Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The csm model range shouldn't be a problem. It's ancient and needs to be redone one way or another. That could easily enough include new models. Besides, look at the loyalist marine hq sections, they have like a bajillion models to could represent anything from a lieutenant to a chapter master.

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

How would that be reflected in the models? The problem is that we want fluff > rules > models while GW operate on models > rules > fluff. Go to the webstore. Look at the selection. Are there enough distinct product offerings to repackage them as lord model, sorcerer lord model, sorcerer model, lieutenant model? If no then this is a nonstarter.

I think the fundamental problem with Chaos is that they are not popular enough to justify a product line that would accommodate rules to do their fluff justice. So the models drag everything else down. We just can't expect GW to expend significant resources supporting what is effectively a legacy line of products.

I think it's one of the few upsides to our outdated models. When a rework happens it will need to be generally substantial. GW has the opportunity to make the rework more meaningful through that. At this point GW should have done a Chaos lord kit that provides the bits to make a variety of character types. Unfortunately I think the present day GW would rather keep CSM characters in neat little boxes that directly parallel loyalist SM. The trend towards monopose character models is also diminishing the likelihood.

 Arbitrator wrote:

TremendousZ wrote:
I think CSM got what they were asking for in a lot of ways, and CSM players need to realize your never getting 3.5 codex level power again. Lets just remember where we came from with the last CSM codex.

I think what most CSM players were asking for is rules for Legions and good internal balance. It just so happens that the 3.5 codex happened to be the overpowered one that also had Legion rules in it, not that CSM players "want overpowered Legion rules." The two don't have to be mutually exclusive.

There's always this smug "lol you just want to be OP again get over it XD" tone you can tell a mile away from these posts. In all my time watching Chaos Space Marine players vent - and they do, it's true, rant a lot but not without good reason - have I ever seem them crave 3.5 power levels. What they want are the 3.5 OPTIONS. That is, being able to take an army that isn't a Nurgle Lord on a bike, with bikes, and minimum Cultist tax and a Helldrake. When people say they miss the 3.5 codex days, what they mean is they miss the options, the customisability, the uniqueness.

Traitor's Hate is more of the same. "You will take this units to stand a chance on the tabletop and you will like it, now shut up whining." The vast majority of CSM complainants don't want powerful, they want OPTIONS. You could make CSM's the most broken thing on the tabletop, but if everything outside of three units is absolutely worthless - even if those three units wipe the floor with Riptides and Knights - then people are still going to complain, because being shoehorned into taking 'powerful' units is bad. Yes, poor internal balance is not unique to CSMs, but they're one of the most flavourful, diverse and potentially unique armies out there that are shoehorned into a handful of units to so much a play the damn game and that's not even getting onto how they're more vanilla than the damn vanilla Space Marine codex. That's not what Night Lord players want, that's not what Word Bearers players want.

Nobody was expecting Traitor's Hate to suddenly revamp the codex, but I think people were hoping for more than some psychic powers and free VotLW.

You know what is funny with this post. It's so true almost.

"You will take this units to stand a chance on the tabletop and you will like it, now shut up whining."

It's almost like the Space Marine players are do what they are told and listen to the all mighty Emperor or GW in this case and people who do not are the heretics or the Chaos Space Marine players. They are defying the Emperor or in this case GW by keep voicing their displeasure. Sort of funny how real life is mimicking the 40K fluff.

 aka_mythos wrote:

I think it's one of the few upsides to our outdated models. When a rework happens it will need to be generally substantial.

I don't know about that. It would take an unusually large release just to get the current finecast infantry models into plastic. We don't even have plastic heavy weapons. And I doubt we'll ever see plastic noise marines. Ever.

In my CSM codex fix, there's marks and then straight up dedications to gods, which was the part that unlocked Cult Marines.

Thats cool. I did marks, and added the rest of the special rules under daemonic gifts in my re-write.

