count as, just why?

[Master Of Malfeasance X]

This may be a little bit non sequitur, but I feel I should add it here.

 

About two months ago, I posted that I was going to use C:BA to reflect a Night Lords army and it was like punching a girl in a club. Everyone jumped on me for it, which was more or less what I expected and when I made my army, it was at least partially to thumb my nose at the fluff/codex purists. I threw in storm shield terminators and even a sanguinary priest which was a standard bearer with a dead Rune Priest on the chaos star. Many of the units were made almost in parody and I took it to Ironman in Vegas on a very nice display board and I poured my heart and soul into the army.

 

I almost won best army; I lost by a single vote (in a tournament of 46) to a guy who had an Imperial Fists army that was so beautiful it looked like his highlights had been applied by a drafting machine, and the yellow was so soft and buttery you could get lost in it.

 

Based on my experience, I can say only this: Until you see the army on the table, you can pontificate all you want about what *should* be and that this unit is fluffy or that unit is fluffy. Everyone who posted here imagines a specific thing when they read 'Khorne Berzerker'. If I were to say that my Khorne Lord is a counts-as Gabriel Seth on a dreadnought base, many here would scoff. If you and I are at the store, talking shop and I show him to you converted so you can practically see the blood flying through the air, pinned to the edge of his base with a couple of space marines cut down around him, all with green stuff injuries leaking blood and organs, dropping bolters and painted to the nines, I GUARANTEE that all of the petty codex squabbling will go out the window and your inner gamer will say to you:

'Holy, :cry: , I want to put my army against that just to see the whole thing unfold.'

 

Alternatively, if you see Seth on a dreadnought base and it's some wonky SM captain who is only primed and unbased along with a mishmash of 'Zerks and a full on daemon prince representing the sanguinor, sternguard and Seth (not respectively), then you're going to avoid that player unless you're in the 'kill anything' mood.

 

In my opinion, the argument (a bit like politics, sorry, Jeske) is almost completely ideological. Blood Angels, and ESPECIALLY Space Wolves players were drawn to their armies by the beautiful stories, iconography and feel of the army. Players who are very devoted to their armies nearly always share personality traits with that army and with each other, which is where stereotypes come from--you can tell a lot about a person by his or her army. Thus, IMHO, they get really riled up when they feel someone is encroaching on 'their' codex to use 'their' army in a way it 'wasn't intended'. On the other side of the coin, the body of players left behind (in this argument, the loyal chaos players) look at the player who decamped as a sellout. The reality isn't as cut and dry as that.

 

I've been playing for over a decade and I think Blood Angels are retarded. They have a very tight, interesting and lightning fast codex that I would really like to explore in play, I just think that red space vampires who gain power from a cup who live on a desert planet that is a 'death world' and value nobility and beauty above anything else but never contribute in any useful way to the Imperium except by slaying its enemies must have been written by someone with an extra chromosome. Even the Salamanders attempt to make life better for their citizens and the Ultramarines, say what you want, have created an enlightened culture of tolerance, happiness and honest patriotism. This is my opinion and I live in a country which legally guarantees me the right to think exactly the way I want to (See Westboro Baptist Church if you want proof).

 

I consider my options to avoid Twilight in space:

 

Night Lords: a hardened legion, loyal only to themselves who specialize in lightning raids, massacring civilians, seek to enslave chaos, have visions of their primarch and use a lot of raptors. Moreover, I have a little bit of wiggle room within the codex because A D-B was kind enough to write a book wherein the Night Lords steal absolutely everything that isn't nailed down. Perfect. That is one point of counts-as; not the only or even the most noble point.

 

For this, I am reviled online and greeted with open arms in person. No one--NO ONE had anything bad to say about my army out of 46 people in Vegas and a player pool of 60-70 where I live in the greater Phoenix, Az area.

[techmarine Azuris]

This may be a little bit non sequitur, but I feel I should add it here.

 

About two months ago, I posted that I was going to use C:BA to reflect a Night Lords army and it was like punching a girl in a club. Everyone jumped on me for it, which was more or less what I expected and when I made my army, it was at least partially to thumb my nose at the fluff/codex purists. I threw in storm shield terminators and even a sanguinary priest which was a standard bearer with a dead Rune Priest on the chaos star. Many of the units were made almost in parody and I took it to Ironman in Vegas on a very nice display board and I poured my heart and soul into the army.

 

I almost won best army; I lost by a single vote (in a tournament of 46) to a guy who had an Imperial Fists army that was so beautiful it looked like his highlights had been applied by a drafting machine, and the yellow was so soft and buttery you could get lost in it.

 

Based on my experience, I can say only this: Until you see the army on the table, you can pontificate all you want about what *should* be and that this unit is fluffy or that unit is fluffy. Everyone who posted here imagines a specific thing when they read 'Khorne Berzerker'. If I were to say that my Khorne Lord is a counts-as Gabriel Seth on a dreadnought base, many here would scoff. If you and I are at the store, talking shop and I show him to you converted so you can practically see the blood flying through the air, pinned to the edge of his base with a couple of space marines cut down around him, all with green stuff injuries leaking blood and organs, dropping bolters and painted to the nines, I GUARANTEE that all of the petty codex squabbling will go out the window and your inner gamer will say to you:

'Holy, :cry: , I want to put my army against that just to see the whole thing unfold.'

 

Alternatively, if you see Seth on a dreadnought base and it's some wonky SM captain who is only primed and unbased along with a mishmash of 'Zerks and a full on daemon prince representing the sanguinor, sternguard and Seth (not respectively), then you're going to avoid that player unless you're in the 'kill anything' mood.

