Switch Theme:

Why does Chaos in 40k suck so much more than in the Fantasy universe?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Pulsating Possessed Chaos Marine




 StrayIight wrote:
I have to wonder if part of the problem, is as simple as there being no CSM 'champion' among the current crop of GW staff. Or at least among the teams who are creating codex's.

We certainly have their advocates in the fluff - Aaron Dembski-Bowden as a very obvious example.

And that's likely another part of the issue. We have really good, compelling fluff. And it's not matched to the crunch one bit. In fact, I'd go so far as to argue (we've seen examples in this thread) that there is a distinct disconnect, often direct contradiction, between lore and tabletop. Our expectations are stoked, but never met.

If I'm right, can things get better? Consistently? If we have a rules team that love Astartes, for instance, and are viewing CSM as the same, but throwaway and with spikes? I suspect that's not the exact attitude in reality, more likely it's a form of enthusiasm's opposite. But the effect is the same largely.


I do not think anyone in the rules studio plays CSM on their own time. I could be wrong, but that is what I understood to be true for many years. However, I honestly think it more along the lines of intentional underpowering. GW knows what the cash cow is, and they will never make the mistake of overpowering the far less popular mirror faction again. Look at the hell turkey fiasco. It really was not THAT good of a unit in 7th, not when compared to the gakky stank eldar and tau were playing with. But, because it punished the marine profile so heavily it got a nerf in a quickish manner. The power fantasy must be maintained for the cash cow. It is just good business. And if a few people want to play the punching bag, all the better.

God I must come off as annoyingly defeatist...............

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/20 09:00:07


 
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator





Table wrote:
God I must come off as annoyingly defeatist...............


It's honest. Outside of some minor changes CSM has been putting the same troops on the table for 30 years. They are the very definition of 'not fresh'.

"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."  
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Table wrote:
God I must come off as annoyingly defeatist...............


It's honest. Outside of some minor changes CSM has been putting the same troops on the table for 30 years. They are the very definition of 'not fresh'.

That wouldn't be a problem if it was correct. The problem is we've been "putting the same troops on the table" for 14 years. The problem is that gw has, for some reason, decided to stick with the 4th edition CSM codex design philosophy for CSM. That wasn't "fresh" from the start, and it hasn't gotten any fresher.
   
Made in ch
Warped Arch Heretic of Chaos





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Table wrote:
God I must come off as annoyingly defeatist...............


It's honest. Outside of some minor changes CSM has been putting the same troops on the table for 30 years. They are the very definition of 'not fresh'.

That wouldn't be a problem if it was correct. The problem is we've been "putting the same troops on the table" for 14 years. The problem is that gw has, for some reason, decided to stick with the 4th edition CSM codex design philosophy for CSM. That wasn't "fresh" from the start, and it hasn't gotten any fresher.


He , it was fresh, like lashwhip triple trippletobliterator fresh...

Managing to somehow be even more attrociously balanced WHILEST being streamlined to death...

ALAS, for the faction it would've been better to remain with the old design paradigm...

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page
A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

In the 41st millennium there is only overpriced hamberders.

 
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
That wouldn't be a problem if it was correct. The problem is we've been "putting the same troops on the table" for 14 years. The problem is that gw has, for some reason, decided to stick with the 4th edition CSM codex design philosophy for CSM. That wasn't "fresh" from the start, and it hasn't gotten any fresher.


The unit list hasn't significantly changed since 2nd edition, which was roughly 30 years ago. But perhaps my perception is skewed, my Obliterator model collection is like a grade school evolutionary chart, my Berserker collection wasn't much different, my first Abaddon model was painted in '94 I think. Chaos has gotten a few new models, and a lot of re-sculpts.

"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."  
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
That wouldn't be a problem if it was correct. The problem is we've been "putting the same troops on the table" for 14 years. The problem is that gw has, for some reason, decided to stick with the 4th edition CSM codex design philosophy for CSM. That wasn't "fresh" from the start, and it hasn't gotten any fresher.


The unit list hasn't significantly changed since 2nd edition, which was roughly 30 years ago. But perhaps my perception is skewed, my Obliterator model collection is like a grade school evolutionary chart, my Berserker collection wasn't much different, my first Abaddon model was painted in '94 I think. Chaos has gotten a few new models, and a lot of re-sculpts.

