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.

Yup.

Glad we solved this miscommunication.

clively wrote:
Engaging the world wide gaming community to fight a campaign in order to determine the next 100 years of timeline would be a marketing coupe.

Have you guys forgotten about Armageddon and the Eye of Terror? They did exactly that. Problem is, with enough players and armies, suitably weighted according to player numbers, the results just even out. GW also backed themselves into a corner with the Eye of Terror, as the results dictated that Abaddons crusade be annihilated. But not wishing to alienate every Chaos player on the planet and drastically affect the storyline, they let it devolve into a stalemate.

I personally would love to see a small change in the setting. Nothing big though, push foward by like 15 years in game time when the 7th edition hits.

Changes would be simple: Finally conclude Armageddon/Cadia campaigns. Maybe kill off a special character.


Killing off a Special Character doesnt mean too much sense people can always play any earlier time (after all, Eldrad is dead for example and he is still a playable SC)

In 8th Edition maybe hint at a new massive campaign but its not needed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Counter question: Would you like Mat Ward to advance the storyline?

touche...

I retract my earlier opinion

 Kaldor wrote:

clively wrote:
Engaging the world wide gaming community to fight a campaign in order to determine the next 100 years of timeline would be a marketing coupe.

Have you guys forgotten about Armageddon and the Eye of Terror? They did exactly that. Problem is, with enough players and armies, suitably weighted according to player numbers, the results just even out. GW also backed themselves into a corner with the Eye of Terror, as the results dictated that Abaddons crusade be annihilated. But not wishing to alienate every Chaos player on the planet and drastically affect the storyline, they let it devolve into a stalemate.

Your recall of the results is the exaCt opposite of what actually occurred. The campaign was officially declared in White Dwarf as a Chaos victory. Abaddon was successful. Iif anything it should be Creed getting executed considering how poorly the Imperials performed in the campaign. I have in the past posted the white dwarf final campaign results unedited in this forum and people are free to search for themselves. It has only been the Imperial sore losers that have been trying for years to argue their defeat into victory despite the explanation by GW of the results and the campaign system. There is none of this griping over any of the other campaigns that the Imperium did win, only the one where the Imperium lost.

It has been GW that has backed away from changing the status quo as a result of the Chaos victory, directly contradicting their earlier promises in White Dwarf of storyline change depending on the campaign results.

Results from white dwarf below:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/392010.page

They should, i want to see what happens next after the 13th black crusade.

Maybe kill a few of the Chapter Masters, or founding legion. That would be fun.

I think GW needs to further the story by declaring the Emperor dead, but make it interesting by saying that the Imperium discovered that he's been dead for hundreds of years (which was a deep dark secret known only to the high lords of terra) and that the golden throne is just a beacon through which thousands of psykers maintain the astronomican.
Have human morale bolstered by the fact that they've been keeping it together without the Emperor. They then make a patron saint of the Emperor and continue to worship him as their deity of war.

No Arc. No frakking way.

The real question is if they are remotely capable of progressing the storyline in a non-hamfisted way. I think no.

As it's been said, worldwide campaigns were a good idea at the very start, but quickly became broken because Imperials always win because of the fact that 75% of 40k players play Space marines of some flavor (Space marine vs. Space marine battles still equal an Imperium victory!) . Also, like it's been said, nothing ever changed. GW wants the setting to be a dead-end at the end of M41 where every faction is equal, so every campaign ended with a mysteriously math-evading stalemate.

Also, that can't happen now even if the campaign was balanced, because the current GW is not the awesome GW of the Golden Age of the late 90's/early 2000's. They are now just a miniatures store, not a group of people passionate about the hobby and their setting.

Iracundus wrote:

Your recall of the results is the exact opposite of what actually occurred. The campaign was officially declared in White Dwarf as a Chaos victory. Abaddon was successful. Iif anything it should be Creed getting executed considering how poorly the Imperials performed in the campaign.

Iracundus wrote:

I have in the past posted the white dwarf final campaign results unedited in this forum and people are free to search for themselves.

So? Just proves the point why GW shouldn't have these campaigns...

Iracundus wrote:

It has only been the Chaos fans that have been trying for years to argue their defeat into victory despite the explanation by GW of the results and the campaign system.

Corrected.

Iracundus wrote:

It has been GW that has backed away from changing the status quo directly contradicting their earlier promises in White Dwarf of storyline change depending on the campaign results.

Which wasn't the obvious result?
Anyone with more than 2 braincells would bet on a stalemate and win. Am sorry but this crappy idea of them giving up control is so far from any chance to happen as 40k is from reality.

Plus its getting worse.