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:
Nah what they need to have, simple IMHO:

1) Lord, can become Sorcerer Lord
2) Lieutenant, can buy Sorcerer or buy something to turn into a dark Apostle OR Warpsmith (basically a generic hero guy who can "upgrade" to the others)

How would that be reflected in the models? The problem is that we want fluff > rules > models while GW operate on models > rules > fluff. Go to the webstore. Look at the selection. Are there enough distinct product offerings to repackage them as lord model, sorcerer lord model, sorcerer model, lieutenant model? If no then this is a nonstarter.

I think the fundamental problem with Chaos is that they are not popular enough to justify a product line that would accommodate rules to do their fluff justice. So the models drag everything else down. We just can't expect GW to expend significant resources supporting what is effectively a legacy line of products.

I don't see why distinct product offerings for repackaging is a deal at all in this case. I mean, look at SM, what's the difference between a captain and a chapter master model? I mean, perhaps there is something but if there is, well, it's too damn subtle for me to notice. Perhaps you could point out this distinction in the product line for me?

 King Pariah wrote:

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:
Nah what they need to have, simple IMHO:

1) Lord, can become Sorcerer Lord
2) Lieutenant, can buy Sorcerer or buy something to turn into a dark Apostle OR Warpsmith (basically a generic hero guy who can "upgrade" to the others)

How would that be reflected in the models? The problem is that we want fluff > rules > models while GW operate on models > rules > fluff. Go to the webstore. Look at the selection. Are there enough distinct product offerings to repackage them as lord model, sorcerer lord model, sorcerer model, lieutenant model? If no then this is a nonstarter.

I think the fundamental problem with Chaos is that they are not popular enough to justify a product line that would accommodate rules to do their fluff justice. So the models drag everything else down. We just can't expect GW to expend significant resources supporting what is effectively a legacy line of products.

I don't see why distinct product offerings for repackaging is a deal at all in this case. I mean, look at SM, what's the difference between a captain and a chapter master model? I mean, perhaps there is something but if there is, well, it's too damn subtle for me to notice. Perhaps you could point out this distinction in the product line for me?

SM are special. They don't follow the same rules as everyone else. If you expect CSM to be treated the same as SM you're gonna be disappointed.

Also, we're talking about adding new rules where there are no corresponding new models to push. Captain/chapter master already exists.

Well, a few of you are looking on the bright side! I'm noticing a few common complaints and would offer a few counter arguments.

First, lack of customization and here is an example leading into number 2. Cult Terminators not being represented. These guys are 10,000 year old warriors that have the same weapon from 10,000 years ago, and have been living in the warp. How can I have them represented in the new codex? What if they aren't 10,000 years old....just 2,000...?

Well, might I point you at the Mutilator entry? Their weapons can be anything, each turn. So if you modeled some sweet Nurgle Terminators with scythes, they can swing at different initiatives and S values, and have 2 wounds! Oh, only 2,000 years old? Then don't take VoTLW. which leads to point number 2. The customization is there, its more an issue of.....

Can't or Won't?

Is it true that you really can't make these units with the current codex, or you won't because of the point tax/competitve rules. I think a lot of you fall into category B, when some people complain about playing CSM with no CSMs. Just take some CSMs...no biggie. This leads into point 3.

Is your meta really so competitive that you need every trick and point optimized? If so, wow this game must be a nightmare for you. Are your opponents not your friends? because that would explain some of the behavior and lists described on here. Talk to your opponent about what your expecting beforehand.

Put it this way, I'd bet that our Decurion would hold up vs any of the other Decurions (scat bikes aside). Maybe someone could eyeball the Eldar guardian battlehost vs. our Decurion, because we can all gauge power level by looking at lists and rules...well at least us experienced gamers (sarcasm, sorry I couldn't let that original comment slide)

And a final food for thought..What happens when we get legion rules and your legion is left in the dust? Be it bad rules, weapons that don't feel right (think vibrating swords of slaanesh), lack of customization, or anything mentioned in this post. You are already not using your current Chaos army of choice because of any of the complaints. Will it be can't? Or won't?

