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.
"The new Havocs also fall in line with more on how they used to fight." -
Only in the sense that they can only take heavy weapons. They're more mobile now, obviously. They don't operate as well as a siege unit since they can't take ablative bodies to absorb hits.
"Also, "options" has nothing to do with design". - Completely false. Amazingly false.
"Also how are they more restricted? In terms of Heavy Weapons total maybe. They've never had Plasma Cannons after all." -
They have to be 5-man. They have to take the maximum number of heavy weapons.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/01 21:52:08
1. They WERE always worse. The introduction of the Cherub merely cemented it.
Having greater customize-ability throughout the editions allowed them to be more tailored to the army's needs, and they've had some pretty great builds over the years. All Special Weapons, T5, Fearless and True Grit for Death Guard in 4th Ed. was pretty sweet.
Isn't this right after you saying "Chaos Marines have ALWAYS been more elite?"
That customization was already brought for Chosen in terms of special weapons. Therefore, the design philosophy behind Havocs was super lazy.
Chaos Codex: pg. 62 "There is little uniformity between squads, much of the organization and structure of the force's former Legion or Chapter falls by the wayside as they turn to the path of Chaos."
More options is more appropriate. Your "design rules" are arbitrary, and your accusation of lazy design is lazy. The new Havocs have the strange distinction of being MORE restrictive than their loyalist Devastator counterparts.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: And yeah they're always supposed to be more elite. That doesn't mean it was tackled correctly.
Chaos Codex, pg.7 "...some never grow beyond this point and remain bloodthirsty renegades and pirates for the rest of their long lives."
They become less disciplined and more savage, but not necessarily more "elite".
The new Havocs also fall in line with more on how they used to fight.
The new Havocs fall in line with how some Chaos Marines used to fight, before they stopped fighting that way? I get that adding such an option, if true, would be ideal - but (a) aren't you arguing that Chaos Marines should be *less* like what they were when they were Loyalist, (b) only a small fraction of Chaos Marines were Veterans of the Long War, and (c) once again, you're arguing that any other option should be *removed* - which is different from arguing that an option should be added.
Also, "options" has nothing to do with design. Distinction does.
Both distinction and lack thereof are important design elements. Options allow you to build either. With options, you can choose to run a list where Havoks are barely distinguishable from Devs, or you can choose to run Havoks that are nothing like Devs. Without options, you're stuck running whatever the latest rules are; this means the distinction is entirely set by the rules writer. This way, distinction is entirely a device of the codex, and not a device of the list. I'd rather allow the list to leverage distinction as a device.
New Havocs are distinguished instead of being the same entry as Devastators but worse.
New Havoks now cannot distinguish between mostly-still Devs, mostly-still Legionaries, and nowhere-close-to-either. Old Havoks could easily distinguish between those three.
Also, new Havoks are easier to distingush form Devs, but harder to distinguish from Oblits.
Insectum7 wrote: "The new Havocs also fall in line with more on how they used to fight." -
Only in the sense that they can only take heavy weapons. They're more mobile now, obviously. They don't operate as well as a siege unit since they can't take ablative bodies to absorb hits.
"Also, "options" has nothing to do with design". - Completely false. Amazingly false.
"Also how are they more restricted? In terms of Heavy Weapons total maybe. They've never had Plasma Cannons after all." -
They have to be 5-man. They have to take the maximum number of heavy weapons.
maybe they are suppose to be like italian crossbowman with those huge tower shields in front of them. GW just took that idea, and then along the way the shield just got droped or build in to the models themself.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
1. They WERE always worse. The introduction of the Cherub merely cemented it.
Having greater customize-ability throughout the editions allowed them to be more tailored to the army's needs, and they've had some pretty great builds over the years. All Special Weapons, T5, Fearless and True Grit for Death Guard in 4th Ed. was pretty sweet.
Isn't this right after you saying "Chaos Marines have ALWAYS been more elite?"
That customization was already brought for Chosen in terms of special weapons. Therefore, the design philosophy behind Havocs was super lazy.
And yeah they're always supposed to be more elite. That doesn't mean it was tackled correctly.
In that case, when a Chapter starts openly dealing with demons, and not just a wink and a nudge here and there (as in, Marks or Demons or Sorcs in-chapter), what becomes of their Devs? Yesterday, they were Devs - Marines carrying heavy weapons. Today, they're the same guys, same kit, same training, same role - but they need to be different guys (T5), different kit (all Heavies), different training (no penalty on move), with a different role (all of the above)?
I've already explained why Renegade Chapters should be handled in the Vanilla codex.
