PDA

View Full Version : Iron Warriors using 5th Edition SM Codex



Haratac
06-01-2010, 20:10
Hey,
I've got a large number of Iron Warriors painted up, however - I'm after a solid force which really suits the Legion. And as such, I've chosen to avoid the new CSM codex and use the fifth edition Space Marine codex. I'm basically looking for suggestions - the army will obviously use a lot of conversions, and included Dreadclaws (as Drop Pods) - but would anyone on these boards object to playing against such an army? And as well, I'm interested in knowing if anyone has a suggestion with how to do this.

All suggestions and comments are welcome, and I will come up with a blog soon to.

Cheers!

- Haratac

Free Spirit
06-01-2010, 20:12
I'd have absolutely no problem playing against that army, in fact i'd really like it. You could even have those chaosy cannons from the 'Storm of Iron' novel in the form of thunderfire cannons. I'd only watch out for things like speeders, but by the sound of your post you're not planning to include those.

Too bad a daemon prince/defiler are out... they could fit the IW pretty good.

WinglessVT2
06-01-2010, 20:12
You already have a codex, which is up-to-date, and really powerful.
Why not use that instead of running a proxy horde?

lord_zyplon
06-01-2010, 20:14
You already have a codex, which is up-to-date, and really powerful.
Why not use that instead of running a proxy horde?

Because it doesn't fit the theme of the army. From what I understand, the new Chaos 'dex is strongest (for example) with Plague Marines - Iron Warriors don't have them.

Sigis
06-01-2010, 20:16
I wouldnt mind, As long as you had like a legitimate reason that the other codex suits your force better (like dread claws as drop pods) I would still play against it. Im all for it. Infact I have a loyalist chapter that is very prevelent on psykers so I use thousand suns rules with loyalist models and have a psyker dreadnought that uses rules for defilers.

WinglessVT2
06-01-2010, 20:16
Iron warriors don't have thunderfires, multi-meltas for their infantry, drop pods, librarians, chaptermasters, or terminators with thunderhammers and storm shields, either.

lord_zyplon
06-01-2010, 20:20
Iron warriors don't have thunderfires, multi-meltas for their infantry, drop pods, librarians, chaptermasters, or terminators with thunderhammers and storm shields, either.

Actually, they do have all of the above (except Storm Shields).

Reading through the fluff, they have lots of artillery that can be represented by a Thunderfire, their infantry do have multimeltas, the have drop pods (dread claws - it's a simple model swap), sorcerers, Warsmiths (with their own warships... ), and various big heavy hammers that could be used as Thunder Hammers.

As stated above, the big thing that wouldn't fit would be Land Speeders.

Corrode
06-01-2010, 20:21
Iron warriors don't have thunderfires, multi-meltas for their infantry, drop pods, librarians, chaptermasters, or terminators with thunderhammers and storm shields, either.

The best siege force in the galaxy doesn't have a heavy cannon, multi-meltas, or drop pods (they're called Dreadclaws, check it)? TH/SS I can't recall the Legions ever using, but the simple option is to not use them. Libarians can be Sorcerors, and Chapter Masters can simply not be used or can be Warmsiths (Orbital Bombardment is pretty Iron Warrior).

marv335
06-01-2010, 20:22
You do this, you lose one of the defining units of an IW army, Obliterators.
Doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

WinglessVT2
06-01-2010, 20:23
If you're not going to use all these items, why even field them under the regular marine book?

Free Spirit
06-01-2010, 20:29
I don't get the fuzz about the entire topic. I'm with the Zyplon and Corrode on this. I don't get what the problem is, after all it's the TS's army and his project. In fact, we applaud (sp?) things like this in my gaming group. We build and paint cool models and then find a way to work 'm in a army. Not optimum? True. Fun and thematic? Absolutely.

Marv has a good point and i think it coexists with my point about Defilers, but it's kind of a win some, lose some situation.

Haratac
06-01-2010, 20:29
Well, a few of the units which have been mentioned I'm not going to include, mainly librarians and landspeeders - and as for Obliterators, that is a unit which has me stuck. The cannons in Storm of Iron were exactly what I was going for with the Thunderfire Cannons.

Now; this isn't going to a tournament worthy force, not by a long stretch - I'm not really a power gamer, I play and collect to suit the background of a force, it makes any game more fun I feel.

Cheers!

Free Spirit
06-01-2010, 20:33
Now i helped you by posting those encouraging comments i demand pictures! :P

WinglessVT2
06-01-2010, 20:35
I must have struck a nerve here.
Such hostilty, simply because I think you're silly for running an army that has a book under a different book, so you can get some other toys.

lord_zyplon
06-01-2010, 20:39
... running an army that has a book under a different book...

Not a bad way to look at it. The C:CSM book is much more, ah, 'chaosy,' while the C:SM book provides more of the siege elements to the army.

Edit:


Now i helped you by posting those encouraging comments i demand pictures! :P

Seconded!

Haratac
06-01-2010, 20:44
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=218859 - this is my general 40k log, it hasn't been updated in a while and the pictures are not as good. Thanks for the replies. I aim to get a Techmarine and Retinue soon, along with green stuff - which will eventually become my Warsmith.

Free Spirit
06-01-2010, 20:46
I must have struck a nerve here.
Such hostilty, simply because I think you're silly for running an army that has a book under a different book, so you can get some other toys.

I didn't mean any hostility i just 'didn't get it'. If he wants to do something that isn't in any way cheesy, rulebending or something else that ruins the fun of the game i'm always up for it! That's the problem with typing comments instead of having a real live discussion. So again, no hostility intended!


http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=218859 - this is my general 40k log, it hasn't been updated in a while and the pictures are not as good. Thanks for the replies. I aim to get a Techmarine and Retinue soon, along with green stuff - which will eventually become my Warsmith.

Nice stuff!! I like the purple on the 'blade and you just can't go wrong with the IW colour scheme.

Johnnyfrej
06-01-2010, 20:53
I was going to use the Space Marine codex rules for my Iron Warriors. However, I decided to use the Space Wolves codex instead. One of the reasons for this is I still want to do a loyalist Iron Hands army with six Dreadnaughts (3 Ironclads, 3 normals with MMs, all DPing). If I used SM for both it would be somewhat repetitive.

As said, I won't use the Chaos Codex until they make a proper one that can accuratly represent all the legions. Simply taking 9 Obliterators just won't cut it for me.

totgeboren
06-01-2010, 20:59
Iron Warriors are known for their use of Obliterators, thats true.
But they are also know for their Warsmiths and techmarines, artillery and different siege guns.
They are also known for not following any of the Chaos Gods, nor using daemons.

So the naysayers are saying he should use a codex where most of the options are a nono fluffwise, instead of using a codex where only 2-3 options are a nono, And where he gain many of the units that define his chosen force?

hmmm...

