Valrak 2026 release rumours video

[Lexington]

10 hours ago, Blindhamster said:

Even in the Dark Imperium book, gravis isn't described as a replacement for terminator armour.

 

I think that whatever happened to make GW change the course of development for what eventually became 8th Edition/Dark Imperium/Primaris, it occurred before novels had been developed or even contracted, which is pretty late in the process compared to model design. The theoretical iteration that would've had Gravis as an explicit replacement for Terminator armor never saw publication, and isn't something GW's ever even admitted to - it's something we can only infer. It's kind of hard to explain the decision-making around the Primaris any other way, tho.

[jaxom]

43 minutes ago, Lexington said:

 

I think that whatever happened to make GW change the course of development for what eventually became 8th Edition/Dark Imperium/Primaris, it occurred before novels had been developed or even contracted, which is pretty late in the process compared to model design. The theoretical iteration that would've had Gravis as an explicit replacement for Terminator armor never saw publication, and isn't something GW's ever even admitted to - it's something we can only infer. It's kind of hard to explain the decision-making around the Primaris any other way, tho.

Not quite. The original printing of Dark Imperium was 200 (maybe 100?) years post Maledictum Cicawhatever. The 2nd printing was 10 years.

Edited Thursday at 08:40 PM by jaxom
Spelling errors

[Mana]

8 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

They tend to add and bolt things on to the lore as opposed to outright changing it.

 

One notable example of change is the timeline retcon in the Dark Imperium novels, and the community made a big fuss about it.

Honestly I wasn't even going to reply, both of us clearly have different opinions and that is fine. There is nothing bad with disagreeing.

 

That being said, GW outright changes the lore all the time, like I said they do it when it's convenient to them, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that GW changing the lore is a bad thing per se, but they do it all the time, and pretending they just "tend to add and bolt things on the lore" most of the time, is pure nonsense. Examples: female custodians, as GW said they always existed, the example you gave: Indomitus crusade lasted 100 years and was over, that got also changed, Rogal Dorn being dead, changed to just missing without a hand, etc. Also I don't want to go off-topic, so this is my second and last post about this, sorry everyone!

 

And being more on-topic, I hope the refreshed dark eldar units look good, if they do new kabalites like the did the new eldar guardians that would be enough for me. Also I'm quite interested in how the refreshed space marines vehicles might look.

 

[Orange Knight]

There are examples of retcons, yes. Another big one is how the Necrons operate.

 

But keep in mind that this is a 40yr old setting serviced by hundreds of authors over generations. It's pretty consistent overall. 

Edited Thursday at 10:48 PM by Orange Knight

[phandaal]

1 hour ago, jaxom said:

Not quite. The original printing of Dark Imperium was 200 (maybe 100?) years post Maledictum Cicawhatever. The 2nd printing was 10 years.

 

What does this have to do with the development timeline for the new Marine range though? He was saying that "Gravis as Terminators" seems like something that was come up with and then abandoned early on before the official lore was written.

 

2 hours ago, MoriyaSchism said:

Isn't it more limited than tracked vehicles and traditional land speeders? It can't fly over friendly units because the repulsor plates pound the ground constantly to keep the vehicle afloat. It's like having an APC or a transport helicopter that can't support troops up close safely. 

 

Yeah, it doesn't fly. It basically punches itself off of the ground with its grav plates. Anything under it gets crushed because it is subject to the full weight of the tank.

 

It should also not be able to go over water, unless something happens between now and the 41st Millennium to make water solid enough to hold up the weight of a tank.

[Orange Knight]

And yet it does go over water. It's literally used to assault positions over the ocean on a planetary engagement against the Tau.

 

The Gravitic field can be focused or dispersed, so it can cover a large surface area or a more narrow space - It isn't just hammering a spot underneath the tank at all times, and using it to cover a larger area suspends it over water.

 

And yes, the tank can also be dropped from orbit, again, this happens in the lore during a key engagement. 

 

 

So taking all this into account, I would like some more compelling rules for the unit. You can hate the Grav tanks all you want, but the lore has been written and I'm simply asking for it to be reflected on the tabletop.

[Evil Eye]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

And yet it does go over water. It's literally used to assault positions over the ocean on a planetary engagement against the Tau.

