How many Chaos lists do we want? Fifteen? Twenty? Fifty?

So far we have 7 lists that are Approved/Developmental, hence relatively stable. We have 2 cultists lists, 5 of the 9 Heretic Legions, plus Red Corsairs raider list. There are another half dozen experimental lists (including 4 in Compendium). With talk of splitting up L&TD list we are probably going to be 15 Chaos lists.

The Compendium includes 4 Developmental lists for the main Chaos gods- these all have the relevant daemon engines of the patron god. The Emperors Children list features 3 Chaos Titans and Daemon Kinghts. If you wanted the full selection of Questor and Subjugator then surely the best option is to tweak the current Emperors Children list rather than add a specific Slaanesh Knight list.

Otherwise if we have too many Chaos lists all you will do is dilute the focus and playtesting. As it is many lists remain at experimental stage because they have nt been playtested or supported widely enough.

Let's stick with Chaos titan list for the moment.

That's a pretty low number of lists compared to imperial numbers

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Wargame_insomniac, your pionts are, imo, valid reasons for not doing it , but, oop minis is not a valid reason.

However, my understanding is that the way epic lists are meant to work means that you have a different list for each specialisation/sub-sub-sub faction etc. Which is why every space marine colour variation gets it's own list, even when the main difference is a preference for a different heavy weapon or land raider varient. I don't actually like that way of doing things, but it seems to be how epic lists work. So, the question:

would probably have an answer that no-one wants

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs

If you want to build a list that requires people to buy $10-15 parts from eBay then I suspect that you won't get a lot of people using it.



And probably more people that aren't.

I'm not sure why the lack of a requirement for OOP figures in a list would "irk" you. If you have the models or the parts then great. If not you should still be able to play a list without needing specific Titan parts or models that haven't been sold for close to 20 years.

How many players play IG/SM vs how many play Chaos?

Given that the 3 most popular armies were chosen for EA rulebook and presumably Eldar was 4th most popular given that GW used in Swordwind. So I guess Chaos/Nids were 5th/6th most popular (given they were in E40k rulebook).

I'm just trying to say that we don't need five Chaos Titan lists (undivided and each god) and 5 Chaos Knights lists.....

Especially if easier to just tweak Slaanesh daemon knights in Emperors Children list.

Cheers

James

Hey guys,

I like the healthy debate about the. chaos lists, I think it's important to get to the heart of things which is what should we be looking at for an generic Chaos Titan Legion list. I acknowledge that there are existing lists that have affiliated titans in them, accept TS, and would like to hear debate about on a generic list.

Do we look to replicate the AMTL construct or look. For something more unique?

I think the marks of each god are a good theme for the army list and should be one of the corps concepts for it. To further the discussion, what should be associated with the marks of each god?

Khorne looks pretty simple with an extra +1 TKD3 as an idea

Nurgle, I like the idea of an extra DC or should it be a roll at the beginning of the game on D3?

Tzeentch, maybe look at the void shield value, maybe again D3 at the start or an ability to regenerate shields at a higher rate. Alternatively looking at an extra FF value with TKD3?

Slaanesh, should we again look at extra CC values or is some sort of sonic attack FF more appropriate?

Looking past further on from this, should there the tail and head weapons feature as part of the list? I have seen the debate already, and subscribe myself to the Yes camp as they give the list some character and make it stand apart from the AMTL.

Is renaming of the weapons required?

What should they be able to take as support formations and allies?

Looking forward to hearing from you all.

Cheers
Aaron

At the very least the ATML list is a good structural starting point. It can then mutate from there if need be



I think that it might be fun to distinguish between Marks being something assigned to a Titan and Gifts assigned to a Weapon. (Or the other way around) So that one could take a Titan and corrupt it via a Mark and several Gifts or just take a basic Titan and leave it largely untouched. The more corrupted by Chaos the more unique it looks and the more the weapons have been modified or distorted. Gifts could also just replace existing weapon systems with Chaos specific weapons like tails etc.



As long as there are other options available for gamers that don't require those heads and tails then I think it should be fine.



No. Keep them the same unless they have a different function or stats



Knights, Land Raiders, Defilers, SHTs?

