So here a thread of its own.

I wrot ein the Black Legion playtestchanges:
I had some ideas concerning Chaos Factions:

First: Remiove the current Faction rules. All CSM formations get 2+ initiative.
Then: Choose a Chaos Faction for every formation. Each Faction gives a +1 modifer to certain Action Tests.
Undivided/Chaos Glory: +1 on Advance (followers of Chaos Glory are eager to please the undivided might of Chaos. They don't have a specialty other then fullfilling their given task as good they can)
Khorne: +1 on Engage (followers of Khorne rally want to get in close and personal with their enemies)
Tzeentch: +1 on Overwatch (followers of Tzeentch are known to see through the fog of possibilities and set up ambushes and traps for their enemies)
Nurgle: +1 on Marshall (followers of Nurgle are known to posess a stoic relentlessness, they shrug off the effects of the battlefield muchmore easily)
Slaanesh: +1 on Sustain (followers of Slaanesh realy enjoy the sounds and visions of battle. And blasting their enemies to parts in loud and sheerful exploisions is justt heir thing)

Thoughts?

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

I think that some sort of dislike/hatred should be there as it fits the feel of chaos. However, adopting these rules, the hatred could be that you lose any bonuses if hated faction is within 30cm?

How do you see this working in single faction lists (such as Death Guard) - do they get these rules?

The thing with the hatred and loose activation bonus is already the current rule which is widely seen as unnesseary.

For God-specific CSM Legion armylists: I see arguments for both ways: Yes they could have the same activation advantage but they already have their Legion-specific boni (eg Plague of Nurgle, completely Fearless formations, etc)

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Not sure I'd want to see this in any of the Net-EA official lists, but possibly as a house rule.

alakazam, the issue all along has been that any 'bonus' should be remembered by its owner rather than a 'penalty' being remembered by the opponent. However, the current approach results in people making a decision when building the army and both players then assuming a particular set of parameters are in force for the entire game. At present I believe Chaos are the only armies with a 'variable' initiatve depending on circumstances, and even if it is used, people tend to forget to check.

I really like the principle behind BL's idea. Essentially this builds the 'hatred' element into the army when it is being put together, and indeed the principle could be extended to buying particular leaders to regain the 1+ all round initiative, or to buying the relevant faction leader to gain the relevant +1 bonus.

One potential issue with this approach is that particular formations would always be fielded as a certain faction that benefited their particular battle-style (eg Forlorn Hope Marshalling, Assault companies and big WE sustaining etc)

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

This would have been a perfect idea several years ago when development on the Chaos lists began.

Now, trying to retroactively fit it in would be too unbalancing.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

How so? On the face of it, it would not seem to be more unbalancing than the current approach which is widely accepted as ineffective.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Because Black Legion armies never actually suffer the supposed drawback of hatred and have an initiative rating of 1+ at all times...

...so they've been playtested and (mostly) balanced at an initiative rating of 1+...

...this proposal would essentially change them to having an initiative rating of 2+, with the occasional chance to get down to 1+, quite different.


It's a great idea, but I'd be surprised to see it gain traction.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Thus making BL as good as SM, but with bigger formations, bigger toys and Daemons to replace TSKNF.

Don't forget this would actually be an improvement on LatD which have lost more toys than they gained

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

BL ARE Space marines, not chunky imperial guardsmen. Initiative 1+ is appropriate in my opinion. (They don't have ATSKNF already - this is enough of a distinction from loyalists)

What I can see from this is the list requiring an across the board points decrease.

The list currently has an assault flavour - a flavour that applies particularly if you are not going war engine heavy. Initiative 2+ when doubling is going to make assaults harder to set up, and lead to frequent activation failures (Black Legion armies accrue large amounts). It will shift the list towards shooting and war engines as the basic retinues, composed of assault units, will become less able to perform their role.

_________________
They are free, yes, but not entirely free; for they have a master, and that master is Law.

Well you could set the Black Legion army as Initiative 1+ (which de facto is their current state. Or does anyone really use more than 2 factions plus Undivided?) and then buy Chaos Marks for boni on the Faction-specific orders.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Other idea: Faction-specific Initiative boni only for formations which are already been upgraded with Cult Marines of the appropiate Chaos God.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

It's "fine" in that it never really comes up and is often forgotten; most people either seem to play just three factions (two specific and one Undivided) or just forget about it all together.

The only thing it does in the Black Legion list is limit Cult Marines and specifc Daemons; the initiative modifier is, practically, moot.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?