Black and White Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 Really Renegades should have been a different codex from the other legions. Yes there maybe be too many marine codexs out there but you know why? They sell. They out sell all armies put together! So don't whine that there are too many. Space marines keeps GW going. It's jsut the fact we had a codex just like DA, BA, and SW and it was taken away. Soon Salamanders, RG, and IH, and IF will have the same thing done to them a bit. Though they have less to loose than we did. I can only hope that the will at least do something like the old Lost and the Dammed book. So a Tzeentch/Nurgle codex and a Khorne/Slaanesh codex. Of course that won't help me get my Alpha Legion back. Werd. Back in index astartes, the legion special rules were like what A PAGE at most? How the hell hard is it to add another measly 8 pages to keep the legions with some flavour. Same goes for IF, sallies, ect... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stella Cadente Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 i am however in favour of balancing the army, though why that meant killing off individuality i dont know... Can't see how this kills off individuality. Really, if anything, it makes room for far more individuality. Unfortunately for GW, their new design ideas put the responsibility for creating unique armies in the hands of its players, who seemingly can't do anything without Papa GW holding their hand. Seriously, this isn't hard, guys. Want to play Word Bearers? Paint your army red with silver trim, and make up some Chaplain-style Lords. Heck, take lots of Daemons if you must acknowledge that frakkin' silly idea of the Children of Lorgar as the Daemon Legion. There. You're set. Want to take Iron Warriors? You've got Vindicators. You've got Havocs. You've got (unrestricted!) Obliterators. Go wild, kids! If you need instructions on how to properly work out a World Eaters list, then you are beyond my help. No, the problem people are having isn't a lack of individuality, it's a lack of specific, unmistakable directions on how to stratify a single army list in order to get game-based advantages. Lord knows that we can't be expected to restrict our army choices without specific incentives to do so. We need our armies to be special, GW! I can't be expected to make the army I want to make if it's not going to make me win more! You mean I have to compete with other players without my beloved, boring, easily-exploited crutch? God, the inhumanity of it all. I didn't get into wargames to make tactical decisions. I got into them to win, dammit! When I say that the genericizing of 40K will be its savior, I don't mean that it'll reverse the plummeting GW sales figures. What I mean is that it will root out the unimaginative, the power-grabby and the infantile, and maybe leave me with a player base worth playing against. I have to agree 100000% you've just pointed out that people can still easily make themed armies by just using there BRAINS, the problem is its not easy for many Chaos players to think for themselves. as a ex Chaos player (the last rulebook was terrible I hated its stupidity more than I hated the players) the new Rulebook is bringing me back to chaos because it is the perfect Codex, it is what people like me want, people who don't mind thinking for themselves on how to make themes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black and White Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 i am however in favour of balancing the army, though why that meant killing off individuality i dont know... Can't see how this kills off individuality. Really, if anything, it makes room for far more individuality. Unfortunately for GW, their new design ideas put the responsibility for creating unique armies in the hands of its players, who seemingly can't do anything without Papa GW holding their hand. Seriously, this isn't hard, guys. Want to play Word Bearers? Paint your army red with silver trim, and make up some Chaplain-style Lords. Heck, take lots of Daemons if you must acknowledge that frakkin' silly idea of the Children of Lorgar as the Daemon Legion. There. You're set. Want to take Iron Warriors? You've got Vindicators. You've got Havocs. You've got (unrestricted!) Obliterators. Go wild, kids! If you need instructions on how to properly work out a World Eaters list, then you are beyond my help. No, the problem people are having isn't a lack of individuality, it's a lack of specific, unmistakable directions on how to stratify a single army list in order to get game-based advantages. Lord knows that we can't be expected to restrict our army choices without specific incentives to do so. We need our armies to be special, GW! I can't be expected to make the army I want to make if it's not going to make me win more! You mean I have to compete with other players without my beloved, boring, easily-exploited crutch? God, the inhumanity of it all. I didn't get into wargames to make tactical decisions. I got into them to win, dammit! When I say that the genericizing of 40K will be its savior, I don't mean that it'll reverse the plummeting GW sales figures. What I mean is that it will root out the unimaginative, the power-grabby and the infantile, and maybe leave me with a player base worth playing against. I have to agree 100000% you've just pointed out that people can still easily make themed armies by just using there BRAINS, the problem is its not easy for many Chaos players to think for themselves. as a ex Chaos player (the last rulebook was terrible I hated its stupidity more than I hated the players) the new Rulebook is bringing me back to chaos because it is the perfect Codex, it is what people like me want, people who don't mind thinking for themselves on how to make themes. So people who don't like being restricted to berzkers and Khârn + vechles if they want to play pure world eaters are stupid? Gee, thanks. I can 'counts as' my terminators as berzkers and my lord as a world eater, but that's still lame. I can shorten the barrell of my basilisk and 'counts as' a vindicator, but that dosen't mean it dosent suck both my balls. It dosen't take brains to make a themed army. Just give everyone an icon of X god, or take max heavy support, or 3 big units of raptors + put everything in rhinos, but you're still just red corsairs with a different paint job. The fact that any differentation between many established and unique legions was passed up is rather infuriating. Even a single page with simplified legion rules would at least have been -acceptable-. Something at least to differentiate the world eaters from astral claws with a khorne theme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combat Engineer Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 Bravo B&W! You smacked the loyalist right on the head: Even a single page with simplified legion rules would at least have been -acceptable-. Something at least to differentiate the world eaters from astral claws with a khorne theme. Chaos Cult and Legion players aren't looking for GW to make a army for them. They are looking for that extra little bit to signify that yes, my legion is fill in blank. This could have been done in two, maybe three pages of the new 'dex. I know I could have lived without the aweful looking new Renegade paint schemes :down:. Mat :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Stalker Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 I have to agree with Stella Cadente. i hate stupid "i want my basilisk and 4th heavy support back" rant. Grow up. @Combat Engineer:you cant do it by army composition ? after all say Iron Warriors marines arent uber haxxorz siege specialist - are they better? yes. it is enought to justify that every single marine can blow bunkers? hell, no! they just use right tools(weapons, armour) and strategy. FoC is flexible enought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maladon Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 I have to agree with Stella Cadente. i hate stupid "i want my basilisk and 4th heavy support back" rant. Grow up. @Combat Engineer:you cant do it by army composition ? after all say Iron Warriors marines arent uber haxxorz siege specialist - are they better? yes. it is enought to justify that every single marine can blow bunkers? hell, no! they just use right tools(weapons, armour) and strategy. FoC is flexible enought. Damn, I totally agree with you on that middle statement! Simple response that seems to resound on this forums, if you don't like the codex don't play Chaos, or Dark Angels or even the Blood Angels... its just that simple! Though the rumors about the Necrons are looking more evil and making them a legitamate Robot army ever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lexington Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 I can 'counts as' my terminators as berzkers and my lord as a world eater, but that's still lame. I'm not sure how it's "lame." Your Lord wasn't necessarily a Berzerker in the old rules, either. He was a Lord with the Mark of Khorne. The difference between your Lord, Termies, Bikers, etc. and the Berzerkers is the lack of Furious Charge. The fact that they're (hopefully) modelled up in 'Zerker gear isn't enough for you? I can shorten the barrell of my basilisk and 'counts as' a vindicator, but that dosen't mean it dosent suck both my balls. :D Dude, where do you shop, again? My Basilisks are obviously missing some options... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combat Engineer Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 Mind what I said: extra little bit. I am not saying add new choices to the codex. No extra FA, HS or anything like that. All I am saying is reward/ penalize players who are interested in doing a Cult or Undivided Legion with either one or two rules, or maybe a piece of Wargear ala Servo Arm for IW players (as this seems to be the example army.). I have no wish to see Basilisks come back or extra choices on the FOC. Yeah it sucks that a crap load of people bought a crap load of basilisks, but there are a crap load of players that bought a crap load of now, IMO, useless daemons The four marked cults could have been done quite easy is my big point. A World eaters Lord would have the same stats as a World eaters marine according to the new Codex, or a Death Guard Daemon Prince to Plague marines etc..... As for waiting on the Codex: Damons, I would not get my hopes up to much. While I am not impressed with the new codex, it will not stop me from playing and growing into it. Mat :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Stalker Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 i suspect that Forgeworld will give us rules for every legion and every one will be happy. me - as FW things are not allowed at mine tournament scene and GW will not waste their time to balance 9 completely different ruleset. you - as it will make EC, DG, WE, TS, WB, NL, IW, AL armies possible with extra bits and you can build your army to play some casual games with such ruleset (and in tournaments - well you can always play chaos army - it will require only some model swap to make legal army) me again as i'll play some fun games against aforementioned foes. it sucks that daemons are crap now - hopefully 2008 daemon codex will change that (cross fingers) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siphon101 Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 i am however in favour of balancing the army, though why that meant killing off individuality i dont know... Can't see how this kills off individuality. Really, if anything, it makes room for far more individuality. Unfortunately for GW, their new design ideas put the responsibility for creating unique armies in the hands of its players, who seemingly can't do anything without Papa GW holding their hand. Seriously, this isn't hard, guys. Want to play Word Bearers? Paint your army red with silver trim, and make up some Chaplain-style Lords. Heck, take lots of Daemons if you must acknowledge that frakkin' silly idea of the Children of Lorgar as the Daemon Legion. There. You're set. Want to take Iron Warriors? You've got Vindicators. You've got Havocs. You've got (unrestricted!) Obliterators. Go wild, kids! If you need instructions on how to properly work out a World Eaters list, then you are beyond my help. No, the problem people are having isn't a lack of individuality, it's a lack of specific, unmistakable directions on how to stratify a single army list in order to get game-based advantages. Lord knows that we can't be expected to restrict our army choices without specific incentives to do so. We need our armies to be special, GW! I can't be expected to make the army I want to make if it's not going to make me win more! You mean I have to compete with other players without my beloved, boring, easily-exploited crutch? God, the inhumanity of it all. I didn't get into wargames to make tactical decisions. I got into them to win, dammit! When I say that the genericizing of 40K will be its savior, I don't mean that it'll reverse the plummeting GW sales figures. What I mean is that it will root out the unimaginative, the power-grabby and the infantile, and maybe leave me with a player base worth playing against. and that, ladies and gentlemen, is the thread. Seriously, I don't understand it. I don't get it. You want a world eatter army? fine, paint it all in khorne colors, give it all marks of khorne, throw in some berserkers, and DONE. world eatters. If you want, make the squad sacred number multiples, put in the champions, and be done. Why in the WORLD would someone need a dedicated page going "and by the way, here is what you do if you want world eatters". It's idiocy in the extreme. World eatters were dedicated to khorne, you can have a wardband dedicated to khorne. are the rules now making a world eatter army different than what a world eatter army was? Well, yes. It's a new book, new rules. But christ, here's your berserkers, here's your mark of khorne daemon prince/chaos lord, here's your khorne icon bearing troops, here's your sacred number multiplier. There's your world eatters. What, exactly, is the problem? That you know longer have a little page in the back of the book that tells you "yup, that's a world eatter army all right"? That your new world eatter army isn't EXACTLY the same as the old one and doesn't use ALL the same rules? No kidding, it's a new rulebook, why would we keep all the same rules? They changed them for a reason! So what if there isn't a dedicated rule section which, inspite of everyoen's arguing that it would only take "a few more pages", by introducing 9 seperate rule systems, you have to make sure all nine systems are balanced Why do you need a page telling you that it's ok to call your khorne army world eatters? If you want them to be world eatters, they're world eatters! If you want iron warriors, break out the chainmail paint, get your tanks and obliterators together, and you got iron warriors. Every single army can effectively be duplicated (except perhaps for alpha legion, but as lost and the damned rules are still technically legal, you can use some old imperial guard lost and the damned to substitute for cultists) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black and White Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 i am however in favour of balancing the army, though why that meant killing off individuality i dont know... Can't see how this kills off individuality. Really, if anything, it makes room for far more individuality. Unfortunately for GW, their new design ideas put the responsibility for creating unique armies in the hands of its players, who seemingly can't do anything without Papa GW holding their hand. Seriously, this isn't hard, guys. Want to play Word Bearers? Paint your army red with silver trim, and make up some Chaplain-style Lords. Heck, take lots of Daemons if you must acknowledge that frakkin' silly idea of the Children of Lorgar as the Daemon Legion. There. You're set. Want to take Iron Warriors? You've got Vindicators. You've got Havocs. You've got (unrestricted!) Obliterators. Go wild, kids! If you need instructions on how to properly work out a World Eaters list, then you are beyond my help. No, the problem people are having isn't a lack of individuality, it's a lack of specific, unmistakable directions on how to stratify a single army list in order to get game-based advantages. Lord knows that we can't be expected to restrict our army choices without specific incentives to do so. We need our armies to be special, GW! I can't be expected to make the army I want to make if it's not going to make me win more! You mean I have to compete with other players without my beloved, boring, easily-exploited crutch? God, the inhumanity of it all. I didn't get into wargames to make tactical decisions. I got into them to win, dammit! When I say that the genericizing of 40K will be its savior, I don't mean that it'll reverse the plummeting GW sales figures. What I mean is that it will root out the unimaginative, the power-grabby and the infantile, and maybe leave me with a player base worth playing against. and that, ladies and gentlemen, is the thread. Seriously, I don't understand it. I don't get it. You want a world eatter army? fine, paint it all in khorne colors, give it all marks of khorne, throw in some berserkers, and DONE. world eatters. If you want, make the squad sacred number multiples, put in the champions, and be done. Why in the WORLD would someone need a dedicated page going "and by the way, here is what you do if you want world eatters". It's idiocy in the extreme. World eatters were dedicated to khorne, you can have a wardband dedicated to khorne. are the rules now making a world eatter army different than what a world eatter army was? Well, yes. It's a new book, new rules. But christ, here's your berserkers, here's your mark of khorne daemon prince/chaos lord, here's your khorne icon bearing troops, here's your sacred number multiplier. There's your world eatters. What, exactly, is the problem? That you know longer have a little page in the back of the book that tells you "yup, that's a world eatter army all right"? That your new world eatter army isn't EXACTLY the same as the old one and doesn't use ALL the same rules? No kidding, it's a new rulebook, why would we keep all the same rules? They changed them for a reason! So what if there isn't a dedicated rule section which, inspite of everyoen's arguing that it would only take "a few more pages", by introducing 9 seperate rule systems, you have to make sure all nine systems are balanced Why do you need a page telling you that it's ok to call your khorne army world eatters? If you want them to be world eatters, they're world eatters! If you want iron warriors, break out the chainmail paint, get your tanks and obliterators together, and you got iron warriors. Every single army can effectively be duplicated (except perhaps for alpha legion, but as lost and the damned rules are still technically legal, you can use some old imperial guard lost and the damned to substitute for cultists) The above examples are redcosairs/black legion with a theme. Nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Stalker Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 The above examples are redcosairs/black legion with a theme. Nothing more. If you want them to be emperor point sticks with theme - fine. Mine are Night Stalkers - not Black Legion offshot. :) old rules allow not much flexibility. i like freedom of the new rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siphon101 Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 The above examples are redcosairs/black legion with a theme. Nothing more. Exactly. A core chaos list, with a god specific theme, and using troops of that god which have special rules differentiating them from normal troops. Now, tell me, how was that different than what world eatters USED to be? Every single legion was black legion with a theme. Every single one of the 9 legion lists was a core chaos list, utilizing a few special rules that made them a bit different. Well you want special rule units that are a bit different than normal chaos space marines? They're called berserkers, have fun with them. Seriously, do you need a book to tell you that it's ok to call your red army of khorne world eatters? Do you need a book to tell you that it's ok? Why? Why do you need such pointless validation that it's only "ok" to call your world eatter army a world eatter army when the book says it's ok? And more importantly, in the very fluff of the game, world eatters were nothing more than black legion, with a theme. They were chaos space marines, just like all other chaos space marines except: 1) they all worshipped khorne 2) some of them got special lobotomies to make them even more aggressive. Gee, so when you get an entire khorne worshipping army together along with some of those special super soldiers, sure as hell sounds like a world eatter army to me. Seriously, why is it so important to you to get a little page in a book that tells you that it's ok to call your khorne army a world eatter army? What, exactly, do you want? A little rule set to make you feel special? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlâdvar The Destroyer Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 I've had alook through the new dex, being an Iron Warriors player, i was abit disapointed to loose the extra heavy slot & baslisk, but hey with dreads being moved to elite sorta makes that a bit better... also at least with still got the vindicator :) as for the other Iron warrior traits such as servo arm & seige spec... not really bothered about these... never really used either, still keepin my servo arms on my champs though 2 make them stand out :wink: the changes i do i like is that Iron warriors can now use cult troops & have marks/icons... gonna get me a squad of Berzerkers painted in an Iron warrior theme... al-la Storm of iron - Kurger & his cronies (or should that be Khornies :blush:) I also have a death guard army in the pipe line (been there 4 ages now) & a World Eater 1 too, although the new dex ain't great for compeletly cult armies, it'll do 4 now till The 2nd dex comes out... its bound to have the anicent enimes & scared numbers (free champs too hopefully) back, cuz lets face it Reneagde warbands ain't gonna really pay much attention to that kinda stuff... I still find it funny how many people are moaning about the newest dex.... wait till the 2nd 1 comes out people.. if that don't make u happy then do u big whinning posts :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lexington Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 The above examples are redcosairs/black legion with a theme. Nothing more. Eh, your choice, dude. If you really need the rules to specifically tell you what your army is, how it plays, and wall you in to keep it that way, I can't help you, but you're also not going to like 40K very much for the foreseeable future. Me? I'm going to love using my Word Bearers with the new list. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combat Engineer Posted August 14, 2007 Share Posted August 14, 2007 I play for fun, I have gone through every edition for Chaos so far. I have not been happy with all the changes and rules in the past, nor am I happy now, as a good many players are. Certain choices will be removed from my Cult armies, while new ones will be added. I am sure with a few more games with the new `dex I will get right back into it. Funny though. When I started DA, I was not concerned at all with the new Codex. Others at the time were out for blood. Just shows how much I love my CSM armies I guess. Oh, Siphon, not to sound like an ass, but tone it down. You seem a little too excited about this topic. Mat :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gree Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 The above examples are redcosairs/black legion with a theme. Nothing more. Exactly. A core chaos list, with a god specific theme, and using troops of that god which have special rules differentiating them from normal troops. Now, tell me, how was that different than what world eatters USED to be? Every single legion was black legion with a theme. Every single one of the 9 legion lists was a core chaos list, utilizing a few special rules that made them a bit different. Well you want special rule units that are a bit different than normal chaos space marines? They're called berserkers, have fun with them. Seriously, do you need a book to tell you that it's ok to call your red army of khorne world eatters? Do you need a book to tell you that it's ok? Why? Why do you need such pointless validation that it's only "ok" to call your world eatter army a world eatter army when the book says it's ok? And more importantly, in the very fluff of the game, world eatters were nothing more than black legion, with a theme. They were chaos space marines, just like all other chaos space marines except: 1) they all worshipped khorne 2) some of them got special lobotomies to make them even more aggressive. Gee, so when you get an entire khorne worshipping army together along with some of those special super soldiers, sure as hell sounds like a world eatter army to me. Seriously, why is it so important to you to get a little page in a book that tells you that it's ok to call your khorne army a world eatter army? What, exactly, do you want? A little rule set to make you feel special? Again, your're being too insulting. Please try to be civil. If so why can't my lord get furious charge like his lackeys can? Why can't my elite terminatiors of the World Eaters who have fought 10k years in the service of Khorne get WS5? Surely the elites should get that kind of stuff. Why can't my general be a noise marine or bezerker depsite leading an entire army of them? The Astral Claws are a bunch of marines who went tratoir a century ago. The World Eaters are 10k year old vetrens of the long war. There is a world of diffrirence between them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Stalker Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 If so why can't my lord get furious charge like his lackeys can? Why can't my elite terminatiors of the World Eaters who have fought 10k years in the service of Khorne get WS5? Surely the elites should get that kind of stuff. Why can't my general be a noise marine or bezerker depsite leading an entire army of them? The Astral Claws are a bunch of marines who went tratoir a century ago. The World Eaters are 10k year old vetrens of the long war. There is a world of diffrirence between them. you have option for berzerker lord (Khârn - forcing sc is not good but at least you get your choice) you dont have option for berzerker terminator(again - if there will be god related books, which is possible, there for sure be proper daemons, terminaotrs,etc) and you have PA berzerker. you dont have biker berzerker(as terminators, but i doubt that they will do berzerker bikes). Marked Terminators anyway are close in effectivnes to "cult" terminators anyway and bikers - who care ? Cult terminators should exist only in God -related legions - seriously - who will "lend" their veterans of the veteran for 10 bucks to some Pink Marine recently turned traitors ? be sane :) not all WE are 10.000 years old dudes - some are later recruits, some join WE warbands recently. to be clear - it is perfectly possible to play WE now. if ever codex:world eaters will hit the shelves with cult units et cetera it will be "proper" we force. right now chaos codex create good army that might be WE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siphon101 Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 actually I do believe I asked a perfectly legitimate question. Why do want some special world eatter lists other than so you can say that your army is "officially" a world eatter army? it seems to me all the things you mentioned, higher weapon skill, furious charge, it doesn't seem you want your army to be "world eatters", you want your army to be "the one with the advantage". There's nothing that magically transforms an army into a world eatter army other than if you choose to call it so. It seems you want a "world eatter" army to be differentiated in some official rules capacity, and all that comes across as is "I want advantage" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodRed Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 Wow, I think that's the single most insulting post I've ever read on the B&C. You know what? Stick it. Just stick it. I think it's one of the single most true posts. He did a great job of telling it like it is. The only reason to feel insulted is if the shoe fits. Here's another great line from another poster (Siphon): Seriously, why is it so important to you to get a little page in a book that tells you that it's ok to call your khorne army a world eatter army? What, exactly, do you want? A little rule set to make you feel special? it seems to me all the things you mentioned, higher weapon skill, furious charge, it doesn't seem you want your army to be "world eatters", you want your army to be "the one with the advantage". There's nothing that magically transforms an army into a world eatter army other than if you choose to call it so. It seems you want a "world eatter" army to be differentiated in some official rules capacity, and all that comes across as is "I want advantage" I think your diagnosis is accurate. I totally understand people being annoyed when their models aren't usable anymore and have to resort to using them as proxies/counts as, but for the ones where it's just rules changes and no separate page to tell them they can call their army World Eaters or Death Guard, I think a lot of the objections are about lost advantages. Take a Death Guard army for example. You can take a bunch of Plague Marines, a Nurgle lord/DP/Typhus as well as having icon toting troops that get nurglefied. Sure they can loose their icons, but Chaos is fickle (especially to who lose their icon-- what blasphemous failure!) and can withdraw it's power. You can have Death Guard Havocs, Raptors, Bikers, Chosen, Possessed, well, everything. And you can even keep using your daemons even though they are not nearly as strong as they used to be. Great Unclean one can still be summoned. If you don't use them as generic daemons, there's no reason you couldn't use nurgling bases as spawns. The only thing you don't have is a little page saying "Deathguard" at the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gree Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 actually I do believe I asked a perfectly legitimate question. Why do want some special world eatter lists other than so you can say that your army is "officially" a world eatter army? it seems to me all the things you mentioned, higher weapon skill, furious charge, it doesn't seem you want your army to be "world eatters", you want your army to be "the one with the advantage". There's nothing that magically transforms an army into a world eatter army other than if you choose to call it so. It seems you want a "world eatter" army to be differentiated in some official rules capacity, and all that comes across as is "I want advantage" Stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that. So basicly what you are saying is that there is no diffrence between a 10k year old World Eaters lord and a recently turned Astral Claw captain? It makes no sense at all. You are saying that people must be power gamers and cheesemongers if they do not like the new codex. All I have posted is about the fluff. I will happily argue with you about the fluff but do not put words in my mouth and tell me what to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodRed Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 So basicly what you are saying is that there is no diffrence between a 10k year old World Eaters lord and a recently turned Astral Claw captain? It makes no sense at all. Umm. There's no difference in the current/old codex either. I can use the same rules for both there as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siphon101 Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 I think the most important quesiton is "what is a world eatter?" And I don't mean what is their background. Events on the table and events in the stories rarely mimic each other. The question is, in game terms, what is a world eatter? Or, perhaps more importantly, what should differentiate a world eatter army from a a no named list that fields squads of berserkers, units with icons of khorne, and lead by a mark of khorne daemon prince/chaos lord. For an example of fluff lining up to table top experience, Abbadon. Abbadon is a clone of horus. A clone of a primarch. THE primarch. If the whole argument is that world eatters have been around 10k years and shouldn't be the same as a newly fallen marine worshipping chaos...Abbadon is genetically equivalent of a PRIMARCH. He's HORUS' CLONE. To adequately represent that he should probably have straight 10s and a plethora of psychic powers. But he doesn't. Why? Because what is on the table top is rarely exactly what it should be according to the background. And all I've seen so far is not disappointment because you now don't have special rules to make your "world eatters", it's disappointment that they're not better than they are. It doesn't seem to be about liking the background, or the flavor of the legion, because it is certainly possible to make a world eater army in theme and visual. It's that you want your world eater (or death guard, or word bearer, or iron warrior) army to be special and different. In short, just special rules. Something that makes this legion X army different than a black legion army with the same troops. But frankly, that's exactly what broke the last codex in the first place. There is nothing, NOTHING stopping you from creating an army, painting it khornate colors, giving it khornate stuff, using berserkers, and having it be a world eatter army. Nothing at all. You're only stopped from having an overpowered army that's better than another one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lexington Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 So basicly what you are saying is that there is no diffrence between a 10k year old World Eaters lord and a recently turned Astral Claw captain? It makes no sense at all. To be fair, there never has been a difference, as far as Codexes are concerned. You could always make a renegade Chapter, and there's only one Chaos Lord choice. This Codex gets things drastically wrong in that it focuses on the (stupid, stupid) renegades, but in the "Astral Claws vs. Traitor Legions" power differential, it's the same bag as it's ever been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siphon101 Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 So basicly what you are saying is that there is no diffrence between a 10k year old World Eaters lord and a recently turned Astral Claw captain? It makes no sense at all. In a background perspective of COURSE there's a difference between a 10,000 year old world eater's lord and a recently turned captain. Absolutly. The question is whether there should be a game play difference. Because frankly speaking, while there is a difference between a day 1 captain and an original legion 10k old lord, there's also a difference between a 1 day fallen captain, and a lord fallen 3000 years ago. And 6000, and 4000, and one that fell 8000 years ago but only turned to khorne about 1000 years ago. And someone who has been around the whole 10k years but realy wasn't paying attention the first 5k or so. Because as soon as we make distinction between "OK, this is the 10k old fallen guy and this is the new fallen guy" well where's the 5k fallen guy on the table? surely there's a difference there too, that makes no sense, there must be something in between... And all the time, if abaddon really had the stats that a primarch should he'd be invincible and 1000 points all by himself. The warhammer 40k world is massive, and sometimes stuff that's in the background doesn't really match stuff that's on the table. It CAN'T. So yeah, your 10k khorne lord probably, if the world were real, be stronger than the recently turned khorne lord. But there's also 10,000 years of variation and permutation that could occur, and there are 5000 year old lords, and 3000 ones, and 1000 ones, and theoretically they'd ALL be different. At some point you just gotta accept that for simplicity's sake, sometimes what's on the table doesn't reflect the background Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.