PDA

View Full Version : The Chaos Counts-as Crew!



Mozzamanx
14-08-2008, 23:06
Good day fellows.

I was reading a thread earlier today about using the new Codex: Marines to represent Blood Angels, Dark Angels etc. just because it's shaping up to be better. "Oh sure, you can totally rationalise your Deathwing with the new Storm Shields, they're supposed to be uber!", or "Why shouldn't Space Wolves have Combat Tactics? Don't they train them fully?".

Well, since this is what the current Chaos Codex has to do, why not use the vanilla 'dex to represent the Traitor Legions?

What's the difference between using Lesser Daemon rules for Cultists, and using Scouts? They can even infiltrate and have much closer stats! My Khorne Terminators can use the rules for a Terminator Command Squad, while an Apothecary FNP can represent their battle frenzy driving them on. Hell, I've been told that any weapon in the Chaos arsenal can be used as a Sonic weapon for Slaanesh, so those Assault Cannons on my Razorbacks are actually Warpfire Throwers. Combat Tactics? Pwhoar, no, those are Terror tactics for my Night Lords! Totally has the Hit & Run stabby stabby aspect!

Why bother with a MoT Lord, wielding a Power Weapon for my Word bearers, when a Chaplain gets the same, for cheaps? After all, Dark Apostles are ex-chaplains. Why use the new Sorcery, when Librarians are much more in tune with the warp?

If Dark Angels can use the new toys, then so can Chaos. You force me to use counts-as for a proper Legion? I'm going to use it to the full.

TheOverlord
14-08-2008, 23:11
Obvious troll is obvious.

Anyway, couldn't you have just posted this on said thread without starting a new one?

But yes, I think that if you could represent the Legion better with the new marine Codex, I'm saying go for it, there's nothing stopping you from doing it. I'd play that army any day, with my vanilla CSM, and if you're a good sport, I'd enjoy that game immensely.

After all, if no one finds that representing LatD with the Guard codex deplorable, I can't see why people can't find using another codex to represent what they want just as deplorable. If you make the Legions with the SM codex THE WAY the Legion used to play, heck isn't that the same as playing with the Legion itself?

If however you cheese out your army and call it the Legion whilst not at all representing the Legion, wouldn't that just make you an ass?

Mozzamanx
14-08-2008, 23:20
Of course, but you can easily get a very good representation of the Legion, in some cases better than the CSM book, and have a higher power level.

For example, Word Bearers.

We need a Chaplain, for our Dark Apostle. Include lots of Scouts for some Chaos Cults, with their jump pack homers. Vanguard Veterans can be our Bloodletters- they hit hard, can deep-strike straight into the fight and get a-chopping. Word Bearers are notoriously zealous, so we'll include the rules for Marneus Calgar, modelled as a Greater Daemon. He fights like one, and makes the whole army Fearless. He can even Deep strike!

We have a zealous army which isn't running anywhere. We have lots of infiltrated Cultists to drown them in, and we have some Daemons sorted out and can even be summoned to battle. Of course, you can still have your Bikers, Terminators and whatever else you need. Why not some Legion of the Damned, for your Horrors?

TheOverlord
14-08-2008, 23:27
Special Characters, I'm afraid, are as they said, Special Characters. I'm not entirely sure if you're allowed to remodel them or make them Counts As. The one hard rule about it, I think. I personally don't mind it.

But I think that list looks good. So I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to wring out of this thread? It's obvious that you can make a good list of Word Bearers with the SM codex, I still don't see what's wrong with that?

Apart from the fact of course the GW still see the sudden increase of sales of the Marine Codex by Chaos players decide that all other codex's be damnned, and ret-con them out of 40k, then THAT would BE a problem. But that's, of course, stretching it one too far.

So... erm... again what were you trying to point out with the snarky new thread? I'm not sure that what you have said so far couldn't be otherwise fairly stated with equal attention by posting in a previous already made thread.

Mozzamanx
14-08-2008, 23:32
The fact that not only is the new codex equally, or even more, powerful than the Chaos one, but that you can actually represent the Legions better. There is very little reason to use the current one since you can Counts-As the Loyalist one for even more options.

But mostly, its because of stuff like Combat Tactics, free Heavy Weapons and the army list changes that characters bring.

Incidentally, you can do Special characters however you want. The 'special' comes into play with 0-1, and generally superior rules. Plenty of people in the Marine Rumour thread were talking about converting them for their own chapters. Sammael and the new Khan, for instance.

Dranthar
15-08-2008, 03:53
The fact that not only is the new codex equally, or even more, powerful than the Chaos one, but that you can actually represent the Legions better.

See, now this really gets my goat. The SM codex is still a good month or two out from being released, and you've already assumed that it will probably (or at least possibly) be more powerful than the Chaos Codex?

To be honest I don't really see how the SM codex can represent the legions better. You might be able to make a case for Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion, possibly Night Lords, but I don't think the rest are better off using the new Marines codex.

Ultimately, and so long as your opponent can actually figure out what is what, you can proxy what you want. But it sounds more like you just want an excuse to use what you percieve to be a 'better' codex. I also suspect that you're still bitter about the current Chaos Codex, which is a topic for a thread that I just don't want to hear about again.

==Me==
15-08-2008, 04:48
Go for it, Space Marines are Space Marines are so long as everything is WYSIWYG it sounds like a good idea.

WB can run Chaplains, IW can take the Master of the Forge and Thunderfire Cannons, Night Lords can use the LS Storm, Alpha Legion can run scout/cultists, Death Guard can have real Chosen with FNP (Command Squad), TSons can use LotD and awesome psykers, EC can use Sternguard as Noise Marines, WE can use Vanguard or anything choppy, and BL can use it all.

And let's please keep this away from the usual Chaos whinefest, I ran out of tissue paper from the last one.

Vaktathi
15-08-2008, 04:53
I've actually been mulling using the new SM dex to represent my Iron Warriors. I think it fits much better than the current CSM codex, and its Techmarines, Thunderfire cannons, Siege Dreads and generally much heavier reliance on shooting make theming an IW army much easier. Alas, oblits and Daemon princes will have to stay at home, but at least I'll have an excuse to use Terminator HQ's again and possibly even Havocs if I don't load up on Dreads and Thunderfire Cannons.

It seems to me that the new SM book does Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors and Night Lords better than the CSM codex, generally any Undivided army that isn't too much into Daemons or Cult units sounds like it would fit better with the new SM book.

Edit:looking at the rules for Lysander, he looks like he would make an excellent Warsmith, fortifying terrain, enhancing bolt weapons, heavy armor, tank busting hammer...

Plastic Rat
15-08-2008, 04:54
I totally agree with the OP. In fact looking at the focus of the new space marine codex, rules are becoming generic to apply to whatever you want. Need a really nasty chapter master with two powerfists for your Rainbow Warriors chapter? Marneus Calgar is your man, just name him something else.

Don't see why you can't take the whole thing a step further and start representing entire races with different codexes.

Heck, for Chaos Space Marine players, they deserve free beer and an apology for having that infernal document foisted on them. I won't blame any of them for using whatever codex they want.

sydbridges
15-08-2008, 06:00
Assuming the OP isn't being sarcastic, I actually agree with him/her. There are a few legions that currently could be better represented with C:SM than with C:CSM, Alpha Legion (scouts as cultists), Word Bearers (chaplins as dark apostles), Night Lords (jet pack psychopaths as elites and fast attack), and Iron Warriors (Master of the Forge as Warsmith) in particular. Since there is no rule as to whether or not you have to use the correct army's models with the codex, and given that the equipment that is shared between the two armies is pretty obvious so there shouldn't be any confusion about what weapons and units are what, I don't see why one wouldn't do this if they were playing a legion that C:SM would represent better.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
15-08-2008, 10:43
i'll use it to represent -my- chapter. Heavy reliance upon Transport/Jump Packs/Teleportation

i will have the option to use drop pods at least! and proper veteran assault squads! and lord with 4 S6 WS6 I5 A, and 3++ with Jump Pack to Boot!

Mythrider
15-08-2008, 10:59
Oddly enough I wnt the other way on this issue, I`m using C:CSM to represent my loyalist Marines. Granted this may all change when the new book comes out.

At this point I believe they are removing the ability of Tac squads to take 2 Special weapons, since CSM can do this I`ll be using their book in the meantime.

Arctophylax Faren
15-08-2008, 11:24
The thing against using the Marine Codex to represent Chaos Marines is that there's nothing Chaos'y at all about them. If you're going to do something like this, GW may as well bring out a book of rules, and you pick the one that suits you the most and just pick models to represent each rule.

What's to stop Dark Eldar players using the Eldar Codex but substituting everything? Painting warriors in different get-up to represent Striking Scorpions, Dire Avengers and so on?

Mostly because each Codices' entry for a unit accurately reflects its army BOTH in terms of stats, rules and appearance. Sure, you can use all the counts as nonsense and field Chaos marines using the new Codex, but it would ruin entirely the spirit of the army. Seems to me you're more interestied in just playing to win than to take up the mantle of a Chaos General.

Cultists as Scouts? Some decent armour these petty cultists have got eh? 4+, same as elite Kasyrkin. And oh my, Bolter-like weapons too! Wow, some puny heretic goes and has a gun that hits as hard as the marines they worship. Likely isn't it?

Let's not forget the Defiler's that have a gaping cannon in their chest that fires like a lascannon, and being unable to take something like Daemonic Possession and can no longer Fleet.

And what about Dreadnoughts? These half-dead warriors in tombs of pain just stride casually across the battlefield as if they're mooching through a field picking flowers, then come tapping politely with their S10 DCCW. That accurately sums up something Chaos Lords have chained up and isolated from, for fear of it causing untold destruction doesn't it?

Chaos also just happens to get their hand on the Crusader Land Raider, which had been missing for god knows how many years and turns up during a Black Templar Attack.

I'm sorry, but you'd be smashing apart the spirit of a Chaos army with a hammer. Seems like you're just having a bit of a whine because the marines are new and seem tough. Why didn't you complain that a group of 10 Ork boyz get 40 attacks on the Charge, with +1 S and +1 Initiative?

As I recall in 2nd Edition of Marines and Chaos, there wasn't some big uproar with the Marines when the Chaos codex had a list of powerful wargear the size of the Kiyoto Agreement, or that even a Chaos aspiring champion could have an invulnerable save.

Of course it's entirely possible to come up with a whole counts as Codex, explaining the Storm Shield rule as Chosen Gifts or the likes, or relic blades as mini-daemon weapons, but the rules the way they are are a true reflection of their army, and anyone who would do such a thing as this truly does not field the right army.

de Selby
15-08-2008, 12:06
Mostly because each Codices' entry for a unit accurately reflects its army BOTH in terms of stats, rules and appearance. Sure, you can use all the counts as nonsense and field Chaos marines using the new Codex, but it would ruin entirely the spirit of the army.

I have a chaos undivided CSM army with daemonic support (word-bearers-esque) and the latest CSM codex doesn't really reflect the spirit of this army any better than the SM one (daemons=scouts). I can't speak for relative power level and I don't much care. Since so many players are using their chaos armies as counts-as forces in the CSM dex, why not do counts-as from the SM dex if it seems like a closer match? Would save me a tenner anyway.

So yeah. Why not use chaos versions of the new marine toys, if there's nothing interesting for you in the CSM dex.

qwertywraith
15-08-2008, 12:19
What's to stop Dark Eldar players using the Eldar Codex but substituting everything? Painting warriors in different get-up to represent Striking Scorpions, Dire Avengers and so on?

Why not? I'm pretty sure dark eldar don't have fluff, just bullet points about torture, emo, and some haiku poems about pain. Do you object to players using different models, like guardians for dark eldar warriors? What about all those harlequin armies out there using the Dark Eldar codex?


Mostly because each Codices' entry for a unit accurately reflects its army BOTH in terms of stats, rules and appearance. Sure, you can use all the counts as nonsense and field Chaos marines using the new Codex, but it would ruin entirely the spirit of the army. Seems to me you're more interestied in just playing to win than to take up the mantle of a Chaos General.

There is nothing in the rules that states what a model is supposed to look like. That's all fluff. Which is why you see armies using models from other ranges, like chaos using loyalist gear.


Cultists as Scouts? Some decent armour these petty cultists have got eh? 4+, same as elite Kasyrkin. And oh my, Bolter-like weapons too! Wow, some puny heretic goes and has a gun that hits as hard as the marines they worship. Likely isn't it?

It's better than the entry in the chaos codex. Because there isn't one.


Of course it's entirely possible to come up with a whole counts as Codex, explaining the Storm Shield rule as Chosen Gifts or the likes, or relic blades as mini-daemon weapons, but the rules the way they are are a true reflection of their army, and anyone who would do such a thing as this truly does not field the right army.

What is a "true reflection" of an army? What GW tells you it is? Or what you tell me it is? In this hobby people are free to make up their own rules; why not make up their own fluff to go along with the rules? For example, if you want to use an all terminator chaos army, why not use the Deathwing rules, hook, line, and sinker. It's easier than making up your own rules, and trying to get a game against random joes at the local store.

How does even the Space Marine codex represent Space Marines? It doesn't, really. Not according to any fluff I've read about Space Marines.

x-esiv-4c
15-08-2008, 12:41
I'll be using the new SM codex for my deathguard.

Arctophylax Faren
15-08-2008, 13:05
Why not? I'm pretty sure dark eldar don't have fluff, just bullet points about torture, emo, and some haiku poems about pain. Do you object to players using different models, like guardians for dark eldar warriors? What about all those harlequin armies out there using the Dark Eldar codex?

There is nothing in the rules that states what a model is supposed to look like. That's all fluff. Which is why you see armies using models from other ranges, like chaos using loyalist gear.

What is a "true reflection" of an army? What GW tells you it is? Or what you tell me it is? In this hobby people are free to make up their own rules; why not make up their own fluff to go along with the rules? For example, if you want to use an all terminator chaos army, why not use the Deathwing rules, hook, line, and sinker. It's easier than making up your own rules, and trying to get a game against random joes at the local store.

How does even the Space Marine codex represent Space Marines? It doesn't, really. Not according to any fluff I've read about Space Marines.

If you were interested enough in the Dark Eldar, you would understand that the Eldar Codex plays nothing like they're supposed to be. And while no, there's isnt a lot of stuff out there about the Dark Eldar, there is still enough to get a good grasp of how they operate.

While no, there isn't, it should at least make sense. We're not talking simple things like conversions, but there was an audible groan at the Forge World Plague Ogryn models. So if it doesn't really matter at all, why do so many people care?

As for the cultists, yes that is a shame, but it shouldn't mean you just jump ship because you can't used a robed weakling.

And seeing as Games Workshop has almost single handedly created an entire universe, the likes such depth hasn't been seen since Star Wars, I am quite sure that the armies have been developed with certain themes and the codices created in relation to, and around, said themes.

And how, pray tell does the new codex not relate to Space Marines? What is it you've read exactly that is so un-like the marines in this Codex?
Space Marines have mighty heroes. I'd say the Characters reflect that.
Space Marines make planetfall quickly and suddenly. Drop pods.
They're superhuman. Each model is a nasty powerhouse.
They're humanity's best. I think the Codex is pretty extreme compared to the Guard.
They're steadfast, religious and zealous. Combat Tactics, ATSKNF and Chaplains.

What have you read that isn't represented?

sydbridges
15-08-2008, 13:23
What have you read that isn't represented?

For one thing, a single tactical squad is unlikely to wipe out a hundred guardmen with no casualties. Which is a good thing, balance-wise, but not particularly fluff-accurate.

That said, other than the obvious complaint about how the last thing anyone needs to see is more armies running around using the Space Marine codex, I really don't see how a AL, NL, WB, or IW player using the new SM Codex negatively affects your ability to play. If someone plays a particular Legion and feels the new SM codex could better represent their army, that's a testament to the success of the new SM codex or the failure of the CSM codex. I'd assume that said Legion player would still choose only 'fluffy' units to do counts-as for their CSM army. For instance, a pure Night Lords force probably shouldn't contain much in the way of plague marines, and similarly they probably should avoid using whatever is unfluffy for them in the new SM codex.

