PDA

View Full Version : what would you expect from a new Hordes of Chaos?



Khorghan
02-12-2007, 01:47
Got this idea from the Bretonian thread, what changes would you expect in a new Warhammer armies: Hordes of Chaos?

Im guessing alot of people will want warriors to be fixed-but how much should they cost? or what should they get?

Discuss any changes you would like to see from the old book into a new one.

SJM
02-12-2007, 02:09
I expect Knights and Warriors to still be Core but upgrading to Chosen will make them a Special Choice. Knights should have a minimum unit size of 5 instead of 4. For Warriors I'd include a shield in their base equipment without any point adjustments.

Hrogoff the Destructor
02-12-2007, 02:30
4 Knights is good if you want to put a hero in the squad.

I also think the shield standard for warriors is a good idea.

I wouldn't be suprised if chosen get +1 ldr, along with the heroes choices.

I'm curious to see if Hordes will maintain the all mortals are core thing. All chariot and knight armies are pretty ridiculous. I expect marauders and warriors to stay core.

Seeing as daemons are getting their own book now, I wonder if there will be any new units. I personally would like to see a berserker unit of some sort, not just a marauder or warrior with the mark of khorne. They would be skirmishers because, well, they're berserkers. The problem is that they would be too much like skirmishing slayers, and that would be a very very bad idea. If they ever get into combat with an enemy that one of your squads is already engaged with, there is a chance they hit your squads on 1's or something like that. Since they would be very eager to charge an enemy if at all possible, it would require you to be as careful as possible when placing your squads and moving them around.

him_15
02-12-2007, 02:31
For warriors I would say 1. shield included (reasonable) and 2. Ld9

VanHel
02-12-2007, 02:33
I would hope more of a focus would be put on marauders.

wizuriel
02-12-2007, 06:30
I would like to see a new unit mutants. Be able to buy different mutations and will be a special choice for any chaos army.

Khorghan
02-12-2007, 06:49
For warriors I would say 1. shield included (reasonable) and 2. Ld9

That makes sense, warriors should have a high LD and the shield help with smoothing out the price for what you get.

i agree they should put more emphasis on marauders, but right now warriors need more help.
In reality marauders are the vast majority of chaos armies and few very experienced ones gain the suit of armour and become a warrior. i dont think warriors should be pushed to special, but i think maybe more options for marauders, different types of barbarians even?

Also marauders need to get new models as the ones GW have at the moment IMO are very ugly

Goldenwolf
02-12-2007, 06:55
I'd like to see Marauders get an update as well. I'd also like some Mutant changes to them as signs of favor from the gods.

Khorghan
02-12-2007, 07:06
IIRC there was some talk of in an update you being able to give marauders marks, perhaps you could fit some mutation in through there

redbaron998
02-12-2007, 07:11
I'd like to see Marauders get an update as well. I'd also like some Mutant changes to them as signs of favor from the gods.

Er....I kinda like them the way they are, none really chaosy raiders.

Maurders are around the very bottom of the Chaosy totum pole, being that they havent earnt much favor in the eyes of thier Chaos God(s)

I would like to see newer models of course, but would like to see them still have the whole Northern Barbarian feel over a Chaosy feel, as that to me belongs on the more favored of the Gods champions....this is of course just my opinion

Chunk01
02-12-2007, 08:44
Main thing i would like to see is a bow option for maurders. if you ever read any of the books "riders of the dead" then recurve bows are the staple of any maurder horde.
I would also like to see Maurders given the smaller base size, or if they are to be kept on 25mm then maybe str 4 basic. give Maurder hero's!

lector#1
02-12-2007, 08:48
i would like to see marauders beeing able to have throwing axes on foot and possibly some new magical weapon,armor, and talismans

Dominatrix
02-12-2007, 09:57
I will refrain from answering until I read the daemon army book.

If it follows the BoC army book path (meaning units can be combined with mortals, something by the way that a sincerely hope) then chaos mortals will have entirely different needs than if mortals are forbidden from using them.

Although I doubt this would happen as it would mean that the army has to be redesigned from the ground up more or less and GW generally doesn't make such fundamental changes.

The first thing that comes to mind though is to fix chaos warriors. There is another current thread where people are discussing this issue so I won't write the same things twice.

TzeentchForPresident
02-12-2007, 10:50
Er....I kinda like them the way they are, none really chaosy raiders.

Maurders are around the very bottom of the Chaosy totum pole, being that they havent earnt much favor in the eyes of thier Chaos God(s)

I would like to see newer models of course, but would like to see them still have the whole Northern Barbarian feel over a Chaosy feel, as that to me belongs on the more favored of the Gods champions....this is of course just my opinion

Looking waaay back the very bottom was made up of thugs, they had WS 4 back then, Marauders WS 5, Warriors had WS 6 and a state line similar to the highest rank of Human Hero with just 1 wound less.

I agree with the others that Marauders should be the main base of the army. Being cannonfodder because they aren´t as favored. ;)

Archaon
02-12-2007, 11:30
I'd like the aspect of Chaos played up more.. unpredictable results, spontaneous mutations and the like.

Back in 4th edition Chaos had its own box sets with tiny chaos gifts cards which you got a few per rounds and could apply to characters or units to represent spontaneous favors to them.

Drawback was that too much could result in your general becoming a spawn or just die.

As it stands the Chaos army is just an elite army which only represents one aspect of their armies in the rules.. apart from that they are just a run of the mill army.

T10
02-12-2007, 11:45
I'd like to see cheaper Warriors of Chaos and cheaper Marauders of Chaos. This would go a long way to actually field a Horde of Chaos rather than the Stag-party of Chaos we see now-a-days.

I'd have no problem with Marauders dropping to base human characteristics, i.e. WS 3 and I 3 if that means I can get more of them.

Id' also like an incentive to field more Warriors on foot. Stat them at WS 4, S 4, T4, I 4, A2 and Ld 8 and give them Chaos Armour, unit size 10+.

Upgrade to chosen adds +1 WS and +1 I and makes them Special, unit size 5+.

Chaos Cavalry Armies should still be possible, but it shouldn't be the only good choice. Taking a cavalry army should be a decision based on personal taste and preferred playing style, not because it's the only viable approach.

-T10

Briohmar
02-12-2007, 11:51
what I'd like to see improved, I'd like it if Daemons got a real ward save, I'd like it if they got their command back, I'd like it if the older Daemon types made a comeback, especially Fiends of Slaanesh, but the Daemonic Cavalry as well. In essence I'd like to see the Daemonic Legion become a real army. I think Marauders are fine the way they are, and wouldn't change anything on them, except it would be kind of cool from the fluff point if they got the raiders special rule, since they are meant to be disorganized tribesmen running amok, and trying to be the first one to the fight to attract the attention of the Gods. Warriors need to cost less, at least for upgrade, 12 points for +1 A and +1 Armor, I mean really, a SM is 15 points with the same stat line (except T and Armor) and he gets 2 attacks that always go first and all for 15 points. A chosen chaos warrior with everything is twice that at least (figure in cost of mark and extra cost for command that nobody else has to pay such a ridiculous amount for.) Knights are another thing altogether. I could see minimum size going up to 5, which wouldn't bother me since that's what I take anyways. Maybe a point or so break, and or reduce the cost of chosen, oh and reduce the cost of command, since 52 points is a bit much. I could also see chosen being relegated to the specials choice. What I don't want to see however, is Chaos loosing their flavor. The big fluff push right now is to make them a low-fantasy army with hordes of marauders and only a few knights or warriors. That's not what Chaos is. Chaos can be anything. In Daemon Slayer Ulrica says it best, You never know what form the chaos incursion will take when comes down through the pass.

Gazak Blacktoof
02-12-2007, 12:08
I agree with T10. More of a horde aspect would improve the army.

What I'd like to see is also ranged options for the chaos army.

Men that hunt and raid and engage in sieges need ranged weapons; thrown weapons, bows, ballistas and catapults in addition to daemon engines would all be suitable.

For all the apparent choice a chaos army has currently its actually very restrictive. Even if you don't want a highly competitive army you can't take more than a dozen ranged weapons without going to dogs war options.

Currently a well built chaos army wont include any ranged weapons which, as I mentioned in the chaos warrior thread, is inappropriate for an army that represents the breadth and depth of barbarian tribes from across Europe and Asia.

Defender of Ulthuan
02-12-2007, 19:52
I like T10's take on the whole scenario. The only thing I would add is to pose a question:

Would it be vaiable to give marauders a bow option? Maybe their own chariot? Possibly a stone thrower as a rare choice? I'd love to see the focus switch to marauder-heavy lists that can do something other than walk slowly into combat. Which reminds me, light armor and plastic models would be good choices for marauder horsemen.

I can think of no better way to fix warriors and knights than as T10 put it. Maybe with the inclusion of a marauder chariot, chaos chariots could be special choices though.

Oh, lastly, give marauders marks already. And maybe a Hero choice?

-Defender of Ulthuan

Just Tony
02-12-2007, 20:28
What Chaos needs, hmmmmmmm.....

Well, the current Warriors statline should be the Chosen statline. AND set as Special. And the Chariots should be moved to Core. Knights, if kept in core, should be toned down a bit, and then the current version being Chosen Knights as Special. Marauders with a bow option (not longbow) and light armor included in their price. And have the option to PAY for the Chaos armor on Lords and Heroes, therefore giving you the ability to run Marauder chieftans.

Past that, I think the list is fine as is

lol

theunwantedbeing
02-12-2007, 21:44
Mutations for anything mortal(and beast).
Obviously there will be downsides likes roll a d6 and add your number of mutations, if this roll is greater than your gods favoured number you become a chaos spawn.(undivided gets 5, slaanesh 6, nurgle 7 khorne 8 and tzeentch 9). So 1 mutation is safe for nurgle, 2 for khorne and 3 for tzeentch...roll at the start of each turn perhaps...or after each wound suffered?

Chaos warrors being given at least a second attack, possibly an extra point of leadership.
Possibly extending this to chaos knights but giving the extra attack for chosen only.
No extra attack for chosen warriors of course(dont be so silly.....seriously).
Both stay core of course as we keep the current mortal/daemonic/beasts way of selecting everything as warriors or knights as special sucks as we are forced to take marauders we dont want to take.
There is no point in marauders being the only mortal core as you'll just see min sized armies with maxed out special and rare or the normal marauder armies......totally pointless and ruins the diversity of chaos.

Greater daemons being customisable as well as more powerful, possibly as they are but cheaper with more options to make them better...eg, fortitude +1 wound, might +1 strength...etc etc at a cost of course.

No "poof" result for instability, possibly lower leadership on daemons but higher on greater daemons and such (eg. 9 for hero's 10 for lords)

Marauders being more of a fodder unit, possibly upping the unit size to more like 15 or maybe 20.(stops them being used as flankers so damned much)

Erm.....probably more I want to see but those are the main things that would be a great enhancement of the current list.

Havock
02-12-2007, 22:36
I actually like it quite the way it is: fix warriors, fix the armoury (half the armoury is unused because the items are etiher useless or way too expensive)

Just shaving off or adding some points to units will go a long way (though warriors can just have A2 and be done with it), screamers need a dramatic pts drop.

Oh, and fix the lore of change, casting values should be a bit lower, CV9 is a bit high for a quite unreliable magic missile IMHO. That and get something decent for spell number six.

I disagree with that knights need to be toned down, I mean, what do you want to tone down? Their S? WS? I? These guys, and expecially chosen are supposed to give anyone (except slayers, undead and other stuff that couldn't care less) a real "OHSHITOHSHITOHSHIT" moment when they hit. At the moment, only chosen can really lay claim to that, normal knights don't hit any harder than most heavy cav, it's during protracted combats that they bare their fangs.

Still, I think the current mortal/daemon/beast separation is nice, all cav chaos armies are hard as nails, sure, but so is a dwarven gunline, brettonia or a WE forest spirits army to name a few examples.

Khorghan
03-12-2007, 03:39
I dont know why everyone thinks chaos should have missile weapons, IMO that would ruin alot of chaos, chaos has awesome units like Chosen knights that make up in the close-combat phase what we lose in the shooting phase.

I also like the way things are done at the moment but i think warriors should be cheaper, marauders should be also(not to the extent that they are given the standard man profile as T10 said, these guys are tough bred in the harsh wastes where only hard survive-theyre not your pansy empire puffy shoulderers) but you want the HORDES of chaos,

Xerxes empire as a posed to leonidas' 300, but you still have the elite(warriors, knights)

Slaaneshi Ice Cream
03-12-2007, 04:37
I'd like to see:

*lower point values so that the army is more like a "Horde". Or change the named to "Elites of Chaos".

As far as I can tell, Chaos armies are supposed to be a Lord or Exalted plus his retinue(chosen, knights, magical support), plus a whole lot of foot soldiers (marauders). Throw in some demons and other stuff (siege equipment? Beasts?) and you have a chaos army. This isn't well represented by the current book because you just can't get a lot of models on the field.

*Some ranged options. C'mon how do you expect chaos to assault the Empire if they have no bows or seige equipment as someone else mentioned? Some bows and bolt throwers would be really nice and give chaos something to do in the shooting phase.

*Demons that have a true ward save and are at least T4 since they have no armor to speak of. I know daemonettes are skinny, but you could justify it by saying they are strengthened by the Warp.

*One giant book with mortals, beasts, and demons in it. I know it won't happen, but it would be cool.

I'd like to see Chaos as a big smashy horde army, but right now that is O & G. Except, with O & G you get silly stuff like animosity, pump wagons, and so on. How about a more grim and dark smashy army?

L192837465
03-12-2007, 16:34
i think a major problem with chaos is that given its straightforward approach, the army is one of the hardest to make work. IE: planning is essential, morso than most armies as we have 0 shooting.

i'll start listing off things here.

Lords:
chaos lord: is fine. a6 base would be nice for 210 points though. dragons are a bit overpriced, i'd drop them to 250.

exaulted sorcerer: give him 3a base, ws6, and t5. its redicuous that a 235 point lord has the statline of a chosen warrior.

deamon prince: make him US 5, 50 points cheaper (at least) base level 2 sorcerer, and +1 leadership, removing Deamonic Instability.

Greater Deamon: not so much grief with the deamoins, but make the leadership even with other lords and heros, so in 3k point games you can field one and a lord so you can have a mortal army.

Hero's:
Exaulted: pretty much perfect. no complaints or ideas
Aspiring: love him. mainly a bsb, but nice.
Sorcerer: a generic sorcerer. what can i say.
Demon guy: crap. 200 billion points, us 3, and too few attacks. and a large target. oh boy!

Core (both books):
Beast heards: awesome. no complaints.
Marauders: option for skirmish and bows
Chariots (both): pretty much great. if you want a cheaper chariot go with beast, and a more powerful punchy chariot go with hoards.
Warriors: whatever you may think, i believe warriors could use a 2 point decrease and a 2 point decrease to move to chosen. thats it.
knights: great. they should not be an army maker. chosen should be 2-5 points cheaper per guy though.
Beastigore: i like em. they should have chaos armour though.
all daemons: t4 base, units of 20 or more cause terror, +1 leadership or stubborn, no instability, ward save. +2 points a pop each and ability for full command on all of em.


i'll do special and rares in a bit.

Gazak Blacktoof
03-12-2007, 17:19
Lords:
chaos lord: is fine. a6 base would be nice for 210 points though. dragons are a bit overpriced, i'd drop them to 250.

exaulted sorcerer: give him 3a base, ws6, and t5. its redicuous that a 235 point lord has the statline of a chosen warrior.


Yes attacks 6 base would be nice for lords, but for 210 points they're good as they are. I think they're ba;anced as they are even if some of the magic items are terrible.


I'd like to see a lore of tzeentch that is actually good on a fighting character, as it stands a lot of the spells can't be used on targets that are in combat, or can't be used once the caster is in combat. Unless chaos get some ranged options elsewhere in the list the mixture of spell types makes tzeentch the worst lore of the lot even if you will get more spells off (which you pay for).

I've never used an exalted sorceror but in line with other spell casters he seems about right.

L192837465
03-12-2007, 18:02
but thats the problem. he's not. he's almost 40 points more than say, an empire caster, and way over that than a High Elf lvl 4. and not to mention, on top of 135, you have to add 15 for a level 4.

Gazak Blacktoof
03-12-2007, 19:34
You do of course get twice the number of attacks a reasonable weaponskill, toughness and importantly a decent armour save of 4+ or 2+ when mounted.

EDIT: Besides which there needs to be a substantial difference between tzeentch casters and those of the other gods.

Havock
03-12-2007, 20:22
Tzeentch casters are not only casters, but also fighters, and good ones at that :)

Ethlorien
03-12-2007, 21:00
I'd like to see an update on the marauders, more choice and troop selection. Hero choice maybe. Different abilities based on their tribe, even. Something to make even an all marauder army a viable choice.

