Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Also, can we start a policy of banning people who have 'played for 19 years' yet can't tell a god awful DA list from a tier 1 tourney list?

What about if they troll relentlessly and won't leave?

"We" have no control over bannings. This is Russ's house.

(which is probably why I've been allowed to post here incessantly)

Posted By malfred on 04/05/2007 2:04 PM
"We" have no control over bannings. This is Russ's house.

(which is probably why I've been allowed to post here incessantly)

I have no idea what you are talking about.

I was having a discussion on the various and sundry codexes presently in print when a good friend of mine (who, coincidentally played in the team tournament at Adepticon this year. His name is Shawn, and the team was playing Minotaur chapter space marines)

The main point of our conversation, as he pointed out to me, was that the codex are presently gaged as follows:

Tier 1: Lists that are damn hard to lose with if you have anything even resembling tactical knowledge. Not unbeatable, but these are safe-bet armies that can do very well and produce very powerful lists. Tier 1 Codexes in order from strongest to weakest in my eyes are:

Codex: Chaos Space Marines (Not legion specific lists, mind you, but the codex as a whole)
Codex: Space Marines (Including named chapters, DIY, and Blood Angels at the moment)
Codex: Eldar
Codex: Tau
Codex: Tyranids

Tier 2: Lists that are very very solid, and can be used to produce effective, game-winning lists, but the ability to produce consistent lists can be tricky at points. Once again, in order from strongest to weakest in my eyes:

Codex: Dark Angels
Codex: Black Templars
Codex: Imperial Guard
Codex: Necrons
Codex: Space Wolfs
Codex: Dark Eldar (this one is tricky, I've seen dark eldar rip armies to shreds, and be wiped off the board back to back, as such I consider it more
of a player driven codex, as it can make some devastating builds that can work consistently, if the general knows his or her
stuff. It may belong in Tier 3, but I'm putting it into tier 2 for the moment)

Tier 3: these lists are, in my opinion, sub par. A person can still win with them, and they are somewhat viable, but in comparison to Tier 1 and 2 codex standards, they do not hold up. These are in order of effectiveness in my eyes, just as the two above lists are.

Codex: Witchhunters (This could also be a tier 2 list as well, but once again, like dark eldar, it really depends on the general playing the list as to
whether it can be brought into it's own and used effectively.)
Codex: Demonhunters
Codex: Orks


That's how it stands in my eyes at the moment. Agree, disagree, I don't particularly care as this is my opinion. Also , let me clarify that I am in no way saying that I don't like any of these armies, or have placed them in the order I have based on personal dislikes or likes. This is based on my ~7 years of playing the game and observing different lists at different times and how effective they were from a typical 'fun' game perspective, as well as a tournament perspective. They all have their strong points and things that make them unique and effective (to varying degrees).

If we could just get all of the codexes into tier 2, I think the game would benefit as a whole.

My thoughts, take from them what you will.

Take it easy everyone.

-Red__Thirst-

Edit: How could I forget bugs??...*sigh*

Russ is my new hero. Russ, man, you are the man. Forever. What kinda guy will take your team's picture at adepticon, run a kick ass website that we all love to hate at times (cache full) but can't live without, brings a huge community of players together that can meet at a huge event, and then....

SMITE THE TROLLS WITH HIS GOLDEN WISDOM!

Slave, please type "www.warseer.com" and "www.bolterandchainsword.com" and click "register", and then join the Dark Angel specific forums so you can masturbate while GW rams Dark Angel and no cult Chaos codicies that splooge plastic bloodthirsters down your throat with the rest of the fan bois.

Russ, you do a hell of a job, and yours is the only show in town. I regret that I never had a chance to go to the Dakka store.

And on a final note, if the Chaos Traitor Legions go away, I think I'll finally have to hang the hat on 40k. I can't play a game without my best friend Khorne looking over my shoulder to cheer me on to blood soaked victory or shameful defeat. Taking the Cults and Traitor Legions out of Chaos would be like telling the Marine players they can't play Blood Angels, Ultras, Dark Angels, or Space Wolves anymore.

Black Templar who?

