For my 3468th post, because I missed my 3456th post and my 3333rd post and my 3000th post (I really don't watch my post count; it's okay though this post also has a pattern in its number which makes it interesting), I'm gonna rank the various armies as for my opinion of them, their fluff, their codex, and their overall feel as they currently stand. I will include the various Marine sub-armies simply because there are some I actually like despite what certain people occasionally insinuate.

So let's start this countdown with the faction I like the least. No, it's not Space Marines. Actually, it's:

16: NECRONS


I just... don't have any feelings at all for them. GW hasn't even written them to be very interesting ENEMIES, nevermind as an actual playable faction. They're emotionless robots which always strike without warning and have uberawesome tech which nobody can replicate and most of the time even when they're killed they're not really killed. There's some people who even claim that they can come back from being vaporized by a meltagun shot. ... yeah. I feel it's ridiculous, and just un-fun, both as a faction and as an enemy. The fact that the actual tabletop army is incredibly uninteresting to play at the moment does not help either, and it's uninteresting to play against as well.

And it doubly sucks because, with the background they have now, the Necrontyr have so much potential! I feel they should be ancient aliens coldly rebelling against their godlike masters, and giving hell to everyone else in their way (after all, they're all creations of the Old Ones they hate so much) as they work to destroy the C'tan now that they're weakened-- they don't need weak gods, so they won't suffer them. Especially the Nightbringer, whom they should hate more than anything that isn't an Old One. Add in those still enslaved to the C'tan and it justifies current fluff as well. Their Lords and Immortals should have personality still, and yet they're never really described-- think of how awesomely bat-s*** insane the Lords should be after being enslaved for countless millenniums? But it's never described. And the sane ones should be the most dangerous of all, but we don't know if there are any left.

The army list is similarly uninteresting, limited, and lackluster. The choices that are there are often uncompetitive due to the move to fifth edition, and Necrons are almost a joke army nowadays because of how notoriously hard it is to win with them against a player that knows what they're doing. They've suffered the most in the move to fifth edition, and even though they aren't as weak as people make them out to be, they're still at the bottom of the pile.

I hope the new codex rumored to come out early-mid next year breathes new life into these otherwise lifeless, and unfortunately also rather uninteresting, abominations. Because they have a HUGE opportunity to be goddamned awesome if they're just given more... personality, in both a literal and figurative sense.

Melissia wrote:Now for something which I suppose is completely expected. But it's partly the fault of certain posters on this and many other forums, as well as the army's fans IRL and GW's own fluff. So, let's move on to the second to last army:

15: CHAOS SPACE MARINES


I just don't like them. They're rather undeniiably evil for one (yeah yeah blah blah gods have positive virtues, and yet, they sanction wholesale slaughter just for the fun of it, making the Inquisition seem tame at times), which means to me they have to be particularly well written or they're only suitable as enemies. And the more I read the Horus Heresy novels (I really should stop, I haven't liked most of them), the less I like each legion.

Horus had the galaxy as his oyster, he was the greatest conquerer of the entirety of human history, and yet he threw it all away because he felt his daddy wasn't giving him enough attention (Chaos, of course, was intelligent enough to waggle silver tongues and make use of his insecurity). Perturabo whined about being stuck in siege duty, and then betrayed the Emperor only to be... stuck in more siege duty. Magnus and Fulgrim I kinda have sympathy for, but the former STILL screwed everything up even if they didn't intend to. And the primarch of the World Eaters is so bland and undeveloped that I can't even remember his name half the time.

And compounding the "bunch of grown men with daddy issues" issue is the way the fans act. I actually think the CSM codex is one of the better ones. Is it perfect? By no means. All the fifth edition ones are better, but then, they're better than ALL of the codices previously written. The codex has a lot of flavorful builds available to it, and though it shows its age, it is still capable of putting up a fight against everything else. The codex is the reason why they're above Necrons-- the army is actually interesting, even if I dislike the fluff. The current CSM codex has both simplicity and variety, and theoretically it should be fun to play as and play against-- except that fans don't quit b... whining about how it isn't absolutely perfect. And they often use some of the dumbest arguments to complain about it, too.

They whine that it's weak, even though it seems to rather consistently place in the top five in tournaments. The codex is consistently one of the better codices when it comes to actual competitive strength-- frankly it's quite possibly a tougher codex than the current fifth edition vanilla Space Marines codex, what with CSMs having what is commonly believed to be a superior selection of troops choices (And thus scoring units). They argue that it has no variety, even though it has more than any other current codex that's not fifth edition. Especially comparing it to third edition ones-- these people that claim that all the units suck save a specifi few don't know how damn lucky they are that they like CSMs instead of, say, Grey Knights (damn would they be pissed then, huh?). Honestly, I just don't get it, and it irritates the hell out of me listening to the constant whining and moaning of the fans, making me dislike the faction even more than I already did.

I'm not pointing fingers at anyone. I'm just ranting about it because I'm tired of it (And just plain tired), having been hearing it ever since the damn codex was released.

The only part of the CSMs I did like (fluffwise) were daemons. And thankfully I don't have to play a CSM army to play Daemons anymore. Fun times for everyone. Or at least me. I'll talk about THAT army when it comes time for that. For now, I think I've ranted enough on this subject, so I'll post this before my graphics card overheats again (I really need to get that checked).

Melissia wrote:I make no apologies for my opinions stated in this thread. CSMs suck, they're the only faction I actively dislike, but their codex is good (Better than half the codices in use today) so they're ranked higher than Necrons. If Necrons gain interesting fluff and a revitalized army list, CSMs are going right to the bottom,and staying there until GW doesn't make them look like spiky failures with daddy issues in my eyes.

Moving right along, let's talk about the next army in the list. It was a bit of a toss-up between three armies,

but in the end of the three I would say that...

14: TYRANIDS


... are the ones I have the least desire to play, for fluff and rules reasons. They make great enemies, but a lot of their fluff is overblown even by 40k standards, and the fact that people are constantly saying there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of hive fleets out there just annoys me. Their personality is limited, and in most cases nonexistent, and they're constantly pushed as the unbeatable enemy (which is boring) by the fans. However, they rank higher than the previous armies because they're actual living creatures, and the synapse creatures DO have personality. It's limited, and very little of it is expounded upon by the fluff, but it IS there. I also have a fondness for Lictors, but unfortunately GW decided not to give us an Alpha Lictor commander, which would have been fairly sweet. That Lictors basically suck in this edition's codex also really disappoints me.

But I actually quite enjoy fighting Tyranids. I may not like their fluff, but they make for extremely enjoyable opponents in tabletop, there's just something visceral and cool about fighting them. Whether it's monstrous creatures or gant/gaunt spam, the codex, despite its flaws (inability to deep strike the tyranid prime for example, and the suckage of Lictors), saves the army for me. Eventually I might even be tempted to start the army, though that's hampered by the aformentioned absence of an alpha lictor commander (Dawn of War 2 really increased my opinion of them as far as playstyle goes, and this character is, specifically, why). The Tyranid Prime however is an interesting HQ unit and so if I did start a Tyranid army, it would probably be my choice in lieu of the previously mentioned nonexistent unit.

I actually kind feel bad for putting Tyranids here, but at the same time, something has to go here and of the three that are to come (sort of a lower-mid tier of armies), this army is the one I'm least likely to start playing. But from here on comes armies that I like to play AGAINST, or at least don't mind. Tyranids are fun opponents, with a good amount of variety which makes up for their lackluster fluff. Certainly I'd rather see a Tyranid army across the trable than any of the previous ones, and probably moreso than the next one as well.

Melissia wrote:To me, without Orks, there is no 40k.

I will say no more until I get to Orks in this list.

Until then, let's move on to...

13: Black Templars

This is going to be a short little rant. This is an army I see little of. This ranking totally a matter of feeling and opinion, as on this particular army I'm not really sure know how to explain these opinions.

I really have mixed feelings for this army. I like the crusader aspect, it's part of the reason I like Sisters, and yet... somehow, it just doesn't work out as well with the Templars. I don't know if I can really explain it, but Black Templars just don't "click" with me. I don't really enjoy seeing them on the field as my opponent that much, and I don't really think I'll ever play them, despite the fact that I like their concept.

The army list itself isn't bad per se I suppose. It's certainly more interesting than Blood Angels as far as varying from the basic default codex (though in other aspects, such as variety, it is lacking like any non-fifth edition codex). But it seems to be showing its age, and there's something I can't put my finger on that makes it feel flawed and unfun. I don't know if it is (I have not seen that many of these players), perhaps I just don't see the army enough to judge it, but in the end I think the army really needs to be revitalized before I can take it seriously, much like Necrons in fact.

