Should the next CSM Codex Mirror the SM Codex setup?

[plasmaspam]

I'll bite and - just out of spite - say that at this point, I would even more like to see the loyalist marines rules entirely negated and all of the divergent, non-essential variations folded back into Codex: Ultramarines. If someone still wanted to play SW/DA/BA/GK or any of the other chapters, he would be entirely able to do so just by fielding appropriately painted standart SM units in an unbound army... :whistling: :devil:

Heresy - BLAMM!

[the jeske]

 

Because it could be done better than the old 0-1 stuff. That's the entire point of that post, in almost every sentence of it. That's what I say every time this comes along, and there's the tragic insistence that Legion Tactics will fix everything and be The Only Answer. It's an okay answer. It's a nice touch. But it's not a brilliant way of reflecting the lore, or an ultimate solution. If it was, it'd have been in every edition since 3.5. If it was, Forge World would be doing it right now. And they're not, are they?

 

Legion Tactics could rock... as part of a greater, wider solution to what people want.

You do know that the 0-1 thing was only for vidicators and basilisks. And now even if it was brought back it wouldn't matter because of multi cad and ally system.

As far as the fix everything goes. Ask a White scare player when he was more happy, when he had the WS chapter tactics or when he had to play white painted ultramarines.

And there was no wider selection of traits and ways to play different armies then 3.5 chaos. There were multiple armies possible just through the flexibility of veteran traits and interaction with marks, with legion rules the codex made 2+builds for list for every legion[and am only counting the cutting edge thing. not stuff like chosen stars or some odd ball builds].

 

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying bad Legion rules (which we've seen before) would be limiting, which is entirely true and entirely evident, as it happened in the past. And I've not said I'd expect them to be bad, just that they were in the past. Done well, Legion Tactics might very well be 1. a nice touch, and 2. a great step in wider changes. I said that clearly and repeatedly. You're mistaking "This could be better and isn't a final solution" for "I completely hate the idea of Legion Tactics and we should never have them".

 

NL have more raptors then other legions they have options to get more raptors then other legions. Other legions can still take them.  AL are known for cultists, they get cultists. A cultists less AL army fully viable. 1ksons can build a thrall list. WB are known for their apostol+chaos religion thing. They get better demons , the apostol[which is actualy good and WB players want to use him] etc.

How the hell were the rules bad? They were the pinacle of w40k design. Open armies full of viable choices , multiple builds with single legions . Compering to today, it is as if it was 10+ dex

 

Let's be honest. Forge World is a legal, official part of the rules. Not accepting them is nothing more than a local group's house rules, now that the misunderstandings have been publicly cleared up. It can suck if people's house rules chop off part of the variety and richness in the game, but that's their choice. It's not really relevant or worthy of mentioning in the discussion.

 

 

When local means most of asia, central and eastern europe, then yeah. Just a local house rules thing, see no problem here either.

 

 

 

 

I'm normally against returning things from 3.5- the synergies were just terrible and broke the meta, Daemonic Stature and Dreadaxe springs to mind, as does Siren Prince- but a points discount would work for me- if you're monomarked, you get your marked units cheaper, if you're mixed, you pay extra but get the mix, etc.

 

Ok he was broken against what? falcon eldar with harlis ?  4+ MC tyrandis which still run ton of infiltrating rending stealers ? or maybe the good old space marines with their 30+rending shot per turn[and for those who forgot/didnt play then. rending was auto wound on 6 to hit]?

The only people who say 3.5 was broken are those who at the time of it being legal played bad armies.

[BrainFireBob]

 

 

Because it could be done better than the old 0-1 stuff. That's the entire point of that post, in almost every sentence of it. That's what I say every time this comes along, and there's the tragic insistence that Legion Tactics will fix everything and be The Only Answer. It's an okay answer. It's a nice touch. But it's not a brilliant way of reflecting the lore, or an ultimate solution. If it was, it'd have been in every edition since 3.5. If it was, Forge World would be doing it right now. And they're not, are they?

 

Legion Tactics could rock... as part of a greater, wider solution to what people want.

You do know that the 0-1 thing was only for vidicators and basilisks. And now even if it was brought back it wouldn't matter because of multi cad and ally system.

