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.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
I mean, airline food, what's up with that.

I bet Games Workshop's behind them, like the evil corporation they are!

SCREW GW! WE ALL KNOW THEY'RE ACTUALLY LIZARD PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT US TO SEE THE EARTH IS FLATT SO THEY DISTRACT US WITH PLASTIC! PLASTIC SO EXPENSIVE WE SPEND ALL OUR DAYS TRYING TO EARN MONEY TO PAY FOR THE PLASTIC! AND NEVER EARN THE MONEY TO PAY FOR THE SPACE ROCKET TO SEE THE EARTH IS ACTUALLY TRIANGLE SHAPED!

 mrhappyface wrote:

odin wrote:
Read his post and reread it unless my englishfu decieves me this seems to sum up his post for me

 =Angel= wrote:

Should CSM have Primaris? No. Should they have equivalent? Maybe.

And in that quoted bit he specifically says CSM shouldn't have Primaris, like I said, Chaos players don't want Chaos Primaris marines. Whether or not CSM need a new option for elite armies (because chosen, terminators, etc. are crap) is another question.

In my eyes I do not see a good reason why a defencive army as codex marines and a offencive army as chaos spacemarines should be using exactly the same weapons. Just think the roman empire while expanding and while trying to hold land how their gear changed it was different equipment was it better? Hellno but it was cheaper so you could maintain a bigger army with the same funds. I think it rougly matches up only inverted as now the offencive army has fewer resources then the defencive army

If you think that SM are a souly defensive army and CSM are a souly offensive army then clearly you don't know either armies as well as you should. I've seen SM armies that field nothing but fast moving/deep striking units that swamp the enemy turn 1 and I've seen CSM armies with gunline that would rival that of Imperial Guard.

Did you read the second half of the quoted line ? Imho they already have equivalents that are (kinda?) better in beserkers, noise marines, rubrics and plague marines

Lets look at fluff:
95% of mayor battles loyalist fight is to defend imperial sectors (so in overall logic you could say that the loyalist are more geared for defencive combat as they are trying to keep the imperium together)
60% of mayor battles the traitors fight are failbaddon (who seems to succeed atm) black crusades and prolly 25/30% raiding or other offencive battles

I am really upset that only assult marines and tactical marines (thanks FAQ) can take melta bombs. Why not vanguard veterans? Did they forget how to use tht weapon when they ranked up? Or sternguards? Bikers are assult marines that did not want a jump pack. Can they take melta bombs? NO!
It's this bs that the weapon is not in the box. Yet SM units have tons of options not in the box, like grav cannon and HB on tacticals.

odin wrote:

Did you read the second half of the quoted line ? Imho they already have equivalents that are (kinda?) better in beserkers, noise marines, rubrics and plague marines

Did you read the second half of my point? We don't want Primaris, but whether or not Chaos needs a new elite choice equivalent is another story. You might say the cult Marine's are enough but what if you play Night Lords or Alpha Legion or Iron Warriors? The cult Marine's aren't strictly used by their mother legions only but some warbands still don't use them.

Lets look at fluff:
95% of mayor battles loyalist fight is to defend imperial sectors (so in overall logic you could say that the loyalist are more geared for defencive combat as they are trying to keep the imperium together)
60% of mayor battles the traitors fight are failbaddon (who seems to succeed atm) black crusades and prolly 25/30% raiding or other offencive battles

Where exactly did you pull those numbers from? I think out of your arse. What about the hundreds of Crusades the Space Marine's have fought in over the past 10,000 years? I would say the majority of SM wars have been fought with them invading a planet, it's only in recent years that they've been on the back foot for most of their conflicts. As for CSM, no, the majority of the battles fought have not been in the name of Abaddon, yes most of them have been raids for the warbands to restock on equipment and geneseed but that doesn't mean there haven't been many cases of CSM forces defending a planet from within the warp or even outside the warp: take a look at the Iron Cage.

Plus the nature of a sector or planet wide battle won’t have an impact on tactical or operational deployments. The counterattack is an important element of many defenses. A good example would be Kharkov in 1943. The Germans are defending but launch a pincer move that encircles and destroys a significant portion of the pursuing Soviet forces.