So I can use the Vanilla codex to have a Chaos Sorc in my detatchment? Or a Demon Engine? DP? Marked units? Oblits/Mutas/Possessed? I never knew I could do that.
Not all recently-Traitor warbands are Renegades who simply aren't loyal anymore - many include aspects that are *far* off the deepend.
You have previously suggested that we use Renegade Chapters for anything but the Legions, but that hasn't reasonably answered how to handle many gaps in that implementation.
(let's not pretend most of the Renegade Chapters are important in terms of combat prowess anyway)
If by Renegade, you mean "Any non-Legion Warband", then why are so many stories about non-Legion Warbands? We hear more about the Legions, much like how we hear more about the same handful of Chapters, but that's not because other successor chapters are *weaker*.
, and they're likely not going to be so different in combat doctrines due to how they would've recently fought. As is, a newly Renegade Chapter can get oodles of Plague Marines and Daemon Engines but lost their Assault Cannons all the sudden and replaced them with Autocannons. It's inconsistent and they need to be separated entirely.
I agree that Renegades should have access to almost everything the Vanilla book has, from a fluff perspective. But which makes more sense: that a Chapter that fell to the lies of Tzeench lead by a Libby-turned Sorc has no Sorcs in their chapter, or has no Grav in their chapter? Both are wrong, but the lack of at least one Sorc in that scenario is much more impactful.
1. A Renegade Chapter is not going to have a lot of those, if at all. They would be such a rarity it hardly shows up or it would be lent by a Legion, in which case it would be following that Legion's combat doctrines. You can maybe count the number of Renegade Chapters that have all that on one hand. Maybe two if you delve in Lexi that far.
Ergo, for better representation, it makes sense to do it my way.
Also I already explained how easily a keyword system is implemented. Please don't act like I'm wrong because I'm not. It's a page at most for keyword switching and marks, and then pages for any Special Characters (so basically just Huron and Cypher). I also already said, like how I would consolidate the Angels, each Chapter gets 3-4 special units. Replace those for Possessed and Spawn, and bam you're done.
Also you do have the Sorcerer entry. It's called a Librarian. Any whining they don't use a single Power table is more a calling to the fact that the generic Psyker tables shouldn't have been removed to begin with.
2. That Chapter Master was killed and Red Corsairs would still be more operating akin to how they would've been in the Vanilla codex. With all the raiding they do, they could easily refill their Assault Cannons or gain Grav Guns.
3. Most are unimportant just like Chapters that are not from the founding. I LOVE Carcharodons, Crimson Fists, and Minotaurs, but they don't need a whole page of rules and Strategems or stuff because they're not important. In fact, Crimson Fists getting a whole new page of rules just adds to the rules bloat that should've been avoided to begin with.
4. Once again, you do have a Sorcerer. It's the Librarian entry.
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.
Likan Wolfsheim wrote: But they look very similar to the normal CSM bolter guy from the new multipart kit and the reaper guy from the new box set, who are T4.
Not really, just look at their heads and legs. It literally looks like their heads started to fuse with their chests and backpacks. Sure, it doesn't really look like T5 but there is really a big difference between the two.
HoundsofDemos wrote: What I really don't like is the massive change to their options and numbers. It's just another in a trend from GW of stripping options and flavor out of the game.
If you told me a month ago turning spiky codex devastator clones into HH era legion support squads with bespoke rules and new guns counts as 'stripping options and flavor out of the game' I'd have laughed. CSM players never cease to amaze me...
An Actual Englishman wrote: 2. The rules aren't fair across multiple factions. Why are CSM the only faction to get heavy weapons specialists that can actually use their heavy weapons properly? Why don't Devastators, who are functionally the same unit, get the same rule? How about any other infantry heavy weapon choice? And don't give me this 'muh asymmetric balance bruh' argument. This isn't balanced.
3. It feels like a cash grab. Why do you think the new gun is by far the best and there's only one in the kit? Aren't some tournaments already banning anything that's not entirely a GW model? Good luck using those 3rd party chaincannon bits in a tournament all you CSM players. They wanted/needed Havocs to sell.
2. While I have similar question, I am willing to wait with complains until we see Codex SM 2.0. And besides, that's not even remotely the biggest problem with SM.
3. Use FW rotor canons, or convert heavy bolters CSM have in abundance into rotor canons, it's simple and easy without paying for knockoff garbage. Problem solved.
Boyz went up a point. They gained chapter tactics (like every other damn troop in the game). That's it.
