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.
2020/11/24 13:29:09
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
Roknar wrote:Agree somewhat, obviously some stuff like a leviathan is not exactly standard equipment, but some of the more standard patterns should definitely not cost CP. So maybe don't remove it wholesale.
To me though it goes further than that.
They use equipment with a different mentality, it's why we have dreadclaws and loyalists stopped using them.
Why we had plasma that blew up and loyalists didn't.
Why Deathguard would use Rad weapons and such.
It's not so much that loyalists can't use relics, it's that they don't want to. Part of that is dogma, part of it is tech and part is resources.
For CSM, who have helforges and STCs, only one of those is a factor.
CSM are more power focused, which is reflected in also in the whole aspiring champions thing as well and that should apply to our gear too.
It really really sucks that they copy pasted the loyalist entries (which they blatantly did).
We should have more unreliable gear that pushes destructiveness like malefic ammo that we used to get. In terms of rules it could be optional all but it should totally be reflected.
That was also shown in the helforged vehicles, they are heresy era tech, but not quite anymore.
We start seeing more malicious machine sprits, exotic weaponry, we had the legacies of ruin that fit chaos sooo so well.
As CSM wage war with these instruments, they (the gear) gradually get corrupted too, never mind being made in factory probably soaked in warp energies to begin with.
As for resoures, CSM regularly raid the imperium for slaves/material whatever.
If they can keep void fleets up for millennia, they have no problem creating machines that they have STCS for.
The helforges are more or less uncontested aside from potential infighting. They're too valuable to lose for the legions even if they don't have any standing alliances.
That doesn't stop them from trading though. And besides, the imperium is rife with infighting too, same for Astartes.
So yes, give us relics of the past, corrupted like their wielders.
And straight up new daemon engines are fine, but for the love of all things unholy, stop basing them on animals.
What about CSM says dragons and spiders....
I can't exalt this post enough, but the part I highlighted is what I want to draw attention to. These units are "Relics" for loyalists. They rarely use them, allowing the tanks to moulder for millennia in locked vaults beneath their fortress monasteries and the dreadnoughts to sit in stasis, because they're rare and precious relics from their past, and because they no longer fit their current methods of waging war. Meanwhile The Legions use them just like any other piece of equipment. Everything is used to wage The Long War.
We've had plenty of lore to demonstrate this, but even the limited lore in the Compendium supports it (almost like the rules writers were not talking with the fluff writers). A loyalist Fellblade is a "rare jewel in the arsenals of the Adeptus Astartes" while Chaos Fellblades have "claimed countless kills for the Dark Gods through the millennia". Loyalist Land Raider Proteus are "rare survival that still serve the Imperium as relic vehicles of highest regard", while Chaos Land Raider Proteus "have played a part in wars beyond reckoning", and "show no signs of yielding as the Long War rages on". A loyalist Sicaran is "one of the rarest tanks in the possession of the Adeptus Astartes" while Chaos Sicarans' machine spirits have been "rendered all the more bellicose through millennia of contact with the warp".
Loyalists keep these machines in storage, only using them in the direst of emergencies, while the Legions press them into service to wage their unending wars. That's why they aren't the same for both factions, and shouldn't be treated the same for each. Fw understood that when writing their rules but apparently gw doesn't.
you realise that a bunch of Black legion warpsmiths found an Planetkiller hull on an abandoned hellforge and decided to stitch it together....
I'm well aware that the Black Legion built an entirely new class of ship that likely essentially required "Warp tech" to create rather then simply build another Heresy era super battleship design such as the Gloriannia (or even Furious Abyss) class.
your exemple was an iowa, they instead decided for the lolz to build a super iowa.
case closed.
*sighs* Just in case you are simply uninformed of logistic realities I used the Iowa as an example specificly because the USA could produce the Iowa 60 years ago. but no longer could now as they don't have the construction infastructure to produce certain key components (the guns and armor I belive it is) I wasn't implying specificly some sort of bizzare naval limitation. my point is, that just because the dark mechanium has forge worlds, doesn't mean they can just snap their fingers and produce something.
But they can produce things they have the STCs for. And they have the STCs for more Heresy pattern vehicles and weapons than the Mechanicum.
2020/11/24 13:33:52
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
So this thread is about someone who really likes their Forgeworld models wants a backdoor to be able to use their forgeworld models? I'm not sure if that really is GWs goal tbh. Now, would I like to see GW expand their daemon engines a little more in a new chaos codex? Sure, let the imagination explode and create some really diabolical engines of war, just keep it in the main codex. You can always use all your forgeworld toys in narrative games.
