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.

Chaos players unhappy with their rules?

Damn you 2020!!!!

 Jidmah wrote:

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
You can also choose to be super salty about what isn't true yet. It's "a" detachment ability, possibly not the only one. It's not a legion trait anymore, despite having been one previously.

I wasn't aware that applying logic and being realistic is considered being salty
Hateful blows has been transformed into a flat +1A unless GW suddenly made it a detachment trait for no reason whatsoever, breaking not only with the previous edition, but also with the implementation of shock assault.

You make a very valid point, but Hateful Assault moving away from Shock Assault isn't too far of a stretch considering Malicious Volleys is different than Bolter Discipline in that in no longer includes bikers like Bolter Discipline does. That very well could be because DG have no bikers, but that would also mean that, unless the rule changes for normal CSM, those bikers lose Malicious volleys. So different placement of the rules verus the rules themselves being different seems like less of change

 ClockworkZion wrote:
"Overwhelming evidence" = one datasheet who may have traded it for always having that extra attack bonus and a lack of being mentioned in articles talking about new and changed rules.

FFS is there even a single person in this thread that has any interest in having a proper discussion?

Evidence for hateful blows being gone:
- All datasheets have received +1A
- Equivalent loyalist rule is NOT a detachment trait
- No army has more than one detachment rule unless it has custom traits
- Multiple detachment effects are always combined into one trait
- It's missing from Mortarion's datasheet
- It's not part of inexorable advance
- It's not part of contagions of nurgle
- It's not part of remorseless
- Not mentioned in any of the previews even once

Evidence for hateful blows remaining:
- "Most improved units" preview said plague marines got an extra attack
- Hope

This thread:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
You make a very valid point, but Hateful Assault moving away from Shock Assault isn't too far of a stretch considering Malicious Volleys is different than Bolter Discipline in that in no longer includes bikers like Bolter Discipline does. That very well could be because DG have no bikers, but that would also mean that, unless the rule changes for normal CSM, those bikers lose Malicious volleys. So different placement of the rules verus the rules themselves being different seems like less of change

The death guard version of hateful volleys has always been missing bikes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Argive wrote:
Quick question.

Is this a DG hellbrute or some sort of conversion?
It looks familiar. but not something ive seen being sold recently.

Spoiler:

It's a regular helbrute with a nurgle icon attached to its chest that might be from the chaos rhino or land raider kits. The nurgling holding onto its chest is from the space marines heros models, I don't know where the one on the base is from.

 Jidmah wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
"Overwhelming evidence" = one datasheet who may have traded it for always having that extra attack bonus and a lack of being mentioned in articles talking about new and changed rules.

FFS is there even a single person in this thread that has any interest in having a proper discussion?

Evidence for hateful blows being gone:
- All datasheets have received +1A
- Equivalent loyalist rule is NOT a detachment trait
- No army has more than one detachment rule
- Outside Multiple detachment effects are always combined into one trait
- It's missing from Mortarion's datasheet
- It's not part of inexorable advance
- It's not part of contagions of nurgle
- It's not part of remorseless
- Not mentioned in any of the previews even once

Evidence for hateful blows remaining:
- "Most improved units" preview said plague marines got an extra attack
- Hope

This thread:

Spoiler:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
You make a very valid point, but Hateful Assault moving away from Shock Assault isn't too far of a stretch considering Malicious Volleys is different than Bolter Discipline in that in no longer includes bikers like Bolter Discipline does. That very well could be because DG have no bikers, but that would also mean that, unless the rule changes for normal CSM, those bikers lose Malicious volleys. So different placement of the rules verus the rules themselves being different seems like less of change

The death guard version of hateful volleys has always been missing bikes.

I had completely missed that Plague Marines got buffed attacks. Probably because it was buried in an article from nearly two weeks ago.

And you're making sweeping claims about detachment rules, unless you've seen the full codex already. GW has shifted gears between books before.

