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.

Scrolling through the Chaos Space Marien Legion Tactics, they seem really weak and minimal in their capacity compared to the Space Marines Chapter Tactics.

Night Lords? Models in enemy units must subtract 1 from their Leadership characteristic for each unit with this trait that is within 6" of theirs (to a maximum of -3). Ohh, one whole Leadership point, assuming you're not ganking one unit.

Word Bearers? You can re-roll failed Morale tests for units with this trait. And Space Marines already have this automatically...

Alpha Legion? Your opponent must subtract 1 from hit rolls that target units with this trait if they are more than 12" away. Raven Guard get this plus +1 to cover, even out in the open.

I could note more, but I hope that you get the point that Chaos Legion Tactics are inferior to Space Marine Chapter Tactics. Does anyone else feel this way? By the way, I am not a Chaos Space Marine player, I merely compare and contrast rules in the hopes of balance. Chaos Space Marines get one, MAYBE two tactics, meanwhile Space Marines get 2-3. Thoughts?

This is called power creep. Were the new hotness always has to be the strongest thing out there to get people to buy it. Many of the early 8th edition armies can't keep up with many of the new stuff. This is especially hard for CSM as they recently got a major update not long before the new Space Marines so they must have known what was coming.

Note as a Space Marine player I wont mind until they are weak again.

This is from when SM weren't so overtuned. Just for reference.

Yoyoyo wrote:
This is from when SM weren't so overtuned. Just for reference.

Spoiler:

Back when we made fun of the Iron Hands players.

Yeah. Welcome to admech traits. And guard traits. And I'm sure a dozen other book traits.

I would argue that the only two legion / renegades supplements etc., GW got right were Khorne Daemonkin and Crimson Slaughter.

If the anticipated Khorne codex was just Daemonkin brought up to date for 8th then I would gladly pick up a chainaxe and jump on that Heresy train.

They had a shelf-life of all of 5min.

This is old news for chaos players, chaos space marines are the worst unit in Codex Chaos Space Marines, CSM codex """"2.0"""" is a scam, cultists get nerfed in every major rule update, the list goes on.

The overall state of chaos marines is pathetic.

it's honestly a reoccuring theme at this point sadly CSM rather then be the "Dark twin" of loyalist marines are useally more often the "inbred hick cousin"

BrianDavion wrote:
it's honestly a reoccuring theme at this point sadly CSM rather then be the "Dark twin" of loyalist marines are useally more often the "inbred hick cousin"

Well, it would explain why they turned from the Emperor's light...

BrianDavion wrote:
it's honestly a reoccuring theme at this point sadly CSM rather then be the "Dark twin" of loyalist marines are useally more often the "inbred hick cousin"

Wasn't that codex better than the loyalist one for all of eight edition, right up until SM2.0 came out?

*edit* not trying to say you deserved being stomped by loyalists since you were better before, or dont deserve a huge update - CSM clearly needs fixing.

nekooni wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
it's honestly a reoccuring theme at this point sadly CSM rather then be the "Dark twin" of loyalist marines are useally more often the "inbred hick cousin"

Wasn't that codex better than the loyalist one for all of eight edition, right up until SM2.0 came out?

*edit* not trying to say you deserved being stomped by loyalists since you were better before, or dont deserve a huge update - CSM clearly needs fixing.

Not really; as part of Soup Lists, yes. Otherwise, no.

 Psionara wrote:
Scrolling through the Chaos Space Marien Legion Tactics, they seem really weak and minimal in their capacity compared to the Space Marines Chapter Tactics.

Night Lords? Models in enemy units must subtract 1 from their Leadership characteristic for each unit with this trait that is within 6" of theirs (to a maximum of -3). Ohh, one whole Leadership point, assuming you're not ganking one unit.

Word Bearers? You can re-roll failed Morale tests for units with this trait. And Space Marines already have this automatically...

Alpha Legion? Your opponent must subtract 1 from hit rolls that target units with this trait if they are more than 12" away. Raven Guard get this plus +1 to cover, even out in the open.

I could note more, but I hope that you get the point that Chaos Legion Tactics are inferior to Space Marine Chapter Tactics. Does anyone else feel this way? By the way, I am not a Chaos Space Marine player, I merely compare and contrast rules in the hopes of balance. Chaos Space Marines get one, MAYBE two tactics, meanwhile Space Marines get 2-3. Thoughts?

