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.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
The devil is in the details.

It is quite possible that Red Corsairs will be meta dominant soon just as Catachans are.

But it is also just CP. I'll bet you will still see Abaddon in those lists, too.

Chaos now has a loyal 32. That doesn't mean that's the only useful part of the list.

This right here is my bigger issue. It's doubling down on the "Loyal 32" and CP battery gak. I've even had people say with a straight face that GW wants you to farm CP because they give you so many ways to do it. I keep harping on this but the FAQ now is my last hope that GW does something to fix CP sharing/CP batteries. They keep saying that they want you to pick an army based on a theme/a story you read/etc. while in the same breath making you want to mix and match factions.

People seem to think that GW should give every legion equally competitive, but still different and unique legion traits that all will see play in the top ten of LVO.

Space Marines have black templars and imperial fists with poor chapter tactics. Craftworlds is always alaitoc or ulthwei. You don't see tau except tau or saacea sept.

If you like your night lords or word bearers then play them. It won't be as easy as playing alpha legion etc but nowhere near impossible to win a game or two. If you want to play an ultra competitive list then make that list and don't worry about the colour scheme.

I'm not sure how to feel about this just yet, but a lot for me rests on the amount of wounds the Lord of Discordant will have. The model isn't a game changer but maybe, just maybe, the CSM will be able to reliably get some unit across the board and actually make it to close combat. This isn't an issue about competitiveness. It's about not being able to do the basic premise that CSM is built upon. It's hard to get excited when you know your CSM CC units are more likely, than not, to get destroyed before they get to do anything useful (especially for their points). It's hard to get excited about CSM when the Thousand Sons and Chaos Daemons still have the best and reliable choices for CC units (Bloodletters with banner and Tzaangors with dark matter crystal).

What I think I was really hoping for, and I think a lot of other CSM players were too, was that CSM would receive a mechanic, whether it be a stratagem like the Daemons or a relic like the Thousand sons, where an infantry unit could get into close combat on T1 or T2 fairly reliably. I say this because, as a whole, the CSM units are fairly expensive, point wise, for what they do and players aren't going to be too incentivized to play CC units that can't make it to CC and won't play units where there are cheaper and easier alternatives.

Do they want us to play Chaos Marines as troops? They just made these cool models that no one will be playing. There hasn't been an incentive to play this unit for several years now so why not do something interesting like have a stratagem for Chaos Marines to do a T1 charge like Tzaangors? It would be competitively useful, fluffy, and give us a reason to buy lots of pretty, new Chaos Marine models.

Same with Chaos Terminators. Why even make terminators? Why redo the models without fixing what makes terminators so bad? No one plays them. If terminators points don't change, they need better rules for mobility, again, like a better chance at making a charge roll, or a stratagem to reposition them, later, on the board after they have been deployed. The new models look good but as a collector, I already have CSM terminators and still have little incentive to play them. The Bringers of Despair is an interesting thing but every time I see units that affect leadership I just roll my eyes. Yes you can hurt a unit with a leadership check but, from my experience, that is situational at best, and not worth relying on as an over all strategy. I might reconsider this position if a list could be made that could force enough leadership checks that methods to mitigate leaderships checks can't save them all.

 BroodSpawn wrote:
Serious question: if an option is not the top tier, competitive, 'best' option does that make in worthless from a design and development standpoint?

Look I'm sorry but I'm really confused. I don't expect everyone to approach this game the same as I do (narrative > crunch, but use the crunch that fits the narrative when appropriate) but if the issue is that because there's always one or two 'best choices' and that anyone that doesn't have that choice is thus sub-par and worthless then...what?

It's more that there's obviously going to be a spectrum from weakest to strongest choice in any given Codex but in many the gap between those two ends of the scale is comically large. Not everyone automatically gravitates towards the best traits and units in their Codex but it would be hugely beneficial if GW would write rules that don't immediately screw over someone playing a specific sub-faction because they can't be bothered balancing their game properly. I think the frustration we're seeing here is that, rather than rebalance the existing Legion traits, GW have left them unbalanced and instead added a whole bunch more options (which will probably have their own balance issues among them too).

