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.

No your statement is low, as it is an adhominem, aka a low blow.

I am also not for this:

Personally, I'm happy with WLTs and appreciate the fact I can pay a CP to give a character more buffs. A laissez-faire system where every character gets a WLT would probably be a bad idea. If every character got one, what's the point? Your opponents are just going to throw their WLT buffed characters at yours, neither side actually sees a benefit relative to the other.

And it absolutely would be a bad system,however, i do think that for most legions the availability is too stingy. A general stratagem as preface or a limit cap improvement if run mono, (maybee one / detachment f.e.) would be a better solution, especially considering that mono bonuses seem to be back on the menu, well kinda.

Also, i have never seen the cultists one in action beyond some lists using massed DA as a substitute for sorcerers. it worked not really.

As for the detachment special ones. Truth is, most of the detachments are not good, or saddled with not good enough units.
Soulforged pack is one exemple. Nice and all but only really affects all melee Daemonengines.

Cult of the damned reroll is great and all, except do you really want to blob up with cultists in melee? (also why not use the better faction for that one, it isn't like R&H do anything else well) Further, why not instead pick cult leader and assault rifle squads? Or cold and bitter for an IW list . both of which better alternatives for cultist play. (infact i had decent success surprsingly with a setup for that, without the need for the detachment.

Not Online!!! wrote:

I am also not for this:

Personally, I'm happy with WLTs and appreciate the fact I can pay a CP to give a character more buffs. A laissez-faire system where every character gets a WLT would probably be a bad idea. If every character got one, what's the point? Your opponents are just going to throw their WLT buffed characters at yours, neither side actually sees a benefit relative to the other.

Okay, you're not for that.

Doesn't change the fact that, if all characters had warlord traits, the power level of every army goes up. Assuming WLTs are equal for every army, you're not really getting an advantage relative to your opponent.

Not Online!!! wrote:

And it absolutely would be a bad system,however, i do think that for most legions the availability is too stingy. A general stratagem as preface or a limit cap improvement if run mono, (maybee one / detachment f.e.) would be a better solution, especially considering that mono bonuses seem to be back on the menu, well kinda.

Again, if you do it for every faction, where's the benefit?

It may be a good time to point out most Xenos armies don't get detachment-specific WLTs, nor do most Imperial factions. This definitely add something extra for Chaos, makes some bad units playable as the meta progresses.

This doesn't mean every unit is OP, or that it's going to become the main threat in your army. It means you have something that will do better in specific circumstances, which is a decent approach.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Also, i have never seen the cultists one in action beyond some lists using massed DA as a substitute for sorcerers. it worked not really.

As for the detachment special ones. Truth is, most of the detachments are not good, or saddled with not good enough units.
Soulforged pack is one exemple. Nice and all but only really affects all melee Daemonengines.

Cult of the damned reroll is great and all, except do you really want to blob up with cultists in melee? (also why not use the better faction for that one, it isn't like R&H do anything else well) Further, why not instead pick cult leader and assault rifle squads? Or cold and bitter for an IW list . both of which better alternatives for cultist play. (infact i had decent success surprsingly with a setup for that, without the need for the detachment.

I'm not really sure what to say about that.

Cultists do make their way to the tabletop, even in tournaments. Nick Navarati was getting some work done with them until a few years ago. He was using them in melee to swamp objectives. I haven't been watching tournament lists closely, but I imagine people are taking advantage of the rerolls to charges - it's just too good if you are going that way.

The majority of Daemon Engines - everything except Defilers - are close combat, even the Forgeworld ones. I'm not sure what to say about your comments there.

Sure, there's benefits to running Cultists as different Legions, but - if you really wanted to use Iron Warriors, wouldn't it be better to have Cold and Bitter plus Exultant Preacher? You'd get morale immunity plus rerolls to charge through WLTs, you'd just need 2 HQs.

If you don't want to play Iron Warriors, you can still get the benefit of rerolls to charge with Cult of the Damned. This gives you a lot of tactical flexibility if you want to go with Cultists.

So what is it exactly you would want to change? Just allow Field Commander to plug in Legion-specific WLTs at the expense of bonuses to specific units?

Massed cultists don't really work anymore for csm.

Defilers, forgefiends, decimators, are all Ranged, or hybrids. as is the venomcrawler, same is true to a degree to the hellturkey.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

So what is it exactly you would want to change? Just allow Field Commander to plug in Legion-specific WLTs at the expense of bonuses to specific units?

Meh, i'd probably go with something akin to the AL stratagem but yes either way.

Alternatively if you go mono you get 1 additional.

The point is csm, and xenos factions (except tau, who already have a superior version, because "tau"), should have the same option to take an extra wt for 1cp just like loyalist marines. Same goes for relics. Gw has showered loyalists enough with advantages. Time for some parity.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
The point is csm, and xenos factions (except tau, who already have a superior version, because "tau"), should have the same option to take an extra wt for 1cp just like loyalist marines. Same goes for relics. Gw has showered loyalists enough with advantages. Time for some parity.

How does extra WLTs compare with doctrines? Or including every unit in legion traits? Or the range / AP of bolters?

If you are seeking parity, there are a number of other points of arguable benefits we don't have. How would you order them, and how would you tone down the areas where CSM have benefits other factions don't?

My take is the current schemes around Stratagems / WLTs / Relics / Legion Traits / etc have missed the mark. I wouldn't want more of them, I would want the basic mechanics of the game of give a more even match. 5th edition was more balanced than 8th is now.

Right now, Space Marine line troops have guns that fire AP negative rounds and have a distance bonus equal to how far our guys move. They have tanks that can fire 40 shots a turn and cost the same as ours that can fire up to 8. They have multiple units that can snipe our characters, they have units with 12" deep strike denial, they have other abilities on basic troops that make many of ours redundant. There's just these layers upon layers of slight advantages that add up like an avalanche for fighting Chaos armies.

It's great that you want to buff this specific aspect of the game that generally provides a single character model with a slight improvement. I mean, maybe it matters in those games where your Warlord doesn't get blown away turn 1 by something 72" away that you can't even shoot back at.

But I don't know how WLTs compare with everything else that's imbalanced at the moment. You don't get parity by making your trash heap equal in height to that other trash heap over there. You get it by moving out the trash and getting back to a level playing field.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
The point is csm, and xenos factions (except tau, who already have a superior version, because "tau"), should have the same option to take an extra wt for 1cp just like loyalist marines. Same goes for relics. Gw has showered loyalists enough with advantages. Time for some parity.

How does extra WLTs compare with doctrines? Or including every unit in legion traits? Or the range / AP of bolters?

If you are seeking parity, there are a number of other points of arguable benefits we don't have. How would you order them, and how would you tone down the areas where CSM have benefits other factions don't?

My take is the current schemes around Stratagems / WLTs / Relics / Legion Traits / etc have missed the mark. I wouldn't want more of them, I would want the basic mechanics of the game of give a more even match. 5th edition was more balanced than 8th is now.

Right now, Space Marine line troops have guns that fire AP negative rounds and have a distance bonus equal to how far our guys move. They have tanks that can fire 40 shots a turn and cost the same as ours that can fire up to 8. They have multiple units that can snipe our characters, they have units with 12" deep strike denial, they have other abilities on basic troops that make many of ours redundant. There's just these layers upon layers of slight advantages that add up like an avalanche for fighting Chaos armies.

It's great that you want to buff this specific aspect of the game that generally provides a single character model with a slight improvement. I mean, maybe it matters in those games where your Warlord doesn't get blown away turn 1 by something 72" away that you can't even shoot back at.

But I don't know how WLTs compare with everything else that's imbalanced at the moment. You don't get parity by making your trash heap equal in height to that other trash heap over there. You get it by moving out the trash and getting back to a level playing field.

Yes, all those other things need to be addressed, and have been discussed in this thread. It just seems that currently warlord traits are on the table. If you dismiss that, then why not dismiss everything else? Yes loyalists have many advantages, if you want to talk about others besides their stronger characters due to being able to take extra warlord traits then go ahead. That's why I started this.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Yes, all those other things need to be addressed, and have been discussed in this thread. It just seems that currently warlord traits are on the table. If you dismiss that, then why not dismiss everything else? Yes loyalists have many advantages, if you want to talk about others besides their stronger characters due to being able to take extra warlord traits then go ahead. That's why I started this.

This is silly. I never said Warlord Traits should be dismissed, I've been arguing they should be preserved - including the detachment WLTs.

The question I asked is, relative to all those other mechanics, what would you rather have? Because you're not getting all of them.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Yes, all those other things need to be addressed, and have been discussed in this thread. It just seems that currently warlord traits are on the table. If you dismiss that, then why not dismiss everything else? Yes loyalists have many advantages, if you want to talk about others besides their stronger characters due to being able to take extra warlord traits then go ahead. That's why I started this.

This is silly. I never said Warlord Traits should be dismissed, I've been arguing they should be preserved - including the detachment WLTs.

The question I asked is, relative to all those other mechanics, what would you rather have? Because you're not getting all of them.

The original argument pertaining to wt was that all legions should have a 1cp strategem like al for a character to gain an extra wt. It seemed you were arguing that we didn't need that because we could spend 2cp to get the limited wt provided by the specialist detachments. Perhaps you've been misunderstood.

As for your question obviously the legion traits must be addressed first, as they should affect the entire army, without adding cost in points or cp.

Then we need an equivalent to doctrines. I'd prefer this come in the form of customizable veteran abilities and marks similar to what we had in the 3.5 codex.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Yes, all those other things need to be addressed, and have been discussed in this thread. It just seems that currently warlord traits are on the table. If you dismiss that, then why not dismiss everything else? Yes loyalists have many advantages, if you want to talk about others besides their stronger characters due to being able to take extra warlord traits then go ahead. That's why I started this.

This is silly. I never said Warlord Traits should be dismissed, I've been arguing they should be preserved - including the detachment WLTs.

The question I asked is, relative to all those other mechanics, what would you rather have? Because you're not getting all of them.

No, we should get all of them. If loyalists get extra warlord traits, Chaos should get that too. If they get doctrines, Chaos should get an equivalent. Same for 2 part chapter traits, and chapter traits on vehicles.

Rules don't have to be identical, but overall rules parity needs to exist if the game is going to be balanced and not generate resentment.

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Yes, all those other things need to be addressed, and have been discussed in this thread. It just seems that currently warlord traits are on the table. If you dismiss that, then why not dismiss everything else? Yes loyalists have many advantages, if you want to talk about others besides their stronger characters due to being able to take extra warlord traits then go ahead. That's why I started this.

This is silly. I never said Warlord Traits should be dismissed, I've been arguing they should be preserved - including the detachment WLTs.

The question I asked is, relative to all those other mechanics, what would you rather have? Because you're not getting all of them.

No, we should get all of them. If loyalists get extra warlord traits, Chaos should get that too. If they get doctrines, Chaos should get an equivalent. Same for 2 part chapter traits, and chapter traits on vehicles.

Rules don't have to be identical, but overall rules parity needs to exist if the game is going to be balanced and not generate resentment.

chaos not having traits on vehicles is completely slowed. I've been "cheating" for a while because i just assumed that it worked for every other army i've ever played (admech, drukhari, eldar, harlequin and knights) and thought that vehicles also benefitted. When i learned it wasnt the case it got me pretty pissed off.

So many vehicles would actually be playable if they worked with the traits. Imagine running flawless host maulerfiends, or the purge predators, or night lords hell blade / hell drake. so many cool options (not OP ones) that we are denied for whatever reason.

No reason gw can't just release a FAQ saying the legion traits affect everything. Wouldn't make much difference for most.

Guess my fellblade could be scary and wb tanks would be really brave.

The whole traits not on vehicles is in general just stupid, consideriing IG got two part traits one for vehicles and the other part for infantry for those traits that would make no sense on tanks like morale or scary.

It basically comes down to the fact that with the release of space marines 2.0 we've got the oldest codex in 8th. No, csm "2" isn't new, even gw said if you already had the original codex you didn't need csm "2".

And when fething gw actually tells people not to buy something that's a pretty big statement.

Like anyone was gonna get 2.0 for Haarkan the World Failure and Smash-Lord-With-No-Utility-or-Mobility. Seriously, who thought the Master of Executions was properly executed?

I feel obliged to not AL isn't the only legion that can get multiple warlord traits, Black Legion can too, granted the BL it's conditional

BrianDavion wrote:
I feel obliged to not AL isn't the only legion that can get multiple warlord traits, Black Legion can too, granted the BL it's conditional

*Sigh* Ok, time for my broken record impersonation: that helps the other legions how?