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.

Gotta say that Natfka dump on the product info sounds extremely underwhelming.

-Lord of Skulls Datasheet

This is random. Are they going to drop the points finally or what? Upping the firepower to make it worth its points? This is the first time I've heard of this happening.

 aka_mythos wrote:
The CSM codex is problematic... CSM pay more points for less effective versions of special rules. SM in a number of instances get for free what CSM must pay a steep price to recieve. It will take pretty significant additions to the rules to negate this without rewriting it.

Even before taking chapter tactics into account, ATSKNF by virtue of improving Marine unit longevity means a CSM squad needs between 13-14 CSM to equal them. When you add chapter tactics it becomes an even steeper disparity. GW would have to give us marks and icons for free just to equal what SM get for free.

This new book doesn't necessarily have to do that specifically but that's the mountain it has to climb to "fix" CSM without rewriting the codex.

That assumes of course that CSM have a reason for existing that isn't "losing to SM". If not then CSM don't need a "fix" cuz they ain't broke.

gungo wrote:

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
I clearly expect to see CSM players complaining about the state of their codex.

Personally, I was just hoping we could keep it reasonably in check until we actually see what the new rules in Traitors Hate are.

Realistically I'm not anticipating much in the way of new rules. I expect a rehash of the formations from the BL & CS supplements, a renaming (and possible nerfing) of the SM psychic powers, a compilation of existing dataslates from recent box sets (i.e., the now discontinued IK: Renegade) and a superformation that grants some kind of Hatred. Like a worse version of AoD.

Oh, and if Kharn gets new rules I expect him to no longer hit Invisible units on a 2+.

We already know you failed already at predictions hopefully your not a follower of Tzetch.

here is some Information about the Preorders on Saturday:

Traitors Hate:
-Contains New Rules to Play alongside Codex: Chaos Space Marines
-New Tactical Objectives
- 4 new psychic trees
-11 new Formations, a new "decurion style" detachment (This is on top of the Black Legion and Crimson Slaughter 14 formations)
-Lord of Skulls Datasheet
- with new rules to add Renegade Knights to csm

Traitors Hate Limited Edition:
-6 Metal Tactical Objective Markers
-Exclusively Designed Heretic Psychic Astartes Psychic Powers Psychic cards
-36 Tactical Objective Cards
-136 Pages of Rules and Narrative
-Double sided Campaign map ( which means a new complete campaign centered on csm)

We already heard Kharn the Betrayer has a new rule (eternal warrior?) and rumoured rules to add him to demonkin.

So odds are something in that list is decent and odds are all these formstions will still be useful in any 8th edition reboot.

And the original post on faeit based on the product info and known white dwarf leaks. http://natfka.blogspot.com/2016/08/details-about-traitors-hate-and-this.html?m=1

That rumor also said the plastic Void Shield Generator would be $85.

I just don't see any reason to optimistic here. If they wanted to fix CSM they could have done so when they redid the BL & CS supplements.

They've been phoning it in on every CSM release since Pete Haines left the company. I just don't see them changing now.

I really hope that this book isn't just a fusion of BL and CS supplements with some more Khorne thrown in. If it is like AoD, it will just have the same stuff reprinted, which is a slap to the face of any player who has the original supplements.

Curious how they're going to integrate C:SM with Renegade Knights, opposed to keeping them separate.

I'm always hopefuly for Chaos, Because I desperately want to use the the cyclopia cabal formation, and make an army all around it. But... I can't justify them, due to poor performance.

I know AoSing or Sigmaring 40K means different things to different people but I'm hoping 40K just becomes less cluttered and a simpler set of rules so datasheets and formations let you make the game more strategetic in that fashion. Not the same exact mechanics as AoS, obviously. And not the fluff, though I'm super excited to see how the fluff develops with the continuation of what started with Fenris and now Traitor's Hate (great name ).

 andysonic1 wrote:

-Lord of Skulls Datasheet

This is random. Are they going to drop the points finally or what? Upping the firepower to make it worth its points? This is the first time I've heard of this happening.

It's not in the original Codex: Chaos Space Marines so if you had that but never bought Escalation or KDK, you don't have access to rules for a Lord of War for Chaos Space Marines. So it makes sense in that context. Likewise with Renegade Knights.

Maybe that's why GW brought Mat Ward back? For some massively over the top CSM stuff. Abaddon is all CSM's spiritual liege kinda crap.

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Maybe that's why GW brought Mat Ward back? For some massively over the top CSM stuff. Abaddon is all CSM's spiritual liege kinda crap.

He's writing something for BL from that tweet he made. Though he could also be secretly controlling the Sigmarine statue in front of HQ like some diabolical gold golem. The second part is ...unconfirmed.

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Maybe that's why GW brought Mat Ward back? For some massively over the top CSM stuff. Abaddon is all CSM's spiritual liege kinda crap.

Well Abaddon is the Chapter Master of the Chaos Space Marines afterall. That's why he's the only Chaos Lord with 4 wounds and 4 attacks.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Smellingsalts wrote:
What I read in the same posts is that elements of Sigmar are going to be incorporated into the new 40k. I actually like AOS so I see it as a good thing.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with what you posted about in this thread, and were subsequently jumped on for.

Game mechanics from AoS making their way into 40k? I don't think many people have issues with that.
".

I beg to disagree. If 40k become as shallow as aos, im pretty sure a lots of players will have issues with it. The only thing i would like to see from aos in 40k is the impact of wounds on mc fighting abilities

 streetsamurai wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Smellingsalts wrote:
What I read in the same posts is that elements of Sigmar are going to be incorporated into the new 40k. I actually like AOS so I see it as a good thing.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with what you posted about in this thread, and were subsequently jumped on for.

Game mechanics from AoS making their way into 40k? I don't think many people have issues with that.
".

I beg to disagree. If 40k become as shallow as aos, im pretty sure a lots of players will have issues with it. The only thing i would like to see from aos in 40k is the impact of wounds on mc fighting abilities

Have you ever actually played AoS?

There's a lot of stuff in there which streamlined the game and made it a hell of a lot more intuitive than having to consult WS/BS charts all the time.

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Maybe that's why GW brought Mat Ward back? For some massively over the top CSM stuff. Abaddon is all CSM's spiritual liege kinda crap.

He will make renegade Renegades, so treacherous they defect from their Legions (or very important warbands like Crimson Slaughter who are wayyy cooler than those stuffy old guys, anyway) to pretend to be wannabe Grey Knights, because GKs are the BESTEST!!1 Berzerkers with psy-cannons, Nurgle Dreadno, err, Hellbrutes strapped into Nemesis Knights and Noise Marines singing praise to our lord and saviour Draigo.

Yes. And i found it to be extremely boring, childish and shallow. Different stroke for different folk.

The thing i really want to see with 8th edition is the removal of formation. These things are a mess and are bloating the game for no good reason.

And you consult bs/ws chart all the time??? Weird, i find the calculation really easy to do, and never ever consult them


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Traitor hate seem s rather unappealing. The only thing that seems interesting are the new psychic power

 streetsamurai wrote:
Yes. And i found it to be extremely boring, childish and shallow. Different stroke for different folk.

Criticism I commonly hear from people who play one game while having the mindset of "I don't like this and don't want to".

Especially the bit about it being "childish".

The thing i really want to see with 8th edition is the removal of formation. These things are a mess and are bloating the game for no good reason

They're only a mess and bloating the game if you don't actually understand how to properly use them.

Formations are far preferable to the garbage that is the CAD.

And you consult bs/ws chart all the time??? Weird, i find the calculation really easy to do, and never ever consult them

Yeah, I consult the WS chart quite often. So? It wasn't well done for 40k.

There's also this other component of playing the game called "an opponent" and not all opponents know these tables by heart. Having the value tied directly to the weapon rather than the wielder is faaaaaaaaaar simpler.

Well, since you need to use the tables to determine the to hit rolls, i can understand why you like simpler games, and are a fan of aos.

And i have to laugh at your lame arrogant rebuttal of a diverging opinion. Guess you are too young to be mature enough to realise that your own opinion is not the objective truth.

Dont bother replying, youre on my ignore list

Ad hominem attacks don't really help your position.

 streetsamurai wrote:
Well, since you need to use the tables to determine the to hit rolls, i can understand why you like simpler games, and are a fan of aos.

Did you actually read the comment made or no?

Figuring out Ballistic Skill rolls is fairly easy(7 minus the firing model's Ballistic Skill=the roll needed To Hit)...but that doesn't really help new players who haven't played much. They'll likely end up consulting their main rulebooks(where the table is listed). AoS made it so that is tied to the Warscroll of a model, with beneficial modifiers listed on the firing unit's Warscroll and detrimental modifiers listed on the fired at unit's Warscroll.

Figuring out Weapon Skill rolls? There's no easy way to do that beyond rote memorization. There is no sensible pattern beyond the fact that it caps out at a minimum of 3+'s to hit and that comes from you hitting anything BELOW your Weapon Skill, 4'+s to hit against the same Weapon Skill, and 5+'s for anything above your Weapon Skill. 6+'s to hit can happen but are related to specific circumstances(Psyker abilities or the like).

So please, tell me again why it is a bad thing to have the simpler option that AoS has?

And i have to laugh at your lame rebuttal of a diverging opinion. Guess you are too young to be mature enough to realise that your own opinion is not the objective truth

If you want to talk about "laughing at lame rebuttals" or insult someone's age and maturity level...
The term you're looking for isn't "diverging" opinion but rather "differing". Nobody says that their opinion is "diverging" from another individual's opinion. They say that their opinion "differs".


For the record, I didn't say that your opinion was outweighed by mine nor that my own opinion was "the objective truth". I simply stated that your criticisms are commonly espoused by those who go into it with the mindset of "I don't like this and don't want to". If you had said that it was different strokes for different folks and you found it boring and shallow? That'd have been fine--as you said, different strokes for different folks.

But what about AoS is so "childish"? The fact you that all the rules you really need are printed on the warscrolls?

I still stand by my stance of the Combined Arms Detachment being garbage though. That thing really ceased to be relevant ages ago and the continued existence of it is far more detrimental to the game than beneficial.

 streetsamurai wrote:
Well, since you need to use the tables to determine the to hit rolls, i can understand why you like simpler games, and are a fan of aos.

And i have to laugh at your lame arrogant rebuttal of a diverging opinion. Guess you are too young to be mature enough to realise that your own opinion is not the objective truth.

Dont bother replying, youre on my ignore list

Back-handed comments still makes yours lame and not within the board rules. But feel free to add me to the list too since I disagree with you.

Less AoS, more complaining about CSM please!

We don't get releases very often so we really need to take full advantage of this opportunity for on-topic whinging to the fullest extent permitted by law. For those of you who enjoy CSM belly-aching I think you're in for a real treat this week!

 Uriels_Flame wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
Well, since you need to use the tables to determine the to hit rolls, i can understand why you like simpler games, and are a fan of aos.

And i have to laugh at your lame arrogant rebuttal of a diverging opinion. Guess you are too young to be mature enough to realise that your own opinion is not the objective truth.

Dont bother replying, youre on my ignore list

Back-handed comments still makes yours lame and not within the board rules. But feel free to add me to the list too since I disagree with you.

I dont mind someone disagreeing with me. I do mind when he does it in an arrogant manner

 BrookM wrote:
Or getting picked up by the more idiotic rumour sites and passed off as actual facts..

BoLS and naftka in 3, 2, 1...

I'm not keen on the setting getting AoS'd but the rules as they stand could well do with it. Might make people start playing again.

As for chaos. Safe to say if gw don't fix them for 8th a lot of people will likely just drop them and use another army. My chaos uses the space marine dex as the chaos book is unplayable. Daemonkin were ok but not enough to make it worthwhile.

Fingers crossed though


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 streetsamurai wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
Well, since you need to use the tables to determine the to hit rolls, i can understand why you like simpler games, and are a fan of aos.

And i have to laugh at your lame arrogant rebuttal of a diverging opinion. Guess you are too young to be mature enough to realise that your own opinion is not the objective truth.

Dont bother replying, youre on my ignore list

Back-handed comments still makes yours lame and not within the board rules. But feel free to add me to the list too since I disagree with you.

I dont mind someone disagreeing with me. I do mind when he does it in an arrogant manner

Pot meet kettle

A bit off topic, but when is the second HH box with the thousands sons supposed to be relase? really wager to see how they look like and if they will be similar enough to 40k to be usable in that setting (arihman does look pretty similar to his 40k setting)

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Maybe that's why GW brought Mat Ward back? For some massively over the top CSM stuff. Abaddon is all CSM's spiritual liege kinda crap.

I suppose ''Abaddon the Spiritual Liege'' is better than ''Failbaddon is an incompetent failure,'' that he so often gets.

Kaluwen, your profile pic is annoyingly wide and making this site a pain to read on mobile!

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Kaluwen, your profile pic is annoyingly wide and making this site a pain to read on mobile!

Use the mobile theme, I don't have that issue on my iPad or phone.

Edit: just switched it to non mobile theme and his is no wider than anyone else's?

Well i guess of the primarch really are coming back has it is rumoured, Abadon will probably get a major upgrading in power, cause i doubt that they want him to play second fiddle

I dunno. I'll still continue to play CSM even if they stay gakky. I'll bitch like hell - because it's amusing to me, to bitch - but I'll keep playing them.

And on the bright side I find that CSM are actually perfect for stupid games against opponents who are just starting out and aren't really familiar with the game or the rules. And when I say "stupid games" I'm talking real pants-on-head stupid here. Like taking-a-full-army-of-cultists-and-20-man-unupgraded-CSM-squads-and-then-stacking-5-Eternity-Stairs-on-top-of-each-other-in-the-middle-of-your-unpainted-Realm-of-Battle-and-putting-The-Relic-at-the-very-top stupid. Just as dumb as you can get. God what a simultaneously awful and magical experience. I can't wait for Age of Emprah!

Reminder:

Rule Number One = Be Polite

Rule Number Two = Stay On Topic

Rule Number Three = No Spam

The privilege of posting is contingent on following the rules.

Thanks!