PDA

View Full Version : Chaos players unite



Pages : [1] 2

Kegslayer
24-03-2014, 02:09
An interesting opinion on our codex:
http://www.thediceabide.com/2013/09/chaos-marines-what-makes-us-special/

You see its not actually bad. Yes no legions etc but the book itself is good when you learn to use it.

Scribe of Khorne
24-03-2014, 03:02
Guy's a noted apologist, and the article is old. ;)

If he where to write it fresh, with the supplements and data slates we now have, it may have some value as I quite enjoy list building when you have CSM, Daemons, Black Legion, Crimson Slaughter, Belakor, Cypher, and the Helbrute being fixed by the latest dataslate.

"Chaos wins out on mobility"

Yeah, that line alone is comical. Really needs a rewrite. :p

=Angel=
24-03-2014, 03:17
He's looking at the book like it's a list of generic options- you'll probably always take the mark of nurgle on your oblits!

If the mark of nurgle was called the rune of durability then it would be an option your squads could take. As it is, it marks that unit as worshipers of a specific god- it's not like throwing a plasmagun into a unit.

It should involve modeling or at least painting in a specific style.

If you didn't want to model a squad in a nurgle style or heaven forbid you wanted to build a cult legion force, it's off the table.

You can't view the chaos codex as a series of options, that only works on paper. It needs to be viewed on the strength of adherence to background and the internal balance between units and god marks. That's what's missing.

Scribe of Khorne
24-03-2014, 03:20
Indeed.

When you free yourself from that mindset, and incorporate a years worth of options and additions, its a passable book, as a stand alone, which this article was contemporary with, its a dismal failure from an internal, external, and fluff perspective, and thats not going to change for the core book itself.

Throw in Daemons, run a Supplement (BL or more likely CS), add some formations (Belakor rocks, Helcut is decent) and now you have something at least.

Slayer-Fan123
24-03-2014, 03:21
Except I play the codex and can tell you everything that's wrong with it:
1. Lots of bad HQ's, like the Dark Apostle and named Characters. Yeah I use Typhus but I can tell from internal balance he isn't actually good; in fact all the special characters are overall bad except Huron, but Huron is unmarked which means I need to take an appropriately marked HQ to get Cult Marines, which leads into the next point:
2. The core troops suck. Everything I need regular Chaos Space Marines to do, I can get Plague Marines to do it better. Then we got Cultists, which are bad except for only costing you 100 points to fulfill the minimum Troop requirement. Then you got Noise Marines doing stuff and there ya go. Those are the best Troop options.
3. Internal balance is ridiculous, even moreso than one would imagine. Everything I need Raptors to do, I can get Bikers to do the same, and both are outclassed by Heldrakes. I need nothing out of the Heavy Support slot outside Obliterators too. In the Elite slot, you got Terminators to do basically all the roles in there. Sure Possessed have Fleet but I'd rather pay a bit extra in points to lose it and gain some durability and default power weapons. Combined with range output, it's silly. Rubric Marines are also bad in the anti-MEQ department that I'd rather ally with Necrons and take Destroyers AND lose access to Wraiths. Yes, Rubric Marines are that bad.
4. Units we didn't ask for still suck. Warp Talons and Mutilators, 'nuff said.
5. This therefore leads into a monobuild codex. I can do a few different builds with Necrons and have a decent chance at winning, and I could probably do the same with Tau (though I don't play them I imagine I could). I can do the same with Space Marines because of several different Chapter Tactics and then bonus ones from Forge World so that, no matter what list I want to run, it becomes more efficient. The moment I take Possessed or Berzerker Marines or Mutilators I'm screwed.

Scribe of Khorne
24-03-2014, 03:38
Let it out brother, let it out.

Knifeparty
24-03-2014, 04:04
The worst part about the Chaos Codex is that this is the second time it's happened. They already ****ed it up once in 4th edition, but then they came back and did the exact same thing again, but this time they made it unplayable on a competitive level. At least the 4th edition codex had some level of competitiveness through the complete lack of options, but this one doesn't even have that. It's like being in an abusive relationship, I hope Phill Kelly doesn't hit me again...

Voss
24-03-2014, 04:22
The worst part about the Chaos Codex is that this is the second time it's happened. They already ****ed it up once in 4th edition
Haha. More than that. The fundamental problem with the very first 'chaos codex' was they kitchen sinked everything, despite the fact that they started as individual army lists. The first Chaos Books remain unmatched and heavily mourned. Everything since then has been so much less than it could have been, even Pete 'I want my Iron Warriors to Win' Haines 3.5 codex. Though nothing was quite as bad as the one that preceded that.

That they went even further and stripped the daemons out to make two crippled armies (lacking the mutual support that was fundamental to both) was such a poor decision that will haunt every incarnation of chaos.

Brother Haephestus
24-03-2014, 04:35
:( this made me so sad I just went and boxed mine up.

R Man
24-03-2014, 04:41
I think the real problem with the Chaos Marine Codex is found in the structure of the list itself.

The army is supposed to be a close range to close combat army, but does not do this too well. The best example are Chaos Marines themselves. Their cost and stats are actually ok. The problem is their movement options. They either have to foot slog, or take a Rhino. That's it. There are few ways to speed them up. Compare this to just ordinary Space Marines who can (in addition to walking and Rhino's): Take Razorbacks, or Drop Pods. Or combat Squad to cover more ground. When looking at the rest of the lists this becomes even more noticeable. Marines can drop pod Dreads too, as well as multiple types of land raider. Chaos gets no Dropdreads and the worst type of land raider. The only ways to get Infiltrate is to take Special Characters, or to hope you roll it as a Warlord Trait. Worse, no teleport homers. This essentially kills Mutilators and Warp Talons, who need to be close to their targets to work. So the overall problem is that Chaos is an elite close fighty army, but has not got the mobility to get to combat, or to compensate for their low numbers. Nor can the army support itself easily.

Note to that the best units in the Chaos book, are the ones that do best in shoot outs. Obliterators, Baledrakes, Plague Marines, Noise Marines and to a lesser extent Havoks.

Scribe of Khorne
24-03-2014, 04:45
That they went even further and stripped the daemons out to make two crippled armies (lacking the mutual support that was fundamental to both) was such a poor decision that will haunt every incarnation of chaos.

Isnt that the truth.

Thankfully, with allies, and these supplements of late I dont think its still as dire as when CSM dropped at the start of 6th.

I'm building up a new CSM/Daemon list right now...but then I have a problem so maybe dont follow my example. :p

Slayer-Fan123
24-03-2014, 05:35
Let it out brother, let it out.
There needed to be a shoulder to cry on. Might as well be you :P

Scribe of Khorne
24-03-2014, 05:40
I'm here till the End. ;)

ashc
24-03-2014, 07:56
I dropped out of CSMs completely with this edition.

The new book masquerades as having options when really it doesn't due to appalling balance issues.

Mozzamanx
24-03-2014, 09:58
I think the fundamental problem is that the book tries to cover too many factions and doesn't have the page count or user attention span to properly execute any of them. It tries to accomplish in one book what Loyalists get in 4, arguably up to 6 if you include Knights and Imperial Guard. It tries to include little twists and flavours from all areas of Chaos and on the surface, looks like it could manage that. The problems start because people don't want the pick'n'mix approach of taking bits from every aspect of Chaos, they tend to identify with a specific part and the book simply lacks the requisite depth to explore any of these corners in detail.

It tries to represent Cult Legions, and does so by introducing the 4 classic Troops units. But the 'real' Legions would also have Terminators, Havocs, Chosen and HQ of similar skills and specialisations which don't exist under this book. Hence having Lords who lack Sonic Weaponry or Inferno Bolts, Chosen who lack WS5 and Chainaxes, or Havocs who lack Blight Grenades and Plague Knives.

It tries to represent the original Traitor Legions and has VotLW to represent that experience. Except Hatred and +1Ld is a pretty middling experience boost even if you count the timey-wimey nature of the Warp since IG Veterans see stat boosts after single campaigns, and ~50 years of fighting sees a Marine Veteran get +1 Attack. Not only that, but all of the Legions are wrapped up into a generic package that doesn't reflect any of their individual styles. It is particularly grating when we have dedicated rules for an individual Company of Marines and yet the Word Bearers are considered 'close enough' to the Iron Warriors as it is.

It tries to represent new Renegades with Huron and cheap bodies. Except this change apparently happens overnight with the total loss of any Loyalist equipment being immediately replaced by Heldrakes and Defilers. Huron has VotLW for some reason, and there is absolutely no reason that you shouldn't base the army on Plague Marines anyway since you have nothing to lose and nothing to identify you as recent turncoats.

It hurts because GW is quite clearly capable of differentiating between factions even within the same book, and has apparently decided not to in the interest of saving space. I am not saying that it would be easy to do but I expect it could be done across 2 pages with a bit of thought and while it might not have the biggest effect on gameplay, it would absolutely explode the book open with new options and fluffy twists.
I'd like to see upgrades for the 9 Founding Legions, applied on a squad-by-squad basis and pay for them in exchange for the flexibility of mixing them over the army. I'd like there to be a reason *not* to take the same few units every time and introduce some kind of benefit to playing 'pure' armies, even if that benefit is nowhere near as powerful as the mixed alternative.

Finally, while I am in no rush to get the 3.5 Armoury back, it would be nice to have a few more bits of unique wargear. As it stands we are basically Codex: Space Marines with different vehicles, the Artefacts list and the Chaos-heavy units. I'd like to see desecrated blades that assist in challenges, or Nurgle toting chemical warfare like Rad-Grenades and Phosphex, or specifically-Khornate melee weapons that trade user-safety for raw killing power. I'd like to see the Daemonic Gifts come back in some format as well.

Mauler
24-03-2014, 10:08
I think that you guys have the same problem as old-skool Tyranid players:


No Andy Chambers.

Harwammer
24-03-2014, 10:39
4. Units we didn't ask for still suck. Warp Talons and Mutilators, 'nuff said... The moment I take Possessed or Berzerker Marines or Mutilators I'm screwed.

I long wanted something equivalent to melee obliterators, true I never wrote in and asked for them or pestered the devs at work, but it is untrue to say mutilators were not wanted by anyone.

Also, a mutilator is 55 points. You're not spending screwed by wasting 55 points in an otherwise decent list. This assumes a single mutilator is literally good for nothing

Honestly what you say is always so hyperbolic it makes it hard to actually identify the good points you make because they are drowning in overexaggerations. Try be a bit more balanced :)

Bugaboo
24-03-2014, 11:37
Mods, just lock this now. It's pretty obvious it's going to be same crud different thread, and we don't need it to get to a double figure page count before that's finally figured out.

=Angel=
24-03-2014, 11:57
What I don't want is legion upgrades that cost points. CSM are already expensive enough. Consider the cost of vets- does nothing for the survivability of the unit and depending on opponents may have zero effect. You are just making your army smaller and easier to kill.

What I'd want is warband traits, similar to chapter traits. Not necessarily legion traits, though they could be used for that.
Say 'hidden serpent' as a trait that could represent alpha legion or other sneaky traitor warband.

Improve the units to you get more internal consistency- a plague lord should be as hard as his men- remove fnp from plague marines or give it to him- just have the units make sense.

Finally- dedication buffs. If you've only got marked units from one god in your army then you're going for a theme at the expense of a good chunk of options in the book.
A buff for dedicated armies would shore up a Khorne warband for example- give them crusader in addition to the warband trait they took.
A tzeentch warband might get to apply the brotherhood of psykers rule to any unit and buy powers for them.

=Angel=
24-03-2014, 11:58
What I don't want is legion upgrades that cost points. CSM are already expensive enough. Consider the cost of vets- does nothing for the survivability of the unit and depending on opponents may have zero effect. You are just making your army smaller and easier to kill.

What I'd want is warband traits, similar to chapter traits. Not necessarily legion traits, though they could be used for that.
Say 'hidden serpent' as a trait that could represent alpha legion or other sneaky traitor warband.

Improve the units to you get more internal consistency- a plague lord should be as hard as his men- remove fnp from plague marines or give it to him- just have the units make sense.

Finally- dedication buffs. If you've only got marked units from one god in your army then you're going for a theme at the expense of a good chunk of options in the book.
A buff for dedicated armies would shore up a Khorne warband for example- give them crusader in addition to the warband trait they took.
A tzeentch warband might get to apply the brotherhood of psykers rule to any unit and buy powers for them.

dangerboyjim
24-03-2014, 13:21
I think the fundamental problem is that the book tries to cover too many factions and doesn't have the page count or user attention span to properly execute any of them. It tries to accomplish in one book what Loyalists get in 4, arguably up to 6 if you include Knights and Imperial Guard. It tries to include little twists and flavours from all areas of Chaos and on the surface, looks like it could manage that. The problems start because people don't want the pick'n'mix approach of taking bits from every aspect of Chaos, they tend to identify with a specific part and the book simply lacks the requisite depth to explore any of these corners in detail.

It tries to represent Cult Legions, and does so by introducing the 4 classic Troops units. But the 'real' Legions would also have Terminators, Havocs, Chosen and HQ of similar skills and specialisations which don't exist under this book. Hence having Lords who lack Sonic Weaponry or Inferno Bolts, Chosen who lack WS5 and Chainaxes, or Havocs who lack Blight Grenades and Plague Knives.

It tries to represent the original Traitor Legions and has VotLW to represent that experience. Except Hatred and +1Ld is a pretty middling experience boost even if you count the timey-wimey nature of the Warp since IG Veterans see stat boosts after single campaigns, and ~50 years of fighting sees a Marine Veteran get +1 Attack. Not only that, but all of the Legions are wrapped up into a generic package that doesn't reflect any of their individual styles. It is particularly grating when we have dedicated rules for an individual Company of Marines and yet the Word Bearers are considered 'close enough' to the Iron Warriors as it is.

It tries to represent new Renegades with Huron and cheap bodies. Except this change apparently happens overnight with the total loss of any Loyalist equipment being immediately replaced by Heldrakes and Defilers. Huron has VotLW for some reason, and there is absolutely no reason that you shouldn't base the army on Plague Marines anyway since you have nothing to lose and nothing to identify you as recent turncoats.

It hurts because GW is quite clearly capable of differentiating between factions even within the same book, and has apparently decided not to in the interest of saving space. I am not saying that it would be easy to do but I expect it could be done across 2 pages with a bit of thought and while it might not have the biggest effect on gameplay, it would absolutely explode the book open with new options and fluffy twists.
I'd like to see upgrades for the 9 Founding Legions, applied on a squad-by-squad basis and pay for them in exchange for the flexibility of mixing them over the army. I'd like there to be a reason *not* to take the same few units every time and introduce some kind of benefit to playing 'pure' armies, even if that benefit is nowhere near as powerful as the mixed alternative.

Finally, while I am in no rush to get the 3.5 Armoury back, it would be nice to have a few more bits of unique wargear. As it stands we are basically Codex: Space Marines with different vehicles, the Artefacts list and the Chaos-heavy units. I'd like to see desecrated blades that assist in challenges, or Nurgle toting chemical warfare like Rad-Grenades and Phosphex, or specifically-Khornate melee weapons that trade user-safety for raw killing power. I'd like to see the Daemonic Gifts come back in some format as well.

I think this is probably the best explanation of what makes the codex naff, I have seen so far.

To fix it, they should put in more units, more options for the existing units, and some sub lists to represent the monotheist factions with suitable rewards/penalties to make it worthwhile.

Throw in Lost and Damned and Daemon summoning/allying options and I'm in.

IcedCrow
24-03-2014, 13:49
The other thing that people have to remember is that the new books are written knowing that supplements will flesh out the legions / chapters individually - so while they COULD put all the rules in the CSM book like they used to - they are not going to do that so they can have cult supplements for Death Guard, Thousand Sons, etc...

Denny
24-03-2014, 14:18
Chaos Players Unite

Sorry but I don't think Chaos players uniting is very fluffy. :shifty:

hobojebus
24-03-2014, 14:22
You should not have to spend 60 or more on supplements and data slates to get a working army, it's bad enough paying out 30 fore the first rule book.

They know they gave us a lame duck, they should be giving us these fixes for free not trying to sell us over priced pdfs so we'll shell out hundreds on hellbrutes.

This is why people are moving away from gw not because they hate the models or the fluff, but because the rules suck and they endlessly gouge you with stupidly high prices.

ObiWayneKenobi
24-03-2014, 14:36
I played Chaos in 2nd and 3rd edition and remember most of the White Dwarf talk about changing things then. What I think the major issues with the current state of Chaos are:

1) They went back to the problems of old where they just throw a bunch of stuff into the codex. People have always mainly wanted Chaos to be specific to its different types, and not just a mishmash. People want an army almost entirely of Chaos Marines, or Daemons, or Cultists/Traitor Guard, not all together.

2) Legion Rules should have been there to begin with; Word Bearers don't fight the same as Iron Warriors or Night Lords

3) Chaos doesn't really have an identity to me anymore - in 2nd edition Chaos had things like Chainfists/axes, Power Mauls, MkI Plasma Guns (with the "Get Hot" rule before it was called that and given baseline) and Combi-bolters to represent they were using archaic technology from 10,000 years ago. Now there isn't anything really to distinguish them other than no ATSKNF and daemon engines, which IMO are still out of place. I'd rather they import some of the tech from 30k, and retcon the old "Their equipment broke down" fluff. Chaos could have access to Volkite weapons, or even Legion Jetbikes and some Legion-specific vehicles (suitably corrupt of course) rather than daemon engines. Instead of equating chaos solely with daemons, make the Traitor Legions actually look and feel like they are a dark mirror image of the Imperium of 10,000 years ago.

4) There should have been a difference between a Traitor Legion from the HH and a Renegade Chapter a la the Red Corsairs or Crimson Slaughter; the Renegades should really have been a separate army list themselves that merged some bits from Chaos and Loyalist marines.

5) The balance is garbage. I don't want to field cult troops if my warband is undivided, and I don't want to feel penalized for doing so. Same if I don't want to take a Heldrake.

Ultimately though I think it's GW's desire to not impose restrictions that hurts Chaos the most, because Chaos should always have been 3-4 or more different armies not having most of it just lumped together. What always attracted me to Chaos was playing an "evil Space Marine", not daemons.

Mozzamanx
24-03-2014, 14:54
While the thread remains civil and unlocked, I'd like the opportunity to talk about what I'd like to see in the ideal Chaos Codex.

1) I'd like to see Legions, Warbands and Renegades all represented as viable armies. This would make the inclusion of 'Legion Tactics' as an army-wide rule difficult to implement without hurting the appeal of mixed Warbands and so some thought would have to go into the execution. I think the best way to do it would be to make CSM cheap as an entry cost, with VotLW becoming more expensive with the inclusion of a 'Pick your Legion' upgrade. You could then run cheap mooks for the Renegades, expensive Veterans for the Legions, and mix up the choice of Legions to represent a Warband.
1b) I'd like there to be some reason to stick to fluffy armies, even if it is nowhere near as powerful as taking a mixed army. The rules equivalent of a pat on the back for sticking it out, even as your Berzerkers are demolished. Something like 'Your Warlord must be Khornate. Non-Khornate units are never Scoring. Slaaneshii units are Desperate Allies. For your trouble, every Khornate unit that has access to Icons of Wrath, can have one for free, and any weapon with the 'Melee' type can be exchanged for a free Chainaxe'.

2) I'd like to have an identity besides insanity. The 'old fashioned, relic wargear and Heresy formations' things works really well, so lets get Volkites, Rotor Cannons and Chem-Munitions in there. If you want people to take big mobs, make the first 5 dudes cost 14pts each, the next 5 cost 12pts each, and the next 10 cost 10pts each. Why not get the Sicaran?

3) I'd like some more thought given to differentiating our unique units. Possessed and Berzerkers are extremely similar units, so why not change Possessed to Unit Type: Beasts? Why not tweak Warp Talons into something more divergent from Raptors, or Chosen from Havocs.

4) I'd like the Marks to be redone. As it is, +1T is simply unmatched for anything with multiple Wounds because of how Instant Death works, and I'd like the Marks to be roughly even rather than introduce massive point differences between supposedly-equal models.

5) I'd like there to be a difference between 'Marked' and 'Cult', and then to make both of them available to most units. A Chosen of Nurgle should never feel more pain or panic more easily than the grunts, and a Sorcerer of Tzeentch should retain his Inferno Bolts.

malisteen
24-03-2014, 15:00
Chaos players? Unite? That's a laugh. Even those chaos players who agree that something is wrong can't agree on what it is, let alone how to fix it.

As for myself, give us back the homing beacons which had no business being taken away in the first place, and I'll be happy enough. I mean, functional dread claw rules, vet skills rules, a workable assault transport, maybe even minimal legion skins, sure that would all be nice, but the lack of homing beacons rendering my once favorite tactic of large deep striking terminator units night unworkable is the only remaining issue that actually makes me angry when I try to play, stopping the game from being fun for me.

Inquisitor Shego
24-03-2014, 15:12
Inb4 shego turns up to tell you why that guys wrong.

I swore when I saw how soon you got that in.

Mr. Ultra
24-03-2014, 15:16
Sorry but I don't think Chaos players uniting is very fluffy. :shifty:

I concur, dear sir.

=Angel=
24-03-2014, 15:21
I agree with some of your points Mozza, but I disagree with paying for more points for a unit just for theme sake.
Ultramarines don't pay extra to be Ultramarines, we have a situation where black legion have a tax to be black legion.
What this leads to is more expensive marines, which is not a good thing.
Spacewolves, for example, currently have very cheap bloodclaws, with lots of cc options. It's a powerful choice that point for point beats the tar out of say, khorne csm or zerkers.
In the background these are the raw recruits of the wolves vs the cream of the blood god's forces.

The fastest way to a terrible list is a ton of ennothing upgrades. I remember when my armies were small trying to make up a points deficit with teleport homers and grenades and auspex that would never come into play.

It's the problem with assault marines in a black Templars army- paying for mobility but they don't hit harder than your mandatory troops. Bringing assault marines means less guys- and that mobility , while nice isn't always a game changer.

It's one of the problems that a thousand son army faces. They pay for that invuln and the inferno bolts- but their defensive ability is not raised against small arms. 5 sons will get you 10 tactical marinesor 8 and some upgrades- the tac squad will likely win a fire fight if they can hug cover.

In effect, you have paid extra points and as a result have reduced your offensive capacity (less shots) and your defensive capacity(less dudes) against anything that is not squads of marines in the open packing plasma.

malisteen
24-03-2014, 15:30
It's one of the problems that a thousand son army faces. They pay for that invuln and the inferno bolts- but their defensive ability is not raised against small arms. 5 sons will get you 10 tactical marinesor 8 and some upgrades- the tac squad will likely win a fire fight if they can hug cover.

Yeah this is frustrating. If they can get any cover at all, basic tacticals will win firefights with sons, and killing other marines is like all sons are good for at all, they're basically garbage against anything lighter or heavier. They're theoretically decent against vanguard vets, but thanks to the vets superior delivery options they almost always get the first shot off, which is usually enough to tip the balance. So sons are a super specialized unit, but aren't even all that good against the target of that specialty.

Inquisitor Shego
24-03-2014, 15:40
Fight me?' said Honsou, spreading his arms to encompass his warriors. 'You think we're going to fight a duel? My warriors and I outnumber you ten to one! What makes you think I'd give you a chance to trade blows with me?' The Iron Warriors aimed their weapons at them, knowing that blood was soon to be spilled here, but waiting for their master's command before unleashing death.

Is that from Dead Sky Black Sun, Angel? If so I think it's justification all the more for me abhoring the forced challenges rule.

Scribe of Khorne
24-03-2014, 16:16
Mods, just lock this now. It's pretty obvious it's going to be same crud different thread, and we don't need it to get to a double figure page count before that's finally figured out.

If we didnt have people claiming it was a good book, we wouldnt have these threads.

=Angel=
24-03-2014, 16:32
Is that from Dead Sky Black Sun, Angel? If so I think it's justification all the more for me abhoring the forced challenges rule.

It is. Twice in McNeill's books an Ultramarine just assumes that another Astartes will fight him man to man, because that's what honourable men do!

malisteen
24-03-2014, 16:32
If we didnt have people claiming it was a good book, we wouldnt have these threads.

I'd be curious to see how many times the chaos argument thread had been started by a whiner vs. how many times it had been started by an apologist. My guess is that the responsibility is shared rather more evenly than either side would feel comfortable admitting.

Fingers
24-03-2014, 16:45
I would have loved to see something like the Chapter Tactics Marines got in their 6e book. Something small for each of the "Legions" armies, then something else for Black Legion and Crimson Slaughter. Maybe a "default" one for people making their own "chapter".

Bugaboo
24-03-2014, 16:45
I'd be curious to see how many times the chaos argument thread had been started by a whiner vs. how many times it had been started by an apologist. My guess is that the responsibility is shared rather more evenly than either side would feel comfortable admitting.