 

In my opinion, the argument (a bit like politics, sorry, Jeske) is almost completely ideological. Blood Angels, and ESPECIALLY Space Wolves players were drawn to their armies by the beautiful stories, iconography and feel of the army. Players who are very devoted to their armies nearly always share personality traits with that army and with each other, which is where stereotypes come from--you can tell a lot about a person by his or her army. Thus, IMHO, they get really riled up when they feel someone is encroaching on 'their' codex to use 'their' army in a way it 'wasn't intended'. On the other side of the coin, the body of players left behind (in this argument, the loyal chaos players) look at the player who decamped as a sellout. The reality isn't as cut and dry as that.

 

I've been playing for over a decade and I think Blood Angels are retarded. They have a very tight, interesting and lightning fast codex that I would really like to explore in play, I just think that red space vampires who gain power from a cup who live on a desert planet that is a 'death world' and value nobility and beauty above anything else but never contribute in any useful way to the Imperium except by slaying its enemies must have been written by someone with an extra chromosome. Even the Salamanders attempt to make life better for their citizens and the Ultramarines, say what you want, have created an enlightened culture of tolerance, happiness and honest patriotism. This is my opinion and I live in a country which legally guarantees me the right to think exactly the way I want to (See Westboro Baptist Church if you want proof).

 

I consider my options to avoid Twilight in space:

 

Night Lords: a hardened legion, loyal only to themselves who specialize in lightning raids, massacring civilians, seek to enslave chaos, have visions of their primarch and use a lot of raptors. Moreover, I have a little bit of wiggle room within the codex because A D-B was kind enough to write a book wherein the Night Lords steal absolutely everything that isn't nailed down. Perfect. That is one point of counts-as; not the only or even the most noble point.

 

For this, I am reviled online and greeted with open arms in person. No one--NO ONE had anything bad to say about my army out of 46 people in Vegas and a player pool of 60-70 where I live in the greater Phoenix, Az area.

 

I never said count as armies, would not look great! Im sure your army look beautiful and would love to see some pics (as i live on the oposite side of the world!)

 

Also thanks for being tho first person that actually said why they count-ased! As my question was just why people did it, if we have our own codex.

 

However, I feel that, unlike you, many people go for a better, sparkly and top tier dex for winning, rather than for fluff which in a way saddens me!

[Hellios]

Hi Legatus and Lexington... I'm sure most people who would like legion rules back would be happy without them if all units in tghe codex were useful and had a proper internal balance and things like true cult unit specialists such as bikers, terminators and havocs came back... If you want your own deamons you could count as a blood letter as easily as a generic summoned daemon. Guess what... My 1ksons do not summon generic daemons, furies (or furries :D) or even bloodletters... My 1ksons summon daemons that belong to their patron... his name is Tzeentch and he likes blue, pink, purple and yellow.

 

However we fear if this was done... then the people who didn't want to be fluffy would make totally broken... The whole point of the legion lists was that you got cool extras but that the game wasn't broken. Maybe someone didn't want infiltrating khorne berzerkers...

 

Hell if you really wanted to play a mixed legion list or or didn't want all the restrictions you could play the default list where you had all the basic stuff but not the cool legion upgrades... but then your night lords could take berzerkers...

 

We are not saying the new codex is bad... most will admit you can make a strong list and that a number of units in this codex are better than the basic version in the 3.5 codex at the very least. This isn't about power, nor is it about just bringing the 3.5 dex back as it was. This is being able to represent the different legion personalities (if a player so wishes) in an army and then take that army to an event and not have one arm tied behind your back.... To have Chaos which is in my mind the most diverse faction not straight jacketed into a couple of generic lists if people want to do well.

 

I could say more but I have no time.

[Legatus]

If you said that the Codex Chaos Space Marines was not interresting for you, we would have a different discussion. I would still disagree with you personally (but then I am not a big fan of the last three Marine Codices GW has put out, as I am more of a traditionalist) but I could maybe understand your plight. But where I will not be understanding is with claims that one cannot properly play "Iron Warriors" or "Night Lords" with the current Codex.

[Hellios]

If you said that the Codex Chaos Space Marines was not interresting for you, we would have a different discussion. I would still disagree with you personally (but then I am not a big fan of the last three Marine Codices GW has put out, as I am more of a traditionalist) but I could maybe understand your plight. But where I will not be understanding is with claims that one cannot properly play "Iron Warriors" or "Night Lords" with the current Codex.

 

I would argue you cannot represent every aspect of an Iron Warriors force with the current Codex. You can represent some Iron Warrior forces and some Night Lord forces but not all of their forces. Imagine their was a a codex chapter famous for deploying an entire company of terminators with little or no support from other companies. No I'm not talking about the Dark Angels but a theoretical chapter. Now if someone wanted to play that force one could argue that codex Dark Angels or Space Wolves might be better codices to use although the chapter is a codex chapter and not related to those chapters mentioned. Obviously if you wanted to play the 4th company then codex space marines would be fine... but to field that entire army of terminators it is not.

 

So it isn't that you can't represent a force of (insert group here) but that people can't represent the force or part of the force that they want. I can take an Alpha Legion army and maybe take chosen or something but in the end my alpha legion army is no different to any other army with chosen. I seriously doubt that the Chosen of the World Eaters, Word Bearers and the Thousand Sons have much in common.

 

If GW wants to make one single list that every race and force uses they could do that... a flacon is the same as a predator which is the same as a battlewagon. This would make the game more balanced and everyone would be able to play their army using different models to represent the same thing. I think is GW did this a lot of people would be upset... Hell if they combined all the loyalist chapters into one codex which could be done with the addition of a few pages to the current codex space marines loads of people would be upset.