For Chaos Tourney players, especially ones that travel, I understand you can't talk to your opponents. Save your breath.

You managed to hit every mark on the "Well all you need is imaginaaaation" bingo card. Well done.

Wait you need imagination to play wargames? *panics and flees*

Yep imagination because the awesomeness of Chaos is only in our heads.

TremendousZ wrote:
Well, a few of you are looking on the bright side! I'm noticing a few common complaints and would offer a few counter arguments.

First, lack of customization and here is an example leading into number 2. Cult Terminators not being represented. These guys are 10,000 year old warriors that have the same weapon from 10,000 years ago, and have been living in the warp. How can I have them represented in the new codex? What if they aren't 10,000 years old....just 2,000...?

Well, might I point you at the Mutilator entry? Their weapons can be anything, each turn. So if you modeled some sweet Nurgle Terminators with scythes, they can swing at different initiatives and S values, and have 2 wounds! Oh, only 2,000 years old? Then don't take VoTLW. which leads to point number 2. The customization is there, its more an issue of.....

Can't or Won't?

Is it true that you really can't make these units with the current codex, or you won't because of the point tax/competitve rules. I think a lot of you fall into category B, when some people complain about playing CSM with no CSMs. Just take some CSMs...no biggie. This leads into point 3.

Is your meta really so competitive that you need every trick and point optimized? If so, wow this game must be a nightmare for you. Are your opponents not your friends? because that would explain some of the behavior and lists described on here. Talk to your opponent about what your expecting beforehand.

Put it this way, I'd bet that our Decurion would hold up vs any of the other Decurions (scat bikes aside). Maybe someone could eyeball the Eldar guardian battlehost vs. our Decurion, because we can all gauge power level by looking at lists and rules...well at least us experienced gamers (sarcasm, sorry I couldn't let that original comment slide)

And a final food for thought..What happens when we get legion rules and your legion is left in the dust? Be it bad rules, weapons that don't feel right (think vibrating swords of slaanesh), lack of customization, or anything mentioned in this post. You are already not using your current Chaos army of choice because of any of the complaints. Will it be can't? Or won't?

For Chaos Tourney players, especially ones that travel, I understand you can't talk to your opponents. Save your breath.

I've been thinking this same thing, just wasn't quite sure how to address it. If I could exalt this 3 dozen times I totally would. For example, as much as people complain about fluffy legions being impossible to represent, you can run Raptor Talon full of warp talons for Night Lords. Iron warriors would be the Demonforge pack, vehicle squadrons and obliterator cult. Will they run it? Probably not because they won't run warp talons, they want Khornes benefits and the IW folks would probably rather run demon knights and Kabal rather than run a fluff list that is 100 percent possible.

We can have our cake and eat it too (unless you're Eldar, Admech or Necrons).

First, lack of customization and here is an example leading into number 2. Cult Terminators not being represented. These guys are 10,000 year old warriors that have the same weapon from 10,000 years ago, and have been living in the warp. How can I have them represented in the new codex? What if they aren't 10,000 years old....just 2,000...?

You can be a cult terminator WITHOUT also being from the original Heresy. I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

Well, might I point you at the Mutilator entry? Their weapons can be anything, each turn. So if you modeled some sweet Nurgle Terminators with scythes, they can swing at different initiatives and S values, and have 2 wounds! Oh, only 2,000 years old? Then don't take VoTLW. which leads to point number 2. The customization is there, its more an issue of.....

Can't or Won't?

Mutilators are terrible at every concievable level from their stats to the models themselves and CANNOT represent Cult terminators. I'm not even talking about a pure competitive game either. I mean just from a straight rules point of view. I'm really not even sure what you're driving at with this suggestion. Cult terminators had access to weapons Mutilators don't. I can't arm a Mutilator with a sonic weapon, I can't take wargear, etc etc. Can I fire my Reaper auto cannon from a Mutie and then charge into CC with my Chainfist? Nope. Obits don't work for Cult Termie replacements either.

It's not even remotely an acceptable substitute IMO. That's great if it works for you, but for those of us who take Terminators and want our Terminators to function like TERMINATORS ... no. Mutilators don't work.
So ... CAN'T

Is your meta really so competitive that you need every trick and point optimized? If so, wow this game must be a nightmare for you. Are your opponents not your friends? because that would explain some of the behavior and lists described on here. Talk to your opponent about what your expecting beforehand.

To each his own, I'm not one to diss any group's particular play style, but some of us LIKE a more competitive game. Even in my meta, when we play what you might call less-competitive and more "fluffy" games, actual CSM are just so so bad. They just aren't worth it right now and fall so far short of what they actually should be in every aspect. They've gotten consistently worse for multiple codexes and are nowhere near what they should be when you compare them to the fluff.

Put it this way, I'd bet that our Decurion would hold up vs any of the other Decurions (scat bikes aside). Maybe someone could eyeball the Eldar guardian battlehost vs. our Decurion, because we can all gauge power level by looking at lists and rules...well at least us experienced gamers (sarcasm, sorry I couldn't let that original comment slide)

It will hold up to the Orkurion. The rest? Well that remains to be seen. Multiple games have been played with the few people who bought TH at my LGS and early evidence says it makes them *slightly* better, but no, not holding up to anyone so far. Time will tell though.

And a final food for thought..What happens when we get legion rules and your legion is left in the dust? Be it bad rules, weapons that don't feel right (think vibrating swords of slaanesh), lack of customization, or anything mentioned in this post. You are already not using your current Chaos army of choice because of any of the complaints. Will it be can't? Or won't?

Yep, there's a chance some of the Legion rules might not be good. That's still better than no Legion rules at all. There's several Chapter Tactics entries that aren't great too. Doesn't seem to be dampening the enthusiasm on that side of the coin though.

For Chaos Tourney players, especially ones that travel, I understand you can't talk to your opponents. Save your breath.

This is one of the issues I see so often with CSM. The players who don't go to tourneys basically dismissing the arguments of the players who DO. The tourney players rarely say anything disparaging about the "fluffy I play in my garage" players for not playing competitively. Both sides are "right". There's really no wrong way to hobby, but your comment seems to imply otherwise (apologies if I've misunderstood it). The simple fact is, that we shouldn't have to imagine that something as awful and woefully inadequate for representing something like a Mutilator actually IS a cult terminator, and that becomes especially exagerated when you're talking about players that enjoy going to a tourney every now and then.

For example, as much as people complain about fluffy legions being impossible to represent, you can run Raptor Talon full of warp talons for Night Lords. Iron warriors would be the Demonforge pack, vehicle squadrons and obliterator cult. Will they run it? Probably not because they won't run warp talons, they want Khornes benefits and the IW folks would probably rather run demon knights and Kabal rather than run a fluff list that is 100 percent possible.

Actually, IW frequently use Berserkers in their front ranks. I'm, running a Raptor Talon pack as Knight Lords (two squads of Raptors and one squad of Warp Talons), and I'm also running the very same combo you mention for IW. For many, the issue is that the taxes are so extreme and a lot of people have simply pointed out that the thing TH probably does best is really underscore just how badly the core codex needs rewritten. In the next edition, if they fix the multitude of issues with the Warp Smith, allow Warp Talons to properly assault from DS without a disordered charge AND give CSM something reliable and not ridiculous to help mitigate DS, I think TH will suddenly be looking pretty good. Right now though? Meh ... Solid C+ to a B IMO. They had a huge uphill battle to give CSM a boost, and no one (well, no one reasonable anyway) expected TH to completely fix everything or launch CSM into the top tier. On the other hand, man, they just came so close on so many things in this book and totally missed in the end. It just feel like if they had given some of it 10 more minutes of actual thought it could have been amazing.