I'm talking rules, not models. That might be the disconnect. We've gotten new models since, but their rules always follow the 4th edition rules paradigm: no customization, our marines are just worse versions of loyalists, find some cheesy combo that works (see Not Online's example of Lashwip).
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I'm talking rules, not models. That might be the disconnect. We've gotten new models since, but their rules always follow the 4th edition rules paradigm: no customization, our marines are just worse versions of loyalists, find some cheesy combo that works (see Not Online's example of Lashwip).


I tend to think those two things go hand in hand. It's possible I've just been playing Chaos too long. The DG rules were pretty solid from what I bothered to read. I'm sure TS rules will be fine and will continue to emphasize the units that GW wants TS players to focus on, so in that regard, my TS collection remains valid, Infernal Master notwithstanding (he looks an awful lot like any other TS sorcerer to be fair). The lack of customization is a distasteful shift in style, but the lack of new marine units is what's really monotonous to me in the past few editions. Changing that would require a level of investment on GWs part that is similar to the SM refresh at the end of 8th and I don't think that's going to happen, and given how that went, I'm not sure I want to play through the community backlash to that kind of power up.

"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."  
   
Made in de
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle




I don't think new units is the problem, really. Between dinobots, heldrake, venomcrawler, Warp Talons, Master of Possession, Greater Possessed, Master of Execution, Dark Apostle, Warpsmith, Cultists, Helbrute there actually were a lot of new units since 6th Edition (admittedly the last four existed as a concept for a long time but were Legion locked, and the Helbrute is just a Chaos Dreadnought).
It's more that the general CSM faction lacks focus or really only works for Black Legion, Word Bearers and undivided Renegades. GW possibly even realized that so they made CSM some kind of mad rabble in power armor, because pulling off proper models and rules for all the 9legions is too much. Add to that that Daemons are treated as their own army, in 5th Edition there was no way to play them together with CSM and in 9th we'll probably have antisoup rules like in every Codex so far.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are people at GW who sometimes think: why did we write that stupid fluff about Chaos legions that actually hate Chaos or about monogod legions that would need their own models for every unit entry when we never wanted to release models for that?
   
Made in de
Terrifying Doombull






Nuremberg

It used to be to encourage creative modelling and conversions.

   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator





Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I don't think new units is the problem, really. Between dinobots, heldrake, venomcrawler, Warp Talons, Master of Possession, Greater Possessed, Master of Execution, Dark Apostle, Warpsmith, Cultists, Helbrute there actually were a lot of new units since 6th Edition (admittedly the last four existed as a concept for a long time but were Legion locked, and the Helbrute is just a Chaos Dreadnought).


To be fair, Cultists have been around since 2nd edition, you just had to proxy them for a long time because there weren't official models for them. Helbrutes, as you pointed out, are simply Chaos Dreads, and have largely had the same thematic rule set for 30 years. Daemon Engines and HQ seem to be what they get for the most part. New infantry units is a bit more sparse, no snipers, no real infiltrators, no combat engineers, CSM for some reason just doesn't have a lot of what would traditionally be viewed as irregular warfare units, in short, the bad guys don't play dirty, they'd rather face you straight up across the field in honorable combat for some reason. This has the effect of making many of the legions utterly fail to represent their canonical fluff underpinnings, IW don't really have artillery despite being siege specialists, AL don't really have infiltrators despite being sneaky, NL have some really terrible terror troops I guess, WB work lightly with daemons, so they've paid some lip service to some extent at least. If we use TS/DG as the yardstick for measuring how long it takes GW to make a chaos legion at least somewhat represent the fluff, we're going to be here awhile for the rest.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if there are people at GW who sometimes think: why did we write that stupid fluff about Chaos legions that actually hate Chaos or about monogod legions that would need their own models for every unit entry when we never wanted to release models for that?


This is accurate, and changing it would require almost completely re-writing the entire faction, which is probably not feasible.

"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."  
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if there are people at GW who sometimes think: why did we write that stupid fluff about Chaos legions that actually hate Chaos or about monogod legions that would need their own models for every unit entry when we never wanted to release models for that?
To be fair, when most of that lore was written up through the early 00's, there were no such plans, and the idea that everything needed its own unique dedicated model kit was actively counter to the hobby mindset at the time, all that lore was written for people to explore with conversions and the like. There's all sorts of stuff GW wrote rules and lore for knowing full well they were never going to make dedicated kits.