 

I can't say I am a fan of everything in the various new marine codices but at least they allow options for number of competitive lists a number of which can be totally fluffy even by traditional standards... I find it much harder to do the same with chaos unless you argue that all chaos factions can hire mercs or whatever from other factions which is true... But some people want to a pure force that shows what that faction is or an aspect of it... For example a stealthy/terror army if the rules allowed it would be great for night lords... but some people would like to focus on the raptor cult (it wouldn't have to be night lords aligned but I imagine it would be a popular choice) theme which while not true for the entire legion is still fluffy on its own as an isolated force. However as soon as you start adding in Khorne Berzerkers be they World Eaters or looney Night lords you start taking away from that theme... unless your theme happens to be the old khornate night lords.

 

 

The forces of Chaos are a 3D organism... the chaos codex is 2D... On the whole loyalist chapters have far less going on in them and so it is easier to represent them and yet they get what? 6 codices! Chaos on the other hand gets 2... and I would argue one of them is very poor and that ideally both should be in the same book anyway.

[Brother Nihm]

Night Lords today is a paintjob + optional conversions and/or a sub-par list filled with broken/bad units if you limit (notice that word) yourself to fielding a 'fluffy list. And if you dont', they aren't Night Lords..

Erm, wha? You realize that the "several pages of Night Lord fluff" from 2nd Edition that you're referencing later in your post is a story about a force of Night Lords invading a world with Berzerker and Noise Marine auxiliaries, right? Hell, they even summon a Bloodthirster at the end of it all. Mixed-Legion forces are as fluffy as mono-Legion ones.

No, I don't know my fluff, at all..

 

You are missing the point completely, and the bit about retcons, please allow me to rephrase:

The new Codex has moronic stuff like 'lightning coming out of nowhere oooh, aaah!", broken units, and it downplays the role of the Horus Heresy so that it is reminiscent of a bar-room brawl, involving "a lot of Marines" sometime in the past. Yeah, that's grand.

 

Where is the fear/terror factor? where is the overwhelming force? and where is the attitude when you have Marines that emit electricity and force the Imperium to court martial and execute their officers?

The Night Lords used to have pages of fluff, now we have a few lines of drivel. Ironically, the same applies to new warbands like Hakanor's Reavers etc. Their background was intentionally left (almost completely) blank in order to give players "more freedom". How well did that work out exactly?

The renegade aspect is what the book is trying to emphasise...

 

If we're lucky, we get to see one of the new Renegade warbands here at the B&C - per year. :P

 

But where I will not be understanding is with claims that one cannot properly play "Iron Warriors" or "Night Lords" with the current Codex.

If my memory serves you also do not play competitively, or am I wrong?

[Lexington]

I would argue you cannot represent every aspect of an Iron Warriors force with the current Codex. You can represent some Iron Warrior forces and some Night Lord forces but not all of their forces.

I know this is probably becoming the most tiring refrain of this thread, but what is it that cannot be represented here? As far as I can tell, Basilisks aside, you're quite able to field the same Iron Warriors force as ever. Night Lords can take everything they've ever been able to, and more!

 

If people want more of the personalized aspects of their Legion to show up on the tabletop, I can see that. I'd argue that, for the most part, it's not necessary, and that a player rather than an army list should be responsible for the "hows" of their games, but it's a disagreement that takes place on reasonable ground. Arguing, however, that one cannot make a "true" Traitor Legion armies because they don't have access to something they've never had before is silly.

[Volchek]

Earlier in the thread both Lexington and Legatus said they could build a force using the Codex: CSM to represent all of the original 9 Traitor legions in a "fluffy" way.

 

*Tosses down the challenge gauntlet to both Lexington and Legatus*

 

Do it. Build a 2000pt force that does what you say it does, and build it so it's tournament competitive and true to the fluff of the Traitor legion it's supposed to represent.

 

So build, for example, a World Eaters 2000pt tourney list. Keep it true to the ideals of what it means to be World Eaters. That means no marks from other chaos gods. Every unit MUST have the Mark of Khorne if it is not a unit of Khorne Berserkers. Build a 2K tourney list and then I'll be impressed.

 

Build a 2000pt Word Bearers list that is true to the fluff of the Word Bearers. Make it a tourney competitive list, complete with something in elites or HQ that accurately represents a foundational and unique troop type of the Word Bearers, and by that I mean Dark Apostles.

 

Build an Iron Warriors 2000pt list that is *truly* an Iron Warriors siege army that is also competitive.

 

There's the challenge. You say it can be done, I say prove it.

[Legatus]

But where I will not be understanding is with claims that one cannot properly play "Iron Warriors" or "Night Lords" with the current Codex.

If my memory serves you also do not play competitively, or am I wrong?

Do it. Build a 2000pt force that does what you say it does, and build it so it's tournament competitive and true to the fluff of the Traitor legion it's supposed to represent.

We may have a difference in gaming philosophies here. I do not set out to lose, but on the other hand I also don't mind using a unit I like just because of its theme or flavour. I usually use squads of Havocs and/or Raptors in my Night Lords force, for example, even though I have heard enough claims that neither of those two units works. Such a concept is completely alien to me. For me they usually do work. I also do not use a daemon prince, which if some repeated claims are to be believed is not even possible.

I also occasionally use a Dreadnought, which in one game did shoot up some of my units, but that did not cost me the game.

 

I do not play in tournaments. I play at the local GW store, which of course has varying degrees of skilled players. I once played against a Chaos Squat army (Chaos Space Marines) with Chaos Droids (Thousand Sons) and a Knight (Defiler). I guess that was not a "competetive" army? It also included a dreadnought I believe, so it could not have been.

