After years of waiting...

[Prot]

GW may not design for competitive play, but it’s no excuse as they get feedback from some of the most competitive players on the planet.

 

The first time GW saw Mortarion die to a Blood Angel smash Captain attack on T1 on a Warhammer TV broadcast, they changed deepstrike. There are more (off topic) examples I have of this, but it does go to show they do try to keep competitive play on the table.

 

I think more importantly though is I’ve seen plenty of examples when they want to sell models and a new army codex, GW doesn’t hesitate to change the meta with their ideas.

 

I can sympathize with players feeling like the effort to make models and campaign books, and codexes should result in a little more imagination. (When are they going to move past trying to pair Chaos with morale based tactics?).

 

But on the other hand we see new Termies....great sculpts. Do they want to sell these boxes or not? The existing chaos Termies aren’t bad. I’ve gone through 6 boxes myself on my Chaos armies ( not including DG or TS). That’s a truth, but another truth is I use none of them.

 

Will we see a new weapon sprue? Perhaps a significant change in the April FAQ?

 

Everything I’ve seen so far is going to keep competitive play stuck with Alpha Legion largely. Daemon Princes, and cacophony. And as much as people are excited about renegade abilities, nothing in Vigilus touches Vets of the Long War. That’s one of the best strats in 40k. Bringers of Despair and Night Lord Raptors aren’t even on the same planet. . I’m not spending 79 bucks on 5 Termies to have Tau erase them on first glance

 

Yet we know GW is capable of having fun, capable rules in theas Vigilus books... look at AdMech and Orks, and Fists, etc. Some great, flavourful stuff in there! So let’s see it GW.

[Subtle Discord]

Besides, these are not mutually exclusive to each style of play. Good rules are good in a competitive environment as much as they're good in a casual game. Even if I'm playing casually I'm trying to win the match (in a good sport way) and I don't want to be handicapped from the get go because I really like the look of a specific faction or sub-faction but that locks me in to an under performing list/army. It's not that every list combination needs to be valid and if you select a group of units that simply don't synergize together well they should still be competitive, but if you build a solid list with proper consideration of what's being included it should have at least a solid chance to do well against most other lists that are built to the same standard.

 

If I was a lead rules developer at GW there would be a massive white board or some other huge layout done digitally that would map out every faction (and preferably every unit) in the game and work out how they all interact and what each brings to the table for each faction and the game structure as a whole. With a bird's-eye-view of the entire lay of the land the team could 'zoom in' to a certain section and make additions/alterations, and then pull back out to see how that jives with the bigger picture. With a system as complex as this there needs to be some overarching design philosophy and oversight in an effort to unify and balance it all, at least to some measure; I have no illusions that given the complexity of Warhammer that it wouldn't be perfect and issues would still arise, but it would have to be better than the way they do it now, which feels like each codex is approached in isolation and not nearly enough consideration of the bigger picture that the codex is going to fit in to. It really seems like they do this sometimes and other times it's much more haphazard.

[Wayniac]

Besides, these are not mutually exclusive to each style of play. Good rules are good in a competitive environment as much as they're good in a casual game. Even if I'm playing casually I'm trying to win the match (in a good sport way) and I don't want to be handicapped from the get go because I really like the look of a specific faction or sub-faction but that locks me in to an under performing list/army. It's not that every list combination needs to be valid and if you select a group of units that simply don't synergize together well they should still be competitive, but if you build a solid list with proper consideration of what's being included it should have at least a solid chance to do well against most other lists that are built to the same standard.

 

If I was a lead rules developer at GW there would be a massive white board or some other huge layout done digitally that would map out every faction (and preferably every unit) in the game and work out how they all interact and what each brings to the table for each faction and the game structure as a whole. With a bird's-eye-view of the entire lay of the land the team could 'zoom in' to a certain section and make additions/alterations, and then pull back out to see how that jives with the bigger picture. With a system as complex as this there needs to be some overarching design philosophy and oversight in an effort to unify and balance it all, at least to some measure; I have no illusions that given the complexity of Warhammer that it wouldn't be perfect and issues would still arise, but it would have to be better than the way they do it now, which feels like each codex is approached in isolation and not nearly enough consideration of the bigger picture that the codex is going to fit in to. It really seems like they do this sometimes and other times it's much more haphazard.

I think the worst part is how inconsistent their designs are.  One army may be really cool, thematic and solid on the tabletop, another might be way OP but only if you ignore the fluff, another might just be garbage.  It's like they have no rhyme or reason with what they do.

[Aarik]

GW may not design for competitive play, but it’s no excuse as they get feedback from some of the most competitive players on the planet.