Also It would make more sense to deploy marines in this way rather than make 1 spot in your defense very strong. If you see a bunch of space Marines at one point, don’t fight there. Plus given the drop pod, storm raven, and land raider variants the loyalists have more mobility options than chaos.

 mrhappyface wrote:

Did you read the second half of my point? We don't want Primaris, but whether or not Chaos needs a new elite choice equivalent is another story. You might say the cult Marine's are enough but what if you play Night Lords or Alpha Legion or Iron Warriors? The cult Marine's aren't strictly used by their mother legions only but some warbands still don't use them.

Did i ever want to shove primaris down your troath ? no... So lets look at those legions; Iron warriors you know the guys who install bionics if it even looks like you are getting mutated, the nightlords who are even to crazy for slaneesh to "help" and the alpha legion (who might be actual loyalist ?)
I think their trait should be good enough to give them the feels

 mrhappyface wrote:

Where exactly did you pull those numbers from? I think out of your arse. What about the hundreds of Crusades the Space Marine's have fought in over the past 10,000 years? I would say the majority of SM wars have been fought with them invading a planet, it's only in recent years that they've been on the back foot for most of their conflicts. As for CSM, no, the majority of the battles fought have not been in the name of Abaddon, yes most of them have been raids for the warbands to restock on equipment and geneseed but that doesn't mean there haven't been many cases of CSM forces defending a planet from within the warp or even outside the warp: take a look at the Iron Cage.

Dont think the off the top of my head is anywhere near my ass sorry
Do you mean the pentance crusades where the inquisition sended full chapter to die for naught ? I dont see wasting good troops in suicide missions as a boon for the imperium. Im talking 40k lore not 30k lore (IMO the ironcage is still 30k) and the imperium in 40k is losing more ground then it will ever regain and thus its its primary force should become more reactive then active. Unlike chaos who has a stronghold unclaimable by the imperium and thus can focus more on the offence (unless your ironwarrios who build fortresses inside their fortresses)

odin wrote:
Did i ever want to shove primaris down your troath ? no... So lets look at those legions; Iron warriors you know the guys who install bionics if it even looks like you are getting mutated, the nightlords who are even to crazy for slaneesh to "help" and the alpha legion (who might be actual loyalist ?)
I think their trait should be good enough to give them the feels

Sorry, what point are you trying to make here?

Dont think the off the top of my head is anywhere near my ass sorry
Do you mean the pentance crusades where the inquisition sended full chapter to die for naught ? I dont see wasting good troops in suicide missions as a boon for the imperium. Im talking 40k lore not 30k lore (IMO the ironcage is still 30k) and the imperium in 40k is losing more ground then it will ever regain and thus its its primary force should become more reactive then active. Unlike chaos who has a stronghold unclaimable by the imperium and thus can focus more on the offence (unless your ironwarrios who build fortresses inside their fortresses)

I mean the many Crusades the Imperium has carried out over the last 10,000 years for a massive amount of different reasons (it's 10,000 years of history, a lot of things have happened). Again, in recent years, yes they've been on the back foot but that doesn't make the Imperium a defensive force: take a look at the second invasion of Fenris, the invasion of Baal, etc. Those are cases where a chaos or Xenos force initially invaded but then had to defend against a Space Marine/Imperial counter assault. Counter assaults that require fast assault units, not slow moving defence forces.

And just because the Imperium can't get to a stronghold within the warp doesn't mean that stronghold doesn't get assaulted by rival warbands and daemon forces.

The point that i was trying to make was: Why would those 4 legions need a specific unit to fully claim their own as they basicly are: havoc's for ironwarriors , raptors for nightlords, and culitist for wb's and Alphalegion

The marines are becoming more the WW2 germans (equipment wise not believes wise) everything becomes biger thougher and harderhitting (just look @ primaris ) but you call the invasion of fenris and baal those chapters are outliers (in plotarmour and tactics ). To push the water back into the sea first you will first need to break the wave. This is why the core of a defencive army is defencive while the flanks are felxible

odin wrote:
The point that i was trying to make was: Why would those 4 legions need a specific unit to fully claim their own as they basicly are: havoc's for ironwarriors , raptors for nightlords, and culitist for wb's and Alphalegion

That is a very one dimensional view of those legions. You only need to take a look at 30k to see the number of legion specific units there are.