4 out of top 10 armies in Adepticon were orks. Clearly the 7 point boyz completely ruined the army and made it really nonviable in tournaments
4 out of top 10 armies in Adepticon were orks. Clearly the 7 point boyz completely ruined the army and made it really nonviable in tournaments
Who’d have thought the most popular horde army would do well at a tournament that massively favours hordes and has a number of unique rules that make said army’s greatest weakness infinitely worse?! Crayzee.
How are Orks doing in other tournaments? Not great? Sub 50% win rate? K cool.
Ok, now we’ve got that our the way I’ll explain my point (again) because you clearly missed it last time (and conveniently left it out of the part of my post that you quoted, odd). My point wasn’t to lament the increase in boyz cost, but to show that 1 pt should not buy a unit +1T and the ability to move and fire heavy weapons with no penalty. This is not normal, as evidenced by the increase in a Boyz cost. That clearer?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/02 08:23:52
Who’d have thought the most popular horde army would do well at a tournament that massively favours hordes and has a number of unique rules that make said army’s greatest weakness infinitely worse?! Crayzee.
Massively favors? Exactly how is that do you figure?
If you're going to sit there and tell me how taking a bunch of 10 man units makes Orks wildly better while Guard who take 10 man units all day long makes them worse...man, I dunno.
How are Orks doing in other tournaments? Not great? Sub 50% win rate? K cool.
1. They WERE always worse. The introduction of the Cherub merely cemented it.
Having greater customize-ability throughout the editions allowed them to be more tailored to the army's needs, and they've had some pretty great builds over the years. All Special Weapons, T5, Fearless and True Grit for Death Guard in 4th Ed. was pretty sweet.
Isn't this right after you saying "Chaos Marines have ALWAYS been more elite?"
That customization was already brought for Chosen in terms of special weapons. Therefore, the design philosophy behind Havocs was super lazy.
Chaos Codex: pg. 62 "There is little uniformity between squads, much of the organization and structure of the force's former Legion or Chapter falls by the wayside as they turn to the path of Chaos."
More options is more appropriate. Your "design rules" are arbitrary, and your accusation of lazy design is lazy. The new Havocs have the strange distinction of being MORE restrictive than their loyalist Devastator counterparts.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: And yeah they're always supposed to be more elite. That doesn't mean it was tackled correctly.
Chaos Codex, pg.7 "...some never grow beyond this point and remain bloodthirsty renegades and pirates for the rest of their long lives."
They become less disciplined and more savage, but not necessarily more "elite".
The new Havocs also fall in line with more on how they used to fight.
The new Havocs fall in line with how some Chaos Marines used to fight, before they stopped fighting that way? I get that adding such an option, if true, would be ideal - but (a) aren't you arguing that Chaos Marines should be *less* like what they were when they were Loyalist, (b) only a small fraction of Chaos Marines were Veterans of the Long War, and (c) once again, you're arguing that any other option should be *removed* - which is different from arguing that an option should be added.
Also, "options" has nothing to do with design. Distinction does.
Both distinction and lack thereof are important design elements. Options allow you to build either. With options, you can choose to run a list where Havoks are barely distinguishable from Devs, or you can choose to run Havoks that are nothing like Devs. Without options, you're stuck running whatever the latest rules are; this means the distinction is entirely set by the rules writer. This way, distinction is entirely a device of the codex, and not a device of the list. I'd rather allow the list to leverage distinction as a device.
New Havocs are distinguished instead of being the same entry as Devastators but worse.
New Havoks now cannot distinguish between mostly-still Devs, mostly-still Legionaries, and nowhere-close-to-either. Old Havoks could easily distinguish between those three.
Also, new Havoks are easier to distingush form Devs, but harder to distinguish from Oblits.
Also how are they more restricted? In terms of Heavy Weapons total maybe. They've never had Plasma Cannons after all.
-Can't take Boltguns
-Can't take Specials
-Can't simply be traitor Marines
They're certainly more restricted than they were.
1. Legions aren't the Chapters so we should probably get that straight.
2. And those Havocs not like Devastators are just Command Squads or Chosen equivalent. That's more of the same "they take the same option but more of it". Not very distinguished.
3. And once again, anything not a Legion should be handled in the main Vanilla codex.
4. Specials could and would already be handled by Chosen, who get a better density of them anyway.
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.
[...]
1. A Renegade Chapter is not going to have a lot of those, if at all. They would be such a rarity it hardly shows up or it would be lent by a Legion, in which case it would be following that Legion's combat doctrines. You can maybe count the number of Renegade Chapters that have all that on one hand. Maybe two if you delve in Lexi that far.