This. And as I stated in my reasoning, no matter which "side" starts it, it always amounts to the same. I'm not even going to speak for either argument, because it will be pointless. People who feel hard done by will continue to act entitled to something more akin to what they desire, and those who couldn't care a damn about winning the majority of games will continue to speak worlds of how happy they are with the Codex. Nothing. Will. Change.

malisteen
24-03-2014, 16:52
This. And as I stated in my reasoning, no matter which "side" starts it, it always amounts to the same. I'm not even going to speak for either argument, because it will be pointless. People who feel hard done by will continue to act entitled to something more akin to what they desire, and those who couldn't care a damn about winning the majority of games will continue to speak worlds of how happy they are with the Codex. Nothing. Will. Change.

This characterization isn't exactly super fair. I may not care that much about winning, but it does kind of suck the fun out when the game after game ends with my termie lord's face stuck half way into a rock. I lost more games than I won deep striking big terminator retinues & tooled up characters in 3rd, 4th, and 5th edition, since that sort of configuration was never really points efficient. But it used to be fun at least, and since the rather arbitrary removal of our homing beacons it just isn't anymore. So yeah, I'm a whiner, I admit it, but it isn't just because I feel 'entitled', and I wouldn't suddenly speak worlds of how happy I was if I didn't care about winning the majority of my games, because I already don't care about that, yet still I'm not happy, and I'm one of the few chaos players who was relatively content (or at least, not as bitter as most) under the 4e codex, and would not want to see a return to the ridiculous excess of the 3.5 book.

hobojebus
24-03-2014, 16:55
Spacewolves, for example, currently have very cheap bloodclaws, with lots of cc options. It's a powerful choice that point for point beats the tar out of say, khorne csm or zerkers.

HAH!

Blood claws suck ass ask any SW player out there if you take them you lose hard, sure on paper 40 attacks looks good but lets put 10 claws against 10 csm with extra weapon to make points even:

first turn:

10 Claws hit 20 times and inflict 10 wounds, they kill 3
10 CSM hit 13 times and inflict 6 wounds, they kill 2

second turn:

8 Claws hit 8 times inflict 4 wounds and kill 1
7 CSM hit 10 times inflict 5 wounds and kill 2

third turn:

6 Claws hit 6 times wounds 3 kills 1
6 CSM hit 8 times wounds 4 times and kills 2

Turn four:

4 Claws hit 4 times and wounds 2 but kill none
5 CSM hit 7 times wounds 4 and kills 1

Claws can tarpit a unit but unless you are really lucky or chose to spend alot of points on power fists they will not win unless they can break the unit turn 1.

Trust me you dont want blood claws, no one does in 6th.

Bugaboo
24-03-2014, 17:45
This characterization isn't exactly super fair. I may not care that much about winning, but it does kind of suck the fun out when the game after game ends with my termie lord's face stuck half way into a rock. I lost more games than I won deep striking big terminator retinues & tooled up characters in 3rd, 4th, and 5th edition, since that sort of configuration was never really points efficient. But it used to be fun at least, and since the rather arbitrary removal of our homing beacons it just isn't anymore. So yeah, I'm a whiner, I admit it, but it isn't just because I feel 'entitled', and I wouldn't suddenly speak worlds of how happy I was if I didn't care about winning the majority of my games, because I already don't care about that, yet still I'm not happy, and I'm one of the few chaos players who was relatively content (or at least, not as bitter as most) under the 4e codex, and would not want to see a return to the ridiculous excess of the 3.5 book.

I suppose I should have added a third category. Those who are :cool: Chaotic neutral.

Inquisitor Shego
24-03-2014, 18:44
HAH!

Blood claws suck ass ask any SW player out there if you take them you lose hard, sure on paper 40 attacks looks good but lets put 10 claws against 10 csm with extra weapon to make points even:

first turn:

10 Claws hit 20 times and inflict 10 wounds, they kill 3
10 CSM hit 13 times and inflict 6 wounds, they kill 2

second turn:

8 Claws hit 8 times inflict 4 wounds and kill 1
7 CSM hit 10 times inflict 5 wounds and kill 2

third turn:

6 Claws hit 6 times wounds 3 kills 1
6 CSM hit 8 times wounds 4 times and kills 2

Turn four:

4 Claws hit 4 times and wounds 2 but kill none
5 CSM hit 7 times wounds 4 and kills 1

Claws can tarpit a unit but unless you are really lucky or chose to spend alot of points on power fists they will not win unless they can break the unit turn 1.

Trust me you dont want blood claws, no one does in 6th.

10 Blood Claws is 150 Points.
10 Berserkers are 200 Points including mandatory Aspiring Champion (thanks GW).

They both have a Bolt Pistol + CCW. They both get counter attack. They both get 2 attacks on the charge as opposed to 1. The difference is 1 weapon skill and Furious charge belonging to the Berserkers, and fearless vs ATSKNF.

So for 50 points you get +1 WS, +1 attack from your suicidal aspiring champion, +1 strength on the charge. Plus if the Blood Claws escape combat by losing a round, provided they're not within 6, they can gun into the Khornate dudes. Give the Blood Claws a power fist and the gap is only 25 points

So Hobo not only do the Blood Claws tarpit the Berserkers, they do so at a budget.

Am I saying Blood Claws are good? Nope. Just saying they're equal if not better than Berserkers. On an added plus, Claws are troop by default.

Merus
24-03-2014, 19:00
10 Blood Claws is 150 Points.
10 Berserkers are 200 Points including mandatory Aspiring Champion (thanks GW).

They both have a Bolt Pistol + CCW. They both get counter attack. They both get 2 attacks on the charge as opposed to 1. The difference is 1 weapon skill and Furious charge belonging to the Berserkers, and fearless vs ATSKNF.

So for 50 points you get +1 WS, +1 attack from your suicidal aspiring champion, +1 strength on the charge. Plus if the Blood Claws escape combat by losing a round, provided they're not within 6, they can gun into the Khornate dudes. Give the Blood Claws a power fist and the gap is only 25 points

So Hobo not only do the Blood Claws tarpit the Berserkers, they do so at a budget.

Am I saying Blood Claws are good? Nope. Just saying they're equal if not better than Berserkers. On an added plus, Claws are troop by default.

Blood claws are also BS/WS 3 base, and require a Wolf Guard transplant to make them not suffer from headstrong (penalty version of rage). They are not better- even 'equal' is arguable.

This is all a moot point regardless mind you, as melee is crippled in this edition.

Inquisitor Shego
24-03-2014, 19:09
Blood claws are also BS/WS 3 base, and require a Wolf Guard transplant to make them not suffer from headstrong (penalty version of rage). They are not better- even 'equal' is arguable.

This is all a moot point regardless mind you, as melee is crippled in this edition.

I already factored in Headstrong Rage, but lets go one beyond. So for the 50 point gap where the Khornate guys are forced to take an Aspiring Champion, I'll take say... a Wolf Guard in Terminator Armour. Say with a power fist, or frost blade, or thunder hammer.

I'm not saying you -should- take Blood Claws, but they make as much sense as taking Berserkers.

hobojebus
24-03-2014, 19:13
Blood claws gun into the unit eh, I'm sure that one wound will only make them mad.

Besides my scenario was basic csm against the blood claws, I wasn't comparing them to cult troops, also if the berzerkers charge the blood claws do even worse in the first turn of combat they will at best kill 2 which will be 1 or 2 kills less than the attackers kills and then will quickly fall appear there after.

There is no second troops choice for SW, claws are not even good for holding objectives as they must charge anything that gets close to them and they lack any reliable shooting.

I've used both claws and basic chaos marines and I'll take the traitors every single time.

Inquisitor Shego
24-03-2014, 19:16
Again I don't argue that, but I'd take Grey Hunters over basic Chaos Space Marines too. Well I would if I wanted to collect a lame army of alcoholic furry-convention attending tramps whose fortress smells of wolf poop .

hobojebus
24-03-2014, 19:26
Still sore about your sisters getting ravaged are we :p.

But yeah while I could kind of defend the chaos dex against the DA book after eldar and tau there is no way I can argue in its favour, the SM book showed what we could of had but instead we get to pay over and over for supplements and data slates because gw hates us chaos players.

Inquisitor Shego
24-03-2014, 19:29
Still sore about your sisters getting ravaged are we :p.

:mad: x 100,000

Merus
24-03-2014, 19:30
I already factored in Headstrong Rage, but lets go one beyond. So for the 50 point gap where the Khornate guys are forced to take an Aspiring Champion, I'll take say... a Wolf Guard in Terminator Armour. Say with a power fist, or frost blade, or thunder hammer.

Or, you could save some points by taking Nurgle marked spawn instead. They have an actually viable way to come to grips with the enemy, are cheaper than said berzerkers, and will crush the claws in combat.

Yahtzee!


I'm not saying you -should- take Blood Claws, but they make as much sense as taking Berserkers.

I don't think anyone should field any assault unit that isn't a beast or FMC.

=Angel=
24-03-2014, 19:36
Or, you could save some points by taking Nurgle marked spawn instead. They have an actually viable way to come to grips with the enemy, are cheaper than said berzerkers, and will crush the claws in combat.

Except spawn are neither powerarmoured astartes nor troops choices.
But sure, why not Zoidberg?

Merus
24-03-2014, 19:41
Except spawn are neither powerarmoured astartes nor troops choices.
But sure, why not Zoidberg?

He shifted the comparison from basic chaos marines versus blood claws, to berzerkers, all in hoping to make a point. I'm clearly not allowed to do the same though.

I'm sorry that you're salty that you can't be an elite, dangerous army, without paying the tax to do so, Angel. Flippancy towards me won't make you feel any better though.

Scribe of Khorne
24-03-2014, 19:43
I'd be curious to see how many times the chaos argument thread had been started by a whiner vs. how many times it had been started by an apologist. My guess is that the responsibility is shared rather more evenly than either side would feel comfortable admitting.

I'll admit I spray gasoline all over this topic any time and every time it comes up. I rarely start threads on it though, as I am just fulfilling an obligation to the community. People shouldnt be able to claim that the book is good, when it isnt. ;)

That said, I DO LIKE all the options we have right now, even if a true Legion list is beyond GW's ability to comprehend (but not Forge World....) the Crimson Slaughter book sure looks like its trying.

Horns - World Eater
Div Relic - TSons
Sword - Whatever, it rocks
Armour - Nurgle
Crozarius - Better Apostle
Daemon Upgrade - Hell thats just cool.

Helbrute supplement rocks as well, so really. If we move on from our Legion focus, we have options, if we add Daemons as Allies, we have options. Its all good.

The base CSM book itself however, is flawed, is subpar, and GW should know it, and so should every single poster, on every forum, on the internet. :evilgrin:

Mit Gas
24-03-2014, 20:18
The big problem is Nurgle. His mark is simply the best and the others are underpowered compared to it. The marks need to be redone therefore IMO - whether that means adding or subtracting power/pointscost depends on the general stats.

I'd make Cults and Chosen better, they are supposed to be very rare and powerful units. The basic CSM is nice for renegades and represents them rather well. Like I said before, introduce "tiers" to Chaos. The more warped/blessed/chosen, the more expensive and stronger they are. Something needs to be the reward for an afterlife of pure torment after all.

To add my 2c: Berzerkers need to be a LOT better than Bloodclaws. They're elite units, murderous psychopaths that fully embraced Khorne and that fight like madmen. They're ferocious monsters. Bloodclaws are ferocious as well but hardly as mad and "blessed" as Berzerkers, at least from a fluff standpoint.

Chaos should be able to properly ally with SM. That's how you'd make a decent renegade force. Add some special rules and restrictions to it to make it work.

The Chaos dex works as a whole somewhat but only if you want to play a mish-mash force (mostly consisting of Nurgle units) and make use of rather broken stuff like the Heldrake. The new codex was done with minimal effort to me and that is/was the problem from the start. I hope very much that Kelly and people as disinterested as him in the subject will stay far away from it next time around, like them getting fired or stranded on an beautiful island or something else that prevents them from being a part of it. It's ok if he doesn't dig Chaos, it's not ok if we have to put up with crap when it could be done much better.

Poncho160
24-03-2014, 21:21
I have thread problems with the codex;

1. The first is entirely my problem and has nothing to do with how the codex is written. I seem to have an inbuilt inability to choose units that don't match the fluff. For example I can't pick an army with bezerkers and plague marines in, I just can't! Let alone pick a force with multiple marks present. Haha. This unfortunately leaves me picking an army but not being able to use all the options from the codex. I am purposely hamstring myself! Haha

2. Codex Space Marines is just better. Me and my friend have played several games where we have played with duplicate forces from both marine codexes (1 chaos lord / Captain, 1 squad of chosen / command squad, 6 chaos marine squads / tactical squads, 2 raptor / assault marine squads and 2 havoc / devastated squads with ML.) and the marines nearly always win even though they cost pretty much the same price. With chapter tactics and ATSKNF, marines have a huge advantage. Yeah sure the chaos player can add a hell drake, but CSM should be able to beat the favourite enemy on an equal footing.

3. I don't like not being able to take chaos lords, terminators and chosen that don't have the same options as the elite "legion" choices.

Luckily I have found the perfect option (for me anyway) to solve the above problems and it involves a series of 75 books from
FW! Haha I love both HH books! :)

=Angel=
24-03-2014, 21:47
He shifted the comparison from basic chaos marines versus blood claws, to berzerkers, all in hoping to make a point. I'm clearly not allowed to do the same though.

I'm sorry that you're salty that you can't be an elite, dangerous army, without paying the tax to do so, Angel. Flippancy towards me won't make you feel any better though.

No flippancy intended good sir. I was trying to be funny, while pointing out something important.
I apologize if I seemed angry or rude.

For it was I who originally made that comparison and I made it between blood claws and basic chaos marines with the mark of khorne/berzerkers.

Berzerkers aren't better, point for point than the bloodclaws and the basic marines with mark of khorne don't do well either.
It's a costing issue caused by throwing marks and stuff at units with the expectation that they'll be 'better'
That was the original thrust of my post,- pricey upgrades aren't going to make a better codex- internal consistency and balance will.

Starchild
24-03-2014, 21:54
Haha. More than that. The fundamental problem with the very first 'chaos codex' was they kitchen sinked everything, despite the fact that they started as individual army lists. The first Chaos Books remain unmatched and heavily mourned. Everything since then has been so much less than it could have been, even Pete 'I want my Iron Warriors to Win' Haines 3.5 codex. Though nothing was quite as bad as the one that preceded that.

What "first Chaos Books" are you referring to? :confused:

The first Chaos Codex in 2nd edition was just a jumbled mess of units and wargear cannibalized from Realm of Chaos with some new special characters. The Realm of Chaos army lists had no variety, for example the Thousand Sons list with only four or five units.

I do miss the older Chaos artwork and concepts but as far as the game itself is concerned, GW has never got Chaos right, not even once, with the exception of the Epic Space Marine game. Realm of Chaos was alright if you were into skirmish-level Warhammer Fantasy or Warhammer 40,000 games with at most 30 models per side, but beyond that it never worked for larger games.

Inquisitor Shego
24-03-2014, 22:38
He shifted the comparison from basic chaos marines versus blood claws, to berzerkers, all in hoping to make a point. I'm clearly not allowed to do the same though.

I'm sorry that you're salty that you can't be an elite, dangerous army, without paying the tax to do so, Angel. Flippancy towards me won't make you feel any better though.

the quote from Angel was


Spacewolves, for example, currently have very cheap bloodclaws, with lots of cc options. It's a powerful choice that point for point beats the tar out of say, khorne csm or zerkers. Which Hobojebus replied to, then I followed on with the Berzerkers reference, yet something else I hate about this dex.

Muad'Dib
24-03-2014, 23:03
What "first Chaos Books" are you referring to? :confused:

The first Chaos Codex in 2nd edition was just a jumbled mess of units and wargear cannibalized from Realm of Chaos with some new special characters. The Realm of Chaos army lists had no variety, for example the Thousand Sons list with only four or five units.

I do miss the older Chaos artwork and concepts but as far as the game itself is concerned, GW has never got Chaos right, not even once, with the exception of the Epic Space Marine game. Realm of Chaos was alright if you were into skirmish-level Warhammer Fantasy or Warhammer 40,000 games with at most 30 models per side, but beyond that it never worked for larger games.
5th edition WFB Chaos seemed pretty all-right, but I never played it; only read the book. It had you pick warlords- Daemonic, Beastmen or Warrior - and select units to accompany this warlord to battle; you could have max of 25 % of your army consist of warlords from other races.
6th edition WFB Chaos was pretty good too - it shifted Beastmen/Warriors/Daemons based on who was your general; it also had some generic troops like Spawns or Dragon Ogres.
I think one of major problems in trying to "do Chaos right" is the needless and actually non-fluffy inclusion of Marks as something that can be bought for units - from reading both background and different Warhammer RPG rules, a Mark itself does not give any benefit...the blessings of the Chaos Gods are also very often not connected to combat in any way. In 5th edition WFB Marks could only be bought for characters. It's really a shame that "Khorne is god of +A", "Tzeentch is god of ++saves" seems to be so ingrained in the community's mind.

Baaltor
24-03-2014, 23:20
An interesting opinion on our codex:
http://www.thediceabide.com/2013/09/chaos-marines-what-makes-us-special/

You see its not actually bad. Yes no legions etc but the book itself is good when you learn to use it.

Am I the only one who thinks this is a troll thread?

1. It minimalistically says a widely regarded as 'bad' book is 'good' with no explanation
2. "No legions" is by the definition of many people a critical failure that renders it all but impossible to make it "good". This is especially true in comparison to many of the other 6th ed. books.
3. As others have said the review is archaic.

I'm not going to go into the reasons why I think the book is bad or not; I'm just pointing out that the OP is minimalistic, and nearly as inflammatory as possible. It smells of someone who just wants to watch chaos players to go up the wall with rage.

I may well be wrong of course.

Starchild
24-03-2014, 23:25
I think one of major problems in trying to "do Chaos right" is the needless and actually non-fluffy inclusion of Marks as something that can be bought for units - from reading both background and different Warhammer RPG rules, a Mark itself does not give any benefit...the blessings of the Chaos Gods are also very often not connected to combat in any way. In 5th edition WFB Marks could only be bought for characters. It's really a shame that "Khorne is god of +A", "Tzeentch is god of ++saves" seems to be so ingrained in the community's mind.

You touched on another major problem with Chaos. There are simply too many unanswered questions and things that don't work out in the background.

Let's look at Dark Eldar as an example to compare. We know how they are organized, who leads realspace raids, and how they traverse the galaxy. Great... Now contrast this with Chaos Space Marines.

Let's look at just one point regarding galactic travel and logistics. How do Chaos Space Marines travel from point A to point B? Do they use the Heresy-era spacecraft portrayed in Battlefleet gothic, or Space Hulks, or both? Can they travel from planet to planet through the Warp? Do they even need Navigators? Can they steer through the Warp, or do they just travel randomly like the Orks do? When they reach a planet in orbit, how do they deploy to the surface?

Those are just examples. Really GW needs to flesh out Chaos Space Marines and fix the background before any progress can be made in the army list. There has to be more to them than mere rebels who worship evil gods. They need their own identity... a culture if you will. As Chaos Space Marines are now, I just can't shake the feeling that they don't know who they are.

Harbinger
25-03-2014, 00:06
An interesting opinion on our codex:
http://www.thediceabide.com/2013/09/chaos-marines-what-makes-us-special/

You see its not actually bad. Yes no legions etc but the book itself is good when you learn to use it.

Joining in just because, but...

1) I agree the Codex is not that bad, but that is the problem. It is mediocre. Yes, you can win games with. But speaking for myself, the allure of Chaos was the diversity, black hearted anti-heroes, and insanity. Sometimes I feel like I am playing "SM w/ Spikes and less gear" if I do not take cult troops. Daemons are back as allies, which is tolerable. But where is our Chaos/ Daemon Armor (2+ save before SM had one IIRC)? Why do SM get versions of our daemonic troops (Centurians vs. Obliterators)?

2) I perosnally do not want Legion traits (for several reasons), but I think they should be represented, and they are to a limited extent. All that would be needed is to bring back veteran skills or let a warlord purchase a army wide trait. Someone wants Renegades over Traitors, not a probem. Have a trait that allows SM codex as allies to represent that aspect.

3) While some people do agrue about the competitive nature and limited builds, I think the first two points are extremely common as reasons for disliking the Codex as well.

Grndhog89
25-03-2014, 01:27
Still sore about your sisters getting ravaged are we :p.

Shego plays Sisters!?!

=Angel=
25-03-2014, 01:46
Let's look at just one point regarding galactic travel and logistics. How do Chaos Space Marines travel from point A to point B? Do they use the Heresy-era spacecraft portrayed in Battlefleet gothic, or Space Hulks, or both? Can they travel from planet to planet through the Warp? Do they even need Navigators? Can they steer through the Warp, or do they just travel randomly like the Orks do? When they reach a planet in orbit, how do they deploy to the surface?

I don't agree that these are unknowns.
A chaos planetary assault during a Black Crusade.
189968

A hundred or so ships, like the gothic ones deploying dreadclaws (actually assault boats) and droppods too, you'd imagine.
Lesser equipped warbands just ride the tides of the eye of terror on hulks and such,like a giant whirlpool, waiting until they are spit into realspace.
Do they need navigators? Or do they have warp seers that are just as good?

This is all well established, there's just no room for all of it in the codex. The Chaos marines use every means possible as they are don't follow codex astartes rules on the nature of their transport (marines are supposed to only have ships that deploy troops and support that deployment- no battleships or ships of the line.
Chaos can use pirate vessels, millenium falcons, ancient warp gates/teleport rituals, cut holes in reality with special knives, or use legion equipment.

Inquisitor Shego
25-03-2014, 01:54
Shego plays Sisters!?!

Why so shocked? :o my current armies are:

2,500 Sisters of Battle (The Order of the Sacred Rose, led by the living saint Ina Steel)
4,500-5,000 Points of Dark Eldar (Kabal of the Crimson Abyss, led by Archon Skarlath)
500-1,000 Points of Storm Troopers (Operation Force Alpha Cerberus led by Inquisitor Shego Iblis)
3,000 Points of Daemons (led by Slaaneshi Herald Necrofantasia Delight and Lord of Change Trazalgulan )

Former armies are
4,000 Points Alpha Legion led by the Daemon Prince Urnhark Gradrakor and Baptismore the Cancer Reaver
4,000 Points Imperial (Traitor) Guard also doubling as Lost and the Damned (The Kasalade Blue Banes 9th Infantry)

My favourite army was Lost and the Damned. Won 1 out of every 8 games at best, but they were so fun to see blown away. I felt I was helping make heroes out of my foes by seeing them chew through chaff. Best of all, the army taught me to be humble. It taught me to stop taking loses so badly. The reason I got into Sisters of Battle (as little as 4 months ago) was because I'm trying to rekindle that humility. Also, Sisters rock. They're the coolest faction in DOW Soulstorm. :D

Voss
25-03-2014, 02:55
What "first Chaos Books" are you referring to? :confused:

The first Chaos Codex in 2nd edition was just a jumbled mess of units and wargear cannibalized from Realm of Chaos with some new special characters. The Realm of Chaos army lists had no variety, for example the Thousand Sons list with only four or five units.

I do miss the older Chaos artwork and concepts but as far as the game itself is concerned, GW has never got Chaos right, not even once, with the exception of the Epic Space Marine game. Realm of Chaos was alright if you were into skirmish-level Warhammer Fantasy or Warhammer 40,000 games with at most 30 models per side, but beyond that it never worked for larger games.

Uh, yeah. Because the game was designed for only 30 or so models per side. Still is in a lot of ways, which is one of the serious problems with the push since third to larger and larger games. So yes, I did mean slaves to darkness and lost and the damned. Everything since has been flavorless mush that doesn't even vaguely do justice to the background, setting or game.

They traded interesting ideas and concepts for limited, one dimensional concepts...as someone else put it, the gods of +1 stat bonuses

The Emperor
25-03-2014, 03:09
With some of these comments here, I'm starting to wonder if maybe GW wouldn't be better served by splitting Chaos Marines into two codex books? I.E....

Codex: Chaos Legions
Codex: Chaos Renegades

The former could be the original nine Legions from the Horus Heresy, which are souped-up versions of Space Marines with Legion rules and Heresy era equipment, while the latter could be rules for more recent turncoats who don't have access to as much Chaotic wargear but have more access to the gear possessed by their modern day counterparts.