Red I think you forgot nids. (they would be tier 1 as well)

But yes your assessment is right. (although I'm personally a big fan of both mech sisters and portal DE)

The problem is that that the DA codex doesn't even fit into tier 3. On top of that, all the builds are absurdly similar and have no identity whatsoever. Hell, they name your characters for you!

Posted By IntoTheRain on 04/05/2007 2:26 PM
Red I think you forgot nids. (they would be tier 1 as well)

But yes your assessment is right. (although I'm personally a big fan of both mech sisters and portal DE)

The problem is that that the DA codex doesn't even fit into tier 3. On top of that, all the builds are absurdly similar and have no identity whatsoever. Hell, they name your characters for you!

I agree totally with your first two sentences and partially with your third.

I do think that DA fit into somewhere between tier2-3 in RedThirsts breakdown. It is a marine list after all. Not as powerful as codem SM, but it is still SM all the same.

IF Jervis can balance everything with the DA codex, then ...everything is balanced and everything fits into the tier 2 slot as redthirst suggested. Hopefully that will come to pass. I have my doubts, but I also have my hopes as well.

But you are right about the lack of diversity in the new DA codex, specifically in the format of wargear options. its a wargear option for a reason. its an option. Without that, there are no options to make a list your own specialized force.

The names characters though, I could care less about their names. "Belial" is just a good as "Alfred Hankle-bottoms the third" to me. As Shakespeare said: "Whats in a name"?

Letters n' stuff.

I have always had an aversion to taking special characters anyway. Give me grand master Bob anyday over Azrael the supreme poo bah. I enjoy seeing customized armies personaly and would hate to see them go away were everyone has the same options and thier just named different. Minus the excessive assault cannons the marine dex and chaos are exceptional and allow for so much customization and I believe that's one of the reasons they are so popular. The trait system also prevents boredom. Today I am going with Trust your battle brothers tommorrow I may just take be swift as the wind. Same goes for chaos, one day papa Nurgle tommorrow Khorne on the nob.

Posted By IntoTheRain on 04/05/2007 1:52 PM

That codex is better than fine, and the only problem it has is a lack of 2 assault cannons in a min/maxed squad, plus the 10 man squad and lack of min/maxed las plas squads.

This, tells me you have no idea what you are talking about.

I still agree that Godzilla Nid lists suck Rhino Testes.

This reinforces it.

If they make ALL of the codexes the same way they made the DA and eldar books, the game will be fine, but that requires a redo of the SM codex sooner than later.

And people complain the lists are all the same now.

Of course, there is always the option that you could do us all a favor and get lost. Your obviously not interested in contributing anything, and even if you were, your obviously not bright enough to have anything useful to contribute.

I hear bolter and chainsword needs a 3 page post about why the grenade launcher is the best assault weapon guard have. And you sound like the perfect man for the job.

yeah, obviously.   

My point about the named characters was just how far the customization has come, and gone... (their writing your fluff for you now)
Its also really no that important. (although I think most people like writing their own fluff)

But I'm actually more interested in debating the tier that DA are at.

I would say that being marines is actually the worst possible thing they could be. For the sake of arguement, lets say someone actually took DA to a tournament. (hypothetically of course) We can already surmise these things about the list. One, it is badly undergunned. Two, its model count is pathetic. And three, it gives him a psycological advantage as your opponent will not stop laughing. (ok that one was filler, just know hes outnumbered and outgunned)

Now consider how heavily saturated the game is with anti MEQ weapons.

Thats why I would much prefer to take Orks than DA to a tournament, at least that way you know you have a moderate chance by simply anticipating the metagame.

Dark Angels are better than Orks...That's about it. I definitely would put DH and WH above Dark Angels any day.

They definitely don't belong above Wolves and Guard.

This thread actually got me to come out of Lurkdom.

But, IntoTheRain, have you actually played a game with DA?  Do you even know who the DA are?  Of course they have named characters, they are one of the 3 Named Chapters with their own codex.  If you don't want a named character, play a DA Successor and then you get to make up your own name and fluff.  It like saying but I want my Ultramarines to be led by Chapter Master Joe and be pink instead of blue.  That's fine, but they ain't Ultras anymore.

EDIT: Took out some remarks to IntoTheRain, this is my first thread, want to be nice...