And as it has been pointed out before: these rule previews have ONLY been about new or changed rules. We don't know what rules where flat out removed yet.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Kharne the Befriender wrote:
You make a very valid point, but Hateful Assault moving away from Shock Assault isn't too far of a stretch considering Malicious Volleys is different than Bolter Discipline in that in no longer includes bikers like Bolter Discipline does. That very well could be because DG have no bikers, but that would also mean that, unless the rule changes for normal CSM, those bikers lose Malicious volleys. So different placement of the rules verus the rules themselves being different seems like less of change

The death guard version of hateful volleys has always been missing bikes.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I had completely missed that Plague Marines got buffed attacks. Probably because it was buried in an article from nearly two weeks ago.

There is a thorough summary in the first post. I know this has gone out of style, but I've always been a huge fan of not having to sift through the entire thread for info.

And you're making sweeping claims about detachment rules, unless you've seen the full codex already. GW has shifted gears between books before.

And as it has been pointed out before: these rule previews have ONLY been about new or changed rules. We don't know what rules where flat out removed yet.

These two contradict each other. Either it wasn't shown because it remained unchanged, then it should have been on Mortarion's datasheet. Plus, they've also shown volleys and plague weapons.

Or it was changed, then it should have been shown.

I think a more apt comparison would be against primaris marines (Let's say an Intercessors and PMs)

In common they both have:
-Ws/Bs 3+, S4, 2A, 2W, Ld7/8, Sv3+
-Bolter Discipline/Malicious Volleys
-ATSKNF/Remorseless
-Chapter Tactics/Inexorable Advance (Hard to compare them given the innumerable CT combos and such)
-Sergeant with varying loadout

Primaris Intercessor has:
-1" better movement
-Shock assault
-Combat Doctrines
-Super Doctrine
-More standard loadout optionss
-Better stats on standard guns

Plague Marine has
-+1T
-Contagions of Nurgle
-Disgustingly Resilient
-Better melee weapons and melee loadouts
-Potential for more attacks (Vectors)
-Special weapons

I think this puts them on par if PM were 23-25pts

Few issues with your comparisons...


1. Special/Melee weapons are paid for, they are not free. The cost of having them should be in the weapon, not the base model (Bar the knives of course)
2. Base, with what we know now, Intercessors have more attacks in CC due to shock assault.
Vectors which is only applicable when paying extra points and losing all range attacks brings it equal.

PMs have more options, but they have to pay a lot for those options. If you wanted to create a CC squad with the points you are mooting it would be 28-30pts per man with no ranged attacks (Going with axes).

3. Lots of what you listed for PMs is only worthwhile in CC.

I honestly think 21-22 points each would be a good cost, 23 at a push.

Tyel wrote:
Really wish I was a good enough painter to produce those beige Plague Marines.

You can buy mine:

On another note, I don't PMs should be costing more because they can mix CC and ranged weapons.

Maybe I am naive, but I only ever see them run as Shooty or CC, it's never a mix.

I would be just as happy to have one version be CC options only and one version be ranged only.

It's not like DG have much in the way of options for troops

Doohicky wrote:
On another note, I don't PMs should be costing more because they can mix CC and ranged weapons.

Maybe I am naive, but I only ever see them run as Shooty or CC, it's never a mix.

I would be just as happy to have one version be CC options only and one version be ranged only.

It's not like DG have much in the way of options for troops

People also forget that even with a bump in CC and options, Plague Marines aren't exactly the speediest units on the table. Very few were picking much of CC except maybe the flails in 8th.

 Eldarsif wrote:

Doohicky wrote:
On another note, I don't PMs should be costing more because they can mix CC and ranged weapons.

Maybe I am naive, but I only ever see them run as Shooty or CC, it's never a mix.

I would be just as happy to have one version be CC options only and one version be ranged only.

It's not like DG have much in the way of options for troops

People also forget that even with a bump in CC and options, Plague Marines aren't exactly the speediest units on the table. Very few were picking much of CC except maybe the flails in 8th.

I mean I know they're slower than normal marine but is 1" really that much slower if you factornin advances or using transports?

Plenty of the fast attack options are quick enough and assumingly packing the toughness aura etc to tie an enemy up.

I like the contagions rules, to me it hits that perfect zone of fluffy, useful, and practical. I like that there is a benefit for running mono-DG, and I really like that the benefit is such that there is a tough choice to be made between the advantages of a daemon detachment or the contagions.

I am 100 % behind the new rules.

Well 90%, I am not a fan of the new DR, but hey, can't have everything.

