Oh fuck... Did we just reason for GW to change the Emperor's Children... I think a part of me just died...
It feels like a statement of the bleedin' obvious, but for the record I support this. I also propose we go with Chaos Space Marine, as the name GW is most likely to approve to replace Traitor, even if it's not what Chaos players would have preferred had we been able to make a completely free choice: Chaos Space Marine has, to the best of my knowledge as a long-term 40k fan, always been the name for the Chaos equivalent of the Space Marine Tactical unit in each Chaos Space Marines Codex, including the current edition. This has also been the usage in several other 40k games featuring Chaos, including the Dawn of War series, Chaos Gate and Fire Warrior. Its pedigree as a name to use for the class in Eternal Crusade is unquestionable. I can see no logical reason for Games Workshop to reject the name. Chaos Marine has never been used in tabletop and I couldn't spot it cropping up in any of the Black Library novels I have. As I can't find any established use of it as a formal name in the lore, it looks to me as if it's an unofficial shortening of Chaos Space Marine. While there are some advantages in a shorter official name, I think it carries a reasonably high chance of rejection by Games Workshop, and isn't worth the risk to drop the extra word. Chaos Tactical is interesting. There is no direct established use of it in the lore. The original legions did refer to the unit as a Tactical back in the pre-Heresy, but since the Horus Heresy there seems to be no evidence of it being used in this way by Chaos in tabletop or by the Black Library that I can see. However, it is in use in a different 40k game, namely Space Marine, where it refers to the Chaos equivalent of the Space Marine Tactical class. So although it's not actually in the 40k lore, it has previously been approved for use by a different game developer. Arguably that sets a precedent that could be followed - but having to rely solely on "You let Relic call them that" makes me feel this is on shakier ground than I'd like. I think it carries a reasonable chance of rejection by Games Workshop. On the note of the Traitor Assault class, we're beyond the map. As far as I'm aware, there is no Ground Assault class (by that name) used by either the Space Marines or Chaos Space Marines in established GW lore. As a result, there's no obvious thing to change it to, except to make it consistent with the name used for Chaos' equivalent of the Tactical Marine. In the case of the names suggested so far, the would be Chaos Assault. This would maintain the distinction between the Chaos and Loyalist variants, and be the most minimal change we could propose. Edit: apologies, Noromiz - unintentionally quoted you when I first posted this
So some notes, Tactical was actually what the class name was originally for those of you who don't know, but Chaos fans thought it would be cool if we could have our own name to differentiate ourselves from the LSM. This of course backfired and here we are. So this would actually be a reversal of the decision, though with an added Chaos. Not sure how that effects probability. Chaos Marine, I can't say I'm sure what their thoughts are on a shortening, but I would like to ask if it wouldn't be pretty much the same thing to submit all iterations of Chaos Space Marine as a batch submission? (Chaos Space Marine, Chaos Marine, Marine) I must admit that although I don't really know why it would, it could complicate things on the acceptance end, or perhaps having a small batch of near alternatives could potentially help as it allows them to cross a few off "the list." Impossible to know for sure though. Chaos Space Marine. I'd have to agree that it's probably the strongest bet as it's the Codex name. It's a tad generic, and though a shortened version sounds a bit better, I'd have to say beggars can't be choosers at this point and I'd take generic over what we have happily and never bring this up again. Any of these work for me, though I'm not sure what actually has the best chance. You're probably right and it's Chaos Space Marine.
I just figured out why "Marauder" got rejected by GW; they obviously rejected it because there is a Loyalist Chapter called "Marauders" :insert slowpoke meme: EDIT: Then again, there are also a Loyalist Chapter called "Raptors"... I am so confused right now EDIT2: The Raptors are actually rather cool, or well, their color scheme are.
Marauder is also the name of the chaos unit in Warhammer: Age of Sigmar (and also back when it was Warhammer Fantasy). I think Kanthric is on the right track when he talks about IP protection and branding concerns, but again, we don't have any statements on what went on there. @The_Dokta is on the right track for limiting our proposals. We still need to do an community poll to engage the greater community, and one of those options needs to be, Keep the class name as "Traitor". If we present too many alternative options on that list we risk dividing our vote and being unable to carry through.
Fine stick with something simple like Chaos Space Marine, personally I would just use the original Tactical. Hell if it was known when people wanted a change from Tactical they would get Traitor they'd have decided against the action to change it around. I'm sure some people would have made a joke or two about getting a name like Traitor...
If you want Chaos Tactical/Tactical/etc. please talk about it, advocate for it. No one should feel that they didn't get the chance to vouch for their decision, or that they settled for something that no one really wanted in the first place. That's how we got into this situation. There is the option in the poll to allow multiple votes. While it does obfuscate some of the statistics, and it may still risk dividing the vote (because people won't know/care to click multiple selections), it is a valid option for the group to consider.