While not as bad as third edition codices, it feels like a very flawed codex, and the fluff itself, despite me liking the concept, does not endear me to the army as much as I would like. Every time I read it I just can't seem to appreciate the chapter. The army's concept is something I can get into for starting it, if it's revitalized sometime in fifth edition (after tau probably), certainly moreso than Tyranids, but currently I'm just held back from really liking the army or its fluff for some reason. Consider this army tied with the previous one, and next one which should come later today.

Melissia wrote:I should note that I don't really dislike any of the low ranking factions/codices, the reason they're low ranking is a combination of competitiveness, appeal, how much they fit into my view of 40k. Personally I think that, outside of Chaos Space Marines, all of the factions have concepts that greatly appeal to me. It's just a matter of their execution-- some of them were done far better than others. Which of course brings me to:

12: TAU EMPIRE


Along with the Necrons, the Tau and their Empire were added in after the conclusion of second edition. Of the two, this faction fared far better, but could still use some work.

Just like with Black Templars, there's some things I like about the army, that entice me to try it out... yet... they're poorly executed. The Tau fluff was originally unambiguously "the good guys", making them fit in like an executioner's block in a preschool building. GW has tried to move them away from that since then, but I feel they haven't done enough to do so. The fact that they try and make the Tau to be a credible threat on par with everything else also is questionable, as they do so even when they emphasize how little territory the Tau actually have at the moment.

Originally, Dark Eldar was in this position. But Dark Eldar's playstyle and models, and possibly fluff, look to be greatly improved with the upcoming codex, and so they're bumped up. Which is unfortunate for the Tau, because frankly I think they have a lot of potential. It's just that they haven't had enough fluff, or enough models, or enough rules to build on that potential. The rules kinda suffer in fifth edition, and they weren't actually THAT great in fourth edition anyway (though they were better than they are now, with fifth edition codices out). I imagine they will move up quite a few spots when the fifth edition codex comes out, probably sometime late next year or early the year after. I look forward to it, and hope they don't do any more stupid things like "Tau can defeat a Tyranid fleet without a single casualty!". As much as I despise the more over the top Tyranid fluff, come ON! They're not THAT incompetent!

The parts of the Tau fluff that I like actually tend to be on how naieve they are, but eventually they're going to have to learn the harsh, unforgiving, merciless truth of the 40k galaxy. And I rub my hands with psychotic glee over how much that realization might change their way of thinking, way of life, and way of warfare. But the Tau at least have the firepower to withstand it a bit longer, and I hope they do. They're one of the more alien factions in the setting, and at the same time, their purely scientific view on warfare and technology is refreshing and has a lot of potential... both for units, AND for potential conflicts revolving it rogue AIs. And the fact that they are an empire of many races brings hope to me that the fifth edition codex will really let you go crazy with the auxiliaries-- be they human, kroot, demiurg, or what have you. It's a part of the army list that reminds me of the Roman Empire and their use of foreign light auxiliaries in support of their legions, and I like such historical references.

So despite it s seemingly low rating, the Tau Empire, much like the previous codex, has a lot of potential. It just feels wasted, with mediocre, incomplete, and often over the top fluff, and rules which have suffered due to age. I sincerely hope GW's fifth edition release makes me want to buy a Tau army.

Melissia wrote:Gone for what, twelve hours, and already two more pages? Goddamn, goddamn.

Well anyway, as predicted by Saint Hazard (I have a text file with the order of the factions, so no, I didn't change it because of his prediction), here's:

11: Dark Angels


Once again, I feel bad giving them this rating. I admit I like the majority of the factions, and yet with a rating system like this that's a numbered list, it's hard to be fair.

In this case, though, I think it's merited. I feel much the same about Dark Angels as I do about Black Templars, except I actually prefer Dark Angels a bit more because of their focus on plasma and ranged warfare. Plasma is cool, both from a visual and from a physics perspective (well, technically it's hot), after all, and I have a preference for playing armies which have some focus on shooting (Although, given that I play Orks, obviously it isn't a requirement). Their codex also has a better variety of choices than the BT codex I feel, including the awesome all-terminator army. They've suffered a bit with age, and yet they still have a good amount of variety to help cover for that.

Yet, for all of that, they're still kinda languishing behind any of the modern codices, left in the dust to suffer from age. Their fluff feels the same way, as well-- their focus on secrecy has resulted in us not knowing that much about them or their "dark secret", which while attractive to some people makes the army less desirable to me. Some secrets are necessary for the sake of a continued narrative, but something feels off about the Dark Angels' narrative. Still, at least they have one and they are, very slowly, moving forward and trying to resolve their dark secret (in secret of course), where with the Black Templars it feels are kinda stuck in stasis (which again is appealing to some people, but not necessarily to me).

All in all, despite anything I've said here, I think DA are a good mid-level codex, IE, they aren't spectacular, but they do look fun, and have a good amount of somewhat interesting fluff. They need more work done on them, but I could say (and have said) the same thing about any non-fifth edition codex.

Melissia wrote:10: DARK ELDAR


As said before, for me to really like bad guys and want to play them requires that they be well written . I'm not so sure Dark Eldar are. But they DO have vastly improved rules and models over their previous incarnation, and heck, even the previous incarnation was probably the most competitive of the third edition codices at the start of fifth edition. It just took more finesse than most codices-- but since it's an Eldar codex, that's expected of it anyway so that's hardly a criticism.

The fluff doesn't really present them to be a huge galactic threat-- they suffer just like the Tau in that regard, only unlike the Tau they don't seem to be intending to expand much. Maybe the fifth edition codex will change that, maybe they'll be more awesome then. But until then, they're kinda stuck in the limbo of evil ninja pirate bondage elves. In space. Which is actually pretty awesome. Dark Eldar make for very interesting enemies, but they suffer much like most of the third edition codices in that they just don't have all that much fluff, which means they don't have that much for me to judge from, and less characterization than they deserve. That which is there isn't all that impressive, though, for aforementioned reasons.

Their playstyle, however, redeems all of that, as do their new models (those two-handed swords are just badass, and Lelith is a great female model and hopefully a sign of things to come for future female models). They're actually DIFFERENT from other armies, which is more than I can say for the many MEQ armies which are basically "like C:SM, but...". Fast, fragile, and hard hitting, with plenty of fun special rules, they're quite interesting on the tabletop even if they lack a bit in the lore.

It's a bit unfair rating Dark Eldar right now, what with a new codex coming out in a month, but hey, I don't feel like waiting a month to finish this. Suffice it to say, Dark Eldar are cool enemies. And if the codex doesn't suck, and has a good amount of well-written fluff, then I might even be tempted to collect a small army.

Melissia wrote:9: DAEMONHUNTERS


I like Daemonhunters. I really do! They're the Marine army that I've most seriously considered starting. They have awesome, highly detailed models, they're complete badasses without going overboard into stupidity (like the other Marine codices). When the Grey Knights appear from their teleportation, the battlefield trembles in fear for THEY have come, and only death awaits their enemies. Sworn to protect humanity from the nastiest of the nasty-- the foul infestations of chaos daemons which threaten to swallow entire worlds into the warp-- they do so with a stoic bravery that just feels lacking in other Marines, whom often fight out of rage, or pride, or simple joy in fighting, or wanting to leave their mark on history. The Grey Knights fight knowing they will not be remembered for what they do. They fight-- and win-- because they must, for the sake of all humanity.

And it is awesome. Where I feel the majority of Marine fluff fails, the lore of the Grey Knights succeeds.

But let's face it, their codex sucks. I mean Necron level of suck. There's very few options-- hell, not even a single fast attack option, just an option for "you can deep strike your troops choice as a fast attack unit, but they can't score anymore". The only reason they're not down there next to Necrons despite having an equally bad codex, competition-wise, is because their fluff is awesome. Their limited options are limited even further because a few of their choices are very weak, and this is due to more than just the age of the codex... they weren't necessarily all that powerful even back when they were created. The units that ARE good are hampered by the fact that they need support from the units which aren't. Winning with a purist Grey Knights army is difficult to say the least, and adding in Inquisitorial Stormtroopers dramatically increases their overall kill points while reducing their overall survivability. They have few upgrade options, and the ones that are there don't really cover their weaknesses very well.

Perhaps because of this, their codex is scheduled to go after Dark Eldar. To wax poetic, I look towards spring in far more ways than one. May the new codex be as awesome as all of the fifth edition codices have been thus far.