I really do not get anything out of these claims that his army should have been led by two Slaanesh Daemon princes, should have used squads of Berserkers or Plague Marines, and should have included Obliterators, and of course my own Night Lords army should use the same units. (I was playing against the Chaos Squats with Ultramarines, though, not with Night Lords.)

[A D-B]

Earlier in the thread both Lexington and Legatus said they could build a force using the Codex: CSM to represent all of the original 9 Traitor legions in a "fluffy" way.

 

*Tosses down the challenge gauntlet to both Lexington and Legatus*

 

Do it. Build a 2000pt force that does what you say it does, and build it so it's tournament competitive and true to the fluff of the Traitor legion it's supposed to represent.

 

 

I think that kinda confuses the two points, though. They're saying the Chaos codex can be used to make fluffy armies, right? And it can. They're right. The people who go to other codices because it reflects their Legion better are, on the whole, duping themselves. Any army can be Counts-As'd into "working better with Codex X".

 

The problem is that most of the choices in the Codex aren't all that great on the tabletop, making fluffy competitive armies difficult, if not impossible for several Legions.

[nurglez]

it isn't that it is impossible to play decently with our sub par choices, It's why should we have to. my chaos lord's (when I used to run them) die all the time to hidden power fists, or pie plates. I dont like to suffer instant death, and neither does my leader, hell in 3.5 I would often have either a tricked out lord or a daemon prince, and then chaos lieutenant along to try and take over the army if my lord died.

 

They made daemon weapons slightly worse, as in even abaddon, mightiest of the chaos lords, has a 1 in 6 chance to do nothing in combat (actually worse then doing nothing, he has a chance to hurt himself). At least make him hurt himself after he attacks, fluff wise, to have abaddon pull out his daemon weapon, that the chaos gods gifted him with, and then to charge some imperial guardsman and just as hes about to hit them his sword goes "no, i want to pick at your soul instead of however many souls I'm about to kill".

 

And yes I have tried lord's, and sorcerers, and dreadnoughts (I love dreads), and possessed, and spawn, and, I feel let down with them. I know how tau player's must feel when they have all that wargear that is actually useless because of the rule change, or necrons (I do have a necron army too), as the way I play them has been totally killed too.

 

On its own, C:CSM is not bad, but compared to choices we had, and 1 page of mini rules that helped us feel more of an affinity for our army, it is bland and flavourless.

 

after eating a chocolate biscuit, that cup of tea doesn't taste so sweet any more.

[Lexington]

...ah, the hell with it, A D-B said all I was gonna say, and did so with far less than the three-thousand words I was going to use to say it. :rolleyes:

[Volchek]

Earlier in the thread both Lexington and Legatus said they could build a force using the Codex: CSM to represent all of the original 9 Traitor legions in a "fluffy" way.

 

*Tosses down the challenge gauntlet to both Lexington and Legatus*

 

Do it. Build a 2000pt force that does what you say it does, and build it so it's tournament competitive and true to the fluff of the Traitor legion it's supposed to represent.

 

 

I think that kinda confuses the two points, though. They're saying the Chaos codex can be used to make fluffy armies, right? And it can. They're right. The people who go to other codices because it reflects their Legion better are, on the whole, duping themselves. Any army can be Counts-As'd into "working better with Codex X".

 

The problem is that most of the choices in the Codex aren't all that great on the tabletop, making fluffy competitive armies difficult, if not impossible for several Legions.

 

And there in lies the root issue. and was the issue I was pointing to. With the SM, SW, or BA codex I can build a fluffy list that is true to the fluff of the army *and* competitive. You cannot do that with the CSM codex. It's either one way to build a tourney list (dual princes w Lash + Oblits and PM's) or a somewhat fluffy list that, while staying pretty true to the fluff of a specific Traitor legion, will not be competitive even in friendly games where the other player is also running a fluffy list built with the SM, SW, or BA codex.

 

That was my point. Yes both Legatus and Lexington did say you could build a fluffy list using the current CSM codex, and that's true to a point, but you cannot build a competitive list while staying true to the concept of a particular Traitor legion, such as the Night Lords, World Eaters, Thousand Sons, or Iron Warriors. You CAN do that with the SW or BA codex as they are currently written, and now that we have a new FAQ covering Black Templars and Dark Angels, you can do it with the codex for either of them as well.

 

I have a fully painted CSM army that hasn't seen the light of day since I finished painting it and played 5 games with it. That's when I saw how badly written the rules for CSM really were when compared to SM and IG which had just been released. I shelved a nicely painted army and built an IG army because it was fun and competitive. I simply want the same with the CSM codex, like it is with my BA codex. I LOVE my BA's. I can build all kinds of lists with the current BA codex.

 

The gauntlet is still down, the challenge still valid. Build me a Traitor specific list that is true to the fluff of the legion it's representing and still be competitive even in a friendly game where the other player has built a friendly but competitive list using a current SM, SW, BT, DA, or BA codex.

[KaosRaptor]

Very interesting thread, seeing a lot of good points thrown up here, might just add my 2 cents...

I'm not entirely sure comparing the CSM codex to the BA, BT, SW, or DA is completely fair. I mean, those codices (sp?) are set around ONE chapter each. The way they are written you can add anything you want to the list, and not only will it be fluffy, since the choices are designed for that chapter, but more likely than not they'll be competitive too. The issue Chaos has is the huge amount of variety that needs to be put across. Because of the differences between say, Rubric Marines and Khorne Berzerkers and the fluff behind them, often it is ridiculous to see them fighting alongside one another, no matter what "warband" you say they're fighting for. And yet, that is what we must do in order to be competitive.

