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.
For the bel’klor army the restriction that kills it for me is no daemon engines. Not because it kills the competitiveness so much but because I have a bunch of them. Maybe when normal CSM get their update this will be more appealing. Right now I would just bring him in a normal daemon army.
As with the other armies of renown, the Disciples of Be’lakor carry some heavy restrictions. For one, Be’lakor has to be your Warlord and the army can’t include any other named characters, daemon princes, greater daemons, daemon engines, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Emperor’s Children, World Eaters, Chaos Knights, Traitor Titans, Plague Marines, or any of the Cult troops (e.g. Berserkers, Plague Marines, etc.). Additionally your army can’t include a second daemon unit from the same Chaos God until you’ve added at least one unit from each god, and likewise you can’t have your third until you have two from each god, and so on, meaning you have to maintain some kind of balance.
Why no Cult Troops?
More interesting for me is that World Eaters & Emperor's Children are listed alongside the TS & DG (when, by excluding cult units/SCs both the WEs and EC have nothing anyway, and all legions lose their specific stratagems regardless). Might be future proofing? Or possibly GW just being thorough in making the army of renown "undivided". Still, an EC fan can dream.
One can hope this is an indication of WE and EC codexes. If it was purely thematic then Night Lords should be excluded as well.
As with the other armies of renown, the Disciples of Be’lakor carry some heavy restrictions. For one, Be’lakor has to be your Warlord and the army can’t include any other named characters, daemon princes, greater daemons, daemon engines, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Emperor’s Children, World Eaters, Chaos Knights, Traitor Titans, Plague Marines, or any of the Cult troops (e.g. Berserkers, Plague Marines, etc.). Additionally your army can’t include a second daemon unit from the same Chaos God until you’ve added at least one unit from each god, and likewise you can’t have your third until you have two from each god, and so on, meaning you have to maintain some kind of balance.
Why no Cult Troops?
More interesting for me is that World Eaters & Emperor's Children are listed alongside the TS & DG (when, by excluding cult units/SCs both the WEs and EC have nothing anyway, and all legions lose their specific stratagems regardless). Might be future proofing? Or possibly GW just being thorough in making the army of renown "undivided". Still, an EC fan can dream.
One can hope this is an indication of WE and EC codexes. If it was purely thematic then Night Lords should be excluded as well.
Pretty funny that WarCom called out specifically that you can use all your toys from CSM, especially Daemon engines
Edit: also, in their preview they had Be'lakor in Front of a Heldrake and these pictures are usually directly from the book... So, are we sure every Daemon engine is out?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/10 17:10:14
As with the other armies of renown, the Disciples of Be’lakor carry some heavy restrictions. For one, Be’lakor has to be your Warlord and the army can’t include any other named characters, daemon princes, greater daemons, daemon engines, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Emperor’s Children, World Eaters, Chaos Knights, Traitor Titans, Plague Marines, or any of the Cult troops (e.g. Berserkers, Plague Marines, etc.). Additionally your army can’t include a second daemon unit from the same Chaos God until you’ve added at least one unit from each god, and likewise you can’t have your third until you have two from each god, and so on, meaning you have to maintain some kind of balance.
Why no Cult Troops?
More interesting for me is that World Eaters & Emperor's Children are listed alongside the TS & DG (when, by excluding cult units/SCs both the WEs and EC have nothing anyway, and all legions lose their specific stratagems regardless). Might be future proofing? Or possibly GW just being thorough in making the army of renown "undivided". Still, an EC fan can dream.
One can hope this is an indication of WE and EC codexes. If it was purely thematic then Night Lords should be excluded as well.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
As with the other armies of renown, the Disciples of Be’lakor carry some heavy restrictions. For one, Be’lakor has to be your Warlord and the army can’t include any other named characters, daemon princes, greater daemons, daemon engines, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Emperor’s Children, World Eaters, Chaos Knights, Traitor Titans, Plague Marines, or any of the Cult troops (e.g. Berserkers, Plague Marines, etc.). Additionally your army can’t include a second daemon unit from the same Chaos God until you’ve added at least one unit from each god, and likewise you can’t have your third until you have two from each god, and so on, meaning you have to maintain some kind of balance.