Melissia wrote:I was hoping a certain Saint would amuse me with another prediction. But somehow I figure he might have predicted:

8: BLOOD ANGELS


... or at least that it would be roughly around this location. Fluffwise, I kinda liked Blood Angels. Metal nipples aside, I like their models. But the reason why they're low is because somehow, their playstyle feels... indistinct. As if they're borrowing a conglomeration of Dark Eldar, Space Wolves, and Space Marines and mashing it all together without developing a coherent narrative for the army.

As for the fluff, I admit I don't know as much about Blood Angels as I would like. I do like their primarch-- Saint Sanguinius, the only primarch considered worthy of being declared an Imperial Saint. Injured and tired from fighting a greater daemon, Sanguinius battled Horus as desperately as he could to protect his father, the Emperor of Mankind. Not seeking any reward-- but because it was the right thing to do. Being the symbol of nobility and honor in a grimdark universe, of course, means that he was killed, and his death was used as a catalyst to curse all of his progeny. The Space Marines afterwards fought desperately not to give in to this curse. They express themselves in the fine arts (something which is kinda endearing and humanizing about them), and yet, they must struggle to maintain their humanity lest they give in to the curse and become the Death Company. They are generally considered very reliable and friendly as far as Space Marines go, and have a good reputation for heroism across the galaxy.

As simple as this concept is, the "tragically doomed heroes" feel is captured very well and done justice by GW. I'm not so sure about the quality of some of the new fluff (as I said, I have only glanced through the newest codex outside of the army list, but all in all I think they're a very likable chapter without becoming Mary Sue. That said, where I feel they fail is the coherency of their army, and some of the more ridiculous things that they are given in order to give "flavor" to them. Descent of Angels feels like they went a step too far-- exchanging Combat Tactics for re-rolling failed reserve rolls sounds good. Exchanging combat tactics for reducing scatter by d6 sounds better. But both of them at once? Perhaps I'm misjudging it, but it feels like a bit too much. I get the idea behind this, but it still feels excessive (time will tell if it is-- I don't think it's THAT excessive mind). The deep striking land raiders come to mind as well, but they're only bad because the concept is ludicrous, not because it's dangerous or overpowered (quite the opposite).

But more than that, they just don't feel coherent. They wanted to give the Blood Angels an assault army feel, which is all well and good, but then they topped it off by making them a FAST assault army (good deep striking, fast tanks), and then a fast and durable (sanguinary priests anyone?) assault army, and then after that they made them a fast durable assault army with good shooting as well. So what CAN'T they do very well? Perhaps they succeeded and the issue is with my own expectations, as it doesn't appear to be an overpowered list, I just think it doesn't really feel like it is very well thought out and coherently organized. If it is my fault, then maybe Blood Angels just aren't my thing.

Metal nipples aside, the models are well crafted and the color scheme is nice to look at, but they don't really vary much from Space Marines visually, which is unfortunate. I don't have that many complaints about the army list and models, I just wish I had more GOOD things to say about it, because I like their fluff. Still, Blood Angels aren't doing badly as they're the first of the top half of the codex list.

Melissia wrote:7: Chaos Daemons


Chaos Daemons, the only reason why I might consider playing a Chaos army right now. A pity that despite the cool fluff and interesting rules, the reason why I'm turned off of the army is because of the models.

The mythological feel of the codex really gives the four gods personality, and their minions as well in turn. The corrupting nature of Chaos in the fluff books-- especially the Dark Heresy roleplay books-- is very well done, and though I am saddened by the fact that there is no Lost and the Damned army (I'm not starting a Chaos army where I have to buy even one single Chaos Space Marine, for reasons stated in that army's review), Chaos Daemons themselves are certainly a very interesting and very dangerous foe, without going overboard. They're highly dangerous, yet they're also very unstable, simply existing in this world damages Daemons and so with rare exceptions they can only manifest for short whirlwind battles and infestations. But oh damn, when those specific conditions are met and they CAN take a long-term stay on a world? They turn that world into a living hell the likes of which the human mind cannot properly comprehend, and it takes the powers of the Grey Knights and Imperial Inquisition in order to fight them off. Even then, sometimes it's judged to be better to simply quarantine such worlds until the sorcery wears off, instead of attempt to cleanse them.

Their rules pretty much represent this. Tabletop 40k battles are short, brutal affairs, and with Daemons this is no different. They manifest onto the battlefield in your face, and quickly move to tear it off in the remorseless manner of the daemons of myth and nightmare. While limited in much the same way as the Ork army is as far as anti-tank goes, they certainly aren't as incapable of handling mechanized armies as many people think-- they just require more coordination than many players are willing to put them through. But that's fine with me, not every army has to be nor should be simple and easy to play (as noted in my Dark Eldar rant). Daemons are tricky, but when mastered present a great deal of potential kickassery waiting to happen.

... and now, onto the models. Well, with a few exceptions, I don't really particularly like most of them. The horrors are just spaztastic in a very uninspiring way, and their form is really just too predictable for a Tzeentch daemon. The Daemonettes look like they belong in a Nurgle army rather than a Slaanesh army, a marked decrease in quality from the previous versions. Plaguebearers are okay, giving a proper Nurgle feel, yet they too feel so limiting. Nurglings are good, properly cute and disgusting at the same time, but their rules feel kinda mediocre and they seem to be rarely used. Bloodletters... well, I just wish their limbs were a bit more muscular, but other than that I'm okay with them. Of the HQ units, I like skulltaker the best (minus his overlong tongue), but most of them have potential.... just very specific problems. The detail on the teeth of the bloodthirster, the nonexistent "face" of the Great Unclean One, the peculiar staff position of the Lord of Change, the passive appearance of the Fateweaver, the "naked baby on a throne" look for Epidemius, the silly masked wand of the Masque, and so on. Much of the rest of hte units are the same way, but visually speaking I'd go with a Khorne army as their models ahve the most consistent visual appeal to me with the least amount of problems.

Still, as collecting and painting is my least favorite aspect of the hobby anyway, that's not really enough to have Daemons pushed lower than this. Since it came out I've been tempted to collect the army, but money and the issues with the new range of models have prevented me from doing so. Perhaps a fifth edition set of models will be better. Perhaps not. Either way, I at least look forward to its codex.

Melissia wrote:6: SPACE WOLVES


Well, Saint Hazard picked another one. I like Space Wolves, which is obvious given that they're in this particular spot. They're a great army, one of the best competitively, with several good options and a few really great options-- far more than anything else in this list thus far. I also enjoy their fluff, the Vikings In Space feel is just awesome in a somewhat humorous way. Space Wolves are known for being gregarious and surprisingly humble, not viewing themselves as better than the average Guardsman. While other chapters might do this, more than any of them it is focused on with the Space Wolves fluff as something that is an intrinsic part of their chapter's culture, and it means that the Imperium at large tends to respect them. Any soldier who fights for the Imperium and gives their life in the name of the Emperor is equal to a Space Wolf even if they were a mere human, and therefor to be honored with a drink in their name. I guess Space Wolves drink a lot after big battles.

But sometimes it feels like it went a bit too far. Thunderwolf cavalry? Goddamnit GW, this isn't fantasy, this is science fiction! Okay okay, sure, in scifi there's always aliens riding aliens or somesuch, but this isn't as cool as that because they aren't aliens, they're just really big wolves. Which works in fantasy, but it does not work in science fiction. And all of the "wolf" equipment feels the same way. I really wish they'd focus more on the viking aspect than the werewolf aspect, because the viking aspect is the one that actually remotely interests me (hell, I wasn't even interested in werewolves back when I roleplayed in the various White Wolf games and settings).

Still, on the parts that didn't go too far, they did a good job capturing the feel of the army while keeping most of the options to be pretty cool and useful. The Sagas are how I kinda wish the original SM codex did things instead of using special characters, but that's an entirely different subject (that I will cover when I get to that). Some things feel like they're too cheap for what you get-- Grey Hunters for instance-- but it's not so much that the force is unbeatable by most codices given a properly built army.

So yeah. Go Wolves. They're the Marine army I'd be tempted to start after Grey Knights.

Melissia wrote:5: SPACE MARINES


And here it is. The big one, in GW's eyes. It pretty much defines what a fifth edition codex is-- no unit is truly useless, there's multiple competitive builds and a huge variety of builds period, a huge variety of units to choose from, representing a very large variety of forces in a single codex. This is, in part, the reason why fifth edition rocks.

