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 Salt Mine wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I don't agree... I don't think its more than most. Combo wombo is the name of the game... Sadly... For everyone.

The wealth of options in terms of traits, relics, strats available to Chaos rivals only that of SM. hence you get Triple Klos nonsense appearing..

I think most armies are in a very good spot right now. Its just the SM bs is so ridiculously oppressive that it hold a lot of gak back but again as was said earlier that is a different topic. I do think its funny that you can compare the entirety of the Chaos faction to just the SM faction and not be far off though lol.

As far as wombo combos and such I have to agree with stratagems and keywords working the way they do that is kind of the name of the game for every army now a days.

In an ideal world every codex would be viable by itself but that is just not the way the armies that can ally with one another have been designed. With the exception of SM of course but that should have never been allowed to happened and was either complete incompetence that that codex was allowed to release or a money grab either of which are not good for the game.

I may be misunderstanding you, but are you saying that the codexes were designed for soup? If so do you think when knights were designed to be an army of a few powerful models with a few powerful strategems but limited cp, that something like the loyal 32 circumvention that was planned? Or that the designers planned for ba to be used just for smash captains?

I don't think soup lists were planned when writing codexes. But like I said, I may be misunderstanding your point.

I may be misunderstanding you, but are you saying that the codexes were designed for soup? If so do you think when knights were designed to be an army of a few powerful models with a few powerful strategems but limited cp, that something like the loyal 32 circumvention that was planned? Or that the designers planned for ba to be used just for smash captains?

I don't think soup lists were planned when writing codexes. But like I said, I may be misunderstanding your point.

I think it was a little bit of both honestly. I think they definitely designed them to with soup in mind. But I also think there were some interactions that definitely slip through the cracks. For example the daemon stratagems only being allowed to work on codex daemon units when almost every other codex strats can affect models if they have the keywords. This was faqqed into existence because at the time people thought the deep striking strat would be absurd on the 2 Primarchs. But I think when the codex was originally designed GW had intended for those strats to be usable on CSM daemon units. But again there are so many interactions that can go on in this game its impossible for them to catch everything when designing and play testing.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I don't agree... I don't think its more than most. Combo wombo is the name of the game... Sadly... For everyone.

The wealth of options in terms of traits, relics, strats available to Chaos rivals only that of SM. hence you get Triple Klos nonsense appearing..

I'll give you the argument on strategems, but csm have the same limit on warlord traits and relics as everyone else except sm have. And you have to be joking about traits.

Agreed the whole combo thing sucks.

Can you not take multiple warlord traits in chaos post PA ?

 Argive wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I don't agree... I don't think its more than most. Combo wombo is the name of the game... Sadly... For everyone.

The wealth of options in terms of traits, relics, strats available to Chaos rivals only that of SM. hence you get Triple Klos nonsense appearing..

I'll give you the argument on strategems, but csm have the same limit on warlord traits and relics as everyone else except sm have. And you have to be joking about traits.

Agreed the whole combo thing sucks.

Can you not take multiple warlord traits in chaos post PA ?

Alpha Legion can have one extra. The other legions cannot.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Argive wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I don't agree... I don't think its more than most. Combo wombo is the name of the game... Sadly... For everyone.

The wealth of options in terms of traits, relics, strats available to Chaos rivals only that of SM. hence you get Triple Klos nonsense appearing..

I'll give you the argument on strategems, but csm have the same limit on warlord traits and relics as everyone else except sm have. And you have to be joking about traits.

Agreed the whole combo thing sucks.

Can you not take multiple warlord traits in chaos post PA ?

Alpha Legion can have one extra. The other legions cannot.

I made an Alpha Legion list with three before. Raptorial Host dude, a Sniper guy, and then a Disco Lord that's apparently Alpharius. I'm working on trying to create a list with more sticking as many of those silly Specialist detachments in there as possible.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Argive wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I don't agree... I don't think its more than most. Combo wombo is the name of the game... Sadly... For everyone.

The wealth of options in terms of traits, relics, strats available to Chaos rivals only that of SM. hence you get Triple Klos nonsense appearing..