But as we all know, only with codex in hand and a few battles with all the rules and points together will we really get an idea of things.

 Jidmah wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
"Overwhelming evidence" = one datasheet who may have traded it for always having that extra attack bonus and a lack of being mentioned in articles talking about new and changed rules.

FFS is there even a single person in this thread that has any interest in having a proper discussion?

Evidence for hateful blows being gone:
- All datasheets have received +1A
- Equivalent loyalist rule is NOT a detachment trait
- No army has more than one detachment rule unless it has custom traits
- Multiple detachment effects are always combined into one trait
- It's missing from Mortarion's datasheet
- It's not part of inexorable advance
- It's not part of contagions of nurgle
- It's not part of remorseless
- Not mentioned in any of the previews even once

Evidence for hateful blows remaining:
- "Most improved units" preview said plague marines got an extra attack
- Hope

This thread:

Spoiler:

So my take on this, and I admit I am making some assumptions is that if you compare the Death Guard rules to Space Marines:

Space Marines
Chapter Tactics
Angels of Death (umbrella rule containing the following)
.Know no Fear
.Bolter Discipline
.Shock Assault
.Doctrines (mono faction restricted) turn based boost of AP

Death Guard
Chapter Tactic - Inexorable Advance
Contagions of Nurgle (umbrella rule)
.Remorseless
.Malicious Volleys
.Hateful Assault?
.Contagion Abilities (Mono Faction restricted) (Nurgles Gift)

So the two match almost perfectly. Today's preview was called contagions of nurgle but the actual -1T ability is called Nurgles Gift and was referred to as a contagion ability. The way it was written suggested it's not the only contagion ability either.
We know malicious volleys and remorseless exist and we haven't yet seen them on a datasheet, admittedly the only datasheet we've seen is Morty's and most of what I am putting under the umbrella doesn't affect him. DTTFE may even fall under Contagions of Nurgle too.
If there is no umbrella rule like Angels of Death then on almost every datasheet they are going to have to print the following abilities:
Disgustingly Resilient
Remorseless
Malicious Volleys
Contagions of Nurgle
Hateful Assault?
DTTFE?

Even if the last two are no longer a thing, four abilities seems excessive on every datasheet.
So I don't agree that there is overwhelming evidence to suggest Hateful Assault is gone.

So if two deathgaurd armies face off then they infect each other and become t4... oh the fluff gw... not

 puma713 wrote:
Disappointed that Contagions is mono-DG. I guess there is a chance that Nurglings are in the book as a selection, but my confidence level is low on that.

Well of course it's mono-DG. Everyone knows that Nurgle Daemons don't spread contagion and, in fact, stop Plague Marines from spreading contagion whenever they show up.

Anyone else notice at the bottom of today's article it mentions that the Death Guard terrain piece can be deployed 12inches away from enemies, and treats the Contagions as turn 4? It might actually be worth using depending on points, especially as a LOS blockers or dropping on an important objective.

 l0k1 wrote:
Anyone else notice at the bottom of today's article it mentions that the Death Guard terrain piece can be deployed 12inches away from enemies, and treats the Contagions as turn 4? It might actually be worth using depending on points, especially as a LOS blockers or dropping on an important objective.

Is there not an issue with fortifications that they can't be placed close to terrain? I only have my app handy so can't check and never used them before.

Yes. The Battle Forged rules for Fortifications make them functionally unusable.

Warhammer 40,000 CORE BOOK Indomitus Version 1.1 FAQ wrote:Page 247
Add the following sub-section:
FORTIFICATIONS
Units with the Fortifications Battlefield Role are terrain features that are part of your army. Unless otherwise stated, when setting Fortifications up on the battlefield, they cannot be set up within 3" of any other terrain feature that is not part of its own datasheet (excluding hills, page 260). If it is not possible to set up a Fortification as a result, it cannot be deployed and counts as having been destroyed. Fortifications can never be placed into Strategic Reserves (pg 256).

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Disappointed that Contagions is mono-DG. I guess there is a chance that Nurglings are in the book as a selection, but my confidence level is low on that.

Well of course it's mono-DG. Everyone knows that Nurgle Daemons don't spread contagion and, in fact, stop Plague Marines from spreading contagion whenever they show up.