While it has its limitations (such as no all-terminator armies, for example), it's still the ideal by which all other fifth edition codices are compared to, and indeed by which all other non-fifth edition codices are compared to when it comes to playing them in fifth edition. While I'm iffy about using special characters-- and I really wish they just used something like Sagas as previously mentioned-- they're still at least an easy way to ensure that people know what your army can do just by looking at it (in this case, by looking at its HQ models). While many people miss fourth edition's customization, very few people would argue against the inclusion of such units as Thunderfire cannons, Ironclad Dreadnaughts, Land Speeder Storms, Sternguard and Vanguard (okay, the Vanguard are hard to use properly, but not everything can be a perfect hit), cheap TH/SS terminators, the inclusion of the Master of the Forge and his bringing back of hte Conversion beamer, etc. It brought a lot of new stuff in, as well as some of the older stuff that was missing.

The army can be built around scouts, or tacticals, and provides a huge amount of support options for these units. Or alternatively one could minimize their scout/tactical purchases (which I dislike seeing, but it does add to variety) and focus on the support functions themselves, leading to a Space Marine list that doesn't have to look the same twice every time you play it while still being quite competitive even with dramatic changes to the list. It's also part of the reason why fifth edition sucks, but I blame that on Matt Ward more than anything else. But marinewank aside, it's viable fluff and offers a huge amount of customization with widely varying DIY chapters that let you completely bypass the spank and produce something completely of your own (this compared to Space Wolves, who in the fluff don't have any descendant chapters, or Dark/Blood Angels, whose limited descendant chapters tend to be cursed like the Lamentors).

All in all, as I said, this is the codex every other fifth edition codex is going to be compared to. And there's a reason for this-- because it's a damned good codex with one of the most balanced and interesting army lists yet released. So yeah, Space Marines of all factions gets the fifth slot.

Melissia wrote:To the surprise of some people I'm sure, the next one is:

4: WITCH HUNTERS


There's a lot I like about the army, from a fluff standpoint. Sisters, especially. The best of the best that humanity can offer, trained to-- and sometimes past-- the human limits, resistant to psychic power through sheer willpower and belief, loyal to a fault and brave to a tee. Though still most assuredly human, they yet at the same time surpass the normal human capabilities, their skill and agility in their power armor eventually raising to match the Astartes... or even exceed it in the most talented cases, due to their special training and utmost dedication. The issues facing Sisters aren't a matter of whether or not they might betray the Imperium (which doesn't happen outside of psychic mind control that can effect even Space Marines with its power), but rather whether or not they succeed or fail in their attempts to catch heresy and betrayal. The traitors attempt to use Sisters for their own benefits, and Sisters must always be vigilant to make sure that this does not succeed... all the while they must also protect the innocent and defend the faithful. In such a galaxy as 40k, these duties constantly conflict, creating a tension in the Sisters' duties that prevent them from being mary sue while still keeping them relatively "good" (as much as anything in 40k can be "good").

The army list, that is the parts that don't suck, has a unique playstyle-- short-ranged shooty in a way that no other army manages to encapsulate. Bolter shock and flamers, are the bread and butter, steak and potatoes, and some other forms of common foodstuffs for the Sisters army-- to the extreme that even armies which have access to equivalents (Space Marines, Orks to an extent, Necrons) just don't compare. In close combat, Sisters rely upon their numbers and skill rather than their raw strength or toughness, as shown by the numbers of Battle Sister Squads, the unparalleled talent Seraphim have in hit and run tactics, or the unmatched skill of Celestians (Holy Hatred). Sadly, this list is very limited.

The HQ choice is good... but really limiting. She's statted out for ranged combat, but she can only really be equipped for close combat. Celestians are okay out of the Elites choice, but they're very limited by the fact that they have no free frags, and no BP+CCW or some other equipment to make them better in close combat (like Sarissas or some such), the other choice I won't even bother with. Battle Sisters are the core of the army, as despite being overcosted they're still very useful, clinging to Acts of Faith and mechanization in order to ensure the army stands a chance. The FA choices are useful, if overcosted, with Seraphim definitely on top. Similarly with the HS choices, the Exorcist comes on top by a long shot. Their transports are overcosted, with the Immolator basically just being an overpriced razorback (BA razorbacks are better).

The Inquisitor Lord is interesting from a game perspective, but from a fluff perspective I find it entirely droll as I don't see combat as an Inquisitor's job. Same with the Elite Inquisitor. Most of the time people just take those because they want the hood, and for no other reason. Stormtroopers aren't as good as Sisters, and never were, but they have their uses (mostly plasma spam with lots of small units) if you really, really have to have them in your list. Assassins I never really bother with... they have a few tricks, but save for one particular one they don't usually really help win battles compared to their cost (including the required Inquisitor).

The priest, if he actually started out with any equipment, would be better than the one the IG has, but s/he doesn't. Not even an armor save. But s/he does have the option to have power armor and other equipment that can make him/her worth taking, and taking him/her unlocks Arco-Flagellants and Penitent Engines. The former is a bit overpriced, but actually not all that bad, rather deadly and can be hard to kill. The latter is far, far more deadly, but also far, far easier to kill despite (or perhaps because of) being a vehicle squadron, and an open topped vehicle with AV11 to boot.

The fluff also has issues. Sisters are often abused as the scratching post of the galaxy, and the overwhelming majority of their fluff revolves around them losing fights, with only a very small portion showing them as the competent, capable soldiers they are. And the models... there was a thread that was what, over twenty five pages on that subject? And it wasn't the first. Enough has been said on that-- suffice it to say I like most of the models, but I despise the corset and boob cups style chest/abdomen armor.

All in all... they're my favorite faction. But goddamn does GW need to do a better job making them more appealing to more people. It's like GW's handling of Avatars-- apparently beating one up is a rite of passage for chapter masters now. I'm hoping that the new codex will focus on the aspects of Sisters that don't suck rather than focusing on the "omg martyrs let's have them kill themselves like lemmings!" bullgakt that some of the gakkier "authors" in BL try and do.

Melissia wrote:3: ELDAR

I like Eldar. I really do, though my like for them is far more subdued than my love of Orks, Guard, and Sisters, they're still my favorite non-human protagonists. Back in the day when I rped DnD and other fantasy-based systems I almost inevitably played an elven character of some sort, as I'm a fan of the long-lived races whom must struggle to keep up with the faster-reproducing races through skill an guile, as opposed to sheer numbers. That's what Eldar are, in essence-- elves in space. Psychic ninja elves in space. The concept is ludicrously over the top, and in any other setting you'd be thinking "what the bleep?" at it, but in 40k... they make it work.

And it is awesome.

Sadly, the Eldar do have aspects of their fluff I dislike-- mostly focused around "we're a dying race, let's go cry a river". Feth, it's just not believable to me the way GW attempt to portray this, they just didn't do a good job. I do my best to ignore that aspect, and instead focus on the idea that Eldar are trying to rebuild their empire, to rise again-- that they're struggling hard because of Slaanesh is fine, but they must struggle, not just wallow in their despair (that path leads to Nurgle). Struggle, fight, and survive. And thrive. The Eldar race is one of the oldest in the galaxy, equal to that of the Orks and younger only than the Necrontyr. They know more about it than just about everyone else, both about the physical world as well as the warp, and this is evident with the skill with which they do everything.

Such skill is also required to play their list, and Eldar is by no means a newbie's army. Generally speaking, it's actually quite the opposite, and that's part of the reason why its players seem to like it-- it's hard to use, but when used properly it's one of the best even with a fourth edition codex in fifth edition. Of the fourth edition codices, I think Codex: Eldar has stood up the tallest and proudest, befitting the race which it represents. IT has its issues, mind you, but all fourth edition codices do... and yet, last year it was second place in 'Ard Boyz. Sadly, I can't tell this year because GW's 2010 page is so screwed up (it just shows a simple table with the names of participants... not their army), but I'd be willing to bet that they got in the top five. I hope very much that their fifth edition codex, when it comes, continues its fine tradition of being a strong finesse army.

Go Eldar, hurrah hurrah, etc. I plan on starting an Eldar army after I finish collecting and painting my Guard and Ork armies up to 2k points, which will be a while, but they're still next in line, and I'm a rather big fan of them (greatly helped, I should note, by Dawn of War 2 of all things).

I love Necrons. Love them, and I totally agree with everything you said. They do need to be fleshed out a little more, they have so much wasted potential. While I wouldn't rank them at the bottom, You do make some excellent points.

Ugh, I was typing up the second post, and my graphics card overheated for some reason . Guess I'm gonna have to take it to get cleaned tomorrow. I'll see about rewriting the post in the meantime.