Defender of Ulthuan
03-12-2007, 21:07
A few things:

@L192.....: What about Khorne Daemon Princes (L2 soc)? Also, Daemon Princes and Exalted deamons aren't large targets :).

Also, I think there needs to be a general points decrease.

Finally, Daemons need big time changes. Here they are IMO:

*NO POOF!!! Same rules as the undead, or just make them unbreakable and change the fluff.

*A 4+ ward, increased to 3+ for Exalted Daemon, 2+ for a Daemon Prince as well as GD, but still no save vs. magic weapons (also, khorne doesn't get amor).

*Get rid of the 0-1 for furies, and make undivided lesser daemons.

*Slight points decrease for Exalted Daemon and Daemon Prince. With the other changes, the other daemons are fine.

*A daemon BSB that works like TK and VC BSB.

*Commands for daemon blocks.

That's it. Defender.

Gazak Blacktoof
03-12-2007, 21:09
Tzeentch casters are not only casters, but also fighters, and good ones at that :)

I hope that wasn't aimed at me:eyebrows:

RipFlag
03-12-2007, 21:10
Demon guy: crap. 200 billion points, us 3, and too few attacks. and a large target. oh boy!


4 attacks with Str 5, t5, for 230pts with 3 wounds, that causes terror and flies, is pretty mean, the real downside of this guy is that its WAY to easy to kill him, no armour and a crapy/expensive ward save.

making him US 5, would be alright, but that you couldnt have him hid in units,

I would like to see marauders get Str 4, I mean look at the models, and they are on 25mm bases, they need to be beefy!
I would make Chaos warriors, knights, and chariots all special, that way you are forced to have the horde style.

For core, keep the Marauders, and horsemen, introduce a marauder chariot, and
For core a +1 unit of cultists, which would be basic stats ws 3, bs, 3 str 3, t3, and Ld 7 and uper cheap like 4 pts a model. use them purely for fotter, or rank bonus

This would add to the "Hordes" of Chaos, not the elite of chaos,

different13
03-12-2007, 21:54
I wanna see the Hordes of Chaos be a lot more like they appear in the fluff.
I want Riders of the Dead style HoC armies. The army book actually did a pretty good job of showing the background of the HoC armies, the list simply reflected the fluff poorly.

First of all, barring one or two special characters, how many followers of Tzeentch have ever been both great fighters and great wizards? (I can only think of van Horstmann)
Seems to me most warriors that follow Tzeentch (Chosen Warriors - those with the armour, etc) are simply smarter versions of Undivided champions, who happen to have a powerful pet wizard.
Examples?
Arek, from Beastslayer. He wasn't a wizard, he had the Twins for that.
Surtha Lenk, afaik, was simply a big scary bastard. Not a sorcerer.
Cyenwulf (not to be confused with Sutenvulf, who was a Khornate champion) was also 'merely' a chosen chaos warrior.

Fluff-wise, the vast majority of marauders are either mounted barbarian raiders (the Kurgan) or sea-raider barbarians (the Norse). The Hung are barely described, and I see them as a mix of the (in-game) Kurgan and the (real-world) Huns - the Hobgoblins already have the horse-archer horde thing covered, so GW can be forgiven for making the Hung a lil different imo.

Gameplay wise:
I want sorcerers to have the option of being Tzeentchian sorcerers. As I've said above, rarely have we seen brilliant warriors that are also sorcerers. Hell, most of the sorcerers are barbarian shamans.. Therefore, both Chaos Warrior sorcerers and Marauder sorcerers (call them Shamans to avoid confusion).
As for people complaining about losing their Tzeentch uber-warlocks - give Tzeentchian heroes/lords the OPTION to take magic levels, don't force it on them.

It's been mentioned, but ranged weapons for Marauders.
Throwing axes or javelins for medium/light marauder cavalry, bows for light marauder cavalry, and possibly a 0-1 skirmishing archer unit.
I don't agree with giving them an artillery unit, as I don't really think they've used them in pitched battles much in the fluff. A simple catapult would be great for sieges though.. But aren't there Besieger/Besieged optional equipment lists anyway, or am I thinking of the General's Compendium?

Give the basic marauder unit the option for either a marauder champion or a chaos warrior champion. This'll make it seem more like the old warband system, and is imo fluffy: a Norse village with just 1 chosen is considered blessed, and these warriors often lead the raiding parties.

Berserkers, like the idea.

Bring back Marauder chariots, check.

Chaos Warriors need improving, but I'll let others deal with that. (I'm more of a fluff-guy, as you can probably tell).
Perhaps remove the distinction between Chaos Warriors and Chosen Warriors..
Or at least give basic warriors back the armour that gives them their name..

All units should be capable of being Marked. Perhaps make a distinction between Warrior and Marauder regiments (give them different effects).

A "Lord of Mortals" gift, that allows daemons to command mortal armies. There's already a Lord of Beasts gift (or words to that effect) that allows mortals to command Beastmen armies, isn't there?

Let's see, This would mean Warriors have one infantry unit, one cavalry unit and one chariot, plus characters of every sort.
Maruaders would have possibly two infantry units (basic + archer), two distinct cavalry units (horse-archers with bow/spear and no armour and medium horsemen with spear/shield & light armour, option throwing axes) and a chariot, plus 2 characters (Shaman & warrior-hero).

MarcoPollo
03-12-2007, 22:10
I'd like to see beasts and mortal in the same book.

I'd like to see chaos wariors fixed. Just reduce the min size of the unit to 5+ and people might take them.

I'd like ambush to be fixed.

I'd like the beastherd frontage issue fixed.

I'd like to see mutations for mortals and beasts.

I'd like to see new/improved/toned down magic lists (just to get the old brain juices flowing).

Khorghan
03-12-2007, 22:11
Greater Deamon: not so much grief with the deamoins, but make the leadership even with other lords and heros, so in 3k point games you can field one and a lord so you can have a mortal army.


thats what master of mortals is for, fluff wise the deamon would be in control


I'd like ambush to be fixed.

how so?

MarcoPollo
03-12-2007, 22:21
thats what master of mortals is for, fluff wise the deamon would be in control


Originally Posted by MarcoPollo
I'd like ambush to be fixed.

how so?

Well ambush used to be able to march once it came on the board. Now you don't get that option. So, big nasty herds comming in from the table edge are all spread out. Really only small ambush herds are viable as anything else takes up too much space/overlaps.

Dominatrix
03-12-2007, 22:36
A "Lord of Mortals" gift, that allows daemons to command mortal armies. There's already a Lord of Beasts gift (or words to that effect) that allows mortals to command Beastmen armies, isn't there?

Check page 48 in the HoC army book. There is an undivided gift called quite appropriately "master of mortals". It does exactly what you suggested. Not that it is your fault you forgot it or anything. Daemon heros are so lame no mortal army uses this gift anyway! ;)

Havock
03-12-2007, 22:42
I hope that wasn't aimed at me:eyebrows:

Nah, sorry, I am just completely drained after a long day work, I read something along the line of "what's...."

soots
03-12-2007, 22:45
As a person who played against chaos alot for the last 3 editions...

Id like to see Chaos warriors brought back to their eliteness. Warriors that actually scare you in little groups of 5 or so. They were once the uber troops of the wfb world, and have been severely brought down in the last 5-10 years.

Mv4 Ws6 S4 T4 I6 A2 Ld8 hvy armor + Shield.
Chosen get chaos armor + ability of their god (frenzy +mag res, immune psyc, -1 hit, power dice)
xtra weap, gw, halb, FC, magic banner.

mistformsquirrel
03-12-2007, 23:14
I would make Chaos warriors, knights, and chariots all special, that way you are forced to have the horde style.

Why should we be 'forced' to have the horde style? I mean look at most other armies - they can go fairly elite OR somewhat hordey; just because the name is "Hordes of Chaos" doesn't mean we should HAVE to have a horde. I likes my Chaos Warriors thank you very much!

Gazak Blacktoof
03-12-2007, 23:38
Agreed. At a minimum chosen should be uber killy.

As I posted earlier though I wouldn't mind a simple reduction of points for chaos warriors in preference to boosted abilities.

A horde could be possible without any warrior types though if marauders are expanded.

************

However...

I think its unlikely that hordes of chaos will ever be a true horde army to prevent them overlapping with beasts (which you can take in addition or instead of mortals). Better titles for the book might therefore be; men of chaos, men of the north, chosen of chaos etc.

I still want ranged weapons, this would also help differentiate them from beasts who likely will get no shooting or a minimum of thrown weapons and daemons who might get an occasional spew attack but will mostly rely on magic for ranged abilities.

Khorghan
03-12-2007, 23:38
As a person who played against chaos alot for the last 3 editions...

Id like to see Chaos warriors brought back to their eliteness. Warriors that actually scare you in little groups of 5 or so. They were once the uber troops of the wfb world, and have been severely brought down in the last 5-10 years.

Mv4 Ws6 S4 T4 I6 A2 Ld8 hvy armor + Shield.
Chosen get chaos armor + ability of their god (frenzy +mag res, immune psyc, -1 hit, power dice)
xtra weap, gw, halb, FC, magic banner.

that stat line looks a little too high, ws 6 for a standard core troop?:eyebrows:

Hrogoff the Destructor
04-12-2007, 00:12
Mv4 Ws6 S4 T4 I6 A2 Ld8 hvy armor + Shield.
Chosen get chaos armor + ability of their god (frenzy +mag res, immune psyc, -1 hit, power dice)
xtra weap, gw, halb, FC, magic banner.

WS6 and I6 is a little much, especially if they were to remain a troop choice. Keeping WS5 and I5 will make them a force to be reckoned with since they have 2 attacks a piece and a 3+ in CC. They will have better stats than virtually every standard troop choice, and will put up a fight against other teams elites (which is what they are supposed to do IMO).

Would it work for chosen? Probably not the I6. Making them I6 would make them too good against elves (well, apart from HE). I could see WS6 though.

Infinitium
04-12-2007, 09:38
Giving marauders WS3 I3 would be a start. If Imperial proffesional soldiers or Orcs are given WS3 so should they. Sure thay are raiders; but the fluff clearly states that there's much more to their culture than simply warfare, and this would reflect that. Making it so that their champion is a Chaos Warrior would also reinforce the idea that their leaders are indeed "blessed by the gods".

Also make it so that marauders can take Marks of Chaos symbolizing that some tribes worship one power exclusively. The effect should effectively be a weaker version of the warriors' marks.

Change the Tzeentech mark so that the unit/character wearing it can re-roll say d3 dice per turn (cannot be used for leadership tests or spellcasting/dispelling) instead of giving power dice/magic levels. Tzeentech is foremost god of change, not magic, and skewering chance in his favors seems much more in character.

Give the Mark of Nurgle 6+ Regeneration (5+ for characters) in addition to the fear effect to represent the fact that they're much more resistant to pain than ordinary extraordinary people.

Get rid of the Chaos Ogres. They're far to redundant with OK bulls. Trolls, Minotaurs and Dragon Ogres is plenty.

Xzazzarai
04-12-2007, 10:52
I'd want some more powerfull daemons. Like ogres in deamon-form. 3-4 wounds, 3-4 attacks and so on. That'd really be cool! And get rid of that silly instabillity. Daemons are just like WE forest spirits, but weaker. Don't like that they have allmost exactly the same rules.

Concerning the warriors, they should have a point decrease or a statline increase. I6 is too much, so is the WS6... Maybe WS6 for Chosen? They are meatgrinders, and should have an extra attack to start with.
The Knights then. Why the hell do they use hand weapons? Give them -1 str and let them use lances ffs! No one sane would send heavy cav to battle without atleast SOME kind of lance! Besides that, it looks silly only with HW.

Further more I'd want to see some ranged attacks. Maybe some warmachines (No, not hellcannon!)

Phoenix Blaze
04-12-2007, 12:32
I don't think there's too much wrong with the current list. But I do think GW should get the "horde" aspect across.

Chaos war machines should be brought into the list.

I think Chaos Warriors should have something similar to the Black Orcs' "Armed to the teeth". Is that what it's called? where they start off with pretty much all weaponry? I imagine chaos warriors having a similar idea whereby they carry a lot of gear with them.

More focus on marauder's is a must. And plastic chaos knights and chariots!!!! We've been waiting far far *far* too long for those.


Eventually, I'd like to see a big heavy book which had all things chaos, mortals, beasts, daemons, dwarves....everything!

mistformsquirrel
04-12-2007, 12:49
I'd want some more powerfull daemons. Like ogres in deamon-form. 3-4 wounds, 3-4 attacks and so on. That'd really be cool! And get rid of that silly instabillity. Daemons are just like WE forest spirits, but weaker. Don't like that they have allmost exactly the same rules.

Concerning the warriors, they should have a point decrease or a statline increase. I6 is too much, so is the WS6... Maybe WS6 for Chosen? They are meatgrinders, and should have an extra attack to start with.
The Knights then. Why the hell do they use hand weapons? Give them -1 str and let them use lances ffs! No one sane would send heavy cav to battle without atleast SOME kind of lance! Besides that, it looks silly only with HW.

Further more I'd want to see some ranged attacks. Maybe some warmachines (No, not hellcannon!)

I don't think Chaos Knights should use lances, and I'll tell you why: Chaos Knights generally aren't "Knights" in the Brettonian, Imperial or even Elven senses. They're powerful and savage, and with none of the pomp, circumstance or tradition that surrounds true 'knights'. Think of them more as heavily armored super-barbarians on horseback, rather than "Knights" of the traditional sense.

I do however agree, some Chaos War Machines and/or shooting would be lovely. It doesn't have to be good necessarily - you could for example have "Marauder Youths" with bows and only a BS2 WS2 LD6 (though with a champion upgrade to Ld7) - that way we could have shooting, but it would be poor enough that our melee killiness still wouldn't seem disproportionate.

I would also like to see more Marauder units in-general; but no matter what I want basic non-Chosen Chaos Warriors to remain Core. I didn't pick the army because I was interested in half-naked vikings with a vague Chaos flavor - I picked it because I could have huge hulking champions of the Dark Gods, each capable of shattering entire ranks of enemy formations, and towering over most mortal beings. In short, Chaos Warriors are a huge chunk of the reason I picked Chaos as an army. (I know you particularly didn't suggest this, but several people have, so I'm explaining my opposition on that point more thoroughly, and just using this post to do it.)

BenK
04-12-2007, 13:14
It's totally unfair that Chaos get two books when other armies only get one. Completely unfair.

They should get three: "Men of the North", BoC and a daemons book.

No, seriously. I loved the direction GW were moving in with the HoC fluff, particularly with the 'were' story. I'd love to see that fleshed out even more. I'd like to see mortals and daemons on separate lists. Off the top of my head, a Men of the North list might look like:

Core:

Marauders (Stats of Swordsmen with light armor and option for option for sword-and-shield, two weapons, great weapons, or flails)

Beserkers (Same stats only with frenzy and no armor)

Axe-Throwers (Cheapish skirmishers with throwing axes)

Marauder Horse (Fast cavalry with options for spears, bows, and throwing axes)

The thing about all the core 'horde' units for Men of the North is that they'd have the option of taking a Chaos Warrior as a unit champion. I'd like to see the distinction between 'Warriors' and 'Chosen Warriors' removed, and for Chosen to be truly fearsome troops, maybe: WS 5, BS 0, S 4, T 4, W 2, I 4, A 3, Ld 8. So whilst the core units aren't that scary in and of themselves, they usually sport a champion as fearsome as other race's hero level characters.

Special:

Huskarls (Medium Cavalry. Marauder Horse with Heavy Armor, Shield, and Great Weapon, Stubborn)

Chosen Foot (Awesomely powerful, obscenely expensive [think 2 wounds, 3 attacks] infantry in Chaos armor. A unit of 5 of these guys should be able to win combats)

Marauder Chariots (Cheap, lighter chariots)

Chosen Chariots (Heavy, expensive chariots)

Rare:

Chosen Knights

Chaos Spawn

Heroes:

Cheiftan (Cheap; stats of an Empire Captain. Is he is the general, no chosen units or unit champions may be fielded).

Aspiring Champion.

Sorcerer.

Lords:

Daemon Prince

Exalted Champion

Sorcerer Lord

Chaos Lord (If a Chaos Lord is the general, Chosen Foot become core and Chosen Knights become special choices.)

Xzazzarai
04-12-2007, 13:50
I don't think Chaos Knights should use lances, and I'll tell you why: Chaos Knights generally aren't "Knights" in the Brettonian, Imperial or even Elven senses. They're powerful and savage, and with none of the pomp, circumstance or tradition that surrounds true 'knights'. Think of them more as heavily armored super-barbarians on horseback, rather than "Knights" of the traditional sense.