They're universally regarded as gak, except for the Alpha Legion trait, which is the only trait we have which is superior to some of the our counterparts. The Word Bearers trait is the only trait in the game which can (and will) hurt you more than it benefits you.

If you're here to play an RPG, you might be able to jump through enough hoops to pretend these are '''fun''' (whatever that means, I can't say losing a majority of games before my models each get on the board is fun, but to each his own!) or 'flavourful' (when most if not all do not reflect the Legions fluff in any manner beyond the WE and maybe Night Lords one), but if you've actually played the game you'll recognise most of these are worthless.

The CSM codex isn't even worth using to wipe cat pee off the floor.

nekooni wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
it's honestly a reoccuring theme at this point sadly CSM rather then be the "Dark twin" of loyalist marines are useally more often the "inbred hick cousin"

Wasn't that codex better than the loyalist one for all of eight edition, right up until SM2.0 came out?

*edit* not trying to say you deserved being stomped by loyalists since you were better before, or dont deserve a huge update - CSM clearly needs fixing.

For a very small window during the indexes, yes. But the moment Guilliman and the Ultramarines dropped in, SM became pretty dang good for a very long time. And before saying "well thats only a fraction of the book", well CSM were good for only a fraction of their book too.

And since then, every single list i've seen online in an attempt to do good with Chaos has involved soup, after soup, after soup. Blobs of infantry and 2 primarchs, Ahriman and 2 DPs. The only time I recall CSM in recent memory having a meta list that was /entirely/ CSM was back when Knights came out in a big bad way, and Abbadon and a crap ton of lascannons were one of the few ways Chaos could compete in a reasonable fashion.

One of the best lists in the last couple months was 30 cultists, 3 knights with the exact same loadout, and 3 Lord Discordants.

Yes, CSM do fine in casual games. But what is "good" goes right out the window in casual games more times than not. Overall I think the legion traits are even worse than a lot of others, because for some ungodly reason they are STILL locked to only infantry, bikers, brutes and characters. The 2.0 codex was a joke. It didnt change anything at all, it just consolidated rules.

The only faction with worse Legion Traits are Daemons, because they don't have any.

As many people have stated, only reason Chaos is able to compete is because there are lots of books available to cook your favorite soup.

It's sad too, because there is some good stuff in F&F.

Unfortunately it simply reinforces 'You should play Alpha Legion.', but there's a lot of stuff in there, that, if the legions weren't in such crap condition, could be really good.

Honour the Prince is amazing, but it's tied to EC and deep strike is sketchy at best, this might have been good early in 8th. The World Eaters stuff, when I was trying desperately to make them work early in 8th, could have made them legit, now, not so much.

The Night Lords stuff is the same way, and the Iron Warriors stuff.

As it stands now though, maybe I'll field my AL list against my friends to see how it plays, but that's probably about it.

nekooni wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
it's honestly a reoccuring theme at this point sadly CSM rather then be the "Dark twin" of loyalist marines are useally more often the "inbred hick cousin"

Wasn't that codex better than the loyalist one for all of eight edition, right up until SM2.0 came out?

*edit* not trying to say you deserved being stomped by loyalists since you were better before, or dont deserve a huge update - CSM clearly needs fixing.

I play both CSM and SM so this isn't a "GW NOT GIVING ME MAH POWER! GW FAVORING LOYALISTS!" so much as it's "I think GW's missed the mark with how CSMs and Space Marines should reflect one another more often then not" in fact I'd oppose slapping doctrines on CSMs and calling it a day. I'd prefer they do something reflecting the chaotic and fickle nature of the gods. a random table that USEALLY is about on par with doctrines, sometimes worse, othertimes better that changes from round to round. (tourny players would hate it, but chaos should by it's nature be less predictable while still not screwing you with a dice roll)

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
It's sad too, because there is some good stuff in F&F.

Unfortunately it simply reinforces 'You should play Alpha Legion.', but there's a lot of stuff in there, that, if the legions weren't in such crap condition, could be really good.

Honour the Prince is amazing, but it's tied to EC and deep strike is sketchy at best, this might have been good early in 8th. The World Eaters stuff, when I was trying desperately to make them work early in 8th, could have made them legit, now, not so much.

The Night Lords stuff is the same way, and the Iron Warriors stuff.

As it stands now though, maybe I'll field my AL list against my friends to see how it plays, but that's probably about it.

I'm just getting caught up, but WB Possesed seem pretty interesting? Haven't read Alpha Legion yet though.

Yeah GW not fixing them in F&F is a real travesty frankly. I'd hope for them to be changed in CA19 but have 0 faith that GW will do it

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Yeah GW not fixing them in F&F is a real travesty frankly. I'd hope for them to be changed in CA19 but have 0 faith that GW will do it

I'd rather fix them in a FAQ or CA rather then F&F simply because IMHO F&F should be, at least on paper, an optional supplement not essentially a book required to get s CSM patch

BrianDavion wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Yeah GW not fixing them in F&F is a real travesty frankly. I'd hope for them to be changed in CA19 but have 0 faith that GW will do it

I'd rather fix them in a FAQ or CA rather then F&F simply because IMHO F&F should be, at least on paper, an optional supplement not essentially a book required to get s CSM patch

Based on what I'm reading it is definitely mandatory.

I think we'll have to accept that marines are the power outlier and that GW needs to bring them down rather than everyone else up.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Yeah GW not fixing them in F&F is a real travesty frankly. I'd hope for them to be changed in CA19 but have 0 faith that GW will do it

I'd rather fix them in a FAQ or CA rather then F&F simply because IMHO F&F should be, at least on paper, an optional supplement not essentially a book required to get s CSM patch

On paper/in theory you're right but in practice this book is a borderline mandatory purchase. I would rather buy a supplement now that has legion traits/warlord traits/relics/stratagems in it, and then buy a yearly CA on top of that for points changes

 blood reaper wrote:


They're universally regarded as gak, except for the Alpha Legion trait, which is the only trait we have which is superior to some of the our counterparts. The Word Bearers trait is the only trait in the game which can (and will) hurt you more than it benefits you.

If you're here to play an RPG, you might be able to jump through enough hoops to pretend these are '''fun''' (whatever that means, I can't say losing a majority of games before my models each get on the board is fun, but to each his own!) or 'flavourful' (when most if not all do not reflect the Legions fluff in any manner beyond the WE and maybe Night Lords one), but if you've actually played the game you'll recognise most of these are worthless.

Even the World Eaters one annoys me. The 'everyone in the chapter is 100% melee-crazed axe murderers all the time' just isn't functional. Khorne doesn't object to ranged killing or smart killing. He just wants blood and gobbets of flesh everywhere.
So the 'Axes Axes Axes' angle makes me pause whenever I think about making a WE force. Because at some point a World Eaters solo book may actually happen and strip out over half the codex from their options. Which would be beyond infuriating, but given TS and DG, it seems a perfectly legitimate concern.

Voss wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:


They're universally regarded as gak, except for the Alpha Legion trait, which is the only trait we have which is superior to some of the our counterparts. The Word Bearers trait is the only trait in the game which can (and will) hurt you more than it benefits you.

If you're here to play an RPG, you might be able to jump through enough hoops to pretend these are '''fun''' (whatever that means, I can't say losing a majority of games before my models each get on the board is fun, but to each his own!) or 'flavourful' (when most if not all do not reflect the Legions fluff in any manner beyond the WE and maybe Night Lords one), but if you've actually played the game you'll recognise most of these are worthless.

Even the World Eaters one annoys me. The 'everyone in the chapter is 100% melee-crazed axe murderers all the time' just isn't functional. Khorne doesn't object to ranged killing or smart killing. He just wants blood and gobbets of flesh everywhere.
So the 'Axes Axes Axes' angle makes me pause whenever I think about making a WE force. Because at some point a World Eaters solo book may actually happen and strip out over half the codex from their options. Which would be beyond infuriating, but given TS and DG, it seems a perfectly legitimate concern.

WE was never going to get a stratagem, trait, or relic that increased shooting ability. No buffs to shooting =/= shooting isn't used.

Voss wrote:

Even the World Eaters one annoys me. The 'everyone in the chapter is 100% melee-crazed axe murderers all the time' just isn't functional. Khorne doesn't object to ranged killing or smart killing. He just wants blood and gobbets of flesh everywhere.
So the 'Axes Axes Axes' angle makes me pause whenever I think about making a WE force. Because at some point a World Eaters solo book may actually happen and strip out over half the codex from their options. Which would be beyond infuriating, but given TS and DG, it seems a perfectly legitimate concern.

When Death Guard received their own codes, it was hard to ignore the obvious. That is, until the codex, bikers and Obliterators were the cornerstone of any Death Guard army. And, guess what got removed completely?

Definitely agree on the World Eaters, because I have an army of them, and I expect one of these days they’ll get a codex and it will consist of Kharn and the unit entry for a new Berzerker kit that will cost $40 for five. (comes with two chain axes and ten chain swords, so the unit can have a maximum of two axes to comply with the kit)

bikes may have been a compeitive cornerstone but the fluff was clear that deathguard where INFANTRY focused. losing things like havoks and oblits was a bit sad yeah but bikes being removed made sense from a fluff standpoint

Oggthrok wrote:

Voss wrote:

Even the World Eaters one annoys me. The 'everyone in the chapter is 100% melee-crazed axe murderers all the time' just isn't functional. Khorne doesn't object to ranged killing or smart killing. He just wants blood and gobbets of flesh everywhere.
So the 'Axes Axes Axes' angle makes me pause whenever I think about making a WE force. Because at some point a World Eaters solo book may actually happen and strip out over half the codex from their options. Which would be beyond infuriating, but given TS and DG, it seems a perfectly legitimate concern.

When Death Guard received their own codes, it was hard to ignore the obvious. That is, until the codex, bikers and Obliterators were the cornerstone of any Death Guard army. And, guess what got removed completely?

Definitely agree on the World Eaters, because I have an army of them, and I expect one of these days they’ll get a codex and it will consist of Kharn and the unit entry for a new Berzerker kit that will cost $40 for five. (comes with two chain axes and ten chain swords, so the unit can have a maximum of two axes to comply with the kit)

I am guessing World Eaters' Khorne Bezerkers will be boxed as 8, as Death Guard's number is 7 and they receive 7 in a box, Thousand Sons' number is 9 and they receive 9 in a box. Safe to assume that Emperor's Children will receive 6 Noise Marines. Price wise, I think we will be looking at $60 USD for each box.

BrianDavion wrote:
bikes may have been a compeitive cornerstone but the fluff was clear that deathguard where INFANTRY focused. losing things like havoks and oblits was a bit sad yeah but bikes being removed made sense from a fluff standpoint

Is there any fluff that say they do not use or have Bikes ? Its cool to say they are Infantry focus. But Bikes would play into that as a Form of Fast Infantry. Seems more a bit of an excuse than any really Fluff to me. Unless the deathguard are to slow for them, but i have not really seen any fluff that really supports that.

 Psionara wrote:


I am guessing World Eaters' Khorne Bezerkers will be boxed as 8, as Death Guard's number is 7 and they receive 7 in a box, Thousand Sons' number is 9 and they receive 9 in a box. Safe to assume that Emperor's Children will receive 6 Noise Marines. Price wise, I think we will be looking at $60 USD for each box.

Rubrics are 10 to a box.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Psionara wrote:


I am guessing World Eaters' Khorne Bezerkers will be boxed as 8, as Death Guard's number is 7 and they receive 7 in a box, Thousand Sons' number is 9 and they receive 9 in a box. Safe to assume that Emperor's Children will receive 6 Noise Marines. Price wise, I think we will be looking at $60 USD for each box.

Rubrics are 10 to a box.

My mistake. Tzeentch's number is 9, but since they are Rubric Marines (i.e. no autonomy), they must have an Aspiring Sorcerer to guide them, which would make 10.

That's not really how that works. Berzerkers are currently 12 to a box. PM were the only unit to get a box tied to its sacred number.

Apple fox wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
bikes may have been a compeitive cornerstone but the fluff was clear that deathguard where INFANTRY focused. losing things like havoks and oblits was a bit sad yeah but bikes being removed made sense from a fluff standpoint

Is there any fluff that say they do not use or have Bikes ? Its cool to say they are Infantry focus. But Bikes would play into that as a Form of Fast Infantry. Seems more a bit of an excuse than any really Fluff to me. Unless the deathguard are to slow for them, but i have not really seen any fluff that really supports that.

From a game design viewpoint too I think deathguard are supposed to be the slow and steady mid range durable infantry boys and too much or too fast fast attack would go against this. The problem is modern gw this rulesets dont particularly do much for different play styles of factions and that they are massively stepping on necron toes even if they did.