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.
Tournament s give us solid data and they show csm isn't competitive,
Still managed to contribute to the winning list of Adepticon. Yeah yeah, "BUT ALLIES!!!11!!!oneoneone" and all that, still part of the CSM Codex that contributed to the victory.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 12:30:07
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
Indeed. Cultists and the heldrake with not a single marine in sight. It's really kind of sad to see how the only marines that really make a splash are White Scar bikers, Iron Hands, and Gravstar. Which all yet again avoid the standard marine.
I wouldn't really say that being in the tops as allies is too much praise though. Especially when it is basically to nab a prince that synergies with FMC spam daemons and/or a Heldrake which I would gladly see erased from the game (and maybe replaced with another troop deployment maybe?)
StarTrotter wrote: Indeed. Cultists and the heldrake with not a single marine in sight. It's really kind of sad to see how the only marines that really make a splash are White Scar bikers, Iron Hands, and Gravstar. Which all yet again avoid the standard marine.
And yet you don't see anyone saying that Codex: Space Marine isn't competetive, despite it avoiding Tactical Marines like the plague. Why the double standard?
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
StarTrotter wrote: Indeed. Cultists and the heldrake with not a single marine in sight. It's really kind of sad to see how the only marines that really make a splash are White Scar bikers, Iron Hands, and Gravstar. Which all yet again avoid the standard marine.
And yet you don't see anyone saying that Codex: Space Marine isn't competetive, despite it avoiding Tactical Marines like the plague. Why the double standard?
mate thats a crock, the CSM allies that were brought in were a minor component, no stand alone list made from CSM has a chance, and thats why you never see them. thoes Daemon's lists are exactly what they are, they wanted MORE flyers, so had to get them from CSM, otherwise.. they would have left them at home. and the drakes even had the hades... which is more than odd.. because thats the weakest loadout for it
playing against mates in a friendly game sure, hell id even take them to a tourney, and with max use of FMCDP, trip drakes and min cultists, i would finnish where do you think? because lets be honest we KNOW its not anywhere near the top
playing against mates in a friendly game sure, hell id even take them to a tourney, and with max use of FMCDP, trip drakes and min cultists, i would finnish where do you think? because lets be honest we KNOW its not anywhere near the top
And playing a Vanilla Space Marine list without allies wouldn't get you near the top either. Your point is?
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
playing against mates in a friendly game sure, hell id even take them to a tourney, and with max use of FMCDP, trip drakes and min cultists, i would finnish where do you think? because lets be honest we KNOW its not anywhere near the top
And playing a Vanilla Space Marine list without allies wouldn't get you near the top either. Your point is?
wait what? are you saying SM NEED allies?
wish i had grav star, or half the stuff in that book, might ballance out the glaring holes in the csm book. the SM codex cocks a leg at the csm book and does a hefty tinkle. lets not even pretend that those 2 books are remotely close in power or ballance
playing against mates in a friendly game sure, hell id even take them to a tourney, and with max use of FMCDP, trip drakes and min cultists, i would finnish where do you think? because lets be honest we KNOW its not anywhere near the top
And playing a Vanilla Space Marine list without allies wouldn't get you near the top either. Your point is?
wait what? are you saying SM NEED allies?
wish i had grav star, or half the stuff in that book, might ballance out the glaring holes in the csm book. the SM codex cocks a leg at the csm book and does a hefty tinkle. lets not even pretend that those 2 books are remotely close in power or ballance
You're dodging the question. If you went to somethign like Adepticon, would you be likely to place anywhere near the top with an army from just Codex: Space Marines? If not, why is there a double standard?
You may also want to note that not only the winner but the runner-up of Adepticon had CSM in it. There's clearly some stuff in there that has some potential, no matter how much you want to pretend it doesn't exist.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
playing against mates in a friendly game sure, hell id even take them to a tourney, and with max use of FMCDP, trip drakes and min cultists, i would finnish where do you think? because lets be honest we KNOW its not anywhere near the top
And playing a Vanilla Space Marine list without allies wouldn't get you near the top either. Your point is?
wait what? are you saying SM NEED allies?
wish i had grav star, or half the stuff in that book, might ballance out the glaring holes in the csm book. the SM codex cocks a leg at the csm book and does a hefty tinkle. lets not even pretend that those 2 books are remotely close in power or ballance
You're dodging the question. If you went to somethign like Adepticon, would you be likely to place anywhere near the top with an army from just Codex: Space Marines? If not, why is there a double standard?
You may also want to note that not only the winner but the runner-up of Adepticon had CSM in it. There's clearly some stuff in there that has some potential, no matter how much you want to pretend it doesn't exist.
You're also twisting the question.
Was the detachment for CSM Primary or Secondary?
Was the detachments for C:SM Primary or secondary?
Considering that the Adepticon lists had far more primary SM then CSM, with CSM being regulated to drake/dp/cultist for CD lists (Meaning it was primarily a secondary alliance list), what does that tell you? That SM is capable on its own, with addition from allies of other lists, but CSM isn't worth it as a primary for other lists, even with CD as allies.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 13:30:59
playing against mates in a friendly game sure, hell id even take them to a tourney, and with max use of FMCDP, trip drakes and min cultists, i would finnish where do you think? because lets be honest we KNOW its not anywhere near the top
And playing a Vanilla Space Marine list without allies wouldn't get you near the top either. Your point is?
wait what? are you saying SM NEED allies?
wish i had grav star, or half the stuff in that book, might ballance out the glaring holes in the csm book. the SM codex cocks a leg at the csm book and does a hefty tinkle. lets not even pretend that those 2 books are remotely close in power or ballance
You're dodging the question. If you went to somethign like Adepticon, would you be likely to place anywhere near the top with an army from just Codex: Space Marines? If not, why is there a double standard?
You may also want to note that not only the winner but the runner-up of Adepticon had CSM in it. There's clearly some stuff in there that has some potential, no matter how much you want to pretend it doesn't exist.
You're also twisting the question.
Was the detachment for CSM Primary or Secondary?
Was the detachments for C:SM Primary or secondary?
Considering that the Adepticon lists had far more primary SM then CSM, with CSM being regulated to drake/dp/cultist for CD lists (Meaning it was primarily a secondary alliance list), what does that tell you? That SM is capable on its own, with addition from allies of other lists, but CSM isn't worth it as a primary for other lists, even with CD as allies.
thankyou, its 10pm here and im cooking haha so distracted, very well worded answer
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 13:34:57
Tournament s give us solid data and they show csm isn't competitive,
Still managed to contribute to the winning list of Adepticon. Yeah yeah, "BUT ALLIES!!!11!!!oneoneone" and all that, still part of the CSM Codex that contributed to the victory.
No.
Heldrakes & Cultists, Heldrakes & Cultists, Heldrakes & Cultists, Heldrakes & Cultists, Heldrakes & Cultists, Heldrakes & Cultists, Heldrakes & Cultists. I am sorry if I sound repetitive but it is obvious you missed this part.
We are talking about Chaos Space Marines here. Not about Heldrakes & Cultists. We all know Heldrakes & Cultists are great. Some (most) CSM players want some, you know, Chaos Space Marines in their Chaos Space Marines armies. Or anything that is not Heldrakes & Cultists.
You're dodging the question. If you went to somethign like Adepticon, would you be likely to place anywhere near the top with an army from just Codex: Space Marines? If not, why is there a double standard?
You may also want to note that not only the winner but the runner-up of Adepticon had CSM in it. There's clearly some stuff in there that has some potential, no matter how much you want to pretend it doesn't exist.
The stuff that has potential is: Heldrakes & Cultists.
Nobody pretends Heldrakes & Cultists do not exist.
The SM Codex has problems too. The basic SM is too weak, with Centurions, Bikes and Scouts taking all the fame. Still, there are many viable lists winning games with SM. And there are lots of fun stuff to do with chapter traits. As many other CSM players, I play SM too. I am getting a lot of fun from SM. Lots of viable options. CSM only has one single list: Heldrakes & Cultists, Heldrakes & Cultists, Heldrakes & Cultists. Heldrakes & Cultists everywhere.
It gets boring after a while.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 14:23:57
‘Your warriors will stand down and withdraw, Curze. That is an order, not a request. (…) When this campaign is won, you and I will have words’
Rogal Dorn, just before taking the beating of his life.
from The Dark King, by Graham McNeill.
Meqs are garbage for both CSM and SM. That's why people minimize their amount of *actual* meqs in both lists. Yes, C:SM can field more potent lists than CSM, but that's because of Tiggy and centurions, not the actual space marines themselves. The average tactical marine is a paste-eating loser.
Martel732 wrote: Meqs are garbage for both CSM and SM. That's why people minimize their amount of *actual* meqs in both lists. Yes, C:SM can field more potent lists than CSM, but that's because of Tiggy and centurions, not the actual space marines themselves. The average tactical marine is a paste-eating loser.
While I completely agree with you, if the basic CSMmeq were as "weak" as the basic SMmeq I would be so happy....
I do not play competitive games, so meqSM, while being far from strong, are good enough for me. To use a nid simil, the SMmeq is like a Tyranid Warrior, ineffective and not very useful yet still fun to play, and CSMmeqs are Pyrovore equivalents. There are tiers in Garbageland.
‘Your warriors will stand down and withdraw, Curze. That is an order, not a request. (…) When this campaign is won, you and I will have words’
Rogal Dorn, just before taking the beating of his life.
from The Dark King, by Graham McNeill.
Martel732 wrote: Meqs are garbage for both CSM and SM. That's why people minimize their amount of *actual* meqs in both lists. Yes, C:SM can field more potent lists than CSM, but that's because of Tiggy and centurions, not the actual space marines themselves. The average tactical marine is a paste-eating loser.
While I completely agree with you, if the basic CSMmeq were as "weak" as the basic SMmeq I would be so happy....
I do not play competitive games, so meqSM, while being far from strong, are good enough for me. To use a nid simil, the SMmeq is like a Tyranid Warrior, ineffective and not very useful yet still fun to play, and CSMmeqs are Pyrovore equivalents. There are tiers in Garbageland.
SM tactical marines are dumpster fires. You don't want to be them. Yeah, they can ATSKNF all day as they hit you with wet noodles and accomplish nothing.
2014/04/29 14:31:07
Subject: Re:Chaos Space Marines becoming Irrelevant?
I think we already had this conversation before...
While playing SM vs CSM (no Heldrakes & Cultists), ATSKNF becomes a big major advantage, as well as the rest of special rules. Getting for one single point Fearless and a chapter/Legion trait equivalent for all CSM units, while getting rid of Warriors of Chaos will balance the match. At the moment, SM vs CSM (without Heldrakes & Cultists) is just not fun, at least in small games.
‘Your warriors will stand down and withdraw, Curze. That is an order, not a request. (…) When this campaign is won, you and I will have words’
Rogal Dorn, just before taking the beating of his life.
from The Dark King, by Graham McNeill.
2014/04/29 14:34:08
Subject: Re:Chaos Space Marines becoming Irrelevant?
da001 wrote: I think we already had this conversation before...
While playing SM vs CSM (no Heldrakes & Cultists), ATSKNF becomes a big major advantage, as well as the rest of special rules. Getting for one single point Fearless and a chapter/Legion trait equivalent for all CSM units, while getting rid of Warriors of Chaos will balance the match. At the moment, SM vs CSM (without Heldrakes & Cultists) is just not fun, at least in small games.
I haven't played against actual CSM with BA or counts-as IH in some time. Well, plague marines.
" (without Heldrakes & Cultists)"
I also haven't seen this in quite a while. There's a reason I call it C:Heldrake.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 14:36:18
So, the help my SOB army get anti-air I should ally in Tau or I deserve to lose???
That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long while.
Heldrakes and cultists.
Heldrakes and cultists.
Boring.
There are so many useless and sub-par units in the codex that its kind of sad. If your meta allows more fluffy armies the CSM can actually rock. But put them against a Taudar type list and they simply don't have the tools to cope with it.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
da001 wrote: I think we already had this conversation before...
While playing SM vs CSM (no Heldrakes & Cultists), ATSKNF becomes a big major advantage, as well as the rest of special rules. Getting for one single point Fearless and a chapter/Legion trait equivalent for all CSM units, while getting rid of Warriors of Chaos will balance the match. At the moment, SM vs CSM (without Heldrakes & Cultists) is just not fun, at least in small games.
I haven't played against actual CSM with BA or counts-as IH in some time. Well, plague marines.
" (without Heldrakes & Cultists)"
I also haven't seen this in quite a while. There's a reason I call it C:Heldrake.
And I do believe you are not going to play against basic csm in a long time. Just like many other units, they have become something difficult to handle even in a casual game. At least for me.
I don´t know, perhaps 7th edition does something to "balance" the game. But until then, it is Codex: Heldrake.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 14:44:58
‘Your warriors will stand down and withdraw, Curze. That is an order, not a request. (…) When this campaign is won, you and I will have words’
Rogal Dorn, just before taking the beating of his life.
from The Dark King, by Graham McNeill.
That brings up a good point: another way to classify the lists in 40K is by whether they encourage or discourage the selection of canonical units. Both C:SM and CSM discourage this.
MWHistorian wrote: So, the help my SOB army get anti-air I should ally in Tau or I deserve to lose???
That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long while.
Heldrakes and cultists.
Heldrakes and cultists.
Boring.
There are so many useless and sub-par units in the codex that its kind of sad. If your meta allows more fluffy armies the CSM can actually rock. But put them against a Taudar type list and they simply don't have the tools to cope with it.
now i know what im about to say is close to blaspemy, but when i play against other marine armies i allow the flakk missile upgrade for ALL ML. +5ppm because lets be honest here +40 on a normal dev squad or equiv is the cost of 4 more ML in the first place... that softens it up a little more for those poor people that havent got upgraded codecies yet.
my AA though is a quad gun and dakka dakka dakka, from havoks, or oblits... and just go with weight of shots...
Just a heads up if you guys didn't know about Jancoran. He does this a lot where he overlooks actual issues and makes wild claims all the time. He advocates bad units all the time and does very little, aside from saying to check out his blog, to give an actual account of why his tactic works.
Long story short, if you argue with him that CSM is not good he will say "Use tactics" and call it a day.
On topic I'm reminded a lot of the Tau 4th ed codex when I look at CSM. There are good choices in there, but the bad choices outweigh the good. Most of the good units in there are crammed into the FA slot with a unit shining in just about every other slot.
For me I completely gave up on the codex a while ago, as someone that just started CSM with no insight on the previous CSM books. There was no real soul to the army. I hated that my Iron Warriors theme was only going to be in paint scheme alone. I hated that there are just so few real builds to the army even in a noncompetitive scene. That and Nurgle was one of my least favorite of the Chaos gods and I feel punished for not using them more.
I'm expecting an Imperial Knights supplement dedicated to GW's loyalist apologetics. Codex: White Knights "In the grim dark future, everything is fine."
"The argument is that we have to do this or we will, bit by bit,
lose everything that we hold dear, everything that keeps the business going. Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky."
-Tom Kirby
MWHistorian wrote: So, the help my SOB army get anti-air I should ally in Tau or I deserve to lose???
That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long while.
Heldrakes and cultists.
Heldrakes and cultists.
Boring.
There are so many useless and sub-par units in the codex that its kind of sad. If your meta allows more fluffy armies the CSM can actually rock. But put them against a Taudar type list and they simply don't have the tools to cope with it.
now i know what im about to say is close to blaspemy, but when i play against other marine armies i allow the flakk missile upgrade for ALL ML. +5ppm because lets be honest here +40 on a normal dev squad or equiv is the cost of 4 more ML in the first place... that softens it up a little more for those poor people that havent got upgraded codecies yet.
my AA though is a quad gun and dakka dakka dakka, from havoks, or oblits... and just go with weight of shots...
Too bad I would never use ML to begin with, nor pay for flakk missiles even if I could.
MWHistorian wrote: So, the help my SOB army get anti-air I should ally in Tau or I deserve to lose???
That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long while.
Heldrakes and cultists.
Heldrakes and cultists.
Boring.
There are so many useless and sub-par units in the codex that its kind of sad. If your meta allows more fluffy armies the CSM can actually rock. But put them against a Taudar type list and they simply don't have the tools to cope with it.
now i know what im about to say is close to blaspemy, but when i play against other marine armies i allow the flakk missile upgrade for ALL ML. +5ppm because lets be honest here +40 on a normal dev squad or equiv is the cost of 4 more ML in the first place... that softens it up a little more for those poor people that havent got upgraded codecies yet.
my AA though is a quad gun and dakka dakka dakka, from havoks, or oblits... and just go with weight of shots...
Too bad I would never use ML to begin with, nor pay for flakk missiles even if I could.
i think iv said it before, but ML on csm, never, i have 8 AC havoks and 8 LC havoks.. mmmm FW thanks for that
but on my BA, MLdevs all the way, same as SW as well...
Martel732 wrote: BAMLdevs are like the worst heavy choice in the whole book. Why would you do that? But not for CSM?
your rather take HB? not a chance... PC? is always a risk for infantry GH is lame.... LC too expensive really unless you want a tank hunter unit, though for double the price of a ML... and a MM... i am not walking devs to within 24" of them.. not a hope
and because i get Autocannons. weight of fire an AC that hits a flyer does so at the same str as a Flakk Missile. does a better job against other models, etc.. oh and cheaper...
Martel732 wrote: BAMLdevs are like the worst heavy choice in the whole book. Why would you do that? But not for CSM?
your rather take HB? not a chance... PC? is always a risk for infantry GH is lame.... LC too expensive really unless you want a tank hunter unit, though for double the price of a ML... and a MM... i am not walking devs to within 24" of them.. not a hope
and because i get Autocannons. weight of fire an AC that hits a flyer does so at the same str as a Flakk Missile. does a better job against other models, etc.. oh and cheaper...
I would take any of those over MLs, but your post sums up why I don't field BA devastators. Ever. Not when I have Stormravens and fast preds.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 15:28:22
Martel732 wrote: BAMLdevs are like the worst heavy choice in the whole book. Why would you do that? But not for CSM?
your rather take HB? not a chance... PC? is always a risk for infantry GH is lame.... LC too expensive really unless you want a tank hunter unit, though for double the price of a ML... and a MM... i am not walking devs to within 24" of them.. not a hope
and because i get Autocannons. weight of fire an AC that hits a flyer does so at the same str as a Flakk Missile. does a better job against other models, etc.. oh and cheaper...
I would take any of those over MLs, but your post sums up why I don't field BA devastators. Ever. Not when I have Stormravens and fast preds.
id only take the ML, though fast preds are mmmmm moist... wishful thinking that chaos stole THAT tech, and the SR, is another fav of mine, though its really really expensive,
i do take PC every so often, and have a divi lib near by to prescience them, so that gets hot doesnt thrash them.. though im only casually playing BA now..
2375
/ 
1690
WIP (1875)
1300
760
WIP (350)
WIP (150) 
20,000 Pts 
6000+ Pts