Knights don't use Lances by tradition. It's cuz they are pretty damn effective! Every knights in history (maybe with a very few exceptions?) used as chock-troops used some kind of lances, spears or other simliar weapons.
It's not a question about tradition, it's a question of what kills most with least effort. On horseback at full speed towards the enemy - the answer is a lance.
And it seems pretty in-line with the Chaos-fluff to use that what makes killing most efficient. :)
The should be equpied with Lances, or atleast have the option to chose them!

mistformsquirrel
04-12-2007, 14:10
I'm talking mostly about Image though.. The imagine of a mounted knight on horseback with a lance is a classic one of nobility, heritage and pride. Chaos Knights aren't noble, they're savages, they want to get up close and rip you apart!

That's why I prefer them using hand weapons - not because they're somehow more effective, but it suits the image quite well. I don't see Chaos Knights charging down the field, in an organized fashion, lances lowered - I see them racing off all at once, just trying to run the enemy over, breaking them with the weight of themselves (Chaos warriors are pretty damn big!) and their chaos-enhanced warhorses.

Dominatrix
04-12-2007, 14:59
I don't think giving lances to chaos knights is fluffy. Flails on the other hand sound fair game to me. Besides if VC are getting S7 cavalry I don't see why chosen chaos knights should be left out of the loop if they were given an appropriate price. Besides chosen knights used to be THE killy cavalry unit of the game and they have been falling back little by little in the powercreep for quite a few years now. I would like to see something that puts them back to the first place.

Briohmar
04-12-2007, 15:46
Ah, but for 5 and 1/2 editions of the game, Chaos Knights did have lances. They had them right up until the very most recent book came out. Which, I might add had an impact on me as it meant I couldn't use my really old chaos knights (the ones on metal steeds) and I had to go through and rip the lances off of my 5th Edition Chaos knights and attach warrior weapon arms on in their place. Actually, I think the older knights actually look better with the Chaos warrior weapon arms, what bothers me is the new knights with hand axes and short swords trying to fight from a clydesdale. It just doesn't work for me. Even the new warriors have big, heroic looking weapons, but not the knights, oh no, they have pansy little weapons. OK, my rant is now over. To the actual argument at hand, The old fluff says most chaos knights did in fact have lances, and were in fact knights, the elite of the elite. The newer fluff says that they're more Kurgan Raiders who have been marked by the Gods. I like the older fluff better, as I've said earlier, I don't want a low fantasy Marauder horde army, I want big, beefy badasses with really big cool weapons chopping people into little bits and pieces.

Gazak Blacktoof
04-12-2007, 16:06
A number of the chaos warriors are/ were knights. Archaon was a templar.

I'd rather not have lances though as it marks them out from the heavy cavalry of other races. I wouldn't mind more brutal weapons. Flails, morning stars or additional hand weapons all seem appropriate. Great weapons are now rather craptastic when mounted so there's no point in including them unless chaos warriors get to use them in initiative order.

Skyldig
04-12-2007, 16:08
For the record, "horde" just means camp. Well, originally anyway, coming down from the eastern steppes, which Mortal chaos background is based upon. Bows and horses and stuff.

I don't think Chaos should be an "horde" army, that is, with alot of numbers at its side like the Orc&Goblins or Skaven. But, they could be given the option, if they sacrifice most of the elites.

As for constructive ideas, improve the warriors (cost, free shield a very good idea), perhaps make chosen stubborn or have a banner with the option. Knights core, marauders core, warriors core. Chosen special. Make Warhounds better and more expensive (for that enormous size, I can't imagine they will loose 1 vs 1 against a simple bretonnia halberder). Throwing axes for footsoldiers, throwing spears for marauders. Perhaps marauder skirmishers.

No bows, and for the love of the gods, please do NOT let marauders get marks.

EDIT: Oh, and when will they remove the option to use a halberd when mounted? Just the option is ridicilous.

mistformsquirrel
04-12-2007, 16:22
Flails could be awesome >.< I'd totally go for flails myself. Something big and brutal and nasty.

I'll let everyone in on a secret that may explain a couple things too <.< I built my Chaos Knights out of Empire Knightly Orders and then gave them weapons from the Warrior sprue for the most part. They have big brutal weapons, huge axes, powerful longswords, well ok, my female knights have smaller weapons, but they themselves are smaller so I think its fine. (A hammer and a nasty looking scimitar from the Empire Militia set - what I made my Marauders from. I figured that since my army is a group of revolutionaries, it made sense their "marauders" would actually be locals who joined up with the group and received heavy training)

mistformsquirrel
04-12-2007, 16:23
For the record, "horde" just means camp. Well, originally anyway, coming down from the eastern steppes, which Mortal chaos background is based upon. Bows and horses and stuff.

I don't think Chaos should be an "horde" army, that is, with alot of numbers at its side like the Orc&Goblins or Skaven. But, they could be given the option, if they sacrifice most of the elites.

As for constructive ideas, improve the warriors (cost, free shield a very good idea), perhaps make chosen stubborn or have a banner with the option. Knights core, marauders core, warriors core. Chosen special. Make Warhounds better and more expensive (for that enormous size, I can't imagine they will loose 1 vs 1 against a simple bretonnia halberder). Throwing axes for footsoldiers, throwing spears for marauders. Perhaps marauder skirmishers.

No bows, and for the love of the gods, please do NOT let marauders get marks.

EDIT: Oh, and when will they remove the option to use a halberd when mounted? Just the option is ridicilous.

Why's that? <o.@>;

GeneralofChaos
04-12-2007, 17:04
Wow, with so many armies in 7th edition getting a small power creep. I think you should see Chaos take a major step forward.

I love to see Marauders become T4, thanks to there 25mm base they now use. Plus they are hulking humans who live in the Chaos Waste Lands. I like to see Chaos armies be able to take diffrent kinds of Marauders as well.

Example:

Kurgan: S4
Norse: frenzied
Hung: hatred

I also like to see these tribes of marauders, to be at odds with each other. So if you take two or more diffrent kind of Marauders. They attack each other on a roll of 1, if they are with in 8 inches of each other or 16 inches of Marauder Horsemen.

Chaos Warriors need to be fixed badly, I like to see them get S5 and 2W for each model. Then give them the ability to be upgraded to Chosen Warriors [special slot] With Chaos Armour and a 2A each.

These few changes now put Mortals in much better postion in 7th edition, plus gives the Chaos player more flexability with Marauders.

I also love to see Chaos mutations make a comeback in 7th edition also, now your Chaos characters can stand out even more in your army.


GoC

DDogwood
04-12-2007, 17:13
Why's that? <o.@>;

Using a polearm, or almost any two-handed weapon, from horseback is extremely difficult. The horse's head keeps getting in the way of your swings.

mistformsquirrel
04-12-2007, 18:01
Using a polearm, or almost any two-handed weapon, from horseback is extremely difficult. The horse's head keeps getting in the way of your swings.

You could probably use it the same way the Japanese used the Naginata while mounted. You'd go kind of "up and over" to the side. I saw it demonstrated once. And there is of course that big point on the end for charging, so you get the spear part for charging, then the axe head for after the fact.

That and I'm not saying its totally practical <.< but I like it cause it looks cool to me. /has a lord with a halberd/ >.>

Hywel
04-12-2007, 18:27
I'm largely very happy with the chaos list. I would only like a few minor tweaks.

- Chosen units become special
- A unit of marauders/warriors/knights required for each chariot (or a beastherd for beast chariots)
- Daemons have a regular ward save and +1Ld
- Daemon characters have +1T or US5
- Warriors somehow made a serious option. I don't think an extra attack is sensible as you'd need to similarly alter the knights who are fine as they are. A simple point reduction would suffice, though not to the point of making marauders redundant.
- Chaos warriors/knights available as unit champions for marauder and hound units to provide a characterful and cheap leadership boost.

Nothing much. :)

If they've not yet rewritten beastherd rules for 7th ed, that also needs to be done.

Chaos Undecided
04-12-2007, 18:48
ok 2nd attempt at posting as power cut destroyed my last attempt

Firstly would like to see some sort of fix for the poor leadership of the Chaos army, for being the bane of civilisation they run away far too easily in my opinion. This could be solved in a few different ways.

a) increase leadership of all units and characters by one from warriors upwards.

b) give them a rule used by several other armies in that warriors ignore marauder panic, marauders ignore hounds etc.

c) slightly more fluffy option imo the stories always seem to indicate the chaos armies staying power is centred on their leader more so than other armies, the general dies and they start to disentegrate rapidly. This could possibly be portrayed by having a +1 leadership to the whole army no matter the range whilst he is alive or maybe all warriors and knights could be stubborn whilst the general lives. (would work quite nicely with a demon prince leader imo as they are fighting in the presence of a living avatar of the gods and know they're being watched)

I wonder also if changing the marks to work more in line with the 40k ones would work better for the army (imagine toughness 5 Nurgle warriors :) )

For the Marauders I think the existing profile suits the standard warlike Kurgan marauder image quite well but if they were to change it then a normal human profile with strength 4 would be quite apt. Some additional access to missile weapons would also be nice with say throwing axes for foot troops and short bows for horsemen. I'd also like to see a return of the marauder chariot though it should be "lighter" than the warriors one.

Looking at the army strictly from a mortals point of view (i.e ignoring beasts) some form of scouting skirmishers would be nice taking the form of say Norse Raiders or Chaos Cultist with maybe some form of short range Burning Brand missile weapon which would be effective against War Machines as an alternative to the usual reliance on flyers.

I assume also we'll see the Hell Cannon make the next list in some form (not sure the existing rules set is entirely balanced for general play).

Chaos Undecided
04-12-2007, 19:00
Ah just remembered another thing from my original attempt at posting.

I've never really been convinced on the weight in numbers rule or whatever its called for chaos hounds, does anyone really take them in big enough units to make use of the rank bonus?

I think they should either make them fast cavalry again or bring back the packmasters to give them a little extra punch and/or staying power.

DDogwood
04-12-2007, 20:57
You could probably use it the same way the Japanese used the Naginata while mounted. You'd go kind of "up and over" to the side. I saw it demonstrated once. And there is of course that big point on the end for charging, so you get the spear part for charging, then the axe head for after the fact.

I've never seen it demonstrated, so I'll defer to you on this one - my impression was that you use a naginata from horseback more like a spear than an axe.


That and I'm not saying its totally practical <.< but I like it cause it looks cool to me. /has a lord with a halberd/ >.>

That's actually a good reason to like it. In a game where you can fight armies of giant lizards, where the dead can walk, and where flying horses can carry around heavily-armored knights, using a halberd from horseback isn't particularly hard to swallow.

W0lf
04-12-2007, 22:38
Armies should focus heavily on marauders.

make them a lot more attractive, same stats, S4 with light armour at current cost and their set.

Then give them the option for bows + heavy armour and a final option that allows them to be from a tribe, somethign like:

Tribe that is reknowned for shooting - +1 BS
Tribe that is reknowned for resilence - +1 T
Tribe that is reknowned for atheletesism - +1 M
Tribe that is reknowned for ferocity - frenzy
Tribe that is reknowned for cults - mark of undivided

Chaos warriors should be chosen stat lines but 2 pts cheaper, +1 ld and made special.
Chosen should be removed as they are effectivly aspiring champions.
Chaos chariots shouldnt count towards core requirments but be core still.

MoN should be -1 to hit in cc and at range.
other marks are fine exept: MoT on characters should be +1 to cast and allow non-magic users to take magic lvls (for +40 pts a lvl).

Havock
04-12-2007, 22:42
Too much cookiecutter, basically you are saying "have marauders with some armoured, but nerfed elites as support.

What could be a better rule is that per X amount of pts, you must have a unit of marauders.

I like the MoT suggestion, though it should come with at least a level, if only for the sake of reason ;)

Dominatrix
04-12-2007, 23:34
I disagree about the marauders made obligatory thing. Part of the beauty of chaos is its variety. If you like to do a horde like army feel free to take lots of marauders. If you want to go elite heavy don't. I never use more than one marauder unit (most of the time none actually).

Some people seem to take the "Hordes" word in hordes of chaos way to literally. Besides if I am not mistaken hordes was added to chaos only in the 6th edition army book. Before that chaos was perceived as an elite army. Only in 6th edition the book was named HoC giving people the right to argue that chaos should not be an elite army but a horde like one.

nerull1025
05-12-2007, 00:27
First off I really like the sounds of that aforementioned rule for the troops to be able to use the general's ld anywhere on the board, very fluffy especially like u said for daemon characters (come to think of it for greater daemons its almost ridiculous that anyone on their side should be running while they're still around, not that anyone ever uses them in fantasy with those retarded pts costs).

Characters - lord 200 pts or ld 10, exalted sorcerer massive pts decrease (I'd guestimate, since I never use them cuz of their current points and atrocious selection of lores, at about 200pts, I don't care if they have armour and are half-ass decent fighters, unless you're fighting warhounds or something with them they're still dead and no good general lets their wizards get into combat in the first place so whats the point of overpricing them?)
daemons - woah nelly cut down on those points, I also wouldn't object to them being US 5, but I also wouldn't object to the standard, as someone else did, why would you ever hide them in a unit? They can't join flyers (even tho a prince storming across the field with some furies or screamers would be pretty badass just to picture) so they'd just be foot slogging and therefore useless even if they weren't a huge point sink to begin with.
I really don't see wut all the fuss over marauder characters is, they'd be pretty useless and is it so unfluffy to have a marauder with some actually good armour count as an AC? What other army in their right mind would turn down better armour on characters (certainly not dwarves)?
greater daemons - make them feasable in games under 3000pts and actually worth their points ie I don't care how fat and diseased he is the GUO should not be under M5

warriors- personally I'd drop em 2 pts and give them that free shield, that or keep em the same and give them A2 and the free shield, as right now they're next to uselsess and a huge point sink (if anyone wants to argue I'll be forced to present the case of the HE SM's who the other poster forgot to mention a huge amount of advantages they have over CW's for 1PT LESS ie CW w/halberd)
also change the MoN to something USEFUL, nurgle is my favourite power but his current rules make me feel like vomitting forth a stream of corruption.
nurgle's troops are supposed to be resilient not pointless, unresilient, and point sink squared
I also agree with the poster who was arguing a bunch of changes to Tzeentch's mark ie no automatic sorcerer and such

marauders - I can see why people want marks for them, and toned down ones could be fitting, but overall it doesn't really make sense for them to have that much favour, otherwise they'd warriors without the good armour.
However all those people who want the marauders to be the new focus of the army are seriously on crack, and not the good stuff either, unless gw gives them A LOT more options and better models they are the absolute most boring thing in the chaos arsenal. Nuts to low fantasy.
No downgrades for all the other posters' reasons plus then they'd be worse than empire swordsmen :wtf: (technically they already are since SM get free equipment) either make them cheaper with better equipment/options (they're supposed to be the horde in HoC after all) or upgrade them somehow for the same pts (not a big fan of the S4 idea, thats what gw's are for, but it would help justify their unneccessary base size which is retarded considering they the same profile as swordsmen.)
Personally I think it would make tonnes more sense to just upgrade both marauder and warrior movement to 5 (are goatmen really that much faster than mortals?) Think about it, that way further improvement to their armour wouldn't be neccessary and its perfectly fluffy, chaos (especially if GW continues to refuse them shooting) is constantly getting shot at; they should have developed some sort of remedy by now AND they're bloodthirsty savages which live for combat (since apparently its the only thing they're capable of) so I imagine they're constantly racing towards the enemy at full tilt, crazed with said bloodlust, plus they've got those toned norsemen legs from wandering the wastes their entire lives.
Knights - I agree that lances don't really fit them so I'd really just make the standard ones a bit cheaper (say 30pts) as like another poster said it's really only the chosen who are actually hard-hitting and perhaps make the chosen a tad cheaper to keep things even (40pts) (I also agree that the command is stupidly overpriced, I only ever take a standard because of this). Also theres no way chosen should be a rare since they're already 0-1 but as a sidenote the 0-1 of each chosen doesn't make sense, 0-2 makes more sense so foot armies could have 2 and vice versa.
Hounds - I'd say I agree that the models demand a much better profile but then what would we heretics use as living shields? I can't see making them fast cav helping much, I'd rather have them a pt cheaper considering what they are: meat shields.
chariots - fine by me, perhaps change the S7 insta death to S8 for super-heavy chariots like the warriors' and the black chariot
Again I really don't see peoples' obsessions with the marauders, their chariot would pretty much be a beast except core for mortals, doesn't add much. I mean it's chaos for dark gods' sake! If we're getting new units it should be something actually creative seeing the infinite options there are, not adding pointless options to the only boring facet there is.

Speaking of options chaos SHOULD get shooting, mostly because no matter what the naysayers think it is illogical for them not to for the reasons others have posted. Not javelins, not short bows, I say recurve bows should be theirs, the rules of which could be debated, but its what tribes like the hungs should be using since they represent the barbarian tribes which mainly used them centuries before the long bow was even invented (and hobgoblins shouldn't have a monopoly on horse archers seeing as how 1/1000 actually play all hobgobbos). Seriously people some of THE most famous barbarian peoples were mainly archers, and amazingly skilled ones at that, even if the Huns aren't a convincing enough argument themseleves I don't think theres a wargamer alive that hasn't heard of a certain someone who rhymes with enghis khan, half his tactics revolved around archery.
Also chaos deserves much better than generic bolt throwers and catapults (which are overprice in the general's compendium btw), 2 words; daemon, engine. And that's the most obvious, there's literally no limit to the war engines that chaos could feasably have and should have considering both they and actual barbarians conducted sieges almost as much as anyone else.

