incinerator950 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Unfortunately, not doing anything can be taken the wrong way. Ironically, if you generate as much noise as the Bioware community over ME3's ending, you may get a change of opinion from GW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sception Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Nope. Bioware has channels of communication with its audience by which that dissatisfaction could be made known. GW deliberately not so much. There's no use in yelling at the wilfully deaf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incinerator950 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 That's what I thought. And the only way GW listens is throug the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sception Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 And they can't measure sales figures of product lines that basically don't exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenith Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Unfortunately, not doing anything can be taken the wrong way. Ironically, if you generate as much noise as the Bioware community over ME3's ending, you may get a change of opinion from GW. A lot of noise was made about C:CSM 4.0. GW heard people were talking about it, must like it, so gave us more of the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incinerator950 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 And they can't measure sales figures of product lines that basically don't exist. That was kinda one of my early points. With that reasoning, why did they go forward with 3.5 from 3.0 than? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kol Saresk Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Four words: Eye of Terror Campaign. The event only worked if it had full cooperation from the community. So, give the community what it wanted so GW could get what it wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incinerator950 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 ... Well, that's a party :cusster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totgeboren Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 With that reasoning, why did they go forward with 3.5 from 3.0 than? Not to mention that the brown 3.0 codex was just horrible! T4 Daemon Princes with no armour except a 5++. One krak missile was all it took to bring it down. T5 Great Unclean One... Bikes were something like 35-40 pts a piece. It really was almost unplayable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucien Eilam Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 There are tons of ways LatD could be done. Full update of vracks, simple datasheet for AM with no more rules then "no special characters, battle buddies with chaos, CTA with armies of the imperium", anything in between really. Or a full AM supplement. Or an inquisition style separate BL rule set. I don't believe they'd ever even consider any of those, except a Vraks update. You won't see anything from Citadel based entirely on conversions of another range, because it dilutes their IP. That wasn't a big deal 10 years ago, but now licensing is typically the equivalent of 1-3 additional major launches every financial year. Codex Astra Militarum products are as inviolately Imperial as Codex Blood Angels or Codex Space Wolves. The only way you'll ever get "Codex: The Lost and the Damned" is if it's launched alongside boxes of plastic Lost and the Damned Renegade Militia, Lost and the Damned Mutants, Lost and the Damned Stalk-tanks (or whatever they came up with). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaeron Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 With that reasoning, why did they go forward with 3.5 from 3.0 than? Not to mention that the brown 3.0 codex was just horrible! T4 Daemon Princes with no armour except a 5++. One krak missile was all it took to bring it down. T5 Great Unclean One... Bikes were something like 35-40 pts a piece. It really was almost unplayable. But we had Cultists and a million options - it was just an awesomely bizarre Chaotic book! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebris Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 It is very hard to expect anything regarding traitor guard from GW. They did only once incorporate them in their resources and that it was the Eye of Terror book, and were mostly mutants. GW is now following the policy no models, no rules, so unless they make traitor models we will not be getting traitor rules, not even via WD. With FW remonivng the models that do not sell well I do not expect much on the Vraks militia front either. Perhaps, maybe, just maybe they will release a Lost and the Damned army list but it is not to be expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sception Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Didn't have cultists in 3.0 until they were added by chapter aproved. Same w/ cult termies & daemonic gifts for princes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leif Bearclaw Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 With that reasoning, why did they go forward with 3.5 from 3.0 than? Because the company that released C;CSM 3.5, back in the days when Andy Chambers, Pete Haines and their ilk were around, is not the company that we deal with in the modern day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uprising Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Personality I see the new IG(AM) codex to be suitable for representing traitor guard. Why is everyone against count as? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaeron Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Didn't have cultists in 3.0 until they were added by chapter aproved. Same w/ cult termies & daemonic gifts for princes. I thought Cultists were, but Cult Termis were added in CA? But I don't have my Codex to hand. You're probably right, has been far too long! Models were lovely ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leif Bearclaw Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Isn't the issue with IG counts as that the allies matrix doesn't like mixing Imperial and Chaos dexes, and while House Rules can negate the issuet, that sort of thing can leave a bad taste in the mouth, especially if you're reliant on playing random people at a GW or gaming club. Running the issue of 'can I ignore the rules because fluff' can be tiring, not to mention problematic if your opponent does have an issue with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totgeboren Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Personality I see the new IG(AM) codex to be suitable for representing traitor guard. Why is everyone against count as? The only problem is that they and CDM/CD are Come the Apocalypse, so the amount of cool combinations you can do is severely limited to say the least. If IG and chaos were Allies of Convenience (or even better, BB), I think we would see traitor guard auxiliary troops in many CS armies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incinerator950 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Personality I see the new IG(AM) codex to be suitable for representing traitor guard. Why is everyone against count as? Come the Apocalypse for allying in Chaos dexes. That is the big gripe. One that they have no outgoing intention of handwaiving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Didn't have cultists in 3.0 until they were added by chapter aproved. Same w/ cult termies & daemonic gifts for princes. I thought Cultists were, but Cult Termis were added in CA? But I don't have my Codex to hand. You're probably right, has been far too long! Models were lovely The models were awesome to the max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilofix Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Enough griping. Pics! Servants of Decay. 2K Points: Company Command with 3 Chemical Mortars 3 Armored Fist Squads each with 1 Heavy (LasCannon) 1 Special (Melta or Flamer) each 1 Vet Squad with 1 Heavy 1 Special 1 Demo Squad with 2 GL 1 Plasma 1 Leman Russ Vanquisher 1 Bane Wolf 1 Colossus Bombard 3 Plague Ogryns 3 Spawn 2 Squads of 7 Plague Marines with 2 Plasma each 35 Zombies Edit - I actually used the above a couple of weekends back against a 7 Drop Pod Troop heavy Space Marine Detachment. We played Scouring and both went for Objective Secured with our Troops. The Zombies screened and tarpitted (line spread multi-assault). The Ogryns and Spawns then close assaulted one flank. Both the Bombard and Bane Wolf had AP3 Ignores Cover against his Marines on the other flank. The Vanquisher targetted his Drop Pods and Dread. While the 4 LasCannon Heavies Weaps supported the same. The Chimeras were reserved to rush Objectives but also to block LOS to my Bombard and Bane Wolf. I won by 2 points. Both had Linebreaker, I had Warlord and First Blood (a kill from the Vanq). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark_Apostle_XVII Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Wow! That is one cool army mate!! If I had an army that cool I wouldn't mind if the rules were not quite up to scratch anymore! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K0rtmer Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Re the OP, I meant to introduce myself much earlier and elsewhere, but seem to run short on hobby time lately.Hi, my name is Kortmer and I'm lurking the LaTD forum with greatest interest.Only recently did I get my stuff together and started off to building the LaTD army I've had planned for a long time now. I don't want a traitor guard army, I'm instead picturing mainly pirates, cultists, mutants, and other subhumans I can come up with, and possibly mix a small elite CSM contingent in. I'm not settled on the rules side of the project though. I'd be happy to play AM counts-as – I think the present guard, CSM, and daemon codices leave quite some possibility to represent traitor guard, and I don't see the ally matrix as too much of a restriction because I wouldn't picture most LaTD forces to operate as coherently as most other (loyalist) military –, but, well, I just won't be playing traitor guard. So I'll be waiting for that rumored FW book to come out some time late this year. I'm bracing myself to build and run my army as counts-as Orks, but I'll wait and see. In the meantime, to get me going, I've started to work on a LaTD Kill Team using AM Scions rules. I've started to put some models together, but I don't have anything much to share at this stage. I don't find much time lately and don't expect to progress quickly, but eventually I will. I guess I'm trying to say I'm really excited to have a LaTD section at B&C and I'll be following and contributing most definitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forté Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 @Brother Kortmer. Nothing wrong with posting wip stuff in the LotD forum. Always a good way to build interest. And likely some input for things/ bits you've not thought of trying. What's there to lose (other than your soul). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark_Apostle_XVII Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Welcome Brother Kortmer! Great to see another LatD player here. You have arrived at a good time, it seems to be gaining popularity this past week and there is talk of a future mini event. I am looking forward to seeing your projects soon, and please do get involved in the LatD forum :) *Liking the sound if the Scions kill team too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.