Melissia wrote:after all, they're all creations of the Old Ones they hate so much

I would disagree with that, I could be wrong but the background for the Necrontyr certainly seems to suggest that they were one of many other races which existed and came into existence alongside the Old Ones. The Necron Codex tells us that the Old Ones were the first species to make it into space with other races coming on behind and it wasn't until the Necrontyr also began to colonise other planets that they encountered the Old Ones. That's why they hate them so much, the Old Ones had everything the Necrontyr didn't have and they resented them bitterly.

Whilst I don't dislike the Necron background or the army I agree with almost everything you've said, they have the possibility for an immensely rich and deep history which has been completely passed over. When they were first introduced as robotic alien raiders (let's face it, someone looked at the old Chaos Androids and wondered how to re-use them in a non-Chaos related way. Maybe they shouldn't have) the concept was so basic that the developers struggled to make them into a fully fledged, playable army, it's why the Tau came from no-where but got completed first. I imagine that's how it went, someone took the look of the Chaos Androids, scoured the background for any other unexplored fragments of background, discovered the few mentions of the quiescent peril of the C'tan and shoe-horned them both together into a single Codex.

As you say, they have a lot of potential and we should know far more about the Necrontyr and what they were like, what they looked like, how their culture functioned and was structured and how it came to pass the majority of this 'proud race' were sold out by a tiny minority to the voracious C'tan. We should know more about Pariahs, about the method by which humans have been turned into Necrons. We should have various Lords with proper personalities, and as you say, maybe some of them couldn't stop what eventually was done to them but it doesn't mean they have to be happy about it. Just as many have the C'tan to thank for everything, a lot of Necrons have them to curse for everything and that would be worth exploring as well as the connection to the Mechanicus.

Unfortunately though, just as much more attention should be given to the Mechanicus, Arbites, PDF, Administratum et cetera I don't think we'll see any of these possibilities touched, when there is a new Necron Codex and wouldn't expect anything other than more of the same but with more emphasis on Lords leading the armies rather than the C'tan directing them from afar.

No, I'm saying the Necrontyr hate the creations of the Old ones, and most life in the galaxy is that, or at least descended from that.

Ahh, yeah, fair enough then.

Now for something which I suppose is completely expected. But it's partly the fault of certain posters on this and many other forums, as well as the army's fans IRL and GW's own fluff. So, let's move on to the second to last army:

15: CHAOS SPACE MARINES


I just don't like them. They're rather undeniiably evil for one (yeah yeah blah blah gods have positive virtues, and yet, they sanction wholesale slaughter just for the fun of it, making the Inquisition seem tame at times), which means to me they have to be particularly well written or they're only suitable as enemies. And the more I read the Horus Heresy novels (I really should stop, I haven't liked most of them), the less I like each legion.

Horus had the galaxy as his oyster, he was the greatest conquerer of the entirety of human history, and yet he threw it all away because he felt his daddy wasn't giving him enough attention (Chaos, of course, was intelligent enough to waggle silver tongues and make use of his insecurity). Perturabo whined about being stuck in siege duty, and then betrayed the Emperor only to be... stuck in more siege duty. Magnus and Fulgrim I kinda have sympathy for, but the former STILL screwed everything up even if they didn't intend to. And the primarch of the World Eaters is so bland and undeveloped that I can't even remember his name half the time.

And compounding the "bunch of grown men with daddy issues" issue is the way the fans act. I actually think the CSM codex is one of the better ones. Is it perfect? By no means. All the fifth edition ones are better, but then, they're better than ALL of the codices previously written. The codex has a lot of flavorful builds available to it, and though it shows its age, it is still capable of putting up a fight against everything else. The codex is the reason why they're above Necrons-- the army is actually interesting, even if I dislike the fluff. The current CSM codex has both simplicity and variety, and theoretically it should be fun to play as and play against-- except that fans don't quit b... whining about how it isn't absolutely perfect. And they often use some of the dumbest arguments to complain about it, too.

They whine that it's weak, even though it seems to rather consistently place in the top five in tournaments. The codex is consistently one of the better codices when it comes to actual competitive strength-- frankly it's quite possibly a tougher codex than the current fifth edition vanilla Space Marines codex, what with CSMs having what is commonly believed to be a superior selection of troops choices (And thus scoring units). They argue that it has no variety, even though it has more than any other current codex that's not fifth edition. Especially comparing it to third edition ones-- these people that claim that all the units suck save a specifi few don't know how damn lucky they are that they like CSMs instead of, say, Grey Knights (damn would they be pissed then, huh?). Honestly, I just don't get it, and it irritates the hell out of me listening to the constant whining and moaning of the fans, making me dislike the faction even more than I already did.

I'm not pointing fingers at anyone. I'm just ranting about it because I'm tired of it (And just plain tired), having been hearing it ever since the damn codex was released.

The only part of the CSMs I did like (fluffwise) were daemons. And thankfully I don't have to play a CSM army to play Daemons anymore. Fun times for everyone. Or at least me. I'll talk about THAT army when it comes time for that. For now, I think I've ranted enough on this subject, so I'll post this before my graphics card overheats again (I really need to get that checked).

Great idea, M. I shall watch this thread with great interest.

Of course the only two armies I play are at the bottom of the list...

I blame the Parents.

Wow, everyone is doing something like this now a days. And I was going to use THIS idea for my 1000th. Great, now I have to think up another... Very interested to see who gets number 1 *cough* WITCH HUNTERS *cough*. Will be a fun read. Looking forward to it.

You might be surprised.

But then, maybe not.

I'm pleasantly surprised that Space Marines weren't at the bottom.

Good stuff so far, though I couldn't disagree more about the Necrons.

I happen to agree with everything you've said about the chaos space marine codex: it is a lot of fun, but so many people whine about it online. My local game group has 3 people that play it and love it. I've played 4 games with it, and I've won each one. It isn't overpowered like a regular space marine variant codex (BA or SW), but it allows for some awesome flexibility. And each army can be different each time. Chaos Terminator units marked Slaanesh with half containing lightning claws, half with combi-melta's are beyond amazing. Obliterators are some of the most useful/multi-purpose models out there. I even use raptors successfully. And chosen ripping in from the sides with melta-guns blazing, spilling out of rhinos that can have meltaguns (combi-meltas)? Yes please! I don't even care about the Slaanesh Daemon Prince with lash build-it's too boring and over used. Give me a Chaos Lord with a daemon weapon any day. Yea, the fluff isn't too amazing, but the playability is great. Don't let a bunch of online haters make this awesome codex (awesome because it's of average build and not overpowered, but not pathetic either-you need some skill to win) seem like crap to you-place it how you like it, not how whiners influenced you. Totally agree with you about the 'crons though, except I'd have put the Tau on the bottom of the list, then 'crons. Just my $.02

For grins and giggles, I'll play a foot slogging Black Templar list on occasion.

Once, my buddy played a lash list with plenty of plasma cannon and other blast templates.

I'm now gun-shy. It was ugly.

Ooh enjoyable to read. Hope Vanilla Marines make it relatively far, in some peoples opinions they already have.

Melissia wrote:And compounding the "bunch of grown men with daddy issues" issue is the way the fans act ... They whine that it's weak, even though it seems to rather consistently place in the top five in tournaments.

I've never complained about the current 'Chaos' Codex being weak. It's a perfectly competitive Codex. It's also a boring Codex, and a pale shadow of its former self.

Melissia wrote:They argue that it has no variety, even though it has more than any other current codex that's not fifth edition.

It has no variety compared to its former self. There's more variety in my Daemonunter Codex than in the current 'Chaos' Codex.

Melissia wrote:Especially comparing it to third edition ones-- these people that claim that all the units suck save a specifi few don't know how damn lucky they are that they like CSMs instead of, say, Grey Knights (damn would they be pissed then, huh?). Honestly, I just don't get it, and it irritates the hell out of me listening to the constant whining and moaning of the fans, making me dislike the faction even more than I already did.

Again, none of my complaints relate to the power of the current 'Chaos' Codex and its worthiness as a viable 5th Edition army. Any complaint or comparison is simply due to how fething awful the Codex is as a Codex, stripping away everything that made Chaos interesting (Marks, Legions, mother-fething Daemons) and replacing them with boring bs that's only slightly more interesting than the Dark Angel Codex (but only just).

Melissia wrote:I'm not pointing fingers at anyone. I'm just ranting about it because I'm tired of it (And just plain tired), having been hearing it ever since the damn codex was released.

That's rich coming from you.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Melissia wrote:I'm not pointing fingers at anyone. I'm just ranting about it because I'm tired of it (And just plain tired), having been hearing it ever since the damn codex was released.