As far as the fix everything goes. Ask a White scare player when he was more happy, when he had the WS chapter tactics or when he had to play white painted ultramarines.

And there was no wider selection of traits and ways to play different armies then 3.5 chaos. There were multiple armies possible just through the flexibility of veteran traits and interaction with marks, with legion rules the codex made 2+builds for list for every legion[and am only counting the cutting edge thing. not stuff like chosen stars or some odd ball builds].

 

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying bad Legion rules (which we've seen before) would be limiting, which is entirely true and entirely evident, as it happened in the past. And I've not said I'd expect them to be bad, just that they were in the past. Done well, Legion Tactics might very well be 1. a nice touch, and 2. a great step in wider changes. I said that clearly and repeatedly. You're mistaking "This could be better and isn't a final solution" for "I completely hate the idea of Legion Tactics and we should never have them".

 

NL have more raptors then other legions they have options to get more raptors then other legions. Other legions can still take them.  AL are known for cultists, they get cultists. A cultists less AL army fully viable. 1ksons can build a thrall list. WB are known for their apostol+chaos religion thing. They get better demons , the apostol[which is actualy good and WB players want to use him] etc.

How the hell were the rules bad? They were the pinacle of w40k design. Open armies full of viable choices , multiple builds with single legions . Compering to today, it is as if it was 10+ dex

 

Let's be honest. Forge World is a legal, official part of the rules. Not accepting them is nothing more than a local group's house rules, now that the misunderstandings have been publicly cleared up. It can suck if people's house rules chop off part of the variety and richness in the game, but that's their choice. It's not really relevant or worthy of mentioning in the discussion.

 

 

When local means most of asia, central and eastern europe, then yeah. Just a local house rules thing, see no problem here either.

 

 

 

 

I'm normally against returning things from 3.5- the synergies were just terrible and broke the meta, Daemonic Stature and Dreadaxe springs to mind, as does Siren Prince- but a points discount would work for me- if you're monomarked, you get your marked units cheaper, if you're mixed, you pay extra but get the mix, etc.

 

Ok he was broken against what? falcon eldar with harlis ?  4+ MC tyrandis which still run ton of infiltrating rending stealers ? or maybe the good old space marines with their 30+rending shot per turn[and for those who forgot/didnt play then. rending was auto wound on 6 to hit]?

The only people who say 3.5 was broken are those who at the time of it being legal played bad armies.

 

 

That's a sweeping generalization. My first Chaos army was in 2000, so I played before and through the 'glorious' 3.5 'dex. This is not the thread to hash all of this out, but I will say the following:

 

The reason I referenced above, with synergy, was that certain builds sacrified nothing. You could take an excellent fast, shooty army that was still hard in assault. Not generalist good, but specialist good. The major elephant in the room was the extra capability added by the Vet skills. All your tank hunting units had tank hunter, all your assault units had furious assault, your champions all had +1 strength on top of that (This would break the current challenge mechanic) for cheap. It was the cheap that's the problem. If they cost more- if the opportunity cost was higher, in particular- then hell yes it would be fun to bring back.

 

Yes, standard units are cheaper now- but for everyone.

 

Yes, ATSKNF is a broken mechanic- I'd rather tone that down than claim it's the right of every army to be at that point.

 

The donkey cannon army suffered from a mixed fragility/speed problem- the fast platforms were fragile, the tough platforms were slow. It also depended on lines of fire and was fairly short ranged. Close fast enough, or play the range game, and it had a weakness. The Harlies in Serpents were later, and that was due to an admittedly broken piece of wargear for Eldar vehicles. Earlier, it was the Starcannon army of doom (still live when 3.5 dropped) which suffered from the range problem, and the boxing Seer council, which suffered in objective missions. The best Chaos lists- infiltrating daemon bomb, Siren Prince daemon bomb, pie plate of doom- didn't have comparable weaknesses. If you like, from a meta standpoint it was not possible to inflict an overwhelming victory on these lists, which inherently unbalanced tournament results due to opponent draw.

[Xenith]

Here we go again.

[AlanofAngels]

Erm... I'd be happy if we follow the Marine Codex in that we get drop pods

[Noctem Cultor]

Wow you break you Tablet board and miss out a great diverse discussion on your topic post.