I'll give you the argument on strategems, but csm have the same limit on warlord traits and relics as everyone else except sm have. And you have to be joking about traits.

Agreed the whole combo thing sucks.

Can you not take multiple warlord traits in chaos post PA ?

Alpha Legion can have one extra. The other legions cannot.

I made an Alpha Legion list with three before. Raptorial Host dude, a Sniper guy, and then a Disco Lord that's apparently Alpharius. I'm working on trying to create a list with more sticking as many of those silly Specialist detachments in there as possible.

That's 2cp a pop. Considering how cp hungry csm armies are you could gimp yourself. Be interested in how it works out.

 Argive wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I don't agree... I don't think its more than most. Combo wombo is the name of the game... Sadly... For everyone.

The wealth of options in terms of traits, relics, strats available to Chaos rivals only that of SM. hence you get Triple Klos nonsense appearing..

I'll give you the argument on strategems, but csm have the same limit on warlord traits and relics as everyone else except sm have. And you have to be joking about traits.

Agreed the whole combo thing sucks.

Can you not take multiple warlord traits in chaos post PA ?

No, only one subfaction can pick one more trait.
And that is Alpha legion..
Atmost therefore you see 2 warlord traits.

Because some people here seem to foget that A : special detachments cost a cp as does field commander which is Stuck ob detachment warlord traits . Also 3 cp for 2 good and one meh warlord trait for 1 subfaction is a Bad turnout.

Which is made more frustrating because strong characters has usually been a strength for csm. It was the options for characters in 3.5 that gave csm a lot of their strength.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Which is made more frustrating because strong characters has usually been a strength for csm. It was the options for characters in 3.5 that gave csm a lot of their strength.

It's why for all the good F&F brought, you don't see many changes overall.

F.e. WB etc would love to bring more then ONE trait for a warlord to make some of the new stuff actually work. yet they can't.

The biggest profiteurs off F&F were AL and IW. To a degree WB but there's only upwards from rockbottom anyways.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Which is made more frustrating because strong characters has usually been a strength for csm. It was the options for characters in 3.5 that gave csm a lot of their strength.

It's why for all the good F&F brought, you don't see many changes overall.

F.e. WB etc would love to bring more then ONE trait for a warlord to make some of the new stuff actually work. yet they can't.

The biggest profiteurs off F&F were AL and IW. To a degree WB but there's only upwards from rockbottom anyways.

Aye, it still galls me that they actually gave us A Talent for Murder but split it between a warlord trait and a stratagem....

Not Online!!! wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Which is made more frustrating because strong characters has usually been a strength for csm. It was the options for characters in 3.5 that gave csm a lot of their strength.

It's why for all the good F&F brought, you don't see many changes overall.

F.e. WB etc would love to bring more then ONE trait for a warlord to make some of the new stuff actually work. yet they can't.

The biggest profiteurs off F&F were AL and IW. To a degree WB but there's only upwards from rockbottom anyways.

Exalted Possession should've been a Strat that could be used multiple times, just like with Death Visions. That alone would've been a better boost. After all, they can't be bothered to fox the Legion traits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Argive wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I don't agree... I don't think its more than most. Combo wombo is the name of the game... Sadly... For everyone.

The wealth of options in terms of traits, relics, strats available to Chaos rivals only that of SM. hence you get Triple Klos nonsense appearing..

I'll give you the argument on strategems, but csm have the same limit on warlord traits and relics as everyone else except sm have. And you have to be joking about traits.

Agreed the whole combo thing sucks.

Can you not take multiple warlord traits in chaos post PA ?

Alpha Legion can have one extra. The other legions cannot.

I made an Alpha Legion list with three before. Raptorial Host dude, a Sniper guy, and then a Disco Lord that's apparently Alpharius. I'm working on trying to create a list with more sticking as many of those silly Specialist detachments in there as possible.

That's 2cp a pop. Considering how cp hungry csm armies are you could gimp yourself. Be interested in how it works out.