Why no Cult Troops?
More interesting for me is that World Eaters & Emperor's Children are listed alongside the TS & DG (when, by excluding cult units/SCs both the WEs and EC have nothing anyway, and all legions lose their specific stratagems regardless). Might be future proofing? Or possibly GW just being thorough in making the army of renown "undivided". Still, an EC fan can dream.
One can hope this is an indication of WE and EC codexes. If it was purely thematic then Night Lords should be excluded as well.
Pretty funny that WarCom called out specifically that you can use all your toys from CSM, especially Daemon engines
Edit: also, in their preview they had Be'lakor in Front of a Heldrake and these pictures are usually directly from the book... So, are we sure every Daemon engine is out?
Yeah, Man reads book is out as well as the articles. Sad.
This really derailed the hype I had, that's for sure. Not being able to include Daemon engines is just such a huge blow. Feels like they went out of their way to ensure that you couldn't include anything that made either army viable.
As with the other armies of renown, the Disciples of Be’lakor carry some heavy restrictions. For one, Be’lakor has to be your Warlord and the army can’t include any other named characters, daemon princes, greater daemons, daemon engines, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Emperor’s Children, World Eaters, Chaos Knights, Traitor Titans, Plague Marines, or any of the Cult troops (e.g. Berserkers, Plague Marines, etc.). Additionally your army can’t include a second daemon unit from the same Chaos God until you’ve added at least one unit from each god, and likewise you can’t have your third until you have two from each god, and so on, meaning you have to maintain some kind of balance.
Why no Cult Troops?
More interesting for me is that World Eaters & Emperor's Children are listed alongside the TS & DG (when, by excluding cult units/SCs both the WEs and EC have nothing anyway, and all legions lose their specific stratagems regardless). Might be future proofing? Or possibly GW just being thorough in making the army of renown "undivided". Still, an EC fan can dream.
One can hope this is an indication of WE and EC codexes. If it was purely thematic then Night Lords should be excluded as well.
Pretty funny that WarCom called out specifically that you can use all your toys from CSM, especially Daemon engines
Edit: also, in their preview they had Be'lakor in Front of a Heldrake and these pictures are usually directly from the book... So, are we sure every Daemon engine is out?
Just another case of the WarCom writers not knowing what was in the actual book. Those pictures were probably made by WarCom.
As with the other armies of renown, the Disciples of Be’lakor carry some heavy restrictions. For one, Be’lakor has to be your Warlord and the army can’t include any other named characters, daemon princes, greater daemons, daemon engines, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Emperor’s Children, World Eaters, Chaos Knights, Traitor Titans, Plague Marines, or any of the Cult troops (e.g. Berserkers, Plague Marines, etc.). Additionally your army can’t include a second daemon unit from the same Chaos God until you’ve added at least one unit from each god, and likewise you can’t have your third until you have two from each god, and so on, meaning you have to maintain some kind of balance.
Why no Cult Troops?
More interesting for me is that World Eaters & Emperor's Children are listed alongside the TS & DG (when, by excluding cult units/SCs both the WEs and EC have nothing anyway, and all legions lose their specific stratagems regardless). Might be future proofing? Or possibly GW just being thorough in making the army of renown "undivided". Still, an EC fan can dream.
One can hope this is an indication of WE and EC codexes. If it was purely thematic then Night Lords should be excluded as well.
Please do not get Gadzilla started again...
I don't care if someone else wants to use daemons in their Night Lords army, or Mark them to the moon. I just don't want it to be a requirement to make CSM units work.
As with the other armies of renown, the Disciples of Be’lakor carry some heavy restrictions. For one, Be’lakor has to be your Warlord and the army can’t include any other named characters, daemon princes, greater daemons, daemon engines, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Emperor’s Children, World Eaters, Chaos Knights, Traitor Titans, Plague Marines, or any of the Cult troops (e.g. Berserkers, Plague Marines, etc.). Additionally your army can’t include a second daemon unit from the same Chaos God until you’ve added at least one unit from each god, and likewise you can’t have your third until you have two from each god, and so on, meaning you have to maintain some kind of balance.