I'd prefer a fan based campaign as fans may keep their promises where the company may not. Thus its always a temporary and local change, a "possible future" , one of many.

Do not misquote me. The White Dwarf result which was quoted verbatim, clearly declares it a Chaos victory. All hope wasn't lost for the Imperium with some small bright spots but nonetheless they lost the campaign. Trying to spin the campaign results otherwise in real life is the same as if Chaos players tried to spin the Heresy into Chaos winning. It is simply not what happened. It is information that was cited and which can be looked up by anyone with access to the sources and is clearly in black and white: a minor victory for Chaos. There is not a single mention of "draw" or "stalemate" anywhere in the article. Those words have only ever been used by Imperial players trying to downplay the victory by Chaos. A minor victory is not decisive but still a step better than a draw in most game victory scales. The principle is that it is bad sportsmanship to be unable to lose a match with good grace, and then to actually claim winning it instead. Such behavior would be ridiculous in a single 40K game, and the same should hold true for a campaign. If one side lost, admit it. The exact mechanics of the campaign were even explained in the White Dwarf article results roundup (including explicitly mentioning how the Forces of Disorder players were more organized than the Forces of Order players), yet people still persist in wanting to cling to conspiracy theories rather than admit that perhaps their side got outplayed.

If you are not aware of the history of what was happening at the time, do not try and make up stuff or try to spread misinformation about it as it seems there are already quite a few people that have heard the wrong information about what happened. Either that or you are one of those Imperial sore losers still begrudging any side except the Imperium actually winning a campaign. Not once do you hear about such complaints about any campaign in which the Imperium did come out ahead, from Ichar IV, to Armageddon 3, to the later Medusa campaign which came after the Eye of Terror campaign. All the wailing and gnashing of teeth only happens over the one where the Imperium lost. Coincidence? It is not even all Forces of Order players that try to spin the results. Although Eldar players might complain about Eldrad's death, they seemed accepting and even satisfied with their performance in the Eye of Terror campaign, such as the expulsion of Ahriman from the Webway and retaking most of one croneworld, and parts of another. I am not intending to paint all Imperial players with the same brush, but the level of sheer denial of what actually happened in the actual real life campaign I have only ever seen from Imperial players.

GW's promise of storyline change and advancement (Aus WD 282, Skeins of Fate article by Graham McNeill) was done at a time when Andy Chambers was still in charge 40K development. He was notable for pushing advancement of the storyline. The White Dwarf article preceding the campaign start made the allusion that a resounding Imperial victory might lead to Imperial resurgence and the High Lords to considering reforming the Legions, while a Chaos victory would lead to a time of greater darkness with Abaddon out of the Eye. Chaos won, but GW first downplayed the significance and then backtracked the timeline. It was also in the aftermath of this campaign that Andy Chambers left GW. It is unclear if there was ever a link between the two. Rumor (unconfirmed to this day) was that Andy Chambers was wanting to 1) Advance the storyline 2) Substantially change the 40K rules in the next edition rather than tweaking which the higher-ups at GW wanted, and that it was this disagreement over where to take the 40K IP that led to Andy departing.

In truth, even if GW had not wanted to radically upset the setting, it could have easily incorporated the results of the campaign while still effectively maintaining the status quo. There were hints of this with mentions in the subsequent Space Marine and Tau Codex of the Tau border being stripped of Imperial forces to reinforce the Cadian Gate, resulting in the burst of Tau expansion. This reflected exactly what happened in the campaign itself which saw Imperial players ignoring the Tau front. If GW had wanted to they could have had Abaddon break out of the Gate successfully, then be bogged down before reaching Terra due to Imperial reinforcements from elsewhere, yet this still weakening the Imperium as a whole due to other factions taking advantage of the weaknesses exposed elsewhere. Even if Cadia had been written as fallen, it wouldn't have meant the end of the Cadian line. Creed and the Cadians could have been written as gearing up for a campaign to retake their homeworld. In fact, there are again mentions of this in the 13th Black Crusade BL publication, in which Creed calls upon Cadian regiments to return to contested Cadia and fight to free it from Abaddon.

Disclaimer: Before anyone tries to resort to ad hominem or suggest personal bias, I posted the White Dwarf results in this forum in the past, unedited. I also played Tyranids and Eldar during the actual Eye of Terror campaign so I was on both sides. The Tyranids lost in their chosen warzone despite the Force of Disorder winning the campaign. The Eldar won in theirs, despite the Forces of Order losing the campaign as a whole. I have no particular factional leanings in this matter, but simply a desire to get the facts of what did happen out there instead of all the hearsay and misinformation being spouted off by people that were either not present or blatantly partisan in their factional leanings.

