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.

DAaddict, I took that list in a team tournament last summer, it performed TERRIBLY. Unreasonably so, didn't really make much sense. Epi was either getting gibbed before the tally could really kick in or we simply weren't killing enough with our nurgle marked units (which constituted 90% of our list) to really make an impact on the game. The one time we saw some success with it though... hehehe, nothing like a unit of nurglings killing a wraithlord... unfortunately that was pretty much the only time the tally did anything for us.

I could see the termie sprue being split in to two, tzentch and slenesh one and khorne and nurgle the other mabe (not too sure how the wargear would work out paring these kits up) sort of like the standard termies and assault termies for SM.

chaos0xomega wrote:DAaddict, I took that list in a team tournament last summer, it performed TERRIBLY. Unreasonably so, didn't really make much sense. Epi was either getting gibbed before the tally could really kick in or we simply weren't killing enough with our nurgle marked units (which constituted 90% of our list) to really make an impact on the game. The one time we saw some success with it though... hehehe, nothing like a unit of nurglings killing a wraithlord... unfortunately that was pretty much the only time the tally did anything for us.

That is a sad tale... Just the thought of facing that would scare the bejebus out of anyone...

Who's asking for Veteran skills? Those went out the window a long time ago, and while sadly missed, they wouldn't add to the army as a whole.

And renegades are getting their own dex aren't they? or at least the rumors say they are.

Its just for the sake of thoroughness, to include anything cut or that might be cut. Simply the matrix also applies to any future "Renegades" update as well.

aka_mythos wrote: Even when it did 3.5ed codex and everyone was happy that created severe imbalance in the game as a whole and showed it was overly complex to have 10+ distinct rule altering flavors in a single book.

But again the 3.5 dex wasn't overly complex at all. It's a myth that it is was. The flavors are what makes it a great book, because there are so many different viable ways to play. Look at IG now. It's powerful but you either have to play a power blob horde army, or have 3 manticores, and 3 vendettas, in a mechanized army. Any deviation is bad. The 3.5 dex COVERED you if you wanted to play any legion, any renegade force, daemon summoning, and with LaTD you got the true cult/masses of chaos deal. If the fourth book had been 3.5 book, with rules update plus LatD enteries no one would of said a thing.

It's like having a good tall glass of cold Guiness and someone comes by drinks 3/4ths of it and then fills the rest with water and gives it back to you.

Vermillion wrote:

But theres the danger of chaos specifically becoming too complex.
Some people want daemons, some all traitor marines other cultists rising up, some with triator guardsmen/PDF in with those cultists/marines, others a mix. Then there is also rules for specific legions, mix and match legions and cults, then ofcourse custom lords, princes etc. And within that complexity even if they do manage to get it into a single codex, you can bet there won't be balance because there is simply too much of a workload for it all to be playtested thoroughly. (bear with me and just assume this is reasonable practical people making this). Even as far back as 2nd edition a single chaos lord could be nigh on unkillable at a very high points cost, and kill anything it went for and win games by itself, be careful what we wish for. Or better yet, make GW give me a developers job, I'll bring back customise your own characters and no need for compulsory special characters!

Point taken, but 3.5 dex had that and it wasn't complex at all. Maybe the dex was a tiny bit op but if they made it fit before why can't they make it fit now?

aka_mythos wrote:GW's failed reinvention was just flawed. Now for the next codex, you can move back in the direction of 3.5ed, but you can't go as far back to the extreme that book did, or you just repeat its flaws.

People want everything that was in the 3.5ed book. There is nothing wrong with that. What's wrong is expecting it all in one book and I've been fairly consistent when someone says they want something that its going to be at the expense of something else. My baseline for saying its too much is when you start putting back too much.

This is what's in my head... given the limited amount of space and GW's desire to always add "new"...
You can have any 2 of these in a single book, 3 if you're willing to take a compromised version:
Legions
Daemons
Renegades
Marks
Expanded Cults
Veteran skills
LatD cultists

But again, bottom line 3.5 had very very very very very few flaws.

And your example is flawed as well. 3.5 covered legions, renegades, and daemons fine enough as it was. Rules wise IMHO a marine is a marine but what makes a marine a chaos marine IS the 5 marks.
The marks are as intergal as ATSKNF is to loyal marines. Now I can do without sillier things like a rule to make Raptors a troops choice (fluff wise yes they are a cult onto themselves, but still a very disjointed and individualistic one.) and Oblits as troops while terrifing and intriguing is something I can live without. It would be easy then to make a dex that covered Legions, Daemons, Renegades (though to me renegades encompass not only chaos but also the marines that say 'up yours' to both Emperor AND Chaos, but that's again IMHO.), Marks, Vet skills (as really that's what five lines of text tops for a Chosen unit?), and LaTD cultists.

I agree with Mythos, to some extent.

Yes the interne Balance of 3.5 was a bit Jeopardized, but it could have been easely fixed.

And all in all, it was the only issue!.

Nearly all units where usefull, maybe the Rubrics did suffered a bit, because lets face it, since the beginning GW as always had troubles with those...

But even soo everything just fited nicely in the book, sure it was one of the largesdt Codex at the time, but its proof that they could do it.

Even now SM codex is a 200 page thick book, while we stand with a 90pages...

So you can't say that it doesn't work.

Now i agree there was too much, but like i allready said somewhere else, they could just have trimmed a bit and it wouldn't have hurt that much.

The biggest argument of the book complexity is the sheer number of Options, now there was normal Wargear, Wargear of the Gods, Mutations, Powers,Veterans Skills and Deamon Weapons, that maked like a good 200 options...

But more then 60% of those, wheren't that usefull, they where there just for the fun of it and for the modelling potential they offered!

Now take like 8 or 9 Mutations, only accesible to HQ's and Elites choices, a Few Veteran Skills, the Wargear of the Gods( it was not the most populated area of the options,...4-5 specific options at best, make it that it doesn't go aboce a say 60-ish options in total with everything, but when i say that i speak of Real Chaotic options!, and it is far more acceptable and less cluthered.

The problem is that CSM is allready a sort of Dobbleganger of SM, and that the Mutations and Gods wargear and deamons whas what really made them different, and not just "another SM Chapter", take of everything of it, and leave just useless Deamon Weapons, was not the best idea.

And even so, when i read the excusses of Gav and Alessio about they though they would make a Legion codex after it..., so why did they cut off things like Ornemental Spikes, or Infernal Engine, or even the ability to gove Lesser deamons some upgrades, or even the Wargear of the Gods?

Even with all thoses excusses, for me there is nothing who can explain this bad writhing.

But to come back to the matter at hand, yes too much was too much, but nothing at all is also too much!

Now if like you said they don't grant some kind of acces to troops Deamons, then maybe we will se the birth of new types of units, now i'm all for it!, i like new things if they make my games more interresting.

I just hope that they take the Dark Eldar Codex as an example of a good writen Codex..., because damn DE is a really pleasant codex to read and to play with, and it also have a large aray of diversity in its units choices, i din't see since they came out two army who are enterly identical, wich for me is a proof that this book is really good, and i do hope that the Legion codex would be of this quality.

Let's not get our terms mixed up here folks:

The 3.5 'Dex was complex (as in intricate) but It wasn't complicated (as in difficult). Let's just be clear on that.

Medium of Death wrote:
I'd probably opt for oodles of these though.

Spoiler:

Edited for clarity.

As much as I love he death guard bits...The legs let them down big time :/

Yeah, I'm an anti-fan of the plastic CSM terminator box. Too black-legion-specific, not enough options, not enough wargear options... just a mess in general.

I suppose if I got some legion specific bits from FW I could make the legs more legion specific?

Well, those conversion kits are just for the torso, head, and shoulderpads. All the Chaos ones are. It's much more jarring with Nurgle stuff than Khorne stuff though, since the top half is all bulgy and rotting and the legs are pristine.

LazzurusMan wrote:I suppose if I got some legion specific bits from FW I could make the legs more legion specific?

Sadly no because the the conversion kits are only upper body. Like Brother SRM said, it looks particularly weird when the upper armor is a big departure from "standard" chaos aka "spikey loyalist armor".

ph34r wrote:

LazzurusMan wrote:I suppose if I got some legion specific bits from FW I could make the legs more legion specific?

Sadly no because the the conversion kits are only upper body. Like Brother SRM said, it looks particularly weird when the upper armor is a big departure from "standard" chaos aka "spikey loyalist armor".

No, I think he means convert the legs to be more legion specific, which, of course, can be done. I did it by drilling holes of various sizes in the legs and cutting the feet to have the "hoof" look of the older plaguemarines. You can check mine out in my gallery; I think they turned out pretty good. That said, full sets like the pre-heresy kits would be awesome. Here's hoping that GW does kits for Noise Marines and 1k Sons, so they get full kits, and in plastic. It would probably finally push me over the edge to start a Slaanesh faction, which I had plans for way back in 2nd Edition before becoming a lifelong Nurgle devotee.

Are anyone hoping for a price cut for the four god specific legions....or at least a ton of more options

Hope the legion dudes are cheaper pts wise.

Thats what put me off doing Noise marines last time I was looking for a new army, they cost more pts than a Gk Strike squad guy and really they just dont come close to as good as a GK troop.

I think Gk troops set the bar for how many pts good elite type troops should be, so I would either like legion guys to be similar pts and similar awesomeness or cheaper but not as great.

Slayer le boucher wrote:The problem is that CSM is already a sort of Doppelganger of SM, and that the Mutations and Gods wargear and daemons whas what really made them different, and not just "another SM Chapter", take of everything of it, and leave just useless Deamon Weapons, was not the best idea.

And even so, when I read the excuses of Gav and Alessio about they though they would make a Legion codex after it..., so why did they cut off things like Ornamental Spikes, or Infernal Engine, or even the ability to gove Lesser daemons some upgrades, or even the Wargear of the Gods?

Even with all thoses excusses, for me there is nothing who can explain this bad writhing.

But to come back to the matter at hand, yes too much was too much, but nothing at all is also too much!

+1 to this.

As HBMC has said, the CSM codex was complex but not complicated to use. It’s only issue IMO was that there was “too much synergy” between the daemonic mutations and veteran abilities. Strangely enough this is almost exactly the same issue that the current BA and GK codex suffers from.

At the end of the day, I would want another rehash of the current CSM book. I agree that Gav and Alessio have little excuse for the mess (as it is a classic case of bad game design). The fact that Alessio writes for Mantic is one of the reasons why I avoid Mantic with a 10 foot pole.

chaos0xomega wrote:DAaddict, I took that list in a team tournament last summer, it performed TERRIBLY. Unreasonably so, didn't really make much sense. Epi was either getting gibbed before the tally could really kick in or we simply weren't killing enough with our nurgle marked units (which constituted 90% of our list) to really make an impact on the game. The one time we saw some success with it though... hehehe, nothing like a unit of nurglings killing a wraithlord... unfortunately that was pretty much the only time the tally did anything for us.

If anything Epi only seems to really shine in Apocalypse games when allied with a Nurgle based CSM army.

Nothing is more hilarious that Terminators with armour ignoring combi-bolters rapid firing at Honour Guard.

KingmanHighborn wrote:But again the 3.5 dex wasn't overly complex at all. It's a myth that it is was. The flavors are what makes it a great book, because there are so many different viable ways to play. Look at IG now. It's powerful but you either have to play a power blob horde army, or have 3 manticores, and 3 vendettas, in a mechanized army. Any deviation is bad. The 3.5 dex COVERED you if you wanted to play any legion, any renegade force, daemon summoning, and with LaTD you got the true cult/masses of chaos deal. If the fourth book had been 3.5 book, with rules update plus LatD enteries no one would of said a thing.

It's like having a good tall glass of cold Guiness and someone comes by drinks 3/4ths of it and then fills the rest with water and gives it back to you.

It's more like someone tried to give you a pint in a shot glass. Tastes great but you wasted alot.

I think the way HBMC already put it best. I never said it wasn't a great book, but it had to fit into a landscape with other codices and it failed to do that. So no matter how good the book was by itself it failed with regards to the entire game. Its not a myth that it was complex, but even if it were a myth, its the stated reason that GW had problems with the book. Good or bad, in the least it was the most complex codex of the day.

KingmanHighborn wrote:
But again, bottom line 3.5 had very very very very very few flaws.

This is purely an issue of volume. Until you accept the simple reality that GW doesn't want to cram in as much stuff into a book as the 3.5 ed codex, you can't understand how they see it was flawed. You're sticking your head in the sand by ignoring what GW's design studio stated. You can place the 3.5ed codex on a pedestal and regard it as the epitome of codices, but you'll be ignoring that GW considered it a failure.

KingmanHighborn wrote:
And your example is flawed as well.

Its not an example. Its a explanation of my rationale. It is to show that in the current landscape of codices GW's only willing to have so many option, only so much complexity.

KingmanHighborn wrote:
3.5 covered legions, renegades, and daemons fine enough as it was. Rules wise IMHO a marine is a marine but what makes a marine a chaos marine IS the 5 marks.

And now all three of those will be separate books; that only underscores the degree GW felt the 3.5 codex was just too compact.

Rules wise, why do marks exist?-It is as matter of distinction, to give a unit a variety of play styles and capabilities. Abstractly, if as a result of other special rules and other abilities, a unit has "enough" variety of play styles and capabilities, should it be given more just for the sake of historic precedence?-No, because to do so ignores game balance.

KingmanHighborn wrote:
The marks are as intergal as ATSKNF is to loyal marines.

A fixture of chaos, maybe. I might agree with you if marks singular special rule applied to the army as a whole. Its mutable, its an upgrade and ATSKNF is not.

aka_mythos wrote:...but you'll be ignoring that GW considered it a failure.

When did they say that?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:...but you'll be ignoring that GW considered it a failure.

When did they say that?

They've stated it a few times, but than again they've stated the current codex was a failure, they also stated Chaos Daemons was a failure as well. So to say the only real opinion that matters is the players. As GW's opinion on things at this point, like Jarvis and his moral crusade that's literally in the Ogre Kingdoms FAQ, are complete and utter

H.B.M.C. wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:...but you'll be ignoring that GW considered it a failure.

When did they say that?

When they said it was too complex... that is by their admission something they considered a design failure.

I recently played a game against a friend who plays blood angels and after talking to him i asked if i could use my 3.5 dex which he said fine to. The game was not only more fun but my army (im terrible at armylists lol) managed to get a draw against him. The codex is still playable and competetive so if the next one us like that just not as complex i'll be all the more happy for it XD

I'm hoping that when we see the army listing for 'cultist' it is a bit more expansive than the last time around.

I'm also hoping it is something more along the line of 'traitor guard' as opposed to 'shirtless skirt wearing lunatic that really wants to work with Word Bearers instead'.

You know, something to maybe more accurately address the somewhat updated Alpha Legion background of infiltration and blending in... I hope!

Either way, I know that's what my "cultists" will look like!

Alpharius wrote:I'm hoping that when we see the army listing for 'cultist' it is a bit more expansive than the last time around.

I'm also hoping it is something more along the line of 'traitor guard' as opposed to 'shirtless skirt wearing lunatic that really wants to work with Word Bearers instead'.

You know, something to maybe more accurately address the somewhat updated Alpha Legion background of infiltration and blending in... I hope!

Either way, I know that's what my "cultists" will look like!

You should look at getting the Siege at Vraks books then .

They talk about the Alpha legion and even includes special rules for Alpha Marines such as infiltration to be used in a renegade militia army.

ph34r wrote:

LazzurusMan wrote:I suppose if I got some legion specific bits from FW I could make the legs more legion specific?

Sadly no because the the conversion kits are only upper body. Like Brother SRM said, it looks particularly weird when the upper armor is a big departure from "standard" chaos aka "spikey loyalist armor".

I can't be alone in thinking, I'd be happy if Forgewold just did complete cult terminators on the same par as Zhufor, but charged between £14-19 a model depending on weapons. For the cost of the Chaos termintor plastics box to complete the figs, I'd be happy to pay the extra for solid figs that really looked the part.

I wouldn't say you're alone, but you're in a minority since the majority wouldn't like to see this hobby become any more unaffordable.

Alpharius wrote:I'm hoping that when we see the army listing for 'cultist' it is a bit more expansive than the last time around.

I'm also hoping it is something more along the line of 'traitor guard' as opposed to 'shirtless skirt wearing lunatic that really wants to work with Word Bearers instead'.