Badger[Fr]
06-01-2010, 21:04
It's actually one of the few count-as armies suggested on Warseer that do make sense, and I would gladly play against it. At least, you're not using the Space Wolves Codex...

Mannimarco
06-01-2010, 22:35
space wolves are old, to do it correctly you need to use the absolute latest codex no matter who it is after realising it "fits the theme better innit!" right now that would be nids, soon it will be blood angels so lets all look forward to "do you mind if I use codex blood angels for my nids/codex marines/space wolves/tau/orks/necrons cos it fits the theme better innit, here look at the story I wrote"

on topic: yeah I dont have a problem with this, its actually better than most of the "army x using codex y" on here

Vaden
06-01-2010, 22:57
I don't find this to be too bad. Under the previous edition, when Iron Warriors had a legion specific ruleset, I would cry foul. A friend of mine did that, liked the fluff of the Iron Warriors but hated the rules, so he just used the regular space marine codex and called them 'pre-heresy.' That was just him wanting to use a cheesier list.

Murphey
06-01-2010, 23:08
This one is completely ok imo. Iron Warriors basically ceased to exist in any real sense after the 4th CSM codex came out.

I'd be fine with it.

~Murphey

Latro_
06-01-2010, 23:39
IW's using the CSM codex can access obilterators vidicatiors and defilers. You can only have three heavy support and any combinations of the above are the de facto fluffy IW units.

There is nothing wrong with representing an IW army, I can't see why anyone would want to use the normal SM codex.

Although its cool to represent stuff from novels like the big artilery in storm of iron... but imo thats for the realms of apocalypse where big battles and seiges (like in the novel) are covered and in apoc you can take what you like, so grab a crap load of immobile earthshaker cannons from FW.

Plus use your imagination for other 'non' fluffy units if you wanna take em.
Like plague marines for example... convert up a load of IW's that have extensively modified them selves with cyber implants, replacement limbs, etc etc:

fearless = check, mind has become more machine than human
T5, FNP = check, all the cybonics etc make them harder and less receptive to pain
I3 = check, all the replacement arms and legs although making them tougher have slowed them down.

If you converted em well you opponent would not mind I guarantee, bit of imagination and firing the rules into the fluff goes a fair way.

Alessander
06-01-2010, 23:51
go for it. use a hellcannon model for a Thunderfire cannon, or daemon-up a whirlwind, forgemaster as a Warsmith, conversion beamer as a kick-ass kaigun... sweet!

Boomstick
06-01-2010, 23:54
I wouldnt want to play a proxy army, i play IW under the current CSM 'dex and find the options in there more than fitting for a themed army.

sayles78
07-01-2010, 00:34
The two things thus far that have been said as 'probably not a good idea to use' are TH/SS Terminators and Land Speeders. Do you read the posts at all or do you just hit the keyboard with your face?

Seriously made me chuckle to myself!

sayles78
07-01-2010, 00:43
Plus use your imagination for other 'non' fluffy units if you wanna take em.
Like plague marines for example... convert up a load of IW's that have extensively modified them selves with cyber implants, replacement limbs, etc etc:

fearless = check, mind has become more machine than human
T5, FNP = check, all the cybonics etc make them harder and less receptive to pain
I3 = check, all the replacement arms and legs although making them tougher have slowed them down.

If you converted em well you opponent would not mind I guarantee, bit of imagination and firing the rules into the fluff goes a fair way.

This sounds really cool ^^^^^

Got the cogs turning in my head... not another army idea.... nooooooo! More money gone!

I really wouldn't mind anyone using different dexes for themed armies, especially using the SM dex for Iron Warriors - it just seems to work quite well. Tech Marines, Thunderfire Cannons, Chapter Master as War Smiths, Drop Pods etc...

Count de Monet
07-01-2010, 00:50
I'd be entirely cool with it.

Chapter Master for orbital bombardment
Various Techmarines
Terminators/Assault Termies
Sternguard
Marines
Devs
Tanks
Pods

Plus various counts-as special characters as desired.

dingareth
07-01-2010, 03:40
I'm doing the same thing, and don't forget about squads of Inquisitorial Storm Troopers as the traitor humans that fight along side them!

Johnnyfrej
07-01-2010, 03:47
;4271936']It's actually one of the few count-as armies suggested on Warseer that do make sense, and I would gladly play against it. At least, you're not using the Space Wolves Codex...

I fail to see how using the Space Wolves codex is any different than using the Space Marine codex.

Unless you really had nothing to say and just wanted to bump your post count... (don't worry, I won't tell ;))

Here is a thread that I indirectly started arguing in favor of SW as IW.
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=224276&highlight=iron+warriors+space+wolves

silashand
07-01-2010, 04:10
I must have struck a nerve here.
Such hostilty, simply because I think you're silly for running an army that has a book under a different book, so you can get some other toys.

I don't think he's silly at all. IMO the current CSM book is poo and doesn't do justice to any of the legions. The SM book seems much more appropriate for an IW force for that reason alone, even considering it doesn't allow oblits. Using the "rationalizations" that some have proposed for including units from the CSM book the OP doesn't want anyway is no different than choosing a different book to use.

vladsimpaler
07-01-2010, 04:23
That's the problem with Codex: Space Marines Gone Bad; Iron Warriors are just known for using Obliterators.

No, just no. That's like saying that Warseer is known for rumors. It is true, but it's just one facet of it.

Iron Warriors are known for sieges and fortifications and technology, all of which are much better under the current Imperial marine codex.

Haratac
07-01-2010, 12:44
The way I see it, I'm more interested in the siege/fortifications side of the Iron Warriors. Not having Obliterators, while a loss - I will still get some, just because they are great sculpts - is something I'm okay with.

As for the Space Wolf codex, I just don't know how it could possibly be used to represent the Iron Warriors. Perhaps I haven't read it enough.

bluenova
07-01-2010, 14:07
There's a long histroy of players using the SM codex to represent a different take on a chaos legion - usually as a pre-heresy interpretation. This one, for the Emperor's Children, was shown on the GW site quite recently: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/blogPost.jsp?aId=5100020a

So I don't see a problem in using such a force, as it's how they've often been played, and an approach recommended by GW in WD and other articles :)

Tyranids as SM? Hmm, well, if you could come up with good like-for-likes, and some attempt at WYSIWYG on the models, I'd play against you :D

Badger[Fr]
07-01-2010, 14:18
I fail to see how using the Space Wolves codex is any different than using the Space Marine codex.
Well, it was a tongue-in-cheek reference to the countless "count-as" armies that followed the release of the overhyped SW Codex. It is quite "remarkable", to say the least, that only the newest, most powerful Codices spawn such trends. So far, I have yet so see anyone playing a count-as army based on the DA or BA Codices... How surprising.

