While Regimental Traits would be awesome, and add that little bit of extra variation that could make IG armies as varied as their Astartes cousins, it is not the break point for me to embrace or dismiss the idea of starting IG. For me, it's still the cost of admission. IG is one of those forces with a huge start up fee, and since my 'Nids can't ally with anyone, there's really no way for me to 'start small' with an allied detachment of IG.
That being said, if I had an army that could take IG allies, or already had some IG to begin with, Regimental Traits would absolutely give me that kick in the pants to start up or bolster an IG force.
Rip - 10 years ago
Whilst I think IG players should have the option, and it would have cost GW nothing to implement it, I voted no because I am into maneuverable armies based around anti-grav vehicles, because fuck having to steer around obstacles.
I also don't have the patience to paint that many grunts.
Kieran - 10 years ago
I voted no for the very reason you boys said. I can't justify throwin that much money at a game of little plastic men (Even though I love the idea, I have rent and bills!)
My friends and I have a friendly Fantasy tourney every Easter and though we've been playing for nearly 20years we all can't stand the basic and childish way 40K plays. Yes we are now thinking about looking into Firestorm.
$ is just too prohibitive.
After a little thought, I realised they do actually let you built regimental armies, albeit in a limited way. The Veteran options are similar to some of your suggestions during the episode. Perhaps they're supposed to represent the old special regimental units (Cadian Shock Troops, etc).
If they are, it's a piss-poor implementation, but one that should be fairly easy to build on by changing the options to a single Regimental Traits-style choice. That would leave your non-Veteran troops as generic grunts, but that kinda works for an IG army.
I voted no because it's impossible to finish my current guard army! That being said, if they finally give me a new Codex Catachans I will never go back to vanilla guard.
David - 10 years ago
My vote is No, because FUCK GW PRICES, i live in South America and we have no oficial support from GW (never seen a GW store, just independents stores) so why in hell should i support them
I all ready have Beastmen and Orks, and nothing on the current releases make me want to buy anithing new, hell i got some marines and i'm making a two player set for Kill Team, jut to get the Orks done and paint some Lamenters
i'm currently looking at firestorm Armada, Saga (you should review it) and Mordheim because i don't feel like paint 100+ models for friendly play
It's all well and good letting people build armies from Tallarn, Mordia, etc, but without a model range to back it up you're still fielding varieties of Cadians. Yellow Cadians, Blue Cadians, Snow Cadians. That sort of thing only works with Space Marines. Maybe that's why the Marines get the most supplements.
While Regimental Traits would be awesome, and add that little bit of extra variation that could make IG armies as varied as their Astartes cousins, it is not the break point for me to embrace or dismiss the idea of starting IG. For me, it's still the cost of admission. IG is one of those forces with a huge start up fee, and since my 'Nids can't ally with anyone, there's really no way for me to 'start small' with an allied detachment of IG.
That being said, if I had an army that could take IG allies, or already had some IG to begin with, Regimental Traits would absolutely give me that kick in the pants to start up or bolster an IG force.
Whilst I think IG players should have the option, and it would have cost GW nothing to implement it, I voted no because I am into maneuverable armies based around anti-grav vehicles, because fuck having to steer around obstacles.
I also don't have the patience to paint that many grunts.
I voted no for the very reason you boys said. I can't justify throwin that much money at a game of little plastic men (Even though I love the idea, I have rent and bills!)
My friends and I have a friendly Fantasy tourney every Easter and though we've been playing for nearly 20years we all can't stand the basic and childish way 40K plays. Yes we are now thinking about looking into Firestorm.
$ is just too prohibitive.
After a little thought, I realised they do actually let you built regimental armies, albeit in a limited way. The Veteran options are similar to some of your suggestions during the episode. Perhaps they're supposed to represent the old special regimental units (Cadian Shock Troops, etc).
If they are, it's a piss-poor implementation, but one that should be fairly easy to build on by changing the options to a single Regimental Traits-style choice. That would leave your non-Veteran troops as generic grunts, but that kinda works for an IG army.
I voted no because it's impossible to finish my current guard army! That being said, if they finally give me a new Codex Catachans I will never go back to vanilla guard.
My vote is No, because FUCK GW PRICES, i live in South America and we have no oficial support from GW (never seen a GW store, just independents stores) so why in hell should i support them
I all ready have Beastmen and Orks, and nothing on the current releases make me want to buy anithing new, hell i got some marines and i'm making a two player set for Kill Team, jut to get the Orks done and paint some Lamenters
i'm currently looking at firestorm Armada, Saga (you should review it) and Mordheim because i don't feel like paint 100+ models for friendly play
My vote is a Yes... with a but.
It's all well and good letting people build armies from Tallarn, Mordia, etc, but without a model range to back it up you're still fielding varieties of Cadians. Yellow Cadians, Blue Cadians, Snow Cadians. That sort of thing only works with Space Marines. Maybe that's why the Marines get the most supplements.