 BroodSpawn wrote:
Serious question: if an option is not the top tier, competitive, 'best' option does that make in worthless from a design and development standpoint?

It's contextual.
A unit can be less effective overall for its points than another and still be a useful element due to some speciality, combination with other units, lack of restriction, unlocking something else, etc.

On the other hand when you have two units performing the same tasks and one is simply better in all practical regards there is no design reason for the weaker unit to exist - same is true of wargear, stratagems, and so on.

My Chaos army is a mixed warband with a little of everything. A unit of Thousand Sons Rubric Marines called "Azakariel and the Nine Magnifiques", a squad of Iron Warriors with 20 mk3 marines, 2 vindicators and one Warpsmith, etc... all painted in their own legion colours working as mercenaries under the banner of my Khorne Daemon Prince, Brutuss the Big (He was Brutuss the Small when he was an Ultramarine, he was very short by SM standards and had a big Napoleon complex. I like my Chaos characters being petty)

For making things easy I always played with all of them using the Renegade rules for all of the army, so personally I'll have 0 problems using the Purge or Black Legion or Red Corsairs rules for my chaos horde.

But I'm one of those that defend that subfaction rules should be generic to allow more creativity.

 Galas wrote:
My Chaos army is a mixed warband with a little of everything. A unit of Thousand Sons Rubric Marines called "Azakariel and the Nine Magnifiques", a squad of Iron Warriors with 20 mk3 marines, 2 vindicators and one Warpsmith, etc... all painted in their own legion colours working as mercenaries under the banner of my Khorne Daemon Prince, Brutuss the Big (He was Brutuss the Small when he was an Ultramarine, he was very short by SM standards and had a big Napoleon complex. I like my Chaos characters being petty)

For making things easy I always played with all of them using the Renegade rules for all of the army, so personally I'll have 0 problems using the Purge or Black Legion or Red Corsairs rules for my chaos horde.

But I'm one of those that defend that subfaction rules should be generic to allow more creativity.

Bingo^. I don't know why tactics were ever tied to a subfaction, they shouldn't be, they should be generic.

 Bach wrote:
I'm not sure how to feel about this just yet, but a lot for me rests on the amount of wounds the Lord of Discordant will have.

12 wounds, toughness 6, 3+/4++, he's trash, save yourself the trouble.

That being said I'm relatively happy with what they've shown so far. I will probably run a Devastation Battery of some sort.

Renegade Chapters look good, everyone needs to keep in mind that they can't use Veterans, this is a major consideration, not a deal breaker, but you're probably only going to want a single detachment of these guys.

Except for the Bringers of Despair, all of the specialist detachments can be used with any Legion, as opposed to the Loyalist ones, which are pretty much all Chapter-locked.

Fallen finally got some functional rules where you might be able to build a decent detachment with them. Also, given that it's a Specialist Detachment you will be able to tag Cypher as a Warlord, which potentially allows you to summon an Imperial Assassin if you set aside 85 points and 1 CP.

Changes to the Dark Apostle are nice, I think there's some potential there. Also, giving him +3 attacks and -4 ap with the Black Mace sounds fun, maybe not total win, but definitely fun.

Not enough information on the Master of Executions to really say much on him yet. No new stuff for World Eaters hints strongly at a codex in the works, but I think we all suspected that already.

Rotor Cannon is supposedly move and fire S5, -1ap, 8 shots, suspect it will be a 25 point weapon, we'll see, available to CSM and Havoc squads.

Other rumors:
Black Legion Warlord traits -
Units within 6" can fall back, charge, and shoot.
Half damage a la Abaddon/Calgar/Bobby G

Stratagems:
Black Legion strat that allows you to shoot during your opponent's first movement phase, probably at the closest unit.