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I'm talking rules, not models. That might be the disconnect. We've gotten new models since, but their rules always follow the 4th edition rules paradigm: no customization, our marines are just worse versions of loyalists, find some cheesy combo that works (see Not Online's example of Lashwip).


I tend to think those two things go hand in hand. It's possible I've just been playing Chaos too long. The DG rules were pretty solid from what I bothered to read. I'm sure TS rules will be fine and will continue to emphasize the units that GW wants TS players to focus on, so in that regard, my TS collection remains valid, Infernal Master notwithstanding (he looks an awful lot like any other TS sorcerer to be fair). The lack of customization is a distasteful shift in style, but the lack of new marine units is what's really monotonous to me in the past few editions. Changing that would require a level of investment on GWs part that is similar to the SM refresh at the end of 8th and I don't think that's going to happen, and given how that went, I'm not sure I want to play through the community backlash to that kind of power up.

They really don't. Right now CSM have the 3rd highest number of available products on the gw website behind loyalists and the Guard (and a large number of available units hasn't helped them much either), and the numbers are about the same for fw. A large selection of units doesn't help if those units don't have functional rules. CSM have plenty of units and models for them, we just need rules to allow them to function properly in the various Legions and Renegades. We had far fewer available units in the 3.5 era, but those units felt far more like what CSM should be than they have since the 4th edition CSM codex.
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





gonna agree with Gad that the problem isn't a lack of models. look plenty of armies have done very well despite having ancient model lines (craftworld eldar for example are often very powerful)
to me the problem is that GW suffers from a serious lack of vision regarding the army. part of the problem is CSMs define too many things and they're unwilling to make the army insanely customizable, but at the same time they're not willing to solodifiy the concept, so we basicly get a weak limp wristed "offensivly inoffensive" codex.

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
They really don't. Right now CSM have the 3rd highest number of available products on the gw website behind loyalists and the Guard (and a large number of available units hasn't helped them much either), and the numbers are about the same for fw.


First off, that's an incredibly simplistic metric and really has no bearing on my point at all. However, quantity is certainly a metric to measure. Redundant is a good metric also, and CSM has that in spades. Sadly, I'm just not excited for more daemon engines, it's more of the same. CSM has never been lacking for good HQ, and some of the new HQ units are quite good, but it just creates force org bottleneck.

Again, my complaint is not quantity (or even quality, the rules are good enough to have fun), it's variety. The variety of spider-mech vs gorilla-mech is just not very compelling.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
CSM have plenty of units and models for them, we just need rules to allow them to function properly in the various Legions and Renegades.


Something that made CSM more than mustache-twirling caricatures would be nice. Every release seems to be like some super-villain rolling out his latest doomsday robot while monologuing about it's utter invincibility.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
We had far fewer available units in the 3.5 era, but those units felt far more like what CSM should be than they have since the 4th edition CSM codex.


Everyone had fewer units back then. Also, we're still on probation for 3.5.

"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."  
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
First off, that's an incredibly simplistic metric and really has no bearing on my point at all. However, quantity is certainly a metric to measure. Redundant is a good metric also, and CSM has that in spades. Sadly, I'm just not excited for more daemon engines, it's more of the same. CSM has never been lacking for good HQ, and some of the new HQ units are quite good, but it just creates force org bottleneck.

Again, my complaint is not quantity (or even quality, the rules are good enough to have fun), it's variety. The variety of spider-mech vs gorilla-mech is just not very compelling.

That's the variety that you want. I don't have much interest in daemon engines either, but some people LOVE them. I'd certainly prefer more along the lines of the Defiler and fw models, but this sounds like a request for the models that you specifically want.

Something that made CSM more than mustache-twirling caricatures would be nice. Every release seems to be like some super-villain rolling out his latest doomsday robot while monologuing about it's utter invincibility.

Yes it would. But again, you're focusing on models, and not rules. We need good rules for the units we already have before worrying about getting new stuff. I don't want to have to throw my current army to the wayside just to replace them with the "new hotness".

Everyone had fewer units back then. Also, we're still on probation for 3.5.

This tired trope really needs to die.
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
That's the variety that you want. I don't have much interest in daemon engines either, but some people LOVE them. I'd certainly prefer more along the lines of the Defiler and fw models, but this sounds like a request for the models that you specifically want.