The 3 Warlords at a time one was overall just okay. I did adjustments I hadn't posted and of course the primary issue is points being an issue, as always with the army, as the moment CSM run low on CP they're worse than other armies.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
Nothing is ever gained by comparing CSM to SM. Just more frustration.

DG and TS did lose a lot by getting their own Codex. Long term, it's probably a gain - having their own Codex means GW will eventually expand their line with unique units. But I would hate to have invested in a bunch of Deredeos and Leviathans and not be able to use them.

Unlike my poor Black Legion. All we get are characters. We don't even have the conversion compulsion characteristic of armies without unique characters.

What's the long term though you're willing to wait for said expansion? Honest question.

I'm willing to wait. No specific amount of time, figure it will take a couple editions.

I play multiple armies, like soup, and avoid tournaments. All this may have something to do with my increased tolerance.

Dysartes wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
DG and TS did lose a lot by getting their own Codex. Long term, it's probably a gain - having their own Codex means GW will eventually expand their line with unique units. But I would hate to have invested in a bunch of Deredeos and Leviathans and not be able to use them.

I don't have the Chaos IA, but do the Hellforged Deredeos & Leviathans not have <MARK OF CHAOS> as a keyword?

Yeah, I could have put that better. Deredeos and Leviathans have the appropriate keywords.

My comment was more about radical change, I'd hate to have these models and no longer be able to fit them into lists. If they took the option away entirely, I'd walk away from 40k forever.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
I may be misunderstanding you, but are you saying that the codexes were designed for soup? If so do you think when knights were designed to be an army of a few powerful models with a few powerful strategems but limited cp, that something like the loyal 32 circumvention that was planned? Or that the designers planned for ba to be used just for smash captains?

I don't think soup lists were planned when writing codexes. But like I said, I may be misunderstanding your point.

I'm pretty sure GW planned for soup, especially for Chaos.

That's the reason we have faction keywords, that's the reason we have detachments. It's only been recently that GW put some restrictions in place for how those keywords could be used together in the same detachment.

We had the allies chart in 6th edition, this is just simpler and more straightforward. You don't have to worry about weird rules for factions that aren't besties in the same army.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Can you not take multiple warlord traits in chaos post PA ?

No, only one subfaction can pick one more trait.
And that is Alpha legion..
Atmost therefore you see 2 warlord traits.

Because some people here seem to foget that A : special detachments cost a cp as does field commander which is Stuck ob detachment warlord traits . Also 3 cp for 2 good and one meh warlord trait for 1 subfaction is a Bad turnout.

Black Legion can take up to 3 Warlord Traits using Council of Traitors.

Any CSM Legion can take additional Warlord traits using Field Commander and the specialist detachments in Vigilus Ablaze.

Saying you don't like the Warlord Traits (or that you don't like paying CP for them) is does not mean a different player cannot choose to take them.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
I may be misunderstanding you, but are you saying that the codexes were designed for soup? If so do you think when knights were designed to be an army of a few powerful models with a few powerful strategems but limited cp, that something like the loyal 32 circumvention that was planned? Or that the designers planned for ba to be used just for smash captains?

I don't think soup lists were planned when writing codexes. But like I said, I may be misunderstanding your point.

I'm pretty sure GW planned for soup, especially for Chaos.

That's the reason we have faction keywords, that's the reason we have detachments. It's only been recently that GW put some restrictions in place for how those keywords could be used together in the same detachment.

We had the allies chart in 6th edition, this is just simpler and more straightforward. You don't have to worry about weird rules for factions that aren't besties in the same army.

They may have planned for soup when writing the keyword and detachment rules, but the people writing most of the codexes didn't seem to factor it into their writing. Too many obviously unplanned interactions, cp generation being the most obvious.

Black Legion can take up to 3 Warlord Traits using Council of Traitors.

Any CSM Legion can take additional Warlord traits using Field Commander and the specialist detachments in Vigilus Ablaze.

Saying you don't like the Warlord Traits (or that you don't like paying CP for them) is does not mean a different player cannot choose to take them.