2020/11/24 13:39:11
Subject: Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
Essentially, this thread is looking for a fluff justification to improve the rules of certain FW models.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/24 13:39:23
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2020/11/24 13:43:14
Subject: Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
bullyboy wrote:So this thread is about someone who really likes their Forgeworld models wants a backdoor to be able to use their forgeworld models? I'm not sure if that really is GWs goal tbh. Now, would I like to see GW expand their daemon engines a little more in a new chaos codex? Sure, let the imagination explode and create some really diabolical engines of war, just keep it in the main codex. You can always use all your forgeworld toys in narrative games.
*YAWWNN*
Aren't you afraid some goats will get across your bridge while you're playing on the internet? I have 0% interest in competitive games. This is about allowing csm to use the units they should be able to without being penalized for it.
Jidmah wrote:Essentially, this thread is looking for a fluff justification to improve the rules of certain FW models.
No, it's about making the rules match the fluff.
2020/11/24 14:23:22
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
bullyboy wrote:So this thread is about someone who really likes their Forgeworld models wants a backdoor to be able to use their forgeworld models? I'm not sure if that really is GWs goal tbh. Now, would I like to see GW expand their daemon engines a little more in a new chaos codex? Sure, let the imagination explode and create some really diabolical engines of war, just keep it in the main codex. You can always use all your forgeworld toys in narrative games.
*YAWWNN*
Aren't you afraid some goats will get across your bridge while you're playing on the internet? I have 0% interest in competitive games. This is about allowing csm to use the units they should be able to without being penalized for it.
Jidmah wrote:Essentially, this thread is looking for a fluff justification to improve the rules of certain FW models.
No, it's about making the rules match the fluff.
I think everone is right here? The thread is lobbying for CP-free FW units as a perk for simply not being space marines which isn't quite right. Instead they should fix the legion rules so they're worth taking and work with the army correctly.
Likewise I'd much rather see some new ancient and HH tech in the codex, it feels better to start shifting the core/base of the army to fix that imagery rather than simply just being tac marines with 1/2 gun options different.
2020/11/24 14:28:18
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
bullyboy wrote:So this thread is about someone who really likes their Forgeworld models wants a backdoor to be able to use their forgeworld models? I'm not sure if that really is GWs goal tbh. Now, would I like to see GW expand their daemon engines a little more in a new chaos codex? Sure, let the imagination explode and create some really diabolical engines of war, just keep it in the main codex. You can always use all your forgeworld toys in narrative games.
*YAWWNN*
Aren't you afraid some goats will get across your bridge while you're playing on the internet? I have 0% interest in competitive games. This is about allowing csm to use the units they should be able to without being penalized for it.
Jidmah wrote:Essentially, this thread is looking for a fluff justification to improve the rules of certain FW models.
No, it's about making the rules match the fluff.
I think everone is right here? The thread is lobbying for CP-free FW units as a perk for simply not being space marines which isn't quite right. Instead they should fix the legion rules so they're worth taking and work with the army correctly.
Likewise I'd much rather see some new ancient and HH tech in the codex, it feels better to start shifting the core/base of the army to fix that imagery rather than simply just being tac marines with 1/2 gun options different.
intercessors alone have more bolter variations than CSM. Sans combi weapons.
Intercessors and Heavy, have more then CSM.
We are way past 1/2 half the guns in regards to boltguns.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2020/11/24 14:33:09
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
bullyboy wrote:So this thread is about someone who really likes their Forgeworld models wants a backdoor to be able to use their forgeworld models? I'm not sure if that really is GWs goal tbh. Now, would I like to see GW expand their daemon engines a little more in a new chaos codex? Sure, let the imagination explode and create some really diabolical engines of war, just keep it in the main codex. You can always use all your forgeworld toys in narrative games.
*YAWWNN*
Aren't you afraid some goats will get across your bridge while you're playing on the internet? I have 0% interest in competitive games. This is about allowing csm to use the units they should be able to without being penalized for it.
Jidmah wrote:Essentially, this thread is looking for a fluff justification to improve the rules of certain FW models.
No, it's about making the rules match the fluff.
Yeah, we're not asking it from a powergamer/minmaxer point of view, we're asking from a fluffy list builder point of view.
IFCSM wasnt so gated behind CP to get access to their legion fluff (like loyalists), then paying a CP to play our fluffy 1-of leviathan and Land raider proteus wouldn't feel as bad. The thing is to play a fluffy CSM list you basically need an infinite amount of CP. And no, i'm not talking about needing CP for VotlW and Endless cacophony, i'm talking about needing CP for Conceal, Ambush, Sabotaged armoury, Excess of violence, cannon fodder, tank hunters, raptor strike, vox scream, dark pact, hexagrammic wards, scorn of sorcery, red butchers, etc.
CSM get some legion specific units locked behind stratagem upgrades. Red butchers being the best example of that, they should just be a separate datasheet but instead you gotta pay CP for them. Dark apostles for the word bearers shouldnt need to pay cp to get a second prayer, theyre THE religious fanatics legion.
Thats the reason why for us, paying extra CP to be allowed to play our thematic units (whose datasheets were already "fixed") feels so terrible.
2020/11/24 14:44:49
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
And yet your suggested change is purely a competitive one - making CSM relic vehicles cheaper.
It's not as if the CSM are locked out of relics, someone wanting to play their idea of a fluffy legion list with a half dozen can do so with the existing rules. Yes it's a cost that restricts unit selection but that is the point of unit costs - and if you truly had no interest in competitive games then you wouldn't have blown off the suggestion of higher points vs cp cost with complaints about competitive balance between the csm and marine book.
Not Online! had the right idea - give them the same trait treatment as the loyalist. Aim for same unit = same power at same cost, or as near as you can get it.
Making units cheaper or better for 'fluff' reasons is why Matt Ward had to be kicked out of the WHFB design rotation. If that's the kind of game you want finding another 0% competitive interest player is the way to go.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/11/24 14:46:06
2020/11/24 14:54:26
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
And yet your suggested change is purely a competitive one - making CSM relic vehicles cheaper.
It's not as if the CSM are locked out of relics, someone wanting to play their idea of a fluffy legion list with a half dozen can do so with the existing rules. Yes it's a cost that restricts unit selection but that is the point of unit costs - and if you truly had no interest in competitive games then you wouldn't have blown off the suggestion of higher points vs cp cost with complaints about competitive balance between the csm and marine book.
Not Online! had the right idea - give them the same trait treatment as the loyalist. Aim for same unit = same power at same cost, or as near as you can get it.
Making units cheaper or better for 'fluff' reasons is why Matt Ward had to be kicked out of the WHFB design rotation. If that's the kind of game you want finding another 0% competitive interest player is the way to go.
read my comment, its not so the units get better, its so we get to feel like our legion for the whole game, not just for 2-3 turns.
2020/11/24 14:57:52
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
And yet your suggested change is purely a competitive one - making CSM relic vehicles cheaper.
It's not as if the CSM are locked out of relics, someone wanting to play their idea of a fluffy legion list with a half dozen can do so with the existing rules. Yes it's a cost that restricts unit selection but that is the point of unit costs - and if you truly had no interest in competitive games then you wouldn't have blown off the suggestion of higher points vs cp cost with complaints about competitive balance between the csm and marine book.
Not Online! had the right idea - give them the same trait treatment as the loyalist. Aim for same unit = same power at same cost, or as near as you can get it.
Making units cheaper or better for 'fluff' reasons is why Matt Ward had to be kicked out of the WHFB design rotation. If that's the kind of game you want finding another 0% competitive interest player is the way to go.
the issue however is right now as vladimir pointed out, even IF you'd change the Dreads to be equal to their loyalist counterpart, they are not, because the baseline "Legion" specific options and choices is locked behind the F&F stratagems. Ergo, the deciscion a fluff player then is forced to make, be able to represent the faction as it should be and behave on the table OR equipping the faction as it would be.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/24 14:58:48
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2020/11/24 15:03:35
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
And yet your suggested change is purely a competitive one - making CSM relic vehicles cheaper.
It's not as if the CSM are locked out of relics, someone wanting to play their idea of a fluffy legion list with a half dozen can do so with the existing rules. Yes it's a cost that restricts unit selection but that is the point of unit costs - and if you truly had no interest in competitive games then you wouldn't have blown off the suggestion of higher points vs cp cost with complaints about competitive balance between the csm and marine book.
Not Online! had the right idea - give them the same trait treatment as the loyalist. Aim for same unit = same power at same cost, or as near as you can get it.
Making units cheaper or better for 'fluff' reasons is why Matt Ward had to be kicked out of the WHFB design rotation. If that's the kind of game you want finding another 0% competitive interest player is the way to go.
the issue however is right now as vladimir pointed out, even IF you'd change the Dreads to be equal to their loyalist counterpart, they are not, because the baseline "Legion" specific options and choices is locked behind the F&F stratagems. Ergo, the deciscion a fluff player then is forced to make, be able to represent the faction as it should be and behave on the table OR equipping the faction as it would be.
Theres also the fact that loyalists get a contemptor that costs zero CP, and they have like 5 other codex options for dreadnoughts, while CSM get a single option.
2020/11/24 15:07:12
Subject: Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
i'd rather see an customizable "hellbrute" entry to upgrade or downgrade it to the corresponding type of dread instead of another 5 dread entries for no apparant reason other then to facilitate skew and bypass the RO3.
But then again as soon as you suggest customizable consolidation to avoid the issue of skew and spam you get branded someone that dislikes "choice"...
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2020/11/24 15:11:03
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
bullyboy wrote:So this thread is about someone who really likes their Forgeworld models wants a backdoor to be able to use their forgeworld models? I'm not sure if that really is GWs goal tbh. Now, would I like to see GW expand their daemon engines a little more in a new chaos codex? Sure, let the imagination explode and create some really diabolical engines of war, just keep it in the main codex. You can always use all your forgeworld toys in narrative games.
*YAWWNN*
Aren't you afraid some goats will get across your bridge while you're playing on the internet? I have 0% interest in competitive games. This is about allowing csm to use the units they should be able to without being penalized for it.
Jidmah wrote:Essentially, this thread is looking for a fluff justification to improve the rules of certain FW models.
No, it's about making the rules match the fluff.
I mean, we could have said "YAWWNN", Gad posting about FW again.
I really don't understand your point if you have 0% interest in competitive games, just bring your FW models and not pay the CP cost, Have a discussion with your buddy/opponent etc, it's not difficult. If you're building a fluffy list, it won't be an issue, but if you're really trying to just bring a truckload of FW models AND still keep your CP for Nightlord strats etc, then yes, you are being competitive, even if on a more casual level.
There's more to life than FW.
2020/11/24 15:13:46
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
bullyboy wrote:So this thread is about someone who really likes their Forgeworld models wants a backdoor to be able to use their forgeworld models? I'm not sure if that really is GWs goal tbh. Now, would I like to see GW expand their daemon engines a little more in a new chaos codex? Sure, let the imagination explode and create some really diabolical engines of war, just keep it in the main codex. You can always use all your forgeworld toys in narrative games.
*YAWWNN*
Aren't you afraid some goats will get across your bridge while you're playing on the internet? I have 0% interest in competitive games. This is about allowing csm to use the units they should be able to without being penalized for it.
Jidmah wrote:Essentially, this thread is looking for a fluff justification to improve the rules of certain FW models.
No, it's about making the rules match the fluff.
I think everone is right here? The thread is lobbying for CP-free FW units as a perk for simply not being space marines which isn't quite right. Instead they should fix the legion rules so they're worth taking and work with the army correctly.
Likewise I'd much rather see some new ancient and HH tech in the codex, it feels better to start shifting the core/base of the army to fix that imagery rather than simply just being tac marines with 1/2 gun options different.
No, it's asking that csm be given rules that allow them to be played as the veterans of the Horus Heresy, with vehicles and equipment from that era, as they should be. It would be great if gw fixed the Legion rules so that CP wasn't so important to maintain their identity, but so far they haven't done that. This would help differentiate csm from loyalists: loyalists would use newer weapons and vehicles, such as the new Cawl tech, while csm would use older tech, which is how they used to be represented.
And what difference does it make if a unit is in the codex or the Compendium?
And yet your suggested change is purely a competitive one - making CSM relic vehicles cheaper.
It's not as if the CSM are locked out of relics, someone wanting to play their idea of a fluffy legion list with a half dozen can do so with the existing rules. Yes it's a cost that restricts unit selection but that is the point of unit costs - and if you truly had no interest in competitive games then you wouldn't have blown off the suggestion of higher points vs cp cost with complaints about competitive balance between the csm and marine book.
Not Online! had the right idea - give them the same trait treatment as the loyalist. Aim for same unit = same power at same cost, or as near as you can get it.
Making units cheaper or better for 'fluff' reasons is why Matt Ward had to be kicked out of the WHFB design rotation. If that's the kind of game you want finding another 0% competitive interest player is the way to go.
I "blew off" your suggestion because the units are already priced correctly without the 1CP surcharge. Just because I don't play competitively doesn't mean I want to play with an overcosted army. Maybe loyalists shouldn't pay the 1CP either, but they shouldn't have as much access to Heresy tech as csm. Maybe they should have the old "Relic" rule back instead, or a limit to how many Relic units they can have per detachment.
2020/11/24 15:17:06
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
bullyboy wrote:So this thread is about someone who really likes their Forgeworld models wants a backdoor to be able to use their forgeworld models? I'm not sure if that really is GWs goal tbh. Now, would I like to see GW expand their daemon engines a little more in a new chaos codex? Sure, let the imagination explode and create some really diabolical engines of war, just keep it in the main codex. You can always use all your forgeworld toys in narrative games.
*YAWWNN*
Aren't you afraid some goats will get across your bridge while you're playing on the internet? I have 0% interest in competitive games. This is about allowing csm to use the units they should be able to without being penalized for it.
Jidmah wrote:Essentially, this thread is looking for a fluff justification to improve the rules of certain FW models.
No, it's about making the rules match the fluff.
I mean, we could have said "YAWWNN", Gad posting about FW again.
I really don't understand your point if you have 0% interest in competitive games, just bring your FW models and not pay the CP cost, Have a discussion with your buddy/opponent etc, it's not difficult. If you're building a fluffy list, it won't be an issue, but if you're really trying to just bring a truckload of FW models AND still keep your CP for Nightlord strats etc, then yes, you are being competitive, even if on a more casual level.
There's more to life than FW.
So loyalists get to bring 3 Contemptors for 0 CP investment and they get to keep the fluff of their chapter. If CSM want to do it we pay 3CP and lose on the longevity of the fluffyness of our lists.
The FW models are juste cooler than the aesthetic that GW has for CSM, Sicarans, LandRaider Proteus, Fellblades, the non-dorito dreads all look miles better than the rhino chassis/vanilla land raider/knights and helbrutes.
the problem with asking your opponent if you can ignore the CP cost is that you're going against a perceived balance choice. You telling Gad that he's playing competitive only because he wants to bring legion stuff proves that most of the time people won't want to.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not Online!!! wrote: i'd rather see an customizable "hellbrute" entry to upgrade or downgrade it to the corresponding type of dread instead of another 5 dread entries for no apparant reason other then to facilitate skew and bypass the RO3.
But then again as soon as you suggest customizable consolidation to avoid the issue of skew and spam you get branded someone that dislikes "choice"...
Oh, i agree, rule of 3 is dumb and should be removed. Getting the options to mix and match a dreadnought into :
Base dread
Angry dread (helbrute)
Heavy dread (ironclad)
Ancient dread (venerable)
could and should all be managed on a single datasheet.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/24 15:18:37
2020/11/24 15:24:37
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
VladimirHerzog wrote: read my comment, its not so the units get better, its so we get to feel like our legion for the whole game, not just for 2-3 turns.
Problems with CP starvation are a fair enough point and a problem GW have introduced to the game by locking fundamental unit abilities behind CP costs set in an edition where players were drowning in them.
Relics probably aren't worth a command point for anyone, I don't know what GW are going for there. My comment was aimed at the original suggestion of selectively lowering costs for one faction but not another on the same unit (accepting that traits and what not are what they are).
Who knows, perhaps forgeworld thought that giving SMs/CSMs a hundred units over and above everyone else should have some kind of opportunity cost.
2020/11/24 15:26:08
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
Not Online!!! wrote: i'd rather see an customizable "hellbrute" entry to upgrade or downgrade it to the corresponding type of dread instead of another 5 dread entries for no apparant reason other then to facilitate skew and bypass the RO3.
But then again as soon as you suggest customizable consolidation to avoid the issue of skew and spam you get branded someone that dislikes "choice"...
Oh, i agree, rule of 3 is dumb and should be removed. Getting the options to mix and match a dreadnought into :
Base dread
Angry dread (helbrute)
Heavy dread (ironclad)
Ancient dread (venerable)
could and should all be managed on a single datasheet.
Disagree, RO3 isn't stupid, the issue is that the way it is implemented is. Armies that have excessive ammounts of options in one place will be bypassing it, especially with the now extremely open detachment system where we now can just bypass whole slots and troops beeing only really relevant because of the typically attached obsec rules.. hence why CSM were able to spam more then 3 Daemonprinces... (as if 3 alone in one place weren't bad enough) Such things should just not fly.
Same as now for no reason CSM have 2 lord entries, for no apparent reason other then GW beeing lazy about no models no rules for copyright reasons.
VladimirHerzog wrote: read my comment, its not so the units get better, its so we get to feel like our legion for the whole game, not just for 2-3 turns.
Problems with CP starvation are a fair enough point and a problem GW have introduced to the game by locking fundamental unit abilities behind CP costs set in an edition where players were drowning in them.
Relics probably aren't worth a command point for anyone, I don't know what GW are going for there. My comment was aimed at the original suggestion of selectively lowering costs for one faction but not another on the same unit (accepting that traits and what not are what they are).
Who knows, perhaps forgeworld thought that giving SMs/CSMs a hundred units over and above everyone else should have some kind of opportunity cost.
Or gw should've finally gotten the memo and implemented a general head editor that controlls the work of all of the rulesteam, to hunt the frankly huge ammount of mistakes found in gw rules releases and manages rulesdesign philosophy more equal?
maybee then we'd still have R&H / lost and the damned, and wouldn't need to constantly mobilise the community when we want a line remade, like SOB or GSC....
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/24 15:28:12
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2020/11/24 15:30:35
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
VladimirHerzog wrote: Yeah, we're not asking it from a powergamer/minmaxer point of view, we're asking from a fluffy list builder point of view.
IFCSM wasnt so gated behind CP to get access to their legion fluff (like loyalists), then paying a CP to play our fluffy 1-of leviathan and Land raider proteus wouldn't feel as bad. The thing is to play a fluffy CSM list you basically need an infinite amount of CP. And no, i'm not talking about needing CP for VotlW and Endless cacophony, i'm talking about needing CP for Conceal, Ambush, Sabotaged armoury, Excess of violence, cannon fodder, tank hunters, raptor strike, vox scream, dark pact, hexagrammic wards, scorn of sorcery, red butchers, etc.
None of those are fluff reasons though? Competitive merely means wanting to win, no more, no less. The only reason to have an issue with the CP tax is because you win less when paying it.
CSM get some legion specific units locked behind stratagem upgrades. Red butchers being the best example of that, they should just be a separate datasheet but instead you gotta pay CP for them. Dark apostles for the word bearers shouldnt need to pay cp to get a second prayer, theyre THE religious fanatics legion.
Thats the reason why for us, paying extra CP to be allowed to play our thematic units (whose datasheets were already "fixed") feels so terrible.
Yes, I do understand that CSM are very CP hungry when you want to play them to win, and that paying CP for FW units sucks because of that. But that doesn't change that this is completely unrelated to fluff. There already is a thread or two covering this topic, and I see no reason to discuss this in a third one.
In any case, I would wait with the mourning until December. Codex: Death Guard will provide a pretty clear picture on how legion traits, daemon summoning, helbrutes and some other things are going to work for CSM. I seriously doubt that CSM will remain Codex: Endless Cacophony, and I also wouldn't be surprised if stuff like Red Butchers would become datasheets like Veterans Intercessors or Primaris Death Company did.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/11/24 15:31:50
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2020/11/24 15:32:06
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
VladimirHerzog wrote: Idk, i feel like it would be possible to hit a sweetspot where no unit is efficient enough to be good when spammed.
but yeah, some units circumventing the rule of 3 makes it even more stupid IMO.
Why can astra militarum bring 9 leman russ but my admech can only bring 3 dunecrawler was a big one that got me when i started playing
The leman russ spam thing isn't insofar an issue because you have diminishing returns on them... (doesn't help that the basic dreads nowadays are more durable because of allways on -1 damage. then your basic leman russ whilest beeing cheaper quite often on top of performing more reliable... but that is a whole other discussion)
In many ways it has a lot to do with sizecreep aswell.
Alot of vehicles needed to become spamable when tac lists have in essence been forced by the wholesale introduction of armies fully made of LOW's to become tank hunting taskforces.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2020/11/24 15:41:13
Subject: Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
Units with squadron rules are also supposed to come in high numbers, so mass-produced LRBT outnumbering other tanks might very much be an intended effect, even if it's just six of them and not the maximum possible 22.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2020/11/24 15:42:26
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
None of those are fluff reasons though? Competitive merely means wanting to win, no more, no less. The only reason to have an issue with the CP tax is because you win less when paying it.
Yes, I do understand that CSM are very CP hungry when you want to play them to win, and that paying CP for FW units sucks because of that.
But that doesn't change that this is completely unrelated to fluff. There already is a thread or two covering this topic, and I see no reason to discuss this in a third one.
In any case, I would wait with the mourning until December. Codex: Death Guard will provide a pretty clear picture on how legion traits, daemon summoning, helbrutes and some other things are going to work for CSM.
I seriously doubt that CSM will remain Codex: Endless Cacophony, and I also wouldn't be surprised if stuff like Red Butchers would become datasheets like Veterans Intercessors or Primaris Death Company did.
How is getting less CP for running Legion units which means we get less CP to have our Legion fluff represented not a fluff reason?
My night lords without Raptor strike/Vox Scream/In midnight clad/We have come for you/Prey on the weak/Hit and run/From the night don't play and feel like night lords. As soon as they run out of CP, they become "generic csm".
Now compare that to loyalists that have their fluffy playstyle completely free in the form of the chapter doctrines and warlord traits/relics. CSM don't get that so we are doubly penalised.
Oh, and i dont play them to win, i play them so they feel like the spooky maniacs that get up close to theyre targets and flay them alive.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/24 15:43:38
2020/11/24 15:52:07
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
VladimirHerzog wrote: How is getting less CP for running Legion units which means we get less CP to have our Legion fluff represented not a fluff reason? My night lords without Raptor strike/Vox Scream/In midnight clad/We have come for you/Prey on the weak/Hit and run/From the night don't play and feel like night lords. As soon as they run out of CP, they become "generic csm".
Oh, please. How many FW units were you going to run that you have none of your 12+5 CP left?
Now compare that to loyalists that have their fluffy playstyle completely free in the form of the chapter doctrines and warlord traits/relics. CSM don't get that so we are doubly penalised.
So, you can't take relics and warlord traits because your leviathan costs as much CP as theirs?
Oh, and i dont play them to win, i play them so they feel like the spooky maniacs that get up close to theyre targets and flay them alive.
I'm sure you can still do that after spending 3CP to have spooky heavily armored walkers and battle tanks and then get close and flay their victims alive with them.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/11/24 15:53:48
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2020/11/24 15:54:23
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
VladimirHerzog wrote: Why can astra militarum bring 9 leman russ but my admech can only bring 3 dunecrawler was a big one that got me when i started playing
Sounds like you missed the glory days of 5th edition Dawn of War deployment where a cron player would deploy two blocks of warriors and a lord, a daemons player would deploy exactly half of their army (by unit count, not cost), and the imperial guard player would deploy a dozen mechanised squads, a couple of dozen autocannon temas, and potentially a tank...
In the current game though perhaps that is what GW thought command points and relics would fix. Make it so that you can take 10 heavy tanks but only one of each type can shoot worth a damn each turn.
VladimirHerzog wrote: My night lords without Raptor strike/Vox Scream/In midnight clad/We have come for you/Prey on the weak/Hit and run/From the night don't play and feel like night lords.
Applicable to everyone. Black Templars befriend the witch when they run out of CPs, white scars fall out of the saddle, salamanders decide to tone down the whole fire thing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/24 15:57:48
2020/11/24 15:55:43
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
VladimirHerzog wrote: How is getting less CP for running Legion units which means we get less CP to have our Legion fluff represented not a fluff reason?
My night lords without Raptor strike/Vox Scream/In midnight clad/We have come for you/Prey on the weak/Hit and run/From the night don't play and feel like night lords. As soon as they run out of CP, they become "generic csm".
Oh, please. How many FW units were you going to run that you have none of your 12+5 CP left?
Now compare that to loyalists that have their fluffy playstyle completely free in the form of the chapter doctrines and warlord traits/relics. CSM don't get that so we are doubly penalised.
So, you can't take relics and warlord traits because you leviathan costs as much CP as theirs?
Oh, and i dont play them to win, i play them so they feel like the spooky maniacs that get up close to theyre targets and flay them alive.
I'm sure you can still do that after spending 3CP to have spooky heavily armored walkers and tanks get close and flay them alive.
Leviathan, Contemptor, Proteus land raider.
Turn 1 i'll usually use : Midnight clad, Vox scream, Prey on the weak, a reroll somewhere (-4 CP)
Turn 2 i'll usuall use : Midnight clad, Vox scream, PotW, From the night, raptor strike, We have come for you, reroll (-8 CP)
Turn 3 i'm already out of CP.
And thats if i don't actually need to destroy something with VotlW + Endless cacophony.
For the relics and warlord traits the difference is that CSM don't get as many auras that change how they play. Sure, my Flayer + Killing fury is free but it also doesn't affect my other units. The Ironstone for Iron Hands or Lord of fire for Sallies are examples of what i mean by a WL/relic adding to the flavor of your list.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/11/24 16:00:14
2020/11/24 16:02:58
Subject: Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
It must be really terrible to lose all that fluff oozing out of those two command re-rolls
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/24 16:03:14
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
2020/11/24 16:03:07
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
VladimirHerzog wrote: Why can astra militarum bring 9 leman russ but my admech can only bring 3 dunecrawler was a big one that got me when i started playing
Sounds like you missed the glory days of 5th edition Dawn of War deployment where a cron player would deploy two blocks of warriors and a lord, a daemons player would deploy exactly half of their army (by unit count, not cost), and the imperial guard player would deploy a dozen mechanised squads, a couple of dozen autocannon temas, and potentially a tank...
In the current game though perhaps that is what GW thought command points and relics would fix. Make it so that you can take 10 heavy tanks but only one of each type can shoot worth a damn each turn.
VladimirHerzog wrote: My night lords without Raptor strike/Vox Scream/In midnight clad/We have come for you/Prey on the weak/Hit and run/From the night don't play and feel like night lords.
Applicable to everyone. Black Templars befriend the witch when they run out of CPs, white scars fall out of the saddle, salamanders decide to tone down the whole fire thing.
Salamanders don't lose their +1 to wound on flamers and meltas because they run out of CP.
Black templars also don't lose their autohit/wound on 6's. and you can always five your warlord Inspiration Fighter or Front-line Commander to keep the "Zealous fighters" feel of the army.
They also both get to bring contemptors for 0 Cp.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: It must be really terrible to lose all that fluff of those two command re-rolls
Alright, then remove the 2 command rerolls and add a vox scream on turn 3, basically the same result. And all of these are used without really wanting to win because then i'd be spamming double shooting +1 to hit and wound which is 4 cp /turn.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/24 16:04:19
2020/11/24 16:26:25
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
And Night Lords don't lose their terror tactics. Whether or not that is a particularly fair exchange is a seperate question.
Penalizing your opponents shooting, movement, auras, and gaining bonuses to hit and movement all all very nice but they are only as 'night lords' as the name given to them. I could be describing the sisters strategems for all most players would know.
What you are describing ultimately is wanting more CP to get more bonuses and rerolls and that applies to every single army... or at least every single army with their own supplement, most of those non chaos/marine factions out there have all of one stratagem to 'define' them. Also another reason why I dislike rules for colours - people start to define the identity of their faction by its bonus rules rather than playing a units only because it's how they would in fluff - like playing waaaay too many bikers in an old edition evil sunz list simply because they were evil sunz, rules be damned.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/24 16:28:35
2020/11/24 16:38:37
Subject: Re:Should Heretic Astartes have greater access to Heresy era tech than loyalists?
VladimirHerzog wrote: How is getting less CP for running Legion units which means we get less CP to have our Legion fluff represented not a fluff reason?
My night lords without Raptor strike/Vox Scream/In midnight clad/We have come for you/Prey on the weak/Hit and run/From the night don't play and feel like night lords. As soon as they run out of CP, they become "generic csm".
Oh, please. How many FW units were you going to run that you have none of your 12+5 CP left?
Now compare that to loyalists that have their fluffy playstyle completely free in the form of the chapter doctrines and warlord traits/relics. CSM don't get that so we are doubly penalised.
So, you can't take relics and warlord traits because your leviathan costs as much CP as theirs?
Oh, and i dont play them to win, i play them so they feel like the spooky maniacs that get up close to theyre targets and flay them alive.
I'm sure you can still do that after spending 3CP to have spooky heavily armored walkers and battle tanks and then get close and flay their victims alive with them.
Three. Fellblade, Contemptor, and Land Raider Achilles. So 3CP for the SHAD for the Fellblade, then one each for the Fellblade and Contemptor, but none for the Achilles. Which is the problem with the Martial Legacy rule. The Achilles is the one unit that should have it, because the Dark Mechanicus can't produce them. They're all either:
A: An actual relic from the Heresy, or
B: Stolen from loyalists, then "broken" by the Dark Mechanicus. A process that includes weeks of rituals and lots of dead hereteks. There's a story in IA 13 that details the demise of one Arch Heretek in his subjection of an Achilles.
That's why the Achilles was an Infernal Relic for csm in IA 13 and that's the problem with Martial Legacy, it has nothing to do with fluff or balance. Gw simply applied it to anything with the "Relic" keyword in the 8th edition fw loyalist Index, then copy pasted it onto the same chaos units. No thinking involved. That's why Dreadclaws and the Karybdis didn't get it even though they're hh units too. And why loyalists have it on resin Contemptors, but not the ones made of plastic.