 

Now, regular codex marines? They have it easy, seeing as no matter what chapter you pick (or create), it is quite possible that, in the fluff, they would use all the available in the army list at one point or another. E.g, Raven Guard may very well use Thunderfire Cannons alongside their assault marines in order to take down heavily fortified targets. And that is still fluffy.

 

For the poor old forces of Chaos however, half of the choices in the army list would either not be seen dead with some of the other options, or do not belong in the Legion or warband you've chosen. Thanks to the supposedly strict way the Legions organise themselves and choose their forces, you are limiting yourself in options in the army list (half of which, in my humble opinion, are a lot worse than their loyalist counterparts, and seem less viable to some players). This, coupled with the somewhat outdated rules of some of the choices (slow and purposeful for a fast attack slot?? REALLY?) means that very few options seem viable, leading to the double-DP-plague-marine-oblit lists you see today.

Or swapping to another codex altogether.

 

A biggish rant right there, hopefully someone can makes sense of it (cause I can't! )

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Can I weigh back in with my apparently Rubber Mallet o' Doom^TM?

 

I have said before, and will say again, that there should be a single large Chaos tome that encompasses everything - Legions, renegades, Daemons and Lost and Damned.

 

This would include rules pertaining to mixing and matching and pure forces as well - as a side note this should really be done with Space Marines Loyalists too in my opinion.

[Legatus]

So build, for example, a World Eaters 2000pt tourney list. Keep it true to the ideals of what it means to be World Eaters. That means no marks from other chaos gods. Every unit MUST have the Mark of Khorne if it is not a unit of Khorne Berserkers. Build a 2K tourney list and then I'll be impressed.

 

Build a 2000pt Word Bearers list that is true to the fluff of the Word Bearers. Make it a tourney competitive list, complete with something in elites or HQ that accurately represents a foundational and unique troop type of the Word Bearers, and by that I mean Dark Apostles.

 

Build an Iron Warriors 2000pt list that is *truly* an Iron Warriors siege army that is also competitive.

I am perhaps not so firm on what is commonly considered "competetive" in a tournament or friendly envireonment, as I would consider Havocs and Raptors solid units. Perhaps if you explained to me what the shortcomings of this example Iron Warriors force are I might also try a World Eaters and a Word Bearers army:

 

Chaos Lord - Terminator Armour, Daemon Weapon, Combi-Melta - 150 pts

 

8 Terminators - 2 Champions with Powerfist, Icon of Chaos Glory, 3 Combi-Meltas, Reaper Autocannon - 330 pts

 

10 Chaos Space Marines - Champion with Powerfist, Icon of Chaos Glory, 2 Meltaguns - 220

Rhino - 35

 

10 Chaos Space Marines - Champion with Powerfist, Icon of Chaos Glory, 2 Flamers - 210

Rhino - 35

 

10 Chaos Space Marines - Champion with Powerweapon, Icon of Chaos Glory, Laser Cannon, Plasmagun - 225

Rhino - Havoc Launcher - 50

 

10 Chaos Space Marines - Champion, Icon of Chaos Glory, Laser Cannon, Plasmagun - 210

 

 

9 Chaos Havocs - Champion, Icon of Chaos Glory, 4 Autocannons - 240 pts

 

Vindicator - Daemonic Possession - 145 pts

 

Vindicator - Daemonic Possession - 145 pts

 

 

Total: 1995 pts

In a more "flavourful" army I might have included a Dreadnought instead of an additional full Troops squad, and I might have taken a Defiler or Predator instead of the second Vindicator, but for the sake of competetiveness I went with a bit of redundancy.

[Lexington]

I have a fully painted CSM army that hasn't seen the light of day since I finished painting it and played 5 games with it. That's when I saw how badly written the rules for CSM really were when compared to SM and IG which had just been released. I shelved a nicely painted army and built an IG army because it was fun and competitive. I simply want the same with the CSM codex, like it is with my BA codex. I LOVE my BA's. I can build all kinds of lists with the current BA codex.

Well, you know...fix it!

 

Really, the mechanics behind 40K are far from rocket science. You're dealing with a system based around six possible randomized outcomes, mostly run through a couple of simple algorithms that have a binary result. The Codexes have, at the very least, a rough metric by which to gauge points values for individual models. The game, as presented by GW, is fraught with really elementary balance errors, many of which are obviously intended by GW, and there's a fair consensus within the community as to how to fix most of them.

 

You've got this nice big Chaos army that you've put a lot of blood, sweat and tears into, so why not put just a fraction of that effort into patching up the rules for them?

 

I know, I know, the common refrain is "oh, but you can't use those in tournaments," or "but no one else will let me use it," which really indicates a weird sickness on the part of the player base. Implicitly, this posits that we're best off using rules from a Studio whose fastest-rising star is Matt Ward. If you don't think you can do better than that, you've got some real self-confidence issues.

[Volchek]

Legatus, nice solid list you have there. Not to beat a dead horse, but look at what I can build with the SM codex as a "siege" army:

 

HQ: 1 Forgefather Vulkan He'stan, (190pts)

All Flamers, Melta weapons, and Thunder Hammers in the force are counted as Master Crafted

 

HQ: Space Marine Librarian (100pts)

Force Dome; Might of the Ancients

 

Elite: Ironclad Dreadnought (160pts)

Ironclad Assault Launchers; Dreadnought CCW; Meltagun; Heavy Flamer; Chain Fist

 

Elite: Ironclad Dreadnought (160pts)

Ironclad Assault Launchers; Dreadnought CCW; Meltagun; Heavy Flamer; Chain Fist

 

Fast Attack: Assault Squad (240pts)

9 Assault Squad, Remove Jump Packs; Flamer; Flamer;

1 Sergeant Thunder Hammer x1

1 Rhino

 

Fast Attack: Assault Squad (240pts)

