127 replies to this topic

[Lexington]

*Looks at Thunderwolves*

Sure, a dragon in the 40K Chaos Codex, why not.

That's not a helpful comparison!

[Tanith Ghost]

I suppose a dreadnought could be labeled a "daemonic engine" with some generic rules for all models of that type. Keeps the dreadnaught while making it no longer a "dreadnaught". GW has had it for CSM dreads for a long time; if the rules keep sucking and the defiler also becomes a daemonic engine, there's not much difference at first glance.

There really is between BS 3 and BS 4. Hitting the broad side of a barn (possession) or your own rhino's rear (dreadnought).....

[Captain Idaho]

*Looks at Thunderwolves*

Sure, a dragon in the 40K Chaos Codex, why not.

That's not a helpful comparison!

I know.

[Scribe of Khorne]

This talk of a generic 'Daemon Engine' unit entry makes no sense. How many Units can share a foot print that is Dread Size, OR Defiler size? They may rename the Dread, but it wont be a shared unit entry with things like Defilers, how could they possibly sell that when its been claimed a plastic 'dread' or whatever they are going to call it has already been seen?

[The Red Worm]

I suppose a dreadnought could be labeled a "daemonic engine" with some generic rules for all models of that type. Keeps the dreadnaught while making it no longer a "dreadnaught". GW has had it for CSM dreads for a long time; if the rules keep sucking and the defiler also becomes a daemonic engine, there's not much difference at first glance.

There really is between BS 3 and BS 4. Hitting the broad side of a barn (possession) or your own rhino's rear (dreadnought).....

And yet other armies have a distinct difference in BS even thought he only difference in the models is the weapon load out. I wouldn't be surprised to see all demonic engines have BS3 with medium to heavy armor, especially if daemons disappear.

I'm still thinking these demonic engines will share some attributes while having some minor differences, likely in movement, weapon options, and armor value/save.

Just my thinking, not backed by anything other than FW releases,GW's trend of adding new units/models to recent codexes, and the general trend of adding stuff just to add stuff rather than fulfilling any codex shortcomings.

[Evil eyeball]

If the rumors are true, I will not be able to field my chaos army.

I play thousand sons and YES I OWN Ahriman, but NO I REFUSE to use him MY ARMY Hates what he stands for, I have a counts as one too but i'd hate to be locked into 1 HQ choice.

[Captain Idaho]

It is a little frustrating to lock every player into the same old HQ choice. Hopefully GW will learn one day and encourage players to customise their own HQ choices by creating choices which are really diverse and can pay points to select certain army builds or traits.

[feuer_faust]

I've got a much better idea for a starter set match-up: Chaos vs Eldar. It makes piles of sense fluff-wise, and would rock the boat just a little.

[MagicMan]

I'd like Chaos Vs Eldar.


For two of the biggest players in the universe, they've seen very little love. It'd be a cool little set, too.

[The Red Worm]

It is a little frustrating to lock every player into the same old HQ choice. Hopefully GW will learn one day and encourage players to customise their own HQ choices by creating choices which are really diverse and can pay points to select certain army builds or traits.

I agree with your thinking, but isn't the current Codex: Space Marines more or less 'locking' players into a specific HQ choice if they want their army to play a certain way? I'm trying not to troll, but I'm struggling to see how different this rumored HQ structure differs from what Codex: SM players have now. Is the main contention the points costs for said HQs, legion dreamers wanting to play without a big name HQ, or something else? I hear refrains of "I don't want to take a 250 point character to play legion X", but aren't most named characters already taken over generic HQs in the loyalist codexes?

For the record, I play Codex: Blood Angels. Nobody ever takes the Captain. They'll take a named character, a reclusiarch or librarian (which tends to be better than the reclusiarch).

[DarkGuard]

It's certainly no different to how it's done. But there's some of us who wish it was different, and more in line with what Idaho said, I'm certainly one of them.

I suppose the thing is if that's how the Chaos Codex is going it means we're going to have to dream a little longer.

Edited by DarkGuard, 01 May 2012 - 03:00 PM.
grammar

[Kol_Saresk]

I believe the inherent mentality regarding people wanting to play a certain way was the Legions players telling everyone to deal with count-as. At least that's how it was in the Chaos Rumors thread. And since I don't plan on taking any of the Special Armies, I'm staying with my Night Lords(read as Black Legion count-as since I'm not playing a Raptor Legion) so oh well. Count-as for everyone.