So many great points, shame most point to GW being unlikely to do anything but a Generic CSM: Codex with a Suppliment.

To be honest the greatest thing GW could do is give us two schools of Traitor Marine Codex's Chaos And Renegade With A Few Chapter Traits chucked in aimed to give us a few themed armies but maybe im asking to much for a Non Ultramarine related product .

Well at least the Crusade Lists and IA13 Books give us a choice if we dont want to use the current Codex.

[Lord Asvaldir]

Separate traitor legions/renegade chapters codexes would be very cool, however I don't see the renegade one catching on-feel like they are a lot more players basing their armies around traitor legions opposed to renegade chapters. Might make more sense to just have your base CSM codex and the traitor legions codex with traits/special units for each of the nine traitor legions (maybe Red Corsairs as well since they are a fairly prominent renegade chapter).

 

I wouldn't be too glum though about these ideas never coming to light, IA13 gives us a bunch more units which in turn allows for taking more legion specific units.  

[Kol Saresk]

Of course the whole "there are no Renegades players" might come from two twin facts: 1.)it is only recently GW has begun harping on the presence of Renegades and 2.)there are many Legion players who are unwilling to let there be room for anything other than the Legions.

 

Primary example. Look at how many people look at the Crimson Slaughter supplement as the Word Bearers supplement. Because they refuse to accept that there could be Renegades who have high levels of Possessed so obviously, anything with a list for a Possessed army must actually be a Word Bearers army.

 

Legions only this, Legions only that. It is a narrow view and it only serves to take one faction(Chaos Space Marines) and make it revolve around one specific subfaction(the Legions). It'd be like if Forgeworld started the Horus Heresy and then told everyone "we're not making Any armies beyond the four at Istvaan III. You're just going to have to make do. But don't worry, those for Legions have a ton of variety and there is still the rather well-endowed Great Crusade list."

 

That's what we're doing. Telling everyone to focus on one portion and anyone who has a standing that exists outside that portion just has to make do.

 

While complaining about GW doing the very same thing to us.

[Loesh]

Of course the whole "there are no Renegades players" might come from two twin facts: 1.)it is only recently GW has begun harping on the presence of Renegades and 2.)there are many Legion players who are unwilling to let there be room for anything other than the Legions.

 

Primary example. Look at how many people look at the Crimson Slaughter supplement as the Word Bearers supplement. Because they refuse to accept that there could be Renegades who have high levels of Possessed so obviously, anything with a list for a Possessed army must actually be a Word Bearers army.

 

Legions only this, Legions only that. It is a narrow view and it only serves to take one faction(Chaos Space Marines) and make it revolve around one specific subfaction(the Legions). It'd be like if Forgeworld started the Horus Heresy and then told everyone "we're not making Any armies beyond the four at Istvaan III. You're just going to have to make do. But don't worry, those for Legions have a ton of variety and there is still the rather well-endowed Great Crusade list."

 

That's what we're doing. Telling everyone to focus on one portion and anyone who has a standing that exists outside that portion just has to make do.

 

While complaining about GW doing the very same thing to us.

 

That and the Dark Apostles in addition to the possessed didn't help, and Word Bearers players seemed pretty upset at that.

 

Just between you and me, my main Warband character may as well be a Dark Apostle with how much I focus on his religious history, but supporting a Slaaneshi Dark Apostle with the limited scope of fluff we have at the moment concerning legions. So I just go with Chaos Sorcerer instead.

[Kol Saresk]

Honestly, I don't see apostles existing outside the Word bearers as being this whole outrageous thing. Something has to happen with the Chaplains who turnTraitor. Is it really any surprise GW decides to say that they become Dark Apostles as well? What else would we call them, Missonaries? Black Evangelists? Wait, I know, we'll borrow a tidbit from Clint Eastwood and just call them "The Preachers"!

 

But see, that's the point. At every step, we have people saying "I want variety" but at every step, those same voices want to limit that variety. You shouldn't have to make your Dark Apostle a Sorcerer just because he isn't a Word Bearer. That defeats the whole purpose. If he is a Dark Apostle then he should be a Dark Apostle, irregardless if he is a Word Bearer, a Sanctified, a Black Psalm or even an Emperor's Child.