Blood Ravens (under Kyras)
Red Corsairs
Adharons Reavers
Angels of extacy
Avenging Sons
Beasts of Annihilation
I don't have 6 fingers on either hand, but it took minutes to spit out the first 6. That's just a fraction.
Ergo, for better representation, it makes sense to do it my way.
Also I already explained how easily a keyword system is implemented.
I seem to recall saying we should have that keyword system, too.
Please don't act like I'm wrong because I'm not.
So your argument is that you're right because you're not wrong?
2. That Chapter Master was killed and Red Corsairs would still be more operating akin to how they would've been in the Vanilla codex. With all the raiding they do, they could easily refill their Assault Cannons or gain Grav Guns.
1. They WERE always worse. The introduction of the Cherub merely cemented it.
Having greater customize-ability throughout the editions allowed them to be more tailored to the army's needs, and they've had some pretty great builds over the years. All Special Weapons, T5, Fearless and True Grit for Death Guard in 4th Ed. was pretty sweet.
Isn't this right after you saying "Chaos Marines have ALWAYS been more elite?"
That customization was already brought for Chosen in terms of special weapons. Therefore, the design philosophy behind Havocs was super lazy.
Chaos Codex: pg. 62 "There is little uniformity between squads, much of the organization and structure of the force's former Legion or Chapter falls by the wayside as they turn to the path of Chaos."
More options is more appropriate. Your "design rules" are arbitrary, and your accusation of lazy design is lazy. The new Havocs have the strange distinction of being MORE restrictive than their loyalist Devastator counterparts.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: And yeah they're always supposed to be more elite. That doesn't mean it was tackled correctly.
Chaos Codex, pg.7 "...some never grow beyond this point and remain bloodthirsty renegades and pirates for the rest of their long lives."
They become less disciplined and more savage, but not necessarily more "elite".
The new Havocs also fall in line with more on how they used to fight.
The new Havocs fall in line with how some Chaos Marines used to fight, before they stopped fighting that way? I get that adding such an option, if true, would be ideal - but (a) aren't you arguing that Chaos Marines should be *less* like what they were when they were Loyalist, (b) only a small fraction of Chaos Marines were Veterans of the Long War, and (c) once again, you're arguing that any other option should be *removed* - which is different from arguing that an option should be added.
Also, "options" has nothing to do with design. Distinction does.
Both distinction and lack thereof are important design elements. Options allow you to build either. With options, you can choose to run a list where Havoks are barely distinguishable from Devs, or you can choose to run Havoks that are nothing like Devs. Without options, you're stuck running whatever the latest rules are; this means the distinction is entirely set by the rules writer. This way, distinction is entirely a device of the codex, and not a device of the list. I'd rather allow the list to leverage distinction as a device.
New Havocs are distinguished instead of being the same entry as Devastators but worse.
New Havoks now cannot distinguish between mostly-still Devs, mostly-still Legionaries, and nowhere-close-to-either. Old Havoks could easily distinguish between those three.
Also, new Havoks are easier to distingush form Devs, but harder to distinguish from Oblits.
Also how are they more restricted? In terms of Heavy Weapons total maybe. They've never had Plasma Cannons after all.
-Can't take Boltguns
-Can't take Specials
-Can't simply be traitor Marines
They're certainly more restricted than they were.
1. Legions aren't the Chapters so we should probably get that straight.
2. And those Havocs not like Devastators are just Command Squads or Chosen equivalent. That's more of the same "they take the same option but more of it". Not very distinguished.
3. And once again, anything not a Legion should be handled in the main Vanilla codex.
4. Specials could and would already be handled by Chosen, who get a better density of them anyway.
1. Where did I say they were? What I'm implying is that some CSM were part of Legions, some were part of Chapters.
2. You're arguing a 10man unit with 4 heavies can t be distinguished from a 10man with some Specials and no Heavies?
3. Why drop all those CSM armies from the game?
4. That's not entirely unreasonable. So what units handle dev equivelents?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/04/02 13:04:16
Who’d have thought the most popular horde army would do well at a tournament that massively favours hordes and has a number of unique rules that make said army’s greatest weakness infinitely worse?! Crayzee.
Massively favors? Exactly how is that do you figure?
If you're going to sit there and tell me how taking a bunch of 10 man units makes Orks wildly better while Guard who take 10 man units all day long makes them worse...man, I dunno.
How are Orks doing in other tournaments? Not great? Sub 50% win rate? K cool.
What's your source for this claim?
Check the how kill points were scored, for a start. Its not about MSU it's about scoring based on points.
Check 40k stats and BCP for my source as to Orks performance at other events.