 

The Gravitic field can be focused or dispersed, so it can cover a large surface area or a more narrow space - It isn't just hammering a spot underneath the tank at all times, and using it to cover a larger area suspends it over water.

 

And yes, the tank can also be dropped from orbit, again, this happens in the lore during a key engagement. 

 

 

So taking all this into account, I would like some more compelling rules for the unit. You can hate the Grav tanks all you want, but the lore has been written and I'm simply asking for it to be reflected on the tabletop.

Sounds terrible. Genuine Saturday morning toy commercial cartoon tier. A bad toy commercial even, like the Dic seasons of G.I. Joe. "Blast into action with the new Primaris Repulsor! It can go over all terrain with its gravitic fields, even water! And when it drops from orbit behind enemy lines, the forces of Chaos better beware! New Primaris Repulsor from Games Workshop! Intercessors sold separately."

 

And as you yourself said, GW retcons things all the time. So frankly they should retcon the grav-tanks to make some degree of sense rather than being "Land Raider and Falcon had a lovechild with none of the weaknesses of either".

[jaxom]

4 hours ago, jaxom said:

I think that whatever happened to make GW change the course of development for what eventually became 8th Edition/Dark Imperium/Primaris, it occurred before novels had been developed or even contracted,

^The original text to which I was replying

 

Then the question:

2 hours ago, phandaal said:

 

What does this have to do with the development timeline for the new Marine range though? He was saying that "Gravis as Terminators" seems like something that was come up with and then abandoned early on before the official lore was written.

It addresses the time frame of GW's course change for what becaem 8th Ed/Dark Imperium/Primaris as post-Dark Imperium and not before novel had been developed or even contracted.

 

As far as I am aware, the first product to be impacted by the course change was the Psychic Awakening series.

[phandaal]

3 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

And yet it does go over water.

 

I am aware of that. Hence why I said it should not be able to. It is bad lore. @Evil Eye nailed it as to why.

 

Edit: actually, now that I think about it more, we could just delete that entire book and let Phil Kelly write the Tau novel he really wanted. Wave racer tanks are the smallest thing wrong with that abomination, but taking them out alongside Azrael's character assassination would be icing on the cake.

 

1 hour ago, Evil Eye said:

Genuine Saturday morning toy commercial cartoon tier. A bad toy commercial even, like the Dic seasons of G.I. Joe.

 

Actually wrote this and deleted it from my last post. It is 100% Saturday morning cartoon stuff. Those were great shows, for Kindergartners. 

 

Edited Friday at 02:14 AM by phandaal
Just write Tau novels, Phil!

[01RTB01]

4 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

And yet it does go over water. It's literally used to assault positions over the ocean on a planetary engagement against the Tau.

 

The Gravitic field can be focused or dispersed, so it can cover a large surface area or a more narrow space - It isn't just hammering a spot underneath the tank at all times, and using it to cover a larger area suspends it over water.

 

And yes, the tank can also be dropped from orbit, again, this happens in the lore during a key engagement. 

 

 

So taking all this into account, I would like some more compelling rules for the unit. You can hate the Grav tanks all you want, but the lore has been written and I'm simply asking for it to be reflected on the tabletop.

 

"Developed as a heavy combat transport for the Primaris Space Marines, the Repulsor is unique amongst Adeptus Astartes battle tanks in that it is held aloft upon a thrumming cushion of grav-waves. Ventral plates upon the tank's underside project and direct these waves of gravitic force and, while they do not permit the Repulsor to soar into the skies in the manner of the lighter Land Speeder, they do afford it exceptional manoeuvrability for an Imperial tank. The Repulsor can traverse not only solid ground but also such extreme terrain as lava flows, acid lakes and frozen oceans with ease. Rubble and barricades are similarly no obstacle to this relentless vehicle, which simply hovers over the obstructions and keeps going."

 

It's a chunky hovercraft. It shouldn't be anywhere near the fly keyword.

 

If difficult terrain was still a thing it could have rules for that. As it is, not sure what else it should have other than maybe making charges against it harder.

[Orange Knight]

7 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

Sounds terrible. Genuine Saturday morning toy commercial cartoon tier. A bad toy commercial even, like the Dic seasons of G.I. Joe. "Blast into action with the new Primaris Repulsor! It can go over all terrain with its gravitic fields, even water! And when it drops from orbit behind enemy lines, the forces of Chaos better beware! New Primaris Repulsor from Games Workshop! Intercessors sold separately."