Don't forget that if Nurgle's daemons have to fight Death Guard for some reason, Nurgle will happily weaken his children.

I guess its good to see an offensive buff for DG, but its an extra special fluff mess.

To be fair, the way Daemons have been handled in terms of benefits with the Legions has been utter fething garbage since 8th and I didn't expect this to change.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To be fair, the way Daemons have been handled in terms of benefits with the Legions has been utter fething garbage since 8th and I didn't expect this to change.

It's been garbage since they were split off from Chaos proper due to corporate mandate in 4th Ed.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To be fair, the way Daemons have been handled in terms of benefits with the Legions has been utter fething garbage since 8th and I didn't expect this to change.

It's been garbage since they were split off from Chaos proper due to corporate mandate in 4th Ed.

I think base daemons for summoning or using compared to the whole Daemons codex was fair for the 8th codices. The problem was punishing you of course for using them.

 alextroy wrote:
Yes. The Battle Forged rules for Fortifications make them functionally unusable.

Warhammer 40,000 CORE BOOK Indomitus Version 1.1 FAQ wrote:Page 247
Add the following sub-section:
FORTIFICATIONS
Units with the Fortifications Battlefield Role are terrain features that are part of your army. Unless otherwise stated, when setting Fortifications up on the battlefield, they cannot be set up within 3" of any other terrain feature that is not part of its own datasheet (excluding hills, page 260). If it is not possible to set up a Fortification as a result, it cannot be deployed and counts as having been destroyed. Fortifications can never be placed into Strategic Reserves (pg 256).

Maybe I'm missing something, but how does this make it unusable? It can't be within 3" of other terrain. Ok that'll depend on terrain placement during setup. It's a part of your army insinuates that it must be deployed in your deployment zone. Ok, unless it has a rule stating otherwise, which it might considering the article said it can be deployed 12" away from enemy units,worst case you deloy it in on your side of the table to make it harder on enemy units trying to drop in on your side. Fortifications can't be in Strategic Reserves. So what am I missing?

There are rarely any places on the battlefield where there is no terrain within 3" of a rather large model. We have explicitly created a house-rule to set up fortifications before regular terrain because large terrain pieces like the nocolith crown, the skyshield landing pad, imperial bastion or the fortress of redemption will almost always self-destruct or deployed in some corner.

Makes sense then. Perhaps myself and other in the local group are pretty sparing with terrain then lol

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Disappointed that Contagions is mono-DG. I guess there is a chance that Nurglings are in the book as a selection, but my confidence level is low on that.

Well of course it's mono-DG. Everyone knows that Nurgle Daemons don't spread contagion and, in fact, stop Plague Marines from spreading contagion whenever they show up.

Presumably the warp empowerment that would go into empowering their plagues is used to bind daemons into service instead.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 puma713 wrote:
Disappointed that Contagions is mono-DG. I guess there is a chance that Nurglings are in the book as a selection, but my confidence level is low on that.

Well of course it's mono-DG. Everyone knows that Nurgle Daemons don't spread contagion and, in fact, stop Plague Marines from spreading contagion whenever they show up.

Don't forget that if Nurgle's daemons have to fight Death Guard for some reason, Nurgle will happily weaken his children.

I guess its good to see an offensive buff for DG, but its an extra special fluff mess.

I agree; the effect should be on all models (friendly or enemy) in range but not affect Nurgle. That is how many abilities in AoS work and it's great.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Presumably the warp empowerment that would go into empowering their plagues is used to bind daemons into service instead.

Ya-huh.

I'm pointing out that rules that make your army forget who they are and lose special rules when allying with units from your own god doesn't make any sense. It's like the old days when CSM squads would forget which Chaos God the served when the Icon Bearer died, only on an army-wide scale.

It's absurd.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Presumably the warp empowerment that would go into empowering their plagues is used to bind daemons into service instead.

Ya-huh.

I'm pointing out that rules that make your army forget who they are and lose special rules when allying with units from your own god doesn't make any sense. It's like the old days when CSM squads would forget which Chaos God the served when the Icon Bearer died, only on an army-wide scale.

It's absurd.

Well duh, if you are looking for ways in which something can be silly you'll find it.