Yes, I'd like more specialized infantry units, that's about as specific as it gets.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Yes it would. But again, you're focusing on models, and not rules. We need good rules for the units we already have before worrying about getting new stuff. I don't want to have to throw my current army to the wayside just to replace them with the "new hotness".


I'm not worried about the rules, I think they'll be fine or at least good enough to play casually. I don't think we get interesting new rules or roles without new models, at least that seems to be the way GW is doing things these days. So yes, I am focusing on models because those are the primary circumstances under which new rules come in to play.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
This tired trope really needs to die.


Tropes usually spring from some level of truth. CSM 3.5 was definitely the most powerful version of the army I've fielded, relative to the rest of the factions that edition, but it wasn't perfect either. Special Characters were pretty underwhelming in 3.5, I think I fielded Abaddon once, on a lark, for the lulz.

At the end of the day, I'm sure the rules will continue to support CSM operating at some relatively functional level of efficiency. I'd just like to see them evolve in some manner beyond monsterbots.

"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."  
   
Made in de
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle




 Vaktathi wrote:
Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if there are people at GW who sometimes think: why did we write that stupid fluff about Chaos legions that actually hate Chaos or about monogod legions that would need their own models for every unit entry when we never wanted to release models for that?
To be fair, when most of that lore was written up through the early 00's, there were no such plans, and the idea that everything needed its own unique dedicated model kit was actively counter to the hobby mindset at the time, all that lore was written for people to explore with conversions and the like. There's all sorts of stuff GW wrote rules and lore for knowing full well they were never going to make dedicated kits.


I agree. It's still a problem now, since players rightfully want to see the (old) fluff on the table that is hard to connect to GWs no model no rules approach of today.
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Yes, I'd like more specialized infantry units, that's about as specific as it gets.

That has usually been best handled in CSM with Veteran Abilities and Marks. You want infiltrators? Take the INFILTRATION Veteran Ability. Vehicle hunters? TANK HUNTERS. Melee specialists? FURIOUS ASSAULT. Marks of Khorne, Nurgle, Tzeentch, and Slaanesh give further pushes in their own direction. Do you want as many different types of Heretic Astartes as loyalists have of primaris?

I'm not worried about the rules, I think they'll be fine or at least good enough to play casually. I don't think we get interesting new rules or roles without new models, at least that seems to be the way GW is doing things these days. So yes, I am focusing on models because those are the primary circumstances under which new rules come in to play.

Again, not really. Drukhari received ONE new model with their codex (and it was a resculpt of an already existing unit), but got an excellent codex. Death Guard received TWO, and got an excellent codex, and one that I hope points to what the other Legions will get. I have no problem with getting new models, some are definitely needed (Chosen, Berzerkers, Noise Marines), but we need good rules for what we already have first.

Tropes usually spring from some level of truth. CSM 3.5 was definitely the most powerful version of the army I've fielded, relative to the rest of the factions that edition, but it wasn't perfect either. Special Characters were pretty underwhelming in 3.5, I think I fielded Abaddon once, on a lark, for the lulz.

At the end of the day, I'm sure the rules will continue to support CSM operating at some relatively functional level of efficiency. I'd just like to see them evolve in some manner beyond monsterbots.

Well Abaddon has definitely received plenty (too much, IMO) attention in the years since.

If you want CSM to be something besides monsterbots + Cultists + characters then we need better rules for our infantry. And new models alone won't fix that, as the new CSM models prove.
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
That has usually been best handled in CSM with Veteran Abilities and Marks. You want infiltrators? Take the INFILTRATION Veteran Ability. Vehicle hunters? TANK HUNTERS. Melee specialists? FURIOUS ASSAULT. Marks of Khorne, Nurgle, Tzeentch, and Slaanesh give further pushes in their own direction. Do you want as many different types of Heretic Astartes as loyalists have of primaris?


I think the ship has sailed on veteran abilities, I've accepted they're not coming back. To a certain extent, yes, I want many different types of CSM, with new weapons that do different things, command different playstyles, emphasize different tactics. You can splat all the veteran abilities you want on to a marine, he's still rolling with bolter/frag/krak.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Again, not really. Drukhari received ONE new model with their codex (and it was a resculpt of an already existing unit), but got an excellent codex.