 

I think having a gravity field that can be adjusted is good lore.

 

You do realise that giant ships made of Iron can float on water, yes?

 

So if the gravity field is wide enough than yes, a tank will also be able to float.

[ChapterMasterGodfrey]

I agree with @Orange Knight. If Repulsor grav-plate tech is just heavy force used to barely keep the tank off the ground, what was the point of replacing tracks? I know many of you (myself included) will and have asked “why did they bother replacing tracks?” but the fact is, they have and the models aren't going anywhere. From the sounds of it, tracked tanks such as the Land Raider aren't going anywhere either, so they should be distinctive from each other and act differently in the sand box. Horses (tanks) for courses. A Space Marine commander should look at a deployment and go, this will require a Repulsor instead of a Land Raider. The story/lore gets weak when there's no difference between how the two tanks conceptually move. 

[Orange Knight]

Indeed, and now we also know that the Landraider isn't going anywhere.

 

So if the Landraider and Repulsor will both exist, then GW need to make them more distinctive.

 

Also, the Tau Hammerhead is as slow a Repulsor and has Fly. I can't imagine the Hammerhead is flying around in the sky either, but there it is.

Even if GW don't want to give the unit the Fly keyword (which it used to have before they nerfed it due to competitive abuse) then it should still have deepstrike or some other movement based abilities.

 

I'm also not sure why people are resistant to the idea of more varied rules for these units. GW should also lean into what makes the Landraider unique.

 

Edited Friday at 11:13 AM by Orange Knight

[Robbienw]

The Repulsor can be dropped from orbit because its grav field can cushion its landing.  It can't actually fly.  Like marines with jump packs can be dropped from orbit, whilst still not being able to properly fly.

 

Imperial grav stuff that truly flies tends to be much lighter.  Although i suspect the Custodes Coronus and Caladius may be kind of capable of low level flight (as opposed to hovering) like eldar grav tanks.

[phandaal]

2 hours ago, ChapterMasterGodfrey said:

If Repulsor grav-plate tech is just heavy force used to barely keep the tank off the ground, what was the point of replacing tracks?

 

Why indeed?

 

3 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

You do realise that giant ships made of Iron can float on water, yes?

 

You don't say??  Sometimes, we just have to laugh. Thanks for the science lesson.

[Orange Knight]

15 minutes ago, phandaal said:

 

Why indeed?

 

 

You don't say??  Sometimes, we just have to laugh. Thanks for the science lesson.

 

So you understand that if the weight is applied across a large enough surface area then the tanks will indeed float? This isn't even a problematic idea.

 

I know you hate the Grav Tanks, You seethe with rage. They keep you up at night, crushing your nice dreams beneath the gravitic power of those Repulsor plates (yes, this is a joke).
You don't have to like them, but the stance against the idea that different units should have varied rules is... Petty? How would you describe it?
 

This is the same setting in which things happen because Orks believe they should happen, and people still seem to lack imagination.

Edited Friday at 11:48 AM by Orange Knight

[Robbienw]

I doubt it keeps him up at night, I implore you to take a chill pill 

[phandaal]

27 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

This is the same setting in which things happen because Orks believe they should happen, and people still seem to lack imagination.

 

No, it isn't. This is the setting where the entire Ork species has to fervently believe that the color red makes things faster in order for red paint to maybe possibly (unverifiable) make a vehicle go a tiny little bit faster if you squint, but maybe the Ork driver was just extra fired-up because he likes the color. Or hey, the ammo feed on this gun kinda stinks but it never seems to jam when the boyz are firing it.

 

(We call that a "limitation," and wouldn't you know it, that actually make it more believable.)

 

21 minutes ago, Robbienw said:

I doubt it keeps him up at night, I implore you to take a chill pill 

 

I seeeethe.   War of Secrets is a bad book though, that much is true. I just wish Phil would stick to his blue boys and leave my innocent, loyal Unforgiven out of it.

[Orange Knight]

I agree War of Secrets is a bad book, but not because of the battles. It does even more damage to the reputation of the Dark Angels.

 

As for the Ork belief, I think the official lore has shown it has a substantial impact - such as guns being able to fire when they are just metal casings with some bolts and gears rattling about inside.

