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.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Balance had to be made for gaining a wound. I know someone is going to immediately reply and say 20 model blobs weren't a problem, but at 40 wounds they would be a problem.

Dudeface wrote:
Almost like you agree that a buffed large wound heavy blob is durable and hard to remove, much like the point you were laughing at?

If we accept the following statements:
(A) 9th edition is the power creep edition. The later the codex the more powerful it is.
(B) There are already several examples in 9th edition of 40 wound units.

It seems entirely logical that we can conclude that:
(C) There is no real reason to cap Legionaries at 10 for balance or gameplay reasons. That ship sailed a long time ago.

Black Templar Crusaders - not broken OP.
Tau Crisis Suits - broken OP currently but fixable with a points increase.
CSM Legionaries - if they are broken OP will also be fixable with a points increase.

Possessed:
M9 S5, T5, 5A, 3W, 3+, 5++
S[USER], AP-2, D2

Interesting statline when you think about it. A 30pts Skorpekh Destroyer is M8 S5 T5 3A 3W 3+. It lacks the invulnerable. SDs weapons are either +1A AP3 D2 or +2S AP4 D3. Possesed are AP2 D2. Both WS3 but SDs have re-roll 1s to hit. Both CORE, INFANTRY. So if they come in at 30 points per model I think with two psychic trees and the dark apostle buffs, better chapter tactics than Necrons, better command protocols, then they should be very good.

I do think if CSM are going to power creep earlier codexes it will be via their unique datasheets, so Daemonkin and Daemon Engines.

The other area for power creep will be if Marks of Chaos are undercosted. So Legionaries might be as weak as Intercessors currently in terms of points to raw stats, but Marks might be so cheap they put the unit back into OP territory.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Anything that can have that many buffs is going to be a problem. Here's hoping that WOMBO COMBO is massively toned down for CSM. The only combo that should matter is what you get when you combine (X) unit + (Y) Mark.

I'll challenge you on the anything. Force multipliers multiply based on bodies. Two or three battlesuits would not be so problematic as five.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Anything that can have that many buffs is going to be a problem. Here's hoping that WOMBO COMBO is massively toned down for CSM. The only combo that should matter is what you get when you combine (X) unit + (Y) Mark.

I'll challenge you on the anything. Force multipliers multiply based on bodies. Two or three battlesuits would not be so problematic as five.

Possibly, but people will obviously take "enough" to be a problem. And I'd much rather limit the number of buffs that units can have applied to them than start cutting squad sizes. Which would you prefer?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:


Mark of Nurgle ability: -1 to wound only IF S=T or S/2>=T. ( Ok, can anyone translate "S/2>=T" ?)

But whyyyyyy ?! I mean, I'm all for creative rules but damn ! How come Space Marines (which are obviously the base for our rules) get "if your unit is <thing> spend CP to -1 to wound" while we get this ?
That's the same hammer but used with boxing gloves. It adds nothing !

As we say in France "Pourquoi faire simple quand on peut faire compliqué ?". Guess the design team took it to heart

EightFoldPath wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Balance had to be made for gaining a wound. I know someone is going to immediately reply and say 20 model blobs weren't a problem, but at 40 wounds they would be a problem.

Dudeface wrote:
Almost like you agree that a buffed large wound heavy blob is durable and hard to remove, much like the point you were laughing at?

If we accept the following statements:
(A) 9th edition is the power creep edition. The later the codex the more powerful it is.
(B) There are already several examples in 9th edition of 40 wound units.

It seems entirely logical that we can conclude that:
(C) There is no real reason to cap Legionaries at 10 for balance or gameplay reasons. That ship sailed a long time ago.

Black Templar Crusaders - not broken OP.
Tau Crisis Suits - broken OP currently but fixable with a points increase.
CSM Legionaries - if they are broken OP will also be fixable with a points increase.

Other stuff is broken so it's fine if this is broken is not great logic.

Regards codex creep tell that to tsons and gsc.

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:


Mark of Nurgle ability: -1 to wound only IF S=T or S/2>=T. ( Ok, can anyone translate "S/2>=T" ?)

But whyyyyyy ?! I mean, I'm all for creative rules but damn ! How come Space Marines (which are obviously the base for our rules) get "if your unit is <thing> spend CP to -1 to wound" while we get this ?
That's the same hammer but used with boxing gloves. It adds nothing !

As we say in France "Pourquoi faire simple quand on peut faire compliqué ?". Guess the design team took it to heart

As I keep reminding everyone: according to Clockworkchris' source, ALL OF THIS INFORMATION IS COMING FROM EARLY PLAYTEST RULES. So, it's entirely possible that they hadn't gotten the wording "quite right" in the rules yet. It may work differently in the final version. Or not. It is gw, after all.

Exactly what gadzilla said. What i get from this is we are getting a -1 to wound ability. When it is applied might be subject to change.

 clockworkchris9 wrote:
Exactly what gadzilla said. What i get from this is we are getting a -1 to wound ability. When it is applied might be subject to change.

To be fair I'm more confused then anything. But yeah, let's hope so.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Anything that can have that many buffs is going to be a problem. Here's hoping that WOMBO COMBO is massively toned down for CSM. The only combo that should matter is what you get when you combine (X) unit + (Y) Mark.

I'll challenge you on the anything. Force multipliers multiply based on bodies. Two or three battlesuits would not be so problematic as five.

Possibly, but people will obviously take "enough" to be a problem. And I'd much rather limit the number of buffs that units can have applied to them than start cutting squad sizes. Which would you prefer?

Fair. Part of it comes down to Abaddon and ignore morale. If that stays in the 20 mans would be hard to get right especially if they get the firstborn discount.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Anything that can have that many buffs is going to be a problem. Here's hoping that WOMBO COMBO is massively toned down for CSM. The only combo that should matter is what you get when you combine (X) unit + (Y) Mark.

I'll challenge you on the anything. Force multipliers multiply based on bodies. Two or three battlesuits would not be so problematic as five.

Possibly, but people will obviously take "enough" to be a problem. And I'd much rather limit the number of buffs that units can have applied to them than start cutting squad sizes. Which would you prefer?

Fair. Part of it comes down to Abaddon and ignore morale. If that stays in the 20 mans would be hard to get right especially if they get the firstborn discount.

Huh? I wasn't arguing for/against the new squad limit for "Legionaries", I was arguing against the absolutely ridiculous amount of buffs that the rules currently allow people to stack on their units. It is beyond out of hand, and if gw ever expects to return any sort of semblance of "balance" to the game, it needs to be reigned in.

 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:
But whyyyyyy ?! I mean, I'm all for creative rules but damn ! How come Space Marines (which are obviously the base for our rules) get "if your unit is <thing> spend CP to -1 to wound" while we get this? That's the same hammer but used with boxing gloves. It adds nothing !

Because Codices are written in a vaccum. That's why each one has new concepts/mechanics that make you scratch your head.

If I gotta do that sorta math when playing the game, I just won't use Mark of Nurgle on anything, no matter how good it may or may not be.

I dig wombo combos sometimes, but there's a limit to what I'll tolerate. The whole wombo-combo grenade strat that the Death Guard with one of their characters gets is pretty neat. It's relatively straightforward, needing a strat or two and a character being within a certain range.

The more clarifications, restrictions, math, or other things you have to consider, the worse that wombo-combo is.

drbored wrote:
If I gotta do that sorta math when playing the game, I just won't use Mark of Nurgle on anything, no matter how good it may or may not be.

The wording is... wordy, but the game effect is simple (and doesn't really involve math on the fly). If strength is more than toughness, than it wounds on a 3+. Otherwise it wounds on a 5+. That's it.

Voss wrote:
No idea why you'd expect the chaos codex in the Adepticon preview. I mean, absolutely none.

This aged well didn't it Voss.

Woo. So daemon cultists, I'm guessing possessed wings, and no clue about the rest.

"I didn't ask for this." Horus

Well...upside the Tzeentch and Nurgle marks aren't actually better than Khorne and Slaanesh... Balance!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting, the 2W Legionnaire stat line only have 2 attacks not the rumored 3. but its Warhammer community they probably just Photoshop'd in the 2W.

 Sersi wrote:
"I didn't ask for this." Horus

Well...upside the Tzeentch and Nurgle marks aren't actually better than Khorne and Slaanesh... Balance!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting, the 2W Legionnaire stat line only have 2 attacks not the rumored 3. but its Warhammer community they probably just Photoshop'd in the 2W.

Maybe? But it also had the buffed Leadership of 8 for the Legionaries, and 9 for the Aspiring Champion. If it is 2A, and we lose Hateful Assault as expected, then we'll be behind loyalists in melee. That ain't right.

Edit: And bolters, bolt pistols, and chainswords are exactly as they are currently. So worse in melee and at shooting than Cawl's overgrown goons.

 Gert wrote:

Voss wrote:
No idea why you'd expect the chaos codex in the Adepticon preview. I mean, absolutely none.

This aged well didn't it Voss.

Yep. A picture of a statline and a jumble of pics is definitely the codex.
Was it a nice surprise? Sure.

But lets look at the full quote, shall we:

No idea why you'd expect the chaos codex in the Adepticon preview. I mean, absolutely none. They're in mid-hype about the tyranid book, and rumors point to knights before marines (and said rumormonger has been reliable to a fault so far). At best, I expect a short roadmap of the next three codex releases, but only a vague mention by super faction (imperial, chaos, xenos)

Hmmm, weird.
They did exceed my expectations, but only by a little.

Teaser at the end can be literally anything, so calling this a Chaos Codex announcement, or expecting it to appear, would've been a stretch.

Voss wrote:

 Gert wrote:

Voss wrote:
No idea why you'd expect the chaos codex in the Adepticon preview. I mean, absolutely none.

This aged well didn't it Voss.

Yep. A picture of a statline and a jumble of pics is definitely the codex.
Was it a nice surprise? Sure.

But lets look at the full quote, shall we:

No idea why you'd expect the chaos codex in the Adepticon preview. I mean, absolutely none. They're in mid-hype about the tyranid book, and rumors point to knights before marines (and said rumormonger has been reliable to a fault so far). At best, I expect a short roadmap of the next three codex releases, but only a vague mention by super faction (imperial, chaos, xenos)

Hmmm, weird.
They did exceed my expectations, but only by a little.

Credit where it's due; this is solid spin on being almost completely wrong.

Is he wrong though? Why would anyone expect the Chaos Codex? It's not the next book. It's not even the book after that (or the one after that, as it turns out).

Generally GW previews one thing per game system. BB got a team. Underworld got a Warband. Necromunda got the next box. Horus Heresy almost got a product reveal, and to make up for that AoS got 2 ( ). 40k got Knights, and amazingly, both books, probably because they're coming out at the same time.

How or why should anyone expect more than that, given GW's track record? Remember that one time the Kill-Team preview that was a silly little trailer that showed sweet feth all and maybe hinted at Flayed Ones? Yeah, they're experts at at showing nothing. Expectations go out the window.

I expected a tease because there's not much time left to fit in what is "known" from the leaked schedule for 40k. Not the full Codex but something that would give an indication of an imminent (global issues aside) release. With Nids and the Knights up next that takes us to May for 40k releases which means CSM would have to be June to avoid a clash with HH which has now clearly been pushed back alongside the rest of the 40k schedule.

If we match up a few of the things to the previous rumors of what's coming, then there's my predictions.

New units rumored: New Chaos Cultist unit, Chaos Cultist HQ with bodyguard, Chaos Cultist Icon Bearer, Chaos Marine Possessed, Chaos Marine Bikers, and Chaos Cultist Mutated.


-Chaos Biker. Only unit with a normal-looking face/chest/shoulder chaos marine.


-Could be the chaos bodyguard, an icon-bearer in the Cultist unit, or an icon that the Possessed can take.


-Chaos Cultist


-Possessed


-Rumored Cultist Icon bearer, the fanciest icon we've seen so far.


-Possessed - it's got a normal-looking hand but a very weird looking kneepad.


-Possessed - a backpack vent with an eye perhaps?


-Rumored mutated cultists that were supposed to be 'monstrously horrible' according to rumors. Fits the bill.

I'm hoping that we get a new terminator Lord soon. I like the old model, but it's definitely showing its age.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
I'm hoping that we get a new terminator Lord soon. I like the old model, but it's definitely showing its age.

Be careful what you wish for...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
I'm hoping that we get a new terminator Lord soon. I like the old model, but it's definitely showing its age.

Be careful what you wish for...

No kidding. They don't make em like that anymore. Coolest chainfist in the game too.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Sersi wrote:
"I didn't ask for this." Horus

Well...upside the Tzeentch and Nurgle marks aren't actually better than Khorne and Slaanesh... Balance!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting, the 2W Legionnaire stat line only have 2 attacks not the rumored 3. but its Warhammer community they probably just Photoshop'd in the 2W.

Maybe? But it also had the buffed Leadership of 8 for the Legionaries, and 9 for the Aspiring Champion. If it is 2A, and we lose Hateful Assault as expected, then we'll be behind loyalists in melee. That ain't right.

Edit: And bolters, bolt pistols, and chainswords are exactly as they are currently. So worse in melee and at shooting than Cawl's overgrown goons.

Confirms the 5-10 cap as well and power level 6 is about 120, so points for 2 wounds are about right.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
I'm hoping that we get a new terminator Lord soon. I like the old model, but it's definitely showing its age.

Yeah agreed. I'd prioritise a power armoured lord ala Autarch/Canoness as the priority though

Dudeface wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Sersi wrote:
"I didn't ask for this." Horus

Well...upside the Tzeentch and Nurgle marks aren't actually better than Khorne and Slaanesh... Balance!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting, the 2W Legionnaire stat line only have 2 attacks not the rumored 3. but its Warhammer community they probably just Photoshop'd in the 2W.

Maybe? But it also had the buffed Leadership of 8 for the Legionaries, and 9 for the Aspiring Champion. If it is 2A, and we lose Hateful Assault as expected, then we'll be behind loyalists in melee. That ain't right.

Edit: And bolters, bolt pistols, and chainswords are exactly as they are currently. So worse in melee and at shooting than Cawl's overgrown goons.

Confirms the 5-10 cap as well and power level 6 is about 120, so points for 2 wounds are about right.

Should be noted that Tactical Marines and both kinds of Troop Intercessors are Power Level 5, though this is probably just GW putting the cost of marks and icons into the base PL of the Legionaires and not a sign that they'll have a higher base cost than Intercessors

drbored wrote:
If we match up a few of the things to the previous rumors of what's coming, then there's my predictions.

New units rumored: New Chaos Cultist unit, Chaos Cultist HQ with bodyguard, Chaos Cultist Icon Bearer, Chaos Marine Possessed, Chaos Marine Bikers, and Chaos Cultist Mutated.

Spoiler:

-Chaos Biker. Only unit with a normal-looking face/chest/shoulder chaos marine.

Spoiler:

-Could be the chaos bodyguard, an icon-bearer in the Cultist unit, or an icon that the Possessed can take.

Spoiler:

-Chaos Cultist

Spoiler:

-Possessed

Spoiler:

-Rumored Cultist Icon bearer, the fanciest icon we've seen so far.

Spoiler:

-Possessed - it's got a normal-looking hand but a very weird looking kneepad.

Spoiler:

-Possessed - a backpack vent with an eye perhaps?

Spoiler:

-Rumored mutated cultists that were supposed to be 'monstrously horrible' according to rumors. Fits the bill.

Thanks for the overview ! I agree with you except for the hand holding the helmet. I'd say it's from the biker kit !