I also like the idea of mutations, but not random or temporary as it just doesn't make any sense for them to be constantly changing each battle unless ur tzeentch.
Daemons - I agree with losing the poof and putting them in line with undead or raising the ld, having command, and giving them an actual save since they don't have armour. I'd make bloodletters T4 and plagubearers T5 but then to be fair they'd have to lose the cloud of flies.
Also that idea of ogre sized daemons is seriously too good to be ignored, even though it prolly will be to make room for the same old calvary and chariots.
Lesser foot daemons was also a real good idea.
Take off the 0-1 on furies and nurglings, even though 1 unit of each is enough in standard-sized games when using daemon+mortal/beast, I just don't see why they're there in the first place.

Finally make the magic items as useful+ fairly priced as other armies, preferably with a side selection of mutations (and no one who can take runes, bloodlines, last names, or spites I believe also are taken in addition as well, can argue).

Beasts I don't have a whole lot wishes for other than their characters and bestigors are too fragile, and theres almost nothing to put marks on.

With all this stuff being said I'd be ecstatic if any sizable portion of my wishes were implemented as GW has a tendency to break two things for every one thing they fix.

Hrogoff the Destructor
05-12-2007, 01:05
also change the MoN to something USEFUL, nurgle is my favourite power but his current rules make me feel like vomitting forth a stream of corruption.
nurgle's troops are supposed to be resilient not pointless, unresilient, and point sink squared

:D


Personally I think it would make tonnes more sense to just upgrade both marauder and warrior movement to 5 (are goatmen really that much faster than mortals?) Think about it, that way further improvement to their armour wouldn't be neccessary and its perfectly fluffy, chaos (especially if GW continues to refuse them shooting) is constantly getting shot at; they should have developed some sort of remedy by now AND they're bloodthirsty savages which live for combat (since apparently its the only thing they're capable of) so I imagine they're constantly racing towards the enemy at full tilt, crazed with said bloodlust, plus they've got those toned norsemen legs from wandering the wastes their entire lives.

I agree. Being so huge you think they would be M5.


Knights - I agree that lances don't really fit them so I'd really just make the standard ones a bit cheaper (say 30pts) as like another poster said it's really only the chosen who are actually hard-hitting and perhaps make the chosen a tad cheaper to keep things even (40pts) (I also agree that the command is stupidly overpriced, I only ever take a standard because of this).

I just don't like how grail knights are better than chosen knights while being quite a bit cheaper. Knights do need to go down in price.


Hounds - I'd say I agree that the models demand a much better profile but then what would we heretics use as living shields? I can't see making them fast cav helping much, I'd rather have them a pt cheaper considering what they are: meat shields.

Don't have my book on me, but I hope they make it so hounds don't cause panic to anyone should something happen to them (assuming they don't already).


Speaking of options chaos SHOULD get shooting, mostly because no matter what the naysayers think it is illogical for them not to for the reasons others have posted. Not javelins, not short bows, I say recurve bows should be theirs, the rules of which could be debated, but its what tribes like the hungs should be using since they represent the barbarian tribes which mainly used them centuries before the long bow was even invented (and hobgoblins shouldn't have a monopoly on horse archers seeing as how 1/1000 actually play all hobgobbos). Seriously people some of THE most famous barbarian peoples were mainly archers, and amazingly skilled ones at that, even if the Huns aren't a convincing enough argument themseleves I don't think theres a wargamer alive that hasn't heard of a certain someone who rhymes with enghis khan, half his tactics revolved around archery.

If don't want Chaos to have fast cavalry archers, they would be flat out annoying to face if someone took a straight army of them. I personally think Chaos should keep shooting to a minimum apart from throwing axes and javelins. Would it make sense they have archers? Well, yeah. I just don't like the idea.


Also chaos deserves much better than generic bolt throwers and catapults (which are overprice in the general's compendium btw), 2 words; daemon, engine. And that's the most obvious, there's literally no limit to the war engines that chaos could feasably have and should have considering both they and actual barbarians conducted sieges almost as much as anyone else.


I love the idea, but I can't imagine them giving Chaos getting a whole lot more than the hellcannon.

soots
05-12-2007, 01:29
I dont mind the idea of Chaos warriors with 3 attacks. I remember the 24pt chaos warriors that could have upto 5 attacks. Boy did they cause a lot of fear on the board. And i was extremely disappointed when the new swordsmasters were far superior to the current chaos warriors. It was unheard of in 4th-5th edition!

Bring back the biff.

Make chaos warriors the best troopers once again.

BenK
05-12-2007, 03:28
I like swordmasters having a higher WS and ASF over Chaos Chosen, where chosen have S, T, and A over swordmasters. Should be a close battle, but I'd like to see swordmasters juuuuuust have the edge.

Sir Charles
05-12-2007, 03:54
You know Marauder fast calvary with javlins calls to mind a rather cool image. I just see them running at the enemy and at the last moment before impact throwing the javlin into the enemy before veering off to reveal the rider behind them who does the same,etc, etc.

Havock
05-12-2007, 11:01
I like swordmasters having a higher WS and ASF over Chaos Chosen, where chosen have S, T, and A over swordmasters. Should be a close battle, but I'd like to see swordmasters juuuuuust have the edge.

Chosen are also a lot more expensive.

Axis
05-12-2007, 13:02
Good post nerull1025... wish you used more spaces though. My eyes are about to explode. Still content was good!

The only thing i disagree with is the lore choice for sorcerers. I think that fire, death and shadow fit chaos well and they are all good lores (these are among the best lores of the non-race-specific ones) . On the lores though the casting cost needs to be decreased for some of them. Nurgle (which i use) has a ridiculous amount of difficulty to cast the spells. If i remember correctly the lowest in nurgle lore is 6..

I don't really think chaos infantry should move at 5 though.

The one thing i don't want to see when the books are redone is losing the ability to take beasts, mortals and daemons in one army. My army is built (or being built, which seems more accurate at the moment) on a mix and to me it just seems this is part of the essence of chaos...

mistformsquirrel
05-12-2007, 13:43
I've never seen it demonstrated, so I'll defer to you on this one - my impression was that you use a naginata from horseback more like a spear than an axe.

Well you're actually correct - what I was mostly referring to was how it would work if you tried to do similar with a Halberd.

See - with the naginata (and its going to sound strange if you haven't seen it), the way I saw it done was the rider pushed himself up and over a bit, made a stab, but then made several slashes off to his right with both hands. This would be after the horse has stopped mind - not so much an "as you're charging in" - then its pretty much acting as a spear. But once you actually get 'stuck in' as it were.

Obviously it differs if you try using a European halberd, but I think you could get away with something similar. Or in the case of a Chaos character being so huge <,< I'm sure they could figure out a way to swing it one handed as they ride by <'x'>; (I mean S5 is an awful lot...)

mistformsquirrel
05-12-2007, 13:48
What could be a better rule is that per X amount of pts, you must have a unit of marauders.

<-.-> What is with people trying to cram Marauders down my throat?

I can't be the ONLY one who doesn't like them at all and would rather just field almost exclusively Chaos Warriors can I?

luck*is*my*friend
05-12-2007, 14:10
i would like to see some cheap skirmish unit, somone to use as a shield ageinst. somone to die for the Chaos gods.. ^^

L192837465
05-12-2007, 15:40
<-.-> What is with people trying to cram Marauders down my throat?

I can't be the ONLY one who doesn't like them at all and would rather just field almost exclusively Chaos Warriors can I?

agree!

what i'm most looking forward to is people complaining about x unit when the new book is released! go team!



On topic now, m5 is excessive, as its reserved for the fast armies. When was the last time you saw a linebacker in 60 pounds of armour run as fast as an unarmored half goat man?

...


But really, m4 is fine, as it makes you NEED support. I dislike marauders as I hate the fact that they die if you blow on them too hard. Ws4 is nice, but it doesn't make up for the need for a slight amount of killing power. The need for a character for killing power should not be necessary.

Warriors should get a point stat increase in:
nothing.

They are amazing troops if used right and can hold out against pretty much anything in a drawn out combat. Give em halberds and they become monsters. ESPECIALLY chosen. A 3+ save to shooting and 2a base at s5 is pretty much the death of anyone.

Knights: yes, a points decrease would be nice. I can see why they wouldn't for their stat line though.

foehammer888
05-12-2007, 16:23
A few ideas

- Strength increase for marauders and warriors. S4 T3 marauders is a fairly unique statline in WHFB, and would represent the fact that they are strong barbarian raiders compared to the weaker civilized humans at S3 T3. Chaos warriors should be S5 to match knights.

- chosen should be something more special than simply warriors/knights with +1A and chaos armor.

- no marks for marauders. I actually marks should be better but only chosen should have them. Isn't that what it means to be "chosen", marked by your god? Marks are supposed to be something special, not something everyone should take. in reality chaos armies have a pecking order

- marauders
- warriors/knights
- chosen
- aspiring champions
- exhaulted champions
- Chaos lords

The availability of these units should reflect that as you go down that list, the units should be rarer.

- knights and warriors need a points/rules adjustment. As others have mentioned, grail knights and the new dragon princes are as good if not better than chaos knights and cheaper

- how about morning stars for chaos knights? its a more barbarian-style weapon (big spiked ball on a chain) and gives them equivilient strength to other knights on the charge (S6), just stronger after (S5). The funny thing about chaos knights is they are more like very fast infantry than cavalry.

Its rumored that there might be a daemonic legion book in the middle of next year. If that's true, and that acts as the "beasts of chaos" book for daemons, the hordes book will need some serious attention, otherwise it will be an army book with only 5 or so units plus characters. (champions, sorcerers, marauders, warriors, horsemen, knights, chariots, dogs, spawn, maybe hellcannon).

theunwantedbeing
05-12-2007, 16:46
The different types of army need to embody different roles.
Eg.
Mortals, cheap foot hoarde and uber elites decked in a foot of armour.
Daemon, never run but killable,not armoured as much as mortals can be but still nasty in combat.
Beasts, Not as good as daemons or mortals but cheaper and quicker

Chucking things from the mortal list as special just stops you combining the lists so well which is one of the good things about the chaos list.
Sure your just using different combinations of combat troops but thats the point.
If chaos warriors are a special slot in a mortal army why would they be just as numerous in a beasts army? or a daemon army?
They wouldnt.....but if they were a special slot they would be which is daft.

Chaos warriors need to be the uber elites.
They dont need ASF the high elves can keep that but otherwise they need to be the best of the best, thats why people go to chaos, to become really powerful.
2 attacks ws6 in 5 seems fair right? ld8 or 9.
Daemons could easily have a low leadership but remove the "poof" roll to allow them to crumble, daemon character's get good leaderships obviously as then they are centrepoints to the field.
Beasts just stay as they are, possibly a bit of a points drop to make them seem viable.

Allowing marauders to gain access to throwing axes or javelins would be good, at a fair upgrade cost of course to deter them from being a must have.
eg. +4pts on a 5pt warrior...you arent going to take units of 30 of those as that'll become pretty expensive, but little units would work fine.
Similarly allowing slightly heavier marauder horsemen and marauders on foot(but they wont have any access to ranged attacks and will be more costly than normal marauders).

That gives greater diversity within the list but allows for everything to stay as core.
Knights dont "need" to get 2 attacks at all just because warriors have them.
Allow chosen knights to get 2 attacks though, and chosen warriors just get chaos armour.
Chariots are still very expensive anyway, pehaps up the cost of the mark of tzeentch for units to 30points.
If you made it a bound spell as well as a magic dice it would easily get to 40points (low level 24" range st3 D3 hits magic missle at power level 2 for example). That cuts back on 20 powerdice tzeentch armies of minimal sized units.

There are other ways to stop people taking lots of min sized units to abuse an ability or mark or whatever than simply saying "make them special" as that completely scuppers them as well as messing up the whole way of creating your army.

foehammer888
05-12-2007, 17:35
The "sharing" could take a new form in newer chaos books
- the Mortal, Beasts, and Daemon books each have their own core's, specials, and rares
- if your general is a mortal, beast and daemon units count as 1 level rarer than normal. Thus core beast units become special, special beast units become rare. Maybe rare beast/daemon units may be taken but take up 2 rare slots instead of 1.

1) mortals should be a strong close combat army
2) beasts are a cheaper, horde style, but more mobile/flexible close combat army
3) daemons should be a psychology army, pure and simple, much like undead, but better in combat. With the exception of khorne daemons, daemons shouldn't be awesome in close combat. Their power lies in the fact that they seduce/terrify/confuse/disgust/tear at the santiy of any mortal they come across.

W0lf
05-12-2007, 17:58
I like swordmasters having a higher WS and ASF over Chaos Chosen, where chosen have S, T, and A over swordmasters. Should be a close battle, but I'd like to see swordmasters juuuuuust have the edge.

Sword masters have s5, chosen s4.
Sword masters have the same attacks.
Sword masters cost like 3/4 of the price.

anyway dont get me started...



Oh and for the 'i want a whole army of chaos warriors' or 'i dont like marauders' crowd the thing is atm a horde of warriors isnt doable (as a playable list) and tbh is so very unfluffy that it has the same arguement as 'make great cannons core or make hammerers core!'

oh and you dont want marauders why?

Becoz the rules and models suck immensly.

Make them nice models, decent rules (im more for hard marauders then hordes of crap marauders) then say you hate them.

In the previous army book marauders were pretty much chaos warriors we know now whilst chaos warriors were something closer to what they should be.

Chaos warriors that are made cheaper is never going to work, as they cant be under 15 pts and anywhere near as good as they should be. I say make them insanely powerful and expensive.

just my view thou.

mistformsquirrel
05-12-2007, 19:02
Way to make assumptions there...

Who said ANYTHING about the Marauder's rules? Frankly their rules are in large part better than the Warriors for the same points. If I were going purely on rules I'd rather have 2 Marauders with Shields and Light Armor over a single Chaos Warrior.

But I don't care about that - I just like the way warriors look, and the feel of having a big heavy killy army. The "Space Marines" of Fantasy, essentially. There has to be a counterpoint to "elite and fragile" (elves); so why not Chaos? Elite and tough.

Ogres don't count for that I'll add - they're tough and BIG, but I wouldn't call them "elite" (few does not elite make).

Also - how is it "Unfluffy" at all? A Chaos Raid can come in many many forms; and not all Chaos Lords still have any contact with their Tribes at all.

Heck - Look at Archaon. His personal Warband, by the time of the Storm of Chaos, was down to nothing but Knights!

Finally - can we PLEASE stop using the name of the book as an excuse to try forcing a playstyle on people?

"Hordes of Chaos" was picked almost certainly because it SOUNDED cool; like anything else GW does.

Havock
05-12-2007, 19:27
<-.-> What is with people trying to cram Marauders down my throat?

I can't be the ONLY one who doesn't like them at all and would rather just field almost exclusively Chaos Warriors can I?

Notice could, I am just tossing in ideas, I share your sentiment though, I'd rather still have the option to field an elite, tough and killy army opposed to having a bunch of marauders with armoured dues and daemons as "elite parts" of the army.

Gazak Blacktoof
05-12-2007, 19:35
Chariots are still very expensive anyway, pehaps up the cost of the mark of tzeentch for units to 30points.
If you made it a bound spell as well as a magic dice it would easily get to 40points (low level 24" range st3 D3 hits magic missle at power level 2 for example). That cuts back on 20 powerdice tzeentch armies of minimal sized units.


I'd rather have spells for tzeentch units or another effect altogether- perhaps unrelated to magic.

+1 PD and loss of the undivided mark isn't worth the points even now unless you go for the ridiculous MSU marks out the wazzoo army type.

As it stands I'd rather have 8 levels of tzeentch magic + the staff and chuck my characters in undivided units (if that were allowed).

mav1971
05-12-2007, 19:52
I liked it better when tzeentch had a natural dispel and slaanesh was unbreakable.

foehammer888
05-12-2007, 19:53
Heck - Look at Archaon. His personal Warband, by the time of the Storm of Chaos, was down to nothing but Knights! Yes, but in warhammer fantasy battles, you can't field archaon and his swords as an entire army.


Finally - can we PLEASE stop using the name of the book as an excuse to try forcing a playstyle on people?

"Hordes of Chaos" was picked almost certainly because it SOUNDED cool; like anything else GW does. It doesn't have to be a horde army, but its how the background says the armies are organized. The majority of the armies are the basic barbarian marauders. The most elite of those barbarians gather together to wanders the chaos wastes and become chaos warriors or knights. Those most favored by their god become chosen.

Give maruaders S4 for +1 point and they really aren't any more of a horde army than dwarves. Sure you'd love to play an army of only knights and warriors. I'm sure some HE players would love to play armies of only dragon princes and swordmasters, but that doesn't mean the army list should let you do it. The majority of HE warriors are the citizen soldiers, the spearmen and archers, thus they are core. If the majority of northmen are marauders, they should be the core units.


Sword masters have s5, chosen s4.
Sword masters have the same attacks.
Sword masters cost like 3/4 of the price.

anyway dont get me started... No one argues that warriors aren't overpriced, but you are overlooking the fairly significant advantage of 1) being able to take several weapon options including great weapons for S6 or halberds for the same S5 and 2) the defensive advantage of having T4 instead of 3 and a minimum of a 4+ armor save, which becomes 3+ with a shield and 2+ with a shield in close combat. The biggest disadvantage of swordmasters is T3 with a 5+ save is miserable when faced with missile fire. The Chaos chosen with shields have a higher toughness and twice the armor save. Probably not worth the additional price they pay, but it is worth something that a chaos chosen can actually take a hit and not crumble like a deck of cards.

Omegakai
05-12-2007, 20:09
\warriors left as they are, but dropped 2-4 points in cost.
marked units in an undivided army becoming special, Chosen special, chariots special
better, and more demonic unit choices and options, Special upgrade (marks) for demonic units lead by greater demons. (Ie like chosen but for daemons)
Special rules for marauder charter armies, or banners that effect only marauders, making them a more viable core choice.

The inclusion of chaos dwarfs

W0lf
05-12-2007, 20:11
Who said ANYTHING about the Marauder's rules? Frankly their rules are in large part better than the Warriors for the same points. If I were going purely on rules I'd rather have 2 Marauders with Shields and Light Armor over a single Chaos Warrior.

Marauders are absolutly worthless in their current form. Why anyone would field them is beyond me.


But I don't care about that - I just like the way warriors look, and the feel of having a big heavy killy army. The "Space Marines" of Fantasy, essentially. There has to be a counterpoint to "elite and fragile" (elves); so why not Chaos? Elite and tough.

S4 T4 marauders in heavy armour seems fairly tough and elite.. and where did i mention removing chaos warriors? i seem to recall me saying they sould be tougher and more elite.


Also - how is it "Unfluffy" at all? A Chaos Raid can come in many many forms; and not all Chaos Lords still have any contact with their Tribes at all.

chaos warriors are very very rare. The only time they would congrigate is in a force of immense size. Fluff to game terms that means you'd expect about 30 warriors at 8k. Not wanting to go that far but thats why a army of chaos warriors is plain silly.


Heck - Look at Archaon. His personal Warband, by the time of the Storm of Chaos, was down to nothing but Knights!

Oh yes because the army to conquer the world summouned by the lord of the end times is in any way comparable to a 2k list which is essentially a skirmish in current form with the hordes book.


Finally - can we PLEASE stop using the name of the book as an excuse to try forcing a playstyle on people?

"Hordes of Chaos" was picked almost certainly because it SOUNDED cool; like anything else GW does.

wait so more elite and harder marauders. more expensive chaos warriors...

oh yeah i see about me making them more horde style (wtf)

BenK
05-12-2007, 20:49
Wow! Not just worthless... Absolutely worthless. That's almost epic.

Dominatrix
05-12-2007, 20:51
Yes, but in warhammer fantasy battles, you can't field archaon and his swords as an entire army.

Not really but in a 2k game fielding archaon and a sizable unit of his drinking buddies eats up enough points to essentially be an entire army! :D

On a serious note though I think we should refrain from making any further suggestions because we don't know GW "master plan" about how the different elements that make up chaos armies will interact in 7th edition (mortals, beasts, daemons).

Personally I love the current sharing system. Simple, effective and allows an endless amount of combinations. I have been playing chaos since 1999 and I still come up with army lists that I have never tried before. For me this is what chaos deserves to be. Not to mention the fact that is is the main reason I was drawn to this army.

However I am concerned about something. When it was first announced that a daemon army book is coming out, it was suggested by some people that chaos armies might not be allowed anymore to combine stuff from their seperate elements. There was even some talk that Jervis "the big cheese" Johnson was going to explain in a standard bearer article how sharing was going to be handled from that point on.

Personally although I dread such a moment may come (and will be pissed beyond measure if it actually does), it is quite possible that unit sharing in the wonderful "let's keep everything streamlined and simple" new world of GW may be heavily restricted or forbidden altogether.

If that is the case the mortals list will require radical changes beyond changing stats for marauders or adjusting chaos warriors prices. Because with beasts and daemons removed what you are left is basically an army of marauders, chaos warriors, chariots, chaos knights, hounds and spawn (:wtf:). Oh and the hellcannon :rolleyes:. The most varied army out there reduced to a handful of units. Not to mention the fact that the army is designed with sharing units in mind to overcome tactical challenges.

Anyway the fact remains that until the sharing issue is made clear I see little reason to suggest changes to units and rules, quite simply because depending on what happens with the unit sharing thing said unit and rule changes may be too much or inadequate.

foehammer888
05-12-2007, 21:55
However I am concerned about something. When it was first announced that a daemon army book is coming out, it was suggested by some people that chaos armies might not be allowed anymore to combine stuff from their seperate elements. There was even some talk that Jervis "the big cheese" Johnson was going to explain in a standard bearer article how sharing was going to be handled from that point on. While I have no inside knowledge, I believe you are reading too much into that statement.

If a daemon book is being released, with its own core/special/rare units, it will likely require some "adjustment" to how it will interact with the other chaos army books. Perhaps only the core units can be shared? Perhaps units increase in rarity if they are shared (core->special, special->rare). Regardless, if the army books can can share units, and the Daemon army book deviates at all from the current hordes/beast layout, some explanation will be needed.

Hell, some explanation will be needed, simply because the release of a daemon codex will mean that there are effectively 2 sets of rules for all the daemons. People will need to know which to use an when!

With all the flouting of sharing units across armies which has been pushed on chaos for the past several years, I don't think they'll completely remove the option. They might restrict it somewhat, and they might make the rules for the armies such that its advantageous to field a non-shared army, but I don't think it will be gone entirely.

Some will point to evidence within the new Chaos Marine Codex that GW is "streamlining" chaos, but I would put forward that, unlike the current hordes book, the chaos marine codex had more than enough "mortal/marine" units without an entire array of daemons. In comparison, the mortals, as many have stated, have only a few units if sharing is not allowed.

In my opinion, the reason we are seeing a daemon codex is mostly because, while we often see beast armies, and often see mortal armies, before the Storm of Chaos list, I almost never saw a daemon-centered army. The daemon units were simply too fragile and 1-dimensional to act as a solid army on their own.

Dominatrix
05-12-2007, 22:31
@ Foehammer 888:

You bring up some very fair points so no reason to argue on anything you said. Although if it were up to me (and I certainly hope this is the case) the daemon army book will be like the BoC one. Meaning full sharing of units and a simple statement at the beginning of the book:

"The rules presented here override the rules about daemons written in the 6th edition Hordes of Chaos book".

foehammer888
06-12-2007, 13:11
"The rules presented here override the rules about daemons written in the 6th edition Hordes of Chaos book" Yes, but then what happens when they reprint the hordes of chaos book? Does the daemon codex still override it? (its printed in black and white in the daemon army book saying it does).

Its bad form to use one army book to clarrify rules from another. It creates issues with various army books being revised after others. Release the daemon book, and make a pdf FAQ available on how it interacts with the other chaos books. When the new hordes/beasts books are released and its no longer an issue, simply remove the FAQ.

I have a feeling around the release of the daemon book we will hear alot more about GW's vision for the future of our chaos armies.

Gazak Blacktoof
06-12-2007, 15:01
Yes, but then what happens when they reprint the hordes of chaos book? Does the daemon codex still override it? (its printed in black and white in the daemon army book saying it does).


Well provided there are no daemons in the new mortal book it will just be an irrelevant statement. Up to the point a new mortals book is released it will make perfect sense.

theunwantedbeing
06-12-2007, 15:18
It's going to be rediclously easy to simply include a mainstay rule for daemons like in the storm of chaos list.
eg. you need a "true core" unit to take one of the other slots.
All slots count as "daemonic".

Stops all daemonic cavalry armies, or all daemonic chariot armies of daemons.
But still keeps the current interchangability of the 2 chaos books we currently have.

The only downside is with all the current streamlining GW is doing that could be classed as "too complicated" and dropped for having a non-interchangable list with core,specail and rare like everyone else.
Which is not chaotic in the slightest.

Dominatrix
06-12-2007, 16:03
Well provided there are no daemons in the new mortal book it will just be an irrelevant statement. Up to the point a new mortals book is released it will make perfect sense.

Without daemons a great portion of the units that make up the mortal army simply ceases to exist. If no daemons appear in the mortal book we might as well say that mortals are being rebuilt from the ground up as I highly doubt that GW will release an army book with a handful of units in it.

Sadly I can't imagine how this is going to play out but I think that this summarizes it fairly:


I have a feeling around the release of the daemon book we will hear alot more about GW's vision for the future of our chaos armies.

Maybe it is the cynic in me but I fear the worst for the future of our chaos armies. Let's just hope GW proves me wrong if only this once. :rolleyes:

Khorghan
07-12-2007, 00:57
yeah, its gunna be interesting seeing what gw will do to the book without daemons. maybe some system with just lesser deamons and greater-like with codex: CSM

Salyx
07-12-2007, 03:03
Well let's see what does not seem to be properly balanced in the actual HoC Book.
For example the Marks need to be reworked: Nurgle is much too expensive
and useless for Units, it's ok for Characters but then they can only join Marauders and Warhounds, so this mark needs to be boosted for Units, but how?
Immunity to poison? Not enough.Auto-hits to the enemy when being in CC? Nice idea but won't work if they are just shot. Cloud of Flies? Maybe an option but I think this would be a bit too hard.

Also the Chaos magic lores need to be reworked: Slaanesh is much too powerful, it should have a more limited area of effect (for example 3 Spells not working vs immune to psychology) and should require LOS. Nurgle should have more devastating or more weakening spells. The effects of the Nurgle Spells are not too hard so they need to be boosted a lot-it's an expensive lore.
Tzeentch Magic should be more like the lore of the heavens, more spells that give you rerolls and support troops.

As the marauders are ment to be the Counterpart of the Empire Swordmen they should be equally adjusted. No marks, Stats boosts etc...

The warriors should have shields included and be stubborn, maybe a second attack but that's not necessary... Chosen warriors could be the Chaos Warrior Champions with Hero-like stats and with 2 wounds.Or just upgrade the warriors to chosen like troll slayers to giant slayers.
The Chosen could perhaps have Ld 9 which would make them worth taking and they could get +1 WS +1 Str and +1 A...if they are only champions they could get the Aspiring Champion stats with WS 5. Of course the other Heroes then need to be adjusted.
Also a magic banner which improves movement or charge range or at least protects from shooting would be a great improvement for Chaos Warriors.
I hope GW will do better on Chaos Warriors than on black orcs...

Another idea that should be mentioned here is the idea of mutations. In the last Version of the Army builder, Mutations for Heroes were included as beta rules. They looked quite nice although they also need to be reworked a little because they are too expensive to be fielded when you have to pay them from the magic pool so it would be nice for Heroes to have an extra mutation pool.

And the chaos armory is crap when you look at the weapons. The only good weapons for Chaos Lords are from the BoC Book, (Black Maul, Great Fang, Slaughterer's Blade)so the high point weapons need improvements.

Deamonic Units should get their command back and the Bloodletters need to have T4-look at the models, they look like T5!!
Deamonettes would then be the cheap deamons, maybe at 10 points per Deamonette they would be ok...and they should all have a regular ward save and no more plopping, would be better to just let them scatter like the undead...

Deamonic characters should no more use 2 choices and be a lot more cheap.
150 basic for the exalted and 230 for the prince should be enough. The deamonic gifts need some attention, sucks to always have Blade of Ether, Soul Hounger,Diabolic Splendour....some more possiblities to have a prince that doesn't die in his first CC would be nice...

So...enough from me now...what do you think? ;)

txamil
07-12-2007, 03:59
New minotaurs- plastic. With better heads.

Khorghan
08-12-2007, 06:30
Nurgle is much too expensive
and useless for Units, it's ok for Characters but then they can only join Marauders and Warhounds, so this mark needs to be boosted for Units, but how?

fear on units is useless??? can only join warhounds:confused:



As the marauders are ment to be the Counterpart of the Empire Swordmen they should be equally adjusted.

No, marauders are supposed to be tough barbarians whos lives revolve around fighting-they survive in their culture for being hard and are always fighting. Empire swordsmen are everymans with swords.



Another idea that should be mentioned here is the idea of mutations.
already has been a few times



New minotaurs- plastic. With better heads.

amen

der_lex
08-12-2007, 10:19
As long as they keep the Hellcannon in, I'll be happy. Making Warriors a more viable choice would be nice too. Never had too many problems with the Chaos list otherwise.

foehammer888
09-12-2007, 20:16
If it is true that a pure daemon book is set for release in the spring, I doubt we will see daemons in the new Hordes book. That leaves two options:

1) A highly reworked hordes list (and it needs it)
2) a combined Mortal/beasts book

Various armies have themes. Dwarves are a stubborn, resilient infantry and shooting army. Brettonians are a cavalary army. Chaos has always been a close combat army with lots of unit selections. The current mortals list in particular needs some work.

1) chaos knights should not be the best unit in the army. These are barbarian hordes, not Brettonia, they are not supposed to rely on their cavalry. Rock hard warriors and marauders should be the sticking point of the army. The knights can still be good, but shouldn't be the be-all-end-all of the list as they are now.
2) armory - as others have mentioned, compared to other lists, the chaos list has relatively weak selection. This is mostly because alot of their items are either mark-specific (meaning only 1/4 armies can use them) or are incredibly expensive. it particular the magical armors are found wanting. Most chaos lords I see have just chaos armor and maybe an enchanted shield.

Foehammer

Little Aaad
09-12-2007, 20:48
Changes:

Knights have -1 strength to strength 4 and the option for lances to reappear. If a white lion can have str 6 then so can someone twice as big!
As seen in previous post, NOT SHIELDS INCLUDED!!! I want to make some great weapon warriors without shields. I want my warriors to be golf players, in a sense. Shields loose this idea and should be avoided. It should be an option still
Definatly Warriors to be -1pt/model
Khorne not to have frenzy. Instead they should have 1+ strength. Frenzy is silly. They are bloodthirsty not dumb...
Chosen: Special, As is - not one per army though.
Daemons, Mortal, Beasts - All backwards compatible..
Marauders - As is, downgrade in base size.
Marauder heroes or existing champs need to naked+handwep.
Chosen Chariots. Chosen - special.


There... I said it.

Omegakai
09-12-2007, 21:08
^^^^^^^
YOu make THE MIND BOGGLE
chosen chariots O_0 +1 strength O_0x2
hi, id like my d6 s7 impact hits, with my 2 x 7 attacks from the riders and 2 x s6 attacks from my steads....
That's laughable, and totally imbalanced imo

Havock
09-12-2007, 21:57
1) chaos knights should not be the best unit in the army. These are barbarian hordes, not Brettonia, they are not supposed to rely on their cavalry. Rock hard warriors and marauders should be the sticking point of the army. The knights can still be good, but shouldn't be the be-all-end-all of the list as they are now.
2) armory - as others have mentioned, compared to other lists, the chaos list has relatively weak selection. This is mostly because alot of their items are either mark-specific (meaning only 1/4 armies can use them) or are incredibly expensive. it particular the magical armors are found wanting. Most chaos lords I see have just chaos armor and maybe an enchanted shield.

Foehammer

1- that has more to do with them being the only reliable mortal hard hitters.
Warriors are slow and overpriced. for a bit more the price of one twelve-strong warrior unit with full command, I can get a unit of knights with full command.
Guess what I'd rather have.

2- agreed. Weapons? Berserker sword, great fang and great maul. mark specific weapons not included. See how two of those come from the BoC book?

Armor? Armour of damnation, enchanted shield.

some stuff is horribly overpriced, runesword comes to mind. Other stuff is just useless.

DeathlessDraich
09-12-2007, 21:58
1) Surely an army or kingdom named Chaos would be chaotic to some extent Instead of simply 'the bad guys', I would like to see themes or special rules which are more interesting.