Kriegschmidt
15-08-2008, 13:27
I think: this is a hobby, there is no "office policy" here and you should do what floats your boat. If you play with friends, they'll be happy to let you take a counts as army. As long as you explain what you're doing and give them a chance to get their heads round it, don't chop and change all the time, they should be cool with it. I'd be perfectly happy with it, as long as my little brain could cope with it ;)

I've been thinking of doing a similar thing and using the Necron codex for my ThSons. Sounds odd I know and it wouldn't be perfect but a few things would work well:
-Necrons' baffling technology = mastering sorcerous magick
-C'Tan Deceiver = special Lord of Change. He's perfect! Misleading the enemy, allowing redeploment, etc.
-Flayed Ones = spawn or daemons (Infiltrating/Deep Striking)
-Gauss/disruption fields = magick woven into ammunition/weapons
-Destroyers/heavy destroyers = either disc-riders (remember them?) or unharnessed sorceror thingies teleporting around the battlefield. Like the Wild Mage from D&D possibly. In armour :)
-Pariahs = some kind of horrific daemon or sorcerors with mind-affecting spells.
-Wraiths = screamers or similar daemonic entities.
-"We'll Be Back" = necromantic magick.
-Phasing Out = What's left of the Legion has low numbers and resources. They fear prolonged combat and will use their sorcery to teleport out under a veil of deception if the battle goes badly.

Just no monolith. Although it could be some kind of Tzeentch silver tower.

Mozzamanx
15-08-2008, 13:44
@X-esiv-4c. Really? Death Guard were the one Legion I couldn't get to work with the resilience thing. How are you gonna work it?

@ Krieg. That list sounds perfect, I'm amazed you can get them to match so well!


The main reason for this is that the current codex really has none of the flavour anyway, so what do you stand to lose by changing? You can actually gain flavour in most cases.

A good example is Night Lords. They are the terror specialists, making horrible examples before disappearing without trace. With codex CSM, this could done with Deep Strike and Dirge Casters. Really, there is nothing else even remotely scary in the new one, except Daemons, but the Night Lords are known to use very few.

Using the loyalist one, we could have massive Drop Pod assaults from turn 1. An entire army appears out of the sky and instantly gets to killing. Vanguard scream into combat from nowhere- that would make me crap my pants. Land Speeder Storm disrupts any reinforcements, meaning they can't get any aid. Combat Tactics means the defenders are constantly being assaulted with blade and bullet, and they can't pin down their assailants.

So, which has more Night Lords flavour, and which has the better rules? I think you'll find Loyalists win on both counts.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
15-08-2008, 13:45
@Arctophylax Faren: -MY- chapter use drop pods assault tactic like many other chaos warband and loyalist chapters. but there is a catch - there is no drop pod in chaos army.

-My- chapter use extensively Veteran Assault Squads - guess which codex have option to field it ? or you do not know yet ?

-My- Traitor chapter use all those among others. Please, say how could i achive it with Codex: Chaos Space Marines or be quiet about chaos codex and how it represent chaos undivided worshipers. thanx.

archangels uk
15-08-2008, 13:52
The thing against using the Marine Codex to represent Chaos Marines is that there's nothing Chaos'y at all about them. If you're going to do something like this, GW may as well bring out a book of rules, and you pick the one that suits you the most and just pick models to represent each rule.



Exactly i agree, you have your own dex, learn how to enjoy that one and get the most from it without worrying what the other dex's have in them!

Kriegschmidt
15-08-2008, 13:55
Let's keep this to how we can use certain rules to field Chaos armies. The choices are infinite :)

(we just need patient mates :D)

The scout bikers rules could nicely represent raw recruits - an existing Legion desperately trying to bolster its numbers. Or perhaps veteran cultists on horseback - they have the speed and can lay mines but lack the courage and commitment for a "cavalry charge".

Arctophylax Faren
15-08-2008, 13:57
No squad has reaped a tally of over a hundred Guardsmen other than those heroic mentions. Most of the stuff about the marines is somewhat embellished, and it makes little secret that it talks mostly about squads or characters of legend as opposed to the regular faceless marine. It also says that scores of marines die every single day, and that if the Bell of Lost Souls was to toll once for every lost life of a Space Marine, it would toll itself hoarse. They don't make them out to be invincible, far from it. They make them out to be stoic defenders of man who give their lives in great numbers to preserve the Emperor's realm.

I never said anywhere that it would negatively affect my ability to play.
I said that doing such things went against the spirit, but if you're fine with that I'm certainly not going to condemn your actions. It is, after all, about having fun, but if you start using the races in ways they are not really designed for in the Codices, you may as well play against a mirror.

If by playing themed armies like you described, and avoiding certain things, you're smashing your ability to fight effectively. The Codexes are designed to work with units have strengths and weaknesses, and other units to fulfill the roles. If you totally cut out certain units because it doesn't fit in, you're left with gaps in your capabilities.

The difference between the Loyalists and the Chaos Legions is that the loyalists are balanced, while the old Legions are specific, 'themed' armies. For example, the entire Thousand Sons chapter became walking shells (with the exception of the sorcerers) and the World Eaters are all blood frenzied maniacs.
In contrast, Chaos marine warbands can be balanced, but are specific like the Eldar. They can be considered ragtag in that they band all sorts of minions together, and their troops have their specific roles, such as Bezerkers for combat, and Death Guard for taking a beating. You wouldn't put Thousand Sons in a rhino and rush them to the enemy, and nor would you sit Bezerkers on an Objective.

If you're using the Space Marine Codex for Chaos warbands or Legions, it practically rejects everything you're trying to represent.

You want a World Eaters army. What do you take?
A Captain to lead, a dreadnought perhaps? Definitely some tactical marines, because you don't have a choice. So your World Eaters army is practically transformed into a bunch of versatile warriors that are not angry or choppy, and roll in with heavy artillery.

What about Death Guard? The most you could do is say that the new Inv saves for Storm Shields are the result of their elite being so utterly plagued they can shrug off shots from a Titan.

And Corsairs. They're practically the representation of the generic Chaos warband, where a mighty champion gets others to flock to his cause and goes off pillaging. You'd have practically no variation or roles for your troops and again end up with good all rounders who have the support of a few elite troops. Doesn't at all reflect a ruthless band of raiders who are only organised enough to reach the same battle at the same time but who are all as selfish as... as a... <Insert humorous selfish reference here>

Can't you see what I'm getting here?

Strix
15-08-2008, 14:04
Special Characters, I'm afraid, are as they said, Special Characters. I'm not entirely sure if you're allowed to remodel them or make them Counts As.
You are apparently. It says in the Da codex that you can just rename the characters (belial, samiel etc...) and use those to represent a sucessor chapter. So my marines are blue and grey, I literally just buy a samiel model and the DA codex and BAM!! I can field a ravenwing army. :D

obviously, if you want to field the new SM characters and make them fit your army you might need to file off the obvious heraldry and so on, but I cant really imagine someone being so anal as to complain about someone using a special character because the army is painted differently.

Mozzamanx
15-08-2008, 14:06
World Eaters?

Take Pedro for your Lord. He has 4 attacks, makes nearby units frenzied, and replaces Combat Tactics for Stubborn. Like hell a Berserker would ever pull out of a fight!
Khorne is the God of war, not just mindless slaughter. He must have at least 2 squads capable of shooting, and your tacticals still get 2 attacks from Pedro. After all, what did World Eaters use for the Crusade?
Vanguard make awesome Bloodletters. They can deep-strike into combat with a bucket of power weapon attacks, while maybe one is a Herald with a Relic Blade. Who knows what Chaos can come up with?
And then its just whatever you want, thanks to Pedro's aura of frenzyness. Multi attack Terminators, with an Apothecary to represent them being completely unhinged and ignoring pain. Bikers running down the foe. Drop Pods carrying Assault Marines.


Death Guard? I've already said they were the one Legion I couldn't get to work, so you can have that one. Its better to use the CSM book for these guys I expect.


Corsairs? They are genuinely renegade Chapters rather than a Legion, so of course they can be done with the current book. The more recent converts wouldn't break all their Plasma Cannons or Land Speeders, they could use them. Similarly, the Hit & Run from Combat Tactics perfectly represents them as pirates. Strike suddenly with Drop Pods so your prize can't escape, cut him off with Bikers and Assault Marines, then get to pillaging.

Hellebore
15-08-2008, 14:11
Welcome to the counts as side of the force. :cool:

Counts As is in my opinion the best rule that exists. Because when you think about it, all you are doing is asigning statistics to models, so no matter what codex you use you are using a model to 'count as' the rules from that codex.

If your army is better served in another list why should you NOT use it?

Chaos uses both Dreadclaw assault pods and drop pods (all those modern renegade types) yet neither are avaiable in the chaos codex.

So if you want a drop podding black legion why should you let the limitations of one codex get in the way of playing the way YOU want to play?

Hellebore

x-esiv-4c
15-08-2008, 14:19
Mozza,
I probably won't count for the whole resilence thing. I'll just rely on the blatant overpowering offered by this codex to get me through :)

sydbridges
15-08-2008, 14:22
If by playing themed armies like you described, and avoiding certain things, you're smashing your ability to fight effectively. The Codexes are designed to work with units have strengths and weaknesses, and other units to fulfill the roles. If you totally cut out certain units because it doesn't fit in, you're left with gaps in your capabilities.

I'm confused. Are you arguing against fielding fluffy armies, or arguing against fielding CSMs using the SM rules?


The difference between the Loyalists and the Chaos Legions is that the loyalists are balanced,

...sounds like a good reason to use the SM codex, then.


while the old Legions are specific, 'themed' armies. For example, the entire Thousand Sons chapter became walking shells (with the exception of the sorcerers) and the World Eaters are all blood frenzied maniacs.
In contrast, Chaos marine warbands can be balanced, but are specific like the Eldar. They can be considered ragtag in that they band all sorts of minions together, and their troops have their specific roles, such as Bezerkers for combat, and Death Guard for taking a beating. You wouldn't put Thousand Sons in a rhino and rush them to the enemy, and nor would you sit Bezerkers on an Objective.

Of course, if you're trying to field, say, a Death Guard army, you probably should be avoiding taking TS squads or Berserker squads, but as far as I can tell, your argument is "just play Chaos Renegades."


If you're using the Space Marine Codex for Chaos warbands or Legions, it practically rejects everything you're trying to represent.

Really? I don't see it. Why would a recently turned to Chaos chapter not have virtually an identical list to the SMs? Where do their landspeeders go? Their Land Raider variants? Their scouts?


You want a World Eaters army. What do you take?

Personally, I'd use the CSM codex for that one, but if someone felt the SM codex was a better match, I don't see how that's a problem.


What about Death Guard? The most you could do is say that the new Inv saves for Storm Shields are the result of their elite being so utterly plagued they can shrug off shots from a Titan.

As opposed to now, where only the basic troops are a representation of the Death Guard, since you can't give the full FNP to anyone else via marks or icons? Neither codex does a full DG army particularly well, but you can force it with sufficient use of "counts as".


And Corsairs. They're practically the representation of the generic Chaos warband, where a mighty champion gets others to flock to his cause and goes off pillaging. You'd have practically no variation or roles for your troops and again end up with good all rounders who have the support of a few elite troops.

A recently turned warband would, I imagine, still have most of their old stuff, so SM would probably be a better codex fix. An warband that relies on drop pods also better fits into SMs, because Chaos doesn't get drop pods. Which codex is a better fit depends on how the player making their warband envisions the warband working - if C:SM works better than C:CSM, then they should use the C:SM.

The_Warsmith
15-08-2008, 14:46
And what about Dreadnoughts? These half-dead warriors in tombs of pain just stride casually across the battlefield as if they're mooching through a field picking flowers, then come tapping politely with their S10 DCCW. That accurately sums up something Chaos Lords have chained up and isolated from, for fear of it causing untold destruction doesn't it?



not all dreadnaughts are crazy and have to be chained up, most do but there are some sain dreadnaughts

i've thought about using C:SM to represent my iron warriors for a while, they have a wider array of tanks and heavy weapons compared to what they get in C:CSM so i can use C:SM to represent a siege company much better

Liber Chaos
15-08-2008, 14:58
An interesting question. I don't see why not.

One issue (of many) I had with the new CSM codex is the removal of the original traitor legions. The old 'dex gave certain incentives for choosing one of those legions over the others (and renegades). The trade-off being you had to accept certain disadvantages as well. This trade-off was not necessarily balanced as to certain armies (e.g., IW) but that probably could have been fixed with a few tweaks -- not the wholesale gutting that took place with the new CSM 'dex.

Now, someone could argue that you can still play these legion armies under the new CSM 'dex by picking certain types of units over others. However, this won't work for certain legions (Alpha) and probably wouldn't be viable for other legions given the changes in objective-taking and close combat (Word Bearers). Moreover, by removing the incentives that made that particular legion unique that legion army under the new CSM 'dex is fundamentally no different since any renegade de jour can use the same units. The only difference is the paint scheme.

So, I can see instances where the new SM 'dex might give players options to run some of those traitor legions in a way that better represents their particular fighting style/fluff than the current, generic CSM 'dex. In some ways, it better represents the more recent traitors/renegades featured in the new 'dex. I have trouble with the concept that as soon as you turn traitor you lose certain weapons and the ability to use them. Hell, if an Ork can fix a Baneblade using tissue paper and masking tape, why can't a renagade capture/fix a landspeeder. I would also think space pirates would actually capture and use wargear during their raids.

The botton line is that I would have no problem with someone doing this as long as they explained what they were doing ahead of time. I would much rather play a Night Lord list using special rules that represented their play style than one cobbled together under the new CSM 'dex.

Unfortunately, the fact that people are considering doing this shows me that GW really missed the mark with the new CSM 'dex, as well as a great opportunity to come up with something really creative while correcting some of the abuses allowed by the 3.5 CSM 'dex. Instead, they used a chainsaw instead of a scalpel.

catbarf
15-08-2008, 15:05
Exactly i agree, you have your own dex, learn how to enjoy that one and get the most from it without worrying what the other dex's have in them!

Nothing Chaosy in the Marine codex? Have you ever heard of counts-as? Chaos players are expected to use counts-as in order to field many units, why not counts-as to make normal Marine rules work as well?

archangels uk
15-08-2008, 15:11
Nothing Chaosy in the Marine codex? Have you ever heard of counts-as? Chaos players are expected to use counts-as in order to field many units, why not counts-as to make normal Marine rules work as well?



Did i say there was nothing chaosy?, because there is no point, imo, of subsituting something when you already have a viable option there

Hellebore
15-08-2008, 15:27
Unfortunately, the fact that people are considering doing this shows me that GW really missed the mark with the new CSM 'dex, as well as a great opportunity to come up with something really creative while correcting some of the abuses allowed by the 3.5 CSM 'dex. Instead, they used a chainsaw instead of a scalpel.

It would have been fine if they'd stayed consistent with codex design, then the marine codex would have been simplified like the chaos marine codex.

The problem comes in the apparent aboutface in design policy. No one could complain if the SM codex was like the CSM codex, and I doubt many people would want to represent their chaos army with it.

But because GW have decided to ramp up the variety and unit options in the marine codex to a massive degree straight after they removed a lot of them from the CSM codex, people just look at it and go WTF!?

Now I had no problem with the way GW was going with codicies, so long as the WHOLE range is designed the same way.

I'm getting a little tired of GW changing how they are writing codicies every few years. It's not even like they are going in completely different directions every time they do, they just vacilate between the two extremes of lots of special rules and options versus streamlined rules and options.

2nd ed: Complicated (80+ page codicies)
3rd ed: Simplified (48pg codicies with tiny army lists)
3.5 ed: Less Simplified (chaos and guard codex revamps)
4th ed: Complicated (marine codex redo etc)
4.5 ed: Less Complicated (dark angels onward)
5th ed: Complicated (5th ed marines - onward?)


I'm mainly worried that GW have decided to go this direction ONLY for marines and every other codex that comes out afterward will be the simplified versions we've seen recently.