[plasmaspam]

That's what we're doing. Telling everyone to focus on one portion and anyone who has a standing that exists outside that portion just has to make do.

 

Kol - this statement here is the only thing I feel I have to disagree with you on, and forgive me for picking on this single sentence as I appreciate it is part of a wider context, but if you'll allow me...  

 

My reading of this thread tells me that people believe a codex (or codex + supplements) can have the "legions" (however we may see them on the 41st millennium) AND the younger renegade warbands existing and available side by side, not one or other.  Certainly from my standpoint I'd just like to see the non-aligned legions given then same due attention as the aligned.  I take A D-B's point that the "legions" are not just a paragraph plus three bullet points marketed as "Legion Tactics", it is much more than that.  But at least it would be a start, surely?! 

 

We are both Night Lords devotees; would you be really that unhappy with a codex that offered a quarter page called Night Lords Legion Tactics that for a set tax on the warlord provided, just for arguments sake, VotLW, Night Vision, D3 Infiltrators, and Raptors as Troops?  Perhaps with a limit on the amount of Armour you could take as a negative to balance the positives?  Please, humour me here whilst considering the principle, I know the traits I've picked may seem a bit obvious or stereotypical.

 

I'm really concerned that the depth of material people believe can be offered for the "legions", ultimately, would require heavy investment in Supplements or FW books.  This may be the direction GW are currenlty pursuing in order to cream us for cash, but the "Chapter Tactics" seem to have worked very well as a starting point for the Loyalist chapters, which leads me to conclude that, as a starting point, Noctems original point about the value of a similar mechanic for a revised C:CSM has validity.

[Loesh]

Honestly, I don't see apostles existing outside the Word bearers as being this whole outrageous thing. Something has to happen with the Chaplains who turnTraitor. Is it really any surprise GW decides to say that they become Dark Apostles as well? What else would we call them, Missonaries? Black Evangelists? Wait, I know, we'll borrow a tidbit from Clint Eastwood and just call them "The Preachers"!

 

But see, that's the point. At every step, we have people saying "I want variety" but at every step, those same voices want to limit that variety. You shouldn't have to make your Dark Apostle a Sorcerer just because he isn't a Word Bearer. That defeats the whole purpose. If he is a Dark Apostle then he should be a Dark Apostle, irregardless if he is a Word Bearer, a Sanctified, a Black Psalm or even an Emperor's Child.

 

I remember reading about Charmosian and I was like "What? that's a thing that exists?" but yeah, during the Horus Heresy the Emperors Children had a chaplain, and probably had multiple chaplains, whatever happened to those guys? I'd certainly like to know. but it's not really touched upon because Dark Apostles are considered a Chaos Undivided and Word Bearer thing. Yet at the same time Noise Marines show up in other legions(Admittedly with less background as well.) so I don't know why there can't a bit of mixing.

[Lord Asvaldir]

Of course the whole "there are no Renegades players" might come from two twin facts: 1.)it is only recently GW has begun harping on the presence of Renegades and 2.)there are many Legion players who are unwilling to let there be room for anything other than the Legions.

 

Primary example. Look at how many people look at the Crimson Slaughter supplement as the Word Bearers supplement. Because they refuse to accept that there could be Renegades who have high levels of Possessed so obviously, anything with a list for a Possessed army must actually be a Word Bearers army.

 

Legions only this, Legions only that. It is a narrow view and it only serves to take one faction(Chaos Space Marines) and make it revolve around one specific subfaction(the Legions). It'd be like if Forgeworld started the Horus Heresy and then told everyone "we're not making Any armies beyond the four at Istvaan III. You're just going to have to make do. But don't worry, those for Legions have a ton of variety and there is still the rather well-endowed Great Crusade list."

 

That's what we're doing. Telling everyone to focus on one portion and anyone who has a standing that exists outside that portion just has to make do.

 

While complaining about GW doing the very same thing to us.

 

Well I mean I was referring to just if you took a poll of every CSM player, the majority would probably say their army represents a legion, but I do see your point. 

