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.

Hey everyone!
Ok so at the momen't many people such as myself are building pre-heresy armies (Loving doing Luna Wolves!), more and more pop up everyday thanks to easy access from FW. But after the few months Betrayal has been released for, using it for anything under 2500 points makes it increibly dull and is like chopping off both your arms before a game if versing any new 40k codex. As such many people resort to using 40k codexi to keep balance in the game while using any of the marine varient codexi. A few months ago this wasn't a problem, however with Betrayal much of the community is in debate about whether or not the HH armies have the same rights in 40k. Many times I have been Flat out been refused to play for using both count-as (SW, C:SM) as well as Betrayal (Fair enough, in fact I write army lists for both and then ask which one they would prefer to play against).

The main problem arises when it comes to count as units, such as using a special character to represent a HH figure, or proxying JetBikes as normal bikes. I have no idea why people refuse to play against that, but to their own I guess. Now when the DA codex came out recently, I got incredibley excited as it offers the more sophisticated rules the HH armies need to represent older more advanced tech as well as better units to represent the wargear options. In fact I love using the deathwing because it allows me to use my capharactii terminators legally ! Obvisouly using units like the fighters or the land speeder thingy is silly, and most HH players tend to want fun like myself! I like to use assault marines, bikes, termies, troops, land raiders and of course the contemptor dread! To many this may seem like bandwagoning, but it truly isn't! BA codex is out of question unless you want to run BA, NL or RG. Vanilla SM doesn't allow much customization. SW would be perfect if not for some special rules as well as WS/BS 3 biker and assault units, and Chaos is terrible if you don't either use chaos related units or wargear/marks/gifts.

Regardless, count-as seems to be an issue with many people when it comes to PH and HH armies in normal 40k (no idea why really). So I ask you dakka, what do you think about Count-As 30k armies and the best codex to use? What would be your personal limits to someone using a count-as heresy army?

Whoah; you're the first person I've heard who actually doesn't like the HH:Betrayal list.

I enjoy the crap out of it, and find it lacking absolutely nowhere in terms of options, unit diversity, and playability.

I'm absolutely taken aback though that someone would refuse to let you use your HH Army as a SM Codex army. That's downright ridiculous.

 CaptainGrey wrote:
Whoah; you're the first person I've heard who actually doesn't like the HH:Betrayal list.

I enjoy the crap out of it, and find it lacking absolutely nowhere in terms of options, unit diversity, and playability.

I'm absolutely taken aback though that someone would refuse to let you use your HH Army as a SM Codex army. That's downright ridiculous.

Oh no don't get me wrong, I LOVE the Betrayal list, everything about it is awesome, I just find it annoying that if I don't play horus (which is most of the time because average game is at 2000) I get my rear end handed it to me! Unless I play another HH army of course, then its awesome! The book just doesn't fight well against GK, Daemons and Crons (goddamn I hate the metagame).

Yeah some people are strange, most of it begins with "You can't proxy those jetbikes as bikes!" And then it goes on from there...

I think - within reason - using 40K dex's to represent your 30k (and therefore beautiful) army is absolutely fine. Providing you're not doing it to access the most powerful combos/units, which you don't seem to be the kind of person to do.

So yeah, I think it's perfectly reasonable to use a Codex for your HH armies and can't understand why people would refuse to play.

FW even said that the HH list would not match up against 40k armies, because it was designed to fight other HH amries.

 =I= White-Wolf wrote:
What would be your personal limits to someone using a count-as heresy army?

Simple: is it clear what everything represents? For example, using jetbike models as normal bikes in a C:SM list is fine, as long as it's clear which models are armed with which upgrade weapons (if any). It's a sensible substitution fluff-wise, and it's very obvious what the unit is. On the other hand, it's probably not going to be ok if you have a tactical squad armed with various Heresy-only weapons and I have to remember that this weird looking gun is a melta gun, that weird looking gun is a flamer, except on terminators where the two are reversed. That's just a confusing mess, and I can understand not wanting to play against it. And of course with vehicles LOS/turret placement/etc become an issue, so it would be a problem if you're using, say, a Typhon as a Vindicator.

Of course with models that have 40k rules I'd probably expect you to use them as the appropriate unit, not a counts-as unit. For example, a Storm Eagle is a Storm Eagle since it has 40k rules, not a counts-as replacement for one of the DA flyers.

 Lightcavalier wrote:
FW even said that the HH list would not match up against 40k armies, because it was designed to fight other HH amries.

The FAQ makes it stand weirder however, where it flip flops back and forth (Where the only conclusion is that the Lord of War slot is not to be used in a normal game..Which should be obvious)

Unless of course you make it a full Age of Apocalypse, then you'd use the HH betrayers books on how to appropriately adjust it for enemies.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
The FAQ makes it stand weirder however, where it flip flops back and forth (Where the only conclusion is that the Lord of War slot is not to be used in a normal game..Which should be obvious)

I don't think there's anything at all inconsistent with it, the FAQ just repeats what they've been saying the whole time:

1) The rules for Heresy and 40k are compatible since the Heresy rules are just a variant of 6th edition 40k. Therefore it is possible to play a game between the two.

2) Heresy is not balanced/playtested/etc with normal 40k.

Conclusion: if you and your opponent want to play a game between a Heresy army and a 40k army you can do it (though you might need to do a bit of house ruling), but don't just show up to 40k night at your local store and demand that everyone play against your Heresy army.