point out the objective fact that they have the same geneseed as the Imperial Fists?

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[Scribe]

39 minutes ago, DesuVult said:

That isn't answering the question.  Why doesn't +1S work for BTs?  BT are known for aggression and have aggression from their geneseed.  They are known to be genetically predisposed towards aggression, melee, and striking hard at the enemy.

 

No, they are a product of training, history, and extra ZEAL.

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

Just your friendly neighborhood BT player here to point out that BT are not just Imperial Fists. There Geneseed has been cultivated over thousands of years to promote the less restrained attributes of their Primarch. They have been selectively refined over time to be more aggressive, on top of it being part of their indoctrination. Not only that, but they can literally hate pray psychic powers out of existence, so even if you were arguing the genetic template is identical, the power of faith could justify +1 S on the charge all by itself.

 

Silly stuff.

[Arkangilos]

6 minutes ago, Marshal Valkenhayn said:

Just your friendly neighborhood BT player here to point out that BT are not just Imperial Fists.

I did not say they were. I said their genetic sequence is the same. They come from Dorn, and so their genetic traits should reflect that. 
 

6 minutes ago, Marshal Valkenhayn said:

They have been selectively refined over time to be more aggressive

Citation needed. Quote and page number, please.

 

6 minutes ago, Marshal Valkenhayn said:

the power of faith could justify +1 S on the charge all by itself.

Sure, and that can be represented in stratagems or in litany rules, as it has been for a while.

 

The reason why BA and WE should share the charge trait is because they both suffer the same blood lust (albeit one ones to drink it, the other wants to spill it). 
The BA suffer the blood lust because of their geneseed, and the WE suffer it because of the Nails. But they get the same rule because it has the same effect.

 

Out of curiosity, what has the consistent chapter rule of the BT been?

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[Special Officer Doofy]

Yeah this whole thread is nonsense. Space wolves, white scars, blood angels and black templars overlap... Melee marines! Only so many ways to express that in a table top miniature game that uses d6 dice.

 

Blood angels have the red thirst and go into fits of rage! Reroll charge rolls

 

Black templars have zeal and must keep crusading! Reroll charge rolls

 

It's a game guys.

[Scribe]

1 minute ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

Yeah this whole thread is nonsense. Space wolves, white scars, blood angels and black templars overlap... Melee marines! Only so many ways to express that in a table top miniature game that uses d6 dice.

 

Blood angels have the red thirst and go into fits of rage! Reroll charge rolls

 

Black templars have zeal and must keep crusading! Reroll charge rolls

 

It's a game guys.

 

+1 S

+1 A

+3 inch Charge (I'm 100% against rerolls at this point, roll the die and live with it for me!)

Always Strike First

Always Strike Last

+1 to Hit

+1 to Wound

 

Plenty of ways to reflect different abstractions of a melee focus, and they could go on and on and on. We have decades of good/bad/meh rules to look at for this but the point remains.

 

Subfactions should have distinction. ;)

[Arkangilos]

6 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

Yeah this whole thread is nonsense.

Then don’t participate.

 

6 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

Only so many ways to express that in a table top miniature game that uses d6 dice.

Right, and what we want is for that to be maintained.

 

BA, WE, etc get +1S on charge. As they always have.

 

BT get a rule (similar to what they usually had) that reflects their stuff.

 

What we are arguing against is that they lose their chapter special rules. 
 

No one is against them all having rules to reflect what they do best.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[Beta galactosidase]

44 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

Its not reasonable because it's not just training.

 

BA are genetically predisposed to their behaviors.

Yes the Red Thirst physically changes the Blood Angels  worse than the wulfen curse. That’s why the detachment has to be structurally different and can be  chapter tactics. I never want to see chapter tactics again.

 

They all have a literal vampiric need for blood, Dante has drained a living person of blood and become visibly and temporarily younger, and when the red thirst goes bad the marines become deformed strigoi monsters locked in a tower.  This is what they look like in that Guy Haley novel

 

Quote

The damned occupants of the Tower of Amareo burst from the darkness. They were abominations, twisted far from their human origins by rampantly malfunctioning gene-seed. They were twice the size of mortal men, bulging with muscles. Yellowed fangs took the place of human teeth. Their skin was blood red and waxy, their eyes amber. They bounded along on knuckled fists like apes, screaming at the sky. Five dozen immortal monsters whose suffering hung over the Chapter like a poison, free at last to kill.