Ozymandias, King of Kings

The 3 month rumor cycle is because they don't want scare anyone off from startinga  new army. Would you buy $400+ worth of stuff for an army whose dex is going to change in 5 months? I don't think so.

And I have to agree with many folks who say the DA dex isn't horrible.... No, it isn't competitive versus many other dexes. But is competitiveness the only criteria for how good an entire codex is? I don't think so. Limiting the assault cannon IS a good way of toning down what is one of the best weapons in the game without having to to a single rules redux. It isn't a nerf and is a move toward balance.

I buy little new GW stuff so i don't have room to complain... But the issue is not that rules invalidate units or tactics but it means we have wasted a bunch of $. If GW wants to create a better game they need to get their pricing issues in order. I don't care how good a unit is if 10 platics are gonna cost me $40. I DIDN'T start a DH army because I didn't want to pay for Vostroyans (they are so choice). This could be the greatest game in the world.... but it can still price itself out of existence.

Oh, and yes, Dakka folks are some of the biggest whiners and groaners around. We are also some of the bigest supporters of thehobby. We play, we paint and we convert. We make up campaign rules and run events. Sites like Dakka, Portent, Batreps.com (the latter are now gone) and others are what made this hobby so much fun.

ender502

I attended the workshop on Monday morning. It was definitely eye-opening and an interesting look at the future of games workshop and their take on the hobby. There were a few more points that need to be brought up (or re-brought up) from what he discussed. I?m going to try hard to keep from advocating any points and just report what was said.

On the philosophy of FAQs: First, he said the question has to genuinely be ?frequent?. They aren?t going to publish something to correct every oversight or interaction. Second, FAQs will only be used to correct categorical inconsistencies such as, ?the cost of this item is 12 points here, and 15 points in another section.? Third, FAQ will not be used to ?write rules as you wish they had been written.? He gave an example to illustrate this point. He said throughout playtesting, the Master of the Ravenwing fired his bolters and his plasma cannon. It wasn?t until the book was going out the door that someone pointed out to Jervis that the rules clearly state a jetbike can fire ONE weapon. He said something along the lines, of how he wished he caught that, but that?s the way the rule is written and it?s just reason to do better next time.

On outside playtesting: He said it has been falsely reported that GW has ended their outside playtesting program. Previously, there had been a site where playtesters could log in and see the rules under development. Within that context they were able to offer advice to the game designers about balance issues and suggestions. He said they came to the conclusion that this was premature to have outside people influence the design of the rules, that the game designers should do their job and have the rules created before they are seen by anyone else. So there are still outside playtesters, but they are limited to only pointing out typos and direct contradictions in the rules, nothing more.

A phrase Jervis kept using was that players should be ?confident? in the units presented in the book and their available choices. He said he wanted the game to be ?nudged? away from a game about the units you pick (and the options you use) and more a game about how you used your units in play. In a way, it sounded to me like 40k is becoming much more like fantasy where the flexibility of any given unit is restricted, and it?s how you maneuver your units and use them that determine a game.

On upcoming codexes: As has been reported elsewhere, Jervis gave no specifics. In my conference he did say though, ?that you could expect that the codexes that are difficult for a new player to create an army with, and one couldn?t be confident in their choices, may be revised first.? At another point it was either stated or agreed that the Chaos codex can be very confusing for a player to use and met this criteria.

On the question of the space marine codex: He said that at some point in the future, ?We will have to answer a question, and the question is, does the space marine codex represent the ultramarines, or all space marine chapters? I don?t have an answer for you yet, it?s a question we are still working on.?

On codex re-printings: During the QA that evening, in reference to the Necrons, he said they would no longer make rules changes in the codexes between printings. He also admitted they were wrong to have done so previously.

Posted By Ebon on 04/05/2007 4:30 PM
I attended the workshop on Monday morning. It was definitely eye-opening and an interesting look at the future of games workshop and their take on the hobby. There were a few more points that need to be brought up (or re-brought up) from what he discussed. I’m going to try hard to keep from advocating any points and just report what was said.