Speaking as a Non-Chaos player, though, I really wish there were Legion rules. I strongly dislike the current state of Chaos lore, with the Chaos Legions broken up into smaller warbands and no longer have any meaning. I wish the Legions had as much importance to Chaos Marine armies as Chapters do to Space Marine armies. When I fight Chaos, I like the thought that I'm fighting the Black Legion, or the Iron Warriors, or the Death Guard. I don't like the idea of just fighting a bunch of random guys with no commitment to any Legion in particular. IMO, most Legions should still be relatively intact and should still retain their identities (With World Eaters being one of the notable exceptions).

I also feel like Chaos should be treated more as the Imperial opposite number, and should feature nearly as many playable armies, both as main armies and as smaller allied armies like the codex books which GW's been putting out recently. If it were up to me, the Chaos lineup would look like so...

Codex: Chaos Legions (Horus Heresy era Chaos Marines)
Codex: Chaos Renegades (The home of Huron Blackheart, the Red Corsairs, and the Crimson Slaughter, among others)
Codex: Chaos Daemons
Codex: Hell Knights (Chaos Knight list. House Devine as well as other houses dedicated to other Chaos gods or Chaos Undivided)
Codex: Dark Mechanicum
Codex: Chaos Cults (Demagogue, Magus, Cultist Coven, Mutants, Beastmen, and so on)
The first three could be complete armies with numerous unit entries and which use up the Allied Detachment slot if taken as allies, while the latter three could be like Codex: Inquisition, Codex: Legion of the Damned, Codex: Imperial Knights, and now Codex: Militarum Tempestus. Mini-codex books with only a handful of units which can form their own army if the player desires, but which are principally intended to be taken as allied forces, and which form a free allied detachment.

Kakapo42
25-03-2014, 03:24
I wonder if perhaps the answer to the Eternal Chaos Codex Problem might be supplements.

So there would be a main Chaos Space Marine codex. That would have the basic background, rules for the units, etc. Everything you need to know when first starting out with Chaos Space Marines. Then as well as that there could be a small 1-3 page section with some equipment from the loyalist codex and rules that could be used for modern renegades, a bit like the Inquisitorial Enemies (I think that's what it was called) section in the old Witch-hunters codex.

Then there would be legion-specific supplements, one for each of the traitor legions. These would be packed full of rich detailed legion-specific background (after the tastes of it in the main codex), as well as all the extra special flavourful rules for that specific legion (army-wide legion-specific bonuses, Bezerkers becoming troops/scoring for World Eaters, sneaky deployment rules for Alpha Legion and Night Lords, etc.). These would be where you go for an army for a specific legion (and the same would be done for the different Space Marine chapters too, but that's for another discussion).

After that there would be the Chaos Daemons codex (I also think Daemons should have stayed integrated into the other book(s), but I can live with the separation), and a codex for the Lost and the Damned, which would be to Imperial Guard what Chaos Space Marines are for regular Space Marines.

And then a Chaos Knights codex for all the Chaotic Knight types (Questors, Hell-striders and the like).



Sorry but I don't think Chaos players uniting is very fluffy. :shifty:

What if it's for a new Black Crusade? :p

LotusCorgi
25-03-2014, 03:59
My two bits:

-The lascannons on the land raider should be optional
-Models with some variation in armor. Every chaos marine has mkVI robot pants?

Scribe of Khorne
25-03-2014, 05:07
I have to echo a few of the comments here.

CSM (not Chaos) as a faction need to be better defined, or the scope simply laid out plainly. Supplements are helping and I pray to Khorne are making it on GW's 'successful idea...keep milking them' radar.

The main book, it need not be discussed. If they did ONE THING, I would be happy enough with it considering Supplement and Dataslates can help as seen by Belakor, Crimson Slaughter, and Helbrutes.

The restriction on Cult's as Troops for Allies. Its a completely asinine restriction.

Get rid of that (Maybe a 'Cult Legion' Supplement idea) and that opens up sooo many fluffy builds. Throw in an army wide rule that isnt a punishment (boons, challenge) or overpriced (VotlW, should be free on Chosen, Cult Units) and we are talking.

Slayer-Fan123
25-03-2014, 08:59
I long wanted something equivalent to melee obliterators, true I never wrote in and asked for them or pestered the devs at work, but it is untrue to say mutilators were not wanted by anyone.

Also, a mutilator is 55 points. You're not spending screwed by wasting 55 points in an otherwise decent list. This assumes a single mutilator is literally good for nothing

Honestly what you say is always so hyperbolic it makes it hard to actually identify the good points you make because they are drowning in overexaggerations. Try be a bit more balanced :)
I think that every point spent on a Mutilator might as well not exist. They're slow and can't kill in combat. They are pure crap, and are literally good for nothing. They are a waste of codex space, they are a waste of points, and they are a waste of money.

bork da basher
25-03-2014, 09:40
i play mono nurgle and have had a lot of success but completely agree that on the whole the book is trash. so many dud units you may as well delete 50% of the codex because it's never going to see the table in anything resembling a competitive list.

GW for years are missing out on the absolute gold mine a concentrated effort on the traitor legions would be. even with just the 4 god specific legions kitted out properly they would fly off the shelves. chaos has always felt underrepresented and badly interpreted in their books. trying to please everyone in one codex was never going to happen and instead they just gave us a mix of next to useless quasi-fluffy choices that was meant to placate people. you can still do ok with the codex its just a massive shortfall on its potential. chaos should be up there alongside marines as the iconic poster boys of 40k but they're nowhere near it.

Harwammer
25-03-2014, 11:39
They are pure crap

Well, it is important for the rules to reflect a model, right ;).


so many dud units you may as well delete 50% of the codex because it's never going to see the table in anything resembling a competitive list. It is a shame that not every option is equally viable, but at least a lot of models have rules, even if not everything is at the cutting edge of 'competition'.

A lot of people want rules for legion/cult terminators and unnamed legion/cult HQs. Perhaps GW followed your advice and as they were unable to make balanced competitive versions of these units they instead chopped them from the codex?

ObiWayneKenobi
25-03-2014, 13:13
Personally what I hate the most is that I don't want to run the typical Nurgle stuff. I have chosen a Crimson Slaughter army and want it to actually be fluffy, not use the rules and do the typical Nurgle Lord on Bike, Nurgle Oblits, Plague Marines and 3x Heldrakes as everybody else (because if I wanted a Nurgle army I wouldn't be playing Crimson Slaughter), I want to take Raptors (love how they look) and CSM squads and Helbrutes and Forge/Maulerfiends because I like how they look, and NOT be penalized simply for wanting a representative force.

Goshawk
25-03-2014, 19:44
I've never taken Chaos Marines to a tournament, as I've played Imperial Guard strictly for about 10 years. Recently two of my brothers and I decided to go to one close by where I go to school at 1750 points. So we started building our lists to get as competitive as possible so we can have a good showing there. I chose Chaos Marines (I've been building a sizable army), one brother plays Tau (since 3rd edition), and the other Space Wolves. I refused to look online for netlists and what units were spammable/ "needed" for a competitive Chaos Marine build as I have been playing this game long enough to figure out for myself what is good and what isn't. The problem is I play Khorne- you can see where this is going.

I started out using Khorne Berzerkers, Raptors, and Terminators. I tried my best to keep the Khorne theme- I really did. But after two games it was clear they just weren't competitive. Five games later I found myself using none of these units unfortunately. So in the twenty or so practice games I could fit in on one of my school breaks, I finalized a list to include the following:
-Nurgle Obliterators
-Nurgle Bikes
-Nurgle Biker lord
-Plague Marines
-Heldrake

Look familiar? Here's the thing: I HATE Nurgle. Their aesthetic, play style, and fluff is terribly unpleasing to me. But I don't want to be wiped off the table by turn 4 every game in a tournament setting. I'm not asking for a super competitive way to play Khorne. I don't expect- or even want- a Taudar power level out of the units. I just want to be able to play Chaos Marines the way I want without fear of losing before my models even hit the table.

So no OP, I don't agree with that guy at all. (And really? ATSKNF isn't that great? C'mon man)

ObiWayneKenobi
25-03-2014, 20:03
Look familiar? Here's the thing: I HATE Nurgle. Their aesthetic, play style, and fluff is terribly unpleasing to me. But I don't want to be wiped off the table by turn 4 every game in a tournament setting. I'm not asking for a super competitive way to play Khorne. I don't expect- or even want- a Taudar power level out of the units. I just want to be able to play Chaos Marines the way I want without fear of losing before my models even hit the table.

So no OP, I don't agree with that guy at all. (And really? ATSKNF isn't that great? C'mon man)

That's exactly my problem. I don't "hate" Nurgle, just it's not my favorite as I really preferred the old Traitor Legions that were Undivided, so taking Plague Marines everywhere was never appealing to me. What I really would like to field would be something that was close to a loyalist army, with CSM (Tactical), Raptors (Assault) and Havocs (Devastator) backed up by tanks and Helbrutes, maybe a daemon engine or two. But that's uncompetitive and while I'm not super WAAC competitive, I also don't want to get creamed just because I picked the wrong units and didn't want spam like everyone else. I'm actually trying to decide if I want a Nurgle themed (but not Plague Marine spam) army for creativity reasons, but even that's not sitting well with me because I don't want it to just end up being another Nurgle army with the typical stuff; there's no creativity whatsoever in that, no matter how they're painted, if you field the same crap as everybody else. If I did a Nurgle themed army I would deliberately NOT take Plague Marines, but likely CSM w/MoN, and again I don't want to feel like I'm gimping myself by choosing to do that versus Plague Marines.

Harbinger
25-03-2014, 20:15
As a reply to the ideas of Chaos having multiple Codeces, while I would enjoy more Chaos stuff, I think there are already too many Codeces, given the many different SM books. I would rather see one Codex that provides the options to create a Legion, Renegade Chapter, or mixed Warband.

I think that the return of veteran skills or something akin to chapter traits for a warlord would suffice. I also think that there is too much SM envy, leading to wanting CSM to look like SM (not a an attack as I have been guilty of it at times). For example, a purchasable option to take SM as allies would suffice for renegades. I do no think they would differ enough for a separate Codex. In addition, every other army has one Codex, and does fine. Supplements are nice, but the main Codex discusses the major regiment, order, craft world, kanal, sept, hive fleet, tomb world.

Just my opinion, but I would prefer a bigger Codex with more options than multiple or a mirror of Imperials. I think lesser warbands are good for supplements or Forge World books, where an author can be creative outside the required codex.

IcedCrow
25-03-2014, 20:38
So here's the condundrum:

"I don't want an OP list - I just want to be able to play against OP lists and not lose every game with chaos"

That's basically a distillation of what I'm reading. Couple pointers:

1) all codices have this same issue unless you are one of the blessed Big 3 (every edition has its Big 3) - not just chaos. Chaos was once upon a time a part of the Big 3 too. Its just been a little while.
2) OP lists are the extreme end of the game. What I'm reading is that one wants to be able to play at the extreme end of the game with chaos (or whatever codex) - which infers that they themselves would need something OP.

Now Nurgle is the chaos competitive build. When I say competitive I mean the build you take to a min/max fight. Most codices have one or maybe two OP builds or builds that they can take against extreme "net listers" (use whatever name you want you get the jist) - that if everything was OP nothing would be OP - and while that is right - I don't think that will ever happen.

Mit Gas
25-03-2014, 21:09
So here's the condundrum:

"I don't want an OP list - I just want to be able to play against OP lists and not lose every game with chaos"

That's basically a distillation of what I'm reading. Couple pointers:

1) all codices have this same issue unless you are one of the blessed Big 3 (every edition has its Big 3) - not just chaos. Chaos was once upon a time a part of the Big 3 too. Its just been a little while.
2) OP lists are the extreme end of the game. What I'm reading is that one wants to be able to play at the extreme end of the game with chaos (or whatever codex) - which infers that they themselves would need something OP.

Now Nurgle is the chaos competitive build. When I say competitive I mean the build you take to a min/max fight. Most codices have one or maybe two OP builds or builds that they can take against extreme "net listers" (use whatever name you want you get the jist) - that if everything was OP nothing would be OP - and while that is right - I don't think that will ever happen.

NOW? I wouldn't say that. Nurgle should've been called Nooble.

Bugaboo
25-03-2014, 22:24
So here's the condundrum:

"I don't want an OP list - I just want to be able to play against OP lists and not lose every game with chaos"

That's basically a distillation of what I'm reading. Couple pointers:

1) all codices have this same issue unless you are one of the blessed Big 3 (every edition has its Big 3) - not just chaos. Chaos was once upon a time a part of the Big 3 too. Its just been a little while.
2) OP lists are the extreme end of the game. What I'm reading is that one wants to be able to play at the extreme end of the game with chaos (or whatever codex) - which infers that they themselves would need something OP.

Now Nurgle is the chaos competitive build. When I say competitive I mean the build you take to a min/max fight. Most codices have one or maybe two OP builds or builds that they can take against extreme "net listers" (use whatever name you want you get the jist) - that if everything was OP nothing would be OP - and while that is right - I don't think that will ever happen.

I will have to say a part of his point is rather valid. For all those wishing for "legion tactics", are we still likely to see anything more than just the Chaos version (i.e. Nurgle) of the IH standard or Shield Eternal Thunder Hammer CM lead netlist being churned out time and time again?

Legion tactics or not, I imagine there would still be complaints. Look at BT. Might as well call them loyalist WEs. Do they get a peed on as much as the CSM codex for being non-competitive? Yup.

Ultramarines. Their chapter tactic requires actual... tactics to use. Are they as popular on the table as IH? Not likely. The Chaos equivalent is BL, and people whined about the VotLW tax, but creamed over the artifacts. So really, all they wanted was OP artefacts to be happy in that regards.

White scars are decent, and there's not really a CSM equivalent I can think of.

RG gets mixed reviews, but people still wanted their already beefed assault squads to ALSO be able to Scout as standard without a SC tax.

IF probably get used a lot because their tactics make for good anti infantry and anti tanks, making them a no brainer power army, so in all likelyhood the second most popular tactic, if not the first.

Then we have Salamanders. Woo, master crafted weapons for characters and better flamers. Bet they're mega popular in competitive metas.

So out of hmmmm, let's see... 7 tactics, only 3-4 would be what most people would deem "competitive".

Let's try and translate this into legion tactics.

Emperor's Children: Already competitive due to Noise Marine spam and decent init for most units. But since you want two special rules to represent your legion, so as to not make them the same as say Flawless Host, Violators, etc (even though the LTs will mean those renegades will use these rules anyway...), I guess you get, hmmm, well, the ability to take noise weapons for certain units that can't already take them, and a beefed up siren type thingy for vehicles. Because that's their thing, I guess.

Iron Warriors Well, you can already spam Vindicators and Obliterators. No, but you want tactics, that's fine. Okay, so you get the same tactics as the IF, since they're your rivals. Bet you're still going to be slapping that mark of Nurgle on your Oblits whether it's fluffy or not, because they're "not good enough at T4".

Night Lords: Hmmm, okay, so every unit gets fear, but because the meta is mostly space marines, that's totally useless, yo!. Well, okay, then I guess you can have Night Vision as well to make up for it. What's that? Only useful in scenarios where night fighting is used? Well, you wanted legion tactics. Why should you have more benefits than the chapters? So, I guess that makes NLs... non-competitive!

World Eaters: Right, well, chapter tactics don't add new units, so your delivery systems still suck. One of the biggest complaint about assault-centric lists. But we need tactics, apparently, so guess you're getting two traits to represent your legion. So you get the Rampage rule (which I have yet to see on anything, and will slow most games up to the point it's just silly on account of the extra math) and likely something which upgrades the chain axes of anyone from this legion to Rending. Good luck getting to a place you can use them.

Death Guard: Plague Knives for those who can't normally take them, likely characters, and free Daemonic Possession on all your vehicles.

Thousand Sons: I will try very hard not to laugh while I write this... okay, so... your chosen and possessed get the Brotherhood of Sorcerers rule, and your rubricae can be upgraded to terminators with the standard terminator gear and the standard terminator gear only, aside from the sorcerer leading the unit. This will be expensive. This will make people moan.

Word Bearers: You gain the crusader and your chaos Lord has the same special rules and starting equipment as a Dark Apostle. What? You wanted something fluffy, didn't you?

Alpha Legion: Outflank and units of Cultists gain infiltrate. Now they can be closer to the enemy when they die in droves.

Still want Legion Tactics?

IcedCrow
25-03-2014, 22:48
When codex chaos 3.5 was out it was typically the same two builds ad naseum as well.

And youre right, chapter tactics isnt enough for a lot of people. POWERFUL chapter tactics are. I hear a lot of bitching about ultra marines and black templars not being "competitive", my guessis the same would happen to "legion tactics" based off of past experience.

hobojebus
25-03-2014, 22:58
Oh look someone accused chaos players of only wanting 3.5 back, what an original accusation that was.

3.5 was broken very few will deny that, chaos players are not asking to be top dog we are asking to be usable without spamming 3 hell drakes and a bunch of bikers, you cant build a fluffy army that work's with chaos, you are forced to use mark's that just don't fit in order to fix basic problems, as an iron warrior i'm not comfortable using mark's and mutations as it's not in theme.

Obliterators get shafted if you don't give them the mark of nurgle, i know i've tried it and unless i give them T5 they die really quickly to instant death weapons, the 5+ demon save isn't dependable and with marker lights and divination power's out there you cant count on cover saves, for 70 points they should of been T5 and just had nurgle give feel no pain if people wanted to spend the points.

Slayer-Fan123
25-03-2014, 23:13
Still want Legion Tactics?
To an extent, yes. Remember that, even when you have non-competitive Chapter Tactics, you're still acquiring them for...1 point. The new supplement, Crimson Slaughter, was a good start for those looking to do Word Bearers or Night Lords (because Fear, though you could use Carcharodon Chapter Tactics and get more rules for your Night Lords I guess).

It isn't a matter of wanting Legion Rules, it's a matter of the main CSM Codex having bad internal balance and a lack of artifacts. The more supplements we get, the less an issue this becomes. However, I shouldn't HAVE to buy the new Crimson Slaughter codex. I'm going to, but I shouldn't have to because I want decent artifacts and more rules overall.

budman
25-03-2014, 23:18
look are they the best army in 40K no that's Tau/dar
Are they fun and full of flavor yeah
every CSM army I make a Blow 40-80 points on gift rolls just for fun

Losing Command
25-03-2014, 23:24
In some regards this codex has even less options to make a personal chaos marine warband than the previous (yes the 5th edition one) You used to have daemonweapons for every god plus undivided, now you only have that Khorne axe and that mace (Inquisitors can get daemonweapons with a table of things it can do that rivals the chaos boon table, odd how the 'good guys' get the more chaotic version) Daemon Princes MUST be of one of the 4 gods now, even though some of the daemon primarchs are now undivided daemon princes.

IcedCrow
25-03-2014, 23:25
Oh look someone accused chaos players of only wanting 3.5 back, what an original accusation that was.

3.5 was broken very few will deny that, chaos players are not asking to be top dog we are asking to be usable without spamming 3 hell drakes and a bunch of bikers, you cant build a fluffy army that work's with chaos, you are forced to use mark's that just don't fit in order to fix basic problems, as an iron warrior i'm not comfortable using mark's and mutations as it's not in theme.

Obliterators get shafted if you don't give them the mark of nurgle, i know i've tried it and unless i give them T5 they die really quickly to instant death weapons, the 5+ demon save isn't dependable and with marker lights and divination power's out there you cant count on cover saves, for 70 points they should of been T5 and just had nurgle give feel no pain if people wanted to spend the points.

Its about as original as players mewling about how they cant powergame the way they want with chaos.

Im a chaos player. Thousand Sons :-) im supposed to immolate and explode by turn one according to the internet.

Ive played a ton of games with non nurgle oblits. Theyve done awesome. Despite the internet saying they arent powerful enough without it.

Scribe of Khorne
25-03-2014, 23:31
Its about as original as players mewling about how they cant powergame the way they want with chaos.

Im a chaos player. Thousand Sons :-) im supposed to immolate and explode by turn one according to the internet.

Ive played a ton of games with non nurgle oblits. Theyve done awesome. Despite the internet saying they arent powerful enough without it.

And by your own admission you play most often in a self regulating environment. Cool.

Either way, this thread need not go down this path again.

Some kind of army wide rules, reflective at a high level of the traits of each legion, would not be asking too much. Would there be complaints? Is water wet?

IcedCrow
25-03-2014, 23:34
Thats what supplements will do i think but i doubt they will be enough unless they are at the white scars chapter traits level

Slayer-Fan123
25-03-2014, 23:46
look are they the best army in 40K no that's Tau/dar
Are they fun and full of flavor yeah
every CSM army I make a Blow 40-80 points on gift rolls just for fun
Full Of Flavor = More than half of the units are useless in disguise. The new Space Marine codex isn't as good as Tau, but it's capable of winning and lets you create tons of armies. THAT is fun. The Chaos Space Marine codex is NOT fun.

Scribe of Khorne
25-03-2014, 23:52
Thats what supplements will do i think but i doubt they will be enough unless they are at the white scars chapter traits level

I think thats false. Crimson Slaughter and the Helbrute slate arent world beaters, but they sure have been well received from what I have seen. If that CS supplement had been called Word Bearers I think even more people would have been happy.

IcedCrow
25-03-2014, 23:54
So for arguments sake, since the word "useless" is thrown around a lot, but at the same time "we arent looking for OP" is also thrown around, and since i use nearly all of the csm book AND win with it fairly regularly (not in a min/max environment)

What exactly then in plain english without obfuscation is desired...

I mean we might as well throw out all vehicles av 12 and less, i hear thats useless.

The inability to have a cheap assault vehicle to bypass the enemy shooting phase - also useless.

Comparing the epeen of every unit to marines and coming short == useless.

No powerful legion rules - useless.

So someone draw out for me what is wanted that is also NOT OP please. :)

IcedCrow
25-03-2014, 23:55
I think thats false. Crimson Slaughter and the Helbrute slate arent world beaters, but they sure have been well received from what I have seen. If that CS supplement had been called Word Bearers I think even more people would have been happy.

Its been received about 50/50. I think its good, a lot think its good, and a lot still spew how useless it is.

ObiWayneKenobi
26-03-2014, 00:03
Its been received about 50/50. I think its good, a lot think its good, and a lot still spew how useless it is.

Personally as a former Chaos player in 2nd and 3rd, I think it's a decent supplement but doesn't fix any of the real issues (i.e. how most units aren't that good). It's a step in the right direction though compared to say the Black Legion supplement which basically did nothing.

The issue is that since GW doesn't balance and has no real internal metrics to balance (they've said as much that they stat things based on the "rule of cool"), it's basically random what you're going to get. Chaos has gotten the short end of the stick, but IMO the Crimson Slaughter supplement and the Helbrute dataslate are nice options; it's not enough to make Chaos truly competitive outside of the typical spam, but I don't think anybody was seriously expecting that given GW's track record.

Bugaboo
26-03-2014, 00:31
Oh look someone accused chaos players of only wanting 3.5 back, what an original accusation that was.

3.5 was broken very few will deny that, chaos players are not asking to be top dog we are asking to be usable without spamming 3 hell drakes and a bunch of bikers, you cant build a fluffy army that work's with chaos, you are forced to use mark's that just don't fit in order to fix basic problems, as an iron warrior i'm not comfortable using mark's and mutations as it's not in theme.

Obliterators get shafted if you don't give them the mark of nurgle, i know i've tried it and unless i give them T5 they die really quickly to instant death weapons, the 5+ demon save isn't dependable and with marker lights and divination power's out there you cant count on cover saves, for 70 points they should of been T5 and just had nurgle give feel no pain if people wanted to spend the points.

I'll agree (probably to the chagrin of my fellow apologists) that this would have been a better execution of MoN and Obliterators than what we have, especially given what happened with the Centurions.

Most other issues with non-slaanesh/nurgle armies are based simply on the type of army they are. Khornate armies fail in a game of gunlines, and TS fail in a game where variety and versatility is key. Undivided builds can work, but if you go too thematic, you're set for disappointment, depending on legion.

I agree there are certainly failings in the CSM Codex, but being a guy who doesn't hop right onto rage wagons, I just try and make do with what I have. If anything, I'm probably the most disappointed that my favourite renegades got neglected this edition. ;p Least all y'all legion players got colour schemes and units in the dex!

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 00:39
*click* - the chaos codex fails at providing the ability to create a "TAC" list. Gotcha. I agree, a "TAC" list is not easy to make with the chaos codex.

Bugaboo
26-03-2014, 00:46
*click* - the chaos codex fails at providing the ability to create a "TAC" list. Gotcha. I agree, a "TAC" list is not easy to make with the chaos codex.

Not quite sure a single soul said that anywhere between your last post and this one.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 00:52
Not quite sure a single soul said that anywhere between your last post and this one.

No but i'm trying to parse the difference in why I find that the codex, while not OP dominant like my eldar army is, works for me compared to a lot of people touting the word "useless" and "worthless" etc.

