Making Chaos Space marines (and troops) more viable

[Marshal van Trapp]

What if they changed minimum unit sizes across the board for "horde" units? Something like a 20 minimum for cultists, gaunts, grots, ect. Then a "msu" for them would be more in line with the other options. Guard are in another section all together, I think they really need the old platoon rules to properly represent them on the tabletop. As for the CSM vs Cultists debate, I think CSM need better options or cheaper points to make them even a choice over cultists, this goes double for plague/rubric marines in DG/1ksons armies. Although they have the added benefit of not having other elite options to take over them (no havocs, no chosen) they are still difficult to want to field enmass when their points can be better spent elsewhere. I don't believe it would be a well received solution but perhaps limiting or removing those more elite options would put a bit of their power back into CSM.

 

Here is my possible solution:

1. Remove Chosen and Havoc squads as options (there are plenty of other elite/heavy support options to take) and reduce CSM by 1 point

2. Give regular CSM squads an option like "Chosen of The Gods: the squad may not take any heavy weapons but gains +1A and +1LD" for +3 points

3. Give regular CSM squads the ability to take 2 heavy/special weapons in a 5-man. Not as powerful as havocs but more balanced for a troop slot.

4. Make chainswords an addon instead of a replacement, could even make them a point to keep it fair.

 

I think together those changes, while crazy and extreme, would give value back to CSM over say cultists

[Schlitzaf]

Honestly, the main advantage/strength that Chaos Marines have over Cultists is ability to act as a ‘center’. They form a hardy hard to remove core in a list. Cultists while point for point more efficient, they run into the Gaurdsman issue of; Well their Humans.

 

STR 3/TO 3 and 5+ saves, are paper mache. 3+ Armor takes medium to heavy firepower to reasonable dislodge and destroy. Finally once you start taking battle shock barring Abaddon, a Warlord Trait or spending 2 CP. Those cultists will vanish.

 

The basic principle is running three to four squads of 10+ Marines either Footslogging or Rhino-Up. In the former cass you want a larger squad and weapons like Flamers, while the latter keep it 10 Men, But go like Double Heavy Bolter for the turn you jump out.

 

If you charge an enemy with cultists, it’s highly unlikely they’ll withdraw. They will kill 3-6 each turn depending whose turn it is and Overwatch. Meaning you’ll lose another 2-3 from Battleshock on average. Those Chaos Marines, will lose maybe one Marine. Then the enemy is either force to stay engaged, or withdrawing. If they do so while opening your unit to enemy fire power but also then losing ability to take the objective.

 

If you time charges right and hit multiple units, withdrawing becomes a much harder decision. As those units for rest of turn in most cases will cease to exist mechanically cannot shoot, Charge or advance. And have to backwards unless they can fly.

 

The basic point is Chaos Marines are cheap ‘center’. Cheap Specials and Heavies, move constantly and take the ‘center’. Cultists are anchors, they provide bodies to hold backfield and run the flanks. The key part of all this, is proper tool for proper job.

 

If you are using Chaos Marines to hold backfield, cheap cultists or havocs are better. If you are using cultists in an attempt to dislodge the enemy, Chaos Marines are better. And this is perhaps something to stress about hordes and ObjSec.

 

Objective FlowChart

1) Check if Unit in 3”

2) If both players have units in 3”, does one or more of those units have ObjSec. If so go to step 3b)

3a) If neither unit has ObjSec, which unit has more MODELS, within 3” of objective. If so the unit with more models claims the objective

3b) If only one side has a unit with ObjSec within 3” of an objective, that side claims the objective. If both units have ObjSec continue to the next step

4) Does one or more of the units with ObjSec have SuperObjSec (Custodes? I think) if so that unit claims the objective. If not continue.

4b) If Both Units have SuperObjSec does unit has more models within 3”? If so that unit claims the objective.

5) Does one of the two units with ObjSec have more models within 3” of the objective then the other? If so that unit and their side, claims the objective.

 

A 30 Man Gaunt Squad, will only get maybe 3-5 models in 3” of an objective. Even basic troop Marines can butcher a squad worth of gaurd or gaunt level (10 models including battleshock) models a turn. And if they push forward with consolidation. If you have newer bases, you can just take up the space around the objective, enemy cannot fit more than a couple models. If you have older bases, you have same base size so should be able to get same number of models from that unit.

 

It’s something see often forgotten, it’s not the count of the units currently alive models for who wins a contested objective, but the amount of models currently within 3” of an objective from that unit

[Panzer]

That's how it's supposed to work in theory. In reality however there's enough anti-infantry damage output within every army that Chaos Marines aren't that hard to shift after all. They aren't the sturdy center you think they are, I fear.

[Schlitzaf]

I mean I find my center composed of Crusader and Intercessor Squads reasonably hard to shift even if those squads are normally decimated to few models by turn 4-5, so I would suspect a force of 30-50 Chaos Marines would be similarly tough to shift.

[Panzer]

Well Intercessors are significantly harder to shift due the W2 stat and Crusader squads get more wounds for less points than Tacticals and Chaos Marines without losing much durability as well.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Personally I think the problem is more to do with how aggressively GW pointed the horde style units. I don't think they realized just how beneficial the AP rule changes would be for them, over estimated the new morale system, and forgot why units were only allowed to hold one objective at a time. 

 

 

1) Give bolter weapons a -1 AP modifier if the str of the bolt weapons is higher than the majority toughness of the targeted unit.

 

2) If a unit holds multiple objectives and one is contested, they all count as being contested. I think GW was trying to make big squads more viable so I don't mind that they can control a lot of territory but there should be some checks and balances.

 

3) I think there should be an elite keyword, which gives a penalty to opposing units leadership if they don't have it as well and are engaged in CC with a unit that has it. Just to represent how hopeless going up against some of this stuff would be for regular trooper. This should go on most marine units and a lot of other iconic units (genestealers, aspect warriors, etc.)

 

All of these would nerf most hordes, but there would be some units like tzaangors that would need to be adjusted. I just think it would be easier than repointing MEQ or Horde units.

[Akrim]

Agree, bolters should universally be -1 AP.

 

How about this - Modify Icon of Vengence to include +1CP for VotLW in a ten strong unit. I would take CSMs again in that scenario.

[Panzer]

The problem is, if normal Bolter become AP-1, then what is with the Primaris Bolter who already are AP-1? Are they going to become AP-2? Storm Bolter and Combi-Bolter become AP-1 as well? Heavy Bolter and the Primaris Inceptor Bolter AP-2?

If anything the only thing it would do is make Power Armor infantry die even faster while Cultists wouldn't even care about that change.

 

I mean, I agree that Primaris with their better Bolters, A2 and W2 feel more like Marines on the table than actual Chaos Marines/Tacticals, however now that they are there to stay I doubt we'll ever see generic Marines buffed in such a way.

Maybe it's time to accept that the generic Marines statline is dated and will get replaced with something else eventually.

[Marshal van Trapp]

...

 

1) Give bolter weapons a -1 AP modifier if the str of the bolt weapons is higher than the majority toughness of the targeted unit.

 

2) If a unit holds multiple objectives and one is contested, they all count as being contested. I think GW was trying to make big squads more viable so I don't mind that they can control a lot of territory but there should be some checks and balances.

 

3) I think there should be an elite keyword, which gives a penalty to opposing units leadership if they don't have it as well and are engaged in CC with a unit that has it. Just to represent how hopeless going up against some of this stuff would be for regular trooper. This should go on most marine units and a lot of other iconic units (genestealers, aspect warriors, etc.)

 

All of these would nerf most hordes, but there would be some units like tzaangors that would need to be adjusted. I just think it would be easier than repointing MEQ or Horde units.

1) I think this would invalidate the primaries bolsters but I can see the merits of such rules (perhaps give them to all bolt weapons such that the primaries and heavy bolsters become -2 when firing at T3/4 troops)

 

2) why not just make it so a single unit can only hold a single objective, even with objsec. Or what if ObjSec only worked if your unit was holding a single objective, that might balance it.

 

3) I like this idea, something like a -1 Ld while engaging a unit with the ability, idk how GW is about giving keywords rules but they could easily FAQ them onto all the "elite" troops as specialist rules

 

Ultimately something has to be done to make horde units more in line with elite troops, be it points adjustments, rule changes, or a combination of the 2.

[Skaorn]

1) I think this would invalidate the primaries bolsters but I can see the merits of such rules (perhaps give them to all bolt weapons such that the primaries and heavy bolsters become -2 when firing at T3/4 troops)

2) why not just make it so a single unit can only hold a single objective, even with objsec. Or what if ObjSec only worked if your unit was holding a single objective, that might balance it.

3) I like this idea, something like a -1 Ld while engaging a unit with the ability, idk how GW is about giving keywords rules but they could easily FAQ them onto all the "elite" troops as specialist rules

Ultimately something has to be done to make horde units more in line with elite troops, be it points adjustments, rule changes, or a combination of the 2.

 

I'm not seeing the merit for the Bolt weapon -1 AP. For one thing it doesn't really help with hordes and not doing an increase like that for weapons like shruiken catapults and pulse rifles would be annoying to many people.

 

I actually like the idea that you can only hold 1 objective and if you are contested on one, you're contested on them all. This way it prevents some from just switching to another objective even though the unit is actively engaged in combat.

 

Finally I think the morale system just needs a major overhaul rather than tacking on modifiers that might not do anything if the horde unit has something that bypasses morale.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

@sfPanzer - Yeah those are all bolt weapons. Look guard used to get no save in the open from a bolter, and costed more points. Marines have stayed pretty close to their old point values and haven't benefited as much as guard from the AP changes. I think this would be a good equalizer. That isn't very complex its not like any MEQ troop is that good right now. Edit: It would make heavy bolters better against MEQs but that would be it unless there a bunch of str 5 bolters i'm not aware of. 

 

That said they went with the elites keyword ideal this could be a function of that instead of being based on toughness to protect SoB, Aspect warriors, and other tweener units. Its mostly the units on extremes that are either too good, or crap. 

 

 

@Skaorn&Marshall Van Trapp - Yeah the objective rule is frustrating, but I get why they did it. They want people not to be punished for the big squads, I just want there to be a drawback. This is the first edition since I started where it doesn't feel like you get punished for big squads (played a tiny amount of second, and played ever since), It really should swing that way for a bit. Plus I think making elites better against horde units really helps on this front.

 

As far as elder are concerned they're in pretty good shape atm, so I don't see why they'd complain (granted with reaper nerfs a strong possibility that may change). 

[Schlitzaf]

Honeslty, I think models with a base leadership 7 or less should take double negatives from negative modifiers.

[techsoldaten]

While this is an interesting discussion, it doesn't feature much talk about the actual benefits of CSMs.

 

I realize a lot of people see the choice between CSMs and Cultists, but that really doesn't speak to the strengths of each unit. It's really a choice between long range firepower or short range assault. It feels like competitive players favor the later, but I have had much more success with the former.

 

One of the variants of my Black Legion army features 3+ squads of 10 - 20 CSMs. I give them 1 - 2 Lascannons each. They cluster around Abaddon, 3 Laspreds, and some quantity of Helbrutes with Twin Lascannons. With this list, there's at least 20 Lascannons - I've fit 26 into a 2k list.

 

It's not a hard list to run. Just line units up on the table edge and start blowing up opponent's tanks immediately. Don't move anyone unless there's LOS blocking terrain, and even then only do it in the 2nd or 3rd turn.

 

When I get the first turn, I just aim them at anything with the ability to shoot 48+ inches, followed by whatever has a long movement stat. When I get second turn, I usually find my opponent has blown up one of my Laspreds. That's okay, because I still have 16+ more Lascannons, and every unit is getting rerolls to hit and immunity from morale because of Abaddon.

 

Yes, there's a vulnerability to hordes, and yes, it's harder to score objectives with a list like this. But in kill points missions or fighting elite armies, CSMs do just fine.

 

It's 8th edition. There are a lot of ways to win, and blowing up all your opponent's big guns first turn then gunning down their infantry is a very valid strategy. CSMs have access to the weapons that let you do that, Cultists don't.

[Trevak Dal]

What if csm and tacticals in general had that Bolter shooting thing that is in 30k (they get to shoot twice with Bolters) have it not cost any command points?

 

Just Bolters, not combis or anything else.

[Panzer]

So basically giving them Storm Bolter? It sure would make them more interesting. What about GK with their Storm Bolter Strike Squads then tho?

[Iron_Within]

I would any ability that granted rapid fire 2 but with restrictions e.g. if they've not moved it becomes rapid fire 2. Alternatively a 1cp command point that affects bolt weapons with no restrictions. That sounds rubbish till you give it to a 20 man squad

[Kite Senet]

If you make an strategem that causes boltguns to be more powerful for a unit, does that same strategem also work for the bolters of god-dedicated units like Rubricae, Plague Marines, etc? That might be something to consider if you're tailoring a fix for CSM/tactical squads in particular. It seems to me like most TSons players aren't too disappointed with the current state of Rubricae (though some a bit with how much our new codex pushes Tzaangors).

[DreamIsCollapsing]

Another thougt : Destroy the "Chosen" datasheet. 

 

Instead make them Sergent of CSM troops, plague, noise marines, havoks, raptors etc...

 

And give them back the "Mutation gift", but nothing random this time.

 

Now you get to choose for each of you squad a sergent with either : 

- Witch eater in case you face a full psyker army (GK, TS)

- Crusader (add +2 to charge ?) woudn't be fun on warp talon or raptor after deepstriking ?

- Stubborn so one squad can get moral immune (not as OP as 50 fearless cultist..)

- Fleshy abondance, so basically you get 1HP more in your squad

- +1 to hit on the sergent

- Inhance sense, basically a signum for you devastor squad. 

- Pheromones to get a FNP 

 

So basically making the same thing with Chosen than for the different command squad in 8th edition, not a single squad but chosen of the dark god scattered throughtout you whole army. And you got what a Chaos player want : Personalisation, fluff and your power armor entry are now better in comparison with cultist, Tzangor or plaguebearer. 

[Iron_Within]

I mean chosen are csm... but worse so i didn't even want to touch them

[techsoldaten]

I've been looking at Deathwatch and saw a few things we could learn from.

 

1) DW Kill Teams can take Storm Shields on Vets and mix units with Terminators to tank wounds.

 

2) DW Terminators can take 3 heavy weapons per squad. And they can't fail morale checks.

 

3) A DW Vet costs the same as 1.3 CSMs. For that, he gets an extra attack, extra leadership, and access to more heavy weapons - as many as they want.

 

4) A DW Vet also gets special issue ammunition with all kinds of bonuses.

 

So, for a few more points, their basic infantry has better stats, all these extra weapon options, and can tank wounds.

 

What they do not get - and which makes all the difference - is screening units. As soon as those tanks take wounds, the rest of the unit is just as vulnerable as a tactical squad. And their equipment can be very expensive, I've kitted out a 10 man squad at 400 points. While they are about to get a Codex, I am not expecting anything earthshaking that would change this basic dynamic. No one thinks DW are more powerful than CSMs right now.

 

I mention this because CSMs don't exist on an island. A lot of discussion about improving CSMs revolves around tweaking bolters, improving armor saves, making banners more powerful, etc. I think this stems from a desire to see an iconic unit make more appearances on the tabletop, which is fine.

 

But I'm wondering how much CSMs would need to be tweaked in 8th edition to become the ideal unit people seem to be seeking. If Deathwatch Kill Teams are that vulnerable & expensive, what do we gain by making CSMs stronger / tougher / whatever?

 

If there was one change I would make to CSMs, it would simply be to make all bolters AP-1. Cultists, Orks, Guardians, Guard, etc should not have decent saves against Bolter fire.

[Schlitzaf]

In all seriousness what would everyone thoughts be able making all CSM Sgt characters have +1 Wo and +1 WS/BS. And Chosen having two wounds.

[Prot]

I’m probably way off basis here but at the dawn of 8th I was seriously disappointed that the 7th Edition Bolter basically got taken away from marines. (And kind of given to Primaris instead)

 

So because of complications already mentioned, we can’t increase AP of all weapons without it getting crazy.

 

But at this point in 8th where chaff and cheap troops are almost too good I would be cool with all bolt weapons getting an increase of one shot. Yea that leaves an awkward stormbolter number in which case those weapons I would just give +1 AP and thus way it might kill,two birds with one stone.

[Skaorn]

I missed 7th, what were Bolters they if not RF 24" S4 AP5?

 

I seriously doubt that GW will do any sweeping weapon changes at this point in the game no matter what. They might address things like the morale system and how ObSec works for horde units. I personally would love the return of veteran skills but that would lead to a lot of complaining again.

[Panzer]

Dunno, for the most part 8th Bolter are the same as 7th Bolter. AP5 is something most units didn't care about anyway.

[Panzer]

I've been looking at Deathwatch and saw a few things we could learn from.

 

Well yes, those are their thing. That's why they're Deathwatch and not any other regular chapter.

Also DW are far from being a good army currently so I'm not sure if it's that useful to look at what they have anyway.