Sorry to say this, but beyond BL, no other legion has access to more then one of their actual good traits of their chosing beyond AL.
The only trait worth the CP in regards to the detachments is sadly raptorial host. So yes unlike SM most CSM factions have comparatively low possibility to gain warlord traits, a main selling point of PA.
Beyond the fact that as you yourself mentioned that the traits just are not working.
Not to mention that build a trait is also somehow not allowed for reasons unknown.

Also not mentioning the "improved character" strategems loyalists got in Faith and Fury.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Sorry to say this, but beyond BL, no other legion has access to more then one of their actual good traits of their chosing beyond AL.

This is where you lose me.

Daemon Bombs are one of the most effective tactics for CSM right now, and Shepherd of the True Faith magnifies its impact immensely. Mortal Wounds on 6+ for models with 4+ attacks on the charge, that's enough to kill multiple Knights in melee.

It's one of the best WLTs. Armour Bane and Exultant Preacher have a similar impact relative to their detachment units.

I guess you could say they are more specific, but there's no reason to say they're not good. All of them are available to any Legion in addition to a standard choice.

So maybe I don't know what you mean when you say good, that's not how most people would use the word.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Sorry to say this, but beyond BL, no other legion has access to more then one of their actual good traits of their chosing beyond AL.

This is where you lose me.

Daemon Bombs are one of the most effective tactics for CSM right now, and Shepherd of the True Faith magnifies its impact immensely. Mortal Wounds on 6+ for models with 4+ attacks on the charge, that's enough to kill multiple Knights in melee.

It's one of the best WLTs. Armour Bane and Exultant Preacher have a similar impact relative to their detachment units.

I guess you could say they are more specific, but there's no reason to say they're not good. All of them are available to any Legion in addition to a standard choice.

So maybe I don't know what you mean when you say good, that's not how most people would use the word.

And yet i'd rather pick my Legion specific traits to Make my legions work and not possessed spam .

Not Online!!! wrote:
And yet i'd rather pick my Legion specific traits to Make my legions work and not possessed spam .

You made your preference clear earlier in this thread.

And yet you don't realize your opinion does not speak for every player. Or even that sticking with Legion-specific WLTs would be sub-optimal for most Legions.

So please stop stating your opinion as if it is rules. Legions can take more than one WLT, subject to some restrictions around detachments.

So you still have options.

Consider that a lot of factions are stuck with one crappy warlolrd trait and that's it.. plus no new starts etc. CHAOS in general is in an ok place, comparable to others (not SM)

 techsoldaten wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
And yet i'd rather pick my Legion specific traits to Make my legions work and not possessed spam .

You made your preference clear earlier in this thread.

And yet you don't realize your opinion does not speak for every player. Or even that sticking with Legion-specific WLTs would be sub-optimal for most Legions.

So please stop stating your opinion as if it is rules. Legions can take more than one WLT, subject to some restrictions around detachments.

Lol, you facilitate excactly ONE subtype of list with one special detachment that is atm the only one that is competitvly showing up.

And frankly, you can't tell me that ANY player regardless of faction is happy, (beyond maybee SM which have some diffrent builds ) that only one build seems to work, with no runner ups in sight.

And truth is, sadly that beyond BL and AL, you don't get additional normal traits, which would actually you know help facilitate some other playstyles and models on the field. Take IW for exemple or even WB.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Argive wrote:
So you still have options.

Consider that a lot of factions are stuck with one crappy warlolrd trait and that's it.. plus no new starts etc. CHAOS in general is in an ok place, comparable to others (not SM)

truth be told,the whole PA stick was a desaster for everyone not beeing a Loyalist marine so far.

DE, got build a trait, and only that.
Others didn't get build a trait but stratagems, and comparatively CSM indeed got better off then many others but it is frankly absurd at this stage how it went down.

 Argive wrote:
So you still have options.

Consider that a lot of factions are stuck with one crappy warlolrd trait and that's it.. plus no new starts etc. CHAOS in general is in an ok place, comparable to others (not SM)

For extra warlord traits? Sure, with specialist detachments. Which orks, cw eldar, and gsc also have. And tau have "promising pupil" which works just like the loyalist marines extra warlord trait strategem. Course all those specialist detachment wt aren't what you want, same as csm.