2) Not more of the same please GW - making some units Chosen etc, higher S or T etc etc - al these generate little excitement

Omegakai
09-12-2007, 22:02
Motrals will = more of the same.
daemons will = totally reworked in order to make them *more* viable

Khorghan
10-12-2007, 01:38
Khorne not to have frenzy. Instead they should have 1+ strength. Frenzy is silly. They are bloodthirsty not dumb...

so strong means bloodthirsty?
NO! it means your strong!

frenzy represents being bloodthirsty

Kerill
10-12-2007, 03:59
The problem is that chaos went from the ultimate h-t-h army to the 4th (behind bretonnians, high elves, and arguably wood elves) all of these other armies have excellent access to shooting and/or cheap magic. So either chaos has to reclaim the h-t-h title or get some shooting. Marauders should not IMHO be necessarily part of every army (they should remain core, but saying you have to take them doesn;t fit the warband fluff). Marauders lose to any similar infantry troop (even men at arms with spears) and are stuck on 25mm bases to boot. Norse marauders on the other hand are hard as nails (so chaos chooses the weaker of the northern tribes, hmmm).

Daemonic characters could be fixed by simply giving them equipment options- they go from useless to worthwhile that easily. Just because a champion of chaos becomes raised to a daemon doesnt mean he forgets how to swing his flail. Warriors with free shields and minimum unit size 5 would be cool and marauder champions should be a chaos warrior (fits the fluff and used to be cool this way).

Finally undivided shaman/sorcerers should have access to the dark emissary/belakor lore as well as their current choices.

And the ability to mix the books should always stay with chaos- chaos is after all infinite in its form.

Frostlord
10-12-2007, 19:06
I personally don't care at all for the horde aspect.

I just want mortals to become an elite combat force again, with the toughest warriors of the old world.
As someone pointed out atm too many other armies overshadow chaos in this aspect. Bretonnians do everything chaos does, only better, faster and cheaper.

Characters should stay as though as they are now, but the lord should become cheaper. Atm it's just way to expensive with too little benefit to chose a lord over an exalted champion. Some effective magical weapons would be nice. Talisman section is great, it can stay as it is.

Warriors should be made playable. Just giving them shields and/or ld 9 isn't going to change anything. As long as they are slow, expensive, and still defeated by most cavalry, they won't be played.

CHOOBER SNIPES
10-12-2007, 19:55
how bout for chaos warriors just giv em shields free, LD9 and stubborn in first round. then they could hold a hard charge, and o what they do; fight.

Omegakai
10-12-2007, 20:08
i lol at all the "chaos mortals are unplayable" portion of this tread.
chaos mortals are some of the best troops in the game, thou i will agree the are some what over priced for what they do.
Comparing berts to chaos is a BIG FAIL in my book as brets need tweaking, saying "oh but we should be better then such and such" is retarded. In my eyes, maunders and warriors just need to be cheaper, and chariots knights need to be special, then most of the morals issues are fixed. some playing around with the marks for a differnt flavour would be nice, but as is, isnt game breaking.

Khorghan
10-12-2007, 20:16
I noticed a lot of people have made comments about how the magic items arnt very good or are too expensive, how would you change it?

foehammer888
10-12-2007, 20:25
Stubborn would help, but you couldn't have them be an unrestricted core unit. It wouldn't make sense for chaos to have access to an entirely stubborn core infantry, when not even dwarves, the kings of stubborness and good LD, don't have that.

When it comes down to it, what makes a northern barbarian scarier than a human, elf, or dwarf?

1) are they particularly skilled fighters, justifying higher WS or I than elves? Not really. Being a warrior culture, they should have higher WS than average (as they do now), but not astronomically high.

2) are they particularly disciplined troops, like the resilient, stubborn dwarves? Holding against even the stiffest odds? Not really.

3) are they known for being excellent smiths armed with the best weapons and armor their smiths can provide? Nope.

The thing that makes a barbarian horde scary is one thing, raw Arnold Swarzenagar (sp?) style physical strength. Even when you look at the current models, the marauders have biceps nearly the same diameter of an empire swordsman's waste. They won't be the most skilled warriors, nor the most disciplined, or the best equipped, but if they hit you, you will feel it.

Thanks why I advocated S4 marauders (with T3) and S5 warriors to match the knights. This defines them compared to other armies. While the elites of many armies have S4 over S3 (dwarves, beastmen, white lions for high elves, I believe inner circle knights), the elite warriors of chaos are even stronger than that, Strength 5. This results in numerous impressive things:

1) marauders attacking at s4 with -1 armor save base, but at S6 with flails or great weapons.
2) warriors with S6 with halberds attacking at initiative, or S7 (that's right, enough to crush a chariot) with great weapons.

Also, I think the Hordes list is where the morning star should find its home. Nothing says barbarian warrior/knight like a giant spiked ball on a chain with strength bonus in the first round of combat.

If warriors are WS5, S4, T4, with heavy armor and shield and Leadership 9, they are basically dwarfs with +1 movement. Their is nothing unique about them. With increased strength, they become oneof the only warhammer units with a chance at kicking a monster's teeth in using nothing more than a huge axe.

Foehammer

Omegakai
10-12-2007, 20:39
Foehammer while i agree with most of what you said. i strongly believe that s6 for a infantry based model should be the cap. if we were going to play with base stats like you have suggested, id have chosen with extra attacks, extra Ws, and a generic ward. rather then extra strength. but then having higher strength is going to INCREASE the base model points buy at least 3 points. do people really want more expensive warriors?

Petey
10-12-2007, 22:04
I think all the chaos items and gifts in the new book should be high power/high risk. Kind of like the item that gives you a ward save but if you flee turn into a spawn.
I don't think chaos should get much of anything defensively, but they sure should get killy gear. Maybe a sword of +d6 attacks, on a one you hit yourself and may not attack this turn (for like 25pts).
The chaos gods are cruel, if albeit comically inspired, deities. They want entertainment, and as a champion you should be forced to either create that entertainment... or BE it.

And i don't think chaos should get any leadership increases. Theyre about personal glory, that would make them undisciplined if nothing else.

Havock
10-12-2007, 22:48
I think all the chaos items and gifts in the new book should be high power/high risk. Kind of like the item that gives you a ward save but if you flee turn into a spawn.
I don't think chaos should get much of anything defensively, but they sure should get killy gear. Maybe a sword of +d6 attacks, on a one you hit yourself and may not attack this turn (for like 25pts).

Let's not copy idiotic items from 40k into the realm of fantasy, okay? :p

there is not a lot wrong with the current items, it's just that they need to realign the price.

Chaos Runesword? Nice, but overpriced.
Hellfire Sword? Idem, but overpriced.

Compare most stuff to this:
Axe of Khorne, Berserker Sword, great fang and black maul. Commons not included. All useful items that are, surprise surprise, decently priced: you cán get a ward save with those, which is what killy characters are all about. I'd love to use a Hellfire sword, but it prohibits me from using the GoT, which sucks. The Great fang however, allows for GoT and enchanted shield. or Gaze if I am putting my lord on a steed.

Omegakai
10-12-2007, 22:49
sounds like everyone wants them to be orcs and goblins :D

Havock
10-12-2007, 22:55
Nah, I like my low modelcount, hitty army of magic doom, thank you very much :)

foehammer888
10-12-2007, 23:57
but then having higher strength is going to INCREASE the base model points buy at least 3 points. do people really want more expensive warriors? Well, as the current warriors are about 2 points overcosted, that would mean a S5 warrior for 15 points. I'd be fine with that. It would likely be only a 1-2 point increase to bring marauders to S4, as they are not overly powerful overall.


there is not a lot wrong with the current items, it's just that they need to realign the price.

Chaos Runesword? Nice, but overpriced.
Hellfire Sword? Idem, but overpriced. Sword of change, cool idea for an item, but extremely expensive unless you plan on buying your lord a dragon and hunting characters all game.

Its something GW hasn't quite understood yet with many armies. Most players would usually prefer to take a low-medium power weapon, armor, and talisman than take one extremely expensive weapon, armor, OR talisman. A hellfire sword may be worth its cost to get D6 wounds per attack, but is only useful in really rare situations. The rending sword gives similar functionality, but at half the power and half the cost, and is a much more commonly seen item. Similarly, no dwarf player spends all his runic allocation on a super-powerful magic item, as its too risky that he may die before using it.

In my opinion, 95% of magic items should be between 20-50 points. Really expensive and powerful items should be delegated to special characters.

Foehammer

Freak Ona Leash
10-12-2007, 23:58
I vote for keeping Marauders as they are, but giving them +1 strength. Maybe put them up in cost by 1 point or so. Warriors...now Warriors need some tweaking.

I vote give them S5, stubborn and Chaos Armour base. For the same cost they are now. Chosen get +1 LD and +1 attack for 4 points. Chaos Warriors can get shields for +1 point, halberds for +1 point, great weapon for +2 or extra hand weapon for +2. There you go, an elite unit that can hit hard and take shots back in close combat, or be killy elite infantry of utter-doomness.

Knights stay the same, maybe a decrease in points, because they aren't THAT good. Chosen upgrade is the same. Knights or Warriors that are upgraded to Chosen are Special choices.

Maybe add a new unit or two. Berserkers as a unbreakable, frenzied skirmishing unit...ok, maybe not unbreakable. But really, really hard. Like, 2 attacks base, equipped with 2 hand weapons, gain +1 strength in the first round of combat to represent their berserk fury and have Frenzy and a 5+ ward save to reprsent their unnatural toughness. Of course, they would be high in points cost, with a stat line the same as Marauders, but with T4 as well. But come on, 4 attacks base, S5 in the first round of combat and a 5+ ward. And they skirmish. And are frenzied.

Come on, Chaos needs something new. It's either Warriors, Warriors with Horses, giant blond guys in bondage leather and giant blond guys with bondage leather on ponies.

Ooooh, and mutations. Mutations serve as unit upgrades that are applied like Marks, but can applied to all units, not just Marked units. Perhaps give each God its own seperate mutation table.

So you can field your Horde of Chaos, masses of Marauders, with a few mutations here and there, backed up by powerful Lords and Heroes, a unit or two of Berserkers and some Warriors and Knights. Or you can have the elite servants of Chaos, replete with Warriors and Knights bedecked out in Marks and Mutations. Tzeentch mutations that grant ranged attacks, access to a spell of the Tzeentchian Lore or something. Slaanesh mutations that cause the enemy to strike last (take THAT, ya High Elf pansies!), grant you 1 extra movement and intiative or gives your warriors a +1 to hit (the enemy just can't wait to let these beautiful maidens caress them-OMG, THATS NOT A BEAUTIFUL MAIDEN THAT HAPPENED TO BE BOTH SCANTILY-CLAD, HORNY AND ON THE BATTLEFIELD! THAT'S A PROSTITUTE-WARRIOR OF THE PLEASURE GOD OF CHAOS WITH A GIANT PHALLUS-SHAPED SWORD! *splat*). Nurgle mutations that grant +1 toughness, -1 for the enemy to hit them (due to the stench you see) or make their attacks posioned. Khorne Mutations that grant +1 Strength, Hatred or a "Feel No Pain!" ward save of 4+ or so that is negated by magic weapons or attacks that don't grant an armor save, such as cannons or stone throwers or other such things that if they hit you, you kinda can't get back up.

Dominatrix
11-12-2007, 00:24
I would also like to see stubborn on chaos warriors. But as Foehammer said having a stubborn is a little strange to say the least. So maybe if they restricted it only to chosen warriors?

To be honest I really don't like infantry in chaos armies (I only use marauders and beast herds if ever). Infantry units are slow and in the case of chaos warriors also seriously overpriced. If you consider the fact that most enemies you will face are either:

a) heavy on shooting, so your M4 infantry will be blown to bits until it reaches close combat.
b) very mobile, so your M4 infantry will either struggle to reach something to attack or find itself in unfavourable match ups.

In my experience infantry units work best when you have a means of making the enemy come to you, since this way their main disadvantage doesn't come into play. But this only happens if you also have sufficient shooting to force him to engage in close combat. But since chaos has no shooting worth mentioning and magic is way to unreliable to be used like shooting, the main problem of infantry can not be addressed.

Anyway judging by the latest trend in army books to make every army more powerful I have high hopes for the new chaos.

TheLionReturns
11-12-2007, 00:38
OK firstly my classifications.

Core

Marauders
Marauder horsemen
Chaos Warriors
Warhounds
BeastherdsSpecial

Chariots
Knights
Chosen Warriors (0-1)
Daemons
Spawn
MinotaursRare

Chosen Knights (0-1)
Greater Daemons
Dragon OgresNow a few ideas

Give Chaos Warriors +1 attack
Give characters the options of mutations, both general and god specific.
Unmounted Daemons become skirmishers, and harder to kill. The idea of daemons in organised ranks just seems out of character to me.
Some form of animosity system for troops marked to rival gods.
Higher leadership for the elites. Chaos are fanatical servants of their gods exposed to all kinds of horrors, they should be more likely to stand their ground.
Change Mark of Tzeentch. Too much focus on magic ignoring the other characteristics of Tzeentch. I like the idea of granting re-rolls.
Tzeentch Lords/heroes don't have to be spell casters.
Change Khorne to reflect the dedicated perfectionist warrior aspect rather than the foaming at the mouth psycho aspect. Be nice if Khorne players could control their armies.
Plastic Marauder horsemen.
I think some kind of movable alter would be good pushed by marauders, similar to the Skaven Screaming Bell.
Marauders can take marks, probably with weaker effects than other troops.
Perhaps a variety of God specific options for units, like blessings. Only for Chaos Warriors and Knights. Others are too low on the Chaos ladder.
Need to work in the fickle nature of the Chaos Gods, perhaps lose benefits of marks if defeated in combat. Perhaps characters turn to spawn if broken in combat.

Omegakai
11-12-2007, 01:32
LOL some of these replies make me laugh. Warriors need major tweaking ? lol
they are only slightly over costed atm.
giving them +1 s for 1 point is going to make them drastically over powered.
making them stubborn, for no points increase will make them drastically over powered.


now making 1 unit per army stubborn, at some sort of cost, feasible , some what balanced. and not game breaking... all these talk of "broken mortals" gets me rilled up, becasue mortals for the most part are fine, its the daemons that really need the work.

theunwantedbeing
11-12-2007, 01:53
Mortals:
Chaos warriors (ws6 ld9) 13pts each
Knights (ws6 ld9) 34pts each
Marauders 5pts each, option for throwing axes/javelins at +4pts each.
Marauder horsemen same as is
Chariot (ws6 crew with 2 attacks each as only the best warriors ride chariots, halberds) same cost though

Allow mortal chariots to be pulled by daemonic beasts(at +25pts per beast(upto 2 beasts)) gains the daemonic ward save and fear, plus the movement and attacks of the daemon as well as an increased unit strength.
Marked chariots only allowed daemonic beasts of their particular god.

Mutations available to warriors, chariots and knights.
Mutations vary from stubborn, to +1 strength, armour piercing,extra initiutive, etc etc
Godly mutations
Khorne
+1 attack on the first charge(riders only)
hatred of the enemy
+1 weaponskill
Nurgle
+1 toughness for D3 turns
Regenerate on a 6+
Tzeentch
D6 re-rolls per game
May modify D3 dice by 1
May modify 1 dice per turn by +/- 1
Slaneesh
Unbreakable
+1 movement

Stuff like that (BUT NOT EXACTLY THAT, I MADE THEM UP ON THE SPOT AS I WROTE IT!)

I dont expect the format of the chaos army to change to being the same as everything else is as that'll ruin what chaos is. And removes the point of getting people to buy 3 seperate books and 3 armies when they start "chaos" in whatever original type.

der_lex
11-12-2007, 02:17
I'll be annoyed if Tzeentch is changed too much. I enjoy the 'magic barrage' playing style, it allows for a different way of playing Chaos than the usual 'run at the enemy and hit them as hard as you can' approach. Re-rolls are fine, but I think Magic should remain the focus of Tzeentch.

I would disagree on Chaos Warriors not needing some sort of upgrade. At the moment, Marauders are a better anvil unit (cheaper, so easier to field a large block, and the hw/shield+ light armour combination keeps them alive long enough to driver a hammer unit into the opponent's flank), and Chaos Knights are a faster, more powerful hammer unit. They need to find their own niche in the game, and simply making them cheaper won't achieve that. Besides, after seeing the new Swordmasters, I think a 'ridiculous' boost might be warranted to achieve that effect. Although they can be useful (I always field at least one unit myself), they're mostly the Chaos equivalent of Empire Halberdiers at the moment...you take them because it's the 'fluffy' choice, not because they're the best choice, and that's simply a shame.

As for daemons... I tend to play nearly all-mortal Tzeentch, with only a unit of Screamers and/or a unit of Furies thrown in, or nearly all-mortal Slaanesh, with a unit of Mounted Daemonettes and/or Furies, and I don't find anything to be wrong with any of those units. Horrors actually being worth their enormous point cost would be nice, though. We'll just have to see how the Daemon army book turns out.

foehammer888
11-12-2007, 03:33
I would disagree on Chaos Warriors not needing some sort of upgrade. At the moment, Marauders are a better anvil unit (cheaper, so easier to field a large block, and the hw/shield+ light armour combination keeps them alive long enough to driver a hammer unit into the opponent's flank), and Chaos Knights are a faster, more powerful hammer unit. They need to find their own niche in the game, and simply making them cheaper won't achieve that. Besides, after seeing the new Swordmasters, I think a 'ridiculous' boost might be warranted to achieve that effect. Exactly. A role that elite infantry can achieve is what I like to call "outlasters". Basically, they are resilient enough to survive well, will survive losing a round of combat or so, and have enough killing power to eventually win combat against almost any single opponent. These are the tough units which your opponent KNOWS he cannot break with only a cavalry charge. That is the role of chaos warriors. The problem is that in order for them to be sufficiently killy, they need to sacrifice most of their protection (no shield). With medium-level chaos leadership, a few casualties results in a lost combat.