So basically, almost none of the cool stuff. I'll be skipping this.
As with the other armies of renown, the Disciples of Be’lakor carry some heavy restrictions. For one, Be’lakor has to be your Warlord and the army can’t include any other named characters, daemon princes, greater daemons, daemon engines, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, Emperor’s Children, World Eaters, Chaos Knights, Traitor Titans, Plague Marines, or any of the Cult troops (e.g. Berserkers, Plague Marines, etc.). Additionally your army can’t include a second daemon unit from the same Chaos God until you’ve added at least one unit from each god, and likewise you can’t have your third until you have two from each god, and so on, meaning you have to maintain some kind of balance.
Why no Cult Troops?
More interesting for me is that World Eaters & Emperor's Children are listed alongside the TS & DG (when, by excluding cult units/SCs both the WEs and EC have nothing anyway, and all legions lose their specific stratagems regardless). Might be future proofing? Or possibly GW just being thorough in making the army of renown "undivided". Still, an EC fan can dream.
One can hope this is an indication of WE and EC codexes. If it was purely thematic then Night Lords should be excluded as well.
I definitely hope so. Having read the rules page in full, if Disciples of Be'lakor are intended to be around in the long term, I'm actually really confident this is for the purposes of future proofing. There's literally no reason to list EC & WE alongside DG & TS except to prevent access to Legion specific units, as Legion specific relics/stratagems/warlord traits are all explicitly outlawed elsewhere.
The limitations in terms of demon engines etc seem odd. Belakor is going to be the big dude in the next demons codex and he is the only one that allows an unaligned list. So GW must think that being able to run an unaligned list is so good that other big hitter like demon engines need to be kept out. As belakor is 83 quid a mode you’d have thought GW would provide rules that are an incentive to buy the big guy.
Intentionally releasing a model at this price point and then making the army uncompetitive seems like shooting yourself in the foot
mrFickle wrote: The limitations in terms of demon engines etc seem odd. Belakor is going to be the big dude in the next demons codex and he is the only one that allows an unaligned list. So GW must think that being able to run an unaligned list is so good that other big hitter like demon engines need to be kept out. As belakor is 83 quid a mode you’d have thought GW would provide rules that are an incentive to buy the big guy.
Intentionally releasing a model at this price point and then making the army uncompetitive seems like shooting yourself in the foot
You're just not galaxy-brained enough to understand how good it is. Don't you know? For years GW has released OP rules for the new hotness to get everybody to buy it. True GW-heads know and understand this, so Be'lakor & his army must be OP in a way the plebians don't get.
mrFickle wrote: The limitations in terms of demon engines etc seem odd. Belakor is going to be the big dude in the next demons codex and he is the only one that allows an unaligned list. So GW must think that being able to run an unaligned list is so good that other big hitter like demon engines need to be kept out. As belakor is 83 quid a mode you’d have thought GW would provide rules that are an incentive to buy the big guy.
Intentionally releasing a model at this price point and then making the army uncompetitive seems like shooting yourself in the foot
Keep in mind that nothing prevents you from just running him in a regular CSM/Daemons lists without any limitations. In fact, competitive daemon players already seem to be incorporating him in their slanesh lists, so that argument doesn't really match up.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
mrFickle wrote: The limitations in terms of demon engines etc seem odd. Belakor is going to be the big dude in the next demons codex and he is the only one that allows an unaligned list. So GW must think that being able to run an unaligned list is so good that other big hitter like demon engines need to be kept out. As belakor is 83 quid a mode you’d have thought GW would provide rules that are an incentive to buy the big guy.