9 Assault Squad, Remove Jump Packs; Flamer; Flamer;

1 Sergeant Thunder Hammer x1

1 Rhino

 

Troops: Tactical Squad (265pts)

9 Tactical Squad, Flamer; Multi-Melta

1 Sergeant Power Fist x1

1 Razorback Dozer Blade; Twin Linked Heavy Flamer

2 Combat Sqds - (#1 - Sgt, Flamer, 3 marines + HQ Vulkan in Razorback) (#2 - MultiMelta, 4 marines)

 

Troops: Tactical Squad (265pts)

9 Tactical Squad, Flamer; Multi-Melta

1 Sergeant Power Fist x1

1 Razorback Dozer Blade; Twin Linked Heavy Flamer

2 Combat Sqds - (#1 - Sgt, Flamer, 3 marines + HQ Marine Librarian in Razorback) (#2 - MultiMelta, 4 marines)

 

Heavy Support: Vindicator (125pts)

1 Vindicator, Siege Shield

 

Heavy Support: Vindicator (125pts)

1 Vindicator, Siege Shield

 

Heavy Support: Vindicator (125pts)

1 Vindicator, Siege Shield

 

Total Roster Cost: 1995pts

 

The point being this: Vulkan lends something to the army that makes it a siege like army. I can take Ironclad dreads to bash defenses and for close assault. I can equip my assault squads with a thunder hammer. My tactical squads can take razorbacks with heavy flamers for burning the enemy out of their bunkers, I can take either whirlwinds or vindicators for heavy support, either are great for supporting an assault, vindies for close support or whirlwinds for stand off large blasts that ignore cover saves. What is represented in my list is something far more in line with the fluff that's been written about Iron Warriors than what you can build using the CSM codex.

[Legatus]

Legatus, nice solid list you have there. Not to beat a dead horse, but look at what I can build with the SM codex as a "siege" army:

 

HQ: 1 Forgefather Vulkan He'stan, (190pts)

All Flamers, Melta weapons, and Thunder Hammers in the force are counted as Master Crafted

 

HQ: Space Marine Librarian (100pts)

Force Dome; Might of the Ancients

 

Elite: Ironclad Dreadnought (160pts)

Ironclad Assault Launchers; Dreadnought CCW; Meltagun; Heavy Flamer; Chain Fist

 

Elite: Ironclad Dreadnought (160pts)

Ironclad Assault Launchers; Dreadnought CCW; Meltagun; Heavy Flamer; Chain Fist

 

Fast Attack: Assault Squad (240pts)

9 Assault Squad, Remove Jump Packs; Flamer; Flamer;

1 Sergeant Thunder Hammer x1

1 Rhino

 

Fast Attack: Assault Squad (240pts)

9 Assault Squad, Remove Jump Packs; Flamer; Flamer;

1 Sergeant Thunder Hammer x1

1 Rhino

 

Troops: Tactical Squad (265pts)

9 Tactical Squad, Flamer; Multi-Melta

1 Sergeant Power Fist x1

1 Razorback Dozer Blade; Twin Linked Heavy Flamer

2 Combat Sqds - (#1 - Sgt, Flamer, 3 marines + HQ Vulkan in Razorback) (#2 - MultiMelta, 4 marines)

 

Troops: Tactical Squad (265pts)

9 Tactical Squad, Flamer; Multi-Melta

1 Sergeant Power Fist x1

1 Razorback Dozer Blade; Twin Linked Heavy Flamer

2 Combat Sqds - (#1 - Sgt, Flamer, 3 marines + HQ Marine Librarian in Razorback) (#2 - MultiMelta, 4 marines)

 

Heavy Support: Vindicator (125pts)

1 Vindicator, Siege Shield

 

Heavy Support: Vindicator (125pts)

1 Vindicator, Siege Shield

 

Heavy Support: Vindicator (125pts)

1 Vindicator, Siege Shield

 

Total Roster Cost: 1995pts

 

The point being this: Vulkan lends something to the army that makes it a siege like army. I can take Ironclad dreads to bash defenses and for close assault. I can equip my assault squads with a thunder hammer. My tactical squads can take razorbacks with heavy flamers for burning the enemy out of their bunkers, I can take either whirlwinds or vindicators for heavy support, either are great for supporting an assault, vindies for close support or whirlwinds for stand off large blasts that ignore cover saves. What is represented in my list is something far more in line with the fluff that's been written about Iron Warriors than what you can build using the CSM codex.

Traitor Legions traditionally do not have thunder hammers, multi-meltas (at least man portable ones) or razorbacks, all of which were developed after the heresy and were in two cases (thunder hammers, multi-meltas) even specifically described as not being in use by the traitor Legions in the 2nd Edition Codex Chaos Space Marines. So, no, while that army may be more efficient in some areas than the Chaos list I posted above, it definitely is not a very good representation of an Iron Warriors force. I personally don't like Iron Clad Dreadnoughts (or any of the new units in the Codex Space Marines) and would not be bothered if they were removed again in the next Codex Space Marines, but I guess heavy armoured Dreadnoughts are not too far fetched for Iron Warriors. Then there is the issue with the entire army having 'And They Shall Know No Fear', which just is not suitable for a Traitor Legion, but I have been over that a lot. ('Combat Squads' is traditionally a loyalist ability as well.) I was also under the assumption that a competetive list should have more than two Troops Choices*, but I am not the tournament/competetive expert here. I also personally refrain from the use of special characters, but I understand that in most areas they are widely accepted, even in tournaments.

 

*Edit: I forgot about the combat squadding there, but 5 man tactical squads do not give me a lot of confidence in being able to secure mission objectives.