I would say that GW could successfully move things forward... but only slightly.

For instance, we could have the period just after Cadia falls, and the Black Crusade presses on to the worlds leading toward Earth.

The problem is, the big ending, the climactic final battle, that will always be for the players to choose for themselves. Here's how mine goes:

All those sacrifices bring the Emperor to life as a new god, but one of order rather than chaos. While losing the war against chaos in the physical realm, a grand alliance of man and alien alike lead a strike into the Eye of Terror itself, guided by the only man who can navigate it: the universally beloved Kaldor Draigo. They are joined by Ynead, the newly born god of the Eldar craftworlds, created from the endless spiritstones gathered since the fall. They strike for Nurgle's garden and free the Eldar god Isha, who possesses a cure for the Plague of Unbelief. Aided now by numerous gods of order, there is a war in heaven that concludes with the madness of the warp cured. The gods are forever reduced in power and the warp itself calmed to a state unknown since the time of the Old Ones. There are no "psykers" as we think of them anymore, but we don't need navigators to use the warp. Without the warp, the psychic communal rage of the Orks eases, and they became a thinking, reasoning race that can successfully interact with other races as something other than an adversary. The Eldar are chastened for their failings but are recovering as a species. The Imperium owes it's survival to alien races it once abhorred, and in the pantheon of the church of the savior emperor there are now figures like Isha and Ynead who are also venerated. It is a new golden age for this galaxy, as the truth of science and the peace of diplomacy reign, and the sentient races of 41k unite against the Tyranid threat as one.

The End.

See, GW can't do that. Everyone would hate it.

Iracundus wrote:
Do not misquote me.

Did not.
Only returned the favor of this pointless ( Nuclear War style ) " I won, I won ".

But there you go:

Iracundus wrote:

The ...

Iracundus wrote:

If you are not aware of the history of what was happening at the time, do not try and make up stuff or try to spread misinformation about it as it seems there are already quite a few people that have heard the wrong information about what happened.

Maybe its time for you to accept some people got their own WD and don't have to run with your illusions of a possibility any side could score a significant win, at all?
Like, reading said articles and without a doubt, not getting the impression you try to insert here, like making up that lots of people would believe in this mythical change of great portions of the background because WD stated so..

Sure enough subscribed to it, to sell new plastic crack, to even organize to play the rules, not the Fluff.
But GW did learn a few things. Especially to avoid such campaigns.

Iracundus wrote:

Either that or you are one of those Imperial sore losers still begrudging any side except the Imperium actually winning a campaign.

Look if all you got to say is to call one uninformed or a sore loser, maybe you are the sore one who begrudges GW because they didn't provide what YOU wanted ?

Iracundus wrote:
I am not intending to paint all Imperial players with the same brush, but the level of sheer denial of what actually happened in the actual real life campaign I have only ever seen from Imperial players.

I don't think your whole post says what you think it says... I mean, you may retract from this Imperial = sore losers claim, anytime , anywhere, be my guest.

Iracundus wrote:

The White Dwarf article preceding the campaign start made the allusion that a resounding Imperial victory might lead to Imperial resurgence and the High Lords to considering reforming the Legions, while a Chaos victory would lead to a time of greater darkness with Abaddon out of the Eye.

And a "return of the Legions" doesn't raise suspicions?
GW would never have to deliver, they could add whatever stopped this from happening...
OtOH, the grimdarkness is always rising and Abby and friends got a new dex and the first in 6th ed too.

Seems GW provides, something.

Iracundus wrote:
Chaos won,

Oh. Really?

As hard is I scour this recent Codex Imperial Guard, can't find the loss of Cadia.
Must be the fact GW learned they are better off without a story-line.

Iracundus wrote:

In truth, even if GW had not wanted to radically upset the setting, it could have easily incorporated the results of the campaign while still effectively maintaining the status quo.

But they did.
At least the parts they deemed acceptable.
It was their campaign, their right to keep or drop.

Iracundus wrote:
Even if Cadia had been written as fallen, it wouldn't have meant the end of the Cadian line. Creed and the Cadians could have been written as gearing up for a campaign to retake their homeworld.

Disagree.
Their singular Line of Imperial Guard representatives, was mostly Cadia. They also focused more on the Cadians after the EoT campaign in Imperial Guard codices.
A fallen Cadia would be lost. Lost as changed into a demon world, most likely swallowed by the warp. How to retake that? A contested Cadia however, is useful as none can be sure about its actual state and both parties still claim to "control" it.
Why should a 50% of a Line, here PLASTC Models, be stuck with a "has to retake their homeworld" ?
Because there is no part 2 of the campaign, ever.
Why?

