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.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I know what the current situation is. I literally don't know when the pairings were retconned.

If I recall correctly it was NvT in Liber Chaotica. The whole anti-magic thing is just a facet of Khorne.

Its more like Khorne hates Slaanesh more than he hates Tzeentch.

The current animosities existed in the original realm of Chaos so not sure when they were before that.

Anyways I agree something needs to be done to limit soup. I'd like to see primarchs require the entire army to be their faction or something like that, maybe excuse <God> for the Chaos ones (e.g. all Nurgle keyword can take Morty, all Tzeentch can take Magnus) or something.

All chaos gods hate two chaos gods and the third one they don't hate as much.

Khorne really hates Slaanesh and Tzeentch, and he hates Nurgle a bit less.
Tzeentch really hates Khorne and Nurgle, and he hates Slaanesh a bit less.
Slaanesh really hates Khorne and Nurgle, and s/he hates Tzeentch a bit less.
Nurgle is the happiest one. He really hates Tzeentch, and he hates Khorne and Slaanesh a bit less.

I thought it was they hated 1 an extreme amount and the other to a bit less.

To put this slightly back on track- If people want % requirements for primarchs shouldn't there also be restrictions on grand masters and warlords? Maybe not as high as primarchs but then again maybe not too much less.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
To put this slightly back on track- If people want % requirements for primarchs shouldn't there also be restrictions on grand masters and warlords? Maybe not as high as primarchs but then again maybe not too much less.

I think Primachs being SO special it makes a bit more sense to restrict them with a % then anything else.

ArmchairArbiter wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
To put this slightly back on track- If people want % requirements for primarchs shouldn't there also be restrictions on grand masters and warlords? Maybe not as high as primarchs but then again maybe not too much less.

I think Primachs being SO special it makes a bit more sense to restrict them with a % then anything else.

And what about the inevitable equivalent among other armies?

 Ordana wrote:

ArmchairArbiter wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
To put this slightly back on track- If people want % requirements for primarchs shouldn't there also be restrictions on grand masters and warlords? Maybe not as high as primarchs but then again maybe not too much less.

I think Primachs being SO special it makes a bit more sense to restrict them with a % then anything else.

And what about the inevitable equivalent among other armies?

You say that as if there's any chance that other armies will get primarch equivalents.

You could also just eliminate the super-heavy auxiliary detachment and add a LoW slot to battailions and brigades. That way Mortarion is no longer plug&play into any army that's chaos.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
You say that as if there's any chance that other armies will get primarch equivalents.

*stares at Marbo*

Gee... thanks.

Or is it supposed to be the baneblade that's a primarch equivalent. They really desperately need an invulnerable save.

ThePorcupine wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
You say that as if there's any chance that other armies will get primarch equivalents.

*stares at Marbo*

Gee... thanks.

Or is it supposed to be the baneblade that's a primarch equivalent. They really desperately need an invulnerable save.

I'd consider a "primarch equivalent" to be a LOW character, face-of-the-faction kind of guy. Most factions don't even have someone that could fill that type of role, and some factions shouldn't (IG being a great example because it is definitely not the IG style to have a Guilliman-type officer). The first thought for a non-space marine primarch equivalent for me is the Silent King, who is of course not tied to any particular dynasty since he rules over all of them.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

ThePorcupine wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
You say that as if there's any chance that other armies will get primarch equivalents.

*stares at Marbo*

Gee... thanks.

Or is it supposed to be the baneblade that's a primarch equivalent. They really desperately need an invulnerable save.

I'd consider a "primarch equivalent" to be a LOW character, face-of-the-faction kind of guy. Most factions don't even have someone that could fill that type of role, and some factions shouldn't (IG being a great example because it is definitely not the IG style to have a Guilliman-type officer). The first thought for a non-space marine primarch equivalent for me is the Silent King, who is of course not tied to any particular dynasty since he rules over all of them.

I'm not sure i'd consider the Silent King as a Primarch equivalent . Perhaps a shard that has eaten a few more shards would be more on the money.

Two things...

Does anyone know the Ork lists (I've read the thread but can't see them).

In regards to Soup, I like it. I've never been in a tournament but I think it adds in a really good flexibility to how I have always liked to play and how my vast collection of models that i've built up over 20 years work together (I play Chaos). I want to take Abaddon at the head of a mixed force of Death Guard, Thousand Sons, World Eaters Daemons etc; not just Black Legion and I don't think there should be any penalties for doing it. Soup isn't the issue, it's the way in which several things can be used in Soul that's the problem. I want to run Ahriman and Fabius together, both soft renegades from their home legions, I want to run Kharn and Typhus together. I want my Chaos Lord to be able to summon daemons to his aid. It's not un-fluffy even if unlikely in some scenarios.

What needs to be done is to bring the ability to create forces more in line with the fluff, as in the frequency of which Primarchs, Chapter Masters and perhaps even Greater Daemons/Daemon Lords are available. Someone above suggested removing the super heavy detachment and adding it into a Battalion. I agree with this and adding them to the larger version. I'd also say take the SH option from a Supreme Command detachment too (and instead replace it with Elites). There used to be old rules that prevented certain characters from existing in certain sized armies (I recall Abaddon only being usable in 2K+ at one point) - this would also be a good alternative. Say that Mortarion can only be included in a DG detachment of 1500 pts or more, same with Magnus. Chapters masters/Abby/GD's/Avatars 1k and so on and then at least you've also got decent grounds in buffing some of these units a little as they have a 1.5k 'tax' atop them. It's not as if Death Guard and Thousand Sons are NOT competitive and it's not as if this change would prevent soup or be a complicated rule to understand.

