Switch Theme:

No more rerolls for non-CORE units  [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 ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 Jidmah wrote:
Breton wrote:
 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


It never made sense to me that some guy standing in the dirt outside the tank would be waving his sword around so the gunner shoots better. Or more comically, making the aircraft that flies over his head more accurate because he pointed sternly at a bad guy.


More like giving the pilot coordinates etc.


That sounds like something a dedicated spotter should to, like infiltrators, incursors or eliminators.


Like maybe a unit that carries a type of light, (lasers perhaps) that mark targets?
ohh we could call them...

Marker lights!

I joke but I'd not mind seeing other armies with support things like that, not marines as it doesn't really fit them, but a new guard unit called "recon squad" with 18 inch assault 1 "Lascarbines" and "marker grenades" that allows them to throw smoke for more accurate artillery.

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in ca
Mysterious Techpriest






 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Um, aren't you forgetting some legions? Like Black Legion, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors, Word Bearers, and Night Lords? I don't think they fit into either of those categories.

And I'd like for Yukishiro to define "janky". If it means csm remaining team WOMBO COMBO, then no thanks.


Well yeah, night lords are basically renegades with low chaos usage, they just arent "fresh converts"

Admech Lucius
Drukhari
Craftworld Yme-Loc
Thousand sons
Tzeentch Demons
Slaanesh Demons
Night Lords
Imperial knights

 
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





BrianDavion wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
Breton wrote:
 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


It never made sense to me that some guy standing in the dirt outside the tank would be waving his sword around so the gunner shoots better. Or more comically, making the aircraft that flies over his head more accurate because he pointed sternly at a bad guy.


More like giving the pilot coordinates etc.


That sounds like something a dedicated spotter should to, like infiltrators, incursors or eliminators.


Like maybe a unit that carries a type of light, (lasers perhaps) that mark targets?
ohh we could call them...

Marker lights!

I joke but I'd not mind seeing other armies with support things like that, not marines as it doesn't really fit them, but a new guard unit called "recon squad" with 18 inch assault 1 "Lascarbines" and "marker grenades" that allows them to throw smoke for more accurate artillery.


I don't mind either, heck I'd make it the Vox Caster model for guard - anyone who's seen We Were Soldiers can imagine a Colonel barking orders to a radioman giving drop coordinates after that. I was just pointing out the SM Captain probably wasn't waving a sword or pointing sternly for the aircraft but doing other Commander In The Field things.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought





Eye of Terror

Dunno if restricting rerolls to Core units is a good thing. Universal Auras added something to the game, sad to see them being nerfed.

Here's why. I ran a Black Legion gunline most of 8th edition, 22+ lascannons on a variety of units. With Abaddon's reroll aura, they wounded about 66% of the time against most things. Sometimes I swapped in Scorpius Whirlwinds, the reroll aura made them lethal to units like Intercessors.

The trade off was board control. My army stayed on my edge of the table most of the time, relying on distance and firepower to win games. This meant I was not going to claim too many objectives before the 4th or 5th turn and things could go catastrophically wrong if opponents optimized around distance themselves.

That felt fair, there was always risk involved. If you really wanted to ranged shooting for Chaos, the only way to make it worth it was rerolls. Let's say CSM are now the only Core unit that can bring lascannons. Chaos loses a playstyle, the BS and range on Daemon Engines is poor and Predators / Land Raiders are inefficient points-wise compared to their Imperial counterparts.

A traditional Chaos army is geared for mid-range melee. The mechanics of 9th edition make this a little harder to run these kinds of lists, the new multicharge rules in particular. Still haven't played a game of 9th but I really don't know what kind of army I would even want to bring.

   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





the problem is, at least from a design POV, that's not entirely what GW wants. Abaddon standing back behind the battlefield and watching his people shoot isn't quite what they want, they want him moving forward with your troops etc

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





BrianDavion wrote:
the problem is, at least from a design POV, that's not entirely what GW wants. Abaddon standing back behind the battlefield and watching his people shoot isn't quite what they want, they want him moving forward with your troops etc


Even moreso they don't want your troops standing back and shooting. They just really aren't very good at making the players move around the board when the players don't want to.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





Breton wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
the problem is, at least from a design POV, that's not entirely what GW wants. Abaddon standing back behind the battlefield and watching his people shoot isn't quite what they want, they want him moving forward with your troops etc


Even moreso they don't want your troops standing back and shooting. They just really aren't very good at making the players move around the board when the players don't want to.
give CSMs the ability to take chainswords AND boltguns back and I think you'd see CSM players being more agressive.