IJW
07-01-2010, 14:21
There's a long histroy of players using the SM codex to represent a different take on a chaos legion - usually as a pre-heresy interpretation. This one, for the Emperor's Children, was shown on the GW site quite recently: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/blogPost.jsp?aId=5100020a
Hmm, Ironclads. Can't get much fluffier for a siege-based IW force than a siege Dreadnought...

Tymell
07-01-2010, 14:27
I'd probably refuse to play it personally.

I'm all for doing different and new things to enhance the game, anything from allied forces to using other codexes. But in this case I can't see much of a reason for it. Using bits from one codex in another, or using a codex to represent something that doesn't have one, great stuff. But you already have a Chaos Space Marine codex, and it's perfectly fine for Iron Warriors.

I can see cool ways to use the vanilla marine codex for Iron Warriors (Ironclads, techmarines, etc), but I can also see ways to incorporate Chaos Space Marine units that in their strict forms wouldn't appear in an Iron Warriors force. Plague Marines as cybernetically enhanced marines, Thousand Sons as robotic warriors, Spawn as warped techno-monsters, etc.

dingareth
07-01-2010, 14:54
I'd probably refuse to play it personally.

I'm all for doing different and new things to enhance the game, anything from allied forces to using other codexes. But in this case I can't see much of a reason for it. Using bits from one codex in another, or using a codex to represent something that doesn't have one, great stuff. But you already have a Chaos Space Marine codex, and it's perfectly fine for Iron Warriors.

I can see cool ways to use the vanilla marine codex for Iron Warriors (Ironclads, techmarines, etc), but I can also see ways to incorporate Chaos Space Marine units that in their strict forms wouldn't appear in an Iron Warriors force. Plague Marines as cybernetically enhanced marines, Thousand Sons as robotic warriors, Spawn as warped techno-monsters, etc.

Well, I'm glad to see that it's only taken a few months for this thread to come around again, but I really don't understand how people can be this close minded. (Nothing against you personally Tymell, you just happen to be the closest naysayer.) It's a model building hobby people! Who are you to tell some one else how to build their army that they've invested tons of time and money into.

If someone wants to play me with their Orkanids because the Tyranid Codex is newer than the Ork one, than sure let's play. I'd love to see an army converted up so that Storm Boyz have Gargoyle Wings coming out of their back, maybe a looked Carnifex or two. It would be hilarious and as long as all the choices are explained to me and it's all from one book, than I've got no problem with it at all. In fact, despite a little confusion, I'd probably enjoy playing a fully painted Orkanid army more so than the legions of unpainted Marine Armies running around my area.


Also, let me ask something, if I have a beautifully painted and converted Iron Warriors army, where everything is WYSIWYG, and the choices are very clear and explained to you, are there really an such elitests here that would refuse me a game simply because I wanted to do my own thing and have some traitor Guardsmen in my army now that LatD is no longer supported? Am I really that much of a dick for trying to incorporate something just as fluffy as Obliterators (which I don't like at all) to the point where you would turn your back on the idea?

If you would, by all means speak up because I've never seen someone that would in the past several months, and I absolutely love new experiences!

Urath
07-01-2010, 15:49
Tymell's interpretation is fine, but it's one of two, as I see it; just how 'warped' are the Iron Warriors?

Yes, that might sound like a silly question because they sided with Horus and reside in the Eye of Terror etc etc. So, you'd have them modifying themselves with bionics (Plague Marines), using warp technologies to create techno-organic battering rams (Spawn), advanced AI constructs (Thousand Sons), corrupted, viral infected Techmarines with shapeshifting qualities (Obliterators), ether enhanced bionic systems and other enhancements (Possessed) and deamonically possessed engines of death (Defilers).

But, you have the side where warp technology may play a lesser part, very small in fact, or a certain qualities not represented at all, like siege dreadnoughts (Ironclads) that were pioneered by the Iron Warriors, Warsmiths and corrupted Techmarines with servo arms/harnesses(Master of the Forge/Chapter Masters and Master of the Forge/Techmarine respectfully), Drop Pods and Dreadclaws (... Drop Pods), advanced siege weaponary (Thunderfire Cannons) and the like.

Two sides of a coin; which interpretation you prefer and whatever you choose, there is a trade off with the other. I mean, you can model things any way you like, but if the rules aren't there for it, then you won't feel as satisfied.

totgeboren
07-01-2010, 15:56
;4274182']So far, I have yet so see anyone playing a count-as army based on the DA or BA Codices... How surprising.

I saw a Night Lords army using the BA codex. Lots of Raptors as troops (meaning you can score, and still have a jump infantry theme), and the Death Company worked great as Possessed. :)

Also, the term Deffwing comes from orks using the DA codex to field an entire Megaarmoured army, with some heavy tanks and dreads.

With the new codex, you can field such a force anyway, so no need for the DA codex.

pom134
07-01-2010, 16:02
I must have struck a nerve here.
Such hostilty, simply because I think you're silly for running an army that has a book under a different book, so you can get some other toys.

The chaos codex has no character whatsoever. Gav made sure of that. Sure the list is very viable but this guy just wants to play Iron Warriors and have a list that reflects the character of that legion. The chaos codex simply can't do that. Unless your definition of "character" is take some obliterators and vindicators.

The guy obviously isn't doing this to try to win. He's doing it to try to have more fun in his games and it seems that you don't want him to. Shame on you.

Baragash
07-01-2010, 16:28
If I can easily tell what every unit is meant to be, I'd play it.

Tymell
07-01-2010, 16:36
Well, I'm glad to see that it's only taken a few months for this thread to come around again, but I really don't understand how people can be this close minded. (Nothing against you personally Tymell, you just happen to be the closest naysayer.) It's a model building hobby people! Who are you to tell some one else how to build their army that they've invested tons of time and money into.

No offence taken, don't worry. As I say, I'm all for doing different things, and I probably have one of the strongest "To hell with the rules, it sounds fun to me!" attitudes here.

The reason I object to this one is it just seems a bit much, using another codex when you have one already.

Ultimately, I'm not telling him he can't anyway. If he wants to, go for it. I just wouldn't play it personally. Tis his right to choose how to make his army, just as it's my right to choose whether to play it or not :)

TheShadowCow
07-01-2010, 16:55
My response to "Iron Warriors already have a Codex" is simple - no, they don't. Codex: CSM is really Codex: Chaos Warbands and perhaps Black Legion.

The more distinct Chaos Legions are poorly represented at best, and this shows up more in the Iron Warriors (and perhaps Alpha Legion) than anywhere else.

On the other hand, Codex: SM, with it's Master of the Forge, Ironclads, Thunderfire artillery and so forth can actuallly be used to represent a very convincing seige force. Heck, the Master of the Forge makes a more convincing Warsmith than anything you can get from Codex: CSM.

So no, I'd have no problem with someone fielding this against me (indeed, I'd probably try and hug them for bothering to do something thematic and cool :p), and I am given pause to wonder just how people can possibly say this idea is less Iron Warrior-y than what you get in Codex CSM.