Because GW found out they cannot control it as much as they like. Control is their creed now.


The time-window to paint the Cadians as campaigning to reconquer was closed when GW focused on Cadians as Guard "poster boyz".
Before this, Cadians as one of several renown sources would have been easily written into a GW controlled fluff source where Cadia is taken back by brute force even if Abby freely was on a rampage throughout the Galaxy.

Who would care if the IG had 6-8 sources for the most common, ie GW-mini supported Guardsmen?
They could slip this in, at their liking.

Now when so much is "Cadianized" in the IG sources, GW isn't going to move because of old campaigns. They may take from that pile of fluff, or leave it to sink to the bottom.

Where this failure at realizing " you don't include important parts of the setup in your open ended campaigns for general change" belongs to. The deepest parts IMO.

There sill never be anything but a galaxy-wide status quo. Consider the fluff that describes each race as being what will be in place for the life of 40K, other than in the situation of complete hand-wave ret-cons, like the Necrons.

-The Imperium is stagnant, but hanging on by a thread (as always).
-The Craftworld Eldar are dying out, while their darker cousins continue raiding.
-There will always be a Tyranid hive fleet looming on the edge of known space.
-Orks continue to have fun.
-Necrons brood in their pockets of their old Empire; the threat of them becoming resurgent always looms but never happens.
-The Tau are on the rise, but never "too" much of a rise.
-Chaos forces threaten to become ascendant, but never doing more than knocking the Imperials back to their "hanging by a thread" status.

The universe will never be more than a "what will happen next?" state.

It's not that I say they shouldnt continue it at all I'm just worried that if they tried they would screw up the wonderful 40k we already have.

 1hadhq wrote:

Iracundus wrote:
Do not misquote me.

Did not.
Only returned the favor of this pointless ( Nuclear War style ) " I won, I won ".

Now you are outright lying.

You wrote this:

 1hadhq wrote:

Iracundus wrote:

It has only been the Chaos fans that have been trying for years to argue their defeat into victory despite the explanation by GW of the results and the campaign system.

claiming that is what I wrote, with the quote having my name and previous post attached as link. When in reality, I wrote the following:

Iracundus wrote:

It has only been the Imperial sore losers that have been trying for years to argue their defeat into victory despite the explanation by GW of the results and the campaign system.

Do not try to claim I wrote something that I did not write. That is deliberate falsification. If you are going to respond, do so in a mature manner instead of lying and mockery.

There was no Chaos defeat no matter how much you might try to down play the victory declared in White Dwarf:

Victory for Chaos! Not a complete victory, the forces of Order have held the line in many places and Cadia itself still defies the Arch Warmaster Abaddon. But nonetheless over eight weeks the forces ot Disorder have consistently out-fought and out-manoeuvred their opponents across the warzones of the Eye of Terror.

WD 287, Death by a Thousand Cuts by Andy Chambers

Whatever the ramifications or lack thereof of the campaign or GW's follow-up to their promises, the actual results of the player campaign was a Disorder victory. To do anything except accepting that is a disservice to sportsmanship and all the players that did play in the campaign. It is equivalent to being a sore loser over a 40K game and throwing a tantrum or claiming that you really won. It is not so much a matter of one faction being better or beating up another but the fact of players being sore losers in not losing gracefully. The fact you tried to claim Chaos players were the sore losers, to turn black into white, suggests you are just another one of many Imperial losers still having sour grapes over losing. There are many all over the Interweb as a cursory search of some 40K forums will show, and who post things in direct contradiction to what actually happened or what was stated in print, to the point of invoking elaborate conspiracies of GW cheating and favoring Chaos despite the actual campaign mechanics being revealed. Yes, even now nearly 10 years after the campaign. Last saw one about 2 months ago on another forum so they are still out there. Losing a game or losing a campaign should not result in such depths of denial of reality.

You also focus too much on the phrase "reforming the Legions" and miss the main point. An Imperial resurgence was definitely possible to write into the background if the Imperium had won.. Perhaps you failed to see the template already given previously in so many other campaigns or background published by GW. It occurred in the BFG rulebook, which showed precisely the same sort of story template as the 13th Black Crusade's event cards were laid out. The initial phase had Chaos surprise attacks and ascendance, followed by Imperial comeback and repulsing of Chaos, and everything settling down as before, with new Imperial glories etc... It occurred in the Armageddon 3 campaign to a lesser extent, with Imperial forces chasing off after Ghaz and his forces. It would have been easily possible for the Eye of Terror campaign to have followed that time worn template again if the Forces of Order had won. Except they didn't. The overall campaign results were showing a trend towards Disorder for the majority of the campaign and definitely towards the final end. Things getting more grimdark in later editions, but moving things back before the 13th Black Crusade, is not fulfillment of what was explained as being at stake with the campaign results, which was explicitly stated as influencing the development of the next edition of 40K:

The Eye of Terror campaign will be the hiatus of the second revelation, building on the release of the Inquisitor game, Codex: Chaos Space Marines, the Index Astartes First Founding series and Codex: Daemonhunters to show the power of Chaos in all its terrible glory. How the campaign concludes will have a big influence on the shape of things to come in the 4th edition of Warhammer 40,0000 and the eventual outcome of the third revelation...