You know, something to maybe more accurately address the somewhat updated Alpha Legion background of infiltration and blending in... I hope!

Either way, I know that's what my "cultists" will look like!

I think all depends on how GW decides to distinguish the different groups of chaos followers and where they choose to include them.

Cultists are those who actively worship Chaos, while Traitors are those who for a variety of reasons flip sides. There are a variety of cultists and obviously with Traitors coming from many different places they'd have varied skill sets.

If there is a Legions book, it makes sense that they'd tend only to have Cultists, while Renegades would have access to both. The different skill sets that Alpha Legion cultists had, really make more sense to me as skills that Traitors as opposed to Cultist should have. Given a Legion armies general emphasis on Veterans and by extension more elite than basic Chaos Space Marines, they could end up being an "Elite" low model count army... and I could imagine Cultists filling a role similar to that of Inquisitorial Henchmen as a more varied mix of characters. As such allowing the inclusion of Witches, Daemon possesd mortals, and similarly characteristically Cultist elements that have been nearly completely ignored. Traitors remain a bit more conventional with the benefits of skills and possibly marks.

GW didn't and isn't moving fast enough to get a new Chaos Space Marine book out. It should have been released a long time ago, considering the popularity of the army.

After a lot of thought and contemplation, I am going to retire Chaos Space Marines for now. I am sick of playing the same list over and over, because that is the
only competitive option in the book. The recent FAQ concerning Lash and Warp Time sealed the deal.

They are going up on the top shelf of my closet. I will be playing Dark Eldar and Grey Knight for now. Both of those armies have lot's of interesting builds, and are much more
fun to play.

Once the new codex comes out, I will reevaluate, but it better be really, really good.

Yak9UT wrote:

Alpharius wrote:I'm hoping that when we see the army listing for 'cultist' it is a bit more expansive than the last time around.

I'm also hoping it is something more along the line of 'traitor guard' as opposed to 'shirtless skirt wearing lunatic that really wants to work with Word Bearers instead'.

You know, something to maybe more accurately address the somewhat updated Alpha Legion background of infiltration and blending in... I hope!

Either way, I know that's what my "cultists" will look like!

You should look at getting the Siege at Vraks books then .

They talk about the Alpha legion and even includes special rules for Alpha Marines such as infiltration to be used in a renegade militia army.

I have heard that before and I really do need to check it out, but it becomes the typical "I can't possibly let you use that most likely overcosted underpowered FW list in this game!" problem!

aka_mythos wrote:I wouldn't say you're alone, but you're in a minority since the majority wouldn't like to see this hobby become any more unaffordable.

Alpharius wrote:I'm hoping that when we see the army listing for 'cultist' it is a bit more expansive than the last time around.

I'm also hoping it is something more along the line of 'traitor guard' as opposed to 'shirtless skirt wearing lunatic that really wants to work with Word Bearers instead'.

You know, something to maybe more accurately address the somewhat updated Alpha Legion background of infiltration and blending in... I hope!

Either way, I know that's what my "cultists" will look like!

I think all depends on how GW decides to distinguish the different groups of chaos followers and where they choose to include them.

Cultists are those who actively worship Chaos, while Traitors are those who for a variety of reasons flip sides. There are a variety of cultists and obviously with Traitors coming from many different places they'd have varied skill sets.

If there is a Legions book, it makes sense that they'd tend only to have Cultists, while Renegades would have access to both. The different skill sets that Alpha Legion cultists had, really make more sense to me as skills that Traitors as opposed to Cultist should have. Given a Legion armies general emphasis on Veterans and by extension more elite than basic Chaos Space Marines, they could end up being an "Elite" low model count army... and I could imagine Cultists filling a role similar to that of Inquisitorial Henchmen as a more varied mix of characters. As such allowing the inclusion of Witches, Daemon possesd mortals, and similarly characteristically Cultist elements that have been nearly completely ignored. Traitors remain a bit more conventional with the benefits of skills and possibly marks.

I agree - I am just hoping that I'll be able to arm them with something a little better than laspistols and CCW's this time around (though the ability to Infiltrate was nice).

Within the confines of a Legion codex, such an Inquisitor henchmen styled Cultist units would likely make sense to include other weapon options in the form of one of the model types being akin to blood pact.