 

For the crimson slaughter example, it may be true that some players feel that way about renegades, however I certainly don't and I'm a word bearers player. Never use crimson slaughter, probably won't anytime soon. I ca understand your argument though about the legion superiority complex, I'm sure it does exist even if I haven't see it that often, it's just not a problem for me because I don't have a renegade chapter army. 

[incinerator950]

http://i891.photobucket.com/albums/ac116/incinerator950/1254416776637.png

[Loesh]

Which I can agree with, believe me when I say i'm a tad irked that the Crimson Slaughter got their own supplement before the Emperors Children, and I certainly don't think ALL Word Bearers players were angry about it just because it had possessed and Dark Apostles.

 

It's just one of the reasons I do remember it coming up, and while initially I sympathized I also realized that it didn't automatically make the CS Word Bearers but better, the problems were largely wider and for reasons you just outlined.

 

Edit: Well now my post just looks silly....

[incinerator950]

I think it's silly that newly converted renegades automatically lose their fancy equipment for turning, or how nobody knows how to capture and reverse engineer things.

[Loesh]

I think it's silly that newly converted renegades automatically lose their fancy equipment for turning, or how nobody knows how to capture and reverse engineer things.

 

Chaos Space Marine 1: "Shouldn't we have Chaos Apothecaries?"

Chaos Space Marine 2: "We do! I mean our warband deals with Fabius constantly for outrageous jacked up prices."

Chaos Space Marine 1: "No, no, I mean Chaos Apothecaries *besides* Fabius so we can harvest geneseed without those price hikes."

Chaos Space Marine 2: "Well only the Red Cosairs are organized enough to have an Apothecar-"

Chaos Space Marine 1: "Yes, yes, yes, the Red Cosairs are more organized then most, but didn't we like...take Apothecaries with us to the Eye of Terror? plus with Chapters constantly going renegade shouldn't we have a steady filter of new ones to fill in, it should somewhat curb our geneseed problem, in fact we should have an apothecary in this very company! where did he go?!"

Chaos Space Marine 2: "....Huh, that's right...where did Joe go?" *Looks around* "Guess he got ate by daemons."

Chaos Space Marine 1: "..."

[Slave to Darkness]

I play Word Bearers, I had some spare cash and picked up the Crimson Slaughter dex, had a read, liked it, didn't want to start another red CSM army so now I run my Bearers with that dex. Not at all fussed that a new Renegade army got what others say should have been the Bearers dex, possessed aint just a Bearers thing, sure they had them first with the Gal Vorbak but most of those died on at the dropsite massacre, the possessed that came later were on par with the possessed from other legions, I don't see the Bearers using them any more or any less than the Black Legion etc. 

 

I would use the Crimson Slaughter book for other legions but then my Chaos armies would all be similar to my Word Bearers. As for Dark Apostles I have one in every army, again no reason for them to be a Bearers thing, Chaos had Chaplain in RoC, so why must they be a gimmick of only one faction, by that logic only Thousand Sons should have psykers?? 

 

Also lets give the renegades some love, I have Tzeentch and Slaanesh renegade army's as Thousand Sons don't really float my boat and Slaanesh = Noise Marines concept as been overdone. 

 

We don't NEED legion codex books, but my earlier post on vet skills would be a good way of doing fluffy legion and/or renegade forces (Zealot for Word Bearers or a renegade warband of fanatical Slaanesh followers, Infiltrate for Alpha Legion special ops teams or little Jimmys made up renegades who travel through the warp). 

 

Though I do think we need something for the mono god forces, Plague Marine, Thousand Sons, Noise Marne termies, lord etc because the whole Deathguard legion turned, not the tactical squads turned into Plague Marines and the havocs just got a cold.

[daboarder]

"lets give the renegades some love".....

They've been getting the love to the detriment of the faction as a whole for 8 or so years now

[Gree]

Of course the whole "there are no Renegades players" might come from two twin facts: 1.)it is only recently GW has begun harping on the presence of Renegades and 2.)there are many Legion players who are unwilling to let there be room for anything other than the Legions.

I don't think anyone in this thread is claiming that nobody plays Renegades or that Renegades don't deserve anything. The thing that's being noted is that Legions are more popular than Renegades in the fanbase, which is essentially true. I don't think that's going to change either. The whole Renegade-centric view for Chaos has been out for 7 years since the Gavdex came out. So far it seems like the Traitor Legions are still the most popular sub-faction for Chaos Space Marines.

 

Who knows. Maybe the Renegades will be way more popular than the Traitor Legions in 5-6 years time, but I don't think that's likely.

[Schurge]

Fudge it. Accidently hit the button on my mouse that makes me go back a page.

 

Long rant short... You can't play Chaos the way the lore describes, meanwhile Space Marines get access to everything.

 

It can't be that hard to change the rules.

 

I made another thread elsewhere that is pretty popular... Read the Crimson Slaughter codex and ordered a bunch of Possessed, Daemon HQs, and Deep Striking units to play as Crimson Slaughter... Sadly the rules can't let me do it without Forgeworld... and the units I do have will just end up sitting on my shelf as I buy other things more conducive to blitzkreig assaults.

 

Why on Earth GW thought Fear was a good army trait in a game where no one has to take Fear tests is beyond me.

[brother_contagion]

I'd agree that the (eventual) 7th edition Chaos Space Marine Codex should be different from the Space Marine Codex, I mean, most have lived in the Warp and only the younger warbands are likely the only ones that live mostly in real-space. Chaos should ACT and LOOK much more demonic than they do now.

They should get new demon engines that have WS, BS and/or I 4 or in some cases better and be more varied in vehicle type and armor value, all models should be able to receive a Mark of Chaos (including Undivided, I liked that idea). Also to represent their mastery and familiarity with the Warp, they shouldn't need to rely on Drop Pods. I could see reason for units to be summoned in a similar manner as the Conjuration powers summon demons and Icons to act as the conduits for their fallen brethren to step into real-space. Also I'd like see more warped beasts besides Chaos Spawn introduced. Another flyer, preferably some sort of heavy/medium transport. Terminators should have the option of something similar to Storm Shields and Thunder Hammers, some sort of elite Terminator unit (besides Mutilators). All Chosen should be able to be as varied as Space Marine Veterans are, on a model by model basis (the option of bikes or jump packs would be a nice touch). GIVE US A REAL COMMAND SQUAD! One that doesn't take up an Elite slot. Warpsmiths and Dark Apostles should have the same options as the Sorcerers and Chaos Lords do. etc. etc. etc.

I don't mind much if we don't get Legion Tactics (maybe special characters give an army wide rule separate from their Warlord Trait), but a greater amount of options is what I want to see. That would make me a happy little traitor

[Kol Saresk]

Double Post

[Kol Saresk]

 

 

That's what we're doing. Telling everyone to focus on one portion and anyone who has a standing that exists outside that portion just has to make do.

Kol - this statement here is the only thing I feel I have to disagree with you on, and forgive me for picking on this single sentence as I appreciate it is part of a wider context, but if you'll allow me...

 

My reading of this thread tells me that people believe a codex (or codex + supplements) can have the "legions" (however we may see them on the 41st millennium) AND the younger renegade warbands existing and available side by side, not one or other. Certainly from my standpoint I'd just like to see the non-aligned legions given then same due attention as the aligned. I take A D-B's point that the "legions" are not just a paragraph plus three bullet points marketed as "Legion Tactics", it is much more than that. But at least it would be a start, surely?!

 

We are both Night Lords devotees; would you be really that unhappy with a codex that offered a quarter page called Night Lords Legion Tactics that for a set tax on the warlord provided, just for arguments sake, VotLW, Night Vision, D3 Infiltrators, and Raptors as Troops? Perhaps with a limit on the amount of Armour you could take as a negative to balance the positives? Please, humour me here whilst considering the principle, I know the traits I've picked may seem a bit obvious or stereotypical.

 

I'm really concerned that the depth of material people believe can be offered for the "legions", ultimately, would require heavy investment in Supplements or FW books. This may be the direction GW are currenlty pursuing in order to cream us for cash, but the "Chapter Tactics" seem to have worked very well as a starting point for the Loyalist chapters, which leads me to conclude that, as a starting point, Noctems original point about the value of a similar mechanic for a revised C:CSM has validity.