 Galas wrote:
All chaos gods hate two chaos gods and the third one they don't hate as much.

Khorne really hates Slaanesh and Tzeentch, and he hates Nurgle a bit less.
Tzeentch really hates Khorne and Nurgle, and he hates Slaanesh a bit less.
Slaanesh really hates Khorne and Nurgle, and s/he hates Tzeentch a bit less.
Nurgle is the happiest one. He really hates Tzeentch, and he hates Khorne and Slaanesh a bit less.

That's not what it says in the fluff. The current 8th edition Codex repeats the classic pairings.
Khorne vs. Slaanesh
Tzeentch vs. Nurgle.

It's just that Khorne ALSO hates magic, but Tzeentch is not just about magic . And of course, basically they all hate each other.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
I think the only thing that rubs me the wrong way in that list is Morty, because he's just there. Hes the only Death Guard model in the list. As fluff-breaking as it is to have Slaanesh/Khorne models in the same army (the "Alpha Legion" stuff all had MoS I think) it can be excused. But "Here's the primarch of the death guard by himself!" is a little harder to swallow.

You know originally there was no problem with a Khorne/Slaanesh combo. The original pairings for hate were Khorne/Tzeench (no magic just muscle/magic > muscle) and Nurgle/Slaanesh (ugly/beautiful). I don't know when GW retconned it but there it was.

Not since Realms of Chaos - the two books were the two opposing Gods:

Khorne-Slaanesh
Nurgle-Tzeentch

Can't recall it any other way?

However if the gods decide to do so they can play nice together and so can their daemons - for a bit, until they get bored, or angry, or jealous......................

Don't read too much into these results.

Most of the top players were playing in another tournament going on at the same time.

Mike712 wrote:
Don't read too much into these results.

Most of the top players were playing in another tournament going on at the same time.

LOL. Wow. That's a new level of absurd right there.

Just remove special characters from matched play, and put them back in narrative, where they like, belong.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
Just remove special characters from matched play, and put them back in narrative, where they like, belong.

yeah because who cares if Ynnari players can play in matched play at all right?

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
Just remove special characters from matched play, and put them back in narrative, where they like, belong.

Just remove all the players who don't like special characters from matched play, and put them back in narrative, where they like, belong.

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
Just remove special characters from matched play, and put them back in narrative, where they like, belong.

yeah because who cares if Ynnari players can play in matched play at all right?

I mean they do make Eldar ridiculously OP so... Something tells me this would not be missed as much as you think

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Mike712 wrote:
Don't read too much into these results.

Most of the top players were playing in another tournament going on at the same time.

LOL. Wow. That's a new level of absurd right there.

Why? 2 different tournaments running at same dates and players choosing between one?

tneva82 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Mike712 wrote:
Don't read too much into these results.

Most of the top players were playing in another tournament going on at the same time.

LOL. Wow. That's a new level of absurd right there.

Why? 2 different tournaments running at same dates and players choosing between one?

I think he meant more just discrediting GT Heat 3 by saying "All the good players were elsewhere"

Wayniac wrote:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
Just remove special characters from matched play, and put them back in narrative, where they like, belong.

yeah because who cares if Ynnari players can play in matched play at all right?

I mean they do make Eldar ridiculously OP so... Something tells me this would not be missed as much as you think

Doesn't change the fact that its an army that people own models for and want to play. Ask GW to better balance the faction rather than making some ham-fisted adjustment that entirely prevents the army from being played.

Wayniac wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Mike712 wrote:
Don't read too much into these results.

Most of the top players were playing in another tournament going on at the same time.

LOL. Wow. That's a new level of absurd right there.

Why? 2 different tournaments running at same dates and players choosing between one?

I think he meant more just discrediting GT Heat 3 by saying "All the good players were elsewhere"

But it's simple fact that regular tournament players weren't there. Level of competition was lower there. Only rookie would think that tournament represented current top meta

Awesome.

Where's the data from this "better" tournament? It should shed some light on the "current top meta" surely?

tneva82 wrote:


But it's simple fact that regular tournament players weren't there. Level of competition was lower there. Only rookie would think that tournament represented current top meta

Right, because only the top 100 or so people at LVO are worth anything. There couldn't possibly be any other good players out there that didn't have time, couldn't afford it, or any other factor prohibiting them from attending.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


But it's simple fact that regular tournament players weren't there. Level of competition was lower there. Only rookie would think that tournament represented current top meta

Right, because only the top 100 or so people at LVO are worth anything. There couldn't possibly be any other good players out there that didn't have time, couldn't afford it, or any other factor prohibiting them from attending.

Silence you heathen! Only the LVO, with a modified version of 40k - not even the regular game, and the people that won that tournament matter! DO YOU HAVE NO RESPECT?! DO YOU KNOW NOTHING?!