The only time variety and versatility is key is when you don't know what you are going to be facing...

Bugaboo
26-03-2014, 01:02
No but i'm trying to parse the difference in why I find that the codex, while not OP dominant like my eldar army is, works for me compared to a lot of people touting the word "useless" and "worthless" etc.

The only time variety and versatility is key is when you don't know what you are going to be facing...

Fairy snuff. I figured you were trying to be snide in response to my last post (and still do figure), on account of me not making it too clear that I was actually neutral on the idea of playing "non competitive" legions. Like, it would be rather unrealistic for anyone thinking bringing a chainaxe to a gunfight is a good idea, but I salute those who would do it anyway, while a TS army is not going to be much better than what it is, because fluff dictates it's an army made up of troops even less diverse than the clone troopers of the republic

But at the same time, even the most set in their ways apologist/non-competitive tactical genius/whatever we want to call ourselves can admit that the master diviner not having divination is a faux pas the likes of which hasn't been seen since Greedo shooting first. ;p But not being a TS player, I couldn't give two fecal lumps about that fiasco.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 01:05
No nothing snide, I like to understand fully someone's point of view so that I can better understand what they are really after.

When someone says "the chaos codex sucks just because" that is a lot of unknown territory there as to why they are saying that.

If they say "the chaos codex sucks because I like to play in environments like tournaments where my opponents are all bringing OP lists and I need an OP option to have a good game" or "the chaos codex sucks because everything in it is situational and I play in games where I don't know my opponent ahead of time" that helps me understand the argument better (and to both of those responses above I'd agree with)

Scribe of Khorne
26-03-2014, 01:13
No but i'm trying to parse the difference in why I find that the codex, while not OP dominant like my eldar army is, works for me compared to a lot of people touting the word "useless" and "worthless" etc.

The only time variety and versatility is key is when you don't know what you are going to be facing...

Those are obviously exaggerations.

Instead lets say 'vastly inefficient' or 'detrimental to goal of winning, if taken' ;)


So for arguments sake, since the word "useless" is thrown around a lot, but at the same time "we arent looking for OP" is also thrown around, and since i use nearly all of the csm book AND win with it fairly regularly (not in a min/max environment)

What exactly then in plain english without obfuscation is desired...

I mean we might as well throw out all vehicles av 12 and less, i hear thats useless.

The inability to have a cheap assault vehicle to bypass the enemy shooting phase - also useless.

Comparing the epeen of every unit to marines and coming short == useless.

No powerful legion rules - useless.

So someone draw out for me what is wanted that is also NOT OP please. :)

I think what we need to define is what exactly is the CSM army?

You look at Tau, and you think '**** look at all that shooting'. Almost regardless of the army list, you have to fight to not have solid amounts of shooting.

So what are CSM supposed to be?

Step one, what am I looking for?

1. Define the faction. Its not 'daemonic stuff' because we have an army for that now. So what are we? Define that.
2. Make that definition, reflective in the rules.
3. Respect the history of the faction and fluff.

Frankly the mechanics of it, are irrelevant. Marks, Icons, Legion Tactics. These are all options, and they dont need to be OP.

Is Fear army wide OP? No, but does it provide a thematic link across the entire Crimson Slaughter faction? Yes.

Mechanics, Champion of Chaos, Boons table, these things are not thematic across the entire faction and its history, they simply make no sense. So strip that away.

I dont know, its a topic I am passionate about, but I just dont have time to put it all down here.

What are CSM meant to be, what does GW think they should be thematically? Its not Legions. Its not Renegades. What is it?

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 01:15
while a TS army is not going to be much better than what it is, because fluff dictates it's an army made up of troops even less diverse than the clone troopers of the republic

I think this is only because people have fooled themselves into thinking that way. It goes hand in hand with the "Ten Thousand years of combat" nonsense that is frequently spouted.

Warbands take casualties, and warbands recruit. A warband of the Thousand Sons Legion has no reason not to include units other than Rubrics in their ranks. There's no reason that they couldn't have hired/coerced troops from other warbands or allied themselves with another. Likewise, most of those non Rubric troops are likely to die in a century or two of combat, just like most Astartes. Those who do survive for a thousand years or more are going to be just as rare as amongst the Loyalists, and just as deadly.

Now, I'll say that GW dropped the ball on Chosen and Lords, especially in light of the Space Marine Codex.

But it seems to me that the complaints stem from A) People who limit themselves from a warped perspective of the fluff and B) People who are concerned primarily with competing against the power lists from other factions and don't actively play the faction that is currently in power (Nurgle now).

=Angel=
26-03-2014, 01:48
Plus each squad of thousand sons is lead by a wizard. You want variety- simply give them a wide range of powers!

This here's my thousand sons squad that tanks enemy fire because the sorcerer is throwing up a kine shield.
This one has inferno bolts that ignore cover because the sorcerer is guiding them to their targets.

This squad hangs back and casts magic missile.

Bugaboo
26-03-2014, 02:03
I think this is only because people have fooled themselves into thinking that way. It goes hand in hand with the "Ten Thousand years of combat" nonsense that is frequently spouted.

Warbands take casualties, and warbands recruit. A warband of the Thousand Sons Legion has no reason not to include units other than Rubrics in their ranks. There's no reason that they couldn't have hired/coerced troops from other warbands or allied themselves with another. Likewise, most of those non Rubric troops are likely to die in a century or two of combat, just like most Astartes. Those who do survive for a thousand years or more are going to be just as rare as amongst the Loyalists, and just as deadly.

Now, I'll say that GW dropped the ball on Chosen and Lords, especially in light of the Space Marine Codex.

But it seems to me that the complaints stem from A) People who limit themselves from a warped perspective of the fluff and B) People who are concerned primarily with competing against the power lists from other factions and don't actively play the faction that is currently in power (Nurgle now).

A warped perspective, or the perspective shown to us by the people that wrote the fluff? Is there anything stating there is anything but sorcerers and rubricae in the 1K legion? Show me the part in the various versions of their history where it states such, and I will happily accept there can be something robots and wizards in the marine portion of the army.

Knifeparty
26-03-2014, 02:06
The complaint is that most of us don't want a miss matched motley crew of marines of different marks and special rules.

We want cohesiveness, a sense of identity and special rules that go with them (both beneficial and detrimental)

We want uniformity in the rules set, if my world eater troops have WS 5, I want all my army to have a minimum of WS 5 and everything with the mark of Khorne.

They throw in a bunch of new units that "sort of" supposed to cover what the army needs, but thats not what we want. We want cohesive rules for specific warband/legions.

It doesn't even need to be legions, it could just be "war band of Khorne" has these rules and these drawbacks.

Combine this with the ability to actually compete on a semi-competitve level and I think Chaos Players would be as happy as a pig in ****.

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 02:14
A warped perspective, or the perspective shown to us by the people that wrote the fluff? Is there anything stating there is anything but sorcerers and rubricae in the 1K legion? Show me the part in the various versions of their history where it states such, and I will happily accept there can be something robots and wizards in the marine portion of the army.

Is there anything stating Sisters of Battle use latrines? Or maybe something that shows Space Marines getting their chainswords sharpened? How about Imperial Guardsmen dying from after combat infection or disease? Things that are obvious don't need to be explicitly spelled out to be true, or a possibility. And I said there's no reason a warband can't recruit.

To counter, please show me where it says that every Thousand Sons warband is made up of only Rubrics and Sorcerers, and they never recruit new blood, absorb other warbands or fight alongside other warbands.


Combine this with the ability to actually compete on a semi-competitve level and I think Chaos Players would be as happy as a pig in ****.

Who though? Every single possible type of warband? You're saying you want a codex where every possible theme (I am assuming you mean spam the same 3 or 4 units over and over means theme) is competitive, and there is no clear winner? Nobody in any game I've ever played has that, because A) that book would be filled to the brim with overpowered units and B) the internet power mongers would figure out the best combination anyways and everything else becomes useless.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 02:19
Well - khorne marines are a bunch of bezerkers basically yes?

But the mark of khorne and khorne bezerkers are not enough ...

You can easily make a 1500 point - 2000 point list filled with khorne marked units and khorne bezerkers, but because they:
A) don't have a cheap ASSAULT transport (land raiders don't count, too expensive, need a 50-70 point transport that they can assault out of to bypass enemy shooting or drop pod option where the whole army can drop pod assault)

B) don't have access to loads of AP2 melee weapons

they are worthless. Worthless of course being an exaggeration but this is the word often used for them. The above two reasons being what I read so often about why khorne troops suck.

Now this is still a cohesive army, it has a cohesive theme - it is a warband of khorne - but it can't stand up to the OP min/max lists. I'm not arguing that fact, I agree - a min/max eldar or tau list will blow this out of the water.

As such - it is worthless. It needs a way to compete with the OP eldar and tau lists. Which means - it needs OP elements of its own.

I figure that the khorne lists I've seen are indeed semi-competitive. Semi-competitive is not what a lot of people want. Themes can be done, its just that the themes can't compete "at the highest levels of play". Semi-competitive can compete in a regulated environment - and that's where I normally play so I know that they can stand toe to toe in that arena.

Thousand Sons - same thing. I can make a thematic thousand sons list. I can throw rubicae troops, sorcerers in, and tzeentch marines that are not rubicae. In fact, this is my thousand sons list. It feels Thousand Sons to me. The problem? Its only good against 3+ save armies. I struggle against orks and nids with that army, and eldar to an extent. As such - it is deemed useless. The things I've seen to make thousand sons competitive range from cool ideas to OP.

I don't buy that the themes cannot be created currently - they can. Its just that the themes, much like why people bemoan Ultramarines and Black Templars, cannot compete "at the highest levels" and I understand people don't want to get blown off the table - that's that imbalance situation rearing its head.

Knifeparty
26-03-2014, 02:29
Who though? Every single possible type of warband? You're saying you want a codex where every possible theme (I am assuming you mean spam the same 3 or 4 units over and over means theme) is competitive, and there is no clear winner? Nobody in any game I've ever played has that, because A) that book would be filled to the brim with overpowered units and B) the internet power mongers would figure out the best combination anyways and everything else becomes useless

It's so easy to write a codex with all these themes it hurts. It hurts even more that GW won't/can't do it.

Power gamers will ALWAYS find the best combination for everything, that won't ever change. So instead of giving something to the people who want a theme you want to ruin it for everyone by giving us neither competitiveness and lack of fluffy options?

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 02:34
But again you have fluffy options. They just lack "powergamey" elements.

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 02:35
It's so easy to write a codex with all these themes it hurts. It hurts even more that GW won't/can't do it.

Power gamers will ALWAYS find the best combination for everything, that won't ever change. So instead of giving something to the people who want a theme you want to ruin it for everyone by giving us neither competitiveness and lack of fluffy options?

It is incredibly easy to write a list with a theme in this codex. You just don't rules to go along with that theme. There's nothing separating a D'Yanoi Fire Warrior from a Viorla Fire Warrior. There's nothing separating a Biel Tan Eldar list from an Ulthwe list other than composition. You can certainly theme your Chaos force just about any way you like. It just might not face down power lists unless you're playing Nurgle.

Knifeparty
26-03-2014, 02:38
If you guys consider this codex fluffy in the least bit then I can't convince you otherwise. We will have to agree to disagree.

Bugaboo
26-03-2014, 02:46
Is there anything stating Sisters of Battle use latrines? Or maybe something that shows Space Marines getting their chainswords sharpened? How about Imperial Guardsmen dying from after combat infection or disease? Things that are obvious don't need to be explicitly spelled out to be true, or a possibility. And I said there's no reason a warband can't recruit.

To counter, please show me where it says that every Thousand Sons warband is made up of only Rubrics and Sorcerers, and they never recruit new blood, absorb other warbands or fight alongside other warbands.



Who though? Every single possible type of warband? You're saying you want a codex where every possible theme (I am assuming you mean spam the same 3 or 4 units over and over means theme) is competitive, and there is no clear winner? Nobody in any game I've ever played has that, because A) that book would be filled to the brim with overpowered units and B) the internet power mongers would figure out the best combination anyways and everything else becomes useless.


You're talking about a superfriends alliance of warbands, not a pure 1K army. ;p I'm talking about the latter. :rolleyes:

As for the part about the recruitment, cool story, which makes neither one of us right. And I guess folks are now rushing to give some of the units in their 1K Sons force a 6++ save to represent that diversity, since they are such free thinkers not bound by the warped perspective of the fluff. Oh wait, that's not happening at all.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 02:48
If you guys consider this codex fluffy in the least bit then I can't convince you otherwise. We will have to agree to disagree.

I haven't seen a convincing argument that shows it not be fluffy, just not powerlisted. I can give several army lists that are prefectly themed and "fluffy" that represent every one of the old legions.

They just lack the power options to make them competitive against the Big 3.

ObiWayneKenobi
26-03-2014, 02:48
The codes isn't fluffy enough because there isn't that identity. An Iron Warriors CSM doesn't fight the same as a Night Lord or a Word Bearer or an Alpha Legionnaire, and that's not reflected in the codex as there is nothing resembling the special legion rules of 3.5, which while it was a bit on the extreme side did the job very well of allowing each legion its own identity on the tabletop, just like an Ultramarine doesn't fight the same as an Imperial Fist or a White Scars space marine. Couple that with lame Rogue Trader-era random crap (the boon table) and the silly "must challenge" rule, and the Codex has too much randomness and not enough actual crunch to allow a thematic and effective force.

GW basically made the same mistakes they have in the past, which is try to make Chaos everything to everyone instead of taking the time to focus on the key areas. So we basically have the functional equivalent to the original 3rd edition Chaos Codex: It's not bad, but it lacks substance and identity and isn't a power list by any means, with some units that are good and some that suck (3rd edition Obliterators in their original version spring to mind). Ironically, just like then it was also an earlier (if not the first this time?) Codex.

Sadly I don't think we'll see a .5 upgrade this time around.

In fact, that's basically what this edition reminds me of - the original 3rd edition Chaos Codex. I played in that era (coming from 2nd edition and the "black codex" in the back of the 3rd edition rulebook), and the 3.0 Codex wasn't AWFUL, but it wasn't anything great and was overall pretty lackluster. You could still win with it (and there was no silly OP junk like the Heldrake then) but it was quickly outclassed by other codexes. Back then though, there was enough negative feedback from the players that GW caved in and gave us first the Index Astartes series and then the 3.5 Codex. This time around they have no outlets for feedback and ignore the internet, and arguably don't have any designers with passion left to do the same thing.

=Angel=
26-03-2014, 02:59
To counter, please show me where it says that every Thousand Sons warband is made up of only Rubrics and Sorcerers, and they never recruit new blood, absorb other warbands or fight alongside other warbands.

Correct sir.
This very thing happens in the novel Ahriman Exile and is the most up to date fluff we have on the legion's post heresy activities.



Who though? Every single possible type of warband? You're saying you want a codex where every possible theme (I am assuming you mean spam the same 3 or 4 units over and over means theme) is competitive, and there is no clear winner? Nobody in any game I've ever played has that, because A) that book would be filled to the brim with overpowered units and B) the internet power mongers would figure out the best combination anyways and everything else becomes useless.


Yes, again you're right. But say a Khornate warband (not necessarily WE, though they'd be recruiting too right?)
People have it in their heads that Khorne is the god of CC- . That's not true- skull cannons exist. People only think that because the berzerker surgeries turn the dedicated into pure rage fuelled gladiators, but thats just the surgery talking. Khorne appreciates this for sure, but they are kind or flawed weapons.
It's possible to be a follower of Khorne without ever getting your chainsword wet during a battle- mass reactive bolts and plasma will do fine.

Consider a chaos codex where the base units are solid choices in and of themselves. The CSM troop squad has all the options of the Templar crusader squad combined with the grey hunter squad.

The mark of khorne applies the old axe of khorne rule to a unit, any 6's to hit generate additional rolls to hit. That's shooting and CC.
Suddenly- Khornate havocs with heavy bolters or autocannons dishing out long range indiscriminate carnage, khornate tacticals loaded up with plasma hoping for extra shots and not overheats, khornate characters granting rerolls to hit for their unit accompanying khornate raptors or troops.
The berzerkers keep their high number of attacks and benefit from the mark's new effects.

Fun and simple, benefits lascannons and lightning claws. can generate hilarious moments where a small squad or character keeps getting 6's to hit, mows their way through an improbable number of troops.

Is it so hard to work out a marks system that is not so overcosted or internally unbalanced- who gives the mark of khorne to Obliterators? I would if I could have a chance to double tap plasmacannons.

Scribe of Khorne
26-03-2014, 03:01
I haven't seen a convincing argument that shows it not be fluffy, just not powerlisted. I can give several army lists that are prefectly themed and "fluffy" that represent every one of the old legions.

They just lack the power options to make them competitive against the Big 3.

Can you build a Khorne army, pure CSM, through and through, that shares the same rules?

No, you cannot, because Berzerkers are always running under a separate set of rules, and outside a Special Character, there is no 'Berzerker' HQ option.

Themes, Fluffy, yes they can be done, but the mechanics are JUST short of being cohesive.

When some of those Legions have been explicitly tied to a fraction of the army, and I shouldnt need to list them, and you cannot spread those out to the rest of the army organically (Berzerker Lord, Berzerker Terminators, Berzerker Chosen) it falls apart.

Can you apply a rule that separates Word Bearers from Alpha Legion? Across the entire army?
Can you apply a rule that separates Iron Warriors from Night Lords? Across the entire army?

Now, can you apply a set of rules that clearly identifies the 3rd Company of the Imperial Fists from the 2nd Company?

EDIT: And you can power list CSM, just not by itself, you need Daemons to carry the **** troops in our book...

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 03:06
Now, can you apply a set of rules that clearly identifies the 3rd Company of the Imperial Fists from the 2nd Company?

That's due to a supplement.

As for the rest, I'd be happier if they got rid of the cult units altogether and just let marks and veteran skills dictate. Of course, that'll get min maxed and everyone will bitch and moan that their favorite Legion doesn't get special rules.

Scribe of Khorne
26-03-2014, 03:08
I dont care if its due to a supplement. Its an affront to anyone with sense, or respect for the entire game that GW didnt put even a fraction of the same care and thought into CSM that they could supplement Space Marines with.

---

Mechanically, I agree Marks need to go, as does the sacred stick.

EDIT: I mean really guys I'm trying to give a few inches of ground here. I accept that the book (with allies and supplements) is at least usable. So thanks GW for delivering at least that after a year+, but to suggest anything but that Legions should get some kind of rule's level acknowledgement is a sin against Khorne.

ObiWayneKenobi
26-03-2014, 03:12
I dont care if its due to a supplement. Its an affront to anyone with sense, or respect for the entire game that GW didnt put even a fraction of the same care and thought into CSM that they could supplement Space Marines with.

---

Mechanically, I agree Marks need to go, as does the sacred stick.

When has GW ever given anyone else half the attention they give to Space Marines? As far back as I can remember Space Marines have gotten multiple codexes, repeated "upgraded" releases while other armies never even had basic troops in plastic (in the days when there was plastic and metal), repeated kits coming out, etc. Nothing new that they would give the "star" army the lion's share of attention, and doubly ironic because for all their "forge the narrative" talk, the cash cow breaks the narrative like nothing else if you have two Space Marine armies face each other - you can only write it off as a "training exercise" or play "Who's the Heretic" so many times before it gets ridiculous.

Scribe of Khorne
26-03-2014, 03:14
I get that, I do. However I would argue (and have, till my fingers ached) that the setting as a whole needs Chaos to be that dark mirror image, and it would be so *********** easy.

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 03:15
EDIT: I mean really guys I'm trying to give a few inches of ground here. I accept that the book (with allies and supplements) is at least usable. So thanks GW for delivering at least that after a year+, but to suggest anything but that Legions should get some kind of rule's level acknowledgement is a sin against Khorne.

Well, I'll meet you halfway then. GW completely bungled the marks system, and after Chapter Tactics it'd be really nice to see Legion tactics.

Will that stop the Chaos complaining? I doubt it'll quiet down one bit, it'll just change.

ObiWayneKenobi
26-03-2014, 03:20
I get that, I do. However I would argue (and have, till my fingers ached) that the setting as a whole needs Chaos to be that dark mirror image, and it would be so *********** easy.

Oh I definitely agree. Chaos is supposed to be the big bad of the setting, the eternal, inevitable darkness that makes the most pious Imperial Preacher rethink his faith, causes hatred and fear in the hardiest of the Adeptus Astartes, causes Guard regiments that fight them to be sterilized and sent to concentration camps simply for SEEING them, can cause an entire world to be obliterated from space at the cost of billions of lives just so the corruption can't spread... and instead they're lackluster and even subpar with very little identity beyond a random boon chart that looks straight out of the old Lost and the Damned/Slaves to Darkness book from almost 30 years ago.

I'd dare say that's reason enough why Chaos should be OP (although I really don't think they should be OP) - Chaos is THE Archenemy of the entire setting, beyond everything except maybe the Tyranids (and them only because there's no reasoning or stopping them). Everyone else SHOULD quake in terror when the Chaos Space Marines go to war.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 03:23
Will that stop the Chaos complaining? I doubt it'll quiet down one bit, it'll just change.

Considering space marine players complain about their chapter tactics and how only one is worth taking - I'd say nothing would change.
If legion traits existed I'd bet the farm that only one would be worth taking, and this debate would still be taking place.

That all being said, my group is doing the Badab War next year and I think I want to open up the chaos players to being able to use the HH lists to represent their legions if they want.

Death Company
26-03-2014, 03:39
Considering space marine players complain about their chapter tactics and how only one is worth taking - I'd say nothing would change.
If legion traits existed I'd bet the farm that only one would be worth taking, and this debate would still be taking place.

Just look at Night Lord players who used C:BA for some time, and now run C:SM as Raven Guard- because it's "fluffier" when you completely cut-out the Chaos from renegades.. Many players would find any excuse to simply shoehorn their chosen Legion into the most competitive slot at the time.

"These are my Alpha Legion, who use Iron Warriors tactics." Let the "fluffy" justifications roll.

Scribe of Khorne
26-03-2014, 03:47
Just look at Night Lord players who used C:BA for some time, and now run C:SM as Raven Guard- because it's "fluffier" when you completely cut-out the Chaos from renegades.. Many players would find any excuse to simply shoehorn their chosen Legion into the most competitive slot at the time.

"These are my Alpha Legion, who use Iron Warriors tactics." Let the "fluffy" justifications roll.

A CSM list will stomp all over BA or Raven Guard. Its got nothing to do with competitive if you are using that example.


Well, I'll meet you halfway then. GW completely bungled the marks system, and after Chapter Tactics it'd be really nice to see Legion tactics.

Will that stop the Chaos complaining? I doubt it'll quiet down one bit, it'll just change.

It would help. Thats all I ask for at this point. Just a little bit of a nod in the direction I want things to be.

Death Company
26-03-2014, 03:59
A CSM list will stomp all over BA or Raven Guard. Its got nothing to do with competitive if you are using that example.

At the time it was being done, Blood Angels were leagues stronger. Now, they've moved onto C:SM, as it's more competitive than their book.

Meta has shifted. Heldrakes don't win tourneys for free now; not with Tau being 50% of the players attending.

It was absolutely done because of power.

The Emperor
26-03-2014, 04:50
Raven Guard are considered competitive? I thought they were considered the poor man's White Scars.

Scribe of Khorne
26-03-2014, 04:57
At the time it was being done, Blood Angels were leagues stronger. Now, they've moved onto C:SM, as it's more competitive than their book.

Meta has shifted. Heldrakes don't win tourneys for free now; not with Tau being 50% of the players attending.

It was absolutely done because of power.

Even when BA where brand new, they where never a power list. They where a way to run Assault Marines as troops for those who did it. The 'best' BA lists where AV13 spam (which they still didnt do well with) or Bikers and Priests.

I ran my NL as BA a month ago at a tournament. Why? Drop Pods, and Assault Marines as Troops.

Death Company
26-03-2014, 05:04
Raven Guard are considered competitive? I thought they were considered the poor man's White Scars.

It was their foot in the door, as a fluff justification; but I have seen many a "White Lord" as of recently.


Even when BA where brand new, they where never a power list.

I won't get into an argument with you over older codex competitiveness- it's not worth it to me to make the point. That said, it was a clear step up in both flavor and competitiveness from the mess that was your last codex.


I ran my NL as BA a month ago at a tournament. Why? Drop Pods, and Assault Marines as Troops.

"Blood Angels were never competitive."
"I took them to a tournament last month."

So you play to lose, then?

Swordsman
26-03-2014, 05:20
Raven Guard are considered competitive? I thought they were considered the poor man's White Scars.

Raven Guard would still be better than stand-alone C:CSM, competitively.

Chaos needs to lean on Daemons to even make a showing. Tau shutdown the heldrake faceroll.