All of this was relayed second hand from a reliable source, but I was unable to ask further questions, so details are lacking.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Bach wrote:
I'm not sure how to feel about this just yet, but a lot for me rests on the amount of wounds the Lord of Discordant will have.

12 wounds, toughness 6, 3+/4++, he's trash, save yourself the trouble

Has this been leaked or just a rumour?

 small_gods wrote:
Has this been leaked or just a rumour?

As I said, the source is reliable, as in, he was looking through the book reliable, but I don't have a lot of additional details since I didn't get to talk to him directly.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 small_gods wrote:
Has this been leaked or just a rumour?

As I said, the source is reliable, as in, he was looking through the book reliable, but I don't have a lot of additional details since I didn't get to talk to him directly.

If the info pans our then that's the nail in the coffin for a daemon engine build from vigulus. They need big boosts to be competitive.

I still see a lot of potential for a summoning build though. I have hoardes of daemons and making isummoning more reliable is worth leaving 500 points in reserve for all that flexibility imo.

Any news on the new csm terrain piece?

 small_gods wrote:
Any news on the new csm terrain piece?

I shared all I know. The Lord Discordant with the Black Legion half damage Warlord trait might be survivable enough to be useful. He's still going to be a massive degrading bullet magnet though.

Ack I lied, apparently we get Thunder Hammers now also, characters only.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 small_gods wrote:
Has this been leaked or just a rumour?

As I said, the source is reliable, as in, he was looking through the book reliable, but I don't have a lot of additional details since I didn't get to talk to him directly.

Do we have points cost? Without knowing how many points it’s impossjble to say whether that stat line is trash or OP.

Regarding this topic generally, many Chaos players seem to be moaning at everything possible. Literally everything. There’s a ton of updated kits coming and a huge number of podcasts heavily hinting at future releases and people are whining about the ‘lack of zerker updates’ today. Yesterday it was the rules. There are some seriously entitled CSM players it seems like.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 small_gods wrote:
Has this been leaked or just a rumour?

As I said, the source is reliable, as in, he was looking through the book reliable, but I don't have a lot of additional details since I didn't get to talk to him directly.

Do we have points cost? Without knowing how many points it’s impossjble to say whether that stat line is trash or OP.

Regarding this topic generally, many Chaos players seem to be moaning at everything possible. Literally everything. There’s a ton of updated kits coming and a huge number of podcasts heavily hinting at future releases and people are whining about the ‘lack of zerker updates’ today. Yesterday it was the rules. There are some seriously entitled CSM players it seems like.

I think it's a little ridiculous too, we don't even know half the rules and model updates but people are crying 'GW just hates csm' right left and centre.

I was talking from a purely competitive standpoint with the lord discordant. The model is still amazing and gives daemon engines a nice boost.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Regarding this topic generally, many Chaos players seem to be moaning at everything possible. Literally everything. There’s a ton of updated kits coming and a huge number of podcasts heavily hinting at future releases and people are whining about the ‘lack of zerker updates’ today. Yesterday it was the rules. There are some seriously entitled CSM players it seems like.

No points information, I expect it to be at least in the Daemon Prince+ price range which means I'm very unlikely to field the unit.

Strangely I took the World Eaters update as a positive, the lack of updates for them suggests that a World Eaters codex is probably in the works somewhere down the road. Of course, that could be horrible, especially given the challenges facing assault focused MEQ armies, but we'll see.

If the Lord Discordant is really that, then it is a huge gigantic fail on GW's part and they are completely fething stupid. Only GW could make such an amazing model that actually fixes a big problem with Chaos, and make him complete garbage.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 small_gods wrote:
Has this been leaked or just a rumour?

As I said, the source is reliable, as in, he was looking through the book reliable, but I don't have a lot of additional details since I didn't get to talk to him directly.

Do we have points cost? Without knowing how many points it’s impossjble to say whether that stat line is trash or OP.

Regarding this topic generally, many Chaos players seem to be moaning at everything possible. Literally everything. There’s a ton of updated kits coming and a huge number of podcasts heavily hinting at future releases and people are whining about the ‘lack of zerker updates’ today. Yesterday it was the rules. There are some seriously entitled CSM players it seems like.

No, that statline is fething doggak period. More than 9 wounds mean he's useless as he'll just get shot off the board, which renders him pointless to take. For a brief minute there, daemon engines were looking to actually be good. But if this guy's source is correct, then GW took an amazing character and has no fething clue how to stat him properly in their own fething game and just rendered him immediately useless for actual gameplay.

Yeah, nevermind, I take back everything I said.

Lord Discordant being 12 wounds at t6 is garbage. He'll be the first to die to a Knight with an Avenger Gatling Cannon and the thing you spent 150+ points on to make your daemon engines worthwhile won't matter any more, leaving you with a half-baked army for the rest of the game.

Oh well. Back to waiting for Sisters of Battle release.

drbored wrote:
Yeah, nevermind, I take back everything I said.

Lord Discordant being 12 wounds at t6 is garbage. He'll be the first to die to a Knight with an Avenger Gatling Cannon and the thing you spent 150+ points on to make your daemon engines worthwhile won't matter any more, leaving you with a half-baked army for the rest of the game.

Oh well. Back to waiting for Sisters of Battle release.

Exactly. If the rumor is true, he's completley useless which is awful because for a brief moment there it seemed like daemon engines would be good.

THIS is why people say GW hates Chaos and why Chaos players are constantly salty. Because of bullgak like this. The studio shows something cool and then proceeds to feth it up because they seemingly have no idea how their own game is played.

however that said, even with 12 wounds if you kept him backfield with a MoP casting Cursed Earth, he'd have a 3+ invulnerable save. If there is a half damage warlord trait, that might also help to keep him alive.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Bach wrote:
I'm not sure how to feel about this just yet, but a lot for me rests on the amount of wounds the Lord of Discordant will have.

12 wounds, toughness 6, 3+/4++, he's trash, save yourself the trouble.

Damn. Though if you can keep him hidden turn 1 he's running a 3++ with MoP around. It all comes down to points now.

Other rumors:
Black Legion Warlord traits -
Units within 6" can fall back, charge, and shoot.
Half damage a la Abaddon/Calgar/Bobby G

Stratagems:
Black Legion strat that allows you to shoot during your opponent's first movement phase, probably at the closest unit.

All of this was relayed second hand from a reliable source, but I was unable to ask further questions, so details are lacking.

Sounds like - and hear me out folks - people need to wait for the book to judge all this.

The statline of this Lord Discordant fella is very similar to the buggies.

Our buggies have 8-9W, T6 and a 4+. No invulnerable. The most expensive is 140 pts. Obviously that particular buggy is trash but enough people were telling me how amazing the Shokkjump Buggy was and how we'd see '9 of them in every Ork army' - it's 120 pts and has 8W.

I think 150 pts for that statline, is pretty fair. They have an inbuilt 4++ and are likely far better shots and have more CC attacks. Wait until all the information is released before judging. There might be a way to Deep Strike this character that would instantly make him incredible, IMO, for example.

Most of you guys are judging this a tad fast.

Warlord traits and stuff from detachments (such as the engine one...) would probably make a clearer picture.

You cannot *and I stress* CAN. NOT. judge this model based on 3 parts of its stat given we don't see the whole picture. To do otherwise is shortsighted and nothing but whining.

If the Black Legion trait is true? Make him Warlord, half incoming damage. 4++ on an engine? If he isn't dead he will be almost at full health the next turn. Assuming reasonable points cost he sounds fine to me. But as with the above... this is conjecture based on limited knowledge base we have right now.

 small_gods wrote:
People seem to think that GW should give every legion equally competitive, but still different and unique legion traits that all will see play in the top ten of LVO.

Space Marines have black templars and imperial fists with poor chapter tactics. Craftworlds is always alaitoc or ulthwei. You don't see tau except tau or saacea sept.

If you like your night lords or word bearers then play them. It won't be as easy as playing alpha legion etc but nowhere near impossible to win a game or two. If you want to play an ultra competitive list then make that list and don't worry about the colour scheme.

are you *** kiiding. You're seriously advocating for : ''Oh damn, you favorite fluff is Iron Warrior? Wow that's too bad we made them up as a joke and purposefully gave them bad rule, we didn't think people would actually *Like* them. Too bad. Get some better taste next time!''
Of course all subfaction should be equally competitive in a perfect game, because if not, making the rule is a waste of time from the designer, and a huge **** you to people who actually like their theme. Now equally competitive can come from all manners of way, be it : this legion has a poor legion trait, but an awesome warlord traits worth building around, or a particularly strong artifact that really unique to them. But saying with a straight face that certain theme should just be WEAKER because ... reason, is really bad from a game design point of view!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
The statline of this Lord Discordant fella is very similar to the buggies.

Our buggies have 8-9W, T6 and a 4+. No invulnerable. The most expensive is 140 pts. Obviously that particular buggy is trash but enough people were telling me how amazing the Shokkjump Buggy was and how we'd see '9 of them in every Ork army' - it's 120 pts and has 8W.

I think 150 pts for that statline, is pretty fair. They have an inbuilt 4++ and are likely far better shots and have more CC attacks. Wait until all the information is released before judging. There might be a way to Deep Strike this character that would instantly make him incredible, IMO, for example.

The difference between 9 wounds, and 12, is not something that can really be expressed by just adding 10 or 20 points to a stat profile. It actually completely change the way the unit is played, and most people would even say that the 10th wound should come with a hefty discount because it removes so much of what a character is good for, ESPECIALLY if that unit is melee (like the lord discordant probably is.)

A better comparison would be to a Hive tyrant, and then no one takes the walking version, because there's just no chance they'll be able to be worth their points then. Flying hive tyrant are very good for one thing, and that is Deepstrike + lots of ranged shoot that they can use immediatly to great effect. If the lord discordant is stuck with a move of 8 - 10 '' , he better be worth like 120 points at most (compared to a flying hive tyrant 200 something points) because you'll need to take many to have a chance to have one survive turn 2 or 3.

There is some merit to suggesting that a new relic or WLT could improve survivability of a character. I don't think it's ideal that a wonderful model be released to be only viable in one particular configuration though. There will doubtless be a best meta choice but for the most part people prefer if the next best isn't miles behind. That's people's issue here, more stuff is cool but functional stuff is better.

To me, purchase is assured if both model and rules are attractive. The model is, the rules aren't if it is >10W. Do you think Guilliman would see tournaments at 10W? I suppose 4++ is nice, if you go first and get it improved to 3++ there is hope, if you go 2nd against anyone but pure daemons he's toast. target saturation could be helpful, he would be a distraction from a knight (if renegades didn't arbitrarily have fewer abilities than loyalists for the same price it'd be less bad).

Good analogy with the hive tyrant. As a T'au player I thought "oh it's like a ghostkeel with good BS/WS, but no -2 to be hit or drone swarms".

VoidSempai wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
The statline of this Lord Discordant fella is very similar to the buggies.

Our buggies have 8-9W, T6 and a 4+. No invulnerable. The most expensive is 140 pts. Obviously that particular buggy is trash but enough people were telling me how amazing the Shokkjump Buggy was and how we'd see '9 of them in every Ork army' - it's 120 pts and has 8W.

I think 150 pts for that statline, is pretty fair. They have an inbuilt 4++ and are likely far better shots and have more CC attacks. Wait until all the information is released before judging. There might be a way to Deep Strike this character that would instantly make him incredible, IMO, for example.

The difference between 9 wounds, and 12, is not something that can really be expressed by just adding 10 or 20 points to a stat profile. It actually completely change the way the unit is played, and most people would even say that the 10th wound should come with a hefty discount because it removes so much of what a character is good for, ESPECIALLY if that unit is melee (like the lord discordant probably is.)

A better comparison would be to a Hive tyrant, and then no one takes the walking version, because there's just no chance they'll be able to be worth their points then. Flying hive tyrant are very good for one thing, and that is Deepstrike + lots of ranged shoot that they can use immediatly to great effect. If the lord discordant is stuck with a move of 8 - 10 '' , he better be worth like 120 points at most (compared to a flying hive tyrant 200 something points) because you'll need to take many to have a chance to have one survive turn 2 or 3.

Yes and 5 out of the 6 new Buggies are not characters and can be targeted anyway. Despite having sub 10 wounds.

So if the Lord Discordant is 120ish points he is massively under priced or all of the buggies are vastly over costed. Or somewhere in the middle. Regardless there is a discrepancy.

Gee, if only there were ways other than "auto immunity for being a character" to get some protections...

 Kanluwen wrote:
Gee, if only there were ways other than "auto immunity for being a character" to get some protections...

Yes, well, that is good.

So if he's infantry, Nurgle, you could potentially stack up to a -3 to hit on him, at the very least you could get him a -2 pretty reasonably.

But damn, I have so many other, better things to use this on...

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Gee, if only there were ways other than "auto immunity for being a character" to get some protections...

Yes, well, that is good.

So if he's infantry, Nurgle, you could potentially stack up to a -3 to hit on him, at the very least you could get him a -2 pretty reasonably.

But damn, I have so many other, better things to use this on...

That 40 nurgle cultist blob screen? If Mere Mortals does not apply to all legions that would mean - 3 potentially to hit against them.

How on earth are people trashing a unit that not only we have no idea what it's interactions are yet-we liturally have zero clue of it's cost, OR its abilities.

Sure, we know of SOME abilities.
We know its two gun choices.

But it's melee weapons? its strength and attack number? movement speed? degradation modifiers (assuming its actually over 10 as rumored),

Its not even not knowing if it has good support-we don't even know what HE does on its own.

 small_gods wrote:
People seem to think that GW should give every legion equally competitive, but still different and unique legion traits that all will see play in the top ten of LVO.

Space Marines have black templars and imperial fists with poor chapter tactics. Craftworlds is always alaitoc or ulthwei. You don't see tau except tau or saacea sept.

If you like your night lords or word bearers then play them. It won't be as easy as playing alpha legion etc but nowhere near impossible to win a game or two. If you want to play an ultra competitive list then make that list and don't worry about the colour scheme.

Eh. I don't think this is right.

I mean comparing Night Lords and Word Bearers is weird.
I think its been probably proven at this point that the Night Lord trait isn't very good. But if you wanted to do it as a characterful thing, you could at least try and make it work. I don't know where on MTG's Timmy/Johny spectrum you would fall - but I can see the attraction of going "hah, your unit has a -7 to LD, run away Space Marines, run away".

Its not competitive... but its a thing.

By contrast Word Bearers might as well not have a legion trait. And I think that's just bad design that could have been fixed.

I don't play MTG, so I have no idea if I'm a timmy/johnny? I play in tournaments, do ok. Play with friends and manage to have fun. Have done for a while.

I'm not comparing the two really. I'm saying if you want to play pure competitive, play with the best list you can put together and don't think about the fluff.

Does it make sense that 3 thousand sons deamon princes, Ahriman and a load of plaguebearers would naturally band together? No of course not. But that's what I see at tournaments.

If you want a Word Bearers fluffy army play with that. They get the cursed crozious and you might save a cultist or two from running away.