Hellebore

Liber Chaos
15-08-2008, 15:38
It would have been fine if they'd stayed consistent with codex design, then the marine codex would have been simplified like the chaos marine codex.
Hellebore

Your entire post perfectly highlights another problem I have with the CSM 'dex -- the complete lack of design consistency given what they are doing with the SM 'dex.

I've heard that some of the changes brought by 5th were intended to make games more cinematic and I have no problem with that. Makes for some fun games. Unfortunately, the new CSM 'dex seems to be missing that quality.

Ubermensch Commander
15-08-2008, 15:55
What amazes me is some Chaos players willingess to "counts as" with the entire army using a SM codex(because its shiny, newer, and more powerful) yet unwilling to accept a Chaos terminator squad with a Icon of (insert god) in a Cult specific legion just because its not the 3.5 Chaos Codex mark rules. C'mon, if one is willing to "count as" the WHOLE ARMY what is wrong with having a unit of Khorne Iconed Havocs in a World Eaters force?
And of course the whole "there is nothing to differentiate my *fill in name of Chaos Legion*from others! they are just different painted Black Legion!" argument wont hold up because now using the SM codex they are just become differently colored Loyalist Chapter.

I have absolutely no problem with a Chaos player using the new SM codex to field his army, so long as everything is consistently counts as and legal within the context of the new SM codex. Y'know, no 3 HQ choices or taking an ACTUALY Defiler alongside a Vanguard vet squad. It can even be alot of fun, especially if done well.
But please, don't throw out the idea that it somehow represents Chaos better than the Chaos codex please? The one exception being, of course, newly turned renegade chapters who are basically Loyalist space marines in training, equipment, and organization,(Codex adherent, basically, not Legion made)...just not loyal anymore.

Cases in point of some un-chaosy bits:
-No Icons of the Gods
-No cult specific troops
-No Daemon weapons
-Chaos doesn't use scouts, landspeeders, assault cannons(and no,saying "its a pimped out Autocannon!...really!" is not a very solid excuse no matter how hilarious that would be.)
-No Defiler(C.mon its a Daemon engine! I am not sure how much more Chaosy an entry can get, outside of Abaddons Evil Top Knot of Doom's self!)
-No insane Dreads (and yes the fluff is pretty clear that Chaos Marines do NOT dig the idea of being put in one of those things)
-the various new types of Land Raiders.

Again, the SM codex can be used to represent the Chaos Space Marines in some ways. It can even be tons of fun if done right and with forethought. But it does NOT represent them better than the current Chaos codex. At least the current Chaos codex has Chaos units in it.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
15-08-2008, 16:17
But please, don't throw out the idea that it somehow represents Chaos better than the Chaos codex please? The one exception being, of course, newly turned renegade chapters who are basically Loyalist space marines in training, equipment, and organization,(Codex adherent, basically, not Legion made)...just not loyal anymore.

Cases in point of some un-chaosy bits:
-No Icons of the Gods
-No cult specific troops
-No Daemon weapons
-Chaos doesn't use scouts, landspeeders, assault cannons(and no,saying "its a pimped out Autocannon!...really!" is not a very solid excuse no matter how hilarious that would be.)
-No Defiler(C.mon its a Daemon engine! I am not sure how much more Chaosy an entry can get, outside of Abaddons Evil Top Knot of Doom's self!)
-No insane Dreads (and yes the fluff is pretty clear that Chaos Marines do NOT dig the idea of being put in one of those things)
-the various new types of Land Raiders.

Again, the SM codex can be used to represent the Chaos Space Marines in some ways. It can even be tons of fun if done right and with forethought. But it does NOT represent them better than the current Chaos codex. At least the current Chaos codex has Chaos units in it.

What about Chaos Undivided army ? You forget that such forces exist ?

-no marks of chaos: ATSKNF represent their MoCU [it is psychological effect afterall]
-no cult specific troops: they do not use them anyway
-no daemon weapon: Relic Blade make perfect Daemon Weapon/Daemonic Strenght Replacement
-no AC/LS/S: [AC]but could use other tech that is similliar in effect, afterall chaos techies are not forced to pray X weeks to click a button. they could do everything they desire, and something will be similiar to ACann, [LS] i do not get the idea that Chaos left all anti-grav tech - it was always stupid excuse [S] Chaos often fight alongside Traitor guard - that use drugs and are gifted with mutations/blessing and random equipment - it is perfectly possible that at least some of them are accurately represented by scouts.

so you have rather weak arguments why shouldn't they use C:SM

reason to use it:
-siege equipment is actually in the codex
-veteran assault squad
-ability to make planetfall with pods
-actual cultist units
-better champions [sweet irony - csm ones used to have Daemonic Strenght, now sm elite could do it]
-thunder hammer and storm shield imagery
-use of chaplains
-veteran squad actually veteran - better than basic squad in cc.
-12 + LR
-attack bikes in codex
-fortification in codex

The_Warsmith
15-08-2008, 16:18
the problem is that if the icon bearer is killed they lose all their abilities. WTF??? just because the guy holding your flag got shot doesn't mean you suddenly stop worshipping your god, it doesn't stop the khorne worshippers from being bloodthirsty killers, it shouldn't stop the nurgle worshippers being tough-as-nails diseased puss bags. the rule makes no sence

personally i've thought about switching codex but i'd miss obliterators too much, god bless those fat idiots

Vaz84
15-08-2008, 16:23
Yeah except for the fact that we are talking about terminators (champions in their own right) and chaos lords, deamon princes, who have NO fluff rules for taking an icon of their god. Plague marines get feel no pain, why don't Nurgle terminators, or heck even a nurgle lord? So what is a nurgle lord in the new codex, just some bloke who came in after and got a mark. How do you represent him being the commander of the heresy involved death guard soldiers?

The Chaos Codex was gutted, toned down, given some cool troop choices, but otherwise left as the most vanilla representation of chaos EVER. New edition, new bells and whistles, and you take one of your longest standing armies. The arguably most convertible and customizable army ever, where there are oodles of white dwarf articles to modeling your troops, tentacles, and so on. And you **** on it till it really just is space marines with spikes. On top of this insult, you give the new loyalist book a boatload of options, with characters, new units, the whole farm basically.

Just leaves some of us with a big WTF? sign over our e-heads.

samiens
15-08-2008, 16:28
I think it might have been me that started the thread that inspired this one- and there is a large voice of negativity towards such actions. I think one of the problems with the whole traitor legions fluff is that several of them have utterly disbanded- so legion specific rules were hyper powered and unnecessary.

Before you shoot me, I do have a 2000 point Death Guard force. The fact is that I think people who abuse the counts-as rule in this way (In most cases counts as is from tournaments and you can strictly only invoke the rule if the model doesn't exist- at least in the tournament pack I have in front of me which is last years doubles) are really trying to have their cake and eat it. If you like the fluff but don't like the ary I thinkits a little far fetched to come out and say 'my whole army is something else as its better!'

The new chaos codex is very similar (daemons aside) to 2nd ed and we had no problem fielding chaos forvces in second edition. Dare I say it the crime of the previous Chaos codex is taht it stopped Chaos armies being choasy!

Don't get me wrong- do what you like in friendly games with people you know and who don't mind it- but in an open environment it is at best deceptive- at worst cheating. I do understand that the reason why people do it is to have a fluffy well represented army but there should be limits- otherwise why don't we all pick and choose between the models we like and the rules we like and spend all our game time trying to remember what's what?

x-esiv-4c
15-08-2008, 16:32
It's going to be awesome having my deathguard emerge from drop-pods :D

Liber Chaos
15-08-2008, 16:38
the problem is that if the icon bearer is killed they lose all their abilities. WTF???

Something that will happen even more often with the 5th Ed. wound allocation rules. I've seen icon bearers die in the first round of shooting.

Poof, there goes your ability for the whole squad and the points you spent for the icon -- some of which are pretty pricey depending on the size of your squad.

Ubermensch Commander
15-08-2008, 16:44
@The Warsmith and Vaz84
Ok fine, its not a mark....but you don't even get an icon and are unable to represent those god-loyal termy lords you speak of with the SM codex. Besides, Nurgle Marines(and Bersekers, etc) are supposed to be the ones TOTALLY gone on the path to their god. Now i know that explanation wont satisy many. I just feel it necessary to give the argument a voice.
At Vaz particularly- It's insulting for the Space Marines getting shiny new toys? How bout how everyone else felt when the easily abusable 3.5 Chaos codex came out?
As for the most vanilla representation ever, it fits right in with both the 2nd edition and 3rd edition codexes.

But thats not the core of my comment- I am just pointing out the argument that the new SM codex will represent Chaos better is BULLS***. If the inability to field Nurgle marked termies(or any other Chaos God) is so horrendous, and so not Chaosy, going to an army THAT DOESNT EVEN HAVE ICONS OF THE GOD OR THE TROOP CHOICES completely invalidates that claim.

I am frustrated because people dis the new Chaos codex so much for not being "Chaosy".....these same people insult and disregard the icons as "counts as" as insufficient or that "counts as" Nurgle marines as siege armoured troopers in an IW army is somehow not fluffy because it isn't pie plates of doom. Then....these same Chaos codex naysayeers turn around and "counts as" an ENTIRE army using a non chaos codex. Ahhhh smell that? That's a false argument and hyprocristy. At the very least it makes no sense. "No Legion specific rules and no marks this new codex is so not Chaos! So lets go use a Codex that STILL doesn't have Icons or Legion specific rules. Hell that doesnt even have Chaos Space Marines in it. Sure yeah, that makes sense."
Is the lastest Chaos codex perfect? Hell no. No codex is. But it was a much needed balance from the 3.5 codex, gave some underused troop choices/armys a boost, and still lets you play a Chaos army...even a Legion specific one.
Again, I don't care if someone uses SM dex to counts as a Chaos force....but it DOES NOT represent Chaos better than the Chaos dex. That argument is false.

Mozzamanx
15-08-2008, 16:48
The Loyalist codex isn't a perfect representation of Chaos. Neither is the Chaos codex. Loyalists have better rules. The undivided Legions are closer to the fluff with Loyalist rules than Chaos.

If you have to use counts-as, you may as well take all the other options and power the Loyalist one offers.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
15-08-2008, 16:52
The Loyalist codex isn't a perfect representation of Chaos. Neither is the Chaos codex. Loyalists have better rules.

If you have to use counts-as, you may as well take all the other options and power the Loyalist one offers.

... and have acces to fluffy things that cant be count as in chaos dex - i posted it few posts above.

but Ubermensch Commander and the Arctophylax Faren did not answered -probably because of lacking arguments to counter my words.

==Me==
15-08-2008, 16:56
If you have to use counts-as, you may as well take all the other options and power the Loyalist one offers.

And it all comes out:rolleyes:

Counts as is a great rule, it encourages people to be creative with their models and just take a new spin on something old. The idea of TSons using Necron rules is awesome. Counts as just to get a supposed advantage ruleswise is pretty weak though.

Ubermensch Commander
15-08-2008, 17:00
... and have acces to fluffy things that cant be count as in chaos dex - i posted it few posts above.

but Ubermensch Commander and the Arctophylax Faren did not answered -probably because of lacking arguments to counter my words.

I just posted two very coherent posts explaing how the Loyalist codex does not represent the Chaos forces better than the Chaos codex. I even stated in my first post that you can in fact use the Loyalist Codex to represnt the Chaos forces. It can be fun. But the argument on this forum for so long is that "I dont want to have to "count as" with the new Chaos codex." But the SECOND the next "uber codex" is rumored suddenly Chaos players are all too willing to "count as" an entire army with some very glaring NOT Chaos bits in it. So NO, the new SM codex DOES NOT represent Chaos better than the Chaos codex. The flexibility of "counts as" allows for the new SM codex(or so we presuppose, since it isnt out yet) to represent Chaos forces does not invalidate my argument in the slightest. I am just pointing out the BLATANT HYPROCRISY and FALSE ARGUMENTS that I am frustrated with.

Ubermensch Commander
15-08-2008, 17:01
And it all comes out:rolleyes:

Counts as is a great rule, it encourages people to be creative with their models and just take a new spin on something old. The idea of TSons using Necron rules is awesome. Counts as just to get a supposed advantage ruleswise is pretty weak though.

Thank You! Shifting to the Loyalist codex reeks of "i want better rules", despite the Chaos codex being competitve still.

Mozzamanx
15-08-2008, 17:02
Dark Angel players are allowed to complain that Loyalists are better. Blood Angels are allowed to complain. Why should Chaos be forced to use a weaker codex, when there is a superior one which can be used to represent them? Because they don't have as many sales?

Would you be happy if your army had about 50% of its options stripped out and none replaced, while your 'mirror' army gets 50% more a few months later? Why should we have to be weaker?

I'm not advocating a Khornate Tigerius or Thousand Son Assault Veterans. I'm supporting Iron Warrior Thunderfire Cannons and Death Guard Drop Pods.

Slaaneshi Ice Cream
15-08-2008, 17:05
And what about Dreadnoughts? These half-dead warriors in tombs of pain just stride casually across the battlefield as if they're mooching through a field picking flowers, then come tapping politely with their S10 DCCW. That accurately sums up something Chaos Lords have chained up and isolated from, for fear of it causing untold destruction doesn't it?



Yeah, the background for that is cool. But, the rules blow chunks. Hm... do I spend points on someone who will probably shoot my own guys at least once per game? Nah.




Unfortunately, the fact that people are considering doing this shows me that GW really missed the mark with the new CSM 'dex, as well as a great opportunity to come up with something really creative while correcting some of the abuses allowed by the 3.5 CSM 'dex. Instead, they used a chainsaw instead of a scalpel.

I agree. The new SM codex sounds much more interesting and varied than the CSM codex. Because it's got OPTIONS people. Actual fun options that don't hurt your own army, like daemon weapons and frenzied dreadnoughts. I think relic blades are what daemon weapons should've been. That would make one heck of a killy lord - who DOESN'T hit himself in the face everytime he rolls a 1.




But please, don't throw out the idea that it somehow represents Chaos better than the Chaos codex please? The one exception being, of course, newly turned renegade chapters who are basically Loyalist space marines in training, equipment, and organization,(Codex adherent, basically, not Legion made)...just not loyal anymore.


The new SM codex sounds really, really flexible to me. That's something I expect from a Chaos codex, considering it's CHAOS. They're supposed to be varied and interesting. But the current codex is boring. No options to customize your forces, just a bunch of stuff cobbled together.

The Song of Spears
15-08-2008, 17:05
I have 100% plans to use my IW with the new awesome space marines rules as the +1 fortification to cover is EXACTLY what IW do in combat. I cant wait for the new marines dex, my IW will live again!!!! Yayy!!!!!!

OT, counts as, even for special characters is 100% tourney legal, which means to me its expected more or less. Building your own chapter (as described in the current marines dex) is not a whole lot different from using the imperium dex to represent a chaos force.

So i say to all those ninnys out there, who cares? Let the counts as players have fun! Work with them to make the army understandable in its unit selection and modeling and you WILL have a better gaming environment. Besides, much to my displeasure, the chaos dex is not going anywhere, so they can always go back to it should they want to.

Slaaneshi Ice Cream
15-08-2008, 17:08
Dark Angel players are allowed to complain that Loyalists are better. Dark Angels are allowed to complain. Why should Chaos be forced to use a weaker codex, when there is a superior one which can be used to represent them? Because they don't have as many sales?

Would you be happy if your army had about 50% of its options stripped out and none replaced, while your 'mirror' army gets 50% more a few months later? Why should we have to be weaker?

I'm not advocating a Khornate Tigerius or Thousand Son Assault Veterans. I'm supporting Iron Warrior Thunderfire Cannons and Death Guard Drop Pods.

Quoted and Bolded for Truth.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
15-08-2008, 17:13
@Ubermensch Commander: There are some armies that are better represented by C:SM than C:CSM

Simply becasue they offer equipment that is not possible in C:CSM.