E sp
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/04/02 06:59:49
Insectum7 wrote: "The new Havocs also fall in line with more on how they used to fight." -
Only in the sense that they can only take heavy weapons. They're more mobile now, obviously. They don't operate as well as a siege unit since they can't take ablative bodies to absorb hits.
"Also, "options" has nothing to do with design". - Completely false. Amazingly false.
"Also how are they more restricted? In terms of Heavy Weapons total maybe. They've never had Plasma Cannons after all." -
They have to be 5-man. They have to take the maximum number of heavy weapons.
maybe they are suppose to be like italian crossbowman with those huge tower shields in front of them. GW just took that idea, and then along the way the shield just got droped or build in to the models themself.
This way of thinking is flawed though because in 40K T5 is not a reliable health insurance. Havocs have been reduced to a glass cannon unit which is really a pity.
Insectum7 wrote: "The new Havocs also fall in line with more on how they used to fight." -
Only in the sense that they can only take heavy weapons. They're more mobile now, obviously. They don't operate as well as a siege unit since they can't take ablative bodies to absorb hits.
"Also, "options" has nothing to do with design". - Completely false. Amazingly false.
"Also how are they more restricted? In terms of Heavy Weapons total maybe. They've never had Plasma Cannons after all." -
They have to be 5-man. They have to take the maximum number of heavy weapons.
maybe they are suppose to be like italian crossbowman with those huge tower shields in front of them. GW just took that idea, and then along the way the shield just got droped or build in to the models themself.
Havoks are still supposed to be Marines (or Marines++), so it's more like a well-armored Knight with Sword, Shield and Crossbow - not just a Crossbowman with a giant shield.
How do Havoc's shoot their Reapers more efficiently than Chaos Terminators? 6 shots per Havoc, 4 shots per Termie. Mind blown. Twice the cost, less shots....
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: How do Havoc's shoot their Reapers more efficiently than Chaos Terminators? 6 shots per Havoc, 4 shots per Termie. Mind blown. Twice the cost, less shots....
Because this differentiates Havocs from Chaos Terminators!
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: How do Havoc's shoot their Reapers more efficiently than Chaos Terminators? 6 shots per Havoc, 4 shots per Termie. Mind blown. Twice the cost, less shots....
They're different weapons...not really sure what the question is asking.
That being said, as someone who benefits from Havocs being upgraded, the upgraded rules are absolutely hand-wavium arbitrary nonsense and only serve to make Terminators etc. worse.
I guess I still don't understand. "shoot their Reapers more efficiently. . . "
Havocs traditionally had Autocannons, which are 2 shots. They get Reaper Chaincannons now, which are 8 shots. . . but not Reaper Autocannons, which are 4 shots.
Insectum7 wrote: I guess I still don't understand. "shoot their Reapers more efficiently. . . "
Havocs traditionally had Autocannons, which are 2 shots. They get Reaper Chaincannons now, which are 8 shots. . . but not Reaper Autocannons, which are 4 shots.
Would've loved to have a reaper autocannon squad...
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
[...]
1. A Renegade Chapter is not going to have a lot of those, if at all. They would be such a rarity it hardly shows up or it would be lent by a Legion, in which case it would be following that Legion's combat doctrines. You can maybe count the number of Renegade Chapters that have all that on one hand. Maybe two if you delve in Lexi that far.
Blood Ravens (under Kyras)
Red Corsairs
Adharons Reavers
Angels of extacy
Avenging Sons
Beasts of Annihilation
I don't have 6 fingers on either hand, but it took minutes to spit out the first 6. That's just a fraction.
Ergo, for better representation, it makes sense to do it my way.
Also I already explained how easily a keyword system is implemented.
I seem to recall saying we should have that keyword system, too.
Please don't act like I'm wrong because I'm not.
So your argument is that you're right because you're not wrong?
2. That Chapter Master was killed and Red Corsairs would still be more operating akin to how they would've been in the Vanilla codex. With all the raiding they do, they could easily refill their Assault Cannons or gain Grav Guns.
1. They WERE always worse. The introduction of the Cherub merely cemented it.
Having greater customize-ability throughout the editions allowed them to be more tailored to the army's needs, and they've had some pretty great builds over the years. All Special Weapons, T5, Fearless and True Grit for Death Guard in 4th Ed. was pretty sweet.
Isn't this right after you saying "Chaos Marines have ALWAYS been more elite?"
That customization was already brought for Chosen in terms of special weapons. Therefore, the design philosophy behind Havocs was super lazy.