Haratac
07-01-2010, 17:05
Well, I'm certainly not doing this to win. I just want to have a nice, conversion heavy army, themed on my own interpretation of the Iron Warriors. Both viewpoints are understandable though, I wouldn't complain if an opponent turned my force down.

Tymell
07-01-2010, 18:17
My response to "Iron Warriors already have a Codex" is simple - no, they don't. Codex: CSM is really Codex: Chaos Warbands and perhaps Black Legion.

The more distinct Chaos Legions are poorly represented at best, and this shows up more in the Iron Warriors (and perhaps Alpha Legion) than anywhere else.

And my response to this is, as it has always been: nonsense. I won't get into detail as to why, because there have been more than enough threads on that. But suffice to say, yes you can make Iron Warriors with Codex: Chaos Space Marines absolutely fine, and this has been illustrated numerous times.

TheShadowCow
07-01-2010, 19:09
And my response to this is, as it has always been: nonsense. I won't get into detail as to why, because there have been more than enough threads on that. But suffice to say, yes you can make Iron Warriors with Codex: Chaos Space Marines absolutely fine, and this has been illustrated numerous times.

"I have a winning argument, but I'm not going to tell you what it is" doesn't count as a winning argument :p

Let's have it then - in a list where the only credible seige unit is the Vindicator (and to an extent units of Terminators with Chainfists etc), how does one represent an Iron Warriors seige/fortification force? No need for great depth of explanation - just a brief summary will do.

Tymell
07-01-2010, 19:34
"I have a winning argument, but I'm not going to tell you what it is" doesn't count as a winning argument :p

Let's have it then - in a list where the only credible seige unit is the Vindicator (and to an extent units of Terminators with Chainfists etc), how does one represent an Iron Warriors seige/fortification force? No need for great depth of explanation - just a brief summary will do.

It meant "I and others have used this winning argument before and I don't want to drag the thread off-topic too much".

I suppose something brief isn't going -too- off-topic.

HQ: Chaos Lords/Daemon Princes
Elites: Terminators, dreadnoughts, and potentially possessed if you use a bit of imagination (this idea was even mentioned specifically in the last codex)
Troops: Heavy-weapon equipped marines, plague marines/Thousand Sons used as super-tough Iron Warrior troops, bezerkers (because assault can be vital in a siege, storming the breach and so on)
Fast attack: Not the Iron Warrior strong point of course, but both raptors (again, storming a breach/over-coming ground obstacles) and spawn (mech-enhanced monstrosities) work okay
Heavy support: Many choices of course, obliterators, predators, havocs, defilers, vindicators and land raiders, with those all being very much Iron Warrior units

Askari
07-01-2010, 20:51
It meant "I and others have used this winning argument before and I don't want to drag the thread off-topic too much".

... snip....

Opinion.

The OP doesn't think the Chaos Codex suits his Iron Warriors, and that the loyalist SM Codex does.

Example, Iron Warriors Warsmith has no better "counts-as" as the Master of the Forge. I really don't think a Chaos Lord fits better, not at all.

I don't get the whole problem to be honest, would there be any dissenters if he called his army the Steel Fighters, who are Chaos Siege specialists but use the SM Codex?

One thing I do, really, want to see....

An Iron Warriors 'Thunderfire Cannon' proxy... using the Fantasy Chaos Hellcannon.... that would be... awesome.

Shipmonkey
07-01-2010, 21:10
I'm I the only person here who remembers that the 3.5 Chaos 'dex was written by the Studio Iron Warriors player? You known, the guy who gave his personal army a boatload of advantages and a total lack of disadvantages.

The current 'dex works just fine for the Iron Warriors. You can get your tanks and your seige weapons. Yes, no more Basilisk, but that didn't belong in the army and the 'dex even said as much. As for the Alpha Legion whine, does a full outflanking army of marines really sound like a good idea under 5th Edition?

This thread has opened my eyes though. I think I'll be using the IG codex for my Ultramarine army. I can use the Valkyrie to represent the Thunderhawks that are such a vital part of the heart and soul of the army. Every marine novel includes them as having such a major role in all marine operations. GWs continuing nerfing of the Marines by not allowing such a vital unit to be fielded in every Marine fore is such a farce.

So good luck using the Marine 'dex for the Iron Warriors. Be sure to use Vulkan to increase the effectiveness of you seige warfare. Your Combat Squading, And They Shall Know No Fear possessing, and Combat Tactics wielding Chaos Marines will need alll the help they can get.

Askari
07-01-2010, 21:28
This thread has opened my eyes though. I think I'll be using the IG codex for my Ultramarine army. I can use the Valkyrie to represent the Thunderhawks that are such a vital part of the heart and soul of the army. Every marine novel includes them as having such a major role in all marine operations. GWs continuing nerfing of the Marines by not allowing such a vital unit to be fielded in every Marine fore is such a farce.

If you think that the Imperial Guard Codex will really represent your Marines better than the Marine codex, then yeah go for it.

However, don't whine when people start calling your Marines wusses because unlike every other Space Marine in the galaxy, they have S3 T3 I3.
:)

Mannimarco
07-01-2010, 21:32
please dont troll

what was the point of bringing up 3.5? what does it tell us? oh yeah the guy who wrote the last book where you could actually play a legion (and not a bunch of slightly annoyed pirates with daddy issues) made the book so his army had all the benifits. what bearing does that have on this topic at all? does the op want to write his own codex so his chosen army gets all these bonuses? no he isnt saying anything of the sort so ripping on the IW because of 3.5 isnt quite right

is there anything in this thread about using vulkan? im reading through it and can see references to the master of the forge and techmarines who, lets face it, fit into the IW army better than lords/sorcerers/princes but your absolutely right, the only people who get to use vulkans cheesy goodness are loyalist marines

the current dex does not work for iron warriors, it has been said that a leman russ does not an imperial guard army make (its sombody on heres sig) then it is also true that some obliterators and vindicators do not an iron warrior army make

@OP: just a thought for you, keep the IW paint scheme, call them steel fighters as was mentioned above and use the loyalist codex to represent your "recently turned chapter who are so recently turned that codex smurfs fits better" and screw the haters

now if you'll all excuse me I need to go finish painting my necrons, the new space wolf FAQ is up and I rather think it fits the theme of my tombworld

twj
07-01-2010, 22:03
Bah, I think Warseer has mellowed... Normally when I see topics such as this one, I expect to be confronted by a lot of nerd rage. So am slightly disappointed...

Anyway, nicely painted army, would like to see some more blood pact.

Freakiq
07-01-2010, 22:13
Other than Obliterators and Vindicators the Chaos list offers nothing fluffy for Iron Warriors.

The argument that you can take Spawns/Plague Marines as robots and cyborgs is quite lame as they have as far as I know never been shown to fight alongside such creatures.