 

The first time GW saw Mortarion die to a Blood Angel smash Captain attack on T1 on a Warhammer TV broadcast, they changed deepstrike. There are more (off topic) examples I have of this, but it does go to show they do try to keep competitive play on the table.

...

 

But on the other hand we see new Termies....great sculpts. Do they want to sell these boxes or not?

 

...

 

Yet we know GW is capable of having fun, capable rules in the Vigilus books... look at AdMech and Orks, and Fists, etc. Some great, flavourful stuff in there! So let’s see it GW.

 

These are all very good points.  GW is clearly tuned in to the competitive meta, with the big FAQs, the points drop in CA2018 that made a lot (but not all) of less competitive armies more competitive, and detachments in Vigilus 1 that overall did a decent job of identifying weak areas and shoring them up.  And we know that the Frontline Gaming people (and others) are heavily involved with playtesting and advising GW on the rules development.  So GW has to be aware (or has no excuse for not being aware) of how bad most CSM units are.  But they're seemingly not buffing any of the problem units/legion traits, and are going to nerf cultists (one of the only genuinely useful units in the codex).  And the rules previewed so far aren't moving the needle.  It doesn't take much more work to write good rules than bad ones, and it's no secret what needed fixing.

 

If there isn't something else big that changes the picture, this is going to be a big misstep for GW.  We have gorgeous new models, but why should I invest hundreds of dollars and dozens and dozens of hours into an army that will be fighting a steep uphill battle as soon as I put it on the table?  Do they not want to sell models?  Just as an example, I've been waiting years for CSM to get updated, and planned to revamp my Word Bearers army when it happened.  But I'm largely out on this release because it seems like almost all of the new stuff just isn't that good on the table.  And while I paint much more than I play, I don't have the time or money to invest in an army that just doesn't cut it on the table top.  It's no fun to show up and get your butt kicked because your army just isn't on the same plane as the one across the table from you.

[Subtle Discord]

Reply to Wayniac:

 

Exactly my point. It really seems like they don't have an overarching design philosophy that they employ on every project to make sure it meshes properly with the greater whole. Sometimes it seems like they do, and other times it really seems like they work on projects in isolation. By no means am I say it would be easy, but we can all agree there has to be some methodology they could use that wold be better than their current approach.

 

Reply to Aarik:

 

Actually, writing good rules can be very challenging. You're right, it's not that hard to write good rules, but it is challenging to write good rules that balance well in a game system as large and complex with as many factions as Warhammer has. Do I think they could do a better job? Hell yes. Do I think it would be particularly easy? Hell no. But, should they be putting more resources towards that end? Again, hell yes.

[techsoldaten]

 

GW may not design for competitive play, but it’s no excuse as they get feedback from some of the most competitive players on the planet.

 

The first time GW saw Mortarion die to a Blood Angel smash Captain attack on T1 on a Warhammer TV broadcast, they changed deepstrike. There are more (off topic) examples I have of this, but it does go to show they do try to keep competitive play on the table.

...

 

But on the other hand we see new Termies....great sculpts. Do they want to sell these boxes or not?

 

...

 

Yet we know GW is capable of having fun, capable rules in the Vigilus books... look at AdMech and Orks, and Fists, etc. Some great, flavourful stuff in there! So let’s see it GW.

 

These are all very good points.  GW is clearly tuned in to the competitive meta, with the big FAQs, the points drop in CA2018 that made a lot (but not all) of less competitive armies more competitive, and detachments in Vigilus 1 that overall did a decent job of identifying weak areas and shoring them up.  And we know that the Frontline Gaming people (and others) are heavily involved with playtesting and advising GW on the rules development.  So GW has to be aware (or has no excuse for not being aware) of how bad most CSM units are.  But they're seemingly not buffing any of the problem units/legion traits, and are going to nerf cultists (one of the only genuinely useful units in the codex).  And the rules previewed so far aren't moving the needle.  It doesn't take much more work to write good rules than bad ones, and it's no secret what needed fixing.

 

If there isn't something else big that changes the picture, this is going to be a big misstep for GW.  We have gorgeous new models, but why should I invest hundreds of dollars and dozens and dozens of hours into an army that will be fighting a steep uphill battle as soon as I put it on the table?  Do they not want to sell models?  Just as an example, I've been waiting years for CSM to get updated, and planned to revamp my Word Bearers army when it happened.  But I'm largely out on this release because it seems like almost all of the new stuff just isn't that good on the table.  And while I paint much more than I play, I don't have the time or money to invest in an army that just doesn't cut it on the table top.  It's no fun to show up and get your butt kicked because your army just isn't on the same plane as the one across the table from you.

 

 

CSMs may be in a better spot than is being suggested. We will have a clearer picture of everything as a whole once Vigilus II comes out.