Intentionally releasing a model at this price point and then making the army uncompetitive seems like shooting yourself in the foot
My first thought is that they wanted to prevent cross-synergy with the daemon keyword (which is itself ???) but oblits and possessed are still fine. I don't like greater daemons being excluded but I at least see the reasoning for that as Bel'akor not being willing to share power with "equals", the daemon engines thing is arbitrary and extremely puzzling. And yeah, as Jidmah said Bel'akor is still quite playable in a normal daemons army, it's just his army of renown that's a failure.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/11 20:03:11
BrianDavion wrote: keep in mind that when GW designs these regiments of reknown there's also lore reasons behind it. maybe Belkaor hates deamon engines?
Yes, maybe he hates daemon engines due to them being enslavement of daemons? He is supposed to be arrogant and independent, and that's how he fell from favor. He could hate the very idea of a daemonic being trapped and enslaved (though hypocritical when it comes to eneslaving his mortal followers). "FREEDOM! (for daemons only)"
mrFickle wrote: So the suspicion is that a straight out belakor, choas undivided demons, army from the codex will be a bit more roomy but will exclude CSM?
Belakor has all four marks now just like Abaddon so you can even run him in a mono-mark list without breaking detachment bonuses. Could definitely just use him as a Tzeentch or Slaanesh HQ.
The Book of Fire review for Narrative Content is up on Goonhammer. They sounded pretty enthusiastic about it. Their review of the Crusade Mission pack for Act II was also pretty hyped.
Made me look at Plague Purge again, and my stance on that book has definitely softened. Looking forward to getting my hands on both of these books.
Book of fire seems to just be a straight buff to my BL army.
I lose a worthless legion trait and get a pretty awesome one. Can take great daemon troops instead of worthless cultists or CSM. Get access to new psychic disciplines. Also still maintain <legion> keyword so my Abaddon can still reroll all hits for multiple units of termies.
I could not possibly be so stoked - except for the fact that Admech exist and make every army look like rubbish.
Jarms48 wrote: This book has some rumoured Ork rules in it right? I imagine it may contain rules for a pure beast-snagga force, with it's restriction being no other Orks being able to be taken.
It will be highly competitive and will incentivise Ork players to buy the new Ork kits.
No not this book.
I think you are thinking of the early and limited edition Ork codex that will come in the beast snagga box?
Yes, you're right. I'm thinking of the new Warzone Octarius that's coming out later.
After seeing the Ork reveal recently. I'm convinced I'm right. Looks like those big squig transports are only going to carry beast snaggas, so Orks getting an "army of renown" that only allows beast snagga units is pretty likely.
IanMalcolmAbs wrote: Book of fire seems to just be a straight buff to my BL army.
I lose a worthless legion trait and get a pretty awesome one. Can take great daemon troops instead of worthless cultists or CSM. Get access to new psychic disciplines. Also still maintain <legion> keyword so my Abaddon can still reroll all hits for multiple units of termies.
I could not possibly be so stoked - except for the fact that Admech exist and make every army look like rubbish.
According to one of the influencers that got a copy you do take a lot of restrictions prohibiting things like daemon engines or cult marines, which is pretty much everything that makes a chaos space marine army competitive. Aside from a defiler (crab walker ftw) it really doesn’t hurt me much, as I love the way power armor and terminators and bikes and what not look on the table. Havingg to cycle through multiple daemon gods for the daemons is sort of annoying to me though... And you need a bel’akor for the warlord... which is a huge restriction all in of itself as he will eat a quarter of your points at standard/tournament list sizes and even more elsewhere. I’m certain someone will find a stupid busted combo though.
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. -Kurt Vonnegut
IanMalcolmAbs wrote: Book of fire seems to just be a straight buff to my BL army.
I lose a worthless legion trait and get a pretty awesome one. Can take great daemon troops instead of worthless cultists or CSM. Get access to new psychic disciplines. Also still maintain <legion> keyword so my Abaddon can still reroll all hits for multiple units of termies.
I could not possibly be so stoked - except for the fact that Admech exist and make every army look like rubbish.