Massed artillery, Servo-arm equipped Commanders and Siege Dreadnoughts on the other hand fits an Iron Warriors army perfectly.

Some of you might like an army filled with robotic spawn monsters but they aren't how most Iron Warrior players see their legion.

Tymell
07-01-2010, 22:16
Opinion.

The OP doesn't think the Chaos Codex suits his Iron Warriors, and that the loyalist SM Codex does.

Which is exactly why I said he has every right to do it if he wants to. But in turn, I have -my- right to choose not to play it because I think using another codex when you already have one is just a bit too much.

Someone then suggested you couldn't be adequetely represented with the current codex. I said they could, they asked me to illustrate how, so I did. This part wasn't really connected with the OP, which is why I was reluctant to post it.


Other than Obliterators and Vindicators the Chaos list offers nothing fluffy for Iron Warriors.

Only if your definition of "fluffy" is simply "units that absolutely scream X army". If your definition is more like, "perfectly in keeping with army background", then most everything is fluffy.


Massed artillery

Which they can take.


Servo-arm equipped Commanders

Which they can still model, and the actual rule for a servo-arm should hardly be army-defining.


Siege Dreadnoughts

Which they couldn't take even in their old incarnation anyway.


Some of you might like an army filled with robotic spawn monsters but they aren't how most Iron Warrior players see their legion.

That's totally up to you, but the option is there. I see complainers saying they can't play Iron Warriors. I show them how they can. Everything after that is your choice. Plus, the old codex sets a precedent by describing Iron Warriors possessed as ones that "harness bound Daemonic energies to power an array of cybernetic enhancements".

twj
07-01-2010, 22:16
Actually, I think that using Spawn to represent robots is genius!

TheShadowCow
07-01-2010, 22:24
There's no reasoning with the crazy haters who think you're only after a power-gaming WAAC list, so let's put that to one side and get back on topic.



Using Codex:SM, you have access to a lot of good looking seige-y type units, allowing you to set up a very convincing seige attack or fortified defence depending on your situation.


HQ

Master of the Forge (Conversion Beamer optional) = one of the best Warsmith representations an Iron Warriors player could get.

Troops

Tactical Squads are more-or-less on par with regular CSM units. These are your line-troops, crewing your fortifications. Forgeworld do beautiful Dreadclaws if you want to make use of one or more of those (they weigh in at a hefty 85 a pop though). Avoid Scouts at all costs. You may want to pop a unit or two in Rhinos for advancing on objectives or a stricken base once you've cracked it open.

Elites

Ah, the Ironclad Dreadnoughts. So much potential here - you could simply model them up as seige Dreadnoughts (start with the Ironclad, add Iron Warriors iconography, perhaps some plating or battle-damage representing age and grit. Alternatively, you could model up Daemonic seige engines in pretty much any way you wish.

Fast Attack

Nada really. Assault Marines could equal Raptors, but they'd look out of place I think. Avoid?

Heavy Support

Now things get interesting. Vindicators, Whirlwinds and Thunderfire Cannons all fit the bill rather nicely. I'd not skimp on the Thunderfires if I were you - they are about as close to turrets as you can get, and the Techmarines (Seige-smiths) can Bolster Defences on your cover (bring your own barricades and concrete to attach to terrain :p). GW's Warsmith model is a great place to start for filling out these Techmarine stand-ins. Building the turrets is another matter though. Again, Forgeworld do some nice turrets (http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Sabredp.htm for instance), but that's up to you.



So yes, plenty of good options to turn whatever table you end up playing on into your own little fortress.

Freakiq
07-01-2010, 22:32
Only if your definition of "fluffy" is simply "units that absolutely scream X army". If your definition is more like, "perfectly in keeping with army background", then most everything is fluffy.


So Iron Warriors can either play their army the way you see fit or not at all?

El Ravager
07-01-2010, 22:42
It doesn't bother me for IW to use the Codex:Space Marines for their list.

What bothers me is the notion that you can't do IW with Codex:Chaos Space Marines. You get plenty of siege stuff there. Defilers, Vindicators, and Obliterators are more than enough heavy support for that. Lack of an independent character with a servo arm doesn't bother me. I've never attempted, nor see anyone else atempt to actually use it to fix stuff, so I just call the big servo arm on my Warsmith model a Daemon Weapon and call it good.

Fill out the rest of the army with Marines and Terminators and maybe Aspiring champions. I would never want to go back to just a bolter and pistol after having access to troops with bolter, pistol and chainsword. You don't HAVE to use plague marines to win with chaos.

Tymell
07-01-2010, 22:59
So Iron Warriors can either play their army the way you see fit or not at all?

No, I simply said that if you define "fluffy" so strictly, then your army composition options are bound to suffer. But that this, ultimately, is your choice. You can do it if you want, but it makes issues with forming an Iron Warrior army something of your own creation, not that of the new codex.

Also, at no point in this thread have I said people aren't allowed to play their army as they want. I've even gone to lengths to make it very clear that's not at all what I'm saying, and I'd really like people to stop putting words in my mouth to that effect.

So for the third and final time:

To the OP: go for it if you want, but if you're asking for thoughts on it, mine is that you already have a Chaos Space Marine codex, and I think using another when you have that is going a bit far. That's my take on it.

To others: yes, you can make Iron Warrior armies with the new codex absolutely fine, please try putting as much effort into enjoying the game as you are into arguing that GW have ruined it for you.

Johnnyfrej
08-01-2010, 00:17
I have a question for you Tymell:

So, in your own opinion, IW can be represented with "their own" codex by simply using other units they wouldn't normally take (when would you ever field Possesed when all the other Elites are ten times more IW fluffy, TS, overpriced Raptors and Bikes, Spawn etc.), but are converted and proxy'd so they can fit the theme.

However, using a different codex, that can be converted and proxy'd but with far more usable units, goes against the spirit of the game and your opinion on how IW should be played so you would refuse to play them?

Am I getting your message right?

Latro_
08-01-2010, 00:34
This still going on? It does get a little ugh.
The reason this always spirals into horse manure is its creativity vs the traditional.

'i wanna make a cool flying lizard for my salamanders and use it as a landspeeder, instead of the multi melta i'm gonna model fire out of its mouth, its gonna look coool'

'If it is not from the landspeeder box set and painted using the salamanders colour scheme then i cannot accept and will not accept that is a land speeder, infact i'd expect company decals on it for authenticity to represent the use of character x whom leads that company since you have him in your army'


Both view points can be argued to be flawed, one promotes creativity and causes confusion, one stifles creativity in favour of canonised rules/fluff and expectations.


Its like different types of political parties and the huge grey area between them.
I think a good rule of thumb is:


If you have to ask random internet folk on warseer if they'd be cool with it, then there is a good chance you wont be able to use it in a strict tournament unless you write to them first.