Although they can be useful (I always field at least one unit myself), they're mostly the Chaos equivalent of Empire Halberdiers at the moment...you take them because it's the 'fluffy' choice, not because they're the best choice, and that's simply a shame. Or because they're great models, you want an army of very few models, or think they look fantastic on paper.


As for daemons... I tend to play nearly all-mortal Tzeentch, with only a unit of Screamers and/or a unit of Furies thrown in, or nearly all-mortal Slaanesh, with a unit of Mounted Daemonettes and/or Furies, and I don't find anything to be wrong with any of those units. This is what almost everyone uses daemons for. Fast, fear-causing, relatively hard hitting units for flanking, war-engine hunting, mage killing. This is because, much like all normal chaos infantry, the standard infantry daemons aren't worth their points. Too costly and too easy to kill

Foehammer

Dominatrix
11-12-2007, 09:42
@ TheLionReturns:

So you are basically suggesting that mortals, beasts and daemons be merged in one list. I would be all for that as a big chaos book filled with everything chaotic would be extremely cool. But this will not happen as daemons at the very least are getting their own book. Plus in your suggestions you have managed to remove from the game almost all beast and daemon units. Even GW isn't stupid enough to make such a move, unless they want an army of chaos players at their doorstep armed with torches and pitchforks.


Or because they're great models, you want an army of very few models, or think they look fantastic on paper.

Sadly this is the mistake that most people who start chaos make. They take chaos warriors for the looks (granted they are awesome models) and after a couple of games they wonder why they suck so hard. Where I live you will never see chaos warriors in a veteran player's army lists. Pretty models may be an incentive to fielding a unit but after realising that all you can do with it is suck with style, the initial warm and fuzzy feeling disappears very fast.


This is because, much like all normal chaos infantry, the standard infantry daemons aren't worth their points. Too costly and too easy to kill.

Actually daemon infantry does not even come close to the uselessness of normal chaos infantry. It is light years ahead worse. What can be more useless than an overpriced, slow unit? A unit even more overpriced who also has the maddening tendency to go "poof" just because it rolled one higher than its leadership value. Unless instability is fixed (and by that I mean removed and replaced with something like crumble, or the same rule as WE forest spirits) the only daemons worth fielding are screamers, furies and mounted daemonettes.

foehammer888
11-12-2007, 13:15
Sadly this is the mistake that most people who start chaos make. They take chaos warriors for the looks (granted they are awesome models) and after a couple of games they wonder why they suck so hard. Where I live you will never see chaos warriors in a veteran player's army lists. Pretty models may be an incentive to fielding a unit but after realising that all you can do with it is suck with style, the initial warm and fuzzy feeling disappears very fast. They have limited uses. I play tzeentch, and run 1-2 smaller (10ish) strong units with great weapons as pseudo-detachments for other units. While some other units might be better at this, the bonus is that they can be marked, providing me extra power dice, and are one of the few mortal units capable of S6 attacks.


Actually daemon infantry does not even come close to the uselessness of normal chaos infantry. It is light years ahead worse. What can be more useless than an overpriced, slow unit? A unit even more overpriced who also has the maddening tendency to go "poof" just because it rolled one higher than its leadership value. Unless instability is fixed (and by that I mean removed and replaced with something like crumble, or the same rule as WE forest spirits) the only daemons worth fielding are screamers, furies and mounted daemonettes The only non-cavalry/flying daemons I've found even close to useful are horrors, for a few reasons.

1) you can create them for free with a spell
2) their best magic ability, the one which causes a S3 hit to every model in a unit within 12in, can be devastating against low toughness armies like elves, goblins, and humans.

When it comes down to it, if you want bloodletters, you might as well buy flesh hounds, as they are almost as good in combat, are faster, and have magic resistance. If you want daemonettes, might as well buy the mounted ones, as they are the same only faster and with the mounts attacks striking first.

Foehammer

Soul of Iron
11-12-2007, 16:03
I'm all for the Horde of Chaos idea but I don't like the idea of militant Orcs.

I think Marauders should remain the same for the most part but allow 2 units access to marked Icons similar to the CSM book. I feel that marauders should receive some boon from their patron god/gods but troops that have been directly blessed like warriors/chosen should recieve greater blessings.

Warriors and Chosen should be dropped in points some. They are mad expensive for what you get. Trim the points off some or fill in the current cost with beefed up stats. +1 A and +1 LD would make them very handy.

Leave Chariots core but limit link them to the amount of warriors/knights fielded. 1 Chariot +1 per unit of knights/warriors purchased. Marauder chariots never sounded right to me.

Chaos knights should never have lances. That's gh3y and I'm glad GW removed them in the last edition. I like the feel of mounted warriors using high ground and the weight of their horses to add power to their attacks. Great weapons are an option but why pay for +1 Str when you loose initiative and armor saves?

Separate the books to Mortal Chaos, Beasts, and Demons. Allow them to mingle like now with alternate troops going up in rarity as suggested (core>special, special>rare). This could make giants non-existent in mortal lists and that makes me sad in the pants but you can't have everything.

And I have 1 more question. Why has GW not made a magical halberd for chaos? "Wait, I can have this magic weapon that grants +1 str and pwns faces without an I penalty? Yes PLEASE!!1!!one"

foehammer888
11-12-2007, 17:12
I think Marauders should remain the same for the most part but allow 2 units access to marked Icons similar to the CSM book. I feel that marauders should receive some boon from their patron god/gods but troops that have been directly blessed like warriors/chosen should recieve greater blessings. I'm against giving marauders marks. Not everyone in a chaos army should be blessed by the chaos gods. Give it to everyone and it stops meaning anything. I agree with the "levels of blessing". Warriors/knights should get minor benefits, with chosen getting the prime benefits. Isn't that what it means to be chosen? To be the favored warriors of your god? Wearing suits of chaos armor which cannot be removed, and oozing with raw chaos power.


Warriors and Chosen should be dropped in points some. They are mad expensive for what you get. Trim the points off some or fill in the current cost with beefed up stats. +1 A and +1 LD would make them very handy. I don't know about leadership, maybe just chosen. They are still barbarian raiders. Ld isn't just being afraid of something, its the units willingness to stand and fight dispite adversity. Dwarves have very high Ld because they will continue to fight on dispite it possibly being a good idea to retreat. Those that do retreat take oaths to seek a glorous death as a slayer. I don't think chaos raiders should be that determined, at least not without a sufficiently inspiring champion leading them.


Leave Chariots core but limit link them to the amount of warriors/knights fielded. 1 Chariot +1 per unit of knights/warriors purchased. Marauder chariots never sounded right to me. Problem is, if Daemons are getting their own book, then Mortals will be on their own. Odds are, if there is an all mortals book, then chariots will probably end up special.


Chaos knights should never have lances. That's gh3y and I'm glad GW removed them in the last edition. I like the feel of mounted warriors using high ground and the weight of their horses to add power to their attacks. Great weapons are an option but why pay for +1 Str when you loose initiative and armor saves? Thus my push for morning stars. +1S for first turn, and you keep initiative and shield. What other army actually makes frequent use of that weapon anyway?


Separate the books to Mortal Chaos, Beasts, and Demons. Allow them to mingle like now with alternate troops going up in rarity as suggested (core>special, special>rare). This could make giants non-existent in mortal lists and that makes me sad in the pants but you can't have everything. Not necessarily. Perhaps giants will be special. Maybe you can include a beasts rare choice in a mortals army, but it takes 2 rare choices instead of 1? There are numerous ways it could work.


And I have 1 more question. Why has GW not made a magical halberd for chaos? "Wait, I can have this magic weapon that grants +1 str and pwns faces without an I penalty? Yes PLEASE!!1!!one" The same reason they haven't made magical halberds for almost any army. Most magic weapons simply count as hand weapons. There are a few exceptions, like a dwarf master rune, a dark elf halberd, and bretonnian lances, which retain their other abilities.

I don't know, I always thought halberds to be too sophisitcated a weapon for the barbarian chaos raiders.


lol some of these replies make me laugh. Warriors need major tweaking ? lol
they are only slightly over costed ATM.
giving them +1 s for 1 point is going to make them drastically over powered.
making them stubborn, for no points increase will make them drastically over powered. How do you figure? Lets compare them to two other similar units in other armies, armies whose primary focus is not close combat.

Chaos Warriors Vs Dwarf Hammerers
CW
- better movement (1)
- better initiative
DH
- better Ld (1)
- stubborn
- immune to fear and terror if led by general

Cost if identically equipped (hw, shield, GW, heavy armor): CW:17 DH:13

Chaos Warriors vs. HE Swordmasters
CW
- better strength (1)
- better toughness (1)
SM
- Better movement (1)
- Better weaponskill (1)
- Better initiative (1)
- Better leadership (1)
- Better Attacks (1)
- Always strikes first

Cost if identically equipped (hw, GW, heavy armor): CW:16 SM:15

So, both the dwarf and HE armies are more versatile in other phases of the game than chaos (shooting for dwarves, shooting and magic for HE), and yet have better close combat troops than the close-combat focused army for less points. I know you can't always compare units across army list, as context matters, but still. Bretonnia is known for its knights, thus they have rules giving them excellent cavalry (lance formation). Dwarves are known for stubborness, thus have some of the best Ld in the game (Ld9, with stubborn, immune to psych, and unbreakable being fairly common). Elves are known for good shooting and magic, thus get higher BS and +1 to dispel/cast depending on the type of elf. Why is the sledgehammer close combat army falling short of other armies in the close combat phase?


foehammer

mav1971
11-12-2007, 17:14
Khorne:Hatred- It was in the Slaves to the Darkness book it talked about them not being allowed to take allies, saying followers of Khorne have no friends. I think that would make sense.

Nurgle:Poison or Killing blow-To represent their diseased bodies when they attack you.

Tzeentch:Keep them the same. I liked when they had a natural dispell. Which you could give them magic resistance.

Slaanesh:Unbreakable or make it -1 to hit them instead of taking a ld test.

Omegakai
11-12-2007, 18:07
I'm against giving marauders marks. Not everyone in a chaos army should be blessed by the chaos gods. Give it to everyone and it stops meaning anything. I agree with the "levels of blessing". Warriors/knights should get minor benefits, with chosen getting the prime benefits. Isn't that what it means to be chosen? To be the favored warriors of your god? Wearing suits of chaos armor which cannot be removed, and oozing with raw chaos power.

I don't know about leadership, maybe just chosen. They are still barbarian raiders. Ld isn't just being afraid of something, its the units willingness to stand and fight dispite adversity. Dwarves have very high Ld because they will continue to fight on dispite it possibly being a good idea to retreat. Those that do retreat take oaths to seek a glorous death as a slayer. I don't think chaos raiders should be that determined, at least not without a sufficiently inspiring champion leading them.

Problem is, if Daemons are getting their own book, then Mortals will be on their own. Odds are, if there is an all mortals book, then chariots will probably end up special.

Thus my push for morning stars. +1S for first turn, and you keep initiative and shield. What other army actually makes frequent use of that weapon anyway?

Not necessarily. Perhaps giants will be special. Maybe you can include a beasts rare choice in a mortals army, but it takes 2 rare choices instead of 1? There are numerous ways it could work.

The same reason they haven't made magical halberds for almost any army. Most magic weapons simply count as hand weapons. There are a few exceptions, like a dwarf master rune, a dark elf halberd, and bretonnian lances, which retain their other abilities.

I don't know, I always thought halberds to be too sophisitcated a weapon for the barbarian chaos raiders.

How do you figure? Lets compare them to two other similar units in other armies, armies whose primary focus is not close combat.

Chaos Warriors Vs Dwarf Hammerers
CW
- better movement (1)
- better initiative
DH
- better Ld (1)
- stubborn
- immune to fear and terror if led by general

Cost if identically equipped (hw, shield, GW, heavy armor): CW:17 DH:13

Chaos Warriors vs. HE Swordmasters
CW
- better strength (1)
- better toughness (1)
SM
- Better movement (1)
- Better weaponskill (1)
- Better initiative (1)
- Better leadership (1)
- Better Attacks (1)
- Always strikes first

Cost if identically equipped (hw, GW, heavy armor): CW:16 SM:15

So, both the dwarf and HE armies are more versatile in other phases of the game than chaos (shooting for dwarves, shooting and magic for HE), and yet have better close combat troops than the close-combat focused army for less points. I know you can't always compare units across army list, as context matters, but still. Bretonnia is known for its knights, thus they have rules giving them excellent cavalry (lance formation). Dwarves are known for stubborness, thus have some of the best Ld in the game (Ld9, with stubborn, immune to psych, and unbreakable being fairly common). Elves are known for good shooting and magic, thus get higher BS and +1 to dispel/cast depending on the type of elf. Why is the sledgehammer close combat army falling short of other armies in the close combat phase?


foehammer

you forgot to add
Cw
Option to be chosen
Equipment options
unlimited choice
Option for marks
Option to take shields and have twice the amour save

SM
magic options for champions that can take magic items and 50 point banners
Special choice

DDogwood
11-12-2007, 18:15
I'm all for the Horde of Chaos idea but I don't like the idea of militant Orcs.

That's a matter of taste - militant orcs have been a fantasy trope since Tolkien invented them. That said, Orcs in WFB have steadily moved towards being less disciplined and more crazy as the editions have rolled by. Black Orcs were supposed to be the "militant" Orcs, and now they seem to be a slightly less wild and crazy tribe more than anything else.


Chaos knights should never have lances. That's gh3y and I'm glad GW removed them in the last edition. I like the feel of mounted warriors using high ground and the weight of their horses to add power to their attacks. Great weapons are an option but why pay for +1 Str when you loose initiative and armor saves?

Chaos knights have always had lances, at least until their latest iteration. A lance is just a highly specialized spear; if the weapon is effective, it only makes sense that Chaos Knights would use it. They're fanatical followers of the Chaos gods, but that doesn't mean that they are ******.


And I have 1 more question. Why has GW not made a magical halberd for chaos? "Wait, I can have this magic weapon that grants +1 str and pwns faces without an I penalty? Yes PLEASE!!1!!one"

It's funny that you think Chaos Knights with lances are "gh3y", but that halberds are somehow appropriate. Halberds are much more strongly associated with regimented armies and discipline than lances. If you're just looking for the mechanical bonuses, why not just use a Sword of Might? Even a magical Great Weapon without any penalty to attack order would work.

Dominatrix
11-12-2007, 22:38
If lances are considered "too civilized" for chaos knights (I don't think so but everyone is entitled to their own opinion I guess) I think it would be very appropriate to give them the option of being armed with flails.

I mean marauder horsemen use them. I am surprised it has not occurred to any chaos knight to pick up a flail and use it since that makes them even better at killing stuff. :rolleyes:

After all if every army out there is receiving a heavy cavalry unit to rival and even surpass chaos knights (with the latest example being blood knights in the VC army a unit that makes chaos knights look like schoolgirls) it is only fitting they receive a buff to place them back in the position they belong. Even armies not traditionally known for its hard hitters (VC) or that have a lot of other ways to affect the game (shooting and magic in HE for example) have very powerful cavalry. Chaos is all about getting in close combat so it makes sense even more.

foehammer888
11-12-2007, 22:47
If lances are considered "too civilized" for chaos knights (I don't think so but everyone is entitled to their own opinion I guess) I think it would be very appropriate to give them the option of being armed with flails.

I mean marauder horsemen use them. I am surprised it has not occurred to any chaos knight to pick up a flail and use it since that makes them even better at killing stuff. :rolleyes: I don't know if I would go with flails. You lose the shield benefit, and only gain the strength bonus for the first round.


After all if every army out there is receiving a heavy cavalry unit to rival and even surpass chaos knights (with the latest example being blood knights in the VC army a unit that makes chaos knights look like schoolgirls) it is only fitting they receive a buff to place them back in the position they belong. Even armies not traditionally known for its hard hitters (VC) or that have a lot of other ways to affect the game (shooting and magic in HE for example) have very powerful cavalry. Chaos is all about getting in close combat so it makes sense even more. It begs the question, why must chaos have the best cavalry in the game? They are not a cavalry army. The one thing I really like about chaos knights is they aren't really cavalry. They are more like a heavy infantry unit with M7, as their hitting power doesn't depend upon a charge. Unlike other knights, they don't have to worry about the enemy not breaking on the charge, as they will hit them just as hard next turn.