Designers' Notes, WD 282, Andy Chambers

No vague handwaving there but an actual statement that the campaign results would influence the future of the following edition of 40K.


The subsequent Black Library publication 13th Black Crusade ended on a down note for the Imperium. The novel Cadian Blood, which takes place in early M42, likewise echoed the campaign results with explicitly mentioning how Abaddon had succeeded, and how more than half of Cadia was under Chaos control.

Your claim of how Cadia could never fall due to invalidation of the miniature product line does not hold up to scrutiny. Not every world that falls to Chaos becomes a daemon world so there is no requirement that Cadia has to do so. It is also easily possible to write in the founding of a "New Cadia" or even "Cadia" (if the old should be unrecoverable or destroyed), in memory of the original world. It would not be the first time that a name in 40K has been re-used, and not the first time that such has happened in real life history either.

Iracundus wrote:

Now you are outright lying.

That is deliberate falsification.

Not really , you're just evading the subject. But I am not surprised at all.
I see the typical style of those who are caught with their interpretation of things....

Iracundus wrote:

To do anything except accepting that is a disservice to sportsmanship and all the players that did play in the campaign. The fact you tried to claim Chaos players were the sore losers, to turn black into white, suggests you are just another one of many Imperial losers still having sour grapes over losing.

And finally he shows his real colors.
If thats all you want to tell us, these idiotic blames of a disservice , of sore losers, then I may suggest to get a hold on reality.
Wasn't part of this campaign as I wasn't foolish enough to believe in a reliability of these 'results'.

Iracundus wrote:

Your claim of how Cadia could never fall due to invalidation of the miniature product line does not hold up to scrutiny.

Sure it does.
As I said, they played Cadia up too much to let go. Before, Cadia was one of the bases. Important but not the end of all if it had to be retaken. Now we have this focus, most likely a marketing tool, contrary to the ancient take on an endless number of IG with so much variety. Its the image they can't offer.
GW got it right with most of their xenos background. Nothing that is "THE" craftworld, or "THE" ork klan, or "THE" necron dynasty, or "THE" Tau sept. But inside their imperial background, they run this different path. Can't have a possible permanent loss of Terra or Mars , even major homeworlds like Fenris or Baal would be iffy.

BTW I don't care if you like it or not.
Its a fact a intelligent company will not offer its centerpieces to fight over if they can't accept every outcome.
And GW has proven they aren't willing to bow to a "foreign" influence. Again, control is everything to them.

 1hadhq wrote:

And finally he shows his real colors.
If thats all you want to tell us, these idiotic blames of a disservice , of sore losers, then I may suggest to get a hold on reality.
Wasn't part of this campaign as I wasn't foolish enough to believe in a reliability of these 'results'.

You sound just like one of the deniers with your casting of doubt over official in print results. You don't believe in the existence of people still in denial over the Eye of Terror results?

From 2011:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/392010.page

Scroll down and you will see another poster claim the Imperium only lost because it was all due to those nasty cheating Chaos players and GW playing favorites.

Or check out Warseer, from 2008:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?151201-Cadia-and-the-Black-Crusade/page2&p=2755885#post2755885

A poster that claims that regardless of what GW states officially happened, he still states the Imperium won.

Or more recently, in October 2012,

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=262530&st=25

A whole thread where somebody tries to argue it is still an Imperial victory. One going so far as to argue an Imperial comeback in the results was imminent at the end, a fantasy which is disabused by the website that tracked daily results:
http://web.archive.org/web/20031015103118/http://hipcat.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/index.htm

Over and over again, the same pattern: Imperial players refusing to accept the White Dwarf printed results because it wasn't an Imperial victory.