Yes, they did. Good rules is not my concern, I'm sure we'll get perfectly functional rules. That being said, Drukhari are still missing models it would be cool to see, like Vect. Orks got some interesting new units that will encourage some changes to playstyle most likely and provide some new flavor, they may or may not be unbalanced in their current state, I'm sure GW will address that in their typically uneven fashion, but they are something new and interesting regardless.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I have no problem with getting new models, some are definitely needed (Chosen, Berzerkers, Noise Marines), but we need good rules for what we already have first.


Yes, this is precisely what I don't want. I couldn't care less if they re-sculpt any of those (or any existing units), I really hope they don't. Do something new, even if it sucks, at least make the attempt. But please don't waste time on the utterly masturbatory process of re-sculpting the umpteenth iteration of Berserkers or Noise Marines.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
If you want CSM to be something besides monsterbots + Cultists + characters then we need better rules for our infantry. And new models alone won't fix that, as the new CSM models prove.


I think we're talking past each other a bit. I've given up on the idea of 'fixes' for 40k factions, GW has established the cyclical nature of balance in the game. I don't think anything will ever be 'fixed' in this game, but new and different are still possibilities.

I'm not worried about rules, they will be good enough for my purposes, which doesn't involve playing in tournaments any time in the near future. Casual match play is about as serious as I care about.

"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."  
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
But please don't waste time on the utterly masturbatory process of re-sculpting the umpteenth iteration of Berserkers or Noise Marines.
Berzerkers are still the models released in about 1999 iirc.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in gb
Assassin with Black Lotus Poison





Bristol

Because in Fantasy the people writing the lore of the world by and large didn't buy into the propaganda from their own universe like they did with the Imperium in 40K.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/21 19:45:38


The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.

Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
 
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator





 Insectum7 wrote:
Berzerkers are still the models released in about 1999 iirc.


That seems fine to me, they're still the same unit they were in 1999 and the sculpts still hold up pretty well today. Newer, prettier berserkers will be just that and nothing else. Even if they release new Noise Marines, I'm keeping my Wu-Tang Noise Marines, because they're cool, and they're Wu-Tang, so by definition, you don't feth with them.

"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."  
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
I think the ship has sailed on veteran abilities, I've accepted they're not coming back. To a certain extent, yes, I want many different types of CSM, with new weapons that do different things, command different playstyles, emphasize different tactics. You can splat all the veteran abilities you want on to a marine, he's still rolling with bolter/frag/krak.


AGAIN, not really. Drukhari can choose from a selection of Combat Drugs to improve some of their units. Ork Kustom Jobs are now an optional upgrade for some of their units that cost points. Nothing is stopping gw from implementing similar rules for optional Veteran Abilities and Marks for CSM.

And I definitely don't want CSM to have the same ridiculous number of redundant weapon and units that loyalists have.

Yes, they did. Good rules is not my concern, I'm sure we'll get perfectly functional rules. That being said, Drukhari are still missing models it would be cool to see, like Vect. Orks got some interesting new units that will encourage some changes to playstyle most likely and provide some new flavor, they may or may not be unbalanced in their current state, I'm sure GW will address that in their typically uneven fashion, but they are something new and interesting regardless.

Again, solid rules for our existing units is far more important than "new stuff". We need our existing armies to function, everyone can't just buy the "new stuff" and let their existing units gather dust.

Yes, this is precisely what I don't want. I couldn't care less if they re-sculpt any of those (or any existing units), I really hope they don't. Do something new, even if it sucks, at least make the attempt. But please don't waste time on the utterly masturbatory process of re-sculpting the umpteenth iteration of Berserkers or Noise Marines.


The current Berzerkers kit is ANCIENT, Noise Marines aren't even an actual kit but an upgrade sprue, and we don't even have a kit for Chosen. These things are far more needed than new units that "may suck", and possibly contribute nothing but more redundant units to the faction.

I think we're talking past each other a bit. I've given up on the idea of 'fixes' for 40k factions, GW has established the cyclical nature of balance in the game. I don't think anything will ever be 'fixed' in this game, but new and different are still possibilities.

I'm not worried about rules, they will be good enough for my purposes, which doesn't involve playing in tournaments any time in the near future. Casual match play is about as serious as I care about.

And I care FAR more about casual play than tournaments. That's why I want good, fluffy rules for our existing units instead of "new stuff" to supplant them.
   