1) On the philosophy of FAQs: First, he said the question has to genuinely be ‘frequent’. They aren’t going to publish something to correct every oversight or interaction. Second, FAQs will only be used to correct categorical inconsistencies such as, “the cost of this item is 12 points here, and 15 points in another section.” Third, FAQ will not be used to “write rules as you wish they had been written.” He gave an example to illustrate this point. He said throughout playtesting, the Master of the Ravenwing fired his bolters and his plasma cannon. It wasn’t until the book was going out the door that someone pointed out to Jervis that the rules clearly state a jetbike can fire ONE weapon. He said something along the lines, of how he wished he caught that, but that’s the way the rule is written and it’s just reason to do better next time.

1) So basically (and please do correct me if I am off base) that the future FaQ's will be tools to change rules. As in "this cost 12 points instead of 15" or "Even though the rules say that a marine carrying bolters cannot fire a pistol weapon once and assault, they can now".
I dont have a problem with this, just wanted to clarify that FaQ's are now a chance for GW to change rules, and not answer frequently asked questions.

Posted By Ebon on 04/05/2007 4:30 PM

2) On outside playtesting: He said it has been falsely reported that GW has ended their outside playtesting program. Previously, there had been a site where playtesters could log in and see the rules under development. Within that context they were able to offer advice to the game designers about balance issues and suggestions. He said they came to the conclusion that this was premature to have outside people influence the design of the rules, that the game designers should do their job and have the rules created before they are seen by anyone else. So there are still outside playtesters, but they are limited to only pointing out typos and direct contradictions in the rules, nothing more.

2) So outside playtesters are adhoc editors who dont playtest? Huh. I wish I was suprised.

Posted By Ebon on 04/05/2007 4:30 PM

3) A phrase Jervis kept using was that players should be “confident” in the units presented in the book and their available choices. He said he wanted the game to be ‘nudged’ away from a game about the units you pick (and the options you use) and more a game about how you used your units in play. In a way, it sounded to me like 40k is becoming much more like fantasy where the flexibility of any given unit is restricted, and it’s how you maneuver your units and use them that determine a game.

3) Not sure what to think about this yet, but I have a feeling it can be good. Of course its a radical change, so it wont be wholeheartedly accepted universally.

Posted By Ebon on 04/05/2007 4:30 PM

4) On upcoming codexes: As has been reported elsewhere, Jervis gave no specifics. In my conference he did say though, ‘that you could expect that the codexes that are difficult for a new player to create an army with, and one couldn’t be confident in their choices, may be revised first.’ At another point it was either stated or agreed that the Chaos codex can be very confusing for a player to use and met this criteria.

4) To much conflicting rumours for me to even comment on this very much either. His use of jargon to communicate is irritating without being there myself and hearing what context he is putting it in.

Posted By Ebon on 04/05/2007 4:30 PM

5) On the question of the space marine codex: He said that at some point in the future, “We will have to answer a question, and the question is, does the space marine codex represent the ultramarines, or all space marine chapters? I don’t have an answer for you yet, it’s a question we are still working on.”

5) I think this could be good news. Or atleast potentially good news. Because the SM codex should represent all chapters, not just ultras. But then again, with the removal of options to use so that armies no fit into a well defined non creative atmosphere, I am thinking the SM codex will be made into the ultra codex and forgo any variations.

Posted By Ebon on 04/05/2007 4:30 PM

6) On codex re-printings: During the QA that evening, in reference to the Necrons, he said they would no longer make rules changes in the codexes between printings. He also admitted they were wrong to have done so previously.

6) Good. Atleast he has admitted that the inconsistencies of the past were wrong. When you give people something, then take it away, its bound to make people not like the changes. (i.e. Codex DA)
Of course, this wont stop them from continuing to make numerous stealth printings like the chaos dex.


Thanks for the report Ebon.

Posted By Hellfury on 04/05/2007 1:39 PM

This is a game about dollies. We discuss a game about dollies on this board.

Magical space dollies, no less.  Some prefer evil magical space dollies.

No problem sell them to me at 50% value. I will stll be playing.

While I readily admit Slave was trolling, watching Dakkaites make fun of other forums which provide equally valuable services to hobbyists is a bit disconcerting, and frankly pathetic. The modeling forums at B&C are significantly better than those here (and they used to be unbelievable here). Warseer gets rumors DAYS before Dakka, usually. Dakkaites are a variety of personalities, as Russ states, but the balance of a few years ago is somewhat lost. And I see plenty of comments referring to Dakka as a monolithic entity with brilliant "tactical" acumen from those making fun of Slave than Slave himself, so he is not the only one guilty of lumping Dakka into one mindset.

Long story short, Dakka still provides value to the hobbyist, but I certainly see a groupthink flavor to many of the posts. Often, it's an echo chamber in here.

Another note, I can't comment on the validity of the Nidzilla list, but obviously one reason for it's tourney popularity is the number of models to paint So that plays into it as well.

Flame away,
Chuck

1) He said they are NOT going to make rules changes with FAQs, but I think it depends on how you define a rules change. I'm being serious here cause I think you misunderstood what I wrote. To clarify, I'll give examples.

For Jervis, "this cost 12 points here, and 15 here, which is it?" is a clarification, not a rules change. Making the Master of the Ravenwing shoot bolters and the plasma cannon on a jetbike is a rules change, so they won't do it.

We'll have to wait and see how firm he is committed to this principle when it comes to bolt pistols and charging.

2) I agree, what he described IS an end to outside playtesting IMHO, and just the beginning of outside proof reading.

3) This is a big ball of wax I'm still trying to process as well.

4) agreed - but I harbor a big fear for what could come of the DA-iffication of Chaos. I'm not saying that DA is a bad codex, but it is very structured. Chaos is antithetical to that (by definition), so trying to put them into that mold could be painful.

5) agreed - although I don't see it mattering a whole lot. Even if they decide to cover "all space marine chapters" they'l be sure to hit it with the same nerf stick that got Dark Angels. Increased points to Assault cannons/ lascannons, reduced psychic powers, and reduced flexibility in traits.

I agree about the comments about B&C's modelling forum and warseers rumours. Outstanding.

Who cares what forum you post on? I post on all of them, much to the chagrin of some people here who accuse me of hate mongering.
Its the community as a whole, in which all the forums are a part of that makes the hobby great from an internet browsers perspective, not a single forum.

Thanks for the clarification Ebon.

On the point of playtesters becoming proofreaders. I dont think this is a bad thing. But they arent making the lists known widely enough for this to be of use.

For instance, put a codex out, and the forums WILL find any and all errors within a matter of days, if not hours.In a much smaller "need to know basis" you arent getting the same quality of communication of proofreaders finding faults as do internet forums. I am not seeing this to be of much use to GW because of inconsitencies such as the bolt pistol/bolter weilding marine to use one example.
I know they cannot catch everything, but this just shows me how little GW actually playtests themselves, or proffreads their rules for that matter.

I wonder if some of you that speak so harshly have even been playing with the new DA list either. I am not going to say it is going to go head to head with a tricked out Space Marine list. It's hard to compete with the min/max las plas and AC gunline with a lot of armies in a lot of missions.

Though I have been playing repeatedly with the DA against Mounted Eldar with a lot of VP denying tanks. In this regard I am not doing bad, though most of our games are coming out to be draws. I keep rearranging the list and tweaking things, but it is competitive against Eldar. It's usually a good game, and we are both finding that it is really a task to decide what units to take, they all fight for a position in the army. I think that makes a good list.

I also don't think that the other Codexes will follow exactly the same structure as DA. DA is a chapter that is in existence. So the book is structured around what we know. The DA use combat squads, are shooty, use bikes to scout and Deathwing to strike at things. They tend to shoot, and are not as CC oriented. The list reflects that in a lot of ways. I don't think the chaos or space marine lists will be as structured. They will be more like the Eldar dex where you can make what you want. In a way DA is like making a mid war panzer grenadier company. We know what they used, we know exactly how they were. The list is a reflection of that.

I am glad they are doing this mostly because they have to do something. A lot of armies just aren't easy to play against others. Nerf a couple of the major players and everyone gets a little bit of a boost.

What I find funny is the snarky passive agressive "standing off in the distance overlooking everything with a superior perspective" type posts.

To say that each forum represents the same thing to the hobbyist is an outright lie. Here at dakka, we have a certain flavor. If you don't like it, you can go to the places where the flavor is more "lite and fluffy" or "tart and tangy".

Changing how you say the differences in forums doesn't really change what you are really saying, and your comment about watching other people make fun of other forums is rather off base there dienekes96.

Back to the discussion at hand,

If GW is really attempting to make the game easy "for the new player", then what will happen between the old vets interacting with the newbies? Now, as a new player you almost have to get involved in the gaming community to know how the game works. This is good because it not only helps the new player learn how to play, it brings some new blood into the mix of the gaming group.

When all you have to do is figure it out yourself, I wonder how much more of a divide will be created between newbies and vets, almost towards the developement of two rulesets, the "beginners" and "advanced", which alienates both sides from each other.

Posted By Hellfury on 04/05/2007 4:45 PM

Posted By Ebon on 04/05/2007 4:30 PM

6) On codex re-printings: During the QA that evening, in reference to the Necrons, he said they would no longer make rules changes in the codexes between printings. He also admitted they were wrong to have done so previously.

6) Good. Atleast he has admitted that the inconsistencies of the past were wrong. When you give people something, then take it away, its bound to make people not like the changes. (i.e. Codex DA)
Of course, this wont stop them from continuing to make numerous stealth printings like the chaos dex.


Thanks for the report Ebon.

The really funny part of that isn't what he said, but how the question was brought up.  The beer-drinking Cannucks were in the house...

Posted By Centurian99 on 04/05/2007 5:36 PM

Posted By Hellfury on 04/05/2007 4:45 PM

Posted By Ebon on 04/05/2007 4:30 PM

6) On codex re-printings: During the QA that evening, in reference to the Necrons, he said they would no longer make rules changes in the codexes between printings. He also admitted they were wrong to have done so previously.

6) Good. Atleast he has admitted that the inconsistencies of the past were wrong. When you give people something, then take it away, its bound to make people not like the changes. (i.e. Codex DA)
Of course, this wont stop them from continuing to make numerous stealth printings like the chaos dex.


Thanks for the report Ebon.

The really funny part of that isn't what he said, but how the question was brought up.  The beer-drinking Cannucks were in the house...

Heh. Could you expand on that for those of use who werent there?

Seriously, guys, talking about changing the bolt pistol + bolter model not being able to shoot and then assault isn't in the same category as many other rule changes made in FAQs: it's a revision of a poorly worded rule. How many people here actually play by it? If you do, do you play by the rapid fire rule which is a result of the same poor wording -- that carrying a rapid fire weapon lets you shoot any other gun you're carrying at a 12" range?

Posted By Lowinor on 04/05/2007 5:42 PM
Seriously, guys, talking about changing the bolt pistol + bolter model not being able to shoot and then assault isn't in the same category as many other rule changes made in FAQs: it's a revision of a poorly worded rule. How many people here actually play by it? If you do, do you play by the rapid fire rule which is a result of the same poor wording -- that carrying a rapid fire weapon lets you shoot any other gun you're carrying at a 12" range?

Good point, but I used that as just an example. But youre right, there are far more worrisome rules that need clarification.

Posted By Schepp himself on 04/05/2007 11:32 AM

And honestly, all the crying about Gw killing the Craftworlds with the new codex is a it exaggerated. In reference to the new Chaos codex, I'm almost sure the Legions will be tuned down like in the new Eldar Codex.

WTF? Exaggerated?

The Craftworlds don't exist in the new Codex. There are no sub-lists, additional rules, anything. You simply take lots of Jetbikes and imagine than you're playing Siam Hann, or take Eldrad and a lot of Guardians and pretend that you're playing Ulthwe, or take loads of Dire Avengers as troops and aspect warriors as other choices and then stick your fingers in your ears and scream 'La la la I'm playing Biel Tan!'.

There's nothing exaggerated about it Schepp because it's the 100% truth about that Codex:

Craftworlds. Are. Gone.

They're fluff, and nothing else. There are no rules at all for them, only an altered FOC in the general lists that gives you a loose approximation of what a Craftworld list would be if it still existed.

And if the Legions are 'tuned down', as you put it, to be in line with the Eldar Codex, that also means that they won't exist.

BYE

Wow, thats utterly retarted. Explains why there is no new news, but still 3 months is seriously bad.