[Lord_Caerolion]

I think that kinda confuses the two points, though. They're saying the Chaos codex can be used to make fluffy armies, right? And it can. They're right. The people who go to other codices because it reflects their Legion better are, on the whole, duping themselves. Any army can be Counts-As'd into "working better with Codex X".

 

The problem is that most of the choices in the Codex aren't all that great on the tabletop, making fluffy competitive armies difficult, if not impossible for several Legions.

 

"And these Terminators? Yeah, they're actually Crisis Suits. The Daemons are Kroot, and the Marines in power armour are Fire Warriors. Oh yeah, and the rhino's are Devilfish".

 

Can't remember if it was on here or Warseer, but someone asked if it was cool to use an Iron Warriors army using the Tau Empire codex. That is just plain ridiculous, I think everyone can agree.

[Hellios]

I would argue you cannot represent every aspect of an Iron Warriors force with the current Codex. You can represent some Iron Warrior forces and some Night Lord forces but not all of their forces.

I know this is probably becoming the most tiring refrain of this thread, but what is it that cannot be represented here?

 

Drop pods (Dreadclaw)? Deathstorm drop pods... Human slaves... are three really big details but often the details I'm talking about are on a smaller scale... If I take the Emperors Children for a second and the fact that their vehicles can no longer use sonic weapons! Personally that is more annoying to me than Iron Warriors not having an IG siege tank.

 

 

Oh that list was just for Iron Warriors and it could be made bigger and if you added other legions into the mix it would get bigger still. As I say you can represent some Iron Warriors force but not every aspect. Oh and before someone says oh you couldn't do that in the 3.5 dex or any of the previous chaos dexes... I don't cares... I'm not here to discuss the quality of previous editions of the chaos rule books (Some were better than others) but the lack of quality in the current dex and why some people may want to use counts as to represent the army they play. Do I claim it is perfect? No! I also claim that anyone who thinks the current C:CSM is perfect is misguided or just plain telling porkies :D

[Iron Father Ferrum]

I'm going to jump in here and explain my hatred of the current codex with a tale of my 40K career.

 

 

I came into the game basically the same month the 3.5 Chaos Codex was released. I was going to play Alaitoc Eldar, but I was young and jobless at the time, so I couldn't afford to dump cash on all those metal Ranger models. My LGS at the time had no Chaos Marine players, so I flipped through the codex and came across the Legion rules for the Alpha Legion. Tzeentch pulled at my soul, but I decided to go with the Alphas, so I built an Alpha Legion army from the ground up that completely lacked vehicles, walkers, demons, or anything on a base larger than 25mm. Everything Infiltrated and the army as a whole worked. I wasn't a 100% win kind of guy, but I was able to tie up or beat down almost every army I fought against. It was themed and I got a benefit from it being themed -- and that theme also had restrictions.

 

Fast forward a few years. I had a job and a new LGS lacking Eldar players, so I fulfilled that dream of building some capricious space elves. I started playing the Craftworld Ulthwé list, and enjoyed benefitting from the theme; ie some BS4 Guardian Defenders, the Augment psychic power, and Seer Councils. Again, the theme benefits came with restrictions. When Codex: Eye of Terror came out, I immediately switched over so that I could have nothing but BS4 Guardians, and BS4 War Walkers, and BS4 Vypers. Again, it was themed and the theme had a benefit within restrictions.

 

Seeing a pattern here?

 

I enjoyed jumping between the two armies, and was fairly successful playing within the theme forces available. And in 2006, the 4th Edition Eldar Codex was released and I was pissed. Gone was Augment. Gone were my 4-skill Guardians. USF rules from C:EoT were declared invalid. I carried my army over unhappily, and starting playing my Alpha Legion army more and more because the theme-with-benefits-that-works-within-its-restrictions was gone from the Eldar.

 

Then, in 2007, I was gifted with the latest Codex: Chaos Space Marines and was immediately even more pissed off. Any attempt at theme was gone. The loss of awe-and-madness-inspiring artwork and good fluff is incidental; I was aghast at the lack of Legion rules, the lack of Veteran skills, the downgrade in abilities even in units I never used, and less than week of studying the book showed a bleak future for Chaos players where the list of things truly competetive on the tabletop was vastly reduced. I was so disgusted with the book that I immediately went out and bought a Loyalist army because at least their Codex had the Trait System which provided a way to make an army with theme benefits that works within restrictions.

 

A year later, they went and :P ing took that one away, too, and my Chapter didn't even get its own Chapter Tactics-utilizing Special Character in compensation. Suffice to say, my relationship with GW over the past couple of years has been surly. At best.

 

 

The moral of this story is that people like Legatus, who have been around since before the advent of themed-by-rules forces, might not see a problem with the current incarnation of codices. As a soldier I've moved around the USA a lot, and I've had LGSs and the accompanying gaming groups in five states, and the vast majority of the regular playerbase in all of those areas got into the game in the 3rd Edition era, like me, when such themed-by-rules forces were the norm. For us, the loss of these special rules is a Big Deal because its changing how we enjoy the hobby. I know of players so angered by the current "streamlining" of the game -- in essence, stripping away character for a minimal and oft-illusory increase in ease of play -- that they have up and quit Games Workshop altogether for Privateer Press' games.

 

So yes, Legatus, I can build an Alpha Legion army with the current codex. I can make it themed to the Alphas, to how they act on the battlefield by including units that can deep strike and infiltrate. Here's the crux of the issue: Is it fun to play? Not really. Is it competitive -- and by that, I mean Can I win with it at least 50% of the time? Again, no, because to fit the theme, it doesn't have Obliterators or Slaaneshi Demon Princes or Plague Marines or Khorne Berzerkers. So I've given up. I'm selling my Alpha Legion army to a friend who is just going to strip the paint off of them anyway because all they're doing is sitting in a carry case taking up closet space.