Looking at point 2 Tycho, Mutilators and Oblits are the closest thing to Traitor Terminators, as a matter of fact, they are quite literally whats left of the them. Or the latest evolution at least. I view them as the Chaos equivalent to GK Paladins(people were pretty stoked about 2W Termis) just with the option to use whatever weapon suits them best at the time

The first paragraph of Mutilators entry says the first were Traitor Terminators that excelled at close combat......

The stats are exactly the same between Mutis, Oblits, and Termis. They don't have assault grenades just like Termis. Same invul save, can deepstrike, and can get marks.

You want to use a Blastmaster type weapon? Well Oblits can use Plasma Cannons (blastmaster +1S, -1 AP, but you can slappa da bass too hard and it will get hot), or an assault cannon instead of a reaper. Mutis get an extra attack for 2x special weapons, combined with MoK, MoS, MoN , or MoT , they get better.

You don't have to use the Mutilator models if you don't like them.

Buckle in folks, this is about to get interesting. I will argue that 3 Mutilators are better assault units than 5 Termis out of a Landraider.

Do the math. Mutis are cheaper (completely naked 22 points cheaper), have more wounds, cause fear, have a smaller footprint, can still fit a PA lord/sorcerer, and can pick the weapons for the situation. They only have 2 fewer attacks, and would be more susceptible to ID. However, they would be jumping out of a landraider(Dirge casters), and can choose higher Int weapons to try to kill off any fists. Those naked Termis get combi-bolters and power weapons.

Soooooooooo I would believe your CAN'T(how unthinkable!), is a big WON'T!

I will wait here while you guys go do the math on Mutis vs Termis. You know where to find me.....



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Accidentally left MoN on Termis, my bad. Naked termis vs naked mutis. Termis are 8 pts cheaper.

We've gone full mutilator thread.
Never go full mutilator thread.

How are the Terminators only 8 points cheaper? Pretty sure Mutilators are 55 a piece.

mutilators are 55 a pop base. Also, yeah, not even gonna engage on this any further. Muties have been shown (despite whatever math you dredge up) to he almost wholly ineffective in game, but mutilator threads go on for months. May be time to lock this one. lol

I've seen Mutilators used to good effect in two situations...

One was in Zone Mortalis where they aren't exposed and can do their thing with greater impunity.
The other was in an army where the player took individual

Mutilators that due to a greater number of more pressing threats went largely ignored but ultimately served to take out vehicles in the other players back field.

In general they are too slow and vulnerable for their purpose and cost.

Mutilators are one man units. I'd kill for a one man unit in the BA codex. You are going for target saturation with them, not expecting them to carry you.

Just think. If we could field 50 units of single marines, Eldar wouldn't be able to table BA or CSM without trying hard.

Considering how much you rag on Terminators Martel, I don't think you want Mutilators at all.

I think what I can't get over, is that Traitor's Hate doesn't do anything but make it more likely to take unfluffy choices or min/max. Like, most lists for the Warband are the same old crap, take minimal squads, max out on min squad havocs, don't take Raptors because they suck, min Terminators, etc.

I mean, I get people have their own styles of play, but damn it that feels dirty to me and nowhere near how the background is supposed to be. Taking a Cabal just because psychic powers are good now is a cop out. Taking min squads just to "unlock" formations is straight up powergaming. It has never and will never sit well with me, and while I fully think Traitor's Hate is an improvement over what we had before, it just feels like it made the stuff people already take that much better so they'll keep taking it.

For instance, every time I think of lists for a Chaos Warband, it's always the same kind of minimal squad powergaming cheesey bullgak as a "tax" and then see about how much of the good stuff can get crammed in to actually do the work. That does not feel correct to me.

Martel732 wrote:
Mutilators are one man units. I'd kill for a one man unit in the BA codex. You are going for target saturation with them, not expecting them to carry you.

Just think. If we could field 50 units of single marines, Eldar wouldn't be able to table BA or CSM without trying hard.

