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.

Which rule set is better, for any reason, for representing traitor legions?

Does it matter which legion? One of the "Big Four" vs. one of the others?

Would you have a problem playing a HH/30K list in a 40K game?

The 30K lists are balanced versus each other, not versus 40k lists. If you and I agreed to a 30k game, no problem. But as a pick-up game, no thanks.

I love the HH FW book, though. It instantly became my favorite FW book.

 Deuce11 wrote:
Which rule set is better, for any reason, for representing traitor legions?

Does it matter which legion? One of the "Big Four" vs. one of the others?

Would you have a problem playing a HH/30K list in a 40K game?

Presumable both?

The HH book would likely be superiour to represent the traitor legions in 30K, still (more or less) in their full fighting glory. The Chaos Codex would be superiour to represent the ragged warbands and corrupted cults that are left of them 10.000 years later.

I am a skeptic of rule set balances hahaha but anyway, I see your point on that.

I see vehicle squadrons and dreadnought squadrons being an issue but besides that I am having trouble forseeing any major rules that don't seem to fit with what other marine codices already offer.

What do you feel would be the most out of balance? (Primarchs and superheavies aside since they have their own FOC slot which is unavailable in 40k and therefore would be prohibited)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 Deuce11 wrote:
Which rule set is better, for any reason, for representing traitor legions?

Does it matter which legion? One of the "Big Four" vs. one of the others?

Would you have a problem playing a HH/30K list in a 40K game?

Presumable both?

The HH book would likely be superiour to represent the traitor legions in 30K, still (more or less) in their full fighting glory. The Chaos Codex would be superiour to represent the ragged warbands and corrupted cults that are left of them 10.000 years later.

My thinking is that some might argue the big four already get plenty of rules to build an entire force, there is no reason why you should risk the imbalance of a HH list when trying to represent WE, EC, or DG. But SoH might be ok since they do not have specific rules besides everything undivided.

 Deuce11 wrote:

What do you feel would be the most out of balance?

Just off the top of my head:

1. 4 elite slots per the Org chart.
2. The Tactical support unit that allows 10 special weapons and is scoring.
3. The Heavy support unit that allows 10 heavy weapons (Heavy bolters, Missile Launchers, etc.)
4. Whirlwind Squadrons.
5. Taking 3 contemptor dreadnoughts in 1 elite slot.


Don't get me wrong, my group will be playing a few games with these lists in the near future, but come on, man. This is not pick-up game material!

Points-wise though, is it balanced? Its nice they can spam a few units and guns, but how would the prices compare via points.

Are they able to actually get a lot more guns and bodies on the board for a better price, or do they pay a premium?

A 20 man tactical squad is 150 points for the first 10, and 100 points for the 2nd 10... That's pretty damn cheap.

Edit: Again, don't get me wrong. I can't wait to play a game of 30k, I just don't think these are pick-up game friendly.

 kronk wrote:
A 20 man tactical squad is 150 points for the first 10, and 100 points for the 2nd 10... That's pretty damn cheap.

Edit: Again, don't get me wrong. I can't wait to play a game of 30k, I just don't think these are pick-up game friendly.

I'm going through it now and I'm not seeing anything that's horrifically out of whack price-wise. Add in that extra weapon, and their average price goes to 14.5, .5 above the CSM marines with the same kit which can also run 20 models. In contrast though, their 20 man squad can have no special weapons.

I'd be real curious to see some batreps between HH legions and regular 40k armies. The mis-balance I think may come from some of their special weapon loadouts for their devs and vehicles. Other than that, think any number of 40k cheese lists should be able to thump em.

 kronk wrote:


Just off the top of my head:

1. 4 elite slots per the Org chart.
2. The Tactical support unit that allows 10 special weapons and is scoring.
3. The Heavy support unit that allows 10 heavy weapons (Heavy bolters, Missile Launchers, etc.)
4. Whirlwind Squadrons.
5. Taking 3 contemptor dreadnoughts in 1 elite slot.


Don't get me wrong, my group will be playing a few games with these lists in the near future, but come on, man. This is not pick-up game material!

1. You can simply use the standard 40k chart.

2. Except that for anything but flamers your are spending a lot of points. A unit of ten plasma guns will cost 325 points. That unit then becomes a massive target and honestly isn't that effective and can kill itself. 10 meltaguns is again expensive, makes you a massive target and is completely unnecessary.

3, 4, 5 All these things cost points, lots of them. The Heresy list has some toys yes but they're expensive, the list does pay a premium. As long as you stay away from the apocalypse oriented units i think the list would be fine to face 40k armies.

Well, while it may be imbalanced, if you play apocalypse games, it may come out fairly even. If both armies had a mix, it would come out good.

But honestly? Forge-world Space Marines would turn normal space marines into cheddar cheese. Grated cheddar cheese. Which has been melted onto pasta.

If you just used standard 40k rules with a mixed force, or vice versa (30k rules with mix) it should come out fairly even. If you do have any disagreements, just refer to the 40k rules. They're probably simpler, and they would have more prevalence (if you're playing a 30k army with a 40k, you're obviously playing it in the 41st millenium.)

To be honest i think what people are saying is that they will not play with you and will be unhappy to play against you (over powered list)

Even if HH book is weaker than normal 40k, if people think its unbalanced then it is unbalanced.

 Marthike wrote:
To be honest i think what people are saying is that they will not play with you and will be unhappy to play against you (over powered list)

Even if HH book is weaker than normal 40k, if people think its unbalanced then it is unbalanced.

And there's no way to tell this until some scientific assessment is done. Lets play some games!

I felt the list were a bit point heavy relative to 40k PA codices. Broken combos are simply the way of 40k now. I doubt HH lists would shatter the game.

In all honesty, the HH books represents Great Crusade forces, not really the traitor legions at the height of the heresy or the devotees of Chaos.

As others have noticed, it's balance is a little different. For the most part you probably won't have issues with a normal 40k game, but the lists are balanced around a different point level/game type so they may feel a bit wonky as the power of units scales differently.

 kronk wrote:
Just off the top of my head:

1. 4 elite slots per the Org chart.
2. The Tactical support unit that allows 10 special weapons and is scoring.
3. The Heavy support unit that allows 10 heavy weapons (Heavy bolters, Missile Launchers, etc.)
4. Whirlwind Squadrons.
5. Taking 3 contemptor dreadnoughts in 1 elite slot.

But put those units into context. For example, your basic tactical squad (which you have to take, since the super plasma squad can't be taken as your mandatory troops) is limited to nothing but bolters, you can't do Razorback spam or MSU at all, etc. It may be that the list is still overpowered, but you have to consider the big picture and not just look at individual units.

Would you have a problem playing a HH/30K list in a 40K game?

I would have a problem with someone showing up to a random game with a Heresy list, since FW have stated that they weren't balanced and playtested for normal 40k. Even if it's balanced and fun it's just bad manners to try to bring something that is specifically intended to be a separate game without making arrangements in advance.

I would probably be fine with playing against a Heresy army if someone asked for a game against theirs and gave me an opportunity to read the rules more carefully and consider whether I want to make any changes to my own army to fit in with the Heresy environment. Also, my willingness to do it would probably depend on the opponent. If they've invested the effort in making a legitimate Heresy-era army and want to use the most appropriate rules for it I'll be a lot more willing to play against it than if they've clearly just realized that the Heresy army list is powerful and taken an optimized competitive list with the same bare plastic marines they've been using as whatever codex army is most powerful at the moment.

The big picture for me is that this "codex" was meant for playing Legion versus Legion. I personally wouldn't have fun playing against Eldar or Orks with it, but I wouldn't begrudge anyone that did.

I'm also very FW friendly, for what it's worth.