 

I love the Alpha Legion. The fluff for them is awesome, and in many ways more enjoyable for me since so much of their background and modus operandi is cloaked in mystery that they're always a good topic of LGS conversation. But until I actually have the ability to run an Alpha Legion army that is themed, fun to play, and capable of winning against any other codex out there, the only time I'll be touching a Chaos Marine model is when I'm handing it over for cash so I can go buy some more War Machine models.

[the jeske]

Oh and before someone says oh you couldn't do that in the 3.5 dex or any of the previous chaos dexes... I don't cares... I'm not here to discuss the quality of previous editions of the chaos rule books (Some were better than others) but the lack of quality in the current dex and why some people may want to use counts as to represent the army they play

things is you could. Lets say you wanted a full khorn IW army a line breaker . You took the WE rules presto army is ready. Want a demon bomb [someone crazy about using his war machine mechani thralls for example] pick EC or WE or BL or WB make list army is ready . Our dex didnt have the must be painted proper way to get the rules [because it wouldnt have made sense for some armies] . It was like that for all armies , IW with IW rules or maybe without smaller number of oblits , but 6 hvy support [being non legion had it good sides too] . 3.5 was world of builds .

What can I do right now with a chaos dex . I can do a mecha an identical in choice LR rush[minus the oblits] no matter what units I pick game play will be identical . Then I can also go to town with some tier 2 like my NM or a mechazilla [i wouldnt realy call that a build but we have so few anything a bit different becomes one] and the game play is still very simiular to what I would get with a DP zerker/pm+oblits mix [only weaker of course]. The new dex gave us not one good new build , not one set up we couldnt have used before , but it took from us many . And no being forced to play with zerkers/pms/DPs/oblits in a AL list to make it viable is not giving AL players options [Just like it wouldnt have been giving SW players an option if GW told them to use codex sm for the rest of this edition].

 

You've got this nice big Chaos army that you've put a lot of blood, sweat and tears into, so why not put just a fraction of that effort into patching up the rules for them?

how ? for that to work you would have to become part of the GW DT team for w40k and even then you would have to be assigned to the chaos dex and the chaos dex would have to be in the plans to be made . the reality is this we got a crap dex from one person who shouldnt write w40k dex and one person who shouldnt have been let anywhere near a codex or a army book ever. We will wait for a new dex for 5-6 years if everything goes the normal way , maybe longer if we get bit unlucky . the next dex is not going to be based around the all arounder 3.5 dex , but the Gav dex which considering we never know how a dex will end up means we maybe looking at 10 years of bland and suck for csm. Now most people dont play that long [we have few starting chaos anyway] so it doesnt realy matter for GW , but for those people that do the only way to go around a codex with extremly limited number of builds is to do counts as . the codex doesnt even have the fluff to make people want to play chaos . It aint a legion dex , so legion fluff is limited . But where is the new and cool renegade fluff ?

[Lexington]

Oh that list was just for Iron Warriors and it could be made bigger and if you added other legions into the mix it would get bigger still. As I say you can represent some Iron Warriors force but not every aspect.

In a larger 'ought' sense, I really don't disagree here. Had I my druthers, the "Chaos" army list would look like a Manhattan phone book, with all the variety and grease stains that implies. There's tons of potential Chaos ideas within the universe, and it would be fantastic if we could see them all given rules and appropriately creepy miniatures.

 

However...that's not really where we're at, and there's a certain point at which we simply need to accept that the game's structure has to revolve around Games Workshop's business needs, grating as that may be. One can quibble with the degree to which potential should be limited by finances, but miniatures production on the scale of 40K ain't cheap, so there's limits to what we can realistically expect from them. In this case, I think we need to accept that "Chaos" includes "Chaos Space Marines, Plus Assorted Ne'er-Do-Wells," and move forward from that point when it comes to talking about what "should" and "should not" be in an army list.

 

For me, this means that an army can be said to "represent" a Chaos Legion as long as it provides a player with enough options to field the sort of things immediately available to its particular war-making apparatus. With a couple of exceptions, I think the current Chaos Codex does this pretty damn well, even if the implementation's obviously lacking. One can disagree, obviously, and a lot of people do, but we're better off if we realistically define the "is/ought" distinction for this particular argument.

 

how ? for that to work you would have to become part of the GW DT team for w40k and even then you would have to be assigned to the chaos dex and the chaos dex would have to be in the plans to be made .

Well, you know, GW's rules are only as valid as we allow them to be. 40K runs on a simple system that's not exactly opaque in its design. It's not like the game police are going to kick in your door and shoot your dog if you go an modify things a little, so I encourage people to give it a try. It is not at all in Games Workshop's interest to have a solid, balanced set of rules that they stick by, so they don't make them. We, as players, want them, and I don't see what's keeping gaming circles from putting a bit of work into making 40K into the game they want it to be, rather than the cycle of wild balance swings that GW's engineered for their own profit.

[the jeske]

We, as players, want them, and I don't see what's keeping gaming circles from putting a bit of work into making 40K into the game they want it to be, rather than the cycle of wild balance swings that GW's engineered for their own profit.

not in the rule book or FAQ/errata wont be played . not in tournament , not in shops where tournament rulings are used anyway , yes in small groups it is possible , but then you have to play against the same people over and over again and unless your buying 1 army per 4 weeks this means playing the same thing over and over a game + you wouldnt be able to test stuff for tournaments , nor would the play group be able to be ready for those [the smaller the group the smaller the chance of wining a big tournament] . playing against 4 dudes over and over again with a self made up system is not gaming , it is not even testing.