According to one of the influencers that got a copy you do take a lot of restrictions prohibiting things like daemon engines or cult marines, which is pretty much everything that makes a chaos space marine army competitive. Aside from a defiler (crab walker ftw) it really doesn’t hurt me much, as I love the way power armor and terminators and bikes and what not look on the table. Havingg to cycle through multiple daemon gods for the daemons is sort of annoying to me though... And you need a bel’akor for the warlord... which is a huge restriction all in of itself as he will eat a quarter of your points at standard/tournament list sizes and even more elsewhere. I’m certain someone will find a stupid busted combo though.
my hope is that when the CSM codex comes out GW will have put effort into making CHAOS SPACE MARINES, actually decent. so we can stop having "codex deamon engines and troop tax"
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
my hope is that when the CSM codex comes out GW will have put effort into making CHAOS SPACE MARINES, actually decent. so we can stop having "codex deamon engines and troop tax"
Erm, not to rain on that hope, but, since their existence as a troop choice and more pronounced since 4th they haven't been worth gak, even WITH chainswords and boltpistols and bolters.
(also the last time they were any good was as a PA horde skewlist with a recycling stratagem and bonus CP... and even that wasn't that good... which goes to show just how bad they were.)
I do think it has to do with how GW shifted away from the customizable mainline vets from 3.5 to 4th and turned the faction into warbands of specific leaders and their goons, making rank and file for CSM more or less "filler" material...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/14 06:36:24
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Given that tacs don't see play (in an era where other firstborn infantry like vanguard vets and terminators do, even) bringing CSM up to parity won't make them see play, either. CSM would have to be better than the equivalent Space Marine models, which... is not happening.
Arachnofiend wrote: Given that tacs don't see play (in an era where other firstborn infantry like vanguard vets and terminators do, even) bringing CSM up to parity won't make them see play, either. CSM would have to be better than the equivalent Space Marine models, which... is not happening.
Tacs problem is they're completely outclassed by intercessors. CSMs however could with minimal effort be a slightly differant story. I know I keep harping on this, but if they gave CSMs an extra attack instead of DTFE, and are willing to allow for chainswords and boltguns taken together (not likely I know but it'd help) CSMs could be, points depending, a reasonably decent choice. Let's examine a hypothetical CSM vs Intercessor under these rules for a moment.
Intercessor: S4 T4 2W 3+ save boltrifle: S4 -1 AP, rapid rife 1. 2 melee attacks at AP 0
CSM: S4 T4 2W 3+ save. Boltgun S4 AP 0 rapid fire 1. 3 Melee attacks at AP -1.
so you'd have an army with inferior shooting, but superior Melee (heck 3 S4 ap -1 melee attacks would make CSMs a better melee unit then some armies assault units)
(assuming they don't get the chainsword, yeah CSMs are just going to be intercessors without the boltrifle at best.. not great and they'll proably be about 16-17 PPM..)
BTW I'm going to make a guess that the black legion trait in the 9th edition codex will be +1 Leadership and the ability to act as if they ahd remained stationary when moving or advancing. Seems it'd retain the feel of what black legion was attempting to do in their 8th codex, and it'll be a pretty nice boost.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
Arachnofiend wrote: Given that tacs don't see play (in an era where other firstborn infantry like vanguard vets and terminators do, even) bringing CSM up to parity won't make them see play, either. CSM would have to be better than the equivalent Space Marine models, which... is not happening.
Tacs problem is they're completely outclassed by intercessors. CSMs however could with minimal effort be a slightly differant story. I know I keep harping on this, but if they gave CSMs an extra attack instead of DTFE, and are willing to allow for chainswords and boltguns taken together (not likely I know but it'd help) CSMs could be, points depending, a reasonably decent choice. Let's examine a hypothetical CSM vs Intercessor under these rules for a moment.
Intercessor: S4 T4 2W 3+ save boltrifle: S4 -1 AP, rapid rife 1. 2 melee attacks at AP 0
CSM: S4 T4 2W 3+ save. Boltgun S4 AP 0 rapid fire 1. 3 Melee attacks at AP -1.
so you'd have an army with inferior shooting, but superior Melee (heck 3 S4 ap -1 melee attacks would make CSMs a better melee unit then some armies assault units)
(assuming they don't get the chainsword, yeah CSMs are just going to be intercessors without the boltrifle at best.. not great and they'll proably be about 16-17 PPM..)