Made in gb
Lit By the Flames of Prospero






 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

That seems fine to me, they're still the same unit they were in 1999 and the sculpts still hold up pretty well today. Newer, prettier berserkers will be just that and nothing else. Even if they release new Noise Marines, I'm keeping my Wu-Tang Noise Marines, because they're cool, and they're Wu-Tang, so by definition, you don't feth with them.

Nah, not when compared with Plague Marines, Rubrics, or even the new CSM models. Zerkers are badly proportioned even for 40k and for a unit that has so many pieces of cool artwork the actual models are just a joke. They've been a go-to unit for CSM for a while AFAIK and I refused to touch the models until I was gifted them by a family member a year ago and ended up using almost none of the parts from the actual kit since they were so bad.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/21 20:34:29


 
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
I think the ship has sailed on veteran abilities, I've accepted they're not coming back. To a certain extent, yes, I want many different types of CSM, with new weapons that do different things, command different playstyles, emphasize different tactics. You can splat all the veteran abilities you want on to a marine, he's still rolling with bolter/frag/krak.


AGAIN, not really. Drukhari can choose from a selection of Combat Drugs to improve some of their units. Ork Kustom Jobs are now an optional upgrade for some of their units that cost points. Nothing is stopping gw from implementing similar rules for optional Veteran Abilities and Marks for CSM.

And I definitely don't want CSM to have the same ridiculous number of redundant weapon and units that loyalists have.

Yes, they did. Good rules is not my concern, I'm sure we'll get perfectly functional rules. That being said, Drukhari are still missing models it would be cool to see, like Vect. Orks got some interesting new units that will encourage some changes to playstyle most likely and provide some new flavor, they may or may not be unbalanced in their current state, I'm sure GW will address that in their typically uneven fashion, but they are something new and interesting regardless.

Again, solid rules for our existing units is far more important than "new stuff". We need our existing armies to function, everyone can't just buy the "new stuff" and let their existing units gather dust.

Yes, this is precisely what I don't want. I couldn't care less if they re-sculpt any of those (or any existing units), I really hope they don't. Do something new, even if it sucks, at least make the attempt. But please don't waste time on the utterly masturbatory process of re-sculpting the umpteenth iteration of Berserkers or Noise Marines.


The current Berzerkers kit is ANCIENT, Noise Marines aren't even an actual kit but an upgrade sprue, and we don't even have a kit for Chosen. These things are far more needed than new units that "may suck", and possibly contribute nothing but more redundant units to the faction.

I think we're talking past each other a bit. I've given up on the idea of 'fixes' for 40k factions, GW has established the cyclical nature of balance in the game. I don't think anything will ever be 'fixed' in this game, but new and different are still possibilities.

I'm not worried about rules, they will be good enough for my purposes, which doesn't involve playing in tournaments any time in the near future. Casual match play is about as serious as I care about.

And I care FAR more about casual play than tournaments. That's why I want good, fluffy rules for our existing units instead of "new stuff" to supplant them.


Yeah, we'll agree to disagree and call it a day. Everyone apparently wants new action figures that do the same things they've been doing for 30 years, I don't get it, but I'll add it to the list of things I don't get, enjoy.

"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."  
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
Spoiler:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
I think the ship has sailed on veteran abilities, I've accepted they're not coming back. To a certain extent, yes, I want many different types of CSM, with new weapons that do different things, command different playstyles, emphasize different tactics. You can splat all the veteran abilities you want on to a marine, he's still rolling with bolter/frag/krak.


AGAIN, not really. Drukhari can choose from a selection of Combat Drugs to improve some of their units. Ork Kustom Jobs are now an optional upgrade for some of their units that cost points. Nothing is stopping gw from implementing similar rules for optional Veteran Abilities and Marks for CSM.

And I definitely don't want CSM to have the same ridiculous number of redundant weapon and units that loyalists have.

Yes, they did. Good rules is not my concern, I'm sure we'll get perfectly functional rules. That being said, Drukhari are still missing models it would be cool to see, like Vect. Orks got some interesting new units that will encourage some changes to playstyle most likely and provide some new flavor, they may or may not be unbalanced in their current state, I'm sure GW will address that in their typically uneven fashion, but they are something new and interesting regardless.

Again, solid rules for our existing units is far more important than "new stuff". We need our existing armies to function, everyone can't just buy the "new stuff" and let their existing units gather dust.