Hey PG

I like the idea of separaton between gifts and marks I think that would be really characterful for the army. So what do you consider as gifts? Are gifts predominantly weapons that can be added as a 0-1 per Titan? And limit gifts to battle titans only?

I agree on the weapon names, I don't see any need to rename weapons at all, keeping in line with AMTL assists with ease of undstanding.

When you say knights, are you referring to generic or our friends from Slaanesh? I think if it is the latter I would prefer to see them elsewhere.

On to support formations, what do people think I'd acceptable for Chaos Titan Legion? Do they still have access to Techguard formations, the book Titanicus certainly would have us believe so, additionally Mechanicum give us some insight into how much defected to Horus's side.

Spitballing, I would like to see that they have choices that include Chaos Legionaries at a 0-1 per core formation choice. Offering basic transport choices and no upgrades. Siliar to the Vraksian list. Not sure if SHTs should make their way into the list. I think the titans should be the focus with infantry with or without transports should be the main part of the army.

Is AA an option to the list, or should it be an upgrade to a Titan like AMTL? What else should the Techguard get in this list, is it characterful to have an armored formation that allows them to use a variety of tanks in the formation with a limitation at six? I am thinking along the lines of looted Armour from across a number of conquered planets.

Small activation choices could include sentinels, robots and defilers.

Cheers
Aaron

When I was looking at this, I considered having the following structure:

Warlord class: the four unique cult warlords wth their weird combinations of weapons, special criticals ect, and a generic traitor warlord
Reaver class: the four unique cult reavers with their weird combinations of weapons, special criticals ect and a generic traitor reaver
warhound: ditto

Imperators: generic traitor only

Marks of chaos, mutations, weapon swaps, gifts are all done the same way and are all applied to the generic traitor titans only.

anyone want me to have a bash at writing it up?

_________________
My shifting projects

Well, your original example (and i realise it was just an example) involved proxying one lot of expensive oop mini (knights) for another lot of expensive oop mini (slaanesh kngihts). With no OOP-ness as a principal I assume this means you would actually change a list to needing to use land raiders, or something similar in production, instead knights for the final list and then suggest that those with knight minis can proxy them instead of the land raiders? Knights cannot exist at all in your new lists, they are OOP and hard to find. Or are you judging a degree of OOP-ness based on ebay prices, with imperial knights being cheaper than chaos? seems like a dangerous path to start down.

It "irks" me specifically for chaos because the only in production minis are some 8mm infantry. You can convert imperial titans, tanks etc, we all do, this is part of the fun of chaos, but you just replied by saying that many people are not capable of this.

Saying no OOP in list building destroys any chaos list idea. No daemon engines allowed at all now in new lists? All oop for some time. Again, im not specifically saying i want to see 'titan heads', I just dont want to see a reason for their removal being because they are hard to find.

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs

How so? Chaos is more than a set of models. It is a series of themes and concepts that take the standard Imperial units and weapons and transform them into something corrupted and perverted.

The old daemon engines, which are a lot easier to find than the Chaos Titan parts, are examples of a codified and standardised Daemon Engine. The fluff is full of examples of other sorts of Daemon Engines that are demonic possession of siege guns, tanks or other items.

Take an SHT, posess it and give it some gifts and it is a "Daemon Engine".

The OOP models can be in an appendix as specific examples of Daemon Engines with stats and point costs for people that have them to be able to use them.

I just think that the list will be more broadly used if it doesn't require gamers to find old models on eBay.

For example, the ATML list can be used without Knights or the Ordinati. I think that we should make sure that the Chaos list can also be used without recourse to OOP models.

But what you've described is true of standardized daemon engines as well. For instance, some players might not use the list if there isn't a brass scorpion or a plague tower, even if there are engine that closely resemble them. However, players devise any number of ways to include a scuttling warmachine with choppy bits at the front.

Genericizing (is that even a word?) units paints over established background with a fresh coat of grey unless done extremely carefully.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

coff, maybe glance at the Stygian incident list, coff

are they too generic? too flexible?

_________________
My shifting projects

With the exception of the Brass scorpion though most of the old Daemon engines aren't part of the established background though.

Most of them are now based on the Baneblade currently.

I think that there is a fixation on specific models instead of focusing on making a flexible list that can include those but also be played without recourse to those OOP models.

I think that is pretty close to what Inwas suggesting.