Drop Pod Chaos Army [impossible under C:CSM]
Siege Chaos Army [require less counts as than C:CSM list]

therefore there are at least 2 ARMY LISTS that shows you that SOME ARMIES [Chaos Undivided] that are better using C:SM than C:CSM

Yes, C:SM is not suited for DG/EC and is less suited for WE/TS, but aforementioned themes shows you that the C:SM plays more like some themes than C:CSM

so stop posting about BLATANT HYPROCRISY and FALSE ARGUMENTS, and instead show me how to build list with Drop Pods using C:CSM - or stop whining

p.s: not everybody wants to play dual lash - the most competetive chaos build. very very boring and horribly unfluffy. at least C:SM give use more real choices and using 'Captain/CM' as 'Lords' is not shooting yourself in the feet.

The_Warsmith
15-08-2008, 17:19
Thank You! Shifting to the Loyalist codex reeks of "i want better rules", despite the Chaos codex being competitve still.

you've complely missed the point, the chaos codex is competative, i agree with that and i've never had a problem with it's power level and never agreed with people who say it is under powered

the point is that if i did switch to the loyalist codex i'd have a better representation of my army on the battlefield. IW don't use daemons and rarly use cult troopers and possessed so for the sake of a themed army i've basicly shot myself in the foot with the chaos codex. on the other hand i could switch to the loyalist codex and get access to artillery (thunderfire cannon + whirlwind) and special rules that show their experiance at trench and siege warfare (fortifing cover ect. as has already been said)

Liber Chaos
15-08-2008, 17:24
Yeah, the background for that is cool. But, the rules blow chunks. Hm... do I spend points on someone who will probably shoot my own guys at least once per game? Nah.

And this will be that unit's final act before it is blown apart after mooning the enemy while it shoots you.

Of course, the way I roll dice, my opponent would probably not shoot my Dred because it would be an asset that would shoot me every turn :rolleyes:

x-esiv-4c
15-08-2008, 17:25
Why is there such resentment by SM players against the CSM crowd that wants to use their codex?

==Me==
15-08-2008, 17:25
Dark Angel players are allowed to complain that Loyalists are better. Dark Angels are allowed to complain. Why should Chaos be forced to use a weaker codex, when there is a superior one which can be used to represent them? Because they don't have as many sales?

Would you be happy if your army had about 50% of its options stripped out and none replaced, while your 'mirror' army gets 50% more a few months later? Why should we have to be weaker?

I'm not advocating a Khornate Tigerius or Thousand Son Assault Veterans. I'm supporting Iron Warrior Thunderfire Cannons and Death Guard Drop Pods.

I play Dark Angels and I'll still be using our Codex (might try out the new rules once or twice, long enough to get ==My== new chapter up and running) as it represents DA the best, I feel.

If you want to use the new Codex to represent Chaos, go for it. It could represent the Undivided Legions quite well (especially IW), probably better than the current Chaos 'dex. That would be a "proper" counts-as. If you do it just because you want "ub3r l33t speshul ruelz!" I'm going to call bs on it. And it looks like a lot of Chaos players (the ones who miss 3.5 cheese so much) are going for the latter.

So yes, hypocrisy is a very fitting word.

Grand Master Raziel
15-08-2008, 17:31
If Dark Angels can use the new toys, then so can Chaos. You force me to use counts-as for a proper Legion? I'm going to use it to the full.

I'm just going to say this once, but it's going out to all the Chaos fanbois who are harboring such sentiments: stop being such a bunch of drama queens. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Codex: Chaos Space Marines. Even after the release of the new Codex: Space Marines, C: CSM will still have it beat in terms of power, flexibility, and customizability. We all know that Chaos took a huge beating from the nerf stick, but quite frankly it needed it, and what you wound up with is still pretty awesome, which you would see if you allowed yourselves half a chance of doing so. Any failures in your ability to make a list appropriate to a particular Chaos legion with C: CSM is a failure on your part, not a flaw with the book. If you'd expend the amount of energy in using C: CSM creatively as you did in knocking down C: CSM for it's percieved, mostly fictional flaws, you wouldn't have any trouble coming up with legion lists that are both thematically appropriate and fun to play. You've got a month or so before the new Codex: Space Marines comes out. Why don't you give that a try between now and then? The only thing you have to lose are your self-established preconceptions.

Brother Gabriel
15-08-2008, 17:35
Cool thread. Im going to use the Chaos Codex for my Darkangels. I mean Azrael is cool with the Rules of Abbadon. And nothing represents the Ravenwing as good as Nurgle bikers (Ravenwing guys are the toughest).
Deathwing = Chaos Termis....
Why havent i thought of that earlier.

Ubermensch Commander
15-08-2008, 17:38
What about Chaos Undivided army ? You forget that such forces exist ?

-no marks of chaos: ATSKNF represent their MoCU [it is psychological effect afterall]
-no cult specific troops: they do not use them anyway
-no daemon weapon: Relic Blade make perfect Daemon Weapon/Daemonic Strenght Replacement
-no AC/LS/S: [AC]but could use other tech that is similliar in effect, afterall chaos techies are not forced to pray X weeks to click a button. they could do everything they desire, and something will be similiar to ACann, [LS] i do not get the idea that Chaos left all anti-grav tech - it was always stupid excuse [S] Chaos often fight alongside Traitor guard - that use drugs and are gifted with mutations/blessing and random equipment - it is perfectly possible that at least some of them are accurately represented by scouts.

so you have rather weak arguments why shouldn't they use C:SM

reason to use it:
-siege equipment is actually in the codex
-veteran assault squad
-ability to make planetfall with pods
-actual cultist units
-better champions [sweet irony - csm ones used to have Daemonic Strenght, now sm elite could do it]
-thunder hammer and storm shield imagery
-use of chaplains
-veteran squad actually veteran - better than basic squad in cc.
-12 + LR
-attack bikes in codex
-fortification in codex


Yes, except nearly everything you mentioned about Chaos Undivided forces can be represented USING THE CHAOS MARINE CODEX. I did forget to mention the Undivided forces. I did not forget them, simply edited them out in my typing and forgot to put em back in.

-Seige equipment- Elaborate for me please. Is there some rumours of new "seige equipment" upgrade or item in the new codex? I have not heard of this. If you mean the new Siege dread for loyalists, I think the Defiler is a pretty good equivalent and more Chaosy for being a Daemon Engine. In the fluff the Defiler is used to blow holes in fortifications and then scuttle up, into, and over the breach. I feel they represent that pretty well. As for the..Thudd Cannon i think it is for Techmarines...I need to see the rules. I do not know what it does so i cannot comment. Oh and all Marines get Vindicators so thats cool. As for Siege Equipment in the Chaos Codex- Nurgle Marines can be counts as in an undivided forces as somewhere between a Terminator and Marine in terms of armor. Clear the trenches, into the breach and all that.

-Yes you can count as all those nifty Land speeders, attack bikes, Asasult cannons and say "well they just have similar tech or use sorcery to reproduce it" You most certainly can. OR you could just use the CHAOS SPACE MARINE EQUIPMENT as in the Chaos Codex. Again, taking the shiny awesome toys of the loyalist marines is not more Chaosy than the Chaos Codex. It might be cool to play with the awesome Loyalist toys, but that does not make it more Chaosy. Like it or not, the fluff has divided(and game balance more honestly) things such as Land Speeders and Assault Cannons from the Chaos Space Marine armory. I believe they did this simply to have the loyalist marines have SOMETHING that the Chaos Marines do not have.

-ATSKNF represents a marines dedication to the Emperor. The self centered and self serving Chaos Marines should not get that. Yes it can be used to represent mark of Chaos undivided(or Chaos Glory i think the latest one is called) OR....you could just use the Actual Icon from the Chaos codex.

-Relic blade-again I suppose you could. It isnt a Daemon Weapon, doenst turn on the user and kill him , but again it could work. and again WHY NOT JUST USE THE ACTUAL ITEMS FROM THE CHAOS CODEX?

Reason to use it-
Actually most of those sound like just wanting the new toys of the Space Marine codex. Thunder hammer and storm shields for example.

-Chaplains-The most zealous devotees of the Imperial fiath(well except of SoB and Commisars...and...man theres alot of those looneys) do not fit in with the Chaos Legions. Yes, Dark Apostles of the Word Bearers. and again you can represent those with MoTzeentch invulnerable save and a power weapon. Yes Demagogue ability is gone. It was only ever there for the 3.5 codex soooo....*shrug*.

-Actualy Cultist unit-simply not true. If you are gonna use Scouts to represent cultist(which they can but those are some bad ass cultists) why not use Daemons from Chaos Codex? They do a better job of representing cultists than scouts anyway. Disposable, low save units, that dont even take up a FoC slot? Yeah baby! Sounds like Cultys to me!
*NOTE* I would like to see a cult troop choice for ALL CSM forces. I think this is one of the oversights of GW in the new dex. All the Legions depend on Slave Labor to function to one degree or another. IT makes sense that they could throw them into the fire. Besides, many of those could be traitor guard or aspiring CSM marines or God Specific worshippers. Prove yourself in battle and you get become a CSM/better follower of you god.

-Veteran Assault Squad-I am afraid I dont follower your point here. Yeah its a cool unit. But other than a "cool new toy/better rules" angle, why is that somehow more Chaosy than Chaos Codex? Raptor squads/chosen? Use a mark of Khorne to buff em. Veteran Assault squad equivalent

-Veteran Squad-I dunno man. Chosen are a very Chaos thing. and pretty good. If the new vets are better thats fine. they have been useless in the Space Marine codex they need a buff. I am just not seeing how they are more Chaosy than Chaos.

-Planet fall with Pods-Hmm, agreed. Pretty Chaosy....for some armies. But they have greater focus in Loyalist armies because thats what Loyalist armies do...spearhead, fast assault. That is their SPECIFIC role.

-12+LR- I am sorry, could you elaborate?

-fortification in Codex- Again elaborate please. I honestly dont know what this is. Is it a special rule?

-Attack bikes in codex-Ok this is a Loyalist space marine toy. I do not see how it is particularly Chaosy. No Legion i know of desperately requires this to represent their forces.

So most of what you mentioned that could be represented using the SM codex and counts is already in the Chaos Codex or the Chaos Codex can be used to represent it. If the Space Marines have toys the Chaos Marines dont, oh well. That is as it should be. Space Marines should no more get T-sons and Sorcerors than Chaos should get Scout Land speeders or the new Sternguard vets.

If i missed one of you points, please let me know. This is really long.

The SM codex is not more accurate for representing Chaos forces. It CAN be used. I never said it couldn't. I actually stated it would be fun. But again........why not just use the bloody Chaos Codex?
The only reason that seems to be emerging, hidden under the lie of "its more Chaosy" is "We want shiny new tools and awesome new rules".

Ubermensch Commander
15-08-2008, 17:48
Dark Angel players are allowed to complain that Loyalists are better. Dark Angels are allowed to complain. Why should Chaos be forced to use a weaker codex, when there is a superior one which can be used to represent them? Because they don't have as many sales?

Would you be happy if your army had about 50% of its options stripped out and none replaced, while your 'mirror' army gets 50% more a few months later? Why should we have to be weaker?

I'm not advocating a Khornate Tigerius or Thousand Son Assault Veterans. I'm supporting Iron Warrior Thunderfire Cannons and Death Guard Drop Pods.

That 50% options stripped was replaced by greater flexibility of a single rules list. If we are allowing "counts as" then that argument quickly falls apart.
Let's take Iron Warriors-No more Basilisk. Drat! But now no restrictions vindicator. Still no restrictions Oblits(though they are rightfully in the Hvy Support section now). I remember 3.5 codex IW players(not all, but some) who wanted Berserkers cause you could take one unit of them in the IW index astartes. Those are back. No Kai gun? Dang...wait! Units armed with Kai guns fighting to control the Daemons within=T-sons. Siege Units=Nurgle Marines. and so on and so forth.

Not to mention the 3.5 codex needed a fix. Had it's good points, but need a balance BADLY. Not all armies from it were broken. Far from it. But it had many, many exploitable lists.


Except you cant have Death Guard Drop Pods in either codex. As for the Thundefire cannon (thats the new Techmarine weapon right?) that should not dictate exactly what a Iron Warriors force is. It is a single item taht the Space Marines forces can get.
What about Defilers? Perfect for Sieges. you stil have vindicatorsl. can still go gunline if you want. Can "count as" possessed as failed, mad, Obliterators(virus didnt go right) and so they are used as shell fodder to go into breach. Iconed CSM can be assorted siege troopers, etc. There is so much you can do with the CSM codex. Saying "ITEM-FROM-OTHER CODEX ARMY FROM MY CODEX" is more an army from your codex is...well.....I just dont get it, man.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
15-08-2008, 17:56
Siege Toys - Conversion Beamer and that-techmarine-guy-gun-forget-its-name. Actual master of the forge [Iron warriors?]

VAS - after khorne icon drops they behave like normal assault marines. also cant use multiple close combat weapons.

Fortification - techie gives one terrain +1 to cover save. sounds like fortification [IW=masters of fortifications?]

Drop Pods - you said that i'm right. beside - some chaos chapters use it extensively [Night Lords and their raid tactics?]

Chosen - they are no more chaosy than veterans. and chaos have no option to 'go shooty' with bolter marines.

ATSKNF - it is psychology boost - source is not important.

Most SM toys - i said actual counts as opportunities. beside, as you noted - lack of some choices is actual game balance than fluff reason.

12+LR - more space in loyalist land rider.

Yeah, most could be done with C:CSM. But using extensive counts as. But some things cant be done.

The_Warsmith
15-08-2008, 17:59
since the night lords make heavy use of raptors and they have been fighting for 10,000 years you'd think some of them had made it to 'chosen' status, slapping an icon of khorne on regular raptors does not make them veterans.

chapter masters mounted on a bike make bikes a troop choice, so take a few units of bikes and a load of veteran and normal assault marines and you have a fluffy night lords force, true some things make little sence like why they have ATSKNF but then they see themselves as fear incarnate so maybe they don't feel it anymore?

12+LR - is a poor excuse though for switching codices, i disagree with anyone who would use count as to get better rules

Ubermensch Commander
15-08-2008, 18:03
you've complely missed the point, the chaos codex is competative, i agree with that and i've never had a problem with it's power level and never agreed with people who say it is under powered

the point is that if i did switch to the loyalist codex i'd have a better representation of my army on the battlefield. IW don't use daemons and rarly use cult troopers and possessed so for the sake of a themed army i've basicly shot myself in the foot with the chaos codex. on the other hand i could switch to the loyalist codex and get access to artillery (thunderfire cannon + whirlwind) and special rules that show their experiance at trench and siege warfare (fortifing cover ect. as has already been said)

I have not missed the point sir. I have shown that you can in fact use the CSM to represent Chaos armies, SPECIFCALLY, IW. Artillery? Defiler and vidicator. Whirlwind is artillery, yes. That doesnt mean the IW should get it or that is an IW tool. Th Defiler is a Siege Engine that perfectly fits with the IW theme. As for not using cult troops in IW... THIS IS MY POINT. I think i have said it multiple times. You are unwilling to proxy DG as Siege Troops, T-Sons as Kai Gunners, or whatever else you can think up....but you are willing to proxy an ENTIRE ARMY FROM A DIFFERENT CODEX? the Chaos Codex is perfectly capable of representing Chaos forces and being a Chaos codex and having Chaos forces in it (such as their basic marine that doesnt have ATSKNF and that is as it should be) is inherently more Chaosy than any SM dex no matter how shiny its toys may be.

@Archeon
Considering this drop pod army hasnt been a part of the Chaos Codex since well before this edition of the chaos codex, im not really sure that is a valid point. NOW PAY ATTENTION PLEASE, because I must iterate this for the umpteenth time...i never said the SM codex could not be used to represent Chaos. But It doesnt make the Space Marine codex MORE Chaosy than Chaos. I can use the Eldar List to creat a pirate list to represent my Dark Eldar. It does not make the Eldar list MORE like Dark Eldar than the DE codex. If we allow "counts as" for an entire army for a diffrent codex, it is a hypocritic argument to then say the CSM codex isnt more Chaosy. When you unleash the wonder and absolute horror that is counts as(it can be both) the CSM can be used just fine.
The 4 Cult armies can still be used, Iron Warriors are still IW, Night Lords are still Night Lords, etc. They just aren't the same as they were in 3.5 codex. Some things were lost, yes. But in the case of Night Lords, any Night Lord player who thinks the flavor of their ENTIRE army was based around stealth should be slapped upside the damn head. That was a single rule, thrown in one iteration of the codex. There is more to the Night Lords than taht and more to Alpha Legion than inflitrating cultists. *note* again I feel ALL Chaos armies should get Cultists for aforementioned reasons.