So do we continue arguing over who got shafted worse compared to loyalists and tau? As usual?

Not Online!!! wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Sorry to say this, but beyond BL, no other legion has access to more then one of their actual good traits of their chosing beyond AL.

This is where you lose me.

Daemon Bombs are one of the most effective tactics for CSM right now, and Shepherd of the True Faith magnifies its impact immensely. Mortal Wounds on 6+ for models with 4+ attacks on the charge, that's enough to kill multiple Knights in melee.

It's one of the best WLTs. Armour Bane and Exultant Preacher have a similar impact relative to their detachment units.

I guess you could say they are more specific, but there's no reason to say they're not good. All of them are available to any Legion in addition to a standard choice.

So maybe I don't know what you mean when you say good, that's not how most people would use the word.

And yet i'd rather pick my Legion specific traits to Make my legions work and not possessed spam .

Possessed bomb is not scary. The fact it's winning is actually kinda comical and it will disappear soon. It does prove that Alpha Legion are the only ones worth it as usual though.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
And yet i'd rather pick my Legion specific traits to Make my legions work and not possessed spam .

You made your preference clear earlier in this thread.

And yet you don't realize your opinion does not speak for every player. Or even that sticking with Legion-specific WLTs would be sub-optimal for most Legions.

So please stop stating your opinion as if it is rules. Legions can take more than one WLT, subject to some restrictions around detachments.

Lol, you facilitate excactly ONE subtype of list with one special detachment that is atm the only one that is competitvly showing up.

And frankly, you can't tell me that ANY player regardless of faction is happy, (beyond maybee SM which have some diffrent builds ) that only one build seems to work, with no runner ups in sight.

And truth is, sadly that beyond BL and AL, you don't get additional normal traits, which would actually you know help facilitate some other playstyles and models on the field. Take IW for exemple or even WB.

In response, your reply has absolutely nothing to do with the rules around warlord traits.

You're wrong, I'm right. Whine all you want.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Possessed bomb is not scary. The fact it's winning is actually kinda comical and it will disappear soon. It does prove that Alpha Legion are the only ones worth it as usual though.

Yeah, I'm kind of surprised how much people are able to do with it.

At the end of the day, it's a single unit. One would think would be hard counters that are easy to employ. Moving backwards, for example, to put them out of aura / spell range from the HQ units. Or send up some sacrificial units while they burn up CPs on Conceal.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
And yet i'd rather pick my Legion specific traits to Make my legions work and not possessed spam .

You made your preference clear earlier in this thread.

And yet you don't realize your opinion does not speak for every player. Or even that sticking with Legion-specific WLTs would be sub-optimal for most Legions.

So please stop stating your opinion as if it is rules. Legions can take more than one WLT, subject to some restrictions around detachments.

Lol, you facilitate excactly ONE subtype of list with one special detachment that is atm the only one that is competitvly showing up.

And frankly, you can't tell me that ANY player regardless of faction is happy, (beyond maybee SM which have some diffrent builds ) that only one build seems to work, with no runner ups in sight.

And truth is, sadly that beyond BL and AL, you don't get additional normal traits, which would actually you know help facilitate some other playstyles and models on the field. Take IW for exemple or even WB.

In response, your reply has absolutely nothing to do with the rules around warlord traits.

You're wrong, I'm right. Whine all you want.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Possessed bomb is not scary. The fact it's winning is actually kinda comical and it will disappear soon. It does prove that Alpha Legion are the only ones worth it as usual though.

Yeah, I'm kind of surprised how much people are able to do with it.

At the end of the day, it's a single unit. One would think would be hard counters that are easy to employ. Moving backwards, for example, to put them out of aura / spell range from the HQ units. Or send up some sacrificial units while they burn up CPs on Conceal.

I've messed around with it a bit its pretty amazing how durable the unit can be, 3+/5++ with the posibility of getting up to a 4++ and a 6+++ from powers with 2 wounds a pop. ITC helps it out a bit by being able to block line of sight. Its also surprisingly fast with the ability to advance and charge if you are slaneesh. You can also warptime them and advance again. If you make them Nurgle you can stack up to a -3 to hit on them and double their damage output. You also don't need to get the whole unit into combat to murder whatever they touch so you can conga line them back to stay inside the auras. If your opponent deploys far away from them then they are just handing you board control and you can hopefully build up such a large lead early on that they hopefully can't come back from it. I was very skeptical when I saw possessed being used as well because for the last well forever ago they have just been pretty much hot garbage.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
And yet i'd rather pick my Legion specific traits to Make my legions work and not possessed spam .

You made your preference clear earlier in this thread.

And yet you don't realize your opinion does not speak for every player. Or even that sticking with Legion-specific WLTs would be sub-optimal for most Legions.

So please stop stating your opinion as if it is rules. Legions can take more than one WLT, subject to some restrictions around detachments.

Lol, you facilitate excactly ONE subtype of list with one special detachment that is atm the only one that is competitvly showing up.

And frankly, you can't tell me that ANY player regardless of faction is happy, (beyond maybee SM which have some diffrent builds ) that only one build seems to work, with no runner ups in sight.

And truth is, sadly that beyond BL and AL, you don't get additional normal traits, which would actually you know help facilitate some other playstyles and models on the field. Take IW for exemple or even WB.

In response, your reply has absolutely nothing to do with the rules around warlord traits.

You're wrong, I'm right. Whine all you want.

Wow normally i respect you, but frankly this statement is low .

First off: Again you can get excactly with two legions warlord traits that are not detachment ones to even facilitate a real change in setup or gameplan. Meaning that F&F's impact was in many a way not really desiered, it helped to an extent but it did not do enough for the underdogs contrary it reinforced the position of AL overall as the top CSM dog.

Secondly: About field commander, there are 2 detachments that work, the daemonbomb one, the other raptorial host, mostly however this ones limited by the units it affects. These allow you their specific warlord trait. They don't facilitate an real alternate playstyle simply put in most cases that work.

And thirdly what you don't seem to understand: IW, f.e. would really like to have some more off their aura traits wouldn't they? Maybee even facilitate a propper gunline? NOPE.
This it the point i am making, the Traits would be there, just not available enough to actually facilitate other playstyles.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Wow normally i respect you, but frankly this statement is low .

First off: Again you can get excactly with two legions warlord traits that are not detachment ones to even facilitate a real change in setup or gameplan. Meaning that F&F's impact was in many a way not really desiered, it helped to an extent but it did not do enough for the underdogs contrary it reinforced the position of AL overall as the top CSM dog.

Secondly: About field commander, there are 2 detachments that work, the daemonbomb one, the other raptorial host, mostly however this ones limited by the units it affects. These allow you their specific warlord trait. They don't facilitate an real alternate playstyle simply put in most cases that work.

And thirdly what you don't seem to understand: IW, f.e. would really like to have some more off their aura traits wouldn't they? Maybee even facilitate a propper gunline? NOPE.
This it the point i am making, the Traits would be there, just not available enough to actually facilitate other playstyles.

When you boil it down every single faction/army/codex only has one or two top tier viable build options and some factions won't even get there with any build in certain metas. That's just the reality of games that are as complicated as 40k. MtGs meta, both pro tour and FNM, tends to boil down to 3 or 4 top decks, a couple budgeted variations, and then brews which may or may not work in the meta. Your favoured subfaction and playstyle might not be viable currently, that sucks but either play through the suck or get some new models and expand your collection.

I have 4 diffrent armies, i don't need more.

Secondly, i didn't ask for perfect balance, i asked for viable alternatives, something other games far more complex achieve.

Further, there are now over 100+ rules sources, of which half are paywalled, don't you think that that should warrant some quality controll to avoid something like IH at release or Ynnari, or or or?


As an aside i did state that most factions suffer from this above.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Wow normally i respect you, but frankly this statement is low .