BTW I'm going to make a guess that the black legion trait in the 9th edition codex will be +1 Leadership and the ability to act as if they ahd remained stationary when moving or advancing. Seems it'd retain the feel of what black legion was attempting to do in their 8th codex, and it'll be a pretty nice boost.
Instead of trying to "Retain the feel of what they were attempting to do in the 8th edition codex", I'd rather they forgot that the 8th, 6th, and 4th edition CSM codexes ever existed, and look at the Chaos: 2nd Edition codex and CSM 3.5 for inspiration. Why continue to build upon a bad foundation when you can draw inspiration from something actually GOOD? That would fix the problem of your 16-17 PPM CSM that are just "Intercessors without bolt rifles" by allowing them to spend those extra points on Veteran Abilities and Marks that actually matter, instead of just giving an additional keyword and access to an extra strategem and psychic power.
Arachnofiend wrote: Given that tacs don't see play (in an era where other firstborn infantry like vanguard vets and terminators do, even) bringing CSM up to parity won't make them see play, either. CSM would have to be better than the equivalent Space Marine models, which... is not happening.
Tacs problem is they're completely outclassed by intercessors. CSMs however could with minimal effort be a slightly differant story. I know I keep harping on this, but if they gave CSMs an extra attack instead of DTFE, and are willing to allow for chainswords and boltguns taken together (not likely I know but it'd help) CSMs could be, points depending, a reasonably decent choice. Let's examine a hypothetical CSM vs Intercessor under these rules for a moment.
Intercessor: S4 T4 2W 3+ save boltrifle: S4 -1 AP, rapid rife 1. 2 melee attacks at AP 0
CSM: S4 T4 2W 3+ save. Boltgun S4 AP 0 rapid fire 1. 3 Melee attacks at AP -1.
so you'd have an army with inferior shooting, but superior Melee (heck 3 S4 ap -1 melee attacks would make CSMs a better melee unit then some armies assault units)
(assuming they don't get the chainsword, yeah CSMs are just going to be intercessors without the boltrifle at best.. not great and they'll proably be about 16-17 PPM..)
BTW I'm going to make a guess that the black legion trait in the 9th edition codex will be +1 Leadership and the ability to act as if they ahd remained stationary when moving or advancing. Seems it'd retain the feel of what black legion was attempting to do in their 8th codex, and it'll be a pretty nice boost.
I don't understand how FB are outclassed. For they same cost you can have a guy with a grav cannon or plasma gun and have more utility with the same durability and less melee.
I think we see selection bias, because people like new models with a cohesive theme.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/14 18:49:17
Arachnofiend wrote: I don't like greater daemons being excluded but I at least see the reasoning for that as Bel'akor not being willing to share power with "equals",
So then they just throw in the line they use in AoS about him enslaving Greater Daemons using their True Names. He doesn't share power, but he's not above forcing powerful Daemons to do his bidding in the Mortal Realms.
You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was
Arachnofiend wrote: I don't like greater daemons being excluded but I at least see the reasoning for that as Bel'akor not being willing to share power with "equals",
So then they just throw in the line they use in AoS about him enslaving Greater Daemons using their True Names. He doesn't share power, but he's not above forcing powerful Daemons to do his bidding in the Mortal Realms.
Oh, I was giving them the benefit of the doubt but if he can use Greater Daemons in Sigmar then it's complete nonsense that he can't in 40k.
Arachnofiend wrote: Given that tacs don't see play (in an era where other firstborn infantry like vanguard vets and terminators do, even) bringing CSM up to parity won't make them see play, either. CSM would have to be better than the equivalent Space Marine models, which... is not happening.
Tacs problem is they're completely outclassed by intercessors. CSMs however could with minimal effort be a slightly differant story. I know I keep harping on this, but if they gave CSMs an extra attack instead of DTFE, and are willing to allow for chainswords and boltguns taken together (not likely I know but it'd help) CSMs could be, points depending, a reasonably decent choice. Let's examine a hypothetical CSM vs Intercessor under these rules for a moment.