Ok. Done with thread. Peace all.

sydbridges
15-08-2008, 18:13
First off, although I keep defending the count-as switch for players who want to use the SM codex, I suppose I should point out I'm not going to be one of them. Although someone suggested using the new Sternguard for Noise Marines, I'd rather just use Noise Marines for Noise Marines. For my army, there's less Count-As work to be done using the CSM codex (which isn't the same as the ideal "no count-as work"), so it's more sensible to use the CSM codex. While I would encourage anyone thinking of making the switch to try it, especially players of the armies that don't use cult troops, it's not something that I think would benefit my army.


If you do it just because you want "ub3r l33t speshul ruelz!" I'm going to call bs on it. And it looks like a lot of Chaos players (the ones who miss 3.5 cheese so much) are going for the latter.

I find it interesting that you think the players who just miss the customization options from 3.5 that were removed in the 4.0 codex are cheesy and that you don't find it telling that they look at the SM codex and go, "Oh, hey, that's where all our crap went. FORWARD!"


Even after the release of the new Codex: Space Marines, C: CSM will still have it beat in terms of power, flexibility, and customizability.

I keep seeing this "CSM codex has more customizability" argument, yet last time I checked, the two armies have nearly the same number of different options available WITH THE CURRENT CODCIES. I even counted all the options in the two codices, helpfully merging the two types of terminators for space marines into one type (since they should be, anyways) and a couple others (like the two predator tank entries), and depending on whether you wanted to count greater/lesser daemons as full options, Space Marines either have one more choice or the same choices as CSMs. And the Space Marine army is getting a new slew of options in the next codex.

So, you can say "CSM beat SM for customizability," but that doesn't actually make it true.

I'll give you flexibility, in that CSMs have more troop choices than SMs have.

As for power, we won't know for sure until the SM codex comes out, but if, as I've seen claimed, all the "cheesy players" want to move to SM because it's so much more powerful than the CSM codex, then I'm not entirely convinced that the SM codex is less powerful than the CSM codex. You're going to have to work to convince me of that, as it certainly doesn't seem to be borne out by the evidence.

I don't feel like going back and finding the person who was complaining about this, but someone felt scouts were too awesome for cultist rules and that daemons were a much more logical fit.

As for the "Cultists are too awesome if you use scouts," maybe they're PDF turned traitor. Maybe they're Arbites turned traitor. The ruinous powers have their hooks everywhere, and if you're telling me it makes more sense for cultists to magically pop out of the pants of an Alpha Legion space marine than it does for them to be a normal unit, we have very different ideas about how cultists appear.

This does give me conversion ideas for a Alpha Legion marine with a cultist peeking his head out from the marine's crotch-plate.

The_Warsmith
15-08-2008, 18:14
when exactly did i say i was unwilling to use proxies? personally i am happy with the chaos codex and have gotten on just fine counting my basilisk as a vindicator and using bezerkers as 'breach storming assault marine' or noise marines as 'dam busters' in my IW army. but i defend the rights of other players to choose if they want to proxy their entire army because they feel it would better represent their army, chaos marines (especially renegades) are so similar it can be done

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
15-08-2008, 18:17
i'm not hypocrite. I use counts as with C:CSM and will use it with C:SM.

Purely because new codex make my army behave more like i envisioned them.

C:SM is no more chaosy than C:CSM, probably true. But either can represent close to the fluff chaos army.

IMO drop pod argument is valid, C:SM do not have pod till 4.0 codex. I cant understand why they do not allow us to use pods in csm codex.

P.S: if i want win, C:CSM is army of choice - it is very strong codex which lacks variety. C:SM allows it it seems.

p.p.s: i'm not huge fan of 3.5 CSM and 4.0 CSM and 3.0 CSM codices. i find first unbalanced, second unbalanced and boring and thrid weak and boring. But i like chaos very much :> especially my own chaos entity.

Ubermensch Commander
15-08-2008, 18:22
Siege Toys - Conversion Beamer and that-techmarine-guy-gun-forget-its-name. Actual master of the forge [Iron warriors?]

VAS - after khorne icon drops they behave like normal assault marines. also cant use multiple close combat weapons.

Fortification - techie gives one terrain +1 to cover save. sounds like fortification [IW=masters of fortifications?]

Drop Pods - you said that i'm right. beside - some chaos chapters use it extensively [Night Lords and their raid tactics?]

Chosen - they are no more chaosy than veterans. and chaos have no option to 'go shooty' with bolter marines.

ATSKNF - it is psychology boost - source is not important.

Most SM toys - i said actual counts as opportunities. beside, as you noted - lack of some choices is actual game balance than fluff reason.

12+LR - more space in loyalist land rider.

Yeah, most could be done with C:CSM. But using extensive counts as. But some things cant be done.

And this is where I have the issue and view the argument for the SM codex being more Chaosy than Chaso(IE unable to reperesent them as accurately) as hypocrisy. Why is it such a chore to have to use "extensive counts as" with the C:CSM but it is totally cool and no worries to proxy an ENTIRE ARMY from a DIFFERENT codex? The ONLY thought that leaps to my mind, having pointed out the myriad and many potentials for counts as is for a rules buff, with rare, rare exception. You might not be saying that but that is certainly how it appears to myself and others.

Just because an item, such as the Thunderfire(Thudd) gun and the Attack Bike could fit into another army, just like Ork Kannons in an IW force or Vypers in a Night Lords (or for that matter a White Scars force), does not necessarily that they should either a) get it. b) supersede what the force already has avaliable to it or c) that the rest of list somehow fits the army more fluffily.
As for the Master of the Forge being IW....I would really have to think on that. Yeah, the IW had Servo arms but beyond that didnt seem to have much "Techmarine" stuff about them. No servitors and the servo arms could be mounted on Asp Champs and such which makes think more "field mechanic with passing familiarity with the tech" than "Master of the Forge" HQ level fellow. Could swing either way i suppose.

Night Lords are more than just raiders. This is one of the problems of the 3.5 codex I think. It shoehorned people into believing that certain Legions need X unit and X rules to be X Legion. Yes the Night Lords do raid. But their modus operendai is FEAR and OVERWHELMING FORCE*FLEX CREATE SUPERNOVA*. Leastways, according to their Index Astartes. As for them using Drop Pods extensively....I do not recall that to be honest. Not saying that is an inaccurate description, just saying that is not what i got out of their IA or 3.5 codex. What i recall is the desciption of them nuking a planet, taking over it's communications system, and inflicting such horrors on the populace that many died from fear.

As for the LR+12, i will believe it when i see it and yes, all regular land raiders(for DA, BA, BT, Chaos, etc) should get that buff when and if it comes out.

Ubermensch Commander
15-08-2008, 18:30
when exactly did i say i was unwilling to use proxies? personally i am happy with the chaos codex and have gotten on just fine counting my basilisk as a vindicator and using bezerkers as 'breach storming assault marine' or noise marines as 'dam busters' in my IW army. but i defend the rights of other players to choose if they want to proxy their entire army because they feel it would better represent their army, chaos marines (especially renegades) are so similar it can be done

I support that as well! Once again... i have no problem with people doing that. I am just annoyed with SM codex somehow representing Chaos better when it lacks Chaos specific equipment and unit options. Really, most of my strong feeling on this comes from the incessant whining (YES that is exactly what it is) that has gone on for MONTHS on the Bolter and Chainsword and Warseer(though this place is way less annoying. Again, havent been called a fascist yet:) at least not seriously) regarding how the Chaos space marine codex "isnt chaosy" or "i dont want to do counts as". Then threads like this appear. So i apologize if i came off strongly. But i feel i gave some pretty sound reasons why the Chaos Codex can represent a Chaos force as well and better than a SM force. Because once you allow "counts as" in there....it all works great....good....decently enough.

The_Warsmith
15-08-2008, 18:34
then we can come to an agreement at least :P

sydbridges
15-08-2008, 18:36
(though this place is way less annoying. Again, havent been called a fascist yet:) at least not seriously)

Why would anyone call you a facist, you're clearly a Hollywood Communist that McCarthy missed.
:D


But i feel i gave some pretty sound reasons why the Chaos Codex can represent a Chaos force as well and better than a SM force.

I agree, the CSM codex can represent some Chaos armies better, but there are cases where the SM codex makes more sense than the CSM codex, and some people feel like it would fit the theme they want for their army better. Since the rules are supposed to provide something to do with the toys, why does it matter which rules people choose to use to represent their toys as long as they're the current rules for this game and they make it clear what they're doing in advance.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
15-08-2008, 18:41
i have no worries to proxy as anything.

about 'extensive counts as'. it's inaccurate. i'll show what i meant.

Vet Ass. Squad vs Raptors + MoK = Vet Ass. Squad is closer to the fluff than R +MoK, based on how they behave on the battlefield and counting their weapon opptions. get it ?

Legions used many tactics. And were trained with even more of them. Planetfall among them.

C:SM for some armies will behave more like C:CSM on the field that using C:SM it is irony.

of course one unit do not describe any legion [or other way - tactical marine describe most of them - as they are 50%+ or any of them]

Vaktathi
15-08-2008, 18:43
@The Warsmith and Vaz84
Ok fine, its not a mark....but you don't even get an icon and are unable to represent those god-loyal termy lords you speak of with the SM codex. Besides, Nurgle Marines(and Bersekers, etc) are supposed to be the ones TOTALLY gone on the path to their god. Now i know that explanation wont satisy many. I just feel it necessary to give the argument a voice. True, and most people won't argure that the SM codex will do Cult armies well.



At Vaz particularly- It's insulting for the Space Marines getting shiny new toys? How bout how everyone else felt when the easily abusable 3.5 Chaos codex came out?



Is the lastest Chaos codex perfect? Hell no. No codex is. But it was a much needed balance from the 3.5 codex, gave some underused troop choices/armys a boost, and still lets you play a Chaos army...even a Legion specific one.
Again, I don't care if someone uses SM dex to counts as a Chaos force....but it DOES NOT represent Chaos better than the Chaos dex. That argument is false.

If you are going to go down that road, look at the gigantic gutting the CSM codex got in terms of units, wargear, unit options, and abilities. Chaos got *one* new unit, that was the vindicator, which wasn't entirely new either, they had them in 2nd Ed and under the IW list.

Currently SM's have the cheapest heavy weapons, some of the best wargear in the game, some very good traits with that require no real drawbacks ("oh noes, we stand alone!"). It's entirely possible to make SM armies currently with more heavy weapons (26 HW's) than most IG armies and still pack in 80 marines, 30 of them infiltrating havoc squads, and an Ld10 basic Master in a 2000pt army. How is that not just as abuseable as anything in the 3.5 Chaos codex?

Now look at the SM codex to this new one, and they get 7 new units (vanguard/sternguard vets, LS Storm, LR Redeemer, Thunderfire Cannon, Ironclad Dread, Legion of the Damned) A huge number of SC's and HQ units, Librarians with far more (and in many ways better) Psychic Powers than Tzeentchian Sorcerers, and many of the basic SM units got better, Drop Pods and LR's got expanded capacities where the CSM, DA and BA ones do not, Tac Squads get *free* weapons options at 10 strong for the same price as 10 man squads in DA BA armies without weapons, the SM Vindicator auto-passes terrain tests where the CSM, DA, and BA ones do not, The Storm Shield now gives a flat 3+ Invul save to all attacks (presumably for no points increase, it costs 35pts for a Chaos termi squad to get a 4+ invul save that can be lost by killing the Icon), Basic Dreads get expanded weapons options, and Devestators can give a model a BS of 5.

While Chaos got a couple cool things, on the whole it was a gutting. The new SM's have a great codex even now, and now they just get far and away better.






As for the most vanilla representation ever, it fits right in with both the 2nd edition and 3rd edition codexes. Not quite, the 2nd Ed codex still had actual Cult units other than basic Troops, the Icons don't compare even to that, and 2nd Ed you could have all sorts of Daemons, Cultists, and CSM's in the same army, and had far more wargear options. The 3.0 Chaos Codex was a pile of crap, a pamphlet with that was rushed out so that people could stop using the Black Book list.



But thats not the core of my comment- I am just pointing out the argument that the new SM codex will represent Chaos better is BULLS***. That depends on the army you want to represent. You keep hitting on Cult armies, which is not what most people would use the SM codex for. I think however you would have a very hard case saying that the new SM codex would not be *great* for Iron Warriors with Thunderfire cannons, all those Techpriests and units that fortify terrain, super shooty Vets, and expanded artillery compared to whats available in the CSM codex. Same goes for Night Lords and Alpha Legion. Granted I don't think that Tzeentch would be the best represented by the SM codex, but if I were making a Night Lords army, I would use the new SM book over the CSM book for sure.



I am frustrated because people dis the new Chaos codex so much for not being "Chaosy".....these same people insult and disregard the icons as "counts as" as insufficient Considering they really don't do what they should do, its not hard to see why.


or that "counts as" Nurgle marines as siege armoured troopers in an IW army is somehow not fluffy because it isn't pie plates of doom. I fail to see that.


Then....these same Chaos codex naysayeers turn around and "counts as" an ENTIRE army using a non chaos codex. If the other army can be better used to represent it, why not.


Ahhhh smell that? That's a false argument and hyprocristy. At the very least it makes no sense. "No Legion specific rules and no marks this new codex is so not Chaos! So lets go use a Codex that STILL doesn't have Icons or Legion specific rules. Hell that doesnt even have Chaos Space Marines in it. Sure yeah, that makes sense." You again are fixated on people using the SM codex to represent Cult armies. Most people aren't going to do so, however for representing the Undivided Legions that don't use Cult Units or Daemons, I would very much like to see why the SM codex wouldn't fit better, from what I'm seeing, at the *very* least Night Lords and Iron Warriors seem a much better fit to the new SM codex than the CSM codex.

Ruroni
15-08-2008, 19:04
Funniest thing about this thread is most people are agreeing on a lot of stuff but still yelling about it haha. From the other side of the coin, as a BT player, I doubted my chapter when I heard about the new SM codex. I've already been a bit annoyed about 1 attack powerfists, but vanguard vets, relic blades, 3+ storm shields (and I'd literally just assembled a new squad with those huge sweet FW ones) I got to work based on rumors on how I could use the new book to rep my BTs better. Funny enough, after taking a step back, I realized nothing fit my army as well as my book.

Sure I could say that BT aren't all CC and zealousness, and justify sternguard, etc. My EC could just be the new honor guard guy. My vow? maybe I'd take pedro and make vets troops, as was rumored. Sure more expensive, but at least 2 CCWs. Vanguard vets on foot are wayyyyyy better than sword brethren, right? Then I got to thinking about points, and balance.

Sure, looking at his options a squad of vanguard kicks @ss. whole bunch of guys with 2 attacks, and wow fists or lightning claws would be sick. But then again, base he's gotta be 20-25 pts. The claws I'm almost positive must have a price tag of 15 more. That's 35-40 pts, and know what else is? The humble BT assault termies who I've been using all along, and sure they aren't as mobile, but they come with a 2+/5+, and using my own rules I can have my reroll hits vow that's served me so well. Plus furious charge, makes a horribly nasty unit.

That's all really just part of the case, and you could go tit-for-tat on the whole list vs list, but I think in the end I can rep myself better. I'm all for counts as to a degree. Recently turned chapters? Some of us probably remember a chapter approved where they first introduced renegades, and actually told you to use whichever book, loyal or chaos, fit best. IW even have a good case here I'm sure, as they don't like mutation, though since their head honcho basically turned himself into an obliterator on purpose, and those are very much not in the SM book, I think there's a much stronger case for the chaos book.

Some have said above, and I agree, that the books are close. If I liked chaos, I'd choose them, as I see them having the edge, having wayyyyyy better troops choices in a game where troops literally win 2/3 game types.