[Robbienw]

War of Secrets was the book that put me off reading post 8th edition 40k BL novels.  I refuse to accept such bad stories.

[Blindhamster]

2 hours ago, phandaal said:

 

No, it isn't. This is the setting where the entire Ork species has to fervently believe that the color red makes things faster in order for red paint to maybe possibly (unverifiable) make a vehicle go a tiny little bit faster if you squint, but maybe the Ork driver was just extra fired-up because he likes the color. Or hey, the ammo feed on this gun kinda stinks but it never seems to jam when the boyz are firing it.

 

 

I have no horse in the repulsor conversation, i like it, i like (some) of the treaded tanks too. 

But on the above point, it doesn't take the entire race, the whole concept of "da red unz go fasta" was because they saw blood angels with overcharged engines. Whats more in things like Dark Heresy/Deathwatch ttrpgs the ork weapons specifically work for orks, but dont properly for anyone else - because orks believe those weapons work. It's a well known fact that waaaargh energy makes stuff happen that shouldn't, and no, it doesn't take the entire species (but it does take a sizeable group... enough to be a proper waaargh)

 

edit 

 

please dont take the fun factor of ork make believe actually working away form me. 

Edited Friday at 03:12 PM by Blindhamster

[Evil Eye]

5 hours ago, ChapterMasterGodfrey said:

If Repulsor grav-plate tech is just heavy force used to barely keep the tank off the ground, what was the point of replacing tracks?

Putting aside the out-of-universe answer (someone at GW thought- mistakenly- that the Space Marines needed their armour pool replaced entirely with excessively toyetic visual catastrophes, and tracks just weren't 2cool4skool enough) I can see the argument that the grav plates do have some advantages. Notably, a crippled plate or two might not immobilize the vehicle compared to a damaged road-wheel causing a thrown track, traction is a non-issue, and presumably they can go a bit faster over rough terrain. The thing is that just because something has theoretical, or indeed practical, advantages over an established system doesn't mean it's necessarily a universal straight upgrade in all scenarios. The in-universe problems I can see with the Primaris grav-tanks and their "suspension" are as follows.

 

1: The aforementioned ground pressure. You're effectively exerting the full weight of the tank plus the downward thrust from the grav-plates on the ground below. Marine vehicles are very large and quite heavy compared to real world tanks (if we go by the rather over-generously conservative* Imperial Armour numbers, even the smallest tank in the Astartes motor pool, the stock Rhino, weighs 30 tons; that's the same as an early-war Sherman and 5 tons more than a Warrior IFV, and that's without power-armoured Marines in the transport compartment!) so the combined weight of a tank that's large and heavy by Marine standards AND the down-force of the repulsion would severely limit its ability to negotiate weak bridges and the like. That's a problem for real world tanks as it is, so when you've got already comically heavy vehicles exerting considerably more ground pressure than from their actual weight, it would actually make them poorly suited to certain theatres compared to their tracked counterparts.

 

2: The thing will be using considerable amounts of power/fuel just to stay stationary. A Rhino or Land Raider idling will be using fairly little energy, whilst the Repulsor's generator will be using a lot of fuel simply to stay afloat. Theoretically it could settle to the ground and "land" to preserve fuel but that isn't something you want to be doing too often, and certainly less practical and a lot more vulnerable than just stopping.

 

3: Speaking of which, these things are going to guzzle fuel. Tanks are thirsty beasts at the best of times, but when their main mobility method are powerful repulsion systems brute-forcing their way past gravity that need to be powered on at all times whilst active, the things are going to be VERY fuel-inefficient, meaning maintaining supply lines will be critical.

 

4: Whilst tracks can cause major headaches in maintenance, they're still fundamentally relatively simple and well-understood mechanisms. In the real world they've been a thing for over a century, and even in the technophobic Imperium they're commonplace. Meanwhile grav-tech is even amongst the most technologically advanced parts of the Imperium considered a rare, arcane and temperamental technology, and would definitely cause difficulties for Techmarines in maintaining and repairing the vehicles. Even the Space Marines have to consider these things, hence the Rhino being beloved for its reliability and simplicity.

 

All this to say that the grav-tanks would have very different strengths and weaknesses compared to the existing tracked tanks, and whilst there are situations they would excel in, there are others they would actually be poorly suited to. As a supplement to the Astartes armoury, sure, but as a replacement for the existing vehicles, definitely not.

 

Now if they were portrayed as such in the fluff, that'd be one thing. Had they been introduced as a new and untested vehicle (which they apparently are, or at least were) which was quickly adopted by some chapters and viewed with skepticism by others, with it soon becoming apparent that they were only situational upgrades over existing Astartes tanks I wouldn't have had a problem with it. Over-enthusiastic adoption of new technology which then turns out to not be quite as good as anticipated is hardly unheard of in real life, hence the trend for multi-turreted behemoths in the interwar period which were soon proven to be highly impractical, and it's not too much of a stretch to imagine the Imperium suffering a severe case of "seemed like a good idea at the time" in a similar manner. Plus it would tie into the whole theme of decay and the death of progress in the Imperium; even the "brand spanking new wonder weapon" is a crude mockery of pre-Heresy grav-tanks and a sidegrade from the established vehicle fleet.

 

Unfortunately, that's not what happened. They were portrayed as amazing innovative new vehicles that are better in every way than those boring old tracked tanks and are now completely replacing the established vehicles people already liked. "New thing comes out and is better in every way than what came before" is about as un-40K as it gets (now ain't there a truism?) and really comes across as transparent toy-pushing.

 

There's plenty of other issues with the Primaris tanks (the Repulsor has far too many guns, everything suddenly using stubbers is going to create havoc for supply logistics now that there's a whole other category of ammunition that needs to be kept stocked, etc) but I'm limiting myself to the grav-tank element or we'll be here for an eternity.

 

Also the Impulsor at least actually looks decent when put on tracks!

 

 

6 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

Also, the Tau Hammerhead is as slow a Repulsor and has Fly. I can't imagine the Hammerhead is flying around in the sky either, but there it is.

Even if GW don't want to give the unit the Fly keyword (which it used to have before they nerfed it due to competitive abuse) then it should still have deepstrike or some other movement based abilities.

Tau skimmer tech is considerably more advanced than the Imperium's, and the Hammerhead is a true skimmer- it defies gravity rather than strongarming it. It's also considerably lighter than most Imperial tanks and is more like a well-armoured low-flying aircraft than a regular tank. Comparing a Hammerhead to a Repulsor is like comparing a supercomputer to a Fischer-Price toy calculator. Also I don't think the Hammerhead should have Fly, myself; realistically there should be more in-depth rules for movement and terrain as in earlier editions.

 

7 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

I think having a gravity field that can be adjusted is good lore.

 

You do realise that giant ships made of Iron can float on water, yes?

 

So if the gravity field is wide enough than yes, a tank will also be able to float.

The problem is that in order to make the thing float on water you'd have to massively widen the grav-field, and in order for it to be wide enough to stay afloat whilst also powerful enough for it not to sink anyway, you'd be using a VAST amount of energy, and thus fuel. They'd actually have been better off describing it as being designed as straight-up amphibious, relying on regular buoyancy to move on water with the jet engines providing propulsion. Though again considering the sheer weight of the tanks they'd almost certainly require detachable floatation aids (pontoons or whatever) to pull this off, which would be quite impractical.

 

Curiously there have been attempts to make tanks float for seaborne deployment in WW2 via canvas "skirts" and other such aids. They didn't work very well and a lot of men died as a result. And that was in relatively lightweight tanks like Shermans, not super-heavy bricks like the Repulsor. As for battleships, yes they are very heavy and very large but also not very dense, and are shaped specifically so they can float. Not to mention they only operate in the water. A battleship with the same density relative to its volume as a tank would just sink.

 

 

 

 

*The Imperial Armour books are excellent tomes but they do tend to hew a bit close to real-life statistics for actual armoured vehicles, which is a bit odd in some cases. The Land Raider "only" ways 70 tons, which is the same weight as the Jagdtiger- which is a fair bit smaller. Realistically the Land Raider should be a fair bit heavier. There's also the Leman Russ' main gun having a 120mm bore diameter- about the same as a modern MBT- when even the more restrained visual depictions such as the old Forge World Leman Russ turrets show the battle cannon as being HUGE. Not that this in any way undermines my point, but worth noting.

[Orange Knight]

You need about 70 sq meters? Nothing impractical about that.

 

But again, you're trying too hard to hate it. You're trying too hard to disprove it. And now you're telling me that the Hammerhead is a real flyer and can soar in the skies? Show me the lore where it flies over tall buildings and I will concede that it deserved the Fly keyword more than the tank that actually drops from high orbit and hovers over water. The method the vehicle achieves flight is beyond irrelevant.

 

You know what doesn't make sense? The lack of ground clearance on a Landraider. That tank will get beached immediately lol. Am I attacking the design in every topic that discusses Imperium Tanks? No.

 

Orks believe blue is lucky so the Ultramarines never lose - This is the setting. It's pulp sci-fi with many a plot hole.

 

End of the day, the Grav tanks are big sellers so they aren't going anywhere. Long before people converted Impulsors into tracked vehicles, people were converting grav Rhinos and flying Landraiders. You can hate away and seethe in every topic (this is how it looks to me), but you're only dragging your enjoyment of the hobby down. Unless complaining is the main objective?

Edited Friday at 03:43 PM by Orange Knight

[LSM]

15 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

please dont take the fun factor of ork make believe actually working away form me. 

 

As an aside, I was recently re-reading my old Codex: Witch Hunters (2004), and in the 'Witch Hunter Narratives' section (aka "why is the internal-affairs branch of the Inquisition fighting X") it includes:

• Orks are thought to generate a unique, gestalt psychic field. The Witch Hunters need to know more.
• An Ork warlord has manifested hugely powerful psychic powers and is being hailed as the greatest 'Weirdboy' of all time. So strong is his psychic power that he is able to turn humans to join his Waaagh! The Witch Hunters must put a stop to this abomination before more of the Emperor's servants are unwittingly turned. 

Both a reference to the Orks possibly passively affecting things, but even to suggest that some unique boys can get humans caught up in the fun!

 

(The third idea was just defending a Sisters of Battle convent. Boo; boring!)

[Evil Eye]

22 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

But again, you're trying too hard to hate it. You're trying too hard to disprove it.

No? Not that I have to try hard to do either. But taking the time to point out how I feel the Primaris grav-tanks were poorly handled in the fluff and the depictions of them break suspension of disbelief even by 40K standards doesn't even remotely qualify as "trying too hard".

25 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

And now you're telling me that the Hammerhead is a real flyer and can soar in the skies?

WHAT? I said it was more like an aircraft, not that it IS an aircraft. In fact I explicitly said it SHOULDN'T have the Fly keyword and that the terrain rules in current 40K are inadequate.

30 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

You know what doesn't make sense? The lack of ground clearance on a Landraider

And sure; in fact when we eventually get a new Land Raider I would like to see it given a bit more clearance. That doesn't make the Mary Sue nature of the Primaris tanks any less aggravating.

32 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

Orks believe blue is lucky so the Ultramarines never lose - This is the setting.

No. Just no. That is not the setting, nor should it be.

33 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

It's pulp sci-fi with many a plot hole.

"40K is pulp sci-fi so it's OK if the new fluff sucks" is certainly a take.

34 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

End of the day, the Grav tanks are big sellers so they aren't going anywhere.

Argumentum Ad Popularum.

34 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

Long before people converted Impulsors into tracked vehicles, people were converting grav Rhinos and flying Landraiders.

Because they were established as part of the setting (specifically as shockingly rare techno-relics) and people wanted to make their own interpretations of these background elements. How does that justify getting rid of classic Marine vehicles in favour of ugly nonsense like the Repulsor?

36 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

You can hate away and seethe in every topic (this is how it looks to me), but you're only dragging your enjoyment of the hobby down. Unless complaining is the main objective?

So simply discussing the shortcomings of modern fluff/giving a remotely negative opinion on the grav-tanks is "seething and hating" now. Funny, it seems like the one seething is you, given how much of a flap you get into whenever anyone dares say anything not 100% positive on Primaris models/fluff. Getting mad at people calmly pointing out why the Primaris tanks and their fluff gel poorly with the cynical tone and military hardware enthusiast appeal of 40K seems far more like "hate" than me pointing it out in the first place.

 

As for "dragging my enjoyment of the hobby down", I'll tell you what does drag my enjoyment down; having things I like being gotten rid of and replaced with things I don't like, and being told it's a good thing.