That's rich coming from you.

To be fair he's much improved lately. I rather like the new Melissia.

I do agree that the Chaos codex is bland and unimaginative; I thought they were the greatest threat to the Imperium, the guys who nearly pulled off toppling the Emperor. Instead we get generic spiky marines and Failbaddon jokes.

In short GW needs to make Chaos badass again. Heroes are defined by the evil they oppose, so how can Marines be heroes if Chaos is 2-dimensional cardboard.

Thus far I agree with you on the Necrons, disagree about the CSM.

To me, the Necrons never really made the jump from WD-only Adversary force to Army. While the Thousand Sons and Undead had a similar focus on mindless automatons, both strongly encouraged you to have individuals (characters in the story sense of the word) leading them: the Thousand Sons by giving you free Aspiring Sorcerers and the Undead with their buffs and special rules for the destruction of units following the death of the general. The Necrons instead get only 0-2 Lords and 0-10 identical Pariahs. Combine that with the lack of options (Lord Wargear, Disruption Fields and Tomb Spyder's ranged weapon, that's it) and you get a boring army. The apparent emphasis on shoehorning them into everybody else's history books doesn't help, either.

On the CSM: I would have thought that someone who liked the Daemons would appreciate why having them and the Daemon Princes flayed to the bone in the newest book would disappoint some people. The Armoury in the 3.5 book was a wonderful thing, giving you a vast array of options to personalise your HQ choices and Aspiring Champions.

I also disagree with you about the Chaos Daemons book. One of the interesting things about the daemons was that (outside of the Daemon Worlds) they relied upon mortals to bring them into the material universe, be it Chaos Space Marines or cultists. The new codex removes that, turning them into a displaced version of a fantasy army.

I am fully amazed and appalled that you thought it was a good idea to put CSM below "Chaoz Deemonzz!!11!". At least, on a fluff level. CSM on a gameplay level are definitely Blandy McPowersauce.

ph34r wrote:I am fully amazed and appalled that you thought it was a good idea to put CSM below "Chaoz Deemonzz!!11!". At least, on a fluff level. CSM on a gameplay level are definitely Blandy McPowersauce.

AlexHolker wrote:The Armoury in the 3.5 book was a wonderful thing, giving you a vast array of options to personalise your HQ choices and Aspiring Champions.

To answer both of these, but the last one in particular: So? I don't give a damn about aspiring champions, at least not chaos marine ones. Why should I?

I like Daemons. Not spiky Space Marines with bad attitudes and daddy issues. Daemons actually interest me from a fluff perspective, and they're actually different and unique from a gameplay perspective (IE, they aren't just another MEQ army).

H.B.M.C. wrote:It has no variety compared to its former self. There's more variety in my Daemonunter Codex than in the current 'Chaos' Codex.

... no.

I think it is probably too early in the morning for a statement so mind-numbingly wrong as this. Because I don't want this thread to turn into another argument on that godforsaken subject (And certainly not an argument with you), drop it. And drop the insults while you're at it.

Now, on to your regularly scheduled thread... I'll work on the third one after the caffeine takes effect.


edit: ... and it happened again. I'm going to have to work on this later, as I don't think I have time to start over before I have to go.

This thread is already starting to get flamy. I will be watching it. Posters are advise to stay polite, that includes you Melissia and the above post is not.

Melissia wrote:

ph34r wrote:I am fully amazed and appalled that you thought it was a good idea to put CSM below "Chaoz Deemonzz!!11!". At least, on a fluff level. CSM on a gameplay level are definitely Blandy McPowersauce.

AlexHolker wrote:The Armoury in the 3.5 book was a wonderful thing, giving you a vast array of options to personalise your HQ choices and Aspiring Champions.

To answer both of these, but the last one in particular: So? I don't give a damn about aspiring champions, at least not chaos marine ones. Why should I?

I like Daemons. Not spiky Space Marines with bad attitudes and daddy issues. Daemons actually interest me from a fluff perspective, and they're actually different and unique from a gameplay perspective (IE, they aren't just another MEQ army).

I've got no problem with you ranking the Chaos Space Marines 15th on a background basis alone. But that antipathy is no reason to make false claims about the rest of the codices, or to insult anyone that disagrees with those claims.

well, I'm in agreement so far. It's really a shame that CSM went from one of the best codexes to one of the worst in a single go.

Beautiful fluff, nice models, plenty compeditive became an army of thousand year old angsty teens that few play because they're so uncompetitive.

I'm hoping eldar or =I= are next...

Ailaros wrote:Beautiful fluff, nice models, plenty compeditive became an army of thousand year old angsty teens that few play because they're so uncompetitive.

Ailaros wrote:CSM

Ailaros wrote:uncompetitive

what

He's right, CSM can't really run with the big dogs (er, Wolves) anymore.

Frazzled wrote:This thread is already starting to get flamy. I will be watching it. Posters are advise to stay polite, that includes you Melissia and the above post is not.

He's got the wiener dogs primed and ready. You'd better do what he says. No telling what horrors he will unleash.

I don't think I ever really heard anyone complain about the Chaos codex being uncompetitive, but rather being really bland and having only one or two decent builds (and the standard rhino rush build having been long left in the dust by chimera convoys, Blood Angel armored companies, and Space Wolf longfang brigades).

They really do need to put the Chaos back into Chaos Space Marines, even if it means scrapping the daemon codex and merging it back into the main book (or at least create ally rules to allow blending of the armies).

I would disagree on a few of the points you made about the Chaos Marines, as I actually like them a great deal. However, I can see where you're coming from; I have never really complained about the codex myself, as I think it's pretty good, but it does get singled out a lot by fans.
Even so, they're your opinions, and I've always liked the famous maxim:
"Sir, I may not like what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

I have noticed already that this ranking is based upon emotions and the rather high blood pressure environment of hearing other players winge and critique of the fluff rather than anything which is applicable to the playing field.

I've certainly never heard that Chaos is not competetive and to say that Necrons are neither is just pandering to taste rather than looking at it with a tactical mind. Players do win with Necrons and not because the opponent is fielding just 500 gretchin either. It takes a player who fields them to understand the tactics required and in doing so can be quite a good fight. They do need a codex upgrade but the existing choices, although limited, can be used to good effect.

I would, personally, have placed both races named so far quite high up the ranks really.

Fetterkey wrote:He's right, CSM can't really run with the big dogs (er, Wolves) anymore.

"Used to be best army, now is just a good army" does not mean uncompetitive. CSM still takes high spots in tournaments.

Anyone who thinks you can't win with Chaos is just not taking the right options. Chaos can be stupidly powerful. Stupidly monobuild and stupidly generic and un-fun. But stupidly powerful none the less.

Jayden63 wrote:Anyone who thinks you can't win with Chaos is just not taking the right options. Chaos can be stupidly powerful. Stupidly monobuild and stupidly generic and un-fun. But stupidly powerful none the less.

I'd disagree there, there are plenty of ways to build a list, provided your goal isn't to crush your opponent stunningly. I've seen plenty of flavoured yet good-in-a-fight lists at my local store.

I make no apologies for my opinions stated in this thread. CSMs suck, they're the only faction I actively dislike, but their codex is good (Better than half the codices in use today) so they're ranked higher than Necrons. If Necrons gain interesting fluff and a revitalized army list, CSMs are going right to the bottom,and staying there until GW doesn't make them look like spiky failures with daddy issues in my eyes.

Moving right along, let's talk about the next army in the list. It was a bit of a toss-up between three armies,

but in the end of the three I would say that...

14: TYRANIDS


... are the ones I have the least desire to play, for fluff and rules reasons. They make great enemies, but a lot of their fluff is overblown even by 40k standards, and the fact that people are constantly saying there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of hive fleets out there just annoys me. Their personality is limited, and in most cases nonexistent, and they're constantly pushed as the unbeatable enemy (which is boring) by the fans. However, they rank higher than the previous armies because they're actual living creatures, and the synapse creatures DO have personality. It's limited, and very little of it is expounded upon by the fluff, but it IS there. I also have a fondness for Lictors, but unfortunately GW decided not to give us an Alpha Lictor commander, which would have been fairly sweet. That Lictors basically suck in this edition's codex also really disappoints me.