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in ch
Warped Arch Heretic of Chaos





BrianDavion wrote:
Breton wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
the problem is, at least from a design POV, that's not entirely what GW wants. Abaddon standing back behind the battlefield and watching his people shoot isn't quite what they want, they want him moving forward with your troops etc


Even moreso they don't want your troops standing back and shooting. They just really aren't very good at making the players move around the board when the players don't want to.
give CSMs the ability to take chainswords AND boltguns back and I think you'd see CSM players being more agressive.


erm, no.

It would make CSM more generalistic, but it certainly wouldn't make CSM players more aggresive, especially considering that CSM are still comparatively Overpriced, Not capable of outright wiping an enemy out or tieing an enemy successfully down.


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 de
Nurgle Chosen Marine on a Palanquin




Not Online!!! wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Breton wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
the problem is, at least from a design POV, that's not entirely what GW wants. Abaddon standing back behind the battlefield and watching his people shoot isn't quite what they want, they want him moving forward with your troops etc


Even moreso they don't want your troops standing back and shooting. They just really aren't very good at making the players move around the board when the players don't want to.
give CSMs the ability to take chainswords AND boltguns back and I think you'd see CSM players being more agressive.


erm, no.

It would make CSM more generalistic, but it certainly wouldn't make CSM players more aggresive, especially considering that CSM are still comparatively Overpriced, Not capable of outright wiping an enemy out or tieing an enemy successfully down.



Well, always giving CSM players worse rules than loyalist SM made them pretty aggressive, so that worked at least.

Höhö.
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





Not Online!!! wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Breton wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
the problem is, at least from a design POV, that's not entirely what GW wants. Abaddon standing back behind the battlefield and watching his people shoot isn't quite what they want, they want him moving forward with your troops etc


Even moreso they don't want your troops standing back and shooting. They just really aren't very good at making the players move around the board when the players don't want to.
give CSMs the ability to take chainswords AND boltguns back and I think you'd see CSM players being more agressive.


erm, no.

It would make CSM more generalistic, but it certainly wouldn't make CSM players more aggresive, especially considering that CSM are still comparatively Overpriced, Not capable of outright wiping an enemy out or tieing an enemy successfully down.



Combined with 2 Wounds it will actually help quite a bit, as long as the price doesn't change or doesn't change much. Giving up the Pistol with the changes to assault rules and a pistol shot into engagement is a moderate to large hit though. Being able to mob up to 20 isn't bad, but it gets expensive and they have to miss out on a couple special or heavy if I'm reading this right and it's accurate.

They should get rid of the Preferred Enemy-esque Death To the False Emperor though, and channel whatever value it has into something more universal. Once they hit 2 wounds, the problem isn't the CSM, its whatever is supporting them.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in gb
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets





Cardiff

Breton wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
the problem is, at least from a design POV, that's not entirely what GW wants. Abaddon standing back behind the battlefield and watching his people shoot isn't quite what they want, they want him moving forward with your troops etc


Even moreso they don't want your troops standing back and shooting. They just really aren't very good at making the players move around the board when the players don't want to.


Guess someone hasn’t tried playing a stationary castle in 9th... you lose, hard.

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in ch
Warped Arch Heretic of Chaos





Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Breton wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
the problem is, at least from a design POV, that's not entirely what GW wants. Abaddon standing back behind the battlefield and watching his people shoot isn't quite what they want, they want him moving forward with your troops etc


Even moreso they don't want your troops standing back and shooting. They just really aren't very good at making the players move around the board when the players don't want to.
give CSMs the ability to take chainswords AND boltguns back and I think you'd see CSM players being more agressive.


erm, no.

It would make CSM more generalistic, but it certainly wouldn't make CSM players more aggresive, especially considering that CSM are still comparatively Overpriced, Not capable of outright wiping an enemy out or tieing an enemy successfully down.