Intercessor: S4 T4 2W 3+ save boltrifle: S4 -1 AP, rapid rife 1. 2 melee attacks at AP 0
CSM: S4 T4 2W 3+ save. Boltgun S4 AP 0 rapid fire 1. 3 Melee attacks at AP -1.
so you'd have an army with inferior shooting, but superior Melee (heck 3 S4 ap -1 melee attacks would make CSMs a better melee unit then some armies assault units)
(assuming they don't get the chainsword, yeah CSMs are just going to be intercessors without the boltrifle at best.. not great and they'll proably be about 16-17 PPM..)
BTW I'm going to make a guess that the black legion trait in the 9th edition codex will be +1 Leadership and the ability to act as if they ahd remained stationary when moving or advancing. Seems it'd retain the feel of what black legion was attempting to do in their 8th codex, and it'll be a pretty nice boost.
I don't understand how FB are outclassed. For they same cost you can have a guy with a grav cannon or plasma gun and have more utility with the same durability and less melee.
I think we see selection bias, because people like new models with a cohesive theme.
It's the strategems. Intercessors can fight twice, shoot twice, auto-wound on 6s to hit in melee, and most importantly, only be wounded on a 4+ (which kinda means you aren't getting the same durability like you said). And TACs can, uhhhh....get a 66% chance to do 2d3 MWs on a vehicle if they get stuck in melee with one? Did I miss anything?
Arachnofiend wrote: Given that tacs don't see play (in an era where other firstborn infantry like vanguard vets and terminators do, even) bringing CSM up to parity won't make them see play, either. CSM would have to be better than the equivalent Space Marine models, which... is not happening.
Tacs problem is they're completely outclassed by intercessors. CSMs however could with minimal effort be a slightly differant story. I know I keep harping on this, but if they gave CSMs an extra attack instead of DTFE, and are willing to allow for chainswords and boltguns taken together (not likely I know but it'd help) CSMs could be, points depending, a reasonably decent choice. Let's examine a hypothetical CSM vs Intercessor under these rules for a moment.
Intercessor: S4 T4 2W 3+ save boltrifle: S4 -1 AP, rapid rife 1. 2 melee attacks at AP 0
CSM: S4 T4 2W 3+ save. Boltgun S4 AP 0 rapid fire 1. 3 Melee attacks at AP -1.
so you'd have an army with inferior shooting, but superior Melee (heck 3 S4 ap -1 melee attacks would make CSMs a better melee unit then some armies assault units)
(assuming they don't get the chainsword, yeah CSMs are just going to be intercessors without the boltrifle at best.. not great and they'll proably be about 16-17 PPM..)
BTW I'm going to make a guess that the black legion trait in the 9th edition codex will be +1 Leadership and the ability to act as if they ahd remained stationary when moving or advancing. Seems it'd retain the feel of what black legion was attempting to do in their 8th codex, and it'll be a pretty nice boost.
I don't understand how FB are outclassed. For they same cost you can have a guy with a grav cannon or plasma gun and have more utility with the same durability and less melee.
I think we see selection bias, because people like new models with a cohesive theme.
It's the strategems. Intercessors can fight twice, shoot twice, auto-wound on 6s to hit in melee, and most importantly, only be wounded on a 4+ (which kinda means you aren't getting the same durability like you said). And TACs can, uhhhh....get a 66% chance to do 2d3 MWs on a vehicle if they get stuck in melee with one? Did I miss anything?
They can also take a heavy weapon and use the Heavy bolter and missle launcher stratagems. Nothing as good as fighting or shooting twice.
Intercessors are just a bargain compared to a tac. For 2 points you get +1 attack and a better stock weapon.
4000+
6000+ Order. Unity. Obedience.
Thousand Sons 4000+
I don't care if someone else wants to use daemons in their Night Lords army, or Mark them to the moon. I just don't want it to be a requirement to make 