But I actually quite enjoy fighting Tyranids. I may not like their fluff, but they make for extremely enjoyable opponents in tabletop, there's just something visceral and cool about fighting them. Whether it's monstrous creatures or gant/gaunt spam, the codex, despite its flaws (inability to deep strike the tyranid prime for example, and the suckage of Lictors), saves the army for me. Eventually I might even be tempted to start the army, though that's hampered by the aformentioned absence of an alpha lictor commander (Dawn of War 2 really increased my opinion of them as far as playstyle goes, and this character is, specifically, why). The Tyranid Prime however is an interesting HQ unit and so if I did start a Tyranid army, it would probably be my choice in lieu of the previously mentioned nonexistent unit.

I actually kind feel bad for putting Tyranids here, but at the same time, something has to go here and of the three that are to come (sort of a lower-mid tier of armies), this army is the one I'm least likely to start playing. But from here on comes armies that I like to play AGAINST, or at least don't mind. Tyranids are fun opponents, with a good amount of variety which makes up for their lackluster fluff. Certainly I'd rather see a Tyranid army across the trable than any of the previous ones, and probably moreso than the next one as well.

I always liked that Alien-esque feel you got from fighting 'nids, myself. It's hard not to feel like the hero of the movie in such a situation.

Cant say I agree or disagree.

Subbing the thread to see where this goes and I hope it does not get closed by the mods so lets play nice!

Crons - While i do play them, i agree


CSM - Dont play them, wont do either.
Last dex was nice, but that was due to the serious chapter changes you could make use of (you know, things that make armies fluffy)
Also, HQ's got nerfed a little.
Allways did like a khorne prince with glaive and some other goodies for unit hunting.
However, the new dex is by no means terrible game wise.
Lash + oblitz spam is still around, and hasnt changed when it works.
So i wouldnt say not competative, just not top tier.


Nids - Ill hold my tongue on this one since im a huge nid fan
Fluff wise - has it weird bits, just like all other armies.
Rules - Cant really pick any faults.
Granted lickies aint beasts, but they arent designed to be.
They are simply for helping on reserves, hunting down small weak units / characters and generally getting in the way.

I was thinking earlier today while reading this thread "If Melissa says Tyranids as the next army, she just hates 'the bad guys' "



Prove me wrong! haha

Nids and Necrons are probably my favorites , mostly because they are the bad guys

I have a feeling the Wolves are gonna rank low on this.

You know, beating up the Sisters of Battle and all...

Cryage wrote:I was thinking earlier today while reading this thread "If Melissa says Tyranids as the next army, she just hates 'the bad guys' "



Prove me wrong! haha

Nids and Necrons are probably my favorites , mostly because they are the bad guys

I don't hate bad guys. I hate uninteresting bad guys.

You'll find I will put Orks fairly high on this list...

I was just about to call orks very high on your list if not first.

So far I only really disagree with you on the Necrons. They can be played rather well (even being hoed by phase out and cover saves) and personally I like the fluff and units. I think a new codex is indeed needed and the fluff/units be tweeked more. They have ALOT of potential to be one of those well liked armies but they just need that right nudge to get there.

I love the Necrons

I was sitting at home flipping between my home page tabs of youporn, dakkadakka and the lazytown fanclub. I was wondering what does Melissa think of all the 40k armies. I would really like to read her thoughts and insights on the game. I am so pleased to participate in this thread. I sit on the edge of my seat waiting for number 13.

tgf wrote:I was sitting at home flipping between my home page tabs of youporn, dakkadakka and the lazytown fanclub. I was wondering what does Melissa think of all the 40k armies. I would really like to read her thoughts and insights on the game. I am so pleased to participate in this thread. I sit on the edge of my seat waiting for number 13.

...





But in all seriousness, this thread is entertaining. It reminds me of The Nostalgia Critic's top 11 videos. I like it.

I really hope this thread doesn't get locked due to flaming. In fact I think after this I outta make a thread like this.

Im gona ghess the next guys.........
Its Tau?

Melissia wrote:I don't hate bad guys. I hate uninteresting bad guys.

You'll find I will put Orks fairly high on this list...

I like Orks. I find them funny, awesome, fun to watch... But interesting?

Is there really ever more than two types of Ork personality? I mean, I don't think that makes them any worse, but swinging the "uninteresting" label at Chaos Marines with all their variety and characters and then throwing praise at a purely Chaotic Neutral species that has no real goal other than krumpin a few skullz is a bit odd.

Also, I love Necrons, but I agree with your issues. I like Necrons for the visual style and the potential they have, but that potential hasn't been used very well.

I honestly like reading these lists. Opinions are always fun, whether I agree or disagree.

Terminus wrote:I don't think I ever really heard anyone complain about the Chaos codex being uncompetitive, but rather being really bland and having only one or two decent builds.

Being boring and having only a couple of competitive builds basically being the definition of an uncompetitive army. DE (for the moment), and =I= both fall into this camp. That the CSM codex is behaving like a 10 year old codex all of 3 years into its existence shows how really poorly it was done.

Basically, the current version of CSM is SM, except they have way fewer options and everything is more expensive. I recently played a couple of games with a person who ran beautiful CSM models, but played with the space wolves codex. I was surprised by the number of random comments I got from people saying that they knew someone personally who was playing their old CSM army with a light-side codex until a new CSM codex comes out.

I'm kind of surprised that tyranid are being ranked so poorly here. Their fluff is sort of shoddy, granted, but they are actually fun to play against and have nice models, and actually have a decent variety of lists that they can field. Why did they lose out to staler, less competitive codecies like DE and =I=, or even tau?

Wow, so far my two favorite armies have ranked last, now I just wonder where deldar will end up. I agree on the necrons section, lots of potential but instead we get lotsa fail. I also get the sinking feeling that they may be the most hated race :( I always manage to pick the most unpopular options in all things.

Chaos codex is kinda boring no argument there. Fluff wise I used to hate CSM but as I read more about em they warmed up to me. The paradoxes, crazy metaphysical nature, and odd interactions with human emotions of chaos itself is far more interesting than chaos marines imo and that's why I play em. In summation I think you need a good custom background to go with your chaos army.

I don't know too much about nids effectiveness (though I thought their codex was pretty neat) I couldn't agree more on the fun to fight part. I think they are the best enemies along with tau.

This is a most strange thread! Nids are No3 because they have too much fluff? You're pissed at some races for not having enough fluff but also berate some for not having enough.

You claim to like fighting Nids but also infer that you don't because you will now list those armies that you do like fighting against. Your arguments are confusing. Nids rank higher because they are living creatures?

I am all for the thread and find your choices interesting but the cases you put together is just a convergence of words and don't add to any logical basis.

This is a very enlightening thread, I shall like to see how this finishes (hopefully not locked).

I agree necrons are dead boring, they need more character.
CSM's aren't that bad, they can kick my guardass any day of the week.
Nids, yes they are fun to fight but I don't like them as an army to collect myself.

Melissia wrote:

Cryage wrote:I was thinking earlier today while reading this thread "If Melissa says Tyranids as the next army, she just hates 'the bad guys' "



Prove me wrong! haha

Nids and Necrons are probably my favorites , mostly because they are the bad guys

I don't hate bad guys. I hate uninteresting bad guys.

You'll find I will put Orks fairly high on this list...

Heh.

Heheheheh.

BAWHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA *cough* aaaaaa.

I'm sorry, Orks are more interesting than Necrons or Chaos? I bet you'll probably say pyromaniac nuns are probably the most interesting.

I haven't slept in many hours, but I'll be back in a bit to discuss this further when I get to work.

In my opinion, orks are entertaining, but not interesting. lol

Personally I'd put orks at the bottom rung, they're too hodge-podge and anachronistic for me

The fun thing lists like these have is that they are opinions. And with all opinion lists you get people who disagree to the point of agressiveness.

>.> That said I'm hoping for an average of my favourite 3 armies that's about 6. The initiasl 15 is a little painful to this goal, but I watch with interest.

To me, without Orks, there is no 40k.

I will say no more until I get to Orks in this list.

Until then, let's move on to...

13: Black Templars

This is going to be a short little rant. This is an army I see little of. This ranking totally a matter of feeling and opinion, as on this particular army I'm not really sure know how to explain these opinions.

I really have mixed feelings for this army. I like the crusader aspect, it's part of the reason I like Sisters, and yet... somehow, it just doesn't work out as well with the Templars. I don't know if I can really explain it, but Black Templars just don't "click" with me. I don't really enjoy seeing them on the field as my opponent that much, and I don't really think I'll ever play them, despite the fact that I like their concept.

The army list itself isn't bad per se I suppose. It's certainly more interesting than Blood Angels as far as varying from the basic default codex (though in other aspects, such as variety, it is lacking like any non-fifth edition codex). But it seems to be showing its age, and there's something I can't put my finger on that makes it feel flawed and unfun. I don't know if it is (I have not seen that many of these players), perhaps I just don't see the army enough to judge it, but in the end I think the army really needs to be revitalized before I can take it seriously, much like Necrons in fact.