Well, always giving CSM players worse rules than loyalist SM made them pretty aggressive, so that worked at least.

Höhö.


No, they just turn into Iron warriors, bitter, and cold..

Now where did i put that danger stripe tape


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Breton wrote:

Combined with 2 Wounds it will actually help quite a bit, as long as the price doesn't change or doesn't change much. Giving up the Pistol with the changes to assault rules and a pistol shot into engagement is a moderate to large hit though. Being able to mob up to 20 isn't bad, but it gets expensive and they have to miss out on a couple special or heavy if I'm reading this right and it's accurate.

They should get rid of the Preferred Enemy-esque Death To the False Emperor though, and channel whatever value it has into something more universal. Once they hit 2 wounds, the problem isn't the CSM, its whatever is supporting them.


Considering , that Tacs hiked, to a degree which is pretty ludicrous, with ALOT more buffs to their name though, i am heavily sceptical.
And morale / blast rules will make anything over 10 man allready a bit iffy, not to mention that reserve stratagems to minimize this probably won't survive.

Granted, the fact that AP-1 chainswords will be a thing Might compensate somewhat the lackluster melee capability, but considering that tripointing is also pretty much dead, leaving only wipe out as a valid melee option (unless you can force a unit to not be able to fall back like night lords) , i seriously doubt that chainsword Bolter happens to be good enough.
Not to mention that the CSM box would contradict that anyways.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/09/20 09:08:06


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
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





 JohnnyHell wrote:
Breton wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
the problem is, at least from a design POV, that's not entirely what GW wants. Abaddon standing back behind the battlefield and watching his people shoot isn't quite what they want, they want him moving forward with your troops etc


Even moreso they don't want your troops standing back and shooting. They just really aren't very good at making the players move around the board when the players don't want to.


Guess someone hasn’t tried playing a stationary castle in 9th... you lose, hard.


In the "tournament" Matched Play missions. Not Open Play, not necessarily Crusade.

And it still doesn't make people who dont want to move move. People frequently hyper focus on model removal. Until/unless movement results in more model removal a lot of people are going to focus on killing more than missions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not Online!!! wrote:


Considering , that Tacs hiked, to a degree which is pretty ludicrous, with ALOT more buffs to their name though, i am heavily sceptical.
Isn't the only difference DTTFE vs ATSKNF for 1 point?

And morale / blast rules will make anything over 10 man allready a bit iffy, not to mention that reserve stratagems to minimize this probably won't survive.
Giving up the free Sgt, and extra Special/HEavy combo is potentially an even bigger issue with going to 20 instead of 10.

Granted, the fact that AP-1 chainswords will be a thing Might compensate somewhat the lackluster melee capability, but considering that tripointing is also pretty much dead, leaving only wipe out as a valid melee option (unless you can force a unit to not be able to fall back like night lords) , i seriously doubt that chainsword Bolter happens to be good enough.
Not to mention that the CSM box would contradict that anyways.
I agree giving up the pistol will hurt. The Chainsword +1A is to offset BP+CCW lost rule, but when they're closer to Assault Intercessor or Intercessor value especially if they're cheaper than Intercessor cost it's hard to say they're not very good.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/09/20 09:31:50


My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in de
Waaagh! Ork Warboss on Warbike






Breton, are you aware that you are arguing that point costs in crusade and open play missions aren't balanced for competitive play?


Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in gb
Irked Necron Immortal




UK

Static gunline play is still a really bad way to play in Crusade anyway as the missions follow the same template as matched play ones.
   
Made in gb
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets





Cardiff

 Jidmah wrote:
Breton, are you aware that you are arguing that point costs in crusade and open play missions aren't balanced for competitive play?



If you switch your arguments around enough who knows what you’ll end up arguing against!

And Breton, you still have it wrong. It’s not just the Tournament pack that rewards mobility. If you just focus on killing you’d better be damn good at it as otherwise you can get outscored. I don’t think you’re grasping how the missions play out. You gotta go get stuff in Matched Play. Other modes, sure, bets are off, that’s the whole point... you can construct games how you want to. You know as well as I that most on here play and refer to Matched Play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Bosskelot wrote:
Static gunline play is still a really bad way to play in Crusade anyway as the missions follow the same template as matched play ones.