You shouldent need to ask WS if you are worried about FLG/mates. They should know you and be cool with your creativity and be very familiar with your army/ideas, if they are not then you'v made a bad impression on them/they are ****** or you dont know them yet, so do that first.

Either way you can see that this never need actually ever need to come up again owing to the above two points hehe.

Zanzibarthefirst
08-01-2010, 01:12
If you think that the Imperial Guard Codex will really represent your Marines better than the Marine codex, then yeah go for it.

However, don't whine when people start calling your Marines wusses because unlike every other Space Marine in the galaxy, they have S3 T3 I3.
:)

However you coudl use one of the Vrak renegade lists as they have the option for a few space amrines and maybe obliterators could count as orgyns or something. You wouldn't have Vindicators which IMO are the stable of any IW force. Nothing says siege like a big cannon

Mannimarco
08-01-2010, 01:23
the vraks list doesnt cover IW very much either, it is however a perfect match for alpha legion/word bearer type armies but hey anythings possible so lets try this:

your heavy support options will be made up of imperial guard vehicles and they follow the old dex rule of 1 tank = 1 slot, your troops will be traitor guard (also get access to a conscript type unit and either plague zombies or bloodgors) you can have chaos space marine chose/khorne berserkers/plague marines as your elites although these share the same slot as the ogryns

for your iron warriors then the best bet of the 3 books would be vraks 1, load up on tanks and traitor guard, get some support weapon squads for added heavy firepower, get some chosen as your IW elites and try arkos as a warsmith, he doesnt have your servo harness but he does have extensive bionics and is tougher and stronger than a chaos lord

if you choose to go this way let me know and ill try to help you

TheWarSmith
08-01-2010, 06:00
Until my army got stolen, I used the SM book for Iron Warriors.

It's a LOT easier to fit into the background of IW with the force layout of codex Space Marines. You can add a lot more armour, with or without taking the master of the forge. You get techmarines, ironclads, better land raiders.

CSM has a lot of things that are a waste for an IW player concerned w/ background. This includes all of the daemons(greater daemons and lesser), possessed marines(these can be converted to represent mechanical stuff)

Tymell
08-01-2010, 09:21
I have a question for you Tymell:

So, in your own opinion, IW can be represented with "their own" codex by simply using other units they wouldn't normally take (when would you ever field Possesed when all the other Elites are ten times more IW fluffy, TS, overpriced Raptors and Bikes, Spawn etc.), but are converted and proxy'd so they can fit the theme.

However, using a different codex, that can be converted and proxy'd but with far more usable units, goes against the spirit of the game and your opinion on how IW should be played so you would refuse to play them?

Am I getting your message right?

I don't think you are, no.

In my own opinion, Iron Warriors can be represented by their own codex (no quote marks needed, since they are chaos space marines, and that is a chaos space marine codex), by using units they would normally take and which are perfectly acceptable unless you're actively looking for a way to complain. Plague marines and spawn are about the only ones requiring any imagination, possessed are, as I have said twice now, backed up in the old codex, most everything else in the codex fits just fine.

As for why I wouldn't play someone using another codex when they have one already, I've explained my reasoning three times now. Just see one of my other posts for it.

Anywho, this is the last time I’ll post in the thread. I’ve said my piece (several times), and already probably done too much to turn this into another “You can’t play legions with the new codex – yes you can – no you can’t” thread. Some will never be convinced that they can still play their armies absolutely fine, no matter how much evidence to the contrary they are shown.

TheShadowCow
08-01-2010, 10:26
If you wanted to field a CSM list geared to win and in Iron Warrior colours, then you'd just take the usual LashPrinces, Plague Marines and (omg fluffy?) Obliterator spam, with some sort of half-baked justification and do it straight from the CSM book rather than picking the current SM crazy list and justifying it.

The OP is intending to use units that fit what he believes the Iron Warriors (or rather his Iron Warriors seige/fortification) force should look like, with the driving force being theme rather than WAAC. It's not about "CSM can't field Iron Warriors", it's about "SM makes for a more convincing seige/defence list".

Baragash
08-01-2010, 10:35
I just find it weirdly illogical...

Assumption: the same army is owned and used by the OP in both scenarios.

Scenario 1: "Hi, this is my Iron Warriors counts as Space Marine army".
Result: no game.

Scenario 2: "Hi, this is my heavily converted Space Marine army".
Result: game.

:confused:

Askari
08-01-2010, 12:27
I just find it weirdly illogical...

Assumption: the same army is owned and used by the OP in both scenarios.

Scenario 1: "Hi, this is my Iron Warriors counts as Space Marine army".
Result: no game.

Scenario 2: "Hi, this is my heavily converted Space Marine army".
Result: game.

Like I said on the previous page, if someone complains, just do a switcharoo and say "Oh did I say Iron Warriors? Stupid me, I meant these are the Steel Fighters, newly turned renegades who still use the SM Codex".

Mannimarco
08-01-2010, 12:30
its funny but what askari is saying will actually work, ive seen it

Urath
08-01-2010, 12:35
Chapter Masters... ASSEMBLE!
*whistles to the wind*

@Mannimarco: I suppose it just shows how unreasonable people can be.

WinglessVT2
08-01-2010, 13:03
If you were using something like mechanius, which doesn't even have a codex, or you were trying out armies, I'd be okay with it, but this is just silly.
When blood angels come out, and they get all the fancy tools that regular marines have, plus Vlad batborn the bloodfang, riding his bloodbat, are you going to switch to them, so you can have a 'demon prince?'

Urath
08-01-2010, 14:04
If he was going to do that, he'd have used Codex: Space Wolves and not Codex: Space Marines, which has been out for some time and, aside from that, he says that he is not doing it for any buffs or to powergame, which has been expressed numerous times in this thread. Codex: Space Wolves and the up-coming Codex: Blood Angels or, for that matter, Codex: Dark Angels and Codex: Black Templars would hardly fit the theme he's going for; which is heavy on artillery, vehicles and support weapons; Codex: Space Marines is the best choice.

Arvendragon
08-01-2010, 14:17
Actually, I find that Dark Angels represents a SW army quite well. Mainly for Terminators as troops.

But I would have to say that Space Marines would be the best codex.

I'm thinking of doing the same thing as you, only switch out Iron Warriors for my custom assault-based chapter and with Chaos codex. But then, my fluff IS about their fall to Chaos.

Urath
08-01-2010, 14:42
Taking Logan allows the Space Wolf army to field Wolf Guard as full troops choices. Logan is better, in game, than Belial anyway.

Talos
08-01-2010, 14:52
I think its a good idea. I say going for it if people like Tymell wont play you just say its a loyal SM chapter that has the same paint scheme as IW and maybe likes spikes a bit to much.
Or you could make them like the Streel Brethen which are a off shot of the Iron Warriors and are into using lots of Droppods which could not be made using the C:CSM.

Arvendragon
08-01-2010, 16:31
BUT not a single person who isn't noob will complain about you.

Freakiq
08-01-2010, 17:06
I think its a good idea. I say going for it if people like Tymell wont play you just say its a loyal SM chapter that has the same paint scheme as IW and maybe likes spikes a bit to much.
Or you could make them like the Streel Brethen which are a off shot of the Iron Warriors and are into using lots of Droppods which could not be made using the C:CSM.

I've really been wanting to do a Steel Brethren army.

I just can't understand why people Would accept Steel Brethren using the Space Marine codex but not Iron Warriors. :wtf:

Talos
08-01-2010, 17:17
I've really been wanting to do a Steel Brethren army.

I just can't understand why people Would accept Steel Brethren using the Space Marine codex but not Iron Warriors. :wtf:

Me to, it is on my to do list with about 3 other chaos armies :) I already have a a IW and EC army. I have been meaning to make a Word bearers, Death guard and Night Lords army at sometime.

I know its odd, why somepeople will accept some counts as armies but not others. I mean I understand not accepting Nids for SM or Orks using the Tau dex but powerarmour is powerarmour well atleast to me it is.
I also find it odd as CSM will be a stronger build so I just dont see the problem.

I bet if you turned up with you IW forces and just said nothing but this is a SM force nobody would say anything. I just find the whole thing odd.

Baracus
07-02-2010, 04:45
Good idea here drop those traitoris scum that killed the salamanders ironhands and raven dudes at the dropsite massacare and join the guard see the world and die with light of the emperor in your heart

Phyros
07-02-2010, 17:39
I think my Salamanders are going to convert to Chaos just so they can continue to use their 2 assault weapons per squad.

Havock
07-02-2010, 21:03
You already have a codex, which is up-to-date, and really powerful.
Why not use that instead of running a proxy horde?

Counts as =/= proxy.

Is a chaos bolter different from a marine version? Are the statslines dramaitcally different?

Codsticker
07-02-2010, 22:01
Please play nice now. I have edited/deleted posts and issued Warnings as neccessary. Please do not repond to Trolling or Flamming, just make use of the Report Post button and let the Moderators deal with it.

Codsticker

The Warseer Mod Squad

MajorWesJanson
08-02-2010, 04:48
I run a homebrew chapter, and depending on how I feel like playing, will use either Codex: SM, or Codex: SW. Maybe Codex: BA when it comes out. Not to powergame, but just because I feel like playing different styles at different times, without having to build a whole new army. Marines are pretty much Marines.

If the OP likes the fluff of the iron Warriors, but prefers the playstyle and options of Codex: SM, go for it. If you aren't picking and choosing units from different codexes, and have units as wsyiwyg (including relatively consistent conversions) than the actual codex (especially marine codexes) used is irrelevant.

Marines can swap codexes easily, as most the changes are in unit loadout, characters, and some options. You don't see much of a difference proxying a chaos rhino for a blue rhino, or a spiky land raider for a wolf one.

On a separate note, if you wanted to play a daemon prince in a loyalist codex, I'd proxy him as a dreadnought. Models are close to the same size.

Born Again
08-02-2010, 12:03
No, I don't think I would play against it. Why? Simply because you have chosen to play a Chaos Space Marine Legion, therefore I believe you should use the Chaos Space Marine codex. Now, it you wanted to play a Space Marine chapter that had a silver colour scheme and specialised in siege warfare, that's cool with me. Go for it! But saying "I want to play X army, but with Y rules" is just nonsensical and silly. I remember a time when army theming meant exactly what Tymell is proposing: modelling the troops in your codex to match your theme, not choosing another army's codex that, in your mind, represents your interpretation better because the guy who wrote the book (and, btw, is paid to decide things like what an army's character and style will be) happens to have a different interpretation to you.

Askari
08-02-2010, 13:24
I remember a time when army theming meant exactly what Tymell is proposing: modelling the troops in your codex to match your theme, not choosing another army's codex that, in your mind, represents your interpretation better because the guy who wrote the book (and, btw, is paid to decide things like what an army's character and style will be) happens to have a different interpretation to you.

So because some "guy" who is paid, but is just some guy nonetheless, has a different interpretation to me then I can't play it my way?

Like I've said several times in this thread already, does this mean you'd have a problem with the Steel Fighters, a bunch of Iron Warriors wannabes who, because they've only just turned to Chaos, use the SM Codex?

Havock
08-02-2010, 14:45
No, I don't think I would play against it. Why? Simply because you have chosen to play a Chaos Space Marine Legion, therefore I believe you should use the Chaos Space Marine codex. Now, it you wanted to play a Space Marine chapter that had a silver colour scheme and specialised in siege warfare, that's cool with me. Go for it! But saying "I want to play X army, but with Y rules" is just nonsensical and silly. I remember a time when army theming meant exactly what Tymell is proposing: modelling the troops in your codex to match your theme, not choosing another army's codex that, in your mind, represents your interpretation better because the guy who wrote the book (and, btw, is paid to decide things like what an army's character and style will be) happens to have a different interpretation to you.

And you pay for the models. It is YOUR army, as long as its clear what everything does and represents, you can do whatever you want. And even if it isn't completely clear at first glance, a lot of leeway can be found by telling me what X is. GW has no authority in this matter.

Still, the marine 'dex is ideal for a non-anything daemonic CSM army.

Sternguard can represent marines infected -but not fully- with the obliterator virus, vanguard are chosen. Ironclad dreads are ideal 'wall breachers' in combination with vindicators. Just stay away from Vulkan thunder hammer armies and such, it wouldn't be right. Scouts likewise really.

A captured whirlwind would suit the force though.

Col. Dash
08-02-2010, 14:58
Storm of Iron had a single obliterator and that is the best fluff for IW written to date. I dont know if that Black sky book had any as I dont read books about the space marines. Known for using lots of oblits was from players being cheesy and having multiples from the last codex not from any real fluff I have ever read. They are much more known for their use of artillery and seige tactics. Ironclad dreads, vindis, and thunderfires are perfect choices for IW. I would avoid jump packs and land speeders though. Terminators would be a fluffy choice and there is nothing that says they couldnt have looted and reused thunder hammers and storm shields, they would be fitting as far as I am concerned. In the bible of chaos (2nd edition dex, also best source for true fluff) you could outfit your termies with dual lit claws and thunderhammer/storm shields.

fluffstalker
08-02-2010, 15:50
Storm of Iron had a single obliterator and that is the best fluff for IW written to date. I dont know if that Black sky book had any as I dont read books about the space marines. Known for using lots of oblits was from players being cheesy and having multiples from the last codex not from any real fluff I have ever read. They are much more known for their use of artillery and seige tactics. Ironclad dreads, vindis, and thunderfires are perfect choices for IW. I would avoid jump packs and land speeders though. Terminators would be a fluffy choice and there is nothing that says they couldnt have looted and reused thunder hammers and storm shields, they would be fitting as far as I am concerned. In the bible of chaos (2nd edition dex, also best source for true fluff) you could outfit your termies with dual lit claws and thunderhammer/storm shields.

Pretty much this. Oblit spam is not IW.

PapaDoc
08-02-2010, 17:23
Wouldn't play because it is lame to count as other codices when Iron Warriors already got one. Chaos marines with ATSKNF is what to me breaks "the spirit of the game". Legion specific Chaos Space Marines should never be fearless. It is their thing to be routed. If you feel your chaos codex is not terribly competative and you don't wish to become a competative player (who has the time really?) just tell your friends to bring nicer lists when playing against you.

Besides 40k is a huge game and there is a lot of people playing it so I can afford to be picky.

Vaktathi
08-02-2010, 17:35
your[/I] codex to match your theme, not choosing another army's codex that, in your mind, represents your interpretation better because the guy who wrote the book (and, btw, is paid to decide things like what an army's character and style will be) happens to have a different interpretation to you.Please note that the "character and style" of legions such as the Iron Warriors were written closing in on two decades ago by far different people who wrote the current codex (and neither of who still work for GW). There's absolutely nothing valid in this train of thought. It's not like there's a whole lot on the Iron Warriors, or any Legion in the current CSM book, past a color scheme and a couple sentences.

In the end, what's the difference? Horns and spikes instead of eagles and olive wreaths with almost identical statlines and models?


Legion specific Chaos Space Marines should never be fearless. It is their thing to be routed. Clearly we've forgotton half the legions that always have Fearless as part of their special rules.

Col. Dash
08-02-2010, 17:43
Whats lame about painting silver and warning strip space marines and calling them Iron Warriors? I fail to follow that logic Papadoc. If he wants to use legal rules and the models are well represented and obvious, why does it matter what color they are painted. So they have ATSKNF? So they are fairly well motivated and dont turn aside easily, whats the big deal?


I personally think the regular space marine codex covers Night lords and IW fairly well since neither are heavily influenced by chaos.

Havock
08-02-2010, 17:56
Wouldn't play because it is lame to count as other codices when Iron Warriors already got one. Chaos marines with ATSKNF is what to me breaks "the spirit of the game". Legion specific Chaos Space Marines should never be fearless. It is their thing to be routed. If you feel your chaos codex is not terribly competative and you don't wish to become a competative player (who has the time really?) just tell your friends to bring nicer lists when playing against you.

Besides 40k is a huge game and there is a lot of people playing it so I can afford to be picky.

That you automatically assume he wants to use the marine dex for the competitiveness says more about you then him really.
Could it be that he wants to use the book because the CSM book is, quite frankly, boring? It certainly is if you are excluding the use of the cultist units.

'Counts-as' is legal people, more legal than whining about someone using codex 'eagle and skull marines for spiky marines.

PapaDoc
09-02-2010, 00:08
This is not whining, it is a simple stand I make as a hobbyist and hardline fluff taliban. If I want the awesome chaos models, then I have to play with their "boring" codex. As the rest of us. It is superlame to 'count as' something that already has rules, no matter how you twist it or how stupid my arguments are.

I won't stop people from doing it... but if I can choose not to play them then I am going to do so. It is also totally legal for me to not play people I don't want to play.

Vaktathi
09-02-2010, 00:11
I don't see why one couldn't use the SM codex to make a perfectly fluffy and characterful IW army, without being powergamey.

Take the following

Master of the Forge (counts as Warsmith)

4x Tac Squads w/ Rhino's

4 Dreads

2 Thunderfires.


Fits IW's perfectly.

And be honest, if someone showed up with a perfectly legal army, built and painted well in IW colors with a list like the one above, you'd really tell them flat out no to their face to a game just because the army had spikes and horns instead of eagles?

Col. Dash
09-02-2010, 00:31
I fail to see whats unfluffy about a grand company of IW who havent reverted to totally being pawns of chaos and still use their old gear. Same goes for a Night Lord company that even in the fluff dislikes chaos and has chosen to keep their old stuff and forgo gifts of chaos. Its fluffier than most marine chapters out there.

rickie8437
09-02-2010, 00:31
It meant "I and others have used this winning
HQ: Chaos Lords/Daemon Princes
Elites: Terminators, dreadnoughts, and potentially possessed if you use a bit of imagination (this idea was even mentioned specifically in the last codex)
Troops: Heavy-weapon equipped marines, plague marines/Thousand Sons used as super-tough Iron Warrior troops, bezerkers (because assault can be vital in a siege, storming the breach and so on)
Fast attack: Not the Iron Warrior strong point of course, but both raptors (again, storming a breach/over-coming ground obstacles) and spawn (mech-enhanced monstrosities) work okay
Heavy support: Many choices of course, obliterators, predators, havocs, defilers, vindicators and land raiders, with those all being very much Iron Warrior units

nice army.. but paint it black with gold trim and what do you have, or even better paint it dark red and hay we have a word bearers army

im all for the idear, and if i had my way id burn every last C:csm, as its the worst thing gw have done, it killed so many cool armys of.. cultists, legion rules ect ect

at the end of the day you do what you feel is right, its your hobby, and if you must ask anyone ask the guys you place along side week after week

good luck with the project

Lord Raneus
09-02-2010, 04:53
Just have to chime in and say that I think it's rather absurd to refuse to play against someone who has a perfectly valid list. As long as it's clear what each model is meant to be, there should be no greater hesitation to play against someone who has made an Iron Hands army (not represented by the current codex) with the C: SM rules than someone who has used them to play Iron Warriors.

Shooting down someone who has poured that much love into thinking out, creating, building and painting their army just because it isn't "fluffy" or somesuch enough for you is rather petty, in my opinion.

direwolf
09-02-2010, 12:42
It. Just. Does. Not. Make. Sense.

So if someone likes the CSM models and wants to paint them metal with black and white stripes but also likes thunder fire cannons, ironclads and the master of the forge that some people won't play him unless he chooses match his models style and colour to the rules? I mean, as far as game play is concerned, this is a stylistic issue. I assume all the models would be wysiwyg and reasonably easy to tell what they are and the list would be legal?

So does this mean if I want a blood angels successor that just happen to come from a planet of savage wolf reverring folk, modelled from space wolves models but using the ba list, people won't play me.

Or is this because in this case the army in question is an existing one and some people can't divorce the fluff from the rules.

If this is the case then some people really shouldn't be playing this game since if the fluff and rules were in sync I should be able to beat a 3000 point Orc army with a tactical squad.

I fail to see how using the vanilla marine codex to create a balanced siege based army that just happens to be painted and modeled as iron warriors is any less creative or acceptable than a double lash plague marine + max oblit spam list of doom modeled to all look like robots or some such with some elaborate and convoluted homebrew fluff to justify it all.