They exhibit all the behaviors defined by Wikipedia as "sore loser behavior":

Sore loser behavior includes blaming others for the loss, not accepting responsibility for personal actions that contributed to the defeat, reacting to the loss in an immature or improper fashion, making excuses for the defeat, and citing unfavorable conditions or other petty issues as reasons for the defeat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sportsmanship

The actual White Dwarf article text (minus result data table) is reproduced at:
http://redelf.narod.ru/w40k/eyeofterror/death_by_thousand_cuts.html

The campaign mechanics are explained. Doubting the "reliability" or legitimacy of this is looking for non-existent conspiracy and makes you sound petulant as the above deniers. There is no need for conspiracy when the herd stupidity of large groups of disorganized people can produce the same results.

Sure it does.
As I said, they played Cadia up too much to let go. Before, Cadia was one of the bases. Important but not the end of all if it had to be retaken. Now we have this focus, most likely a marketing tool, contrary to the ancient take on an endless number of IG with so much variety. Its the image they can't offer.

Of course they can let Cadia go. The possibilities have already been mentioned, just that you refuse to accept them as possibilities. The older IG Codex even depicted Guardsmen from many different worlds using Cadian equipment, but they weren't Cadians. If Cadia were to fall, to be replaced by a "New Cadia" or "Cadia", things would not change except now they would have a thirst for vengeance. Written background is easy to change. Change has happened before in the 40K universe and storyline and it could easily happen again if GW so wished it. All the anxiety over "breaking the setting" if anything changes is ridiculous considering steady change was a feature of the setting up til the Eye of Terror campaign.

BTW I don't care if you like it or not.
Its a fact a intelligent company will not offer its centerpieces to fight over if they can't accept every outcome.
And GW has proven they aren't willing to bow to a "foreign" influence. Again, control is everything to them.

I don't care what you think, only that you stop spreading misinformation about the campaign or claiming Chaos lost, when the actual in print evidence explicitly contradicts you. It does not help discussion in a background forum when you are spreading false information about the past. For there to be discussion in a shared fictional universe, there has to be agreement on the facts of the setting, and facts in real life.

BL author ADB is operating under no misconceptions as to the impact and result of the 13th Black Crusade:

...

The 13th Black Crusade was launched in order to allow Chaos into the Imperium, no longer almost completely blocked by Cadia. It was about breaking the dam, not to just say "LOL LET'S GO TO TERRA!", but to change the very dynamics of Chaos and the Imperium. The Chaos Marine can now sail fleets into Imperial space much, much, much easier than ever before. The dam is broken. The Crusade's goals were achieved. As far as I know, that's the current deal. The subject is confused by poor phrasing and general online assumptions clouding the issue.

But a crusade is a crusade. That sounds obvious, but a lot of people miss the relevance of the word, and the intent of the warrior declaring it. Anyone thinking a single Black Crusade was to take Terra, or see the Golden Throne fall, is probably missing the point. After all, historically, crusades weren't declared to conquer the whole world, or to wipe out all of Islam. They were, variously, declared to recover territory; to take Constantinople; to capture and/or sack a certain city; with heavy side orders of political, social and financial gain. A crusade is a campaign targeted at achieving a certain goal - one that, say, requires a massive army.

To take the "Abaddon is the thematic Antichrist" trope one step further, the forces of Hell never "just appear and take over the world". Even with the Rapture, there's supposed to be years of war on Earth between angels and demons. To the Imperium, that's just happened. The Astronomican blinks on and off now, losing thousands of vessels in the warp, and the Golden Throne is failing. We have events called things like "The Night of a Thousand Rebellions". And Cadia, the unbreakable fortress world that guarded the Eye, was cracked open and the dam is broken: Because of Abaddon's last crusade, Chaos fleets enter the Imperium practically unopposed now, compared to how it's been the last 10,000 years.

The reason there's no 14th Black Crusade is because there no longer needs to be. The gates are open. The Gates of Hell, literally, are broken open. Chaos Marines are basically free, like never before, to do as they please. And to assume "They all totally want to kill the Emperor" is a wild, wild miscalculation. There's nothing to say most of them these days, after years / centuries / millennia in Hell, give a toss about the Emperor. Most published lore we have cites Chaos Marines concerned with their own amassing of power, wealth and renown, rather than in idealistic campaigns to destroy the Imperium. How many warbands want nothing more than a weak enemy to prey upon? Countless, countless numbers of them. Especially in Legions like the Night Lords. The Gates of Hell being open is pretty much exactly what they wanted. Their goals are achieved.

That's not to say they don't want the Emperor / Imperium to fall. It's just that that's a background theme to most of their lives, given their other interests, desires, allegiances and obsessions. It's a great overall objective, but doesn't apply to daily existence. That can be hard to grasp if all you ever see Chaos Marines as are essentially models based on stereotypes of Legions, but as a living, breathing soldier spending eternity in Hell, things would get a little different.

One of the core themes of 40K has always seemed to be "Every single one of these enemy races could (or probably will) wipe out the Imperium if they sped up and/or got their crap together". And as befits the end of the Dark Millennium, Chaos is one of them. The One, in fact. The greatest threat, but also because they're the enemy within, as well as the threat from without.

So, no. Abaddon isn't a failure. He's only a failure in, well, the "frequently espoused by younger player" terms of believing he wants to take Terra, and all anyone like him could be interested in was "Just killing the Emperor". Bit of a shallow overlook, that.

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=250003&st=0&start=0

I play as Cadian (or at least I collect Cadians, I dont actually play) and as much as I would hate see Cadia to fall. I would have prefered had GW just accepted the ending of the campaign and just do what you recomended Iracundus, a new Cadia with their goal to retake Cadia.

That would be a fun way to push the story foward, I would love it. Gives character to the Cadian players and boost the success and threat of the Chaos image

Iracundus wrote:

You sound just like one of the deniers with your casting of doubt over official in print results.

So if I doubt a flawed setup of a campaign, I am a "denier" ?
Really, find help good sir.

Iracundus wrote:

Over and over again, the same pattern: Imperial players refusing to accept the White Dwarf printed results because it wasn't an Imperial victory.

And he's back to his "christmas present to dakka": playing imperial = sore loser.

Got nothing for x-mas and we all shall suffer so you feel better?

Iracundus wrote:

The campaign mechanics are explained. Doubting the "reliability" or legitimacy of this is looking for non-existent conspiracy and makes you sound petulant as the above deniers. There is no need for conspiracy when the herd stupidity of large groups of disorganized people can produce the same results.

Such improvement, now I am "petulant"...

Look, you can fill the whole interwebz with your rants, it would still benefit the thread if you started to listen to what I am saying, instead of blocking anything you don't want to hear with "walls of text".

Iracundus wrote:

Of course they can let Cadia go. The possibilities have already been mentioned, just that you refuse to accept them as possibilities.

Because said possibilities provide..nothing. Except incompatibilities with current product and fluff.

Iracundus wrote:

The older IG Codex even depicted Guardsmen from many different worlds using Cadian equipment, but they weren't Cadians. If Cadia were to fall, to be replaced by a "New Cadia" or "Cadia", things would not change except now they would have a thirst for vengeance.

So you can buy the "not-cadians" who are on these shelves, looking like cadians. Sure....
Vengeance is unimportant in the story of the black crusades. The value of Cadia is not.

Iracundus wrote:

Written background is easy to change. Change has happened before in the 40K universe and storyline and it could easily happen again if GW so wished it.

So you admit I was right and its about GW keeping its grip on the course of their background?
Plus GW could easily re-write the campaign...as its old and many wouldn't remember it...

Iracundus wrote:

I don't care what you think, only that you stop spreading misinformation about the campaign or claiming Chaos lost, when the actual in print evidence explicitly contradicts you.

Misinformation in posted opinions, really?
I am aware youre completly lost on the fact: I did just turn your claim about "sore losers" around to show you how bad such a generalization is. Don't blame me for the tone of your posts. You could post without disclaimers if you didn't paint people with a broad brush first...

Iracundus wrote:

It does not help discussion in a background forum when you are spreading false information about the past. For there to be discussion in a shared fictional universe, there has to be agreement on the facts of the setting, and facts in real life.

There was nothing falsified by me.
Maybe a bit unaware of the outcome of my attempts to get you off of this line of questioning the personality of players by army or faction choice.

Call for facts? Get a 6th ed codex Chaos space marines: move on to pages 20, 25, 57.
Spot the current version of the 'facts'.
Including our current: 6th ed chaos = opening up the curtain of reality to unleash the demonic hordes and drag the eye closer to Terra fluff.
Still insisting the movement of the EoT wouldn't make Cadia unaccessible? Like your possibilities contradict the 6th fluff, so sticking with old fluff combined with less desirable buisness decisions like reprinting all of the boxes of IG has what on real life and facts?

Iracundus wrote:

So, no. Abaddon isn't a failure. He's only a failure in, well, the "frequently espoused by younger player" terms of believing he wants to take Terra, and all anyone like him could be interested in was "Just killing the Emperor". Bit of a shallow overlook, that.

Thats where an BL author says there is more to it than just this, but we all know the theme of Abby is still, and always will be: "death to the false emperor". Pretty clear in every single official GW source. May I request to look into the actual CSM dex? Written and as you seem to like the printed material, tell me is there anything to oppose the impression the major motivating factor of Abaddon is to get to Terra and do what his Primarch hadn't?


PS: Don't know if youre angry because you didn't get for x-mas the desired presents.
But consider this: I don't complain about your ongoing edits of your posts, which could mean its a " under construction" post or you are trying really hard to hide a problem.
So why is it feasible to complain about misinformation when I never altered any facts?
Don't try to sell us your opinion about the behaviour of players as facts.

 1hadhq wrote:

Iracundus wrote:

You sound just like one of the deniers with your casting of doubt over official in print results.

So if I doubt a flawed setup of a campaign, I am a "denier" ?
Really, find help good sir.

You have attempted to deny that GW declared it a Chaos victory. One can have discussion about the campaign setup and rules but what is not in question is that in a particular WD, GW officially declared the campaign as played according to the rules that were actually implemented, a Chaos victory. As GW is the holder of the IP, what they say in print counts for more than anyone else, including you.

Because said possibilities provide..nothing. Except incompatibilities with current product and fluff.

There are no incompatibilities as already stated. You are making up non-existent incompatibilities to argue against any change.

Did you even read the possibilities? A newly founded Cadia II or Nova Cadia or whatever can easily make use of the same miniatures and even be descended from the original Cadians. It makes no difference to the final miniatures product. They would still be effectively Cadians. You are making up a non-existent hurdle. GW could even name the new planet Cadia again and claim the Cadians did so in memory of their lost world, leaving no re-branding necessary at all. There are many possibilities. Just because you cannot see them or personally close your mind off to them does not mean they do not exist.

Iracundus wrote:

I don't care what you think, only that you stop spreading misinformation about the campaign or claiming Chaos lost, when the actual in print evidence explicitly contradicts you.

Misinformation in posted opinions, really?

Whichever way everyone takes the situation, please discuss it politely and with consideration to the other users.


Remember Rule no.1

[

Personally, I'd love to see one of the "lost Primarchs" from the initial establishment of the Space Marines show back up at the head of an entire legion. I'd love to see them return, after having been on a light-speed journey for 40+ thousand years in intentional cryo-, a last ditch effort from the Emperor to provide for his people. They return with a full STC database with what were some of the most senior Mechanicum of the period.

All of that, only to encounter the Administratum and their determintation to rule in the Emperor's place and the revulsion and terror of the STC's and Space Marines in Legion strength.

Where it spins off from there? Depends on how the story is written.

 Bonecrusher 6 wrote:
Personally, I'd love to see one of the "lost Primarchs" from the initial establishment of the Space Marines show back up at the head of an entire legion. I'd love to see them return, after having been on a light-speed journey for 40+ thousand years in intentional cryo-, a last ditch effort from the Emperor to provide for his people. They return with a full STC database with what were some of the most senior Mechanicum of the period.

All of that, only to encounter the Administratum and their determintation to rule in the Emperor's place and the revulsion and terror of the STC's and Space Marines in Legion strength.

Where it spins off from there? Depends on how the story is written.

This idea is (IMHO) magnificent. Actually, unlike some others, it would spawn another new codex probably! Of course, it would likely be a new Imperial codex, but it might be a third chaos dex too.
All I want is a small advancement of about 100-300 years, enough for a new Xenos codex.

Personally, I want to see less spess mareens, more IG and aliens. A bit more information into the Catchan regiments, the Old Ones, the Necrons, Tau, Eldar, Orks, all of them. They should give Matt Ward some Maternity Leave while they do it though, otherwise all we'll get is Ultramarines, Black Templars, and Grey Knights murdering everything, including the Battle Sisters.

The new FFG RPG Only War (p. 319) has a bit where it says the Administratum is aware of at least 3 dozen worlds called Nova Cadia, presumably founded by Cadian regiments. Cadia itself is not critical for the continuation of the Cadian miniature line at all.

 LlamaAgility wrote:
All I want is a small advancement of about 100-300 years, enough for a new Xenos codex.

Why do they need to advance the setting to introduce another xenos book? What exactly will happen in 300 years that will warrant it? The setting hasn't advanced since 2nd edition, and they've added three xenos books since then.

There's plenty of xenos factions in the background already that can be fleshed out with a full book, and shoehorned into the fluff the way the Tau, Dark Eldar and Necrons were.

 LlamaAgility wrote:

This idea is (IMHO) magnificent. Actually, unlike some others, it would spawn another new codex probably! Of course, it would likely be a new Imperial codex, but it might be a third chaos dex too.
All I want is a small advancement of about 100-300 years, enough for a new Xenos codex.

Well considering most people just want it to be foward 10 years with GW to come out and offically say "Imperials defeated the Orks at Armageddon yet lost Cadia" (something that pretty much is already obvious) What you are asking for is actually a lot lol