The marines are becoming more the WW2 germans (equipment wise not believes wise) everything becomes biger thougher and harderhitting (just look @ primaris ) but you call the invasion of fenris and baal those chapters are outliers (in plotarmour and tactics ). To push the water back into the sea first you will first need to break the wave. This is why the core of a defencive army is defencive while the flanks are felxible

If anything, defensive Space Marine forces are outliers,

BA: fast moving assault army.
SW: fast moving assault army.
DA: fast moving assault army.
WS: fast moving assault army.
RG: fast moving assault army.

UM: tactically variable.
IH: slow moving assault army.
IF: seige specialists.

Only 3 out of the 8 loyalist legions could a case be made for that they're a defensive force.

odin wrote:

Do you mean the pentance crusades where the inquisition sended full chapter to die for naught ? I dont see wasting good troops in suicide missions as a boon for the imperium. Im talking 40k lore not 30k lore (IMO the ironcage is still 30k) and the imperium in 40k is losing more ground then it will ever regain and thus its its primary force should become more reactive then active. Unlike chaos who has a stronghold unclaimable by the imperium and thus can focus more on the offence (unless your ironwarrios who build fortresses inside their fortresses)

Solar Macharius who was one of the most succesfull but note just ONE which heavily implies multiples.

Sabbat crusade.

Howabout read 40k fluff more?

Nevermind even strategic defence doesn't mean static gun lines. Especially with marines. Marines are all about lightning strikes. Actually battle where marines(loyal) DON'T come out by flyers and drop pods are fluffwise rather unusual. That's the modus operandi they work. They are DESIGNED for lightning attacks like that. Being on ground they lose most of what makes them good in the first place!

 mrhappyface wrote:

odin wrote:
The point that i was trying to make was: Why would those 4 legions need a specific unit to fully claim their own as they basicly are: havoc's for ironwarriors , raptors for nightlords, and culitist for wb's and Alphalegion

That is a very one dimensional view of those legions. You only need to take a look at 30k to see the number of legion specific units there are.

The marines are becoming more the WW2 germans (equipment wise not believes wise) everything becomes biger thougher and harderhitting (just look @ primaris ) but you call the invasion of fenris and baal those chapters are outliers (in plotarmour and tactics ). To push the water back into the sea first you will first need to break the wave. This is why the core of a defencive army is defencive while the flanks are felxible

If anything, defensive Space Marine forces are outliers,

BA: fast moving assault army.
SW: fast moving assault army.
DA: fast moving assault army.
WS: fast moving assault army.
RG: fast moving assault army.

UM: tactically variable.
IH: slow moving assault army.
IF: seige specialists.

Only 3 out of the 8 loyalist legions could a case be made for that they're a defensive force.

You forgot the Salamanders. whom given their preferance for flamers and melta are another fast moving assaulty army.

Space marines on a whole are a fast moving assaulty force. you don't typically use space marines to defend. even on strategic defences, space marines are best off used defensivly. you see it in the novels all the time.

"planet X is under attack by the evil forces of Y! Well the Imperial guard heroicly holds the line, the space marines will launch a drop pod assault on Target A, and target B. this will tear the spine out of the enemy attack and allow us to ush them b ack and off the world.

I play Ironwarriors in 30K Bigboi P and friends have a good home here (maybe my bias for defencive logic) :3 but this is 40k everything has 1 dimension unless it has (or had) its own codex

You forget tho that 75% of the chapters are codex complient and thus (kinda in a way) fight like ultramarines....

Tneva Jees the hate....

ever heard of armageddon? ever heard of hades hive ? you know the place even the blacktemplars would work in gunlines? (untill they ran out of ammo and go into ccb)

Ever heard this quote ?
Daylightwall stands forever. No other stands against it. Bring them down.

some parts dont make an entire army as there are more devastators then assault marines in a complient chapter

odin wrote:
I play Ironwarriors in 30K Bigboi P and friends have a good home here (maybe my bias for defencive logic) :3 but this is 40k everything has 1 dimension unless it has (or had) its own codex

Just because it isn't fleshed out in 40k doesn't mean it shouldn't be.

You forget tho that 75% of the chapters are codex complient and thus (kinda in a way) fight like ultramarines....

And? Ultramarines aren't necessarily a static force either and though many chapters follow the codex, very few of them follow it to the letter.

Tneva Jees the hate....

ever heard of armageddon? ever heard of hades hive ? you know the place even the blacktemplars would work in gunlines? (untill they ran out of ammo and go into ccb)

Ever heard this quote ?
Daylightwall stands forever. No other stands against it. Bring them down.

some parts dont make an entire army as there are more devastators then assault marines in a complient chapter

That's one example of static warfare from an assault orientated chapter and that's due to the conflict in question being one of the longest planetary seige in Imperial history. The exception that proves the rule.

Ok 3. questions:
1: Is the imperium expanding or decreasing
2: Should the imperial armyforces (tactics+equipment) suit them selves to the combat at hand ?
3: In the point of they got X so we need Y2 as we dont find it fair they got X. Where do you stand?

odin wrote:
Ok 3. questions:
1: Is the imperium expanding or decreasing
2: Should the imperial armyforces (tactics+equipment) suit them selves to the combat at hand ?
3: In the point of they got X so we need Y2 as we dont find it fair they got X. Where do you stand?

1. Decreasing but does that have anything to do whether the best form of defence is attack and or whether Space Marines are the strike force to the Imperial Guard's static defence?
2. It should, though the discussion is still what is that tactic.
3. In what context do you mean? As in "they have a new super soldier so we need a new super soldier!" or "they've had their new releases, now we want our new releases!". I'm not bothered about the former but I am in the boat of the latter, the last Khorne release was an updated Kharn and a pitiful set of rules in an over costed supplement. I'll wait my turn like everyone else but dammit, I want Juggernaught riding Berzerkers!

Ok good atleast we agree on these points =] but arent juggernaught riden bezerkers thunderwolves ? So go loyalist and play them

I believe it should be 100% defencive by the astramilliwhatnow and 50% supportive and 50% counteroffencive (not fullblown just counter push them back to their lines by the spacemarines turn it to atrittion warfare grind the enemy down with ig units and then send in the powerarmour cleanupcrews

odin wrote:
I play Ironwarriors in 30K Bigboi P and friends have a good home here (maybe my bias for defencive logic) :3 but this is 40k everything has 1 dimension unless it has (or had) its own codex

You forget tho that 75% of the chapters are codex complient and thus (kinda in a way) fight like ultramarines....

Tneva Jees the hate....

ever heard of armageddon? ever heard of hades hive ? you know the place even the blacktemplars would work in gunlines? (untill they ran out of ammo and go into ccb)

Ever heard this quote ?
Daylightwall stands forever. No other stands against it. Bring them down.

some parts dont make an entire army as there are more devastators then assault marines in a complient chapter

Yes there are cases but those are exceptions. Just read the fluff for a change. You'll note standard operation is lighting strike. When it comes to gunline it's usually out of desperation.

And btw you are wrong on last part. Each battle company has same number of squads. both have dedicated company. Equal number.

And you know what? Devastators tend to come by drop pod/aircraft as well.

Marines are MOBILE army. They hit hard when enemy wasn't expecting and specifically they hit key points. The hit HQ section. They don't have numbers for gun lines. That's job for IG. They resort that as last resort. Doing otherwise is wasting their capability. In trench war they are giving up all the advantages and simply having IG regiments would be better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

odin wrote:
Ok 3. questions:
1: Is the imperium expanding or decreasing
2: Should the imperial armyforces (tactics+equipment) suit them selves to the combat at hand ?
3: In the point of they got X so we need Y2 as we dont find it fair they got X. Where do you stand?

You seem to think strategic defence=guys sit on gun lines.

But on tactical level it's move, attack, counter attack by both sides.

Now tell me. Is 40k strategic game dealing with planetary systems etc or tactical with ~platoon sized battles?

You can be defensive on strategic scale yet be aggressive on operational. Hell there's even phrase "best form of defence is attack". Ever heard of it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

odin wrote:
Ok good atleast we agree on these points =] but arent juggernaught riden bezerkers thunderwolves ? So go loyalist and play them

I believe it should be 100% defencive by the astramilliwhatnow and 50% supportive and 50% counteroffencive (not fullblown just counter push them back to their lines by the spacemarines turn it to atrittion warfare grind the enemy down with ig units and then send in the powerarmour cleanupcrews

Except you are wrong there. Even IG doesn't just sit back in trenches. That would be bad tactically so if IG would do that they would be losing every battle flat out.

Tank and mechanized regiments exists to attack btw. If IG was 100% defense TANK COMPANIES WOULDN'T EXIST! Tanks are by their nature offensive things. If your tactical goal(which btw has 0% relevance on strategic mode. Even army on defence attacks and defences as appropriate to the situation and attack in form of defence is very common) is defense and you use tanks for that it leads to dead tanks soon and not using their potential to full.

odin wrote:
Ok good atleast we agree on these points =] but arent juggernaught riden bezerkers thunderwolves ? So go loyalist and play them

God no! I have visions of S6 T5 3W base models with access to power fists for S12, Chainsaws for S7, big axes for S8/9, 2A base, +1A on the charge and fighting twice. On top of that the 3x S7 attacks from the mount. I have visions of Imperial players panicking because they didn't while out the WE unit at range and now they're knocking on their door; kind of like berzerkers now.

I believe it should be 100% defencive by the astramilliwhatnow and 50% supportive and 50% counteroffencive (not fullblown just counter push them back to their lines by the spacemarines turn it to atrittion warfare grind the enemy down with ig units and then send in the powerarmour cleanupcrews

Perhaps, though I'm not convinced.

now that I notice are the juggernaught riding the beserkers or vice versa?

And what is to not be convince about thats how Douglas Haig did it in ww1 and thats how we will win in 40k !

odin wrote:
now that I notice are the juggernaught riding the beserkers or vice versa?

Does it matter? They're gonna kill you either way.

And what is to not be convince about thats how Douglas Haig did it in ww1 and thats how we will win in 40k !

Yeah but Field Marshal Haig only changed his tactics after his original plan to march slowly across no mans land was leaked to the enemy.

Good point makes the unit more flexible

Did he ? I though he kept using the plan as they expected that the germans would never anticipate that plan as it didnt work the 50 previous times so it must work now!

From what I heard, the reason why Haig kept sending soldiers into the grinder was because he was subordinate to a French general who was a huge fan of attrition warfare. Supposedly he tried limiting casualties at first, but when that failed he did what every one was doing, as that was considered the most efficient way to fight an industrial war.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
From what I heard, the reason why Haig kept sending soldiers into the grinder was because he was subordinate to a French general who was a huge fan of attrition warfare. Supposedly he tried limiting casualties at first, but when that failed he did what every one was doing, as that was considered the most efficient way to fight an industrial war.

Tut, it's always the Frenchman's fault when you think about it.

And here I though John French was a british fieldmarshall
#BlameFrench

odin wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:

odin wrote:
Read his post and reread it unless my englishfu decieves me this seems to sum up his post for me

 =Angel= wrote:

Should CSM have Primaris? No. Should they have equivalent? Maybe.

And in that quoted bit he specifically says CSM shouldn't have Primaris, like I said, Chaos players don't want Chaos Primaris marines. Whether or not CSM need a new option for elite armies (because chosen, terminators, etc. are crap) is another question.

In my eyes I do not see a good reason why a defencive army as codex marines and a offencive army as chaos spacemarines should be using exactly the same weapons. Just think the roman empire while expanding and while trying to hold land how their gear changed it was different equipment was it better? Hellno but it was cheaper so you could maintain a bigger army with the same funds. I think it rougly matches up only inverted as now the offencive army has fewer resources then the defencive army

If you think that SM are a souly defensive army and CSM are a souly offensive army then clearly you don't know either armies as well as you should. I've seen SM armies that field nothing but fast moving/deep striking units that swamp the enemy turn 1 and I've seen CSM armies with gunline that would rival that of Imperial Guard.