Scribe of Khorne
26-03-2014, 05:21
"Blood Angels were never competitive."
"I took them to a tournament last month."

So you play to lose, then?

If I had wanted to do better, I would have ran pure CSM and brought a drake or 2. This is simply being realistic, unless your going to tell me PURE Blood Angel, no allies, is better than CSM with Drakes and Daemon allies.

But you couldnt make that claim, it would be outrageous. Instead you'll have to accept I brought a Blood Angel list with 3 pods (tacs, sternguard, furioso) because it was the closest approximation to my HH list, which is Night Lords.

Never competitive, or simply not more competitive than CSM? Its ok though, continue to try and twist words if thats how you like to play these out.

Play to lose? No.

Play to a theme or list regardless of codex? Sure.

Death Company
26-03-2014, 05:34
If I had wanted to do better, I would have ran pure CSM and brought a drake or 2. This is simply being realistic, unless your going to tell me PURE Blood Angel, no allies, is better than CSM with Drakes and Daemon allies.

You keep missing the part about how it was done originally, when the codex in question was more competitive.

Not sure how many times you can intentionally avoid that point, to remain valid.

Be sure to tell me all about how C:CSM is more competitive than the recently hopped to book - which is C:SM - though. I genuinely look forward to reading about how your drake-neutered list threatens Taudar, the likes of which C:SM can.

Scribe of Khorne
26-03-2014, 05:41
The people running that list did it for pure jumpers! I get that it was done, but pure jumpers wasnt good either lol, and it certainly wasnt better than the stale Double Lash/PM/Oblits (or even Lash/CSM/Oblits.

They were not doing it for the ease of victory, they did it to run pure jumpers. I'm not dodging the point at all, but your claim that it was competitive in nature, instead of to find a playstyle, is what I take exception with.

CSM with minimal Marines, an Axe Jugger Lord and Spawn, + 2 Drakes, allied to Daemons? Go ahead and drop a drake or 2, there are still threats there.

Space Marines didnt do **** at the last tournament I was at, maybe they just arent competitive with tau/eldar, riptide spam, wraith knights, and beaststars? I dont know.

Bugaboo
26-03-2014, 09:44
I think I might actually be a disciple of Malice. I like Chaos a lot, but these sort of threads just make me even more happy about the anti-chaos rules I'm writing into my supplement. :|

I wish I could add something more constructive, but constructive was rendered moot the moment someone decided to post this thread. I say again, this will just be and endless cycle of the same. Mods, let's just call it a day before it reaches the inevitable.

Denny
26-03-2014, 10:35
I think I might actually be a disciple of Malice. I like Chaos a lot, but these sort of threads just make me even more happy about the anti-chaos rules I'm writing into my supplement. :|

I wish I could add something more constructive, but constructive was rendered moot the moment someone decided to post this thread. I say again, this will just be and endless cycle of the same. Mods, let's just call it a day before it reaches the inevitable.

Constructive? Chaos is never constructive. I mean, I always assumed the point of these threads was to create a bubble of pure rage powerful enough to open a new Eye of Terror . . . :shifty:

Harwammer
26-03-2014, 10:59
An Iron Warriors CSM doesn't fight the same as a Night Lord or a Word Bearer or an Alpha LegionnaireCorrect. So take the options and use the tactics that suit your theme if you want to be fluffy.

You can make fluffy lists with the codex, though it would be great for supplements or whatnot to be added that widen the range of fluffy lists that can be made.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 13:48
Constructive? Chaos is never constructive. I mean, I always assumed the point of these threads was to create a bubble of pure rage powerful enough to open a new Eye of Terror . . . :shifty:

We have a ways to go to top the tyranid rage. I mean - we would need someone videoing themselves setting fire to their models or pounding them with a hammer to equal the tyranid explosion, which had someone promoting just that very thing.

Denny
26-03-2014, 14:07
We have a ways to go to top the tyranid rage. I mean - we would need someone videoing themselves setting fire to their models or pounding them with a hammer to equal the tyranid explosion, which had someone promoting just that very thing.

Burning Tyranids doesn't seem very fluffy . . . they should have promoted eating them instead.

Nkari
26-03-2014, 15:22
All I want for my Iron warriors is the following, Counter attack, Furious charge, Stubborn when within 3" of an objective, or assaulting an enemy that is within 3" (to better represent their insane determination when it comes to assaulting objectives), and -1 on enemy cover saves (to better represent their siege specialist role), cause army wide ignore all cover saves is just to good.

Give me that and 1 more front armour on the daemon engines and the current codex is ok... (Tho I really really wich for scoring chaos terminators, but I would think that is best left for the black legion.)

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 15:38
Why would iron warriors get super buffed in assault like that? Why would you never take those rules if you could?

Why dont we just say all vehicles should have av 13 or 14? Seems that ive heard how useless av 12 is 12 times this week and its only wednesday. Esp considering the demon engines get a 5++ and it will not die...

This to me is a great example of OP

Bob Hunk
26-03-2014, 16:26
All I want for my Iron warriors is the following, Counter attack, Furious charge, Stubborn when within 3" of an objective, or assaulting an enemy that is within 3" (to better represent their insane determination when it comes to assaulting objectives), and -1 on enemy cover saves (to better represent their siege specialist role), cause army wide ignore all cover saves is just to good.

Give me that and 1 more front armour on the daemon engines and the current codex is ok... (Tho I really really wich for scoring chaos terminators, but I would think that is best left for the black legion.)

Not sure if serious or parody... :shifty:

Goshawk
26-03-2014, 16:56
All I want for my Iron warriors is the following, Counter attack, Furious charge, Stubborn when within 3" of an objective, or assaulting an enemy that is within 3" (to better represent their insane determination when it comes to assaulting objectives), and -1 on enemy cover saves (to better represent their siege specialist role), cause army wide ignore all cover saves is just to good.

Give me that and 1 more front armour on the daemon engines and the current codex is ok... (Tho I really really wich for scoring chaos terminators, but I would think that is best left for the black legion.)

You want all that AND an additional front armor point?!
Why do Iron Warriors get Counter attack? Furious Charge? -1 to cover saves? I suppose I can get behind the stubborn idea OR the 1 more point on daemon engines but that's it. We aren't looking for traits that will make our guys monsters. We just want something to differentiate them enough from each other.

Also why should any Legion have scoring Terminators? They're Elites

hobojebus
26-03-2014, 17:01
Why would iron warriors get super buffed in assault like that? Why would you never take those rules if you could?

Why dont we just say all vehicles should have av 13 or 14? Seems that ive heard how useless av 12 is 12 times this week and its only wednesday. Esp considering the demon engines get a 5++ and it will not die...

This to me is a great example of OP

Iron warrior's are refereed to as being exceptionally violent once they've breached their enemies defences, week's/month's of frustration build up and they release it in melee once the walls are torn down.

Long ranged fire power combined with a strong assault late game would reflect their style of combat, the down side would be they cant use mutations, don't work well with demons and could not field possessed units for example.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 17:05
So you've essentially with those rules made Iron Warriors super heroes that can not only blow you away with siege shooting, but in combat they fight like assault super stars AND of course with the AV13 & 14 made their vehicles with demonic inv save and it shall not die very hard to kill off. I guess the only thing missing is to give them access to an armory that lets them wield AP2 power swords as well.

Sounds like a fun game!

Their weaknesses would be.... and I would want to choose another legion because....

Nkari
26-03-2014, 17:07
Why would iron warriors get super buffed in assault like that? Why would you never take those rules if you could?

Why dont we just say all vehicles should have av 13 or 14? Seems that ive heard how useless av 12 is 12 times this week and its only wednesday. Esp considering the demon engines get a 5++ and it will not die...

This to me is a great example of OP

You dont seem remember the index astartes articles from pre codex 3.5 I guess then icedcrow, where they do explain that IW allmost behaves as zerkers when it comes to the assault phase in a sige. Be it on the offence or defence, thus a toned down version of zerker rules.. ie no fearless But stubborn instead, just +1 str in offence, and +1 attack and +1 str in defence. And since IW are allso notworthy for picking down defences picemail -1 coversave is quite fluffy in my mind, since you cant destroy most cover saves in 40k, and I thought that adding "bunkerbuster" on top of -1 cover save would be to much..


And the +1 front armour on daemon engines, I mean specifically the two dinobots and the defiler, NOT the drake or the dreadnought.

And ofc, IW needs to be unmarked.. that goes without saying.

And Iced, OP, dont make me laugh.. =)
All you need to do is assault or shoot at them when they are not within 3# of the objectives and 2/3s of the rules do not apply.
But ANY buff to chaos and you will scream OP iced.. atleast thats the conclusion I have come to reading your posts in various chaos threads over some time now.. =(

Nkari
26-03-2014, 17:12
Also why should any Legion have scoring Terminators? They're Elites

Black legion and the former sons of horus are quite known for their brutal terminator teleport assaults. Again I reference to second edition chaos codes and IA articles. A nice legacy instead of this crap with power armoured chosen being troops.


And the +1 armour if for all the legions just not IW, and in my above pose it seems I needed to clarify it to apply to Dinobots and the defiler.


You guys should really read more about the legions before you blow up screaming OP for something that is quite tame compared to a great many things.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 17:13
You dont seem remember the index astartes articles from pre codex 3.5 I guess then icedcrow, where they do explain that IW allmost behaves as zerkers when it comes to the assault phase in a sige. Be it on the offence or defence, thus a toned down version of zerker rules.. ie no fearless But stubborn instead, just +1 str in offence, and +1 attack and +1 str in defence. And since IW are allso notworthy for picking down defences picemail -1 coversave is quite fluffy in my mind, since you cant destroy most cover saves in 40k, and I thought that adding "bunkerbuster" on top of -1 cover save would be to much..


And the +1 front armour on daemon engines, I mean specifically the two dinobots and the defiler, NOT the drake or the dreadnought.

And ofc, IW needs to be unmarked.. that goes without saying.

And Iced, OP, dont make me laugh.. =)
All you need to do is assault or shoot at them when they are not within 3# of the objectives and 2/3s of the rules do not apply.
But ANY buff to chaos and you will scream OP iced.. atleast thats the conclusion I have come to reading your posts in various chaos threads over some time now.. =(

I own every iNdex Astartes compilation actually. By your reasoning, world eaters should all be WS 6 or 7 with 3 or 4 power attacks each. (THATS A STRAWMAN someone will scream, but really when you make a ranged shooty army bad *** in assault too, what do you do with the assault army except make them even more bad *** in assault?)

You've essentially made a faction, made it super good at shooting, super good at assault, buffed up the vehicles to make them even harder to kill, and then claim that this is some kind of balance.

There's buffing chaos, and then there's making their legions stupid, which is what you've accomplished with those suggestions, because if Iron Warriors could do all of those things, then things like World Eaters would have to be even stupider to fulfil their role in the game. They would have to one up the chapter that gets all of the bonus assault rules. Sounds like fun!

The suggestions above read like most fan requests for their legion of choice - make it overly powerful and then act like its perfectly reasonable.

Which is why you'll never get what you want.

I don't scream OP at things that aren't OP. ;) I am a chaos player after all. Your requests however are fairly over the line in regards to any balance that other legions would have to abide by.

Why WOULDNT I choose Iron warriors if I could be a bezerker AND a siege specialist all in one? 40k is basically shooting and assault right? Well right there you've made your favorite legion great at BOTH! BRILLIANT! That right there fails game design as bad as GW fails game design with their improperly pointed units.

Nkari
26-03-2014, 17:22
So you've essentially with those rules made Iron Warriors super heroes that can not only blow you away with siege shooting, but in combat they fight like assault super stars AND of course with the AV13 & 14 made their vehicles with demonic inv save and it shall not die very hard to kill off. I guess the only thing missing is to give them access to an armory that lets them wield AP2 power swords as well.

Sounds like a fun game!

Their weaknesses would be.... and I would want to choose another legion because....

So, lets see now iced, they are all super heroes.. well.. kinda they are since they are space marines, but lets see now, IW would get counter assault if they are close to an objective, Space wolves gets it all the time, Furious charge, orks get it all the time, so does all units marked with khorne, and 1 in 6 Blood angel squad gets it and fearless the entire game. And stubborn, dark angels get across the greenwing and the ravenwing, while the deathwing are fearless all the time. While IW would only gets it when they are actually doing something near an objective, either being assaulted or assaulting themselfs.. seems fair to me.

And ofc, like hobojebus says, there would be limits to certain stuff like no marks, and no daemons..

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 17:24
So how if you make iron warriors awesome ranged and awesome assault do you balance the other seven legions

Who needs access to marks when you have superior USRs.

Thats not a weakness, thats a joke lol

Goshawk
26-03-2014, 17:24
I've read pretty much every source available on the Legions including the new Horus Heresy stuff. I know what they are like and such. IcedCrow has it. Why would I ever play something other than Iron Warriors if they get bonuses like that? If Iron Warriors get assault bonuses like that, then what would your idea of World Eater traits be? Unless you're suggesting Iron Warriors are better than World Eaters at assaults- which would go right back to why bother playing anything but Iron Warriors.

I don't think I can get behind really any of your arguments to be honest. The -1 to cover saves just doesn't make sense. You attack strong points one at a time so that somehow makes you ignore the fortifications there? The reason they are so effective is because they focus all their firepower at one point at a time, not because they snipe out the enemy. You can do this in your games without needing a special rule. The only one that I think I would get behind is the stubborn rule around objectives. That would highlight their rage around objectives and their commitment to an assault. You don't need a direct boost like Furious Charge to represent this. Stubborn- if you look at it- would represent this well enough.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 17:25
Stubborn on objectives would be cool

Nkari
26-03-2014, 17:31
I own every iNdex Astartes compilation actually. By your reasoning, world eaters should all be WS 6 or 7 with 3 or 4 power attacks each. (THATS A STRAWMAN someone will scream, but really when you make a ranged shooty army bad *** in assault too, what do you do with the assault army except make them even more bad *** in assault?)

No, I have not given any example for zerkers so dont put words in my mouth please. And to be frank, current zerker rules are quite ok, tho +1 init while assaulting would not be op, like the old furious charge.
Some sort of drop pod for zerks would be nice to,


You've essentially made a faction, made it super good at shooting, super good at assault, buffed up the vehicles to make them even harder to kill, and then claim that this is some kind of balance.
AT objectives, you seem to forget that part.




Why WOULDNT I choose Iron warriors if I could be a bezerker AND a siege specialist all in one? 40k is basically shooting and assault right? Well right there you've made your favorite legion great at BOTH! BRILLIANT! That right there fails game design as bad as GW fails game design with their improperly pointed units.
As the general consensus is, pure assault armies are quite sub par this edition, and again, it would not make IW insane at assault all the time, it would just make them a sub par zerker when they are assaulting or defending objectives.

think about it for more than two seconds please iced.. =)

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 17:38
THey would be better than bezerkers because not only would they match their ability to fight, they'd have access to superior long range firepower, and super powered demon engines toting AV 13 and AV 14.

Why would I ever not take Iron Warriors? Again, I've asked that three times now.

At objectives, 3" from objectives you said earlier, on most of the tables I play at if I get to be a bezerker within 3" of an objective then I might as well have it always because all I'm going to do is take my troops and then camp on an objective or get near one to game the system.

The idea is bad other than stubborn on an objective. That could be cool

Nkari
26-03-2014, 17:39
I've read pretty much every source available on the Legions including the new Horus Heresy stuff. I know what they are like and such. IcedCrow has it. Why would I ever play something other than Iron Warriors if they get bonuses like that? If Iron Warriors get assault bonuses like that, then what would your idea of World Eater traits be? Unless you're suggesting Iron Warriors are better than World Eaters at assaults- which would go right back to why bother playing anything but Iron Warriors.


So, they are better than zerkers(wich are supposed to be world eaters, atlest most of them) when they are not fearles but stubborn instead, and do not have the rage rule, nor do they have WS 5, or AP4 CCW, yes they are clearly better than world eaters in assault, oh, and did I mention that the zerkers have these rules all the time, while IW would need a set condition for them to apply and not all the time ?

Srsly, stop kneejerking..

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 17:41
Fortunately this will never actually happen so ... no worries.

Raven1
26-03-2014, 17:42
I believe the IA rules for Iron Warriors being able to take one squad of berzerkers? I always thought that was for the furious rage monsters in assault they are. In game balance terms you cant have an army that is awesome in assault and in shooting.

As far as the Iron Warriors go I would like to see them to have something that ignores cover or reduces a cover save. Then have the warpsmith be able to curse cover giving a further reduction. Stubborn in cover or near an objective would be nice too.

The problem is Space Marines use multiple codexes to cover the chapters, while the traitor legions, renegades, and cults are stuffed into one book. It's never going to be all that good until that separate them out, but honestly that is a terrible answer as well. It will become a gigantic monster of books that need updating. Maybe these new codex supplements, and dataslates are the answer. One codex for the basic list and traitor tactics type rules, and then codex supplements for the 4 major cults legions.

Mozzamanx
26-03-2014, 18:05
So for those asking 'If you get free stuff, why play anything else?', I'd like to propose my solution (Again, but expanded).

Legions- VotLW now costs a little more. Probably 3-4pts as a baseline and increasing with the unit. Any unit that upgrades to VotLW, must choose a Legacy. Legacies can be combined with Marks but may impose limitation on the model taking them.

Legacy of the Warmaster- Preferred Enemy: Warlord and Stubborn. If arriving via Deep Strike, may reroll the Scatter dice.
Legacy of the Red Angel- Fearless, Furious Charge. May replace any weapon with the 'Melee' property for a Chainaxe at +Xpts. Must have the Mark of Khorne.
Legacy of the Cyclops- Fearless, Inferno Bolts, Aura of Dark Glory. Characters gain a Mastery Level, non-characters gain Slow & Purposeful. Must have the Mark of Tzeentch.
Legacy of the Phoenician- Fearless. Any Bolters may be upgraded to Sonic Blasters for +Xpts, and Autocannons for Blastmasters at +Ypts. Must have the Mark of Slaanesh.
Legacy of the Reaper- Fearless, Feel No Pain, Blight Grenades. Any weapon with the 'Melee' property may be upgraded to a Plague Knife for +Xpts. Must have the Mark of Nurgle.
Legacy of the Hydra- Outflank, Acute Senses. May shoot with Precision Fire in any turn that they did not move.
Legacy of Nostramo- Night Vision, Fear, Hit & Run.
Legacy of Olympia- Stubborn and Furious Charge when within 3" of a Fortification. Gain (Tank Hunters but applied to Buildings).
Legacy of the Aurelian- Zealot. Any friendly unit with the 'Daemon' special rule will not scatter if attempting to land within 6".

(Of course not all of the above are equal, with the Phoenician standing out as a weaker option. This is written with the assumption that the Cult units will change and so the difference between a Noise Marine and a Slaaneshii dude will be more than simply being Fearless)

Then, introduce a page of 'Legion splinters' with a big old designers note that these are *not* the way that the army is intended to be used, and that they are deliberately weaker than the Warband option. They are strictly for fluff and a crowd-pleaser with minimal benefits, but just enough to reward fluffy play.

World Eaters- Warlord must be Khornate, non-Khornate models are never Scoring (This includes Cultists). Slaaneshii people are Desperate Allies. In exchange, every model with Red Angel gets their Chainaxe for free, and the squad gets a free Icon of Wrath.
Thousand Sons- Mark restrictions as above. Any squad with Cyclops can now draw sight from any member of the unit, every Psyker gets a free Spell Familiar.
Iron Warriors- Non-Veteran troops are never Scoring, 'Master of Traitors' rule is suspended. In exchange, you gain a second Fortification slot on the FOC and your Warlord gains Shatter Defenses and either Weapon Virus for Sorcerers and Princes, or the ability to repair for anyone else.
Night Lords- Non-Veteran troops are never Scoring, 'Master of Traitors' rule is suspended. In exchange you can force Night Fight on the first turn and enemy Leadership tests must reroll any '1's.

Black Legion- Non-Veteran troops are never Scoring. Chosen become Troops.
Red Corsairs- Veterans are never Scoring, 'Master of Traitors' is suspended. You may take an Allied Detachment of Space Marines as Battle Brothers, though all models lose the ATSKNF special rule.


Just throwing some ideas out there for how it could be executed with minimal effort and provide something for everyone. This list took me about 5 minutes to type so there's room to rebalance stuff.

Death Company
26-03-2014, 18:05
The people running that list did it for pure jumpers! I get that it was done, but pure jumpers wasnt good either lol, and it certainly wasnt better than the stale Double Lash/PM/Oblits (or even Lash/CSM/Oblits.

It was supposedly done for access to more jump troops (which in itself is a silly choice, given that the Night Lords do not go to war with nothing but raptors), but curiously a lot of bikers, sanguinary priests, and Mephiston all managed to make an equally 'fluffy' appearance.


They were not doing it for the ease of victory, they did it to run pure jumpers. I'm not dodging the point at all, but your claim that it was competitive in nature, instead of to find a playstyle, is what I take exception with.

You seem to be under the impression that lash spam lists were a solid choice at the time, in comparison.


CSM with minimal Marines, an Axe Jugger Lord and Spawn, + 2 Drakes, allied to Daemons? Go ahead and drop a drake or 2, there are still threats there.

Like I said, lean on that Daemon book (should the tourney you're in allow it). Tau will lean on Eldar - except they don't need to do so - and be a lot stronger for it.


Space Marines didnt do **** at the last tournament I was at, maybe they just arent competitive with tau/eldar, riptide spam, wraith knights, and beaststars? I dont know.

Must of been an interesting tourney. In the last two I've been to, C:SM devours tides like it's their job- which a lot of Taudar lists rely too heavily upon.



All I want for my Iron warriors is the following, Counter attack, Furious charge, Stubborn when within 3" of an objective, or assaulting an enemy that is within 3" (to better represent their insane determination when it comes to assaulting objectives), and -1 on enemy cover saves (to better represent their siege specialist role), cause army wide ignore all cover saves is just to good.

Give me that and 1 more front armour on the daemon engines and the current codex is ok... (Tho I really really wich for scoring chaos terminators, but I would think that is best left for the black legion.)

This, right here, is a perfect example of the unrealistic expectations of what many Chaos players will 'expect' from their tactics.

They will never release a single codex that has stellar fluff, competitive - fluffy - choices for every god/cult, and is appropriately priced. There will always be a more competitive god/cult, an undercosted unit, and 'no brainer' choices that people will shoehorn into their list in order to have a chance of winning, and setting this vicious cycle of tears spinning yet again.

Nkari
26-03-2014, 18:20
THey would be better than bezerkers because not only would they match their ability to fight, they'd have access to superior long range firepower, and super powered demon engines toting AV 13 and AV 14.
AV13.. no AV 14, I was a bit unclear in my first post, but have since clarified it, get over it and stop lying.. =)


Why would I ever not take Iron Warriors? Again, I've asked that three times now.
If IW got these upgrades and noone else got their set of legion rules, no reason what so ever, butdont you think I would want the other legions to get something like this to represent some of their traits that stand out. And no, I really dont want to do all the legions now, I gave the IW ones because I like IW.. I allso like black legion, and world eaters have grown on me thanks to the black library audio dramas with kharn.


At objectives, 3" from objectives you said earlier, on most of the tables I play at if I get to be a bezerker within 3" of an objective then I might as well have it always because all I'm going to do is take my troops and then camp on an objective or get near one to game the system. Again, the IW rules are NOT the same rules, exactly 1/5 the ones zerkers have (WS, fearless, rage, furious charge AP4) and they dont even get them all the time, wich zerkers does,
between 1 and 6 objectives there are in 5 out of 6 games, HALF of those your oponent gets to place, so they wont be where you want them, the other half that you get to place MAY not be placed exactly where you want since you cant place an objective within 12" of another objective, nor within 6" of a table edge. So, mabye half of the objectives will be near where you want them, but in reality, only 1/3 of the scenarios will have enough objectives for you to place more than 1, and roughly half of them you will be able to place 2 of hem, and to get to place 3 objectives you are looking at 1/3*1/2*1/6.. So its HARDLY as strong as you make it out to be.

And if you continue to exaggerate and give examples of stuff I have not purposed and use them as arguments for calling my purposed rules as OP, I wont continue to answering you, since you do start to smell like a troll by how you try to make your points by exploding on things you yourself have come up with.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 18:23
If me thinking that your desired special rules for Iron Warriors are far OP makes me a troll, then yes I am a lying, filthy, dirty troll. Thankfully you aren't a games designer and I don't have to worry about something like this coming to pass.

Praise Dog.

ObiWayneKenobi
26-03-2014, 18:25
Personally I would be happy with similar to Chapter Tactics; enough to make fluffy lists viable without being overbearing. Let's not get carried away with wanting lots of really cool things because it would never happen in a million years.