Blood knights is a bit of a weird example, as it is effectively a unit of hero-level characters on horseback. From rumors, their high points cost and frenzy will make them a tricky unit to use correctly.

Foehammer

Dominatrix
11-12-2007, 23:09
It begs the question, why must chaos have the best cavalry in the game?

Because traditions are there for a reason? :D Nah seriously I suppose chaos doesn't have to have the best cavalry in the game if you put it this way.

My argument is that if armies with access to powerful magic and shooting have access to powerful cavalry, chaos should have something more powerful to compensate for the fact that close combat is the only thing it practically does.

Chaos armies can't sit back, blast you to pieces with artillery and guns (and no magic, especially in 7th edition is not anywhere near as reliable or effective as shooting) and force you to come to them. They have to charge you. And all the while endure whatever you can throw at them.

And let's not forget that their M7 is not that hot for cavalry anyway. Lots of units out there can charge chaos knights thanks to their superior movement and make a mess out of them.

So they have to be powerful quite simply because they are one of the very few (if not the only one) ways you can effectively play chaos.

As far as blood knights are concerned, as a VC player I am anxiously looking to using them. Frenzy is not that big of a drawback especially if you already know, as a chaos player who frequently uses khorne units, how to control it and channel it effectively. But if a horde army that relies on overwhelming opponents like VC get such a powerful weapon, why not a dedicated close combat army (like chaos) as well? It certainly deserves it more at least in my opinion.

der_lex
11-12-2007, 23:32
Chaos armies can't sit back, blast you to pieces with artillery and guns (and no magic, especially in 7th edition is not anywhere near as reliable or effective as shooting) and force you to come to them. They have to charge you. And all the while endure whatever you can throw at them.



As a Tzeentch player who has yet to lose a game with my defensive army (both in 6th and 7th ed), I have to beg to differ here :D
Tzeentch magic is as close to a shooting phase as you'll get with Chaos, and if you throw in a Hellcannon, it's almost like playing a Dwarf army. I know there aren't too many people out there who play Tzeentch this way, but even in 7th ed, it's still darned effective.

I'll readily admit that this play style isn't an option for the other marks, though, so I agree that Chaos should retain its general hittiness. Chaos, to me, is an army without shooting that isn't horribly fast, but packs a huge wallop when they finally reach the enemy lines. If GW keeps that aspect in in the new army book, I'll be happy. That does mean, however, that Chaos Warriors and Knights somehow have to be brought up to par with the elite units from other armies, which will probably lead to the inevitable cries of cheese from non-Chaos players everywhere... :D

Dominatrix
11-12-2007, 23:43
As a Tzeentch player who has yet to lose a game with my defensive army (both in 6th and 7th ed), I have to beg to differ here

I will have to take your word for it as I have never used a tzeentch army in a defensive way like you describe. It sounds weird even to be typing it to be honest! :D But then again I am not a huge fan of the hellcannon so I doubt I could get the "chaos gunline" idea to work anyway. Out of interest could you elaborate a bit about what you are using? My curiosity got the better of me! :o


That does mean, however, that Chaos Warriors and Knights somehow have to be brought up to par with the elite units from other armies, which will probably lead to the inevitable cries of cheese from non-Chaos players everywhere...

Well judging by the design philosophy that is becoming apparent as more and more 7th edition books are being released, GW wants to give significant boosts to all armies out there. Sometimes I even think that the situation intensifies with every book released. So I think hardly anyone is entitled to cry "CHEESE" when their own backyard is full of it as well! ;)

TheLionReturns
12-12-2007, 01:09
@ TheLionReturns:

So you are basically suggesting that mortals, beasts and daemons be merged in one list. I would be all for that as a big chaos book filled with everything chaotic would be extremely cool. But this will not happen as daemons at the very least are getting their own book. Plus in your suggestions you have managed to remove from the game almost all beast and daemon units. Even GW isn't stupid enough to make such a move, unless they want an army of chaos players at their doorstep armed with torches and pitchforks.


Sorry I probably should have explained myself a bit better here. This is my idea for a mortals list. I would foresee mortals having access to some units from other lists but not all of them, so the beastherds and current daemons are in place, but not the mounted daemons, beasts characters, centigors etc. Playing daemons would give you access to more daemon units whilst playing beats would give you more beasts units. I'm undecided as to whether beasts and daemons should have access to any mortals units but thats not really part of this discussion.

Omegakai
12-12-2007, 01:51
I do a Of every unit of XZY choice you make include 1 unit of either Deamons/ beasts and use the same method for the other two books.

theunwantedbeing
12-12-2007, 02:35
You could just require 1 of X unit of daemons to get 1 unit of Y daemons, like requiring beast herds to get bestigor in any army, beasts mortal or daemons.
So you cant just spend all your special slots on the best daemons, you need to "waste" one or 2 on the lesser daemons first.
This keeps access to all units regardless of book, butdoesnt allow free choice of unit unless you take that specific type as the general.

As they are core so the requirement isnt such a problem.

kenshin
12-12-2007, 03:28
I would like to be able to build a marauder only raiding force. Basically a hero type character (no need for a lord level) would be great. A chariot unit would be nice too but not necessary. Another idea could be a very mobile seige/war machine unit. Not alot of damage but can pack a small punch.

Marauders imo should be on par with swordsmen in terms of stats. They could have a wide array of weapons like previous posters have suggested. But really, if they can reduce the points of marauders by 1 (on par with swordsmen again) I would be happy.
*a special rule that lets them fight with an extra rank on a charge would be fun.

Dominatrix
12-12-2007, 11:48
What do people find so hot in the concept of a marauder character? I mean seriously marauders are the lowest "rank" of chaos troops. Basically tribes of northmen who have sworn an allegiance to chaos in one of its forms. If they rise in the chaos food chain they become chaos warriors and after that chosen warriors (each rank with increasing benefits from the chaos gods).

Marauder characters are basically aspiring/ exalted champions. I don't see how a marauder character could be any different from the hero level characters listed above (stat wise at least). If what you want is a hero who looks more marauder than chaos warriors, that is a strictly artistic matter that could be dealt with modelling a marauder to look more like a hero than a rank and file trooper.

A chariot unit that is less powerful but cheaper than the chaos chariot would be nice, especially if it had a movement rate greater than 7.

What I would also like to see is making chaos hounds fast cavalry and remove that retarded rule that they can have ranks. In all the years I have been playing chaos I have never seen units of warhounds bigger than 5-6 man units (hound units actually :D). Much less units of warhounds big enough to get even a +1 rank bonus. Warhounds are used as screens, bait etc. not as a fully ranked unit. Thank god there is no rule in the army book that chaos hounds have the option of taking a standard... :rolleyes:

TheLionReturns
12-12-2007, 13:14
My reasons for keeping the daemons, beats and mortal units separate in the way I suggested is mainly for balance issues. I think the smaller the list the easier to balance. Whilst more options should mean more variety this is not always the case as such large lists are harder to balance so certain units are taken a lot and others very rarely. I think that by having a strict mortal list that allowed limited daemon and beasts units this would be easier to balance whilst enough variety could be maintained. A compromise if you will.

This kind of flies in the face of my general philosophy which is more variety than less. However, it seems there are a lot of gamers out there for whom building really powerful lists is the key part of the hobby and this must be recognised and catered for in designing the lists.

foehammer888
12-12-2007, 13:27
You could just require 1 of X unit of daemons to get 1 unit of Y daemons, like requiring beast herds to get bestigor in any army, beasts mortal or daemons.
So you cant just spend all your special slots on the best daemons, you need to "waste" one or 2 on the lesser daemons first. Restrictions like those above just reek of lousy game design. It basically means you KNOW that the X daemons are useless and the Y daemons are overpowered, and the way you balanced them was to force the player to take a combination of overpowered and underpowered units to make a balanced army.

While everyone likes variety, there really should only be as much variety in an army list as you can support with effective rules. GW isn't very good at this, mostly because they don't want to invalidate previous models. Example in the HE book, there is little reason to take reavers or silver helms, when dragon princes are slightly more expensive but highly more effective, and all three are special units. They made redundant units.

Every unit should have a purpose, be it war-machine hunting, core-block infantry, sledgehammer cavalry, long-range shooting. Denying you the ability to take too many of an overpowered unit is not a valid purpose.


What do people find so hot in the concept of a marauder character? Because many players need theme handed to them on a platter, rather than simply modeling it up themselves. If there was a maruader character, you'd like give him magic armor to give him something better than a 4+ armor save, and the result would basically be an aspiring/exhaulted champion.


What I would also like to see is making chaos hounds fast cavalry and remove that retarded rule that they can have ranks. In all the years I have been playing chaos I have never seen units of warhounds bigger than 5-6 man units (hound units actually :D). Well, part of that is because they are so incredibly expensive $-wise for how many points they cost. Its $40 for 60 points of dogs. If they made plastic dogs, you might actually start seeing 20-strong dog units led by an exhaulted champion on a horse. The champions killing power combined with a possible +4 CR from ranks and outnumbering moving at 14in marching.


This kind of flies in the face of my general philosophy which is more variety than less. However, it seems there are a lot of gamers out there for whom building really powerful lists is the key part of the hobby and this must be recognised and catered for in designing the lists. I think this is where GW's approach to army-wide special rules might help. Each chaos army type: mortal, daemon, and beast, would have its own army special rules. However, the general determined what army special ruels you use. Thus, if you take a mortal general, you get the mortal army special rules. You can still take beast and daemon units, but those beast/daemon units won't get the benefit of the beast/daemon army special rules.

Thus, balanced is maintained. While you can get more variety, you don't get those other units at their full effectiveness, and you miss out on the opportunity of taking advantage of your own army special rule. An example would be suppose in a "daemon" army all daemons get a straight ward save rather than a daemonic one. Now you could take a beast unit in that army as special, but that beast unit can't make use of the raiders beast army special rule, as its a daemonic army.

However, there are numerous ways of spicing up various mortal chaos units, which make them better at what they do while remaining faithful to the background:
- Giving chosen a 5+ daemonic ward save to represent them being imbued with the power of the chaos gods
- Giving chaos warriors killing blow rather than a strength increase to represent them being a huge warrior swinging a huge axe.
- I might make chaos warriors and chosen immune to panic, or maybe something similar to the littl'un panic from the O&G book. Hounds don't panic anyone, marauders don't panic warriors, ect.
- Not sure if I'd go too much into chariots. Chariots aren't really the archetypical barbarian weapon of war. Traditionally its actually seen as a tool of the more civilized races who opposed barbarian hordes.
- maybe a new "weregeld" skirmishing unit of mutant were-creatures. Might make a good choice for a scouting unit for chaos.

Just some thoughts

Foehammer

Soul of Iron
12-12-2007, 13:31
That's a matter of taste - militant orcs have been a fantasy trope since Tolkien invented them. That said, Orcs in WFB have steadily moved towards being less disciplined and more crazy as the editions have rolled by. Black Orcs were supposed to be the "militant" Orcs, and now they seem to be a slightly less wild and crazy tribe more than anything else.

When I referred to the militant orcs I was meaning the Tolkien style of orcs. Sorry for the lack of clarity. Chaos is not 'Chaotic' enough for me. I would like to see 1-2 mortal (non-beasts) skirmish units. I've always wondered how the beastmasters of the chaos hordes managed to train dogs to run and fight in regimented blocks.



Chaos knights have always had lances, at least until their latest iteration. A lance is just a highly specialized spear; if the weapon is effective, it only makes sense that Chaos Knights would use it. They're fanatical followers of the Chaos gods, but that doesn't mean that they are ******.

Look at it from another angle. 90% of your fighting force fights with barbaric weapons. Axes, swords, all kinds of vicious bludgeons, even their bare hands in some cases. Then you have your mounted cavalry that use a lance. It does not fit the fighting style of a barbaric horde. In fact the only troop type that used spears are ungor. Or javelins for the mounted marauders.

Regardless of the fact that chaos has always had them does not change the fact that they don't fit. I was glad when they removed them because variant they use now is more efficient anyway.



It's funny that you think Chaos Knights with lances are "gh3y", but that halberds are somehow appropriate. Halberds are much more strongly associated with regimented armies and discipline than lances. If you're just looking for the mechanical bonuses, why not just use a Sword of Might? Even a magical Great Weapon without any penalty to attack order would work.

The glaive is a weapon that has it's place in fantasy. I know you know what I mean. Shoot, there's a pic of a Khornite demon carrying a glaive right in the middle of the book. So don't try to put a spin on what I posted. I would like to see more weapon options open in fantasy. The SoM is not a glaive, and we have enough great weapons as it is.

Soul of Iron
12-12-2007, 13:38
In retrospect, I should have used 'Pole arm' instead of Halbard in my post. Sorry if that caused confusion.

DDogwood
12-12-2007, 16:08
When I referred to the militant orcs I was meaning the Tolkien style of orcs. Sorry for the lack of clarity.

Right, I think I understand you. It's just funny that, in most fantasy backgrounds, Orcs will work as soldiers for just about any evil overlord who comes along, but in Warhammer they only fight for themselves (and the Chaos Dwarfs, who are barely clinging onto the background as it is).


Chaos is not 'Chaotic' enough for me. I would like to see 1-2 mortal (non-beasts) skirmish units. I've always wondered how the beastmasters of the chaos hordes managed to train dogs to run and fight in regimented blocks.

I agree, the 'skirmish' formation isn't applied very logically or consistently through the rules. Wolves, Zombies, Chaos Hounds, Trolls, and Harpies all seem like models that would fight as skirmishers instead of in rank-and-file formations. Sometimes I think that 'skirmishers' should just be ranked up like any other unit, with the special skirmishing rules applied to modify how the block of troops moves and fights, and how they are harder to hit with ranged attacks.



Look at it from another angle. 90% of your fighting force fights with barbaric weapons. Axes, swords, all kinds of vicious bludgeons, even their bare hands in some cases. Then you have your mounted cavalry that use a lance. It does not fit the fighting style of a barbaric horde
...
Regardless of the fact that chaos has always had them does not change the fact that they don't fit. I was glad when they removed them because variant they use now is more efficient anyway.

Chaos wasn't always a barbarian horde in the Warhammer background, but I understand your point. My view is that Chaos Warriors are highly skilled fighters, who have the ability to use any weapons that they can forge or pillage. Chaos Warriors with spears or halberds make sense to me, as do Chaos Knights with lances (after all, who else would use lances?).

The 'barbarian horde' thing is new, because Chaos Warriors used to be human warriors from anywhere in the world who had been corrupted by Chaos and had won themselves a suit of Chaos Armor and the favor of a Chaos god. The Chaos Knights were presumably composed of warriors who were trained in mounted combat, which would most likely include knights who preferred fighting with lances.

foehammer888
12-12-2007, 19:51
I agree, the 'skirmish' formation isn't applied very logically or consistently through the rules. Wolves, Zombies, Chaos Hounds, Trolls, and Harpies all seem like models that would fight as skirmishers instead of in rank-and-file formations. Sometimes I think that 'skirmishers' should just be ranked up like any other unit, with the special skirmishing rules applied to modify how the block of troops moves and fights, and how they are harder to hit with ranged attacks. I kind of agree here, it would certainly make the units easier to move. However, "skirmish" doesnt just mean a loose formation, and a standard "rank and file" unit doesn't necessarily represent a formation as tight as a greek/roman shield wall. Skirmishing is a formation where units are well trained enough to advance on the enemy with several meters between individuals and still move/fight as a cohesive unit. Its something more than simply "if you don't move and fight as a tight block you are a skirmisher". Two other things

1) zombies will move and fight in whatever formation the necromancer who created them wants them to move. I'm sure they'd be easier to control if all collected together in a big bunch and given a single command.
2) harpies are flyers, thus aren't they skirmishers by default?
3) trolls are kept in a tight unit to keep them from being distracted by every shiny object. They aren't exactly "independant thinkers"


Chaos wasn't always a barbarian horde in the Warhammer background, but I understand your point. My view is that Chaos Warriors are highly skilled fighters, who have the ability to use any weapons that they can forge or pillage. Chaos Warriors with spears or halberds make sense to me, as do Chaos Knights with lances (after all, who else would use lances?). That same could be said for any army in Warhammer, and to that point any army throughout history. Its a point that "culture" often overrides "logic". In a barbarian culture were brute strength revered above all else, simple axes and blunt instruments are likely the weapons of choice. If your culture emphasizes sophisticated mounted warfare, lances will become a more common weapon. A few points for thought

1) chaos knights likely aren't specialized mounted warriors. They are more likely chaos warriors who happened to get their hands on a horse.

2) halberds, spears and similar weapons often require units to move an fight as a cohesive unit. The primary idea behind chaos is its a group of individuals constantly vying for the favor of their gods. They strive for individual achievement over their peers. This mentallity definitely lends itself more to the charge-in-head-first axe-and-shield style of fighting to the more cohesive/defensive pike/spear/halberd style of fighting.

foehammer