Did you read the second half of the quoted line ? Imho they already have equivalents that are (kinda?) better in beserkers, noise marines, rubrics and plague marines

Lets look at fluff:
95% of mayor battles loyalist fight is to defend imperial sectors (so in overall logic you could say that the loyalist are more geared for defencive combat as they are trying to keep the imperium together)
60% of mayor battles the traitors fight are failbaddon (who seems to succeed atm) black crusades and prolly 25/30% raiding or other offencive battles

My point was that if CSM are going to remain a dark mirror to the loyal astartes, and SM armies are going to have lots of primaris units from here onward, it could be argued that some units (perhaps cult and chosen units) should be primaris statted and scale. Perhaps ancient chaos marines dedicated to the gods should always have been physically superior to some ablative wound bolter guy freshly promoted from the ultramarine scout company.

This would have the effect of making the primaris look like an Imperial counter to chaos ubermench rather than a superior loyalist master race that outstrip the original traitors entirely.

All Astartes armies are primarily aggressive forces that roam around space looking for threats to respond to or worlds to pillage. While eventually, some marine is going to be manning a wall somewhere (especially if he is silver or yellow) most of spacemarine warfare is aggressive by necessity of numerical disparity. You don't create a numerically small force of invulnerable superhumans and then have them hang out where the enemy isn't.

Arguments over whether either codex should be primarily defensive or offensive based on the background are missing the point of what marines are. Arguments over whether either codex should be primarily defensive or offensive based on the need for codexes to be different in theme miss that we already have shooty plasma loyalists and extra choppy loyalists -in black and red and black.

The classic difference in theme was that loyalists were harder to affect with morale, reflecting their dependable selflessness whereas cult units were immune to morale- being particularly crazed religious psychopaths in a galaxy of crazed religious psychopaths.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Space Marines just got an entirely new line of stuff that CSM doesn't get access to, so... I have no idea what you're talking about.

Uhmmm
"Leviathan Dreadnought - Created in limited numbers in the latter days of the Great Crusade of the late 30th Millennium" that would suggest that the CSM also has it, but in very limited numbers, it would be better if GW worded it that it was in developments during Horus Heresy and since the Empy didn't give his blessing to the final product it couldn't be taken in use in later years because the Inquisition prohibited it! So this would also prevent CSM to have it and make SM more unique.

Win/win, but ofc it's the usual, "if SM has it, then CSM must have it too" which is poor logic from GW.

HexHammer wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Space Marines just got an entirely new line of stuff that CSM doesn't get access to, so... I have no idea what you're talking about.

Uhmmm
"Leviathan Dreadnought - Created in limited numbers in the latter days of the Great Crusade of the late 30th Millennium" that would suggest that the CSM also has it, but in very limited numbers, it would be better if GW worded it that it was in developments during Horus Heresy and since the Empy didn't give his blessing to the final product it couldn't be taken in use in later years because the Inquisition prohibited it! So this would also prevent CSM to have it and make SM more unique.

Win/win, but ofc it's the usual, "if SM has it, then CSM must have it too" which is poor logic from GW.

That is just wrong; the Leviathan was originally created for 30k, not 40k, so it had nothing to do with giving CSM SM toys, it was more to do with making 30k a far more even and balanced game than 7e 40k by giving each faction basically the same army with a few elite units and rules tacked on.

 mrhappyface wrote:
That is just wrong; the Leviathan was originally created for 30k, not 40k, so it had nothing to do with giving CSM SM toys, it was more to do with making 30k a far more even and balanced game than 7e 40k by giving each faction basically the same army with a few elite units and rules tacked on.

Maybe it's just me, but your answer seems incoherent and self contradictory, but thanks for answer.

HexHammer wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:
That is just wrong; the Leviathan was originally created for 30k, not 40k, so it had nothing to do with giving CSM SM toys, it was more to do with making 30k a far more even and balanced game than 7e 40k by giving each faction basically the same army with a few elite units and rules tacked on.

Maybe it's just me, but your answer seems incoherent and self contradictory, but thanks for answer.

It's very simple:
You're saying the Leviathan was made during the great crusade so that it could be used in 40k by both CSM and SM, however, when the Leviathan first came out it couldn't be used in 40k.
If the Leviathan couldn't initially be used in 40k then their intentions for having it come out during the great crusade couldn't have had anything to do with "If SM has it, then CSM must have it too".