count as, just why?

[KaosRaptor]

Thought I might just wade back into the fray, found this interesting post while exploring the warp (a.k.a Google):

http://cadia122.blogspot.com/2011/01/chaos...dex-anyone.html

I thought the guy brought up a lot of good points, and he didn't just whine either, he made some very good suggestions. Obviously some may disagree, but just thought I'd bring it to your attention.

[Spacefrisian]

In the end all marines have: (sum up)

-Powerarmour

-Bolter

-boltpistol

-Frag & krak Grenades

 

Most weapon options are the same:

-Plasmagun, melta gun, flamer, Heavybolter, missile launcher, lascannon

Commanders have the same options.

-Powerfist, powerweapon, plasmapistol

Both have Rhino options

 

I wonder if peeps get a little bit to excited on the colour part rather than the wysiwyg part.

[Volchek]

In the end all marines have: (sum up)

-Powerarmour

-Bolter

-boltpistol

-Frag & krak Grenades

 

Most weapon options are the same:

-Plasmagun, melta gun, flamer, Heavybolter, missile launcher, lascannon

Commanders have the same options.

-Powerfist, powerweapon, plasmapistol

Both have Rhino options

 

I wonder if peeps get a little bit to excited on the colour part rather than the wysiwyg part.

 

Yes, Chaos Space Marines and Space Marines of any Imperial chapter have a common lineage shared by all.

 

Currently the issue is being driven from this point of view:

 

Blood Angels, Space Wolves, Black Templars, Dark Angels, standard Codex marines, and soon to be released Grey Knights, while sharing a common lineage in equipment choices all have a very unique flavor to them depending on the build chosen and how the unites are designed to work together. Yes, Blood Angels and standard Codex marines have assault squads, but the BA units are scoring units and count as troops while in the vanilla SM codex they are fast attack.

 

The current C: CSM is bland, the units do not complement their counterparts elsewhere in your list, none of the HQ or Elites lend any real support or benefit to the list, and it goes far beyond WYSIWYG. You have in the Heresy fluff very distinct ideals and corruption across the 9 original traitor legions. The World Eaters, if a codex or rules were ever written for them like they were in 3.5 and in support of the fluff of the World Eaters would play very very differently from an Emperor's Children or an Iron Warriors list.

 

You currently get those differences in the Space Marines codex and the 4 chapter specific codicii of BA, SW, BT, and DA, and soon the GK. Each of those has distinct abilities, units, characters, and complimentary function. You simply do not get that in the current Codex: CSM.

 

That's where the rub is. Dedicated Chaos players consistently feel shortchanged by a gimped codex while the imperial marines get, in some cases, very fun if not overpowered units in their current codicii. (SW Thunderwolf Cavalry anyone?)

[goldenwonder]

I think it is incredibly sad that:

A - There is the need for some players to feel the need to use counts as due to a poorly written mess of a codex

B - That in many cases, counts as seems to be done to power game rather than from a background perspecive

C - That GW did not atleast support the WYSIWYG upgrades the new 'dex brought in - i.e. Sonic Weapons for EC tanks

D - That we have five codex books for Space Marines (six if you include Grey Knights) and we cannot even have 1-2 pages for a Legion in our single Codex.

 

I also feel it is sad that we have to refer back to the 3.5 'dex but for it's flaws, it did a much better job of representing Chaos Space Marines - both Legion and Renegade than the current Codex does.

 

Counts as is something which at first did not bother me but has become somewhat irritating. Nobody seems to be able to agree on it. I have no problem with DIY chapters doing so if the background and or conversions are interesting. I can understand and to an extent sympathise with Chaos players wanting to do the same but what wrangles me is the powergaming aspect - an example - a poster wishing to field a first Company Ultramarine force - previously using Loganwing rules now wants to use Deathwing rules instead as following the FAQ they now appear to be stronger - complete with passing comment on Deathwing previously being inferior. I have no problem ith this poster doing this - it is after all just a hobby and ultimately if someone has taken the time to theme and paint a force I will be happy to face it if asked, but it is the powergaming direction the counts as concept can be taken into that concerns me. Even though GW have tried to take out the Tournement element - the demand for it is still there and always will. Tournements are a vital outlet for the social aspect of the hobby for many.

 

Ultimately Counts As seems like a lazy get-out clause to me. I mean if people are happy to counts as and buy more codex booklets to do so - why rush and put more money into the Chaos line.

 

I am biased. I learned 40k in 3rd ed with the 3.5 'dex. When I came back to the hobbey after a break and saw the new Codex my passion for Chaos Marines withered and died. My Emperors Children never came to be. My Dreadnoughts & Possessed have gone into storage.

 

Given the scope, quality and popularity of the Horus Heresy Novels, the quality of current codex books I find it sad to see what Chaos players are left with. Even Daemonhunters, Witch Hunters and Necrons have better production quality, fluff inclusion and artwork.

 

Ultimately, if Imperial marines have 5-6 Codex books to pick from, is it unreasonable to ask for 1-2 pages per Legion?

 

Allowing players to field a Legion specific warband does not break the fluff of Legions not being what they once were. Even at apocalypse level pre-heresy Legions would not truly be represented. Also, who is to say when a battle is taking place? Tycho can be used and he's dead. Lysander used to be dead.

[Lexington]

not in the rule book or FAQ/errata wont be played . not in tournament , not in shops where tournament rulings are used anyway

I know it's something of an extreme position, but, really, to play in a 40K tournament is to participate in an enormous communal farce. We're talking about a game that still has valid material from three different editions, all of which had wildly different philosophies and rules - and the "official" position is "well, if it doesn't work with the current rules, it simply doesn't exist." Codexes are blatantly designed with a sales goal in mind, and we're now seeing books come out which have units that are intentionally designed to make use of known rules exploits. This is not a good system, and it sure as hell isn't one people should feel good about "winning" with.

 

This is all done because GW knows damn well that their player base will blithely accept and use all rules of theirs rather than risk being ostracized for using their own damn brain cells in the pursuit of a better gaming experience. There's a shuddering fear in the community of being judged ill by some greasy Tournament Organizer for not strictly following dictates set down by the same mental giants that gave us Thunderwolves. There's a lot of intelligence in the 40K player base that gets locked away behind this fear, which is really sad. We'd all do better to own our own gaming experience, rather than passing blame onto an uncaring corporate entity and screaming at the sky.

 

playing against 4 dudes over and over again with a self made up system is not gaming , it is not even testing.

Eh. I spent my college years playing 40K with the same fifteen or so people, and had a blast doing so. We did campaigns, made up scenarios, carved out our own little intertextual corner of the 40K universe and wrapped up its plotlines via day-long, epic battles with tens of thousands of points per side, often played on the concrete floor of a barn. A number of them are still among my best friends in the universe, even though the closest of them is a good six hours away by car. If any of us need to get rid of a body, the others will be there with shovels and smiles in equal measure.

 

Conversely, my hotel-mates at Adepticon this year came back from the Team Tournament complaining bitterly about facing the same Space Wolf army in each round, and of players who partook of every dirty trick in the book - mis-measurement scams, dice-rolling tricks, and if there wasn't a TO within earshot, simply refusing to let a game move forward unless they were allowed to out-and-out cheat. My friends had spent weeks on making fun, interesting armies on a well-crafted theme board. They weren't there to win, and their lists were no threat to a competitive player's chances, but they were given the crap treatment regardless.

 

So, you know, it may not be "gaming" by your definition, but I know which experience sounds more appealing.