Spoiler

 

 

 

Blood Angels are so different physically they are the only chapters who in-setting should be able to make jump lists and jump veterans work. We had a PDF codex in fourth  edition that was great for this.  They were the only chapters that could get melee jump veterans.

 

that’s what a subfaction list needs to look like, almost as good as the Armageddon Salamanders one.  When you played that list you knew they were Salamanders: they hit at the same time as Guard, they could not get the most popular tactical heavy weapon and had to use the terrible multi-melta, and you could afford to take 10-15 terminators, the only usefully priced terminators in the game.

 

To have sub faction rules, they need to be that kind of structurally different, like the fourth edition blood angels where they had the only jump veterans of any chapter or the hard mode salamanders. 

[Lysimachus]

=][=

 

It seems things are getting a little heated and discussion is becoming circular. Perhaps the tension has built up because Faction rules weren't revealed as soon as we might have been expecting?

 

However, this is no reason for speaking in a disrespectful manner to other Fraters. Please take a deep breath and think before you post.

 

Otherwise this thread will end up being closed.

 

=][=

[Special Officer Doofy]

7 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

+1 S

+1 A

+3 inch Charge (I'm 100% against rerolls at this point, roll the die and live with it for me!)

Always Strike First

Always Strike Last

+1 to Hit

+1 to Wound

 

Plenty of ways to reflect different abstractions of a melee focus, and they could go on and on and on. We have decades of good/bad/meh rules to look at for this but the point remains.

 

Subfactions should have distinction. ;)

 

Okay, care to assign them then to each faction while being balanced and factoring in every faction's unit selection, point cost, secondaries, strats, mono bonuses and what not with having the win rates close between those said subfactions and bonuses? Sub factions should have distinctions, but not at the cost of balance.

 

4 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

Then don’t participate.

 

I'm not the one arguing with everyone and getting the thread locked.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Special Officer Doofy

[Scribe]

1 minute ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

Okay, care to assign them then to each faction while being balanced and factoring in every faction's unit selection, point cost, secondaries, strats, mono bonuses and what not with having the win rates between those said subfactions and bonuses? Sub factions should have distinctions, but not at the cost of balance.

 

  

1 hour ago, Scribe said:

Now, if you want a break down for each chapter, point me to PDFs over the history of the game, and an SRD of 10th, and PayPal me some cash as a rules consultant. ;)

 

Sure, but if you are looking for perfect balance, you can forget it, and play HH with stock, prebuilt forces instead with no legion traits.

[Arkangilos]

27 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

I'm not the one arguing with everyone and getting the thread locked.

I’m not arguing with everyone. @Inquisitor_Lensoven@ThePenitentOne, @Scribeand I all agree with each other. There are several others who all agree. Literally this thread is @Inquisitor_Lensovensaying we should maintain subfaction support and distinctiveness and you and @DesuVultarguing against it.

 

This thread got locked before because @DesuVultaccused me (who actually quoted the codices), of ignoring fluff, and me responding negatively to slander.

 

27 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

Sub factions should have distinctions, but not at the cost of balance.

Why? Why should every army be perfectly balanced with each other to the point that they lose their distinctiveness?

 

 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Arkangilos

[Scribe]

Just now, Arkangilos said:

Why? Why should every army be perfectly balanced with each other to the point that they lose their distinctiveness?

 

Its a literal impossibility to have variation and distinction, as well as it being perfectly balanced. Meta demands, individual boards/terrain, variance.

 

It cannot be actually balanced, but it can be 'good enough'.

[Arbedark]

46 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

@ArbedarkWhat was confusing about that? That I would ask for citations, or that I would point out the objective fact that they have the same geneseed as the Imperial Fists?

 

How needlessly antagonistic you're being. Asking for a citation for BT being aggressive as if it's some kinda 'gotcha' in your attempt to 'win' as opposed to having an actual discussion. That's what's confusing.