But still, these daemon machines can only go so far before they start getting ridiculous a dragon(-like) flyer is pushing the limit. Actually I'd say it's the straw that broke the camel's back.

If we have to have an answer to the Grey Knights, give us Kai Guns and Daemon weapons that won't kill us like what they have.

And what are we supposed to call a Dreadnought other than a Dreadnought? The Roadblock?

[Tanith Ghost]

And yet other armies have a distinct difference in BS even thought he only difference in the models is the weapon load out. I wouldn't be surprised to see all demonic engines have BS3 with medium to heavy armor, especially if daemons disappear.

I'm still thinking these demonic engines will share some attributes while having some minor differences, likely in movement, weapon options, and armor value/save.

Just my thinking, not backed by anything other than FW releases,GW's trend of adding new units/models to recent codexes, and the general trend of adding stuff just to add stuff rather than fulfilling any codex shortcomings.

I'm sorry I don't really understand you. Dreadnoughts are piloted by a marine, near death yes, but still a marine. Daemon engines are piloted by? Daemons! That's right. So having BS 3 for a dreadnought would be like sticking up a certain finger to chaos. Oh wait, they've been doing that to chaos dreads for a long time. Silly me.

If they did do something like give daemon engines heavy armor that'd be kinda cool, but so far it's been light-medium armor. Which gets eaten alive by loyalist BS 4 or even 5 counterparts.

If the daemon engine thing is true, which I hope and doubt is, then it's just another ploy by GW for more money. The whole bigger model more money thing.

[The Red Worm]

@Tanith Ghost:

I also play Tau and Eldar (well I did until 5th edition). Both armies use vehicles that are pretty much the same, only the BS and weapon load out differs. The heavy support options have BS4, the troop transports; BS3. That's what I mean by saying there is precedent for pretty much identical models to have different BS values.

I believe daemonic possession makes the BS3, which essentially would make the vehicle a "daemonic engine" of sorts. While I agree that chaos dreads have been cited as being run by an old entombed CSM, I don't see why GW would need to stick with this in a new codex.

Frankly, I don't see how making a dread BS3 is any less of "sticking a certain finger to chaos" than the current and past rules for chaos dreads nor the fact that the chaos dread model hasn't changed since the second edition codex (and it was an eyesore back then too). I think I'd rather have BS3 and not worry about shooting or assaulting my own guys than keep BS4 and maintain random rules. To each his own, but I do hope you understand what I am saying.

@DarkGuard and Captain Idaho: I totally understand and respect that viewpoint. Whether the powers that be at GW agree or not, is something else.

@Kol_Saresk: I'm guessing that if you showed 100 non-players a pic of the Chaos Decimator and a pic of the Chaos Dreadnaught, 80+% would say they're the same model. Putting the same pics in front of 100 wargamers, most would say they are from the same unit type. I'm just saying that GW could easily make dreads fall into the same 'class' of models as defilers, decimators, etc. Think of daemonic engines similar to 'infantry', 'jump infantry', 'jet pack infantry' or 'cavalry' rather than a specific unit.

Again, just my thoughts. Thanks for the explanations.

[Tanith Ghost]

It's "sticking the finger" to those of us who have made up our own fluff about dreads and converted them from loyalist ones.

With regular Eldar I'm not that familiar. The vehicles are usually more elite than the Dire Avengers though aren't they?

I'd rather keep BS 4 and just lose the random insanity, which wouldn't be hard to do. Just make people pay an extra 10 points or so for sanity or 10 points for insanity, whatever floats your boat. I understand what you're saying, but you don't understand me I don't think. That's alright though kinda hard for me to get the meaning across sometimes.

[Artein]

And since I don't plan on taking any of the Special Armies, I'm staying with my Night Lords(read as Black Legion count-as since I'm not playing a Raptor Legion) so oh well. Count-as for everyone.

That's not count-as. You're playing Chaos Space Marines. Painting generic CSM units as Night Lords does not make them count-as.

[Tanith Ghost]

That's not count-as. You're playing Chaos Space Marines. Painting generic CSM units as Night Lords does not make them count-as.

No? What does it make them?

[Ethrion]

That's not count-as. You're playing Chaos Space Marines. Painting generic CSM units as Night Lords does not make them count-as.

No? What does it make them?

It makes them chaos space marines... which is the book you're using, hence that isn't "counts as". A "counts as" army would be painting your army Night Lords and then using the Blood Angel codex. Or painting a Thousand Sons army and then using the Grey Knights codex.

[MagicMan]

If the HQ unlocking rumour is true, I don't see anything wrong with Counts-As characters...


You want to have an all beserker army, and need to take Kharn, but don't want your army to actually be led by him? Use his awesome rules to represent your own Khornate lord of your own devising. Seems cool to me.


I doubt its true, anyway..

[Tanith Ghost]

That's not count-as. You're playing Chaos Space Marines. Painting generic CSM units as Night Lords does not make them count-as.

No? What does it make them?

It makes them chaos space marines... which is the book you're using, hence that isn't "counts as". A "counts as" army would be painting your army Night Lords and then using the Blood Angel codex. Or painting a Thousand Sons army and then using the Grey Knights codex.

Every "chaos space marine" in the current codex is basically black legion. That's where he got the counts as from. The undivided guys (Mostly legion warbands but a few renegade ones too) got the shaft.

I'd rather have counts as characters then daemon-engine-zilla which the rumors keep going on about.

[The Red Worm]

I'd prefer to not have random rules too. I used to laugh *and* groan playing first and second edition and watching Ork bikers blow themselves up. Chaos has always had random rules. In 3.5 that seemed to go away a bit (or at least not affect most lists as much), but like Possessed who roll their abilities after deployment, I don't think the current GW developers want to move away from random stuff in Chaos. I admit it is poor rules design, but for GW chaos=random seems to be a mantra.

I learned a long time ago if you don't like random rules, don't play Chaos or Ork books. Ever.

[Deus Ex Ferrum]

I'd prefer to not have random rules too. I used to laugh *and* groan playing first and second edition and watching Ork bikers blow themselves up. Chaos has always had random rules. In 3.5 that seemed to go away a bit (or at least not affect most lists as much), but like Possessed who roll their abilities after deployment, I don't think the current GW developers want to move away from random stuff in Chaos. I admit it is poor rules design, but for GW chaos=random seems to be a mantra.

I learned a long time ago if you don't like random rules, don't play Chaos or Ork books. Ever.

Yeah, but there's ways of doing it properly. For instance; Possessed rolls? Bad. It's a decent assault unit, but the various USRs they can pull vary widely in how good they are and in some cases end up benefitting the player not one bit. Now the Eye of the Gods table from Fantasy? Perfect use of random (ie, dice roll) effect. It doesn't affect army building or deployment, it only comes into play once play has commenced and it has both good and bad things on it.

The whole Dreadnought-crazy-roll was always unnecessary.

[Artein]

Every "chaos space marine" in the current codex is basically black legion.

Nope?

A basic grunt from Black Legion is the same as one from Night Lords or Iron Warriors or Word Bearers.... Same gear. Same abilities.
Sure, it's a bit simplified but we're operating on 1-10 characteristics' scores so it's obvious that many things will be simplified.

[Tanith Ghost]

You might think so. But there are a great many more people who would disagree with you. Me being one of them. Same stats, same gear yes but if you want to be able to play some specific faction of chaos and now counts as "black legion", you should be able to. Example give them a veteran skill or a specific ability. Difficult? For GW and some players apparantley it is.

[DarkGuard]

If the HQ unlocking rumour is true, I don't see anything wrong with Counts-As characters...


You want to have an all beserker army, and need to take Kharn, but don't want your army to actually be led by him? Use his awesome rules to represent your own Khornate lord of your own devising. Seems cool to me.


I doubt its true, anyway..

But then your counts as character is exactly the same as Kharn in every way that matters on the board. When I run my counts as characters I never refer to them in the middle of a game with the name I gave them, but with the name of the character they are pretending to be. So they still aren't unique.

But here's conundrum, I want a Captain with relic blade, storm shield and Stubborn to represent my army, but can't take that. The closest character is Vulkan, but that's still not my character. The 4th Ed Codex for Marines let you do something like that, 5th Ed changed and simplified it. And that seems to be the direction with the new Chaos Codex. Which is a shame.