That one mutilator is the price of a combat squad. And that combat squad is obsec.

If you want MSU, you have it.

And a unit of cultists is 5 points less for 10 obsec wounds, so yea. I'd rather keep pretending that mutilators don't actually exist.

Muti-what? Oh, yeah, the ugly, useless models....

Martel732 wrote:
Mutilators are one man units. I'd kill for a one man unit in the BA codex. You are going for target saturation with them, not expecting them to carry you.

Just think. If we could field 50 units of single marines, Eldar wouldn't be able to table BA or CSM without trying hard.

Scouts aren't bad anymore...

WayneTheGame wrote:
I think what I can't get over, is that Traitor's Hate doesn't do anything but make it more likely to take unfluffy choices or min/max. Like, most lists for the Warband are the same old crap, take minimal squads, max out on min squad havocs, don't take Raptors because they suck, min Terminators, etc.

I mean, I get people have their own styles of play, but damn it that feels dirty to me and nowhere near how the background is supposed to be. Taking a Cabal just because psychic powers are good now is a cop out. Taking min squads just to "unlock" formations is straight up powergaming. It has never and will never sit well with me, and while I fully think Traitor's Hate is an improvement over what we had before, it just feels like it made the stuff people already take that much better so they'll keep taking it.

For instance, every time I think of lists for a Chaos Warband, it's always the same kind of minimal squad powergaming cheesey bullgak as a "tax" and then see about how much of the good stuff can get crammed in to actually do the work. That does not feel correct to me.

40k has been like this for ages. Minimum troops to cram heavy support or elites was a thing in the past too.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Mutilators are one man units. I'd kill for a one man unit in the BA codex. You are going for target saturation with them, not expecting them to carry you.

Just think. If we could field 50 units of single marines, Eldar wouldn't be able to table BA or CSM without trying hard.

Scouts aren't bad anymore...

Without chapter tactics and/or a LSS (why the feth to BA still not have this?)to ferry them around the non-sniper kind are actually pretty bad. Their online use is for locator beacons or messing with the opponents infiltrators.

Dantes_Baals wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Mutilators are one man units. I'd kill for a one man unit in the BA codex. You are going for target saturation with them, not expecting them to carry you.

Just think. If we could field 50 units of single marines, Eldar wouldn't be able to table BA or CSM without trying hard.

Scouts aren't bad anymore...

Without chapter tactics and/or a LSS (why the feth to BA still not have this?)to ferry them around the non-sniper kind are actually pretty bad. Their online use is for locator beacons or messing with the opponents infiltrators.

They're errata'd to have the WS4. And BS4 for Shotgun lovers. All you really need is the furious charge at that point. They're an easily spammed OS unit and would cost the same as a Mutilator with none of the drawbacks.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dantes_Baals wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Mutilators are one man units. I'd kill for a one man unit in the BA codex. You are going for target saturation with them, not expecting them to carry you.

Just think. If we could field 50 units of single marines, Eldar wouldn't be able to table BA or CSM without trying hard.

Scouts aren't bad anymore...

Without chapter tactics and/or a LSS (why the feth to BA still not have this?)to ferry them around the non-sniper kind are actually pretty bad. Their online use is for locator beacons or messing with the opponents infiltrators.

They're errata'd to have the WS4. And BS4 for Shotgun lovers. All you really need is the furious charge at that point. They're an easily spammed OS unit and would cost the same as a Mutilator with none of the drawbacks.

Drawbacks like flesh metal or drawbacks like being a 65 point distraction fexes that deepstrikes?


OS doesn't mean jack if they can't reach the objective before they're smoked. MSU is fine unless you blow over to a stiff breeze. Furious charge? With shotgun scouts? Seriously?

WayneTheGame wrote:
I think what I can't get over, is that Traitor's Hate doesn't do anything but make it more likely to take unfluffy choices or min/max.

U kidding, right? It buffs oblits, terminators, raptors and even warp talons.