First off: Again you can get excactly with two legions warlord traits that are not detachment ones to even facilitate a real change in setup or gameplan. Meaning that F&F's impact was in many a way not really desiered, it helped to an extent but it did not do enough for the underdogs contrary it reinforced the position of AL overall as the top CSM dog.

Secondly: About field commander, there are 2 detachments that work, the daemonbomb one, the other raptorial host, mostly however this ones limited by the units it affects. These allow you their specific warlord trait. They don't facilitate an real alternate playstyle simply put in most cases that work.

And thirdly what you don't seem to understand: IW, f.e. would really like to have some more off their aura traits wouldn't they? Maybee even facilitate a propper gunline? NOPE.
This it the point i am making, the Traits would be there, just not available enough to actually facilitate other playstyles.

When you boil it down every single faction/army/codex only has one or two top tier viable build options and some factions won't even get there with any build in certain metas. That's just the reality of games that are as complicated as 40k. MtGs meta, both pro tour and FNM, tends to boil down to 3 or 4 top decks, a couple budgeted variations, and then brews which may or may not work in the meta. Your favoured subfaction and playstyle might not be viable currently, that sucks but either play through the suck or get some new models and expand your collection.

Yes, top competitive players will always find the strongest builds for a faction and play those. But everyone isn't trying to play top tables. Variety and options for builds make for better, more interesting games. Most people don't want to play with or against the same lists over and over. If that's fine with you ok, but it isn't what everyone wants.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
In response, your reply has absolutely nothing to do with the rules around warlord traits.

You're wrong, I'm right. Whine all you want.

Wow normally i respect you, but frankly this statement is low .

First off: Again you can get excactly with two legions warlord traits that are not detachment ones to even facilitate a real change in setup or gameplan. Meaning that F&F's impact was in many a way not really desiered, it helped to an extent but it did not do enough for the underdogs contrary it reinforced the position of AL overall as the top CSM dog.

Secondly: About field commander, there are 2 detachments that work, the daemonbomb one, the other raptorial host, mostly however this ones limited by the units it affects. These allow you their specific warlord trait. They don't facilitate an real alternate playstyle simply put in most cases that work.

And thirdly what you don't seem to understand: IW, f.e. would really like to have some more off their aura traits wouldn't they? Maybee even facilitate a propper gunline? NOPE.
This it the point i am making, the Traits would be there, just not available enough to actually facilitate other playstyles.

Low is probably the wrong word.

You made some statements about how there's only one Legion that can take more than one Warlord trait. I pointed out that, factually, this is not correct, all Legions (including Renegades) can take more than one WLT. If there's a 3 detachment limit, every Legion can take up to 4.

The conversation then turned to the quality of the warlord traits and whether or not they come from detachments. Which has nothing to do with facts, it's just your opinion and seemed like an attempt to obscure the original point.

While you're free to believe whatever you want, I'd say the majority of Legion-specific warlord traits aren't very useful. But most detachment-specific WLTs grant benefits that are directly relevant to the units that get the detachment keyword.

So I don't understand what point you are trying to prove here. Like, are you saying if I play Emperor's Children Daemon Engines, I'm going to be better off with Unbound Arrogance / Intoxicating Musk instead of Master of the Soulforges? That makes no sense, you get more out of faster Fiends / Crawlers than you do from d3 extra attacks on a Warlord. Or if I play World Eater's Cultists, I'm going to be better off with Violent Urgency / True Berzerker instead of Exultant Preacher? That makes no sense, you're trading reroll charges on large blobs of Cultists for reduced damage on the Warlord, that's a lot of wasted potential.

You could make the same argument for every detachment WLT. It's not like no one takes these other units, you may not find them as exciting as Possessed and Raptors but people have a use for them. The detachment WLTs enable people to play with other playstyles while making certain units more effective.

Personally, I'm happy with WLTs and appreciate the fact I can pay a CP to give a character more buffs. A laissez-faire system where every character gets a WLT would probably be a bad idea. If every character got one, what's the point? Your opponents are just going to throw their WLT buffed characters at yours, neither side actually sees a benefit relative to the other.

On the bright side, the novels about Chaos Space Marines are generally pretty good.