Chaos Codex: pg. 62 "There is little uniformity between squads, much of the organization and structure of the force's former Legion or Chapter falls by the wayside as they turn to the path of Chaos."
More options is more appropriate. Your "design rules" are arbitrary, and your accusation of lazy design is lazy. The new Havocs have the strange distinction of being MORE restrictive than their loyalist Devastator counterparts.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: And yeah they're always supposed to be more elite. That doesn't mean it was tackled correctly.
Chaos Codex, pg.7 "...some never grow beyond this point and remain bloodthirsty renegades and pirates for the rest of their long lives."
They become less disciplined and more savage, but not necessarily more "elite".
The new Havocs also fall in line with more on how they used to fight.
The new Havocs fall in line with how some Chaos Marines used to fight, before they stopped fighting that way? I get that adding such an option, if true, would be ideal - but (a) aren't you arguing that Chaos Marines should be *less* like what they were when they were Loyalist, (b) only a small fraction of Chaos Marines were Veterans of the Long War, and (c) once again, you're arguing that any other option should be *removed* - which is different from arguing that an option should be added.
Also, "options" has nothing to do with design. Distinction does.
Both distinction and lack thereof are important design elements. Options allow you to build either. With options, you can choose to run a list where Havoks are barely distinguishable from Devs, or you can choose to run Havoks that are nothing like Devs. Without options, you're stuck running whatever the latest rules are; this means the distinction is entirely set by the rules writer. This way, distinction is entirely a device of the codex, and not a device of the list. I'd rather allow the list to leverage distinction as a device.
New Havocs are distinguished instead of being the same entry as Devastators but worse.
New Havoks now cannot distinguish between mostly-still Devs, mostly-still Legionaries, and nowhere-close-to-either. Old Havoks could easily distinguish between those three.
Also, new Havoks are easier to distingush form Devs, but harder to distinguish from Oblits.
Also how are they more restricted? In terms of Heavy Weapons total maybe. They've never had Plasma Cannons after all.
-Can't take Boltguns
-Can't take Specials
-Can't simply be traitor Marines
They're certainly more restricted than they were.
1. Legions aren't the Chapters so we should probably get that straight.
2. And those Havocs not like Devastators are just Command Squads or Chosen equivalent. That's more of the same "they take the same option but more of it". Not very distinguished.
3. And once again, anything not a Legion should be handled in the main Vanilla codex.
4. Specials could and would already be handled by Chosen, who get a better density of them anyway.
1. Where did I say they were? What I'm implying is that some CSM were part of Legions, some were part of Chapters.
2. You're arguing a 10man unit with 4 heavies can t be distinguished from a 10man with some Specials and no Heavies?
3. Why drop all those CSM armies from the game?
4. That's not entirely unreasonable. So what units handle dev equivelents?
1. You didn't understand the task it seems. Anyone could name Renegade Chapters.
What I asked for is for Renegade Chapters that are so fallen they no longer fight like Loyalists and for some reason now have all the Daemon Engines and Reaper Autocannons and such. Certainly the Red Corsairs aren't like that.
2. What I'm saying is that I'm correct when it comes to how Renegades ought to be represented. The current CSM codex doesn't do that, the last one didn't do that, and certainly the one before that didn't do that. Entries for Huron and Cypher as is don't do that.
Maybe only in your imagination because change is bad or something.
3. Once again that's akin to Task #1.
4. What's really the difference between the two entries outside the Psyker powers they have access to? Nothing. Saying they wouldn't have Sorcerers is a non-argument.
What, the NAME has to be the exact same? That's a lame excuse.
5. And those Chapters would be better represented in the Vanilla codex. Look at that!
6. From Chosen or Command Squads? No. They absolutely needed to be their own thing a long time ago.
7. They wouldn't be dropped. They'd simply get proper representation on the tabletop via the Vanilla codex whilst the CSM one handles Legions proper.
8. You're not specific on what you mean by dev equivalents. Havocs would be that, they simply have rules to make them distinct just like regular Devs with the Cherub and Signum. Which they wouldn't have but apparently when a Chapter goes Chaos they lose those things!
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.
[...]
1. You didn't understand the task it seems. Anyone could name Renegade Chapters.
What I asked for is for Renegade Chapters that are so fallen they no longer fight like Loyalists and for some reason now have all the Daemon Engines and Reaper Autocannons and such. Certainly the Red Corsairs aren't like that.
Blood Ravens (under Kyras):
How are you going to field Kyras without the CSM book?
Red Corsairs:
How are you fielding Corpulax without access to Plague Marines? Or anyone marked? Or any of the ruinous gifts the chapter was given?