And there you have it. Even in that mode mobility is key.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/09/20 11:08:19


 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





 Jidmah wrote:
Breton, are you aware that you are arguing that point costs in crusade and open play missions aren't balanced for competitive play?



No, I'm arguing their rules to make/encourage people move don't work all that well for open play and Crusade where they don't necessarily have the Matched Play missions that involve more movement for objective secured - And that even when Matched Play missions are involved some people still won't play the mission because of "Buck Fever" all as part of the "GW isn't very good at encouraging the type of games they think they want us to play"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JohnnyHell wrote:


And Breton, you still have it wrong. It’s not just the Tournament pack that rewards mobility. If you just focus on killing you’d better be damn good at it as otherwise you can get outscored. I don’t think you’re grasping how the missions play out. You gotta go get stuff in Matched Play. Other modes, sure, bets are off, that’s the whole point...


JohnnyHell wrote:If you switch your arguments around enough who knows what you’ll end up arguing against!


Especially if you switch it around in the very next sentence.

Breton wrote:In the "tournament" Matched Play missions. Not Open Play, not necessarily Crusade.


I added the underlines to help you read a little better. You seem to have skipped a few words of what I said.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/09/20 11:56:51


My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka







Breton wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Considering , that Tacs hiked, to a degree which is pretty ludicrous, with ALOT (sic) more buffs to their name though, i am heavily sceptical.
Isn't the only difference DTTFE vs ATSKNF for 1 point?


Last I checked there are currently these little things called Doctrines, and even some mono-faction Super Doctrines - in capes - as well.

2019 Plog - Dysartes Twitches - 2019 Output

My Twitch stream - going live at 7pm GMT Tuesday & Thursday, 12pm Sunday (work permitting).

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
 
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





 Bosskelot wrote:
Static gunline play is still a really bad way to play in Crusade anyway as the missions follow the same template as matched play ones.


SOME of the missions follow the same template. Some of them are strictly kill based. Some of them start out on that template, but don't maintain it.

Sweep and Clear starts out that way, but doesn't require camping on it, so one unit can go claim anohter
Supply Drop is even nastier than Matched Play
Assasinate not so much.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in de
Waaagh! Ork Warboss on Warbike






Breton wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
Breton, are you aware that you are arguing that point costs in crusade and open play missions aren't balanced for competitive play?



No, I'm arguing their rules to make/encourage people move don't work all that well for open play and Crusade where they don't necessarily have the Matched Play missions that involve more movement for objective secured - And that even when Matched Play missions are involved some people still won't play the mission because of "Buck Fever" all as part of the "GW isn't very good at encouraging the type of games they think they want us to play"

What makes crusade missions so different from matched play missions in your opinion?

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





 Jidmah wrote:
Breton wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
Breton, are you aware that you are arguing that point costs in crusade and open play missions aren't balanced for competitive play?



No, I'm arguing their rules to make/encourage people move don't work all that well for open play and Crusade where they don't necessarily have the Matched Play missions that involve more movement for objective secured - And that even when Matched Play missions are involved some people still won't play the mission because of "Buck Fever" all as part of the "GW isn't very good at encouraging the type of games they think they want us to play"

What makes crusade missions so different from matched play missions in your opinion?


They're frequently not nearly as focused on VP based on Objective Securing
Unit XP can provide an alternative primary goal other than necessarily "winning" the match
Even the ones that ARE objective Secured style missions, frequently allow more forgiving objective placement - i.e. in you get to put them in your own deployment zone at the feet of your gun line. At that point they're just the same old missions they've always been.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Jidmah wrote:

What makes crusade missions so different from matched play missions in your opinion?


They're (currently at least, we'll see how the ones in the new book shake out) mostly re-hashes of 8th edition missions, which stand in pretty stark contrast to the 9th edition paradigm of "hold X, hold X+1, hold more, plus Secondaries". Victory conditions are a lot narrower, much more army dependent, and far less concerned about every army composition being viable to complete them. The decision to replace Secondaries with Agendas (which for the record I goddamn adore in a narrative setting because it allows players to genuinely focus on narrative force development over short term victory) makes a very big difference when it comes to how Crusade games play mechanically.
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





Sterling191 wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:

What makes crusade missions so different from matched play missions in your opinion?


They're (currently at least, we'll see how the ones in the new book shake out) mostly re-hashes of 8th edition missions, which stand in pretty stark contrast to the 9th edition paradigm of "hold X, hold X+1, hold more, plus Secondaries". Victory conditions are a lot narrower, much more army dependent, and far less concerned about every army composition being viable to complete them. The decision to replace Secondaries with Agendas (which for the record I goddamn adore in a narrative setting because it allows players to genuinely focus on narrative force development over short term victory) makes a very big difference when it comes to how Crusade games play mechanically.


Even more so - 9th Matched Play dictate where the objectives are placed, and rarely are any, let alone all of them, in anybody's/split into everybody's deployment zone - without Infiltrate/Scout/Whatever-the-hell-they-change-the-name-of-the-same-basic-concept-to-this-edition, you have to move onto them, and even with it, you still have to move more units onto them for saturation.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in us
Ancient Chaos Terminator




The dark hollows of Kentucky

VladimirHerzog wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Um, aren't you forgetting some legions? Like Black Legion, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors, Word Bearers, and Night Lords? I don't think they fit into either of those categories.

And I'd like for Yukishiro to define "janky". If it means csm remaining team WOMBO COMBO, then no thanks.


Well yeah, night lords are basically renegades with low chaos usage, they just arent "fresh converts"

Yes, but they don't fight like loyalists. Loyalists are primarily a "special forces" type of army. They specialize in fast, hard hitting targeted attacks in support of conventional forces. Night Lords, and the other legions I mentioned, fight as Legionnaires: they fight as they did in the Crusade and Heresy, as an actual standing army, with a combined arms approach using their own forces, with or without the support of other factions. Loyalists would shy away from things like heavy armour, artillery, and super heavys, while the Legions would make full use of them to varying degrees depending on the Legions preferred methods of war. The Legions, even those that don't fully embrace Chaos, wouldn't behave like common renegades.

Breton wrote:

Granted, the fact that AP-1 chainswords will be a thing Might compensate somewhat the lackluster melee capability, but considering that tripointing is also pretty much dead, leaving only wipe out as a valid melee option (unless you can force a unit to not be able to fall back like night lords) , i seriously doubt that chainsword Bolter happens to be good enough.
Not to mention that the CSM box would contradict that anyways.
I agree giving up the pistol will hurt. The Chainsword +1A is to offset BP+CCW lost rule, but when they're closer to Assault Intercessor or Intercessor value especially if they're cheaper than Intercessor cost it's hard to say they're not very good.

You're missing his point about the new csm models themselves. The new models do not support bolters + chainswords. All the bolters in the kit have both hands molded onto them, thus forcing a two handed grip. All the chainswords are molded onto hands/arms, with none being scabbarded. I doubt gw will be producing another csm kit anytime soon. If we get a csm infantry kit anytime soon that incorporates long arms and melee weapons into the same loadout it will most likely have to be an actual kit for Chosen. Which I would personally love.
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





 Gadzilla666 wrote:

You're missing his point about the new csm models themselves. The new models do not support bolters + chainswords. All the bolters in the kit have both hands molded onto them, thus forcing a two handed grip. All the chainswords are molded onto hands/arms, with none being scabbarded. I doubt gw will be producing another csm kit anytime soon. If we get a csm infantry kit anytime soon that incorporates long arms and melee weapons into the same loadout it will most likely have to be an actual kit for Chosen. Which I would personally love.


I was going to say I wouldn't be shocked to see a BP/Chainsword kit for CSM in Assault Intercessor style. Especially with the current ruleset pushing Fight Phase. Not like they wouldn't sell.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in us
Ancient Chaos Terminator




The dark hollows of Kentucky

Breton wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:

You're missing his point about the new csm models themselves. The new models do not support bolters + chainswords. All the bolters in the kit have both hands molded onto them, thus forcing a two handed grip. All the chainswords are molded onto hands/arms, with none being scabbarded. I doubt gw will be producing another csm kit anytime soon. If we get a csm infantry kit anytime soon that incorporates long arms and melee weapons into the same loadout it will most likely have to be an actual kit for Chosen. Which I would personally love.


I was going to say I wouldn't be shocked to see a BP/Chainsword kit for CSM in Assault Intercessor style. Especially with the current ruleset pushing Fight Phase. Not like they wouldn't sell.

The current kit does support bolt pistols + chainswords (though it doesn't include enough of either for the full squad). I still think an actual Chosen kit would be excellent. Long arms + melee weapons would be different from what loyalists have. We don't want csm to just be "spiky loyalists" now do we?
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Breton wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:

You're missing his point about the new csm models themselves. The new models do not support bolters + chainswords. All the bolters in the kit have both hands molded onto them, thus forcing a two handed grip. All the chainswords are molded onto hands/arms, with none being scabbarded. I doubt gw will be producing another csm kit anytime soon. If we get a csm infantry kit anytime soon that incorporates long arms and melee weapons into the same loadout it will most likely have to be an actual kit for Chosen. Which I would personally love.


I was going to say I wouldn't be shocked to see a BP/Chainsword kit for CSM in Assault Intercessor style. Especially with the current ruleset pushing Fight Phase. Not like they wouldn't sell.

The current kit does support bolt pistols + chainswords (though it doesn't include enough of either for the full squad). I still think an actual Chosen kit would be excellent. Long arms + melee weapons would be different from what loyalists have. We don't want csm to just be "spiky loyalists" now do we?

Tell that to GW who can't better differentiate armies and the white Knights that be all "ThEy Should Be A mIrRoR".

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





 Gadzilla666 wrote:

The current kit does support bolt pistols + chainswords (though it doesn't include enough of either for the full squad). I still think an actual Chosen kit would be excellent. Long arms + melee weapons would be different from what loyalists have. We don't want csm to just be "spiky loyalists" now do we?


At a certain level they're all comparable. Storm Guardians, BP/CS CSM, Assault Intercessors, Grey Hunters, Sword Brothers, Choppa Boys, etc. and they're going to make kits for the meta that sells. So far they've worked pretty hard at keeping (rifle type) + pistol + CCW off of troops. Bolter + CS is just a spiky shoota boy at that basic level.


My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in us
Ancient Chaos Terminator




The dark hollows of Kentucky

Breton wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:

The current kit does support bolt pistols + chainswords (though it doesn't include enough of either for the full squad). I still think an actual Chosen kit would be excellent. Long arms + melee weapons would be different from what loyalists have. We don't want csm to just be "spiky loyalists" now do we?


At a certain level they're all comparable. Storm Guardians, BP/CS CSM, Assault Intercessors, Grey Hunters, Sword Brothers, Choppa Boys, etc. and they're going to make kits for the meta that sells. So far they've worked pretty hard at keeping (rifle type) + pistol + CCW off of troops. Bolter + CS is just a spiky shoota boy at that basic level.


Yes, but we don't need a new kit when the one we already have supports the loadout you're talking about. We do, however, need a kit for Chosen, as one doesn't currently exist.

Chosen, BTW, aren't troops. Though they should be, for the Legions, but that's another conversation....
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran





 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Breton wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:

The current kit does support bolt pistols + chainswords (though it doesn't include enough of either for the full squad). I still think an actual Chosen kit would be excellent. Long arms + melee weapons would be different from what loyalists have. We don't want csm to just be "spiky loyalists" now do we?


At a certain level they're all comparable. Storm Guardians, BP/CS CSM, Assault Intercessors, Grey Hunters, Sword Brothers, Choppa Boys, etc. and they're going to make kits for the meta that sells. So far they've worked pretty hard at keeping (rifle type) + pistol + CCW off of troops. Bolter + CS is just a spiky shoota boy at that basic level.


Yes, but we don't need a new kit when the one we already have supports the loadout you're talking about. We do, however, need a kit for Chosen, as one doesn't currently exist.

Chosen, BTW, aren't troops. Though they should be, for the Legions, but that's another conversation....


Doesn’t include enough of either...

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: