Are you still having fun?

[Mordas]

Pre-Lockdown I was running rampage with my Black Legion and loving every moment of it. They are my first venture into Chaos and so far have performed very well. By that I mean I am winning games I clearly shouldn't (tactical mistakes by my opponent and getting far too lucky with cards in others).

 

But it is very clear that they are lacking in firepower, going up against marines or ad-mech recently and the amount of constant firepower coming at me I cannot rival and find it difficult to counter. I have friends who think bringing centurions to a friendly uncompetitive game is fun, I dread those kinds of games at the moment as they just aren't any fun.

 

At the moment I am preparing my TS army and greatly looking forward to bringing them to the table!

[Dread]

I understand what you're saying. I got my legion started and was really fun trying to figure them out. A few games at 1250 pts. I got a little handle on them then we went up to 1750. That is where I found a kinda sweet spot. Im looking forward to the lock down ending to get back to gaming. My main opponent is admech and you're correct, I still haven't beat him with my legion, necrons, DE or my GK. My CRAFTWORLD is the only army I got him with and it was a lot of work. If you come up with a good list please share it. I'll do the same, the main thing I learned is a sorcerer in terminator armor is a must.

[Irate Khornate]

Okay, I might have had a bit of fun this past weekend. Definitely an exploit that Khorne would disapprove, however I had an idea. A dastardly maniacal this will never work but let's try it anyway idea.

 

I parked Khârn in the middle of a lascannon "flower". This "flower" was 3 Las preds, and 3 teams of Las havocs all within his 1" aura. Normally I would go well this is just plain silly, but I got 1st turn and I had LOS on all of my opponents executioners.

 

I have to say it's reinforced my idea that the chapter master aura is plain too powerful. I took the special character from THE melee legion and made a dang decent gun line because of his aura. Probably never going to happen or be brought again but it felt great.

[Khornestar]

I dunno, frater. Compared to the absolute cheese other factions can bring to the table, that really seems rather reasonable to me.

[Snazzy]

CSM are in a wierd spot right now, especially if you are Black Legion.  In addition to the Codex, you need Vigilus Aflame and Faith & Fury.  There's lots of specialist detatchments and so many Stratagems... it seems like a lot of work to make up for a botched initial codex.  I too see a lot of old time staples shelved.  In particular, Hellchickens, all of our vehicles, Terminators and... basic CSMs.  ITC is a terrible format, but especially for us.  It frustrates me to see the actual CSM Troop choice replaced by minimal investments in Cultists.

 

On the other hand, what i enjoy about CSM is that through our Stratagems and Detatchments we can bend the dice like no one else.  What ends up happening in my most successfull games is one unit going ham on the opponent through a combination of CP overuse and Dark Hereticus discipline.  In other words, CSM is well supported if you want a mid tier army.  Lots options, most mediocre.  If it helps, consider the plight of my other army, Drukhari.  GW's refusal to reexamine them since the 5th edition relaunce has their community on life support.

[dakkamasta]

I agree with Snazzy for the most part. I'm still loving my Black Legion (with the occasional Daemon or Thousand Sons allies) and have had reasonable success in a semi-competitive environment (using ITC), even against marines.

 

What I find though is that Chaos needs to leverage the crazy buff stacking of stratagems, aura buffs and psychic powers to contend with other high-tier factions. It's definitely doable but unfortunately filters out many units from the codex that do similar roles, since if you're going to spend 2-3 CP and a psychic power onto a unit it needs to be worth the investment.

 

Hence lists tend to revolve around a few key super units that do most of the heavy lifting surrounded by cheapish units that can operate completely independently by holding objectives and gaining board control.

[Bulwyf]

I play Space Wolves, Death Guard, Emperor's Children, Dark Eldar and starting to rebuild my Night Lords army.

 

The only one in that list that is competitive is Dark Eldar and I have played them since they were I think called "Eldar Pirates" back in the day. Ironically enough I rarely play them because they are too good and I'd rather play Astartes of some stripe. 

 

I am still having fun but the shooting in 8th edition is off the chart. I try to have a melee aspect in all my lists even if it isn't the main emphasis. Playing against castle or gunline armies even in friendly games is gruesome. If we could have better ways to get into combat and better defense for CSM troops it would be wonderful.

 

If you have a good group of friends or a local scene then any army and any list you have should work because if nothing else a friendly game should mean both players kinda agree on lists before you play on some level. My best friend that played nothing but Black Legion and was a die hard just lost all faith in GW and is now an angry ex player that refuses to play. My local scene is probably half 40k and half Sigmar which is fine with me. I started with fantasy back in the mid 80's so I love that as well as 40k.

 

This is a great question because frankly it speaks to what I think is a huge problem with 40k. This is a game. Games are meant to be fun and enjoyed by all. When certain armies or lists can just steamroll other people then where is the fun? 

[Special Officer Doofy]

lost all faith in GW and is now an angry ex player that refuses to play.

That's starting to sound like me haha.

[Hannibal]

 

lost all faith in GW and is now an angry ex player that refuses to play.

That's starting to sound like me haha.

 

Well, I still like to play CSM, but to be honest I only use them for games against less experienced gamers because I´ll still give them a run for their money due to higher grade of experience. When I use my Daemons against beginners / hardly experienced people they start to refuse to play.

 

That being said, I rather loose than steamroll other people. That´s why I still enjoy CSM.

 

Another thing to note: IMO 8th edition is really vulnerable to any kind of spam. If your collection is big enough, you can just spam a certain aspect, ie high toughness or vehicles or mass of infantry or... That often results in one sided games but that doesn´t mean CSM are always on the recieving end. Sometimes you will surprise your opponent, sometimes the scenario being played favours your spam, sometimes you´ll face an uphill battle. IMO that is one way to create challanges.

 

And when Daemons start to be part of the equation then things get messy really fast.

Edited May 4, 2020 by Hannibal

[Bulwyf]

 

 

lost all faith in GW and is now an angry ex player that refuses to play.

That's starting to sound like me haha.

 

Well, I still like to play CSM, but to be honest I only use them for games against less experienced gamers because I´ll still give them a run for their money due to higher grade of experience. When I use my Daemons against beginners / hardly experienced people they start to refuse to play.

 

That being said, I rather loose than steamroll other people. That´s why I still enjoy CSM.

 

Another thing to note: IMO 8th edition is really vulnerable to any kind of spam. If your collection is big enough, you can just spam a certain aspect, ie high toughness or vehicles or mass of infantry or... That often results in one sided games but that doesn´t mean CSM are always on the recieving end. Sometimes you will surprise your opponent, sometimes the scenario being played favours your spam, sometimes you´ll face an uphill battle. IMO that is one way to create challanges.

 

And when Daemons start to be part of the equation then things get messy really fast.

 

 

 

This is why I think people should talk about and compare lists before you play. I'm not talking about tourney play obviously but for friendly games. It takes a lot of the stress out when both players know what to expect and talk about what kind of game they want. I'm not saying this should be done before every game but nothing turns people off 40k quicker than bringing a fluffy list versus someone's ITC murder hobo list. 

[Tyriks]

I personally led a crusade in my group to get people to start sharing lists beforehand.  One player is new, and he can be a really poor sport sometimes.  He would sometimes bring a list with no coherency and sometimes would surprise you with a superheavy so it was really hard to make lists that would be a fun matchup.  It has made a big difference, both in helping teach him how to make a list that actually works and for making sure games are fun to play.  That way if someone wants to bring a weird list (like all dreadnoughts, different types but just tons of them) instead of the game being all or nothing, it can be made to work.

[Snazzy]

I have foundational problems with 8th ed.  I really don't like this trend of overly simple basic rules, and the complexity coming from the Codex.  It requires far too much headspace to be familiar with not just every piece of equipment an enemy has, but their rules and Stratagems.  In a world where army rules, Strats and faction rules didn't make a tremendous impact on the game, all would be welcomed.  But, as any CSM or Loyalist can tell you, stacking bonuses is SOP.

 

I also don't understand why GW can't make morale warfare a viable thing.  The morale phase is so cumbersome in this edition, but rarely produces meaningful results.  Several armies have Ld debuffs, but it also seems like GW doesn't want players to be bothered.  Ld values are either so high, or there are auto pass mechanics and 1 model max fleeing mehanics that i just don't get it.

 

HOWEVER.  I am grateful for the addition of the Chaincannon.  Heavy Bolters are largely irrelevant now, and it is nice to have an anti-infantry weapon that is a legit crowd crusher.

[Bulwyf]

I have foundational problems with 8th ed.  I really don't like this trend of overly simple basic rules, and the complexity coming from the Codex.  It requires far too much headspace to be familiar with not just every piece of equipment an enemy has, but their rules and Stratagems.  In a world where army rules, Strats and faction rules didn't make a tremendous impact on the game, all would be welcomed.  But, as any CSM or Loyalist can tell you, stacking bonuses is SOP.

 

I also don't understand why GW can't make morale warfare a viable thing.  The morale phase is so cumbersome in this edition, but rarely produces meaningful results.  Several armies have Ld debuffs, but it also seems like GW doesn't want players to be bothered.  Ld values are either so high, or there are auto pass mechanics and 1 model max fleeing mehanics that i just don't get it.

 

HOWEVER.  I am grateful for the addition of the Chaincannon.  Heavy Bolters are largely irrelevant now, and it is nice to have an anti-infantry weapon that is a legit crowd crusher.

 

I also find it odd that Night Lords are completely geared for morale phase...that GW gives every army easy outs to avoid. Sure it costs them CP but you usually don't get to see your army's special gimmick in play on the table. 

[Snazzy]

Yeah.  That there is a generic auto pass for morale available to everyone only convinces me further.

[Bulwyf]

Yeah.  That there is a generic auto pass for morale available to everyone only convinces me further.

 

They should remove the auto pass. It would instantly make NL and morale debuff lists in other armies viable.

[Tyriks]

Well even without people using that stratagem, NL chapter tactics aren't good. They'd be much better if they just made every loss inflicted by the NL count as two losses for morale or something. Then even with the stratagem you can spread out pain and force them to use the stratagem consistently and still lose models.

[Azekai]

I have not played in over a year. The outset of 8th was probably the most balanced the game had ever been, and I enjoyed that thoroughly. I could also make a list without having to use a third party app, which was nice.

I think GW has no concept for how powerful rerolls are, or how nuts +1/-1 modifiers are in a d6 based game. Everything is so deadly in 8th, which isn't necessarily bad, but it is magnified by stratagems, army/warlord traits and relics that make shooting insanely reliable, especially at the 2k points level where you can build in lots of redundancy and have the CPs to buff killy units to the moon and back. 

[Bulwyf]

I have not played in over a year. The outset of 8th was probably the most balanced the game had ever been, and I enjoyed that thoroughly. I could also make a list without having to use a third party app, which was nice.

 

I think GW has no concept for how powerful rerolls are, or how nuts +1/-1 modifiers are in a d6 based game. Everything is so deadly in 8th, which isn't necessarily bad, but it is magnified by stratagems, army/warlord traits and relics that make shooting insanely reliable, especially at the 2k points level where you can build in lots of redundancy and have the CPs to buff killy units to the moon and back. 

 

Honestly Sigmar is a more balanced and more fun game. There's limited CP uses, no strategems and I can't remember any rerolls. The armies are far more balanced and the games are quicker. I truly wish 40k in 8th was more like Sigmar.

[Goreshed]

GW has been testing out various rules and such between AOS and 40k and implementing it into the next edition/chapter approved when they find something that they like.

 

But as Bulwyf has said, talking about lists ahead of time would solve a lot of issues. It also helps with the simple question of 'are we doing this competitively or to have fun?' is asked. From there everything else can be worked around and hopefully both sides can come to an agreement where both are satisfied.

 

Some of my best games have come off the fact that both of us talked ahead of time as to what they wanted. Finding a balance is never easy but being open about it will always mean things go far smoother.

[Xenith]

Awesome stuff guys - I'm aware of overarching issues with 8th. Interesting on the Morale issues. Ld has really been a non issue for years, with most armies able to ignore or nullify it. At the start of 8th/end of 7th, NL had some niiice ways to mess with your opponent, and lots of raptors was super tempting. 

 

Most of my games are in store pick-ups, so discussing a list beforehand doesnt relaly work. There's a kind of gentlemans agreement I hope, that people bring effective, but not insane armies, but my games have largely been close (albeit with BA, not chaos).

[Hannibal]

Well, while I´m reading through the Codex I noticed something that is unfun in 8th edition: the total simplification when it comes down to model and options. There is just so much diversity in our HQ that the current easy to build models are suited to represent them. No need for conversions which equals in no freedom for conversions. HQ in Terminator Armour? Just the Chaoslord and Sorcerer, the only models available in Terminator Armour. Whereever you look: poor options when it comes down to modelling.

 

It´s no fun at all.

[Rune Priest Ridcully]

Well, while I´m reading through the Codex I noticed something that is unfun in 8th edition: the total simplification when it comes down to model and options. There is just so much diversity in our HQ that the current easy to build models are suited to represent them. No need for conversions which equals in no freedom for conversions. HQ in Terminator Armour? Just the Chaoslord and Sorcerer, the only models available in Terminator Armour. Whereever you look: poor options when it comes down to modelling.

 

It´s no fun at all.

This, a thousand times this is the biggest thing I hate about GW at the moment.

And the worst thing is, if they took a brake from doing Primaris and Sigmarines every year and did just a clam pack of weapons and heads, like the existing primaris upgrade sprues but more functional then aesthetic, they could then open the options like they used to.

 

As someone who mainly enjoys converting characters (I have way too many characters for all my armies) the almost constant streamlining is depressing.

What I wouldn't give for our lords/heros to be able to be a threat without being forced into using warlord traits/relics where other factions can do more without those, or to be able to take some kind of elite retinue unit.

[Tyriks]

Nothing stops you from converting characters.  

[MegaVolt87]

Well, while I´m reading through the Codex I noticed something that is unfun in 8th edition: the total simplification when it comes down to model and options. There is just so much diversity in our HQ that the current easy to build models are suited to represent them. No need for conversions which equals in no freedom for conversions. HQ in Terminator Armour? Just the Chaoslord and Sorcerer, the only models available in Terminator Armour. Whereever you look: poor options when it comes down to modelling.

 

It´s no fun at all.

 

Very true. We went from the most bespoke characters to less customization than loyalists these days. Can't do things like terminator dark apostle, jump pack exalt etc and we lost biker characters and demonic mounts. And the "no model, no rules" excuse is a joke considering there is no model for a jump pack sorc but we can still do it. It feels like I am being pushed out to 30k to do anything useful or effective with the legions IMO. Another funny one- we still have chosen with no official kit, yet DE loses cabalite trueborn unit where they also make it from a troop unit box like us. No consistency. 

[Cheex]

I'm having tons of fun with my World Eaters. Try a Schemes of War mission, and stack your Maelstrom deck with killy objectives - it's incredible fun and makes them play exactly as they should.

 

 

And the worst thing is, if they took a brake from doing Primaris and Sigmarines every year and did just a clam pack of weapons and heads, like the existing primaris upgrade sprues but more functional then aesthetic, they could then open the options like they used to.

 

 

Hell, I'd go further and just make each "specialist unit" compatible with core units and HQs to make variants for those units, and write the rules with the idea that combining two kits for parts should be possible. We already pretty much have this with Havocs; CSM have access to lascannons and chaincannons even though those aren't in the box, but you can easily kitbash two kits with minimal converting.

 

I'd like to see this applied more generally across the range. There's no reason a Dark Apostle should be limited in weapons when it's so easy to kitbash him to have lightning claws from the Raptor kit; there's no reason an Exalted Champion (using the Aspiring Champion model) couldn't have a jump pack from the Raptor kit; there's no reason a Terminator Lord couldn't have a thunder hammer from the regular Chaos Lord model.

 

IMHO, if you can make something out of two kits and it makes sense in the context of the lore, then it should be possible.

 

That said, it's pretty easy to write rules for this sort of stuff yourself - most of the weapons and options have points, or are at least easily deducible like Terminator Armour. The hard part is finding opponents who are ok with something that isn't "tournament legal". It's not like you're making a Chaos Guilliman, or coming up with some absurd homebrew character with 15 lascannons who can't be targeted. You're making things that realistically only don't exist because there are no models, not because GW thinks they're overpowered.