 

Most of my 8th edition lists have been long-range, lascannon-heavy Black Legion armies. They did well until Knights, Orks and Dark Eldar came along. I've been tinkering with mid-range, assault oriented lists and the recent releases plug some holes I've been seeing.

 

If GW is pushing CSMs towards a meta consisting of Daemon Engines, summoning and specialist detachments, that's not a bad thing.

[BrainFireBob]

My 2 cents: GW is treating Chaos as a Timmy/Johnny army. The inner Spike is expected to play elsewhere.

 

Or GW is all Timmy and Johnny, and their internal Spikes play Chaos, giving them a skewed perspective.

[Trevak Dal]

Snap, the Wordbearers legion trait, is what every loyalist chapter gets on top of something else, still. That's just cold.

 

And I'm a little distressed my Dark Apostle Cheerleader isn't doing his "go get em boys!" Automatically. This rolling noise and copy paste stinks of Phil Kelly.

[Danny Cyanide]

At least they are getting a strayegem to give a unit of possessed an extra attach and another point of strength. S7 D3+1 attacks, it's better than nothing.

[Sonoftherubric21]

I thought todays preview showed that GW CAN in fact write competent rules for chaos. 

Possessed are fantastic when you design them as a core to a list. Prince, Couple of MOPS, an apostle if the prayers turn out good, and a whole heck of alot of possessed and engines. 

That is a competent and unique list. 

[Trevak Dal]

Well golf clap for that. I mean, they could have allowed them to use daemons from the csm codex (...assuming they are still going to be in there...). They could have given them Dark Angel type rules where they never lost more than one guy to moral, and extra benefits if allying with Daemons, like marked Wordbearer units benefiting off of Daemonic locuses.

[Danny Cyanide]

Add a Daemons detachment with a Herald, greater posessed and this stratagem and you've got S8 posessed

[Trevak Dal]

So, you spend a command point to get the Formation, the possessed are in it (Max of 3 units), and then get the privilege to spend more command points to make possessed close to what they should be base?

 

Doesn't sound like a great deal to me man.

[Wayniac]

Keep in mind the specialist detachment they showed was not limited to Word Bearers.  ANYONE can take it.  So Word Bearers aren't really any better since they still didn't touch the horrible trait.

 

I have said this elsewhere as well but I'm really bothered by the fact they are putting so much more behind CP that it's just encouraging more CP farming/CP batteries.  These things are cool but all it's doing is giving you more incentive to just take a cheap Red Corsairs battalion for easy bonus CP to power them.  It really does seem like they are wanting CP farming to be a core part of the game as so many things are behind it.

[Trevak Dal]

Well how else would they sell more models right?

 

I liked Red Corsairs but couldn't figure out how to do my Terminators in their scheme in a way that I was satisfied with so I went with black legion.

 

The whole "lost cause narrative" of The Astral Claws and the other Maelstrom Wardens struck a narrative chord with me.

[Aarik]

I was really hoping that the Vigilus formations were the test bed for ideas that would eventually be incorporated into the respective codexes, but taken out from behind the CP gate.  E.g., space marines could spend 1 CP to make an Intercessor squad a veteran one, without having to spend an additional command point to make the detachment an Indomitus Crusaders one.  It's bittersweet because these new rules seem to be helping, but are really only buffing things to what should have been the baseline.

[Wayniac]

I like the red corsairs I just find their color scheme atrocious with the black thighs and red everything else with black trim.  I did consider doing a variant that was blood red armor, black metallic trim, with random pieces (a shoulder inset, a knee etc.) be painted black with either red or gold trimming, and black helms.  

 

My biggest issue is I just don't like the idea of renegades looking like full Chaosified marines.  Even though the Corsairs have been in the Malestrom for like 200 years or more now, my headcanon is they should look more like battered loyalist marines with some Chaos parts here and there to represent scavenged stuff.  I just don't want to convert that (not to mention things like Terminators become harder to convert).

[Dragonlover]

Go for the classic scheme then Wayniac! Old chapter colours with red crosses through the symbology. That's my plan if I ever do them.

 

Dragonlover

[Sception]

Honestly, I'm not a big fan of how much is tied up in CP, but that's a problem I have with 8th edition in general already.  That said, if you were going to do a special formation for possessed, giving them more attacks base isn't a terrible bonus to offer, given that rolling badly on number of attacks is one of their big failings currently.

 

So I don't dislike this at all.  But honestly, I'm mostly just hoping the wait for 9th edition won't be too terribly long, and that when it comes we see the game get closer to Age of Sigmar in a number of ways, from how allies and faction bonuses are handled to how CP is handled to how summoning is handled.  That, and it would be an excuse to actually redesign existing unit and faction rules, which just doesn't seem to have been a major priority this time around.

 

Still, I like the idea of dark apostles having a variety of prayers to choose from, even if they need a roll to activate them.  CSMs have plenty of options for attack re-rolls, chances are at least one or two of those prayers will offer more unique and significant bonuses - even if the previewed one isn't exactly doing it for me.

[Tyriks]

I like the red corsairs I just find their color scheme atrocious with the black thighs and red everything else with black trim.  I did consider doing a variant that was blood red armor, black metallic trim, with random pieces (a shoulder inset, a knee etc.) be painted black with either red or gold trimming, and black helms.  

 

My biggest issue is I just don't like the idea of renegades looking like full Chaosified marines.  Even though the Corsairs have been in the Malestrom for like 200 years or more now, my headcanon is they should look more like battered loyalist marines with some Chaos parts here and there to represent scavenged stuff.  I just don't want to convert that (not to mention things like Terminators become harder to convert).

When they show up in the NL books the NLs criticize them for how corrupted they are. They went all in right away, so for them at least it makes sense.

[Wayniac]

 

I like the red corsairs I just find their color scheme atrocious with the black thighs and red everything else with black trim.  I did consider doing a variant that was blood red armor, black metallic trim, with random pieces (a shoulder inset, a knee etc.) be painted black with either red or gold trimming, and black helms.  

 

My biggest issue is I just don't like the idea of renegades looking like full Chaosified marines.  Even though the Corsairs have been in the Malestrom for like 200 years or more now, my headcanon is they should look more like battered loyalist marines with some Chaos parts here and there to represent scavenged stuff.  I just don't want to convert that (not to mention things like Terminators become harder to convert).

When they show up in the NL books the NLs criticize them for how corrupted they are. They went all in right away, so for them at least it makes sense.

 

Huh.  Did not know that, but I've never read the NL books.

[Reyner]

 

 

I like the red corsairs I just find their color scheme atrocious with the black thighs and red everything else with black trim.  I did consider doing a variant that was blood red armor, black metallic trim, with random pieces (a shoulder inset, a knee etc.) be painted black with either red or gold trimming, and black helms.  

 

My biggest issue is I just don't like the idea of renegades looking like full Chaosified marines.  Even though the Corsairs have been in the Malestrom for like 200 years or more now, my headcanon is they should look more like battered loyalist marines with some Chaos parts here and there to represent scavenged stuff.  I just don't want to convert that (not to mention things like Terminators become harder to convert).

When they show up in the NL books the NLs criticize them for how corrupted they are. They went all in right away, so for them at least it makes sense.

 

Huh.  Did not know that, but I've never read the NL books.

 

Read them they're great :) 

[Hollenweger]

I have a bit of a question for any folks that have the Shadowspear boxed set. Does the Daemonkin Codex include a painting guide for the new scheme GW are using for the Black Legion marines?

 

They put out a 'Battle-Ready Black Legion' tutorial on the YouTube channel last week but it doesn't go into much detail.

[Sception]

They are great books, but I wouldnt put too much stock in the perceptions and opinions of the characters in them, particularly when it comes to other chaos marines or chaos in general. There are plenty of indications within the trilogy, especially towards the end, that the viewpoint character is not the most reliable narrator, with a somewhat blinkered view of the warp in general and other chaos marines in particular. IMO, by the end it's pretty clear that his obstinant rejection of the power of the warp, and his belief that anyone who willingly embraces it to /any/ degree is hopelessly lost to degeneracy, is largely to blame for the slow collapse and disintigration of the forces at his command.

That said, 200 years operating out of a warpstorm, directly exposed to the malign influence of chaos, cut off from imperial resources with only the favor of the dark pantheon available as an alternative source of power, is more than enough to justify a quite thoroughly corrupted interpretation of the Red Coursairs. Especially as Huron seems to be actively courting the favor of the dark gods and encouraging the same from the marines at his disposal.

[Wayniac]

I have a bit of a question for any folks that have the Shadowspear boxed set. Does the Daemonkin Codex include a painting guide for the new scheme GW are using for the Black Legion marines?

 

They put out a 'Battle-Ready Black Legion' tutorial on the YouTube channel last week but it doesn't go into much detail.

Nope, no painting guide.  I honestly really dislike how the studio paints black.  The stark highlights on otherwise pure black just look artificial to me.  So I created my own style:  I actually paint the black a very dark gray (I use Vallejo Air Dark Panzer Grey; I tried skavenblight dinge but it's a little too light) and then I basically follow the battle-ready video.  Paint the gold and horns/bone/red stuff, wash everything with Nuln.  Since I painted the black very dark charcoal, the wash dulls it down to a not-quite-black that looks much more natural than matte black with edge highlighting.