Yes, this is precisely what I don't want. I couldn't care less if they re-sculpt any of those (or any existing units), I really hope they don't. Do something new, even if it sucks, at least make the attempt. But please don't waste time on the utterly masturbatory process of re-sculpting the umpteenth iteration of Berserkers or Noise Marines.


The current Berzerkers kit is ANCIENT, Noise Marines aren't even an actual kit but an upgrade sprue, and we don't even have a kit for Chosen. These things are far more needed than new units that "may suck", and possibly contribute nothing but more redundant units to the faction.

I think we're talking past each other a bit. I've given up on the idea of 'fixes' for 40k factions, GW has established the cyclical nature of balance in the game. I don't think anything will ever be 'fixed' in this game, but new and different are still possibilities.

I'm not worried about rules, they will be good enough for my purposes, which doesn't involve playing in tournaments any time in the near future. Casual match play is about as serious as I care about.

And I care FAR more about casual play than tournaments. That's why I want good, fluffy rules for our existing units instead of "new stuff" to supplant them.


Yeah, we'll agree to disagree and call it a day. Everyone apparently wants new action figures that do the same things they've been doing for 30 years, I don't get it, but I'll add it to the list of things I don't get, enjoy.

Fine, agree to disagree. We're not talking about the same thing anyway. I'm worried about how the faction, and it's many subfactions, functions and is represented on the table by its rules. You want new models that aren't a resculpt of an existing unit or a new deamon engine.
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





well vetern abilities aren';t entirely bad there's also some room for new units that also can fill in for things, I mean if instead of a vetern infiiltration thing we're given "chaos sharp shooters" with "shadow cloaks" and stalker bolters or something I'd be cool with that partiuclarly as some concepts may suit an elite unit but not be something you want to say... let chaos players add to all their troops etc

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

Sgt. Cortez wrote:I don't think new units is the problem, really. Between dinobots, heldrake, venomcrawler, Warp Talons, Master of Possession, Greater Possessed, Master of Execution, Dark Apostle, Warpsmith, Cultists, Helbrute there actually were a lot of new units since 6th Edition (admittedly the last four existed as a concept for a long time but were Legion locked, and the Helbrute is just a Chaos Dreadnought).
It's more that the general CSM faction lacks focus or really only works for Black Legion, Word Bearers and undivided Renegades. GW possibly even realized that so they made CSM some kind of mad rabble in power armor, because pulling off proper models and rules for all the 9legions is too much. Add to that that Daemons are treated as their own army, in 5th Edition there was no way to play them together with CSM and in 9th we'll probably have antisoup rules like in every Codex so far.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are people at GW who sometimes think: why did we write that stupid fluff about Chaos legions that actually hate Chaos or about monogod legions that would need their own models for every unit entry when we never wanted to release models for that?

Eh, if they think that they can sell the models, then they'll want to make them. We already have Death Guard and Thousand Sons, I'm sure World Eaters and Emperor's Children are at least in their plans, if not for 9th, then in the future. Every "What new army should gw make?" thread, poll, or YouTube video is usually topped by one of them. That means $$$, and gw loves $$$.

As for "Chaos Legions that actually hate Chaos", that's entirely possible with our current options. That's literally my army. They just need to write better rules for such Legions. Which they've done before.

@BrianDavion: That's a good idea. I still don't understand why we don't have snipers.
   
Made in us
Pulsating Possessed Chaos Marine





I really wish that the rule of three wasn't around, or at least had more exceptions. If I want to front an Iron Warriors army with nothing but Plague Marines, I don't see why I shouldn't be able to.
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 ArcaneHorror wrote:
I really wish that the rule of three wasn't around, or at least had more exceptions. If I want to front an Iron Warriors army with nothing but Plague Marines, I don't see why I shouldn't be able to.


the rules of three dates back to the early days of 8th edition when we saw tourny lists consisting of nothing but supreme command detachments of flyrants. and was a band-aid solution for the fact that Hive Tyrants where great but the rest of the Tyranid codex was hot trash, and the fact that the supreme command detachment (which for those new to 40k with 9th edition was basicly a way to take 4 or 5 HQs and an elites choice and nothing else) was a completely idiotic detachment created souly because with 8th edition GW promised none of our detachment based armies would be made illegal and thus needed something for the librarian conclave. HQs are, by design, supposed to be pound for pound, some of an armies best guys, letting people get around troop limits and just run HQs was just bad design. it was the SINGLE worst design decision in 8th IMHO

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/22 07:28:51


Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: