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.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Real question: giving FW/GW perhaps too much credit, is it possible that this is simply limiting the number of toys CS/Marines can have from FW books because they disproportionately benefit re: available options vs. other factions?

(This of course doesn't address the ridiculous codex: marines, but, just thinking...)

But csm need our fw units to make up for our lackluster codex options compared to loyalists, where fw is just "MOAR!" for loyalists.

Loyalists codex dreadnoughts:
Standard box dread
Venerable Dreadnought: BS/WS2
Ironclad: T8
Contemptor: 5++

Csm codex dreadnoughts:
Hellbrute

If that's the case, it's hitting the Legions a lot harder than loyalists. And that's just talking dreadnoughts.

To be fair, we need a hard consolidation of the Dreads. The fact that Ironclads, regular, and Vens are all different entries is fething stupid.

Here's a wild concept: The Imperial Armour Compendium, much like the Chapter Approved Munitorum Field Manual 2020 is future proofed. Many of the issues you note will resolve themselves when the new Chaos Space Marines codex is released. You will almost certainly be able to use your Legion Tactics on all units when that happens (with a few exceptions like Cultist). You should get a good clue on that when Deathguard comes out next month.

 alextroy wrote:
Here's a wild concept: The Imperial Armour Compendium, much like the Chapter Approved Munitorum Field Manual 2020 is future proofed. Many of the issues you note will resolve themselves when the new Chaos Space Marines codex is released. You will almost certainly be able to use your Legion Tactics on all units when that happens (with a few exceptions like Cultist). You should get a good clue on that when Deathguard comes out next month.

Death Guard don't have anything in the IA comp as far as I'm aware.

alextroy wrote:Here's a wild concept: The Imperial Armour Compendium, much like the Chapter Approved Munitorum Field Manual 2020 is future proofed. Many of the issues you note will resolve themselves when the new Chaos Space Marines codex is released. You will almost certainly be able to use your Legion Tactics on all units when that happens (with a few exceptions like Cultist). You should get a good clue on that when Deathguard comes out next month.

I'd say you're right, but that doesn't fix the problem of csm having to pay an extra CP for units they would have more access to in the first place compared to loyalists, or in the case of Contemptors, units loyalists have in their codex without that added cost in the first place, or that our LOWs are 1CP more expensive than everyone else's "because". I could see the less daemonicly inclined legions getting an "ignore Martial Legacy" rule, but I doubt it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Death Guard don't have anything in the IA comp as far as I'm aware.

They got Blight Drones, that's it.

 alextroy wrote:
Here's a wild concept: The Imperial Armour Compendium, much like the Chapter Approved Munitorum Field Manual 2020 is future proofed. Many of the issues you note will resolve themselves when the new Chaos Space Marines codex is released. You will almost certainly be able to use your Legion Tactics on all units when that happens (with a few exceptions like Cultist). You should get a good clue on that when Deathguard comes out next month.

Like Psychic Awakening was compatable with 9th ed??

I don;t think GW is able to do this sort of thing.

They could also have just made basic adjustments to CSM when they did the huge Marine update.

I think he is right though, except "resolve itself" means that the grey area disappears and DG will lose all access to chaos FW stuff.

 Jidmah wrote:
I think he is right though, except "resolve itself" means that the grey area disappears and DG will lose all access to chaos FW stuff.

They did the same thing with the 8th edition fw chaos index. It'll be fixed in the FAQ. Hopefully with a lot of other things.

Though I hope I get to use my Fellblade as a giant APC at least once before the FAQ comes out.

In fairness you could say our Daemon engines mitigate the shortfall in number of dreadnoughts we can access. I think the bigger deficiencies in the CSM line up compared to loyalists are probably aircraft and elite characters.
There are no aircraft in the main codex and can't see that being fixed so we're basically stuck with the lackluster FW options. I'm hoping some of the lower level HQs get moved to elites in the new codex.
At least we finally have a viable drop pod option...

Abaddon303 wrote:
In fairness you could say our Daemon engines mitigate the shortfall in number of dreadnoughts we can access. I think the bigger deficiencies in the CSM line up compared to loyalists are probably aircraft and elite characters.
There are no aircraft in the main codex and can't see that being fixed so we're basically stuck with the lackluster FW options. I'm hoping some of the lower level HQs get moved to elites in the new codex.
At least we finally have a viable drop pod option...

The new Dreadclaw rules look awesome. But as far as daemon engines are concerned: Not in my Night Lords. Not to mention I'll almost guarantee daemon engines won't be CORE, or reduce all damage by 1.

Did Dreadclaws move to "Dedicated Transport"?

 Mr Morden wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Here's a wild concept: The Imperial Armour Compendium, much like the Chapter Approved Munitorum Field Manual 2020 is future proofed. Many of the issues you note will resolve themselves when the new Chaos Space Marines codex is released. You will almost certainly be able to use your Legion Tactics on all units when that happens (with a few exceptions like Cultist). You should get a good clue on that when Deathguard comes out next month.

Like Psychic Awakening was compatable with 9th ed??

I don;t think GW is able to do this sort of thing.

They could also have just made basic adjustments to CSM when they did the huge Marine update.

It was rumored that the playtesters were working with all the 9th Ed codex rules during the playtesting for 9th- if true, and GW had the rules for all factions ironed out before the release of any of them, then it would be more surprising if FW rules were done after the fact rather than alongside the codices.

 Nicorex wrote:
Did Dreadclaws move to "Dedicated Transport"?

Fast Attack.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Abaddon303 wrote:
In fairness you could say our Daemon engines mitigate the shortfall in number of dreadnoughts we can access. I think the bigger deficiencies in the CSM line up compared to loyalists are probably aircraft and elite characters.
There are no aircraft in the main codex and can't see that being fixed so we're basically stuck with the lackluster FW options. I'm hoping some of the lower level HQs get moved to elites in the new codex.
At least we finally have a viable drop pod option...

The new Dreadclaw rules look awesome. But as far as daemon engines are concerned: Not in my Night Lords. Not to mention I'll almost guarantee daemon engines won't be CORE, or reduce all damage by 1.

I think the FW book has all but confirmed that daemon engines will not get core unfortunately. Hopefully they will benefit from any improved legion traits or doctrines GW may bless us with though.
What I did find interesting, and I'm probably reading too much into this, but I notice that of the FW daemon engines, the Blood Slaughterer went from 3+ WS, 4+ BS to 3+ for both. The Greater Blight Drone went from 4+ WS, 3+ BS to 3+ for both. The Kytan and Brass Scorpion were already 3+ for both.
Clearly GW are trying to rationalise the rules between the GW and FW books, and the GBD is probably the most significant in that the new weapons, profile and points bring it very much in line with the Foetid Bloat Drone. That is apart from the 3+.
Could we be seeing the daemon engines moving to a 3+ across the board? It always felt a little odd that daemon possession seemed to make them less acurate. If they don't get the core keyword, and subsequently lose the ability to reroll 1s due to lord auras etc, then this might be how GW look to mitigate that?
Probably wishful thinking

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

alextroy wrote:Here's a wild concept: The Imperial Armour Compendium, much like the Chapter Approved Munitorum Field Manual 2020 is future proofed. Many of the issues you note will resolve themselves when the new Chaos Space Marines codex is released. You will almost certainly be able to use your Legion Tactics on all units when that happens (with a few exceptions like Cultist). You should get a good clue on that when Deathguard comes out next month.

I'd say you're right, but that doesn't fix the problem of csm having to pay an extra CP for units they would have more access to in the first place compared to loyalists, or in the case of Contemptors, units loyalists have in their codex without that added cost in the first place, or that our LOWs are 1CP more expensive than everyone else's "because". I could see the less daemonicly inclined legions getting an "ignore Martial Legacy" rule, but I doubt it.

I was more thinking along the lines of Death Guard will allow all units to utilize the Legion or Plague Host tactics, with exceptions like Cultist, Pox Walkers, and the like.

As for Chaos having "more access" to Hersey Era tech, the Legions lost vast amounts of their armory during their retreat from Terra and the Scouring. Instead, they have been dependent upon captured wargear and new construction by the Dark Mechanicus. Apparently, the Dark Mechanics has not been building a lot of Heresy Era tech. Instead, we are getting standard wargear and the new Daemon engines being build the the Legions themselves.

 alextroy wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

alextroy wrote:Here's a wild concept: The Imperial Armour Compendium, much like the Chapter Approved Munitorum Field Manual 2020 is future proofed. Many of the issues you note will resolve themselves when the new Chaos Space Marines codex is released. You will almost certainly be able to use your Legion Tactics on all units when that happens (with a few exceptions like Cultist). You should get a good clue on that when Deathguard comes out next month.

I'd say you're right, but that doesn't fix the problem of csm having to pay an extra CP for units they would have more access to in the first place compared to loyalists, or in the case of Contemptors, units loyalists have in their codex without that added cost in the first place, or that our LOWs are 1CP more expensive than everyone else's "because". I could see the less daemonicly inclined legions getting an "ignore Martial Legacy" rule, but I doubt it.

I was more thinking along the lines of Death Guard will allow all units to utilize the Legion or Plague Host tactics, with exceptions like Cultist, Pox Walkers, and the like.

As for Chaos having "more access" to Hersey Era tech, the Legions lost vast amounts of their armory during their retreat from Terra and the Scouring. Instead, they have been dependent upon captured wargear and new construction by the Dark Mechanicus. Apparently, the Dark Mechanics has not been building a lot of Heresy Era tech. Instead, we are getting standard wargear and the new Daemon engines being build the the Legions themselves.

Right, not a lot, but they can still produce it, and do. In fact, according to IA 13 they still crank out the occasional Fellblade, though they still need to use a few salvaged parts. But that still puts the Dark Mechanicus ahead of their toaster worshipping cousins. If they can turn a few salvaged parts into a whole 300+ ton tank, then they can maintain the ones that are still in one piece. And if they can do that with a super heavy tank, then dreadnoughts wouldn't be a problem. Remember, the Dark Mechanicus doesn't play by all the tired dogmatic rules as Mars, they have no problem with modifying or reverse engineering existing technology, no matter how old or "sacred". So no, the Legions wouldn't have a lot of Heresy Era tech, but they have more than their thin blooded cousins. And since loyalists already have access to a lot of units csm don't because they're too "new" for the Legions, it's only fair to let the Heretics have more of the "old" toys.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To be fair, we need a hard consolidation of the Dreads. The fact that Ironclads, regular, and Vens are all different entries is fething stupid.

Why is that stupid?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To be fair, we need a hard consolidation of the Dreads. The fact that Ironclads, regular, and Vens are all different entries is fething stupid.

Why is that stupid?

because you could have a singular dread entry, with an option to upgrade into either? Heck you could have a venerable ironclad that way....

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To be fair, we need a hard consolidation of the Dreads. The fact that Ironclads, regular, and Vens are all different entries is fething stupid.

Why is that stupid?

Because it goes against the tired consolidationist dogma...

*shrug*

I don't agree with it, but Slayer has been beating this particular brand of dead horse beyond the point of being a meat paste.

Not Online!!! wrote:
because you could have a singular dread entry, with an option to upgrade into either?

And what benefit is there to this other than saving page space?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
because you could have a singular dread entry, with an option to upgrade into either?

And what benefit is there to this other than saving page space?

Reduction of skew.
Reduction of spam.

there are a LOT of such entries that depending upon buff and entry could become rather problematic, like DP's which needed FAQing, or elysian mortars with normal mortars.
Same for Chaos lords, the jumppack and foot version share one sheet, the terminator is another. ( ok on one hand having 6 CSM lords would be kinda funny to see if only for the sheer ammount of smash you could produce but let's be honest here, there's no reason to separate them and for some sheets it can become an issue...

Probably also thinking about the rule of 3. If they're different entries you can have 3 of each for 9 dreads. If Ironclad and Venerable are just upgrades you can have 3.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Reduction of skew.
Reduction of spam.

Been a big issue in 8th with people bringing 3 regular Dreads and 3 Iconclads in the same list, has there?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Abaddon303 wrote:
In fairness you could say our Daemon engines mitigate the shortfall in number of dreadnoughts we can access. I think the bigger deficiencies in the CSM line up compared to loyalists are probably aircraft and elite characters.
There are no aircraft in the main codex and can't see that being fixed so we're basically stuck with the lackluster FW options. I'm hoping some of the lower level HQs get moved to elites in the new codex.
At least we finally have a viable drop pod option...

The new Dreadclaw rules look awesome. But as far as daemon engines are concerned: Not in my Night Lords. Not to mention I'll almost guarantee daemon engines won't be CORE, or reduce all damage by 1.

Hey, if you want to apply artificial limitations to what you take, you can't really complain when they act as, well, limitations.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Abaddon303 wrote:
In fairness you could say our Daemon engines mitigate the shortfall in number of dreadnoughts we can access. I think the bigger deficiencies in the CSM line up compared to loyalists are probably aircraft and elite characters.
There are no aircraft in the main codex and can't see that being fixed so we're basically stuck with the lackluster FW options. I'm hoping some of the lower level HQs get moved to elites in the new codex.
At least we finally have a viable drop pod option...

The new Dreadclaw rules look awesome. But as far as daemon engines are concerned: Not in my Night Lords. Not to mention I'll almost guarantee daemon engines won't be CORE, or reduce all damage by 1.

Hey, if you want to apply artificial limitations to what you take, you can't really complain when they act as, well, limitations.

Sure I can. What I'm complaining about is that csm have to pay 1CP for a Contemptor, while loyalists have one in their codex without that added cost, and that all of the Legion LOWs also have that additional cost, while no other LOW does. That isn't an even playing field. Those limitations were imposed by gw, not me.

Are those valid complaints, or are you still calling shenanigans on me?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Reduction of skew.
Reduction of spam.

Been a big issue in 8th with people bringing 3 regular Dreads and 3 Iconclads in the same list, has there?

ask any player on the reciving end of IH supplement Dread spam, even ignoring the more Power game comp builds, it was not particular fun to face only dreads, just as any skew list is.
That way you can limit internal skew quite a bit.
Heck you don't need to be as drastic as my suggestion but making a Ven dread and a regular dread sheet which could both be upgraded could curb the worst excesses whilest still allowing for a heavy dread force in that exemple.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Probably also thinking about the rule of 3. If they're different entries you can have 3 of each for 9 dreads. If Ironclad and Venerable are just upgrades you can have 3.

Aye, it's partially future proofing for comp type style and pick ups..

Allbeit it0s maybee to excessive, instead i'd think a ven sheet with upgradeability and a regular dread sheet with upgradeability would still lower the entries by 33% and the spam aswell as give more customizability.

Im all for certain forge world units hell even certain codex units getting the CP cost treatment. have your commonly seen units (codex units) your uncommonly seen units (forgeworld) and your rarely seen units with added cost of CP, not becuase they are op or better but becuase they are rare and your using up your resources to requisition one.

So long as its attribuated fairly and not based on "gw doesnt like people running this unit so blam cp tax". things like this vehicle has maybe 3 left in the imperium, CP tax. or This vehicle can only be created by mineral rich forge worlds or those by which have the greatest tech priests, just points.

CP tax could be an alternative way to lower the point cost of certain units... like when the forge world greater daemons have been at meme points for over half their total existance, and zarakynel was playable preifly when she was only the cost of like 2 keepers before going bac, up to her meme points, and after the "rework" is still basically unplayable but not auto lose to take at least.

Basically every other ork vehicle has a 1 CP tax because many aren't worth taking without a kustom job.

 warmaster21 wrote:
Im all for certain forge world units hell even certain codex units getting the CP cost treatment. have your commonly seen units (codex units) your uncommonly seen units (forgeworld) and your rarely seen units with added cost of CP, not becuase they are op or better but becuase they are rare and your using up your resources to requisition one.

So long as its attribuated fairly and not based on "gw doesnt like people running this unit so blam cp tax". things like this vehicle has maybe 3 left in the imperium, CP tax. or This vehicle can only be created by mineral rich forge worlds or those by which have the greatest tech priests, just points.

CP tax could be an alternative way to lower the point cost of certain units... like when the forge world greater daemons have been at meme points for over half their total existance, and zarakynel was playable preifly when she was only the cost of like 2 keepers before going bac, up to her meme points, and after the "rework" is still basically unplayable but not auto lose to take at least.

The rules are better, but many of the FW superheavies are still pointed so high simply to restrict them from normal games. Things like Warhound titans have improved somewhat to be more characterful, but cost 2000 points so you cant really run it, not because they are equivalent to 5-6 knights. Same with Stompas in plastic, but that is a separate point.

I agree that a lot of Marine entries are spread out too much and should be consolidated. Venerable Dreadnoughts ought to be a strategem to upgrade an existing dreadnought, and give the normal dreadnought entry back the weapon options it used to have that got split out to the venerable kit or FW models. There was no need to split the Predator Annihilator and Destructor into 2 separate datasheets when they have a single turret option separating them. same with the gravis captain and captain with heavy bolt rifle when a single line "May replace the boltstorm auto-gauntlet with a heavy bolt rifle" would yield identical results rules wise without a 7th captain entry. GW has been pushing mono-loadout entries on orks and such, but it would have been more fun if the gladiator had been more flexible with the 3 turret options and sponson guns, letting players build them how they want rather than tying specific sponsons to specific main guns.

 Jidmah wrote:
Basically every other ork vehicle has a 1 CP tax because many aren't worth taking without a kustom job.

Most of the Kustom Jobs should have just been the base stats on the datasheet. Hopefully that's what we'll see in the new Ork codex.

Not Online!!! wrote:
ask any player on the reciving end of IH supplement Dread spam

Then fix IH.

Don't apply big fixes to small problems. That's how GW fixes things and they're terrible at it.