Angels of Extacy:
How are you taking Mark of Slanesh in the Loyalist book?
Beasts of Annihilation:
How do you use the Loyalist book to do a chapter with an excessive presence of Possesed Marines?
I'm not going to look up each of them. Here's a few of them. None of those are reasonably represented by the Loyalist book.
2. What I'm saying is that I'm correct when it comes to how Renegades ought to be represented. The current CSM codex doesn't do that, the last one didn't do that, and certainly the one before that didn't do that. Entries for Huron and Cypher as is don't do that.
Maybe only in your imagination because change is bad or something.
What I'm saying is that what you propose strips countless players' armies from the game for the sake of redefining the CSM book as Codex: Legions, just because you think it should be. I like the idea of letting Renegades use the Loyalist book, as appropriate. But I don't like your idea of denying any non-VOTLW from using the book. That retcons *far* too many Warbands out of the game.
3. Once again that's akin to Task #1.
Agreed - once again, you're denying the right for many prominant Warbands to exists.
4. What's really the difference between the two entries outside the Psyker powers they have access to? Nothing. Saying they wouldn't have Sorcerers is a non-argument.
What, the NAME has to be the exact same? That's a lame excuse.
There's more difference than that. Reread the entries. After all, what's the difference between a CSM Squad and a Tac Squad?
5. And those Chapters would be better represented in the Vanilla codex. Look at that!
For certain subsets of 'those chapters'. Others, not at all. As above.
6. From Chosen or Command Squads? No. They absolutely needed to be their own thing a long time ago.
Compared to Chosen or Command Squads? They already were. Now, nobody is allowed to field what they were.
7. They wouldn't be dropped. They'd simply get proper representation on the tabletop via the Vanilla codex whilst the CSM one handles Legions proper.
As long as they fit *your* stipulations. They can be Renegades. But they can't talk to Chaos. They can't have Sorcs. They can't have Possessed. Oblits. DPs. Demon Engines. Because you only consider "I'm not really Chaos!" and "I'm a vet of the Crusade!" as the only possible states for a Chaos Marine - and nothing in between.
8. You're not specific on what you mean by dev equivalents. Havocs would be that, they simply have rules to make them distinct just like regular Devs with the Cherub and Signum. Which they wouldn't have but apparently when a Chapter goes Chaos they lose those things!
It's not ideal that a Dev squad loses a Cherub and Signum when they stop drinking the Kool Aid and start drinking blood. It could be hand-waved away as protocols or support not being provided for those tools, but I consider it a miss. However, the idea that you'd have Bob, Sam, Larry, John, and Joe be loyalists one day, deployed with a boltgun and 4 Lascannons - then, their chapter goes off the deep end, and you have the same 5 guys with the same kit the next day - why are they now T5? How is that Boltgun now a Heavy Bolter?
Havoks have always been the CSM version of Devs. What becomes the CSM equivelent for Devs?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/04/02 22:25:07
[...]
1. You didn't understand the task it seems. Anyone could name Renegade Chapters.
What I asked for is for Renegade Chapters that are so fallen they no longer fight like Loyalists and for some reason now have all the Daemon Engines and Reaper Autocannons and such. Certainly the Red Corsairs aren't like that.
Blood Ravens (under Kyras):
How are you going to field Kyras without the CSM book?
Red Corsairs:
How are you fielding Corpulax without access to Plague Marines? Or anyone marked? Or any of the ruinous gifts the chapter was given?
Angels of Extacy:
How are you taking Mark of Slanesh in the Loyalist book?
Beasts of Annihilation:
How do you use the Loyalist book to do a chapter with an excessive presence of Possesed Marines?
I'm not going to look up each of them. Here's a few of them. None of those are reasonably represented by the Loyalist book.
2. What I'm saying is that I'm correct when it comes to how Renegades ought to be represented. The current CSM codex doesn't do that, the last one didn't do that, and certainly the one before that didn't do that. Entries for Huron and Cypher as is don't do that.
Maybe only in your imagination because change is bad or something.
What I'm saying is that what you propose strips countless players' armies from the game for the sake of redefining the CSM book as Codex: Legions, just because you think it should be. I like the idea of letting Renegades use the Loyalist book, as appropriate. But I don't like your idea of denying any non-VOTLW from using the book. That retcons *far* too many Warbands out of the game.
3. Once again that's akin to Task #1.
Agreed - once again, you're denying the right for many prominant Warbands to exists.
4. What's really the difference between the two entries outside the Psyker powers they have access to? Nothing. Saying they wouldn't have Sorcerers is a non-argument.