A few of the chapter tactics could easily apply to legions, perhaps with some modifications e.g. Night Lords could have what amounted to Raven Guard tactics, Iron Warriors would have Imperial Fists, etc. and then you could add some extras for the other legions. Word Bearers for example might have some way to upgrade a Cultist squad, Alpha Legion might have infiltration, etc.

Goshawk
26-03-2014, 18:31
Again, the IW rules are NOT the same rules, exactly 1/5 the ones zerkers have (WS, fearless, rage, furious charge AP4) and they dont even get them all the time, wich zerkers does,
between 1 and 6 objectives there are in 5 out of 6 games, HALF of those your oponent gets to place, so they wont be where you want them, the other half that you get to place MAY not be placed exactly where you want since you cant place an objective within 12" of another objective, nor within 6" of a table edge. So, mabye half of the objectives will be near where you want them, but in reality, only 1/3 of the scenarios will have enough objectives for you to place more than 1, and roughly half of them you will be able to place 2 of hem, and to get to place 3 objectives you are looking at 1/3*1/2*1/6.. So its HARDLY as strong as you make it out to be.

And if you continue to exaggerate and give examples of stuff I have not purposed and use them as arguments for calling my purposed rules as OP, I wont continue to answering you, since you do start to smell like a troll by how you try to make your points.

Weapon skill 5 doesn't do as much as you think it does. It's not a big game changer. Fearless is good, as is rage. But you have to pay for and protect the icon to give Furious Charge. And NO ONE takes the chainaxes. If you haven't noticed, no one takes Berzerkers anymore. Why? Because they aren't worth their points. You can make a cheaper, better all round unit in regular chaos marines with close combat weapons and the Mark of Khorne. If the fact that you can make an almost identical unit for dramatically cheaper that functions almost the exact same way as Berzerkers doesn't change your opinion than I don't know what will. I know the codex and how the rules work so I would appreciate it if you didn't talk down to me as well.

I find it slightly ironic that you are calling other people trolls now.

Inquisitor Shego
26-03-2014, 18:35
I own every iNdex Astartes compilation actually.

You remind me of Del Boy from Only Fools and Horses, Icedcrow. Whatever the situation, you owned it, saw it, fought it, or married it. Your house must be Warehouse 13 with sprues.

Del: I remember what Mum said on her death bed. She said to me: "Del," she said, "please give little Rodney all the encouragement that you can. Never, Del, never hold him back."
Rodney: She didn't half say a lot on her death bed, didn't she?
Del: What?
Rodney: Whatever the subject is, Mum had something to say about it on her death bed. She must have spent her final few hours in this mortal realm doing nothing but rabbiting!
Del: You are walking a bleeding tightrope here, Rodney!!!
Rodney: No, hang on! Right, you remember last week we were having a row about whose turn it was to go down the chippy, yeah? And you claimed that Mum said on her death bed: "Send Rodney for the fish!"
Del: Yeah well, I'd had a few, hadn't I?

Now I can only speak for myself with this codex, which is why I adore a certain immunity to a great deal of the fingers you point. I got into Chaos Space Marines with the Index Astartes article from 3.5. I loved, adored, worshipped the idea of space marines fighting with asymmetrical warfare. Sabotage, infiltration, misdirection, psychological warfare, betrayal. Here was a Chaos Space Marine army that didn't run at you like the dipstick Black Legion in the Space Marine movie (which had not been released at the time).

Then I became a power gaming scumbag. I invented something I called Yellow Squadron. If you've played Ace Combat 04 you'll know why. 5 Chosen with Infiltrate, Daemonic Strength, Daemonic Mutation, Melta Bombs, Infiltrate, Furious Charge, Power Swords, Master Crafted, Spikey Bits, Daemonic Flight (jump packs). There might have been other things on there, but it was a 5 man unit doing 25 attacks on the charge, rolling 10 misses, wounding on 2s against basic marines, who could deploy in charge range. It was awesome. Combined with 50 marines doing infiltrate, I won every deployment. I tore my gaming club apart.

Took me about 4-5 months to realise it was obscene, broken, and crap. So when I yearn for the days of 3.5, its because I know I've got the brains to avoid the sickening crap of power gaming. I quickly ditched my Alphas for Alphas supporting Lost and the Damned, and had an army of rickerty Leman Russes, shambling mutants, and leadership values so low, Empire Core choices looked like Necron phalanxes. SPLAT. It was awwwwesome :D I lost 9 out of 10 games and didn't care. As the Leadership 6 traitors still had infiltrate, I felt it fitted nicely with my Alphas. I'd still break my Alpha Legion out from time to time, but toned down. No obscene daemon prince, no yellow squadron, no 100% army infiltration. Was good "fun" :)

Then along came the Last of Submission, a vile vile power. I never bought it. I never bought 2 Daemon Princes with the Lash of Submission either (though someone else in our gaming group took 1 lash DP + 1 lash sorceress) for his Emperor's Children. In response to this one single power, I took Inquisitor Shego Iblis for my Imperial Guard with Null Rod, just to combat this filthy psychic power. My Imperial Guard army was my latest project which was now used to represent my traitor guard, because LATD was not compatible with the latest Codex CSM, a dire book of bland vanilla. I left Codex Chaos Renegades (that's what it was) because I didn't want to suck Huron Blackheart's meat and two veg, and felt Alpha Legion, Night Lord, Iron Warrior, Black Legion, and Word Bearer players were dumped on. It was one of the most uninspired things I've ever read. When Space Marines were getting build your own chapter rules, and Imperial Guard got build your own regiment doctrines, Chaos Space Marines took 2 steps backward. Did they need a nerf? Hell yes. Did they need to become My Little Huron: Bland is Magic? I'd say nadda.

But we'd had a taste of the Legions. We'd had a taste of Daemons. Then they went and split it into two codices, one dire and one meh. I opted for Imperial Guard traitors, without the Chimera rush. We were pure foot slogging, and died in droves as traitors should. My Inquisitor also went on to start her own storm trooper force, equally dire, that were a black ops unit. When Grey Knights came out, I didn't use this as an excuse to collect the most broken army of 5th. I simply stopped playing and waited for GW to fix the issue. I'm still waiting.

My point there is at a very early age I realised after making a cheesy unit in a cheesy dex, I am about 95% FAAC. So when I say I hate the Chaos Space Marine book, I say I hate it for being in my interpretation, an uninspired means to generically paint Chaos into the vision of some stupid generic saturday morning villains. If you like Heldrakes, Nurgle, and Emperor's Children you're quids in.

When this book came out I saw forced challenges as ridiculous, exploding into a daemon prince as an excuse to screw us out of more money, the lack of undivided daemon princes as a middle finger to chaos undivided, the lack of Legion rules as a firm reminder we will always be in the shadow of the loyalists - which was confirmed MASSIVELY with the new SM codex. I saw the Heldrake as a desperate push to get us to buy new flyers and join the Fabulous Flying Machines edition, which would soon become obsolete with the fortification rules. Ahriman doesn't have divination, Berserkers are pathetically nerfed, cultists are an uninspired footprint left from yet another unbalanced starter set, our transport is woeful, our relics were laughable compared to the SM, Warp Talons were a comedic screw up, and on and on and on.... so many things I hate about this book. It's not because I want gargantuan steps in power. There's a reason I don't collect Tau/dar. There's a reason I instead 4-5 months ago bought a Sisters of Battle army for 500 (as hobojebus and warlord bob can confirm).

What I find most interesting thought is your desire to see the worst in the Chaos Space Marine player base. Any criticism is a hunger for obscene power, a whine, or an insult to the apologist camp, rather than stress and despair at a continued slump in quality and understanding. Can you please everyone? Nope. But your vision seems to be in not trying to please anyone, but to make everyone accept mediocre as the new peak.

You seem so set against Legion rules, but *points at Space Marine Codex* there they are. They're not overpowered. That could easily be converted to CSM. Would some be better than others? Sure. Would some try to jump chapter to get that edge? Hell yes. But it doesn't speak for all of us, Icedcrow. I would be thankful for GW showing some competence and interest, rather than trying to bleed me dry with 30 supplements that do not address problems, but simply shuffle the furniture.

-EDIT- I'm working 12 hour shifts for the next 2 days so forgive me if I'm not around to batter your argument as I usually do.

Slayer-Fan123
26-03-2014, 18:44
Correct. So take the options and use the tactics that suit your theme if you want to be fluffy.

You can make fluffy lists with the codex, though it would be great for supplements or whatnot to be added that widen the range of fluffy lists that can be made.
Except you get no bonuses for choosing to play that list. If you wanted to do Jump Pack Assault stuff, you got two Loyalist options to make it less bad (Blood Angels and Raven Guard, and make it three if you use FW for Fire Hawks). If I wanted to do something similar in the CSM book, I couldn't without getting massacred because of my lack of using Plague Marines, which is literally one of two good troop choices, with the other not actually being good at all and only is used because they're 50 points to begin with. Any number of supplements will not change what's good and what's not. Possessed Still aren't good and I simply see it as my Plague Marines and Cultists gaining Fear for free.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 18:46
You remind me of Del Boy from Only Fools and Horses, Icedcrow. Whatever the situation, you owned it, saw it, fought it, or married it. Your house must be Warehouse 13 with sprues.


Awww really? I've been playing the game since 97. You think it outside of the realm of possibility that I don't own the handful of IA books that came out?

I have two full book cases full of GW books and rulebooks dating back from 3rd edition on, and as a tournament palyer at the time I owned every army book and supplement that was released up until the end of 4th ed when I quit. Chapter approved and Index Astartes were used in my area quite a bit, so I made it a point to own them. I also own most of the art books released, the liber chaotica that was released volume by volume that detailed all of the factions, and a ton of their narrative books that they released under various publishing names.

I own full armies for: Thousand Sons, Death Guard, Fallen Dark Angels, Nurgle Chaos Demons, Necrons, Imperial Guard, and Eldar. When I say full armies I mean at the minimum 3000 points and my chaos army sits at around 15,000 points. I have an entire wing of my house that is full of industrial shelving that holds all of my models and terrain, as well as the two full five shelf book cases full of material. That's roughly 16 years of GW models and books and terrain.

The things I discuss that you are claiming I am lying about are things that I have invested a ton of time and money and interest in. When it comes to chaos - I have three full massive armies and have been playing it since the 3.0 codex. When it comes to me chiming in on chaos, typically that is: chaos 3.5, thousand sons are horrible, and we need legion traits or we will froth with rage until we get them because we are unplayable right now arguments.

I realize trying to call me out as a liar (that is what I insinuate anyway from your post, if I'm wrong I apologize) may try to make your point stronger, but you are so far off point that you're in a different zip code. :)

However yes people have called my house a warehouse of GW because - it is a warehouse full of GW. I have two full giant shelves full of unopened boxes, some dating to the 90s that I never got around to using. The knight i painted that is in the painting thread used bits from both the metal demon prince and plastic demon prince kits that I had bought when tehy both first came out (the metal one being over 10 years old) that had sat unopened. They sit next to two unopened boxes of thousand sons (the metal box that was released around 2000 or so) and death guard that I need to get around to putting together.

I have enough bits and sprues and unopened boxes to probably create another two or three smaller armies sitting around.


You seem so set against Legion rules, but *points at Space Marine Codex* there they are.

Not at all. I'm dead set against OP legion rules that people want to make their armies OP so they can go compete against OP min/max lists. I don't want the game going further in that direction, I don't care that there is already OP stuff, I will always be on the side that wants restraint.

Chaos dex 3.5 was a powergamer's wet dream made physical.

ObiWayneKenobi
26-03-2014, 18:57
Except you get no bonuses for choosing to play that list. If you wanted to do Jump Pack Assault stuff, you got two Loyalist options to make it less bad (Blood Angels and Raven Guard, and make it three if you use FW for Fire Hawks). If I wanted to do something similar in the CSM book, I couldn't without getting massacred because of my lack of using Plague Marines, which is literally one of two good troop choices, with the other not actually being good at all and only is used because they're 50 points to begin with. Any number of supplements will not change what's good and what's not. Possessed Still aren't good and I simply see it as my Plague Marines and Cultists gaining Fear for free.

And that's my major issue; I am a fluffy Chaos player who wants to win at least some of my games, but I don't want to go WAAC. I don't like Plague Marines, and I don't want to field a Nurgle army. I want to make a fluffy Crimson Slaughter army because I love their fluff - to me that means a solid core of Chaos Marines, backed up with more traditional style of units as they are a recently turned renegade chapter - Havocs, Raptors, Rhinos and Predators, some Possessed maybe; a Forgefiend because I think the model looks totally awesome. I don't want to feel like I'm going to lose just because I looked at the list and want to play what I think is cool and thematic versus "Take Plague Marines and 3x Heldrakes". I want to be able to take an Undivided army and not have it suck because it's not everything with Mark of Nurgle.

I don't want a return to the OPness of 3.5 but I think a lot of the 3.5 things could be brought back to bring Chaos back up to snuff. I find it a bit ironic that every time we've had a Chaos player write the codex (as with Andy Chambers in 2nd and Pete Haines in 3.5) the army has been decent at worst and OP at best, and every time it's been someone who isn't a Chaos player (3.0 written by Jervis, 6.0) Chaos falls behind. Our current codex is a throwback to 3.0, which itself was lackluster and uninspired.

Inquisitor Shego
26-03-2014, 19:02
I have two full book cases full of GW books and rulebooks dating back from 3rd edition on, and as a tournament palyer at the time I owned every army book and supplement that was re
I realize trying to call me out as a liar (that is what I insinuate anyway from your post, if I'm wrong I apologize) may try to make your point stronger, but you are so far off point that you're in a different zip code. :)

It's okay Icedcrow, I accept your apology, because I'm not a man too proud to overlook the good graces of someone admitting they're wrong. If anything, I think slightly more of you now.


Not at all. I'm dead set against OP legion rules that people want to make their armies OP so they can go compete against OP min/max lists. I don't want the game going further in that direction, I don't care that there is already OP stuff, I will always be on the side that wants restraint.

Chaos dex 3.5 was a powergamer's wet dream made physical.

It totally was, but I argue it can be brought back without descending into the sheer insanity of its unbalanced nature. The thing was also a fluffy player's wet dream. The question it comes down to is is the individual happy with the current dex? For me, no. I am chomping at the bit to get back into CSM and put aside my Daemons, but out of protest I cannot spend my money because I fear I am sending GW a message that they are moving in the right direction. Some players want a more competitive army. They are just as entitled to ask for it as the fluff players wanting a more rich feel and theme for their army that "RAWWWR" and "I turn into a spawn: your argument is invalid".

Do I think the Chaos Space Marine book is competitive? On a casual level, probably, but I put it below Space Marines, Eldar, Tau. About on par maybe with Nids and Dark Angels? Do I think this does the Index Astartes books you own any justice? Not at all. This from someone who got into 3.5 because of an Index Astartes article.

Scribe of Khorne
26-03-2014, 19:17
Must of been an interesting tourney. In the last two I've been to, C:SM devours tides like it's their job- which a lot of Taudar lists rely too heavily upon.

....


This, right here, is a perfect example of the unrealistic expectations of what many Chaos players will 'expect' from their tactics.



Yeah, I dont know specifically what the list's where, but their paper must have found a scissors. Beaststar won, with Necrons, Daemons, and a few Eldar filling out the top 10.

---

I agree, thats a bit much to expect. I'd be happy for army wide Night Vision, something on the level of Crimson Slaughter at a minimum, up to the average level of what traits we saw with Space Marines, I dont even need/desire for them to be the 'best' ones like Iron Hands, or White Scars, or whatever. Just something.

Bugaboo
26-03-2014, 19:21
Emperor's Children: Already competitive due to Noise Marine spam and decent init for most units. But since you want two special rules to represent your legion, so as to not make them the same as say Flawless Host, Violators, etc (even though the LTs will mean those renegades will use these rules anyway...), I guess you get, hmmm, well, the ability to take noise weapons for certain units that can't already take them, and a beefed up siren type thingy for vehicles. Because that's their thing, I guess.

Iron Warriors Well, you can already spam Vindicators and Obliterators. No, but you want tactics, that's fine. Okay, so you get the same tactics as the IF, since they're your rivals. Bet you're still going to be slapping that mark of Nurgle on your Oblits whether it's fluffy or not, because they're "not good enough at T4".

Night Lords: Hmmm, okay, so every unit gets fear, but because the meta is mostly space marines, that's totally useless, yo!. Well, okay, then I guess you can have Night Vision as well to make up for it. What's that? Only useful in scenarios where night fighting is used? Well, you wanted legion tactics. Why should you have more benefits than the chapters? So, I guess that makes NLs... non-competitive!

World Eaters: Right, well, chapter tactics don't add new units, so your delivery systems still suck. One of the biggest complaint about assault-centric lists. But we need tactics, apparently, so guess you're getting two traits to represent your legion. So you get the Rampage rule (which I have yet to see on anything, and will slow most games up to the point it's just silly on account of the extra math) and likely something which upgrades the chain axes of anyone from this legion to Rending. Good luck getting to a place you can use them.

Death Guard: Plague Knives for those who can't normally take them, likely characters, and free Daemonic Possession on all your vehicles.

Thousand Sons: I will try very hard not to laugh while I write this... okay, so... your chosen and possessed get the Brotherhood of Sorcerers rule, and your rubricae can be upgraded to terminators with the standard terminator gear and the standard terminator gear only, aside from the sorcerer leading the unit. This will be expensive. This will make people moan.

Word Bearers: You gain the crusader and your chaos Lord has the same special rules and starting equipment as a Dark Apostle. What? You wanted something fluffy, didn't you?

Alpha Legion: Outflank and units of Cultists gain infiltrate. Now they can be closer to the enemy when they die in droves.

Still want Legion Tactics?

I originally wrote the above off the top of my head while trying to keep things in line with the SM Chapter Tactics, but I never did seriously ask, would the above make CSM more fluffy like people are asking for? And would it suffice as a decent gaming representation of the different legions and their MOs?

ObiWayneKenobi
26-03-2014, 19:28
I originally wrote the above off the top of my head while trying to keep things in line with the SM Chapter Tactics, but I never did seriously ask, would the above make CSM more fluffy like people are asking for? And would it suffice as a decent gaming representation of the different legions and their MOs?

Personally yes, but I think overall some rules just need to be redone (see: Helbrutes) to have actual balance. Those do seem fairly fluffy, but nothing can get around things like wanting MoN on Obliterators, as unfluffy as that is IMO (especially for Iron Warriors)

Inquisitor Shego
26-03-2014, 19:39
I originally wrote the above off the top of my head while trying to keep things in line with the SM Chapter Tactics, but I never did seriously ask, would the above make CSM more fluffy like people are asking for? And would it suffice as a decent gaming representation of the different legions and their MOs?

Black Legion: Chosen as troop + can take all four cult legions as troop
Alpha Legion: D3 units can infiltrate + satchel charge in cultist units
Night Lords: Army wide fear + Night Vision. Trophy rack wargear for -1 Ld to enemies within 6
Iron Warriors: Tank Hunter on Havocs and/or 2 fortification slots? Obliterators can use the same weapon twice in a row.
Word Bearers: Stubborn + Can always regroup. Apostles are 5 to a single HQ slot. No more than 5 per detatchment.
World Eaters: Assault Launchers on Rhinos + Land Raiders and Chain Axes do rend.
Thousand Sons: I would love to see something like the Necrons with Reanimation Protocols. The idea of a suit being blown to pieces and swimming through the air, floating and reconnecting would be epic. Divination on Sorcerers too.
Death Guard: All close combat weapons have Poison 5+ cept on actual Death Guard where it's 4+. Usual rules apply for how durable they are.
Emperor's Children: Not sure to be honest. If playing in a store, store manager must consent to playing Brian May over the speakers?

This is just a rough idea mind you. When making a dex you don't slam some stuff together on the spot. You play test, and play test, and play test some more. Also, this does not include other things in the dex that needs fixing. For example I feel Apostles need a tweek.

=Angel=
26-03-2014, 19:42
I own full armies for: Thousand Sons, Death Guard, Fallen Dark Angels, Nurgle Chaos Demons, Necrons, Imperial Guard, and Eldar.
{snip}

Not at all. I'm dead set against OP legion rules that people want to make their armies OP so they can go compete against OP min/max lists. I don't want the game going further in that direction, I don't care that there is already OP stuff, I will always be on the side that wants restraint.

Chaos dex 3.5 was a powergamer's wet dream made physical.

I'd argue that it was also a fluff gamer's wet dream.

What do you think of the Thousand Sons from 3rd ed rulebook to present?
The first 3rd ed codex ones were a bit overcosted, but they could hang back- they weren't forced to close with the enemy.
Their sorcerers had one power- flames of tzeentch- a lascannon you fired in the movement phase.
I signed up at that stage because I wanted psychic powers all over the place.
The Index Astartes article was just Icing, my big bird didnt have to kill my expensive sorcerers.

come 3.5, the thousand sons got more variety in psychic power but were now forced to get their numerically inferior squads closer to the enemy to do damage. Rubric terminators made the army a bit more interesting and daemons gave it a bit more dakka. Defilers with indirect battlecannons forced the enemy to close with you.

How I remember 3.5 from the Imperial side is the variety in what I faced. I played with a guy who gave his chosen the mark of khorne and every upgrade under the sun. They had loads of attacks on the charge, higher inititiative, higher strength.... 5 models.

I rolled up my mk1 rhino full of templars with bolters. A fortuitous rapidfiring later and they were all removed before they could charge. Next game they would be something else, maybe possessed.

Fighting 3.5 was all about killing deathstars in landraiders and self repairing dreadnoughts with armour 13. The codex was great because they felt like the archenemy and your lord could be this powerful monster saturated with unnatural energies and mutations.

IcedCrow
26-03-2014, 20:00
The trick is making it narratively accurate without making it grossly over powered, which is why 3.5 failed. Yes from a narrative standpoint it was great... however that was ruined by powergaming it (and I was one of those powergaming with it... IRON WITHIN IRON WITHOUT lol)

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 20:19
3.5 was not a fluffy wet dream, as it made no differentiation between marks and cult units. You want to have a Khornate army? Congrats, the whole thing is Berzerkers now. Oh, and you can't use jump troops. Combined together with the obvious power lists, and you were pretty well straightjacketed beyond how much you customized your HQ's and maybe Elites. At least now I can have some variety in my unit composition and the level of devotion/corruption they have. My Possessed I have are, story wise, failed experiments by Sorcerers trying to make a better Rubric.

Inquisitor Shego
26-03-2014, 20:25
The trick is making it narratively accurate without making it grossly over powered, which is why 3.5 failed. Yes from a narrative standpoint it was great... however that was ruined by powergaming it (and I was one of those powergaming with it... IRON WITHIN IRON WITHOUT lol)

Likewise, For Alpharius!! It is quite a trick. Ironically as well, I feel Chaos should be the losers. I hated Storm of Iron for how Chaos won. It made Dead Sky Black Sun all the sweeter. Yet you need to be convincing antagonists, and the image I have of Chaos Space Marines roving around as small bands, welding together what bits they can, and being very generic doesn't pose well for these evil astartes who must be overcome.

It is a fine line, and a difficult line to walk, this balance of fluff and power. I just don't feel GW did it this time. I'm glad we're not as abusable as 3.5. I am sad we are not as fluffy.


3.5 was not a fluffy wet dream, as it made no differentiation between marks and cult units. You want to have a Khornate army? Congrats, the whole thing is Berzerkers now. Oh, and you can't use jump troops. Combined together with the obvious power lists, and you were pretty well straightjacketed beyond how much you customized your HQ's and maybe Elites. At least now I can have some variety in my unit composition and the level of devotion/corruption they have. My Possessed I have are, story wise, failed experiments by Sorcerers trying to make a better Rubric.

I never said it was perfect, just that I had to change my bed sheets. :p

One correction though. Shouldn't it be "you want to have a World Eaters army? Congrats, the whole thing is Berzerkers now"

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 20:29
One correction though. Shouldn't it be "you want to have a World Eaters army? Congrats, the whole thing is Berzerkers now"

Nope, because not every Khornate warband is World Eaters. Nor should a World Eaters warband be made up entirely of Berzerkers.

Inquisitor Shego
26-03-2014, 20:31
I mean in the codex. The bit at the back. For Alpha Legion, you were getting an Alpha Legion legion, that was the deal for you losing daemons. With the entry in the codex did it say "this is a Khorne section" or "World Eaters"? Also could you not still build a Khorne/World Eater list with the stuff in the main dex and the rich list of options? And the stuff at the back is just going balls deep?

EDIT

Work calls. Back in 18 hours

hobojebus
26-03-2014, 20:39
I hated Storm of Iron for how Chaos won.


I thought it was because of what my honsu did to your nurgle prince :P

ObiWayneKenobi
26-03-2014, 20:39
IIRC that was specifically for World Eaters, you could do a Khorne army without that.

In any event, the issue is that the current state of Chaos is neither very fluffy nor very evocative of what Chaos should be.

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 20:45
IIRC that was specifically for World Eaters, you could do a Khorne army without that.

I've got the book in my hand. The marks were governed by the stuff in the back of the book. If your Khornate Warband was made up of nothing but Khorne marked units, you could claim to be World Eaters and get free champions and it was easier to summon Daemons.

And the status of how effective the book is at representing Chaos is completely subjective.

Nkari
26-03-2014, 20:50
IIRC that was specifically for World Eaters, you could do a Khorne army without that.

In any event, the issue is that the current state of Chaos is neither very fluffy nor very evocative of what Chaos should be.

+1 Words for the word god.

Scribe of Khorne
26-03-2014, 21:26
The important thing here is not if it was a fluffy players dream. Not if it was a waac players dream, or a min/maxer.

The important thing here, was did it pay homage to the Legions and the Warbands based on them.

If it did it well or not is not the point. Did it at least do, what 3, 4, and 6 (pre-supplements) did not, by giving Legion players a way to on the table, say 'this is the X Legion, and its got these rules'.

Yes, yes it did.

Lord Damocles
26-03-2014, 21:35
...giving Legion players a way to on the table, say 'this is the X Legion, and its got these rules'.
I guess if I paint my Emperor's Children as Emperor's Children, take units which fit the background of Emperor's Children, and say 'these are my Emperor's Children'; without special rules, there's no way they could possibly actually be Emperor's Children.
...

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 21:36
Yeah, I am with Lord Damocles here. It seems so completely petty that you can't see yourself playing a certain faction because you don't get a special rule saying you do.

ObiWayneKenobi
26-03-2014, 22:32
Yeah, I am with Lord Damocles here. It seems so completely petty that you can't see yourself playing a certain faction because you don't get a special rule saying you do.

Then no offense but you don't get why it's an issue. It's not about just painting them in X color, it's about having them play like that on the tabletop, as opposed to playing like every other Chaos army regardless of color scheme (which also leads to stupidity like the Red Corsairs behaving the same as 10,000 year old traitor legion marines despite having turned to Chaos maybe 100 years ago). Hence the reason why Space Marines get 4 codexes minimum (3 in second edition, I believe 5 in 3rd edition if you count Armageddon, 6 if you count Eye of Terror, and that's not counting Grey Knights), and the reason why many Chaos players feel shafted since we get tossed one that has to fill multiple lists in one book when Chaos warbands would in actuality fight less alike than Ultramarines/Blood Angels/Dark Angels but more like the difference between Space Wolves and Ultramarines (i.e. a significant difference).

Bugaboo
26-03-2014, 22:37
How much more like the EC could the EC possibly get with these rules..? >.> Just curious.

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 22:51
Then no offense but you don't get why it's an issue. It's not about just painting them in X color, it's about having them play like that on the tabletop, as opposed to playing like every other Chaos army regardless of color scheme

So play them differently. You want to emphasize the fast attack tactics of the Night Lords? Put CSM in Rhinos, add some bikes and Raptors and support with tanks or a Heldrake.


(which also leads to stupidity like the Red Corsairs behaving the same as 10,000 year old traitor legion marines despite having turned to Chaos maybe 100 years ago).

Ugh, this one again? Traitor Legionairres aren't 10,000 years old. A Marine with 1000+ years experience is Dante. Chaos doesn't have, nor ever has (If I recall correctly) an army made up with Chapter Master equivalents for troops, not even in the fluff. With the rate they take casualties, the largest of the Legions should be reduced to less than company strength if they aren't constantly replenishing their losses with new troops.


Hence the reason why Space Marines get 4 codexes minimum (3 in second edition, I believe 5 in 3rd edition if you count Armageddon, 6 if you count Eye of Terror, and that's not counting Grey Knights), and the reason why many Chaos players feel shafted since we get tossed one that has to fill multiple lists in one book when Chaos warbands would in actuality fight less alike than Ultramarines/Blood Angels/Dark Angels but more like the difference between Space Wolves and Ultramarines (i.e. a significant difference).

Jealousy is a petty thing, as is the idea that you are entitled to something just because somebody else has it. Sure, it'd be nice to have Legion tactics, and it's beyond me why GW doesn't provide an FAQ with them. But pitching such a fit because you feel you are entitled is, in a word, petty.

Lord Damocles
26-03-2014, 23:02
Then no offense but you don't get why it's an issue
I'm sure no Ork (clans), Eldar (craftworlds), Dark Eldar (kabals), Necron (dynasties), Imperial Guard (regiments), Tyranid (hive fleets), or Sororitas (orders) palyers could possibly understand this gross misjustice meted out to Chaos Marines.

ObiWayneKenobi
26-03-2014, 23:03
I'm sure no Ork (clans), Eldar (craftworlds), Dark Eldar (kabals), Necron (dynasties), Imperial Guard (regiments), Tyranid (hive fleets), or Sororitas (orders) palyers could possibly understand this gross misjustice meted out to Chaos Marines.

How many of those besides Craftworlds had rules and then had them removed because the company doesn't know what they want out of the army?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Spare Change
26-03-2014, 23:08
You remind me of Del Boy from Only Fools and Horses, Icedcrow. Whatever the situation, you owned it, saw it, fought it, or married it. Your house must be Warehouse 13 with sprues.

I've stated this myself, haha.

He, a friend, or his club has proofread _____, play-tested _____, are veterans of _____, owns 10,000 points of _____, etc.



I guess if I paint my Emperor's Children as Emperor's Children, take units which fit the background of Emperor's Children, and say 'these are my Emperor's Children'; without special rules, there's no way they could possibly actually be Emperor's Children.
...

It's a tad more difficult when your 'mark' that you're advised to 'splash around' to make things fluffy, absolutely sucks in comparison to the others.

It's not about power-gaming; it's about not having to shoot yourself in the foot before every game to feel as if you're playing your beloved Legion of choice.

Voss
26-03-2014, 23:17
People have it in their heads that Khorne is the god of CC- . That's not true- skull cannons exist. People only think that because the berzerker surgeries turn the dedicated into pure rage fuelled gladiators, but thats just the surgery talking.
That isn't why. People believe that because of the pedestal people have stuck the 3.5 codex on, and its enshrinement of the 'One True Way' chaos powers, with their single-playstyle, single-legion garbage (fun fact, night lords were originally khornate). None of that was true before, and its absolute nonsense that it has continued forward, that people want more of it, and want it to be exclusively what chaos is. Khorne is a god of bloodshed, not bonus attacks. As long as blood flows and it isn't magic, it matters not how it gets spilled. Slaanesh isn't a god of initiative and murder guitars, and so on. Really, any fans of the Emperors Children should feel bitter that they were demoted to just noise marines way back in 3rd, not want a legion codex to give them more sonic.


How many of those besides Craftworlds had rules and then had them removed because the company doesn't know what they want out of the army?

Certainly orks and guard. Orks had separate lists for each clan as some of the earliest army lists for the game! Guard had and lost doctrines. Tyranids didn't have hive fleets, exactly, but had all sort of modifications they could inflict on their army and their opponent. It was a messy and easily broken system, but it was there.

Slayer-Fan123
26-03-2014, 23:19
The trick is making it narratively accurate without making it grossly over powered, which is why 3.5 failed. Yes from a narrative standpoint it was great... however that was ruined by powergaming it (and I was one of those powergaming with it... IRON WITHIN IRON WITHOUT lol)
You can claim that for any codex though. The main point is that, if you aren't taking Plague Marines or Cultists as troops, you lose. Is that really fair? At least with 3.5, based off what I've heard, if you wanted a specific theme you could make it work more because you got bonuses. That's why I think that the new Space Marine codex is the best written codex this edition. If you wanted to do literally any theme, you can make it happen and make it more efficient. As soon as this new CSM codex hit shelves, you're stuck with what I listed above: Cultists or Plague Marines. Any other troop sucks, and it's as simple as that. This then applies to all the other slots in the codex: Heldrakes, Terminators, Obliterators, and then that Nurgle Lord or a Daemon Prince. If you have points to spare, then you sometimes buy a Sorcerer. Hell, at least in the previous codex when you guys were playing 5th, you had more Troop choices that could work: Berzerker Marines, Plague Marines, and the Vanilla Marines.

We need to quit apologizing for the codex and call it out for what it is: a piece of crap. No amount of supplements will change what's good and what's not because internal balance is literally THAT bad. As I stated earlier: all the Crimson Slaughter supplement did was give my Plague Marines Fear at the cost of my Daemon Prince not having access to the Black Mace if I wanted it, and I could easily just ally with them for an extra 50 points of Cultists if need be.

Kingly
26-03-2014, 23:28
Cultists or Plague Marines. Any other troop sucks, and it's as simple as that.
We need to quit apologizing for the codex and call it out for what it is: a piece of crap. No amount of supplements will change what's good and what's not because internal balance is literally THAT bad. As I stated earlier: all the Crimson Slaughter supplement did was give my Plague Marines Fear at the cost of my Daemon Prince not having access to the Black Mace if I wanted it, and I could easily just ally with them for an extra 50 points of Cultists if need be.

if you're an uber competitive top ten player maybe, for the 99% of everyone else using Chaos we (I) have beaten plenty of people with Rhino clad Bezerkers, Raptors, Termies, Tacticals and Defilers.

I think you should probably take your little men less seriously...

=Angel=
26-03-2014, 23:34
I guess if I paint my Emperor's Children as Emperor's Children, take units which fit the background of Emperor's Children, and say 'these are my Emperor's Children'; without special rules, there's no way they could possibly actually be Emperor's Children.
...

Well no not really. They don't FEEL like Emperors Children to a player who had previously had legion rules. That sonic weapon on my drea-HELLBRUTE, that counts as a plasma cannon ok?
And my chaos lord likes drugs but now he's in a support group, as mandated by codex officials.

Check out this piece of background:

Upon the Daemon worlds of the eye of Terror, many Sorcerers
of that Legion still study magic at the feet of their Daemon
Primarch, Magnus the Red, and are justifiably considered the
most accomplished of all their kind.
Rule: Thousand sons sorcerers are the best- has no ingame effect. Enjoy the Tzeentch table though.

Inquisitor Shego
26-03-2014, 23:43
I'm sure no Ork (clans), Eldar (craftworlds), Dark Eldar (kabals), Necron (dynasties), Imperial Guard (regiments), Tyranid (hive fleets), or Sororitas (orders) palyers could possibly understand this gross misjustice meted out to Chaos Marines.

I compare it to a restaurant owned by GW. The Chaos players and the Space Marine players are sitting down eating, and they each pay for a steak. The Chaos Space Marine players get an 8oz siroloin steak for 10, the Space Marine players get a 16oz steak for 10. Yes they both have steak, but one got better than the other, and we're both in eyesight of each other. Would I go back there and eat again? Especially if the waiter says "ah but the other tables only got 6oz steaks".

Now you bring the Sororitas, the Tyranids, the Guard, the Necrons, the Dark Eldar, Orks and Eldar into it. Well you're spot on correct, they can't build different varieties yet. So I'd support their argument for a richer dex like loyalists got, ideally without having to shell out 30 a time for some crap relics, and the option to move your force organisation about. "Toilets are now in the kitchen" comes to mind with the possessed as troop for example.

Space Marines get: Raven Guard, White Scars, Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Iron Hands (plus suppliment), Salamanders, Ultramarines, Imperial Fists (+ suppliment), Space Wolves.

Chaos Space Marines get: Chaos Space Marines (plus Black Legion and Crimson Slaughter).

So now we go back to the deep south in the 1940s-60s. Chaos Space Marine players shouldn't be complaining about being on the back of the bus because they still get a bus ride? (Yes I know it's hyperbole). Also I wouldn't blame Tyranid players for wanting hive fleet specifics. I would understand Guard players wanting regimental changes. I would love to see Eldar craftworlds, and Ork Clans would be rocking. Dark Eldar and Sororitas I'm not so sure on, but only because Sisters are almost unheard of unless there's a force organisation chat where we can be on the end of Nemesis Force Halberds to prevent corruption. As much as I love my Dark Eldar, the entire fluff section was

"Archon Nuggetbrains decides to do something behind Vect's back, and it doesn't go so well. Vect says "Just as planned".

Goshawk
26-03-2014, 23:47
How many of those besides Craftworlds had rules and then had them removed because the company doesn't know what they want out of the army?

The Imperial Guard 4th edition codex had two full pages of USR giving doctrines that players got to choose up to five of. That codex was the epitome of army customization. It had everything you needed to make your army the way you wanted it and even gave famous regiments and their doctrines they use. They then took all that away from us leaving us with three "doctrines" our Veteran Squads could take that was a hollow shell of its former glory. What we have now is an affront to the Imperial Guard

Slayer-Fan123
26-03-2014, 23:49
if you're an uber competitive top ten player maybe, for the 99% of everyone else using Chaos we (I) have beaten plenty of people with Rhino clad Bezerkers, Raptors, Termies, Tacticals and Defilers.

I think you should probably take your little men less seriously...
Yeah yeah everyone has their own anecdotes about winning with bad units. That's not the point. You shoot yourself in the foot each time you don't use the units I mentioned. Tau doesn't have this problem, Necrons don't have this problem, Space Marines don't have this problem, but Chaos Space Marines DO have this problem.

Ssilmath
26-03-2014, 23:59
Yeah yeah everyone has their own anecdotes about winning with bad units. That's not the point. You shoot yourself in the foot each time you don't use the units I mentioned. Tau doesn't have this problem, Necrons don't have this problem, Space Marines don't have this problem, but Chaos Space Marines DO have this problem.

Yup, those Vespid themed, Flayed One themed and Vanguard Vet themed lists sure are tearing up the competitive scene.

=Angel=
27-03-2014, 00:03
Space Marines get: Raven Guard, White Scars, Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Dark Angels, Iron Hands (plus suppliment), Salamanders, Ultramarines, Imperial Fists (+ suppliment), Space Wolves.

Chaos Space Marines get: Chaos Space Marines (plus Black Legion and Crimson Slaughter).
For loyalists + Black Templars, Red Scorpions, Sphess Sharks, Raptors, Exorcists, Mantis warriors, Executioners, Angels Revenant, Red Hunters, Star Phantoms, Minotaurs, Fire hawks, Astral Claws.....
Remember, for a brief shining moment back in 3.5, Chaos had more variant army lists (in the form of in codex legion rules) than Loyalist marines! Now through chapter tactics the Marines have more lists than the rest of the game has armies.

But I'm sure that for complex and nuanced reasons 23 chapters can get tactics (and supplements!) but it would break the game for chaos to get 9 legions.


Also I wouldn't blame Tyranid players for wanting hive fleet specifics. I would understand Guard players wanting regimental changes. I would love to see Eldar craftworlds, and Ork Clans would be rocking. Dark Eldar and Sororitas I'm not so sure on, but only because Sisters are almost unheard of unless there's a force organisation chat where we can be on the end of Nemesis Force Halberds to prevent corruption. As much as I love my Dark Eldar, the entire fluff section was

"Archon Nuggetbrains decides to do something behind Vect's back, and it doesn't go so well. Vect says "Just as planned".

I'd prefer minor hivefleet differences to individual biomorphs. This unit has X today!
Every other army has established regiments or factions that could benefit from background, if not rules.
I don't know my martyred rose from my crimson lady if you take my meaning.

Morrslieb
27-03-2014, 00:15
Time to stick my ladle in the mix...

1) Warband traits: Something meagre yet benefical like Tank hunting Havocs, Stubborn on 3" from objective armywide rule and lord gaining access to Mechatendrils for already much discussed Iron Warriors. Universal fear rule, scoring raptors and free jump pack for lord in Night Lords etc...
2) Tiers for marks much like locusts in Daemons codex but cumulative, price goes up with tier naturally, Something like:
Khorne: Rage & Furious Charge (minor) -> Rage, Furious Charge and reroll to wound (cult) -> Rage, Furious Charge, reroll to wound and Instant Death (exalted).
Nurgle; +1 toughness (minor) -> +1 toughness and FnP (cult) -> +1 toughness, FnP and Shrouded (?) (exalted)
Slaanesh: +1 initiative, acute senses (minor) -> +1 initiative, acute senses and counter-attack (cult) -> +1 initiative, acute senses, counter-attack and shred (exalted)
Tzeentch: +1 inv. save (minor)-> +1 inv. save, reroll failed saves of 1's (cult) -> +1 inv.save, reroll failed saves of 1's and gain extra psychic level (exalted).
Exalted marks HQ only.
3) Unaligned marks and DPs back

Scribe of Khorne
27-03-2014, 00:17
I'm sure no Ork (clans), Eldar (craftworlds), Dark Eldar (kabals), Necron (dynasties), Imperial Guard (regiments), Tyranid (hive fleets), or Sororitas (orders) palyers could possibly understand this gross misjustice meted out to Chaos Marines.

Frankly its a difference of scale, and placement in the setting, but I believe they should (like Eldar did lol) get sub faction attention.


I guess if I paint my Emperor's Children as Emperor's Children, take units which fit the background of Emperor's Children, and say 'these are my Emperor's Children'; without special rules, there's no way they could possibly actually be Emperor's Children.
...

Nope, no difference at all actually from a Slaanesh themed list, that has no bearing whatsoever (potentially) on being EC.

If you dont see or care for the difference thats fine, but it doesnt mean there isnt one.

Slayer-Fan123
27-03-2014, 02:21
Yup, those Vespid themed, Flayed One themed and Vanguard Vet themed lists sure are tearing up the competitive scene.
At least those Vanguard Veterans are scoring under Fire Hawks tactics, and with Jump Packs become more usable under the three Chapters I named. You can't do that with Raptors or Warp Talons, which are laughably bad.
Vespid are cheaper MEQ killers than Rubric Marines if you actually needed that niche to be fulfilled, and that isn't entirely a theme itself anyway as a force compared to Rubrics too. At least you could throw them in the force and not entirely kill yourself unlike The Rubrics.
Flayed Ones actually have practical purposes as a tarpit/speed bump that you can deploy in many different ways, and they get better under the FW Dynasty where you can give them Flensing Scarabs and they become scoring for free. You don't get that with your cultists outside that cheap base cost, which is literally the only reason they're used.

hobojebus
27-03-2014, 02:37
Frankly I'm tired of the only thing making my marines iron warriors being the paint job, they are not the bastard warriors of warsmith honsu they are just guys in unpainted power armour.

Nothing reflects their bitterness and melancholy, nothing shows their hate for the imperial fists and their successor chapters, nothing prevents me handing out mutations even though real IW will chop off a mutation and get bionics, the only word you can attach to them is generic.

Gig
27-03-2014, 02:48
At least those Vanguard Veterans are scoring under Fire Hawks tactics, and with Jump Packs become more usable under the three Chapters I named. You can't do that with Raptors or Warp Talons, which are laughably bad.Raptors are perfectly fine there biggest negative is there inferior to Chaos Bikers, they are hardly “Laughably Bad” I'm not saying there exceptional or even good there an average unit you won't lose a game just because you took a unit or 2 of them.


Vespid are cheaper MEQ killers than Rubric Marines if you actually needed that niche to be fulfilled, and that isn't entirely a theme itself anyway as a force compared to Rubrics too. At least you could throw them in the force and not entirely kill yourself unlike The Rubrics. Rubric Marines are scoring if you have a Sorcerer with mark of tzeentch or Ahriman leading your army Vespid from what I know are never scoring. You can counter act this argument if you want but it is identical to one you used to justify Vangaurd Vets as being better than Raptors.

Nkari
27-03-2014, 02:53
indeed, it feels allmost like if you where an adopted child in a childless family, and suddenly that family gets a son, into wich they pour all their love, money and attention, and their adopted child gets the left overs from the real son, and the parents telling the adpoted child.. be happy you get anything at all, we love you to.. promise.. and then proceedes to buy the real son the newest Iphone while handing over the used iphone with a cracked screen to you.

Nkari
27-03-2014, 02:54
Raptors are perfectly fine there biggest negative is there inferior to Chaos Bikers, they are hardly “Laughably Bad” I'm not saying there exceptional or even good there an average unit you won't lose a game just because you took a unit or 2 of them.

Rubric Marines are scoring if you have a Sorcerer with mark of tzeentch or Ahriman leading your army Vespid from what I know are never scoring. You can counter act this argument if you want but it is identical to one you used to justify Vangaurd Vets as being better than Raptors.


There are no fluff telling us that the tau use the vespid in any other way than support units. They do NOT use vespid as their main fighting force, so why should they get special treatment ?

It would be like if I asked you why dont you give rules for a main army that consists of gyrocopters or rough riders, or any other random unit that is not in the troop slot.. it has no bearing cause there is no fluff to support that those units should be diffrent than any other units..

But hey since you guys are satisfied with blandness.. lets remove all the codexes for SM and all the chapter tactics, strip out all the unique units from the codexes and then make one SM book using the ultras Chapter tactics..
then release 2 supplements that makes you shuffle around one elite choise that noone uses, and another elite choice that is to expensive for what it does into troops, oh.. and you have to pay extra for that to happen.

Tell me you would be satisfied with that if Space wolves or blood angels where your main army.
Because THAT is the situation for chaos at the moment.

Kakapo42
27-03-2014, 02:59
There are no fluff telling us that the tau use the vespid in any other way than support units. They do NOT use vespid as their main fighting force, so why should they get special treatment ?

I was always under the impression that Rapters weren't used as the main fighting force either, but rather as shock troops to spearhead the main fighting force.

Gig
27-03-2014, 03:04
There are no fluff telling us that the tau use the vespid in any other way than support units. They do NOT use vespid as their main fighting force, so why should they get special treatment

I don't care if Vespid get special treatment or not I'm merely pointing out that Rubics can score, an argument he used to claim that Vanguard Veterans are better than Raptors.

Goshawk
27-03-2014, 04:00
I was always under the impression that Rapters weren't used as the main fighting force either, but rather as shock troops to spearhead the main fighting force.

The idea behind Raptors is that the squads are kind of like their own little warbands, and they ally themselves with a Lord. Not necessarily submitting themselves wholey to the authority of the Lord but almost like mercenaries. Of course there is nothing saying you can't have a Raptor themed army but they aren't generally their own main fighting force.

Slayer-Fan123
27-03-2014, 04:47
Raptors are perfectly fine there biggest negative is there inferior to Chaos Bikers, they are hardly “Laughably Bad” I'm not saying there exceptional or even good there an average unit you won't lose a game just because you took a unit or 2 of them.

Rubric Marines are scoring if you have a Sorcerer with mark of tzeentch or Ahriman leading your army Vespid from what I know are never scoring. You can counter act this argument if you want but it is identical to one you used to justify Vangaurd Vets as being better than Raptors.
Sorry if I didn't word that properly.
Warp Talons are laughably bad, and Raptors are ridiculously mediocre and you might as well not take them because Bikers exist.

I already covered Vespid and how they aren't actually a fighting force themselves, but you kinda seemed to ignore that. At least they don't shoot you in the foot when you run them in your Tau force, unlike with Rubrics where you put yourself in a losing position by simply taking them. Remember that scoring is a bonus, and it's what makes Vanguard in those specific conditions I named just a little better, along with the +1 S for the HoW. It's the little things that add up.

Challenge Accepted
27-03-2014, 05:53
I guess if I paint my Emperor's Children as Emperor's Children, take units which fit the background of Emperor's Children, and say 'these are my Emperor's Children'; without special rules, there's no way they could possibly actually be Emperor's Children.
...


Yeah, I am with Lord Damocles here. It seems so completely petty that you can't see yourself playing a certain faction because you don't get a special rule saying you do.

Who are either of you gentlemen to bag on their hobby, and claim that you - and you alone - are able to define what a "Chaos" army is? If some people need that little fluff blurb to tie everything together, and add that little bit of .. whatever .. to their gaming experience, well, then who are you to toss snide comments at them for requesting it? Loyalists have tactics; why not Chaos as well?

The only thing genuinely petty here is the predisposed nature of nerd elitists, who need to belittle those who oppose their talking-point in a discussion over rules applicable to toys. Jesus Christo.

Baaltor
27-03-2014, 07:26
Sorry if I didn't word that properly.
...Raptors are ridiculously mediocre and you might as well not take them because Bikers exist.

This is pretty much it. For a scant few more points you get SOOOO many benefits. The thing is raptors are based off of the cruddy CSM pricetag, which is laughably bad because they're worse across the board than the similarly priced Tact. squad, which itself is rather meh.

Bugaboo
27-03-2014, 09:25
These sort of arguments are why I am a modeler first and a gamer second. I frankly couldn't give a crap how much better than bikers are than raptors. If I can find a nice looking, readily accessible model to fill out my fast attack slots, I'd sooner buy those than bikes which require finecast mailorder only parts to be made into "competitive" options. I could just slap plastic special weapons on the hands of the riders, but oh noes, I lose an attack, that means I'm not a tactical genius. :rolleyes:

Harwammer
27-03-2014, 09:29
How much more like the EC could the EC possibly get with these rules..? >.> Just curious.

Each turn they take a Leadership test. If they fail they get bored and leave the battle.

Darnok
27-03-2014, 09:37
These sort of arguments are why I am a modeler first and a gamer second. I frankly couldn't give a crap how much better than bikers are than raptors. If I can find a nice looking, readily accessible model to fill out my fast attack slots, I'd sooner buy those than bikes which require finecast mailorder only parts to be made into "competitive" options. I could just slap plastic special weapons on the hands of the riders, but oh noes, I lose an attack, that means I'm not a tactical genius. :rolleyes:

The CSM special weapons are plastic, thus easy to cut and glue. I really see no reason to buy the FC parts - converting your own is extremely easy.

Bugaboo
27-03-2014, 10:08
The CSM special weapons are plastic, thus easy to cut and glue. I really see no reason to buy the FC parts - converting your own is extremely easy.

I might give it a try, but I guess I fear fudging it and wasting a model.

Darnok
27-03-2014, 10:35
I might give it a try, but I guess I fear fudging it and wasting a model.

Since the bolters are seperate parts, which you'd replace with a special weapon cut to fit, you'd at most ruin a single special weapon (in case it doesn't work you still have a perfectly fine bike with bolters). I think that's worth a try.

And now enough of this off topic chatter. :shifty:

Bugaboo
27-03-2014, 11:24
Since the bolters are seperate parts, which you'd replace with a special weapon cut to fit, you'd at most ruin a single special weapon (in case it doesn't work you still have a perfectly fine bike with bolters). I think that's worth a try.

And now enough of this off topic chatter. :shifty:

But the topic was how good the Chaos Codex is, isn't it? Wouldn't that make 80% of the posts on here off topic? ;p

A note on Raptors, though, I am not really sure what people are asking for. Across the editions they've been in, they've never really been anything more than the terror troops equivalent of Assault Marines. I am not really sure what people want for them to be better than "mediocre". They do what they do fluffwise, and asking for more is kinda redundant. Yup. Bikes are better. Doesn't take a genius. But really, Raptors are only an insult if one is playing purely to win. If you're playing because you want an army that looks good, or at the very least has units that do what they are supposed to do, Raptors do just fine. The issue people are probably having is that the thing that sets them apart from say the Assault Marines is "useless" in most metas where Fearless or ATSKnF is in abundance. I will say, the fact they made IG mostly Fearless is rather irksome, though that's hardly an always on issue. And I'm sure there are other armies out there where Fearless isn't too abundant, but I don' buy every army book, so I don't know for sure.

wanderingblade
27-03-2014, 11:42
I compare it to a restaurant owned by GW. The Chaos players and the Space Marine players are sitting down eating, and they each pay for a steak. The Chaos Space Marine players get an 8oz siroloin steak for 10, the Space Marine players get a 16oz steak for 10. Yes they both have steak, but one got better than the other, and we're both in eyesight of each other. Would I go back there and eat again? Especially if the waiter says "ah but the other tables only got 6oz steaks".


As long as Chaos - or any other faction - compare their options with Space Marines and demand parity, they will be unhappy. That has been true for large amounts of 40k history. Obviously you appear to disagree but I don't see the point of the complaint in such terms. Space Marines have usually got more, they pretty much always will and that's the way it is because they are cash cow number one and that is what matters.

Gods knows there's enough to complain about as is really - not least the fact that a large proportion of people who use or wish to use the codex don't like it. That's probably the major sign of a bad codex to me. I tried to like it. I couldn't. I can live without the Legions being fully defined and without the super-veterans of 10,000 years (that, realistically, should be pretty much all dead by now). I can live with the slightly wonky differentiation of CSM and loyalist SM, the fact that it's not a top tier army by any stretch of the imagination. I can live with the numerous overcosted units, just, and the fact that Marks are generally a bad idea (although patience is getting stretched...) but the fact that most of the best and interesting ways to play CSM involved as few Marines as possible, well...

Its a bad codex and I don't see how the argument continues. Also, I decided to buy some Daemons to satisfy my Chaos-worshipping impulses.

skorczeny
27-03-2014, 12:15
Frankly I'm tired of the only thing making my marines iron warriors being the paint job, they are not the bastard warriors of warsmith honsu they are just guys in unpainted power armour.

Nothing reflects their bitterness and melancholy, nothing shows their hate for the imperial fists and their successor chapters, nothing prevents me handing out mutations even though real IW will chop off a mutation and get bionics, the only word you can attach to them is generic.

Up until Codex: Space Marines was released, I would have disagreed with your sentiment 100%. But now Ultramarines and Crimson Fists and Salamanders and White Scars and Raven Guard all have different army wide rules. It is disheartening that they went to such a degree of detail to differentiate the Space Marine Chapters, but did nothing like that for Chaos Space Marines.

But at least we have supplements to look forward to?

hobojebus
27-03-2014, 13:12
Up until Codex: Space Marines was released, I would have disagreed with your sentiment 100%. But now Ultramarines and Crimson Fists and Salamanders and White Scars and Raven Guard all have different army wide rules. It is disheartening that they went to such a degree of detail to differentiate the Space Marine Chapters, but did nothing like that for Chaos Space Marines.

But at least we have supplements to look forward to?

Do we? So far only the black legion has had a supplement, the new one has nothing to do with legions and unless chaos has a champion in the development team we could be in for a long wait.

I think we'd be better off using HH lists as long as your group agrees and you don't go mad with it you could have a thematic army, yes you lose things like oblitirators and marks but in exchange you can build a legion force that has flavour and balance.

It's never made sense to me that the legions have worse gear than modern chapters, we know they have forge worlds in the eye and that dark mechanicum has been around since the heresy so why have we not got conversion beamers or grav guns? Why don't we have crazy vehicles they don't drempt up by some insane techpriest.

Demon engines came out of nowhere and feel forced in to me, just an excuse to sell us big kits which seems to be the focus in most codexes these days like tau and the riptide or eldar and the wraithknight.

IcedCrow
27-03-2014, 13:23
Demon engines did not come out of nowhere. They were indeed asked for, for years. Alternates to things like the defiler.

When the new demon engines were announced at games day back when they were announced, a good portion of the place went up in applause.

adreal
27-03-2014, 13:33
Its funny, the codex itself can build a strong list, and compared to dark angels its fine. Tau and eldar do make it look weak, but as far as marine on marine, it could compete (with variety, not just nurgle)

I want to play alpha legion, to get some variety in my deployment options I can take huron (yay infiltrate d3 units, so plan on a one unit alpha strike, and huron takes up a whole slot all for himself, so really you cant even use his heavy flamer for a nice alpha strike with that) or a chaos lord/sorcerer on a steed of slaanesh (cause being solo dedicated to a power of chaos is totally a alpha legion thing) to outflank. Up until marines got their new codex, this was okay, not fantastic, but okay. Why wouldnt I use ravenguard tactics (get scout on all basic infantry) or khan (buy a transport, have scout)? Basic chaos marines stack up okay to basic dark angels, but the basic codex marines get a free chapter tactic because reasons?

I would love scout on basic csm, even if I had to pay for it (VOTLW), I dont want to use daemon engines, but havics with autocannons?? Heck yeah. Chosen and customisable termies?? Not all the time, but sure. So while yes, I use and abuse khans rules (scouting land raider with grav centurions, as well as 40 scouting marines) I would happily play out of the csm dex if I had options that let me plan my army (not, maybe three units today and wee only 1, so my foot slogging marines just die)

hobojebus
27-03-2014, 13:50
I never asked for dinobots I wanted something like those described in storm of iron, mortars with a demon bound inside etc.

Besides the fact a bunch of fanboys that paid to get into an event cheered at them means nothing to me, the fact is they don't get used because the drake is the auto choice because of the FAQ, the drake is the only half decent concept and I'd still of preferred a regular fighter with the pilot fused into the command couch.

IcedCrow
27-03-2014, 13:54
It also depends on your group I guess. I see the forgefiend in many games. I remember in wishlist threads people wanting more demonic engines. GW delivered. *shrug*

adreal
27-03-2014, 13:57
And to be honest, they are a good idea, but then soul grinders can become daemons of 'god here' while csm cant seems silly to me (I realise they will all just be nurgle, but options)

wanderingblade
27-03-2014, 14:26
And to be honest, they are a good idea, but then soul grinders can become daemons of 'god here' while csm cant seems silly to me (I realise they will all just be nurgle, but options)

Sticking the Mark of Slaanesh on a Maulerfiend would be a pretty ok move. A 140 point close combat walker that moves an average of 19 inches to the enemy in its first turn, ignoring cover, and has fleet when the time comes for the charge? That has uses.

Mark of Tzeentch would see use too. Assuming this is Marks as in the CD book of course.

ObiWayneKenobi
27-03-2014, 14:29
IMO only the Big Four should have had daemon engines (and those should have been the ones from Epic). I'd rather have HH-era vehicles and weapons, something to tie Chaos other than "daemons".

Bugaboo
27-03-2014, 14:35
IMO only the Big Four should have had daemon engines (and those should have been the ones from Epic). I'd rather have HH-era vehicles and weapons, something to tie Chaos other than "daemons".

I agree that I would also have preferred to see the classics scaled up. Don't care about the mechanics, or competitive, blah blah blah, but the aesthetics had potential.

Instead the only one which comes even close is a Khornate engine which is little more than a nod to a similar model from epic.

The Forgefiend is... well, I don't mind the dinobot look, and really, it could have been a lot worse (check out spider demon from Doom, some time...), and the head with the Ectoplasma cannon actually does have some aspects of the epic Daemon engines, sorta. Just a shame the other head sucks. The thing is practically going "NYAH NYAH, I'M HERE TO STAY B******!"

Inquisitor Shego
27-03-2014, 17:33
Demon engines did not come out of nowhere. They were indeed asked for, for years. Alternates to things like the defiler.

When the new demon engines were announced at games day back when they were announced, a good portion of the place went up in applause.

As I said before, they applauded the Space Marine movie for its plot and graphics. Hell, the Games Day crowd would probably applaud 9/11 footage if they thought GW was responsible. To be honest though, I'm fine with daemon engines. I just think they were done **** poor. Looking like a happy meal toy more than a daemonic doomsday machine.


As long as Chaos - or any other faction - compare their options with Space Marines and demand parity, they will be unhappy. That has been true for large amounts of 40k history. Obviously you appear to disagree but I don't see the point of the complaint in such terms. Space Marines have usually got more, they pretty much always will and that's the way it is because they are cash cow number one and that is what matters.

And how can any other army hope to sell as well when Marines are pushed in the starter sets perpetually, they're in the intro games, they're in the video games, most of the literature, etc etc? This is why I stopped eating at the restaurant.

ObiWayneKenobi
27-03-2014, 17:43
And how can any other army hope to sell as well when Marines are pushed in the starter sets perpetually, they're in the intro games, they're in the video games, most of the literature, etc etc? This is why I stopped eating at the restaurant.

Very good point. I mean, it's been this way since the dawn of time, but it's still pretty crappy that it gets done, especially when some armies have to wait years for an updated Codex while there's 2, 3, 4 or more Space Marine codexes released, especially since outside of maybe Space Wolves you don't need much extra rules, certainly not a full codex worth.

hobojebus
27-03-2014, 17:48
As I said before, they applauded the Space Marine movie for its plot and graphics. Hell, the Games Day crowd would probably applaud 9/11 footage if they thought GW was responsible. To be honest though, I'm fine with daemon engines. I just think they were done **** poor. Looking like a happy meal toy more than a daemonic doomsday machine.



And how can any other army hope to sell as well when Marines are pushed in the starter sets perpetually, they're in the intro games, they're in the video games, most of the literature, etc etc? This is why I stopped eating at the restaurant.

See i dont get what else we are meant to compare chaos to, tau? nids? necrons? there is only one book to compare chaos to and thats space marines, they should be mirror images one noble and pure aided by state of the art tech and the other twisted possessing forgotten technology empowered by the warp.

Instead SM have all the old tech and chaos get naff all.

Death Company
27-03-2014, 18:19
See i dont get what else we are meant to compare chaos to, tau? nids? necrons? there is only one book to compare chaos to and thats space marines, they should be mirror images one noble and pure aided by state of the art tech and the other twisted possessing forgotten technology empowered by the warp.

Instead SM have all the old tech and chaos get naff all.

Defilers, maulers, obliterator virus, daemon-bound weaponry and vehicles. Chaos has more of a fantasy feel than futuristic, all because of their loyalty to the warp - and essentially - monsters. It's not that you get nothing, it's that from my experience, most Chaos players don't actually seem to like the Chaos of their faction all that much. This all just reminds me of the C:SM tactics thread, where many 'Chaos' fans essentially admitted they just want to be loyalists with a mean streak- the daemons and all that jazz isn't actually desirable.

The game would probably do better if it was set in 30K, where traitors and loyalists were identical for the most part, aside from different ideals. That's what people seem to want.

Inquisitor Shego
27-03-2014, 18:23
Defilers, maulers, obliterator virus, daemon-bound weaponry and vehicles. Chaos has more of a fantasy feel than futuristic, all because of their loyalty to the warp - and essentially - monsters. It's not that you get nothing, it's that from my experience, most Chaos players don't actually seem to like the Chaos of their faction all that much. This all just reminds me of the C:SM tactics thread, where many 'Chaos' fans essentially admitted they just want to be loyalists with a mean streak- the daemons and all that jazz isn't actually desirable.

The game would probably do better if it was set in 30K, where traitors and loyalists were identical for the most part, aside from different ideals. That's what people seem to want.

It's why I did Alpha Legion :-x But even then so much of our stuff doesn't seem that weird and whacky and wonderful. Obliterators do. Derpfiends look like a kid excited he's found his dad's porn mag.

ObiWayneKenobi
27-03-2014, 18:39
Defilers, maulers, obliterator virus, daemon-bound weaponry and vehicles. Chaos has more of a fantasy feel than futuristic, all because of their loyalty to the warp - and essentially - monsters. It's not that you get nothing, it's that from my experience, most Chaos players don't actually seem to like the Chaos of their faction all that much. This all just reminds me of the C:SM tactics thread, where many 'Chaos' fans essentially admitted they just want to be loyalists with a mean streak- the daemons and all that jazz isn't actually desirable.

The game would probably do better if it was set in 30K, where traitors and loyalists were identical for the most part, aside from different ideals. That's what people seem to want.

Depends. I think there's a bit too much Chaos and not enough "corrupted Space Marine". I'm all for having that choice, but it's forced. That's why the 3.5 book was so lauded - the 3.0 and subsequent Codexes (barring 3.5) took the approach of one vision for Chaos, across all warbands. That's what we have now; there's one identity for Chaos and it involves monsters/daemons, and if you don't want that for your warband then too bad.

I could see Word Bearers with lots of daemon engines and the like, not so much Night Lords or Iron Warriors (beyond like siege engines) but there's no option for that, it's take GW's vision or not at all.

Your renegades like Red Corsairs or pre-supplement Crimson Slaughter though SHOULD basically be "Marines with an angry streak" but again there's no option for that outside of using the loyalist codex. You can't show a renegade army slowly corrupting and turning to the warp, its either you're totally corrupt and daemon-infused, or you aren't really Chaos.

Inquisitor Shego
27-03-2014, 18:41
Depends. I think there's a bit too much Chaos and not enough "corrupted Space Marine". I'm all for having that choice, but it's forced. That's why the 3.5 book was so lauded - the 3.0 and subsequent Codexes (barring 3.5) took the approach of one vision for Chaos, across all warbands. That's what we have now; there's one identity for Chaos and it involves monsters/daemons, and if you don't want that for your warband then too bad.

thumbs up to this

Scribe of Khorne
27-03-2014, 18:48
Depends. I think there's a bit too much Chaos and not enough "corrupted Space Marine". I'm all for having that choice, but it's forced. That's why the 3.5 book was so lauded - the 3.0 and subsequent Codexes (barring 3.5) took the approach of one vision for Chaos, across all warbands. That's what we have now; there's one identity for Chaos and it involves monsters/daemons, and if you don't want that for your warband then too bad.

I could see Word Bearers with lots of daemon engines and the like, not so much Night Lords or Iron Warriors (beyond like siege engines) but there's no option for that, it's take GW's vision or not at all.

Your renegades like Red Corsairs or pre-supplement Crimson Slaughter though SHOULD basically be "Marines with an angry streak" but again there's no option for that outside of using the loyalist codex. You can't show a renegade army slowly corrupting and turning to the warp, its either you're totally corrupt and daemon-infused, or you aren't really Chaos.

A lot of truth here.

Its something I brought up a long time ago though, CSM need an identity, and need to stop trying to do all, but nothing well.

Legions? VotlW is a weak link.
Renegades? No access to SM type stuff, so thats just flat out of the picture.
Warbands? Generic, no true soul.
Daemon driven? Daemon Weapons, Boons Table, Champion of Chaos, Marks, Daemon Engines, Daemon-breed units? This is the only side that is at all being fleshed out, imo.

Ssilmath
27-03-2014, 18:53
The thing is, Chaos really does do it all. They're incredibly diverse in organization, tactics and style. There are Night Lords who willingly ally themselves with Daemons and have even ascended to Princehood, so the whole "Night Lords don't deal with Chaos" thing is right out.

hobojebus
27-03-2014, 18:53
It's why I did Alpha Legion :-x But even then so much of our stuff doesn't seem that weird and whacky and wonderful. Obliterators do. Derpfiends look like a kid excited he's found his dad's porn mag.

Showing your age there mate, kids these days don't know what dirty magazines are, when I were a lad we`d walk six miles up hill in the snow for a picture of a girl showing her ankle, kids don't even know how good they got it!

As for not liking the chaos we do get let's look at that, we have possessed which have never been good since they got introduced over priced for a random power that probably will do nothing, we have obliterators which used to be decent but now die hard unless you make them nurgle and can't use the same weapon two turns in a row, we have the underwhelming warptallons which are way over priced for what they do.

The only chaosy things worth a damn are the ever popular death chicken and spawn, ones way over powered and the other does not fit in certain legion lists if you want to be fluffy.

Being chaos should not automatically mean random.

Scribe of Khorne
27-03-2014, 18:55
The thing is, Chaos really does do it all. They're incredibly diverse in organization, tactics and style. There are Night Lords who willingly ally themselves with Daemons and have even ascended to Princehood, so the whole "Night Lords don't deal with Chaos" thing is right out.

Yes, Chaos is. Our books constantly underwhelm and dont reflect that diversity well enough. Hence the whole reason many people call out that CSM dont have a solid identity.

ObiWayneKenobi
27-03-2014, 18:57
I get why they are doing such a tie-in to daemons as that's the general "What makes Chaos Chaos" vibe in Fantasy and oldschool in Rogue Trader. I just wish there was the option. Maybe I *do* want a totally corrupted warband that makes pacts with fiends and binds daemons into mechanical beasts, and then awesome i get Maulerfiends and Heldrakes and Defilers and all that good stuff (probably Word Bearers). But maybe I don't. Right now, I don't get a choice in the matter. I can't make a more disciplined "We are still the ## Legion" warband that behaves more like a dark mirror image of the Adeptus Astartes without severely gimping myself or using a lot of proxy/counts as (e.g. MoN = Bionics).

That's why we want choice. I want to be able to make an army that acts similar to the legion it used to be, fighting the same as it did on the fringes of the Great Crusade, ever waging the Long War against the Imperium it used to serve. I want to be able to make an army of corrupted Space Marines, tainted by the warp and consumed by daemonic influence with hellforged nightmares. I want to be able to make a recent Renegade army that still retains some of its Adeptus Astartes roots, slowly succumbing to the warp. I want to be able to make a cultist uprising that has eaten away at a planetary government and taken control, with their dark overseers in baroque and evil armor looming behind them. I want to field an army of hellish nightmares given form, preying on the mortal world.

Right now, only two of those options are viable. Instead of those options I get told "You get daemons and you will like them" and I get to play around with a random mutation chart and forced challenges that are more at home in warband vs. warband (like where they originated in Rogue Trader) than the real battlefield. I *do* like daemons to a point, but I don't want to feel like all I get is daemons, and without daemons I have no identity. Chaos and Daemons might be eternally intertwined, but there's more to Chaos Space Marines than daemons.

Scribe of Khorne
27-03-2014, 19:20
Yeah I feel you. Thats the whole thing though. What makes Chaos unique, cannot be its vastness, because GW has indicated either through action or between the lines, that it cant or wont deliver.

We have to start somewhere, and build out from there using supplements at this point, and the current book 'feels' to me like it wants to be Daemon corrupted in focus, Daemon Engines/Weapons/Half Breeds, feel like what they wanted CSM to be about, despite our desire for Legions and the relative ease of adding that in.

Slayer-Fan123
27-03-2014, 19:24
As long as Chaos - or any other faction - compare their options with Space Marines and demand parity, they will be unhappy. That has been true for large amounts of 40k history. Obviously you appear to disagree but I don't see the point of the complaint in such terms. Space Marines have usually got more, they pretty much always will and that's the way it is because they are cash cow number one and that is what matters.

Gods knows there's enough to complain about as is really - not least the fact that a large proportion of people who use or wish to use the codex don't like it. That's probably the major sign of a bad codex to me. I tried to like it. I couldn't. I can live without the Legions being fully defined and without the super-veterans of 10,000 years (that, realistically, should be pretty much all dead by now). I can live with the slightly wonky differentiation of CSM and loyalist SM, the fact that it's not a top tier army by any stretch of the imagination. I can live with the numerous overcosted units, just, and the fact that Marks are generally a bad idea (although patience is getting stretched...) but the fact that most of the best and interesting ways to play CSM involved as few Marines as possible, well...

Its a bad codex and I don't see how the argument continues. Also, I decided to buy some Daemons to satisfy my Chaos-worshipping impulses.
The issue is that there have been lots of Chapters you couldn't entirely represent. Iron Hands were finally thrown a bone, and now someone's painted Iron Hands have true purpose, and your fluffy force work somewhat. If you run Night Lords, you're still forced to run Heldrakes, which, last I checked, is something they don't like to do. I get no benefits from not running the Heldrake as I gimp myself, and that's simply unfair. It is bad internal balance AND laziness, and I'm shocked how people still try to defend the codex.

IcedCrow
27-03-2014, 19:32
Because not everyone runs lists that have to have the best things in it or else they feel "gimped". :)

Inquisitor Shego
27-03-2014, 19:41
Because not everyone runs lists that have to have the best things in it or else they feel "gimped". :)

Nice sphere. Where's the point?

IcedCrow
27-03-2014, 19:42
I know you're smarter then that.

Inquisitor Shego
27-03-2014, 19:43
I know you're smarter then that.

Damn right I am.

Bad monkey
27-03-2014, 19:43
His point seems pretty clear, not everyone builds lists to be the best. Some do it just for what looks good, I know I do.

IcedCrow
27-03-2014, 19:44
You caught me in a rushed phone text using the improper "than". You win a cookie and a pat on the back.

Inquisitor Shego
27-03-2014, 19:46
His point seems pretty clear, not everyone builds lists to be the best. Some do it just for what looks good, I know I do.

So do I, Bad Monkey. I build a lot of stuff for what looks good and cool and fluffy and fun. We've just been debating for 13 pages why some people think that codex isn't up to standards for that. Of course if people DO think this book is a perfect or acceptable representation of Chaos Space Marines, I won't say they're wrong. It's all a matter of opinion. Icedcrow likes the book. I don't. Some people take power builds, and some take fluffy builds.


You caught me in a rushed phone text using the improper "than". You win a cookie and a pat on the back.

You don't need to make excuses, Icedcrow. We both know the Grammar Police is the uncoolest club to be in and I lowered myself with that post. Sometimes though its just toooo tempting for me to throw away maturity and be a silly goose. Anyway, as this is post 599 :o I'll save myself for 600.

Scribe of Khorne
27-03-2014, 19:46
So back around.

"CSM is fine as a book, because I can build lists I like"

Inquisitor Shego
27-03-2014, 19:50
So back around.

"CSM is fine as a book, because I can build lists I like"

Chaos Space Marines is a good book to some, an acceptable book to some, a meh book to some, and a dire travesty to some. I have seen people split on opinions over many many things. I will confess however, I have never seen a codex this polarised. Even Grey Knights had Grey Knight players feeling dirty about using it.

ObiWayneKenobi
27-03-2014, 19:50
So back around.

"CSM is fine as a book, because I can build lists I like"

If only those things were related. You can build a list you like, and the book can still by and large suck.