As for what you intend for the spirit of the Night Lords receiving a set of rules that show their doctrine of shock assault with psychological warfare and not the exact examples you listed, would I be unhappy with that? No. But woul I be unhappy if the Night Lords were the only group to receive such treatment? Yes. Would I be unhappy if only the Legions received such treatment and the Renegades did not? Yes. That's my point.

 

 

 

Of course the whole "there are no Renegades players" might come from two twin facts: 1.)it is only recently GW has begun harping on the presence of Renegades and 2.)there are many Legion players who are unwilling to let there be room for anything other than the Legions.

 

Primary example. Look at how many people look at the Crimson Slaughter supplement as the Word Bearers supplement. Because they refuse to accept that there could be Renegades who have high levels of Possessed so obviously, anything with a list for a Possessed army must actually be a Word Bearers army.

 

Legions only this, Legions only that. It is a narrow view and it only serves to take one faction(Chaos Space Marines) and make it revolve around one specific subfaction(the Legions). It'd be like if Forgeworld started the Horus Heresy and then told everyone "we're not making Any armies beyond the four at Istvaan III. You're just going to have to make do. But don't worry, those for Legions have a ton of variety and there is still the rather well-endowed Great Crusade list."

 

That's what we're doing. Telling everyone to focus on one portion and anyone who has a standing that exists outside that portion just has to make do.

 

While complaining about GW doing the very same thing to us.

Well I mean I was referring to just if you took a poll of every CSM player, the majority would probably say their army represents a legion, but I do see your point.

 

For the crimson slaughter example, it may be true that some players feel that way about renegades, however I certainly don't and I'm a word bearers player. Never use crimson slaughter, probably won't anytime soon. I ca understand your argument though about the legion superiority complex, I'm sure it does exist even if I haven't see it that often, it's just not a problem for me because I don't have a renegade chapter army.

Maybe, but how biased would that poll be? Is it a poll of every single Chaos player worldwide, or just the BnC, which has a heavy Legion base?

[Slayer le Boucher]

I'm okay with renegades Chapters, after all the actual CSM and CS supps do that nicely.

 

What i'm not okay is that Traitors Legions/Warbands are simply ignored.

 

Each time for some months now, that this discussion come up, someone says" Yeah, but there is no Legions anymore, they are scattered in warbands yadd ayadda yadda" yeah and?

 

Why is this denying us the pride to be Part of that Legacy?

 

Its just the same with Loyalist Marines, There is no more SM Legions, they are Chapters now, but they still have a claim and right to have their pride in their Legacy of their "parents", so why is it so hard for CSM to have the right to claim that?

 

See what i'm trying to say?

 

Now in a gameplay mechanics view i don't say that they should be similar to Sm chapters and just add spikes and sprinkle them with Deamonic power, no.

 

CSM while still having some form of connexion with their Lyalist counter parts, should for the most part be different.

 

The other only 2 armies i can think of that has the same way is the Eldar and Dark Eldars, 2 different armies that are somehow linked to each other, but that still feel and plays( for the most part) differently.

 

After all Sm and CSM are the two sides of the same coin in some regardes, but the Path they walk is the real difference and its should be emphazised more on it.

 

AS it is a part from marks and Boons and a few units, there isn't much that sets them aparts, i mean you could possibly take a regular UM army and use the BL supp with it without anymuch problems.

 

What i wish is for Chaos to stand more out has his Own, it should still have some connection with his past, but it shouldn't be just "Marines with Spikes and worse gear"

 

And thats one of the main problem, since the Start GW never really knew how to handle Chaos properly has an army.

 

In 2nd Ed with RoC it worked because the game itself whas a giant mess, so a bit more or less din't change much to it, and it fitted perfectly into it.

 

But after that they've always struggled to do something with it, they've tried, gods knows they did, and they failed for long.

 

But FW is on a good path i think, not only with IA13 but also with the HH series, i mean look at their Legions traits and rules, its the kind of thing that you look at it and you think " Yup definatly feels like Legion X/Y/Z", and thats what we are missing.

 

know like someone stated before, Legions/Warbands tactics alone won't really make much, but its a start, and you have to start somewhere eventually.