What, the NAME has to be the exact same? That's a lame excuse.
There's more difference than that. Reread the entries. After all, what's the difference between a CSM Squad and a Tac Squad?
5. And those Chapters would be better represented in the Vanilla codex. Look at that!
For certain subsets of 'those chapters'. Others, not at all. As above.
6. From Chosen or Command Squads? No. They absolutely needed to be their own thing a long time ago.
Compared to Chosen or Command Squads? They already were. Now, nobody is allowed to field what they were.
7. They wouldn't be dropped. They'd simply get proper representation on the tabletop via the Vanilla codex whilst the CSM one handles Legions proper.
As long as they fit *your* stipulations. They can be Renegades. But they can't talk to Chaos. They can't have Sorcs. They can't have Possessed. Oblits. DPs. Demon Engines. Because you only consider "I'm not really Chaos!" and "I'm a vet of the Crusade!" as the only possible states for a Chaos Marine - and nothing in between.
8. You're not specific on what you mean by dev equivalents. Havocs would be that, they simply have rules to make them distinct just like regular Devs with the Cherub and Signum. Which they wouldn't have but apparently when a Chapter goes Chaos they lose those things!
It's not ideal that a Dev squad loses a Cherub and Signum when they stop drinking the Kool Aid and start drinking blood. It could be hand-waved away as protocols or support not being provided for those tools, but I consider it a miss. However, the idea that you'd have Bob, Sam, Larry, John, and Joe be loyalists one day, deployed with a boltgun and 4 Lascannons - then, their chapter goes off the deep end, and you have the same 5 guys with the same kit the next day - why are they now T5? How is that Boltgun now a Heavy Bolter?
Havoks have always been the CSM version of Devs. What becomes the CSM equivelent for Devs?
1. The same way you would field current Blood Ravens. They don't have a picked Chapter Tactic and you pick accordingly. Except keywords.
Red Corsairs are handled via Keywords. Bam done. I also already said 2-3 of the Chaos Daemonic units (probably would just Possessed, Warp Talons, and Spawn) cover that amount of corruption.
Angels of Ecstacy are handled the same way. Switch out the keywords and bam you're done.
Seems like your complaints are limited to Marks, which are strictly keywords now and really don't offer any rules outside some Strategems and Relics. Hell, the main codex is already inconsistent with units being able to take marks in armies that don't usually have them anyway. Plus wargear is a much bigger problem, and you should know that. Bad complaint. Next.
2. That's because the focus should have always BEEN the Legions. What ended up happening was that proper representation was lost because SOME people decided it should be a catch all for Renegades, even though they shouldn't have the same benefits and equipment.
And no it doesn't retcon warbands out of the game. It forces them into a codex that better represents them via my handling of it. As is, the two main ones (Red Corsairs and The Fallen) are not handled well at all because of you wanting them in the main CSM codex. They shouldn't be there in the first place.
3. Once again, no Renegade Chapters were denied outside some maybe badly made fan ones.
4. There isn't a difference, which is part of the problem. Proper legion Marines aren't represented like they should be compared to how it was done before. Distinction is once again the problem here.
5. No they weren't. 4-5 Special Weapons is the same entry outside maybe a couple of point values, especially with the current point costs (compare the original 13 point Havocs with 14 point Chosen, Command Squads, and Sternguard).
6. Renegade Chapters shouldn't have a bunch of Daemon Engines as is, so you definitely proved my point. Nor should they have a bunch of Daemon Princes running around. They get Possessed at most.
Also Sorcerers are still there. It is the LIBRARIAN entry.
7. Off the deep end that Devatsator squad would still be operating closer to their original formation than Havocs in the first place. Now it would be clear at least rather than some crap catch-all that doesn't actually do it like you pretend it does.
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.
You keep arguing that:
1. Codex CSM is legion-only
2. Any non-legion CSM can t use anything but what Loyalists use. And maybe a special rule can be invented whole cloth for each variance mentioned (and somehow Possessed are just marked Marines?)
3. There are no CSMs in the fluff that are non-legion yet do anything notably chaos-y
4. Any theme, rule, or fluff that doesn't support what you want should be retconned.
5. Any unit that isn't what you want it to be should be thrown in the trash and it's rules removed.
It's just silly how assertive you are. I get that you don't care about there being a difference between Libbys and Sorcs, ASM and VV, or Demon Princes and Libbies. Why does this mean the game must discard those differences?
Why is nuking any theme you don't care for a good idea? Because we aren't talking about making the things you want to field an option; we are talking about making models people already have, and making them illegal.