The problem is there's no line. The guy that makes a really cool, fluffy and fair army of Alpha legion out of loyal rules will be alongside 4 kids who saw how ZOMG UBER NU SM DEX IS!!! who just took the rules that they read on a forum performed the best.

As I said above, everything has a points cost, and any new super leet zomg SM stuff will cost you in points, and while I don't doubt it'll be a bit better than the current book, to bring it into balance, I don't think it'll be the showstopper. Even last chaos dex, which was just sick nasty, after a while, people got used to it, and had no trouble playing against it and winning.

I just think anyone doing this counts as switch needs to take a long look and make sure they're making the game more fun for them and not just trying to build an army they think has a momentary rules advantage, that may or may not be all in their heads.

The_Warsmith
15-08-2008, 19:20
I just think anyone doing this counts as switch needs to take a long look and make sure they're making the game more fun for them and not just trying to build an army they think has a momentary rules advantage, that may or may not be all in their heads.



quoted for truth.

Heru Talon
15-08-2008, 19:21
Special Characters, I'm afraid, are as they said, Special Characters. I'm not entirely sure if you're allowed to remodel them or make them Counts As. The one hard rule about it, I think. I personally don't mind it.
No they are valid choices in your armylist that you can count as whatever you want. There is no "hard rule" anywhere that states otherwise.

Liber Chaos
15-08-2008, 21:16
I'm just going to say this once, but it's going out to all the Chaos fanbois who are harboring such sentiments: stop being such a bunch of drama queens. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Codex: Chaos Space Marines. Even after the release of the new Codex: Space Marines, C: CSM will still have it beat in terms of power, flexibility, and customizability. We all know that Chaos took a huge beating from the nerf stick, but quite frankly it needed it, and what you wound up with is still pretty awesome, which you would see if you allowed yourselves half a chance of doing so. Any failures in your ability to make a list appropriate to a particular Chaos legion with C: CSM is a failure on your part, not a flaw with the book.

Another example of the typical, knee-jerk assumption that anyone who was disappointed with the new CSM 'dex is nothing more than a whiner upset because they can no longer field a cheesy, uber-competitive list.

A gross over-generalization that misses the point regarding why a lot of Chaos players dislike the new CSM 'dex.

Contrary to popular belief, there are a lot of Chaos players, like myself, who like to run fluffy/flavorable lists. Did 3.5 have issues that needed to be fixed? Of course it did. The problem is that GW did more than remove the chessy stuff, they threw out the meat, vegetables, mustard and even some of the bread. What was left was pretty bland.

I don't think most CSM players or people on this thread are complaining that you can't field a competitive list with the current CSM list. You can, and if the 'dex is looked at in a vacuum it has some options. When put in context of the legion-specific options in 3.5, the wholesale removal of those options and legions in the current CSM 'dex in the name of simplification, and the list of new options given in the new SM 'dex, the reason for the disappointment is pretty clear. I am not very interested in running a 2 lash prince, 9 oblit and mixture of Cult troops army, or something like it. A bland competitive list isn't fun for me. I'd rather have a broader range of options to select from.

I don't begrudge the SM's their shiny new toys or rules. I think that makes the game more interesting. But I also don't begrudge a player who wants to use the SM 'dex to represent a legion army or recent traitor/renegade army when the CSM 'dex does not provide the necessary tools to effectively do so.

Heru Talon
15-08-2008, 22:21
Here's a question if we put aside the Legions for a minute (assuming that GW does indeed intend to get a Codex: Chaos Legions made) how is C:CSM as a Codex: Renegades (ie what they designed it as)?

Vaktathi
15-08-2008, 22:41
Here's a question if we put aside the Legions for a minute (assuming that GW does indeed intend to get a Codex: Chaos Legions made) how is C:CSM as a Codex: Renegades (ie what they designed it as)?

Personally I don't think it even does Renegades all that well. In its attempt to do Cult Legions, Undivided Legions, *and* Renegades while keeping the equipment (weapons and vehicle options) identical to other Chaos codex's in addition to its attempt to "streamline", it ends up doing Renegades rather poorly.

Renegades I would imagine would not have Reaper Autocannons, Daemon Princes, Havoc Launchers, Oblits, Defilers, insane dreads, Twin Linked bolters (as opposed to storm bolters), Thousand Sons equivalents (those created by the Rubric), Autocannon Havocs and other such equipment, and I would imagine for the most part that their equipment would remain somewhat similar to that of the basic SM's (e.g. powerfists instead of power weapons on Termi's).

Unfortunately it is exactly those things that basically define CSM's from their normal counterparts. With a true Renegades codex, I would have imagined that most of the equipment and wargear would be almost identical to that of the loyalist SM's, with a couple possible exceptions, but on the whole much the same. Instead I would imagine Renegades as normal SM's, but with the Icon system that the current CSM codex has (whereas Legions would have Marks from the old Codex), with a much more randomized leadership (they aren't loyalist SM's anymore and thus no ATSKNF, but they aren't all the Ld10 or fearless hardcore dudes of the Legions yet either).

I would imagine a true Renegade list as something lacking in vehicles for the most part, but heavily dependent on Deep Strike and Infiltrate entry (drop pods, etc) as such forces are likely to be without either the full support of their chapter, or without the resources they once had, and heavily favor a rapid insertion and raiding style force. Maybe a few abilities related to orbiting renegade strike cruisers to provide fire support instead of having Predators and Whirlwinds providing it.

As a raiding/suprise attack type army, I would imagine them with some abilities regarding army setup and things like that at the expense of raw firepower or killy, and be very reliant on placement and positioning.


At least thats how I would have done Renegades.

CHOOBER SNIPES
15-08-2008, 22:55
I am on the side of the "counts as" for a couple reasons. the main reason, is because even though there will be powergamers from chaos that go over to the SM dex for better rules reasons (if they even are), the people who really want to go over because they feel it can better represent their force should not be limited and should have the opportunity to do it (and the rules for SM in SOME cases definitely represent that force better). As it is, there will be powergamers in the SM crowd, and the powergamers will always be there. Powergamers will be powergamers, but the honest fluffy flavor of the game players should not be limited by them.

On the topic of the SM dex. the only problem to me is it seems like they took units that can just outclass chaos marines in what they do. for example, Khorne beserkers, dedicate every waking hour to close combat and bloodshed... some of them are thousands of years old. explain to me why the vanguard veterans should be BETTER than them. i could understand equal, i could understand a little worse but still got a good chance, but why that much better? i mean, yea theyre veterans but there are lots of chaos veterans too, so wouldnt a guy who starts out the same, has the same amount of experience as, but prays to the god of bloodshed in cc and dedicates his life to it so much at least be as good? before everyone says "stop crying about the rules just cus they have a better unit than you at cc" i dont care about rules balance in this, i mean the fluff. truly, i just believe they should have made a veteran like option that can be customized for chaos, but seeing as they didnt, i feel like we just got completely outclassed in everything (points justified or not). other than the lash, their psychers are better, their shooting overall is better (i mean, we have oblits but they have ass cannons,some free hvy weapons, whirlwinds the thunderfire thing, etc etc) now their cc is better too. I want to reiterate that this is not about them being overpowered or whatever, my point is that chaos marines are supposed to be "space marines and then some" the whole "all the training of the space marines added to the power of the chaos gods " deal. i believe the normal SM should have advantages over them in some ways, but there should be SOMETHING that the CSMs do better (i always thought CSM more cc and SM more shooty). TO ME it seems like they gave the SM a way to do each thing CSM do, but better (it may be justified in points but i feel like why should we be any less elite, give us something we can do better).

Liber Chaos
15-08-2008, 23:12
Here's a question if we put aside the Legions for a minute (assuming that GW does indeed intend to get a Codex: Chaos Legions made) how is C:CSM as a Codex: Renegades (ie what they designed it as)?

Good question.

I would echo Vaktathi's view that it does not do a very good job. It seems like in trying to fit everything into the 'dex none of the groups were well-served.

I like some of V's suggestions and would add another angle. A variant set of rules to match the background of part of my undivided army -- Fallen Templars. Black Templars who got trapped in the warp and are now part BT's and part daemons (the new Possessed models and fantasy beastmen were perfect for this). It would be interesting to have rules that give these types of armies some daemonic attributes to distinguish them from their loyalist brothers. They didn't turn traitor voluntarily. They were turned bad due to The Warp.

The concept of SM's turning into renegades, pirates and traitors has a lot of potential. It gives some choice to those who don't want to do god-specific legions, etc. Unfortunately, IMHO that potential was not really developed in the new 'dex. It turned out to be generic CSM's with differing paint schemes.

nomadimp
16-08-2008, 01:03
I, personally, love "Counts as" because it really lets your creative juices flow. Just look at all the awesome ideas in this thread already (necron rules for 1k sons!! That is just awesome!).

This game has always required creative input to get the most out of it and some of the coolest and fluffiest armies around are "counts as."

As long as the people you play with roll with it (and even better, join in!), I forsee many fun games in your future.

Gutted
16-08-2008, 10:14
Here's a question if we put aside the Legions for a minute (assuming that GW does indeed intend to get a Codex: Chaos Legions made) how is C:CSM as a Codex: Renegades (ie what they designed it as)?

IMO C:CSM is pretty flexible and has most of the options one would want for your regular Chaos force. The only issue is that it is made to represent the Heresy level tech from when the legions defected.

So if you want your typical Chaos Warband the bulk of which are made of the marines that splintered away from the Legions with the odd new recruit it is realy good.

If you want to represent your average Legion Force it can do that fine as long as your prepared to strip the fluff away from some of the mechanical bonuses and count as.

For more Modern forces such as Hurons it doesn't have the wargear, so its not quite as good as it is for the Legions or Warbands. You are probably better off using C:SM

Arctophylax Faren
16-08-2008, 10:33
but Ubermensch Commander and the Arctophylax Faren did not answered -probably because of lacking arguments to counter my words.

When you type a sentence you should at least make it make sense.
And no, it's more likely I didn't answer because I do other things with my life than sit on the same thread 24 hours a day waiting for someone to post in it just so I can smash in a reply. I'll get to things when I'm ready. Now I'm ready, and I'm going to smash your point apart with my Thunder Hammer.

TOUGH.

There's a tonne of armies out there that don't get everything they want in their codex, so just because your Chaos army can't use Drop Pods (BOO HOO) the total opposite army represents them better?

Veteran Assault squads! Oh I see. So you make use of them. What about Chosen Marines? 4 power weapons available to that squad. Oh what's that? You like the MARINE rules better? What a wonderful excuse to discard Chaos' version of Veteran's and take the marines!

You're just whining because the current Codex isn't as good as the Space Marines. What did you use to represent these Veteran Assault troops with the last Codex? Perhaps you used the Possessed marines. No wait, they sucked a tad didn't they? Obviously not very elite there. Did you Counts As your Chaos army with the Eldar Codex so you could have some nifty veterans?

Justify why you are only complaining now that the new Space Marine codex is on its way, but didn't when the 3rd Ed Marine Codex was out and going up against the Chaos one. Did you use the older Space Marine Codex for Drop Pods when Chaos never had them? I don't think you did. You're using the new Codex as a thinly veiled excuse to whine loudly about the fact the Space Marines are getting the first 5th Edition Codex, and that you're not getting what you want because you're a Chaos player. Simple solution is to just disregard your entire army in its spirit and take up some new rules. Bright beacon of Chaos you are. You'll be fielding nothing other than a Space Marine army dressed for Hallowe'en if you Counts As for the arguments you're giving.

Oh, and whoever said "not all Chaos Dreadnoughts are angry", THEY ARE!!! They're built like that on purpose. You don't think a Chaos marine straps himself in do you? NO! They are incarcerated by their masters, into tombs of pain, so they will be furious fighters. Wait, let's do a Counts As, rip asunder the spirit of Chaos, and have your wicked Chaos Lord (Chapter Master), the guy who has ruthlessly backstabbed his way to the top, give his marines chocolates for their birthday, and even buckle up their little dreadnought seatbelt. Fits pretty well.

The whole reason Chaos Codex doesn't have drop pods is because it is currently tailored to be supreme WITHOUT THEM. Each book is made balanced and fair, and therefore CANNOT incorporate every single aspect you wish. Why yes, there are elements of the Marine Codex which fit very nicely for the Chaos Marines. Drop Pods being one of them. Everyone can argue all day that their army isn't truly represented by the Codex before them, but it can never justify throwing it out of the window and taking up an entirely new one.

In this case, there are examples in the Space Marine Codex that are perfect for Chaos players, but that's because it is the FIRST 5th Edition Codex. When the new Chaos Codex comes out (given it won't be for a fair while), then you can surely expect a whole host of things that can play to 5th Ed advantages and really make your armies feel at home. Chaos has the ability to enhance an entire BASIC squad with marks of Chaos, and you're moaning because the Space Marines can slightly fortify ONE piece of terrain? Anyone who says that in this current case, they're Counts As-ing because the new 'dex represents their Chaos army better is really whining about how seemingly tough the Space Marines are. If you're all about better representing, you'd bite the bullet, quit whining, and rough it out until the new Codex comes along.

I've been waiting 5 years for a Dark Eldar Codex. Hell even just a new model. We got totally bumped in Apocalypse Reload, with not a SINGLE datasheet. We're fighting blind and practically unable to compare to half the armies out there in terms of options, models and accurate representations, while you're complaining that you army, that has been tailored countlessly and given scores of attention can't field drop pods like they should be able to, or missed out on cultists.

Take an example from the Dark Eldar players. Suck it up.

Ubermensch highlights the most valid point - you don't have to have Plague marines be plague marines. They can be the Iron Warriors siege specialists, who are encased in armour so thick it gives them T5 and bionics that allow them the Feel No Pain Rule. There is NOTHING to justify you doing the Counts As rule with the SM Codex and not the Chaos Codex.

Use Lesser daemons as cultists. It's far more believable to have them with a 5+ inv save and S T 4 because their God has temporarily gifted them with such things so they can cause as much damage in the fight as possible.

You could even Counts As a Defiler. Create a tank that has a cannon and appendages used for ripping down walls. So now, we'd not have a Defiler, but an Iron Warriors Siege Track. It's easily explainable with minimum imagination.

List of possibilities goes on with things such as Spawn, Terminators and the likes at your disposal.


There will be very, very few of you out there who want to use Counts As using the SM Codex that are not simply after the new rules. And for that majority, just stop it. You're not fooling anyone with your whines of 'our codex doesn't represent us properly'.

djinn8
16-08-2008, 11:24
If it works for you and the people you play with, do it!

But you could reason that the Loyalists have better weapons, formations, tactics, etc, than the Traitor Legions because the Traitor Legions have been outdated by a thousand years. Untill the new codex turns up, your marines are trying to catch up with the new doctorines of the Astartes. That would be truly representative of your army - just wait for the RnD boys to crack it and when you get your hands on the new Chaos Codex watch in glee as those new Imperial tactics lose there punch and get countered.

The_Warsmith
16-08-2008, 11:54
Oh, and whoever said "not all Chaos Dreadnoughts are angry", THEY ARE!!!



have you ever read 'Dark Apostle'? judging by your answer i'd say you havn't. there is a dreadnaught in that book who is perfectly sane, he is more than sane he is a source of knowledge and wisdom for the younger members of the legion and is even given command of a company of marines. i'll admit that this is an exception to the rule that most chaos dreadnaughts are mental but since you are a dark eldar player i don't expect you to be an expert on the subject just like i know very little about dark eldar, just don't go around shouting that i am wrong when i have a soucre that proves i am right

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
16-08-2008, 12:15
Now I'm ready, and I'm going to smash your point apart with my Thunder Hammer.

TOUGH.

There's a tonne of armies out there that don't get everything they want in their codex, so just because your Chaos army can't use Drop Pods (BOO HOO) the total opposite army represents them better?

You mean total opposite with same statline, equipment and armour ? As you said, no Drop Pod is avilable in C:CSM. one of videly used tactics :>

Veteran Assault squads! Oh I see. So you make use of them. What about Chosen Marines? 4 power weapons available to that squad. Oh what's that? You like the MARINE rules better? What a wonderful excuse to discard Chaos' version of Veteran's and take the marines!

Do said vas have JUMP PACKS ?

You're just whining because the current Codex isn't as good as the Space Marines. What did you use to represent these Veteran Assault troops with the last Codex? Perhaps you used the Possessed marines. No wait, they sucked a tad didn't they? Obviously not very elite there. Did you Counts As your Chaos army with the Eldar Codex so you could have some nifty veterans?

Ever heard of Chosen ? in c:csm 3.5. or counts as c: blood angels?

Justify why you are only complaining now that the new Space Marine codex is on its way, but didn't when the 3rd Ed Marine Codex was out and going up against the Chaos one. Did you use the older Space Marine Codex for Drop Pods when Chaos never had them? I don't think you did. You're using the new Codex as a thinly veiled excuse to whine loudly about the fact the Space Marines are getting the first 5th Edition Codex, and that you're not getting what you want because you're a Chaos player. Simple solution is to just disregard your entire army in its spirit and take up some new rules. Bright beacon of Chaos you are. You'll be fielding nothing other than a Space Marine army dressed for Hallowe'en if you Counts As for the arguments you're giving.

yes, i used it for planetfall theme. I used C: SM 4.0, C: BA 3.0, Army of Death rules among others.

Oh, and whoever said "not all Chaos Dreadnoughts are angry", THEY ARE!!! They're built like that on purpose. You don't think a Chaos marine straps himself in do you? NO! They are incarcerated by their masters, into tombs of pain, so they will be furious fighters. Wait, let's do a Counts As, rip asunder the spirit of Chaos, and have your wicked Chaos Lord (Chapter Master), the guy who has ruthlessly backstabbed his way to the top, give his marines chocolates for their birthday, and even buckle up their little dreadnought seatbelt. Fits pretty well.

Galaxy is pretty big, and warbands/chapters/legions are vastly different. I bet some dreads are sane.

The whole reason Chaos Codex doesn't have drop pods is because it is currently tailored to be supreme WITHOUT THEM. Each book is made balanced and fair, and therefore CANNOT incorporate every single aspect you wish. Why yes, there are elements of the Marine Codex which fit very nicely for the Chaos Marines. Drop Pods being one of them. Everyone can argue all day that their army isn't truly represented by the Codex before them, but it can never justify throwing it out of the window and taking up an entirely new one.

Not everyone wants to play cheese 2xDP, 9xOblits and pm/Zerkers as troops. Some people want to play fluffy lists and have reasonable chance of winning.

In this case, there are examples in the Space Marine Codex that are perfect for Chaos players, but that's because it is the FIRST 5th Edition Codex. When the new Chaos Codex comes out (given it won't be for a fair while), then you can surely expect a whole host of things that can play to 5th Ed advantages and really make your armies feel at home. Chaos has the ability to enhance an entire BASIC squad with marks of Chaos, and you're moaning because the Space Marines can slightly fortify ONE piece of terrain? Anyone who says that in this current case, they're Counts As-ing because the new 'dex represents their Chaos army better is really whining about how seemingly tough the Space Marines are. If you're all about better representing, you'd bite the bullet, quit whining, and rough it out until the new Codex comes along.

But most of IW are basic marines, who likes to use fortification, not exacly gifts from the gods ... its too hard to understand ?

Ubermensch highlights the most valid point - you don't have to have Plague marines be plague marines. They can be the Iron Warriors siege specialists, who are encased in armour so thick it gives them T5 and bionics that allow them the Feel No Pain Rule. There is NOTHING to justify you doing the Counts As rule with the SM Codex and not the Chaos Codex.

not everyone like to be forced to play unit he do not like in order to remain competetive. thanks.

Use Lesser daemons as cultists. It's far more believable to have them with a 5+ inv save and S T 4 because their God has temporarily gifted them with such things so they can cause as much damage in the fight as possible.

yeah, and forget to shoot things, have uber WS and have inv save. not to mention that have to be summoned ...

You could even Counts As a Defiler. Create a tank that has a cannon and appendages used for ripping down walls. So now, we'd not have a Defiler, but an Iron Warriors Siege Track. It's easily explainable with minimum imagination.

List of possibilities goes on with things such as Spawn, Terminators and the likes at your disposal.

There will be very, very few of you out there who want to use Counts As using the SM Codex that are not simply after the new rules. And for that majority, just stop it. You're not fooling anyone with your whines of 'our codex doesn't represent us properly'.

to have it like artilery which can shoot only direct, right ? you are unable to take a bullet and say 'your point is valid' ?

==Me==
16-08-2008, 13:25
I don't buy the "we don't want to have to use Lash, Oblits, blah, blah, blah to be competitive" myth. The Chaos Codex has lots of good units and a good deal of internal balance (barring spawn). Some units need more work than others and some just operate differently, but they are all useful and viable. The Chaos Codex is probably one of the strongest Codices out there thanks to its solid Troops, flexible units, and a wide variety of choice. Also Lash (the Siren of 5th Ed)

catbarf
16-08-2008, 13:41
There's a tonne of armies out there that don't get everything they want in their codex, so just because your Chaos army can't use Drop Pods (BOO HOO) the total opposite army represents them better?

Rea-a-a-ally? Total opposite army? News to me. The equipment and statlines are almost exactly the same. Differing unit choices are solved with counts-as in a manner just as valid as your proposed IW not-Plague Marines.

The current Chaos codex is extremely similar to the current Marine one. Chaos just gets the marks of chaos and generic daemons. For an undivided force that doesn't use these, there is little difference between the two codices. For some other examples, such as Alpha Legion or Night Lords, it actually fits the theme.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
16-08-2008, 13:46
I don't buy the "we don't want to have to use Lash, Oblits, blah, blah, blah to be competitive" myth. The Chaos Codex has lots of good units and a good deal of internal balance (barring spawn). Some units need more work than others and some just operate differently, but they are all useful and viable. The Chaos Codex is probably one of the strongest Codices out there thanks to its solid Troops, flexible units, and a wide variety of choice. Also Lash (the Siren of 5th Ed)

troops is only place of any variety.

lets tak about HQ - show me non-prince competetive choice!

csm are not internaly balanced. take icon of nurgle. or possessed.or spawn. or dread. or lord. or non-slaaneshi sorcerer. or lesser daemons.

so? how do you want defend your point? show me.

before you say those are valid choices - yes. they are. if you want to fight uphill battle.

The_Warsmith
16-08-2008, 14:01
an uphill battle is nothing to be afraid of, the challenge is rewarding in itself

ok it's a little frustrating when you loose but a good general makes use of the troops he has not the troops he could have

as long as i have a fluffy, good looking army i don't really care and it's because of this i don't think we're on the same page Acheron, we agree but for different reasons

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
16-08-2008, 14:07
cool.

but there is a catch - i use Lord with Daemon Weapons [!], Raptors, Undivided Marines in Rhinos, Lesser Daemons, Dreads, Chosen and other uncompetetive units, and i have good win/draw/lose ratio.

Acually i use chaos codex, and miss only few things - like proper VAS and Drop Pod army.

Ruroni
16-08-2008, 14:20
That's pretty much where I was at with BT. I thought it stunk that as a chief SM assault army, it was bogus that the new dex had way better assault units, etc, but decided the rest of it was still more in line with my army.

Vaktathi
16-08-2008, 17:36
There's a tonne of armies out there that don't get everything they want in their codex, so just because your Chaos army can't use Drop Pods (BOO HOO) the total opposite army represents them better? Why not? It's not like trying to use Tyranids to represent Daemon Hunters, its not a total opposite.



Veteran Assault squads! Oh I see. So you make use of them. What about Chosen Marines? 4 power weapons available to that squad. Oh what's that? You like the MARINE rules better? What a wonderful excuse to discard Chaos' version of Veteran's and take the marines! Ah, but Chosen can't get jump packs, and Night Lords would very likely have some sort of jump pack Chosen equivalent, thus use the SM codex with vet Assault Squads.





Justify why you are only complaining now that the new Space Marine codex is on its way, but didn't when the 3rd Ed Marine Codex was out and going up against the Chaos one. what does the 3.0 Marine codex have to do with anything? The 5.0 codex has *tons* of brand new units, HQ's, and even the existing units (some of which are in the Chaos codex) get upgraded. Why do Loyalist SM's get to transport 12 guys in a normal LR, but CSM LR's don't? (or for that matter Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Black Templars or Space Wolves?)


Did you use the older Space Marine Codex for Drop Pods when Chaos never had them? I don't think you did. You're using the new Codex as a thinly veiled excuse to whine loudly about the fact the Space Marines are getting the first 5th Edition Codex, and that you're not getting what you want because you're a Chaos player. There's some truth to that, but when you look at what happened to the Chaos, DA and BA books (mainly cutting wargear, unit options, and in some cases entire units) and then look at the SM codex getting all sorts of brand new units, HQ's and getting their existing options for the most part made snazzier, can you blame anyone?





Oh, and whoever said "not all Chaos Dreadnoughts are angry", THEY ARE!!! They're built like that on purpose. You don't think a Chaos marine straps himself in do you? NO! They are incarcerated by their masters, into tombs of pain, so they will be furious fighters. Read Dark Apostle and Dead Sky Black Sun. Both have dreadnoughts that act nothing like the ones in the CSM codex and one acts as the leader of a large army.



The whole reason Chaos Codex doesn't have drop pods is because it is currently tailored to be supreme WITHOUT THEM. Each book is made balanced and fair, and therefore CANNOT incorporate every single aspect you wish. Hahahahaha, you are far more naive than I thought. The design studio unfortunately isn't as lofty as that, otherwise they would have realized when remaking the Eldar codex the stupid synergy between Holofields and SMF, or the potential brokenness of the Daemon Prince options and sublists of the 3.5 codex, or the retarded ability of the current SM army to field 26 heavy weapons with 30 infiltrating Devestators and a total of 81 Ld10 Marines in a 2000pt game. I've seen Drop Pod chaos armies using the IA Dreadclaw (and proxied them once for a game to see how they work), they aren't game breaking in any way, I assure you that were they included in the CSM codex, there wouldn't be a problem, the design studio just wanted to keep Drop Pods mainly a loyalist SM thing.



Why yes, there are elements of the Marine Codex which fit very nicely for the Chaos Marines. Drop Pods being one of them. Everyone can argue all day that their army isn't truly represented by the Codex before them, but it can never justify throwing it out of the window and taking up an entirely new one. I think I could with my Iron warriors. IW aren't ones to use Cult Troops, Daemons, spawn, and usually not Possessed. That leaves the army mainly with options that have duplicates in the SM codex save for Oblits and Daemon Princes. With the new SM codex, one could make a much better themed IW army, with a Master of the Forge as a Warsmith (or a Lysander Counts as, both fit the IW theme pretty well) throw in some Thunderfire cannons (very Iron Warriors-y) a squad three or four Tac squads, a squad of Sternguard vets and a couple Termi squads and you've got a better themed IW army than the Chaos list could provide.



In this case, there are examples in the Space Marine Codex that are perfect for Chaos players, but that's because it is the FIRST 5th Edition Codex. Correction, its the first one released after the 5th ed ruleset came out. Everything from the Eldar codex on was designed with 5th in mind, and the Daemon codex was the first one designed only for 5th in mind (it doesn't even mention frag grenades, all it mentions are Defensive and Offensive grenades)


When the new Chaos Codex comes out (given it won't be for a fair while), then you can surely expect a whole host of things that can play to 5th Ed advantages and really make your armies feel at home. Aagain, the current Chaos codex was designed with 5th ed in mind. By the time it came out, the 5th ed rules were already pretty much done, if product timeline has anything to say about it, they were just waiting for their release cycle to finish so they could get the 5th ed rules out there and clear our their stock of 4E books.


Chaos has the ability to enhance an entire BASIC squad with marks of Chaos Yes (although now its the far inferior Icons instead of Marks). have you seen their cost however? Most aren't worth what they cost, especially not on basic Troops and *especially* not with the new wound allocation rules.





Take an example from the Dark Eldar players. Suck it up. Nobody is saying the Dark Eldar don't have it bad and don't need an update. That said, telling people to suck it up when they are trying to be constructive and use a new book when they don't like their current one doesn't help things.



Ubermensch highlights the most valid point - you don't have to have Plague marines be plague marines. They can be the Iron Warriors siege specialists, who are encased in armour so thick it gives them T5 and bionics that allow them the Feel No Pain Rule. There is NOTHING to justify you doing the Counts As rule with the SM Codex and not the Chaos Codex. True, and people do this, whats your point?



Use Lesser daemons as cultists. It's far more believable to have them with a 5+ inv save and S T 4 because their God has temporarily gifted them with such things so they can cause as much damage in the fight as possible. A unit that needs to be Summoned and has an invul save and WS4 is more believable as a cultist than a WS3 BS3 infiltrating unit?




There will be very, very few of you out there who want to use Counts As using the SM Codex that are not simply after the new rules. And for that majority, just stop it. You're not fooling anyone with your whines of 'our codex doesn't represent us properly'. Not only can you not seem to acknowledge a point when its made, you seem to just want to say "eat it and be happy". It's our game too, and some people feel that, looking at what the new SM codex is offering, that it fits the theme of their army better. Looking at Night Lords, AL and IW, I can't say I disagree.

Also given the total about-face the design team did with this book, its not hard to see why many people would want to use it as opposed to their own. If I were a Dark Angels player that wasn't using Deathwing or Ravenwing as the cornerstone of the army I don't see why I would use the DA book, the new SM book can make the *exact* same army, only better.

Vaz84
16-08-2008, 18:59
Seems those against counts as just see the chaos players wanting to play a "perceived" more "powerful" army. Not so much. The space marine codex has oodles of customization options that chaos once had.

Chaos HQ choices are disappointing as a whole, commanders for thousands of battles and the war gear options are tiny. Plus, there is no way to include a retinue for a chaos champion, no bodyguard units that you can even take for Abbadon (who always has a full terminator squad on hand). However, taking the Space Marine codex lets you take an honor guard / command squad, that can happily represent chaos chosen and friends. Some players WANT that fluff choice for their lords bodyguard. How come space marines have company champions, standards, and other specialist upgrades but chaos marines do not? This is another example of chaos getting the VANILLA paintbrush.

Possessed had the option to be really good, if you could PURCHASE the upgrades, not a random lol-roll at the start of the game.

Chosen are fairly bland, still fairly basic marines. No extra rules, attacks or anything, just access to a few extra war gear options.

Dreadnoughts firing at the closest model on fire frenzy, and not the closest visible model. Or if no enemy models in rage, fire at a visible model. The situation here is there are many different chaos legions, and each can have different uses for the dreadnought unit.


The overall issue is with how GW treats Chaos in the game. Which is understandable for balance. Chaos does not have an imperial navy, guard, and multi-leveled organizations. Things are controlled by the legions. Chaos is not always "BLOOD BLOOD BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD" rushing forward with no tactics. If anything, Chaos will use bait (renegades) and other various means to get the job done. There would be no chaos legions left (particularly world eaters) if you carry back the single-dimensional images shown in some of the fluff. The Chaos book should blow the marine book out of the water on options, but pay the price in points costs on its units if anything.

We can argue and fight about it all day, but people can do whatever they want with their toy models. The new Marine dex allows for a number of chaos armies to be fielded more accurately in the eyes of the player. Maybe those assault vets let the player represent khorne berserker's better, in his mind. Maybe his dreadnoughts are not all wacky and crazy, in his mind. Maybe his chaos lord has a bodyguard and he wants to field it.

So you go ahead, and tell that player how to play his army. Call him a cheese monger for looking for ways to display his army as he perceives it in his mind. However I am afraid when you do this, you crush one of the fulcrums of this hobby. That being imagination and creativity. Yeah, people will abuse this to play an army that could be perceived more powerful under some combos, so what? If your playing those people thats your choice. Not all chaos players are looking for a more powerful list, some just want to play chaos as we see it.

Rioghan Murchadha
16-08-2008, 20:11
The whole reason Chaos Codex doesn't have drop pods is because it is currently tailored to be supreme WITHOUT THEM. Each book is made balanced and fair, and therefore CANNOT incorporate every single aspect you wish.


Sorry man. You lose right there. How long have you been playing GW games for? They are quite a few things. Fun, amusing, entertaining, teeth-grindingly badly written... But I wouldn't dare, in the 20 years I've been playing their games, call them even remotely fair and balanced. You pretty much have to suck that up as soon as you start playing, or you end up disillusioned and quit.

CHOOBER SNIPES
16-08-2008, 21:20
The problem for all the people against the "counts as" guys is that you are failing to see what our problem is. Our problem with the new codex for CSM is not that they made it less competitive, its still quite powerful and has some very strong combos. The problem is that GW took one of the most diverse armies and clumped them all together. They took away the variety that originally attracted us to chaos. In truth, the different legions of chaos are arguably more deserving of separate codices than the SM, BA, and DA. The differences are much more extreme than the differences in those armies, yet they have different codices. But please don't argue about that, the reason i brought it up is because it highlights how different chaos armies could be from one another (and how different they SHOULD be) and how they have been clumped together. They got it right on the cult troops, but You cant make an army off of one unit and have it be at all interesting. Now dont say that we have the option of icons, as these were a FAILED attempt to give us the different legions, and the icons benefits dont make sense compared to the benefits of the cult troops (ie death guard termies dont get FNP, and lose their T if a certain guy dies). They tried and FAILED to make a codex that could cover all of the legions and renegades.

To me, it seems that most of this argument has stemmed from the failure of the Chaos codex. Before people say, "well just suck it up that they missed the mark on your codex and dont try to use C:SM because yours got messed up", remember that it isnt OUR fault, its GW's. So, these players that feel the new SM dex will represent their army better are just making the best of how they got screwed.

ashc
16-08-2008, 22:04
It is quite obvious in this thread that there is a distinct difference between players who only see variety and diversification in rules only, and those who see variety and diversification elsewhere.

Ash

Nero
16-08-2008, 23:50
One thing that confuses me, is when people say Chaos players want to use the new SM codex so they can again have a cheesy army list. Since when were powergamers loyal to a specific army? I thought they were only interested in winning, in which case they'll probably not bother using counts-as to represent SMs. They'll just use SMs.

None of the powergamers running cheesy IW lists under the last CSM codex are still here today 'whining' about the current CSM codex. They all left a year ago for the next cheese-ridden codex (whatever that was at the time - Eldar I think). Powergamers don't bother whining about an army after it gets nerfed, they move on to the next thing.

Regardless, I don't know whether the new SM codex will represent my CSM any better than the current CSM codex does but I'll probably end up using it anyway. Because unlike the current CSM it looks like it'll actually be fun to play, and at the end of the day that's all that matters. The CSM codex is about as much fun as root canal surgery.

The_Outsider
17-08-2008, 00:36
diversification in rules only

This ultimately is the sad state of affairs we are in now.

Variety, ultimately doesn't stem from rules, rules merely give preferences a slight nudge here and there (a good exmaple is a 10 strong wraithguard unit becoming troops - you have to pay a lot of points for it but it is there only so a preference of Iyanden themed forces can exist).

Rules flatout equalling variety kills any force, be it chaos eldar or whatever as it starts to have the effect of tunnel vision. For example alpha legion should all have infiltrate, so you won't see any units that don't have infiltrate ( a rule that is pretty rare) thus leading to the only point of variety in an AL is whether you have a plasmagun or meltagun in a squad.

The current codex takes a step back and returns to what nearly all the other (current) codices are like, where marks act as the little bonuses (for a moderate cost) for taking a nurgle themed force instead of a generic chaos warband force. The variety from this point on is huge as a mark isn't going to dramatically affect a untis role, only slightly increase how well it does.

Go look at the DE codex - it favours only a handful of builds simply because some units are flatout better in nearly everyway than others (namely wyches versus the other elite choices) - this is basically what the last chaos codex was.

Variety should stem from modelling and painting, not whether you get true-to-fluff berzerkers or whatever.

So IMO the current codex needs no "counts-as" to work for any legion, all of them can be repesented to a very large degree, GW have just been subtle in how a dedicated legion theme is achieved.

Slaaneshi Ice Cream
17-08-2008, 00:36
Regardless, I don't know whether the new SM codex will represent my CSM any better than the current CSM codex does but I'll probably end up using it anyway. Because unlike the current CSM it looks like it'll actually be fun to play, and at the end of the day that's all that matters. The CSM codex is about as much fun as root canal surgery.

Here here. The large number of options gets me excited for all the possible army builds.

As for chaos dreadnoughts, they may or may not be crazy. I really don't care. I think the rules for them are terrible and actually encourage players not to use dreadnoughts. That's just silly.

And it's the same with spawn. I can't even control which direction they move in, they HAVE to move towards the closest enemy unit. Not closest visible unit.

And as for possessed, since when has a random roll on a table made any unit fun to use? Never.

And for pete's sake, don't ever tell people to wait for the next version of their codex. No one should have to wait that long for a book which may or may not be any good at all. I feel sorry for DE players, and I have no problem with them using the eldar codex for their army.

ashc
17-08-2008, 00:40
I see we agree The_Outsider; I also think GW are victims of their own success in a way though, namely in regards to the Index Astartes articles and the rules that accompanied them. Thanks to those articles a lot of people have very one-sided (and in some cases, practically stereotypes and charicatures) of certain legions tactics and that has become their view on the legions in particular. Games Workshop have obviously decided to try and backstep this idea with the latest Chaos codex.

Ash

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
17-08-2008, 00:57
I see we agree The_Outsider; I also think GW are victims of their own success in a way though, namely in regards to the Index Astartes articles and the rules that accompanied them. Thanks to those articles a lot of people have very one-sided (and in some cases, practically stereotypes and charicatures) of certain legions tactics and that has become their view on the legions in particular. Games Workshop have obviously decided to try and backstep this idea with the latest Chaos codex.

Ash

yeah, i do not like such ************ as Khorne Berzerker-only for WE and Plague Marine-only DG and Thousand Sons-only TS [it is probably my pet example how legions should NOT look like]

also there could be siege Night Lords and Lighting Fast Iron Warrior force. or Slaanesh one IW.

IMO marks are bad done now, and to boot it, we are too much forced to take multi-god army in order to remain competetive. Ideal solution would be some kind of limiting factors, like unlocking elite choices [cult troops] by taking mark on your general [and also forbid opposing god cult troops - but not squad with it icon]. or taking no mark on general to unlock all cult troops [and make them troops choice].

[i hope they will limit chaos lord and daemon princes numbers too. it's stupid to always meet 2 said daemons ... or be forced to use them ftw]

Arctophylax Faren
17-08-2008, 05:19
One thing that confuses me, is when people say Chaos players want to use the new SM codex so they can again have a cheesy army list. Since when were powergamers loyal to a specific army? I thought they were only interested in winning, in which case they'll probably not bother using counts-as to represent SMs. They'll just use SMs.



If you were playing an army just to win, and it was Chaos, would you buy and paint a whole new army just to use Marine rules?
Anyone in that mindframe wouldn't 'waste' their time building a new army.

Look, there are some extremely valid points around here, and even I would mudslap GW for removing the wealth of options available from the last Chaos Codex. Hell, I even bought that book just so I could IMAGINE what it would be like to field a Chaos army from it, and when the new Codex came out even I was disappointed at how they'd downscaled it. I just took it as if they'd changed it because, quite frankly, the older one was scary. After reading that, I made a small note to avoid Chaos players because I'd have my mesh armoured troops smashed to kingdom come.

But running off to another book is just.... wrong. I seriously doubt that GW are doing it just to screw everyone, so there must be some twisted logic in their heads. I just can't figure out what it is.

I do feel for the other loyalist Legions with regards to this new book, as it was very, very unfair of GW to bring out the Codex's so close to the release of a new SM one (Less than 2 years). Especially with regards to the format and the options available in comparison. I can't remember who said that the new SM codex isn't the first with 5th Ed designed in mind, but I'm sorry I don't believe that. They've definitely done that on purpose to make money, meaning people will be eagerly waiting on the old Codices to be updated to take full advantage of 5th Ed.

In all of this, don't think that I don't know how you feel about the new Chaos Codex, I do. I can see it just by comparing the two, and my favourite section of the old one was the back where all the armies were listed under their Gods with a whole armoury of God-specific wargear sections.

Yes, it is unfair, but the only solice you'll find out of Counts As is adding to the already massive throng of fighting loyalists. They're the most common army out there, and about to get even more-so if Chaos use their rules too. You're sacrificing the individuality of your army in comparison to the races available.

Chaos already has practically everything the Imperium has to offer. It has the ability to use the Guard Codex as traitors, EVERY SINGLE Imperial datasheet, AS WELL AS its own whole host of things, and you still can't try and make the best out of what you've got? I'm sorry, but even if I was a Chaos player with a tattoo of the star on my forehead and I sacrificed children daily while making my lounge furniture out of skulls, I would never be able to side with you on using Counts As on such a large scale.

Gutted
17-08-2008, 06:00
And as for possessed, since when has a random roll on a table made any unit fun to use? Never.

Obviously not a fan of 2nd Edition Orks then :)

Slaaneshi Ice Cream
17-08-2008, 07:52
But running off to another book is just.... wrong. I seriously doubt that GW are doing it just to screw everyone, so there must be some twisted logic in their heads. I just can't figure out what it is.

I have to disagree with you here. The current codex doesn't interest me. Sure I can make a powerful list, but it's bland. And there flat out shouldn't be an option for two Daemon Princes in one army. That ain't right.

I don't think GW is trying to screw people ... ok, maybe a little. But, I think they keep changing design philosophies as well. There needs to be consistency between books, not one book gutted of options wihle another gets a boatload of new options.



In all of this, don't think that I don't know how you feel about the new Chaos Codex, I do. I can see it just by comparing the two, and my favourite section of the old one was the back where all the armies were listed under their Gods with a whole armoury of God-specific wargear sections.

That's my favorite part as well. I really miss the separate books of the gods.



Chaos already has practically everything the Imperium has to offer. It has the ability to use the Guard Codex as traitors, EVERY SINGLE Imperial datasheet, AS WELL AS its own whole host of things, and you still can't try and make the best out of what you've got? I'm sorry, but even if I was a Chaos player with a tattoo of the star on my forehead and I sacrificed children daily while making my lounge furniture out of skulls, I would never be able to side with you on using Counts As on such a large scale.

I wouldn't mind if GW did more to differentiate Chaos and Loyalists. Why exactly does chaos have vehicles that are almost identical? Haven't the legions thought of anything better than a Predator in 10,000 years? Why is the rhino still the main transport? Chaos isn't tied down by fear of technology like the Imperium. Why not have daemon-vehicle-things that ride on tentacles? That'd be awesome.

Finally, when you say I ought to accept what I have, my immediate thoughts were "I won't accept a shoddy product." Because the CSM codex is poorly written. As an owner of over 7k and growing of CSM, I think I deserve a bit better than this hack job.

The_Warsmith
17-08-2008, 08:16
Yes, it is unfair, but the only solice you'll find out of Counts As is adding to the already massive throng of fighting loyalists. They're the most common army out there, and about to get even more-so if Chaos use their rules too.



for once i agree with you :p chaos where my first 40k army and i'll stick with the codex through thick and thin, but i still think players should have their choice, it's their hobby and what can you do? you can complain and call them powergaming cheesmongers but they'll still go ahead and switch codices.

Nero
17-08-2008, 08:27
If you were playing an army just to win, and it was Chaos, would you buy and paint a whole new army just to use Marine rules?
Anyone in that mindframe wouldn't 'waste' their time building a new army.

Why would anyone in that mindframe 'waste' their time arguing such a point on an internet forum? Powergamers aren't known for caring if their opponents have fun in a game, so long as they win. Why would they care if their opponents thought that using their CSM army as counts-as in the new SM codex was a good idea? It isn't against the rules, so they'll do it.

Pretty much the definition of a powergamer is someone who only cares whether the rules technically allow him to do something, regardless of whether it's no fun for his opponent or it flies in the face of fluff.

Like it or not, the people you're arguing with in this thread are not powergamers. You can't automatically label us as such just because our old codex happened to be a powergamers wet dream, that isn't fair. Seriously, you tell those who complain about the new CSM codex to shut up, and you tell those who try to make the best of a bad situation to shut up. I guess you'll only be happy when all CSM players submissively bow at the feet of GW and pretend they're having fun with the crappy codex.

Nostro
17-08-2008, 11:43
Now that the thread has turned into a debate about Count-As, I'll jump the bandwagon and say CA is the best rule of the game.

That people use SM for a Chaos army because it has better rules is a bit sad but you would never prevent powergamers from playing the most powerful army out there. (Ever remember the loads of people discovering a love for TSons with 4th Ed CSM dex? Nidzillas? Orks? etc)

Them aside, people switching to SM because they think CSM doens't do their force justice is sad but can only be blamed on GW's design of the CSM dex, not on the players.

Some Chaos armies, especially a good part of the Legions (IW, AL, NL...), can take better advantage od the SM dex. Not all, but some.

Dark Eldar / Eldar is a good example: you (IIEC Arctophylax Faren) say that then nothing would stop people to play an Eldar list with Dark Eldar minis. I say nothing should. If they feel their list lacks flavor, they could and should. If they do that because the codex is better to win, that's a pity. But I never saw any of those.
If anything, I would do a Dark Eldar army (they have a powerful codex when well handled) with Eldar minis (no need to compare in great lenghts the quality of each range...). If new DE minis are not as good as I expect, this is what I'll do.

Thousand Sons as Necrons is an awesome idea, and you can't say it's because the codex is better.

Trying to conclude:
- people who switch because the codex wins more games, there is the bad thing.
- people who switch because of flavoury units and customisability, there is the "good" thing. "good" as in they have every right to do so, but bad because it speaks volumes about the blandness of the current CSM dex.

Heru Talon
17-08-2008, 17:01
Personally I don't think it even does Renegades all that well. In its attempt to do Cult Legions, Undivided Legions, *and* Renegades while keeping the equipment (weapons and vehicle options) identical to other Chaos codex's in addition to its attempt to "streamline", it ends up doing Renegades rather poorly.

Renegades I would imagine would not have Reaper Autocannons, Daemon Princes, Havoc Launchers, Oblits, Defilers, insane dreads, Twin Linked bolters (as opposed to storm bolters), Thousand Sons equivalents (those created by the Rubric), Autocannon Havocs and other such equipment, and I would imagine for the most part that their equipment would remain somewhat similar to that of the basic SM's (e.g. powerfists instead of power weapons on Termi's).

Unfortunately it is exactly those things that basically define CSM's from their normal counterparts. With a true Renegades codex, I would have imagined that most of the equipment and wargear would be almost identical to that of the loyalist SM's, with a couple possible exceptions, but on the whole much the same. Instead I would imagine Renegades as normal SM's, but with the Icon system that the current CSM codex has (whereas Legions would have Marks from the old Codex), with a much more randomized leadership (they aren't loyalist SM's anymore and thus no ATSKNF, but they aren't all the Ld10 or fearless hardcore dudes of the Legions yet either).

I would imagine a true Renegade list as something lacking in vehicles for the most part, but heavily dependent on Deep Strike and Infiltrate entry (drop pods, etc) as such forces are likely to be without either the full support of their chapter, or without the resources they once had, and heavily favor a rapid insertion and raiding style force. Maybe a few abilities related to orbiting renegade strike cruisers to provide fire support instead of having Predators and Whirlwinds providing it.

As a raiding/suprise attack type army, I would imagine them with some abilities regarding army setup and things like that at the expense of raw firepower or killy, and be very reliant on placement and positioning.


At least thats how I would have done Renegades.
I didn't just mean Renegades as just Space Marine Chapters / forces who have recently turned Traitor, I meant those guys plus the Legion sub-factions / unknown Chaos Groups (The Sanctified, The Purge, Extinction Agenda, Wolves of Horus etc).

There wouldn't be a point in having the Codex if I was talking about the recently turned (who still have the know-how to maintain the difficult to maintain weapons and vehicles - ie Land Speeders).