While not as bad as third edition codices, it feels like a very flawed codex, and the fluff itself, despite me liking the concept, does not endear me to the army as much as I would like. Every time I read it I just can't seem to appreciate the chapter. The army's concept is something I can get into for starting it, if it's revitalized sometime in fifth edition (after tau probably), certainly moreso than Tyranids, but currently I'm just held back from really liking the army or its fluff for some reason. Consider this army tied with the previous one, and next one which should come later today.

wait, individual SM codecies are getting their own ratings? In which case, why aren't all of them (except possibly blood angels) below tyranid? I'm surprised DA even beat CSM.

16 codices, 16 ratings. Pretty simple concept.

Another ''***** celebrates x posts'' thread?

Yes. Hell Yes.

I'll be following this thread ( and I agree with most of the things you say, Although I think Sisters are boring).

Yeah, should be a laugh Mel.

Though sometimes, I do wonder if I could have seen what I start those months ago I would have chosen differently.

I like the thred its good stuff I'll be keeping an eye on this one. Also I hope the emo DAs are next.

It'll be called Codex SoB and not WH in this thread.

You heard it here first

Oh and I'll be controversial and say Guard as No.1

Good luck with this.

the_ferrett wrote:The fun thing lists like these have is that they are opinions.

I 100% agree. While I might not agree with the opinions, still a very good read and always interesting to see the thoughts on other armies!

Cryage wrote:

the_ferrett wrote:The fun thing lists like these have is that they are opinions.

I 100% agree. While I might not agree with the opinions, still a very good read and always interesting to see the thoughts on other armies!

Correct. No need for a flame war just because Mellissa has (to some) controversial views.

This is the sort of thread you keep an eye on, simply for the reason "where does my favourite army place, and what will be the verdict about it". Personally I'd better not make a similar list, since all Marine codices except Space Wolfs would end up bottom rung (i.e. a fairly boring list to read).

I just hope more people remember that it's a thread regarding one person's views and opinions about each individual army, and not about facts or which army is better because of <insert poster's personal opinion here>.

Tyranids are third last?

I thought they would be higher. When I play tyranids, I always thought it had the "when animals attack" kind of feel to it. Oh well.

Damn mellisia...Stop posting so much...You have even more posts than me!

<3

Anyway, I mostly agree so far, except CSM would be about number 8 on my list. Necrons..Obviously last...BT.. 15th.

No guesses about Guard and Witchunters... Er, sorry, Sisters of Battle, being in the top 3.

Anyways, I was interested in this thread until I saw that you're just ranking the books based on which ones you like to play versus the ones you'll never play. I thought this was going to be a list based on each books strengths and weaknesses.

Noisy_Marine wrote:Anyways, I was interested in this thread until I saw that you're just ranking the books based on which ones you like to play versus the ones you'll never play. I thought this was going to be a list based on each books strengths and weaknesses.

That would require some degree of analysis skill.

Whats not to love with BT, I love the crusadeing knight feel they have, its great! Sure we don't have all the cool new toys that SM have but thats a good thing, plus with all the people joining the DE band wagon Lances won't do much against our LRC.

But this is your opinion though I think its wrong, its yours so I won't hold you to it.

Necroman wrote:No guesses about Guard and Witchunters... Er, sorry, Sisters of Battle, being in the top 3.

SoB, Orks and Guard!

Commissar Agro wrote:.

But this is your opinion though I think its wrong, its yours so I won't hold you to it.

These 'opinion' threads are just that.

It is best to just relax and enjoy the ride, if that's possible.

I see Grey Knights appearing very shortly.

Viking Scot: the Orange Knight is the best knight.

I don't think there's any flaming going on here, we're just arguing opinon anyways and most of the fun in that is the whole: "You're wrong, I'm right and here's why!" kinda' thing; and I certainly won't deny being opinionated and blunt but there's certainly no malice there.

...OR IS THERE!? (creepy music, maybe an orchesta hit!)

Alpharius wrote:

Commissar Agro wrote:.

But this is your opinion though I think its wrong, its yours so I won't hold you to it.

These 'opinion' threads are just that.

It is best to just relax and enjoy the ride, if that's possible.

Im sorry if I seemed rude, that wasn't my intention

Melissa I LOVE you... for putting BT so low!

What, what did you think I was gonna say?

Such is the life of us Templars, never loved, always shunned.

Oh well, at least we don't use the Codex Astartes for everything.

Noisy_Marine wrote:Anyways, I was interested in this thread until I saw that you're just ranking the books based on which ones you like to play versus the ones you'll never play. I thought this was going to be a list based on each books strengths and weaknesses.

These ratings are based off of the army's current fluff, composition, competitiveness, and overall appeal to me. If it were purely the latter, CSMs would be in position 76, while Necrons would be moved to position 15.

I'm debating whether or not to include the new Dark Eldar rules in judging that army at the moment.

>.> You could do them seperately? Ie where they are 'currently' and where they might be given the rules?

I agree with the first three, especially the nids and crons because I hate "our army is sooo much better and will destroy everyone else... sometime next week" fluff.

Not sure about Templars though. I quite like the pseudo knightly stuff but its a matter of taste to be sure.

Is it ironic that Mellissia's first three choices (Necrons, Tyranids & Chaos) are all armies I play?

Weird...

H.B.M.C. wrote:Is it ironic that Mellissia's first three choices (Necrons, Tyranids & Chaos) are all armies I play?

Weird...

How many armies do you not play?

H.B.M.C. wrote:Is it ironic that Mellissia's first three choices (Necrons, Tyranids & Chaos) are all armies I play?

Weird...

Yes, that is ironic. I'm sure we can count on witch hunters being at least number 5

*Must not snark at the complainers. Must not snark the complainers*

Sigh...I completely agree with the take on CSM. And, sadly (because I like them) on Necrons too.

I disagree with Nids rant, for me they are perfect at least fluff-wise.

If this is about blandness and uselessness I would hazard a guess that the next are Tau. But I wouldn´t be surprised if its Eldar.

My bet's Emo-rines. I mean they attack themselves, for the love of cheese.

the_ferrett wrote:My bet's Emo-rines. I mean they attack themselves, for the love of cheese.

Blood angels? Never heard them called that before

I don't think so. There's worse things..Like dark angels..or grey knights....Or chaos daemons.

Dark angels.

Actually, my dilemma is pretty much that.

If I include Dark Eldar without newly released rules and fluff, they're next. If I DO consider the yet-to-be-released rules and fluff, they're probably going to be much higher, because those models look amazing and the rules look quite fun.

@Dark Eldar dilemma, I'd run down to my Gw and point a gun at the staff. If they don't tell you how awesome the new Dark Eldar will be on a
scale of 1-10, you shoot one of them and ask again. Problem solved!

They'd say ten as a sales pitch, lol.

I think I will include the new rules and models, which means I need to work on the next army.

Melissia wrote:They'd say ten as a sales pitch, lol.

Bring out the Truth Serum?

Ediin wrote:@Dark Eldar dilemma, I'd run down to my Gw and point a gun at the staff. If they don't tell you how awesome the new Dark Eldar will be on a
scale of 1-10, you shoot one of them and ask again. Problem solved!

I like this idea it might work out in your favor and if they just throw out a 10 and don't explain shoot 2 more of them.

The only thing I agree on is tyranids...space bugs don't appeal to me.

Necrons are ok, their fluff might not be the coolest, but I think they have some interesting aspects.

Black Templars, meh, I don't really like their models, but I don't think they deserve 13th.

I would have eldar in dead last, I despise their models, and how they play, then SoB. Space Nuns with guns?


I do give you credit, and I will be watching your thread to see your further opinions, keep up the good work.

Yeah, LOL at the possibility of SOB scoring near last on any list made by Melissia.

the_ferrett wrote:*Must not snark at the complainers. Must not snark the complainers*

So if I were to snark at you, would that be complaining about complaining about complaining about complaining about the game?

I'll hazard a guess: Next will be Tau, Blood Angels, or Dark Angels.

AlexHolker wrote:How many armies do you not play?

Eldar.
Dark Eldar.
Orks.
Blood Angels.
Space Wolves.
Dark Angels.
Tau.
Daemons (I have enough Daemons to have a very big Daemon army, I just don't play Daemons because the army is slowed)
Grey Knights (do have a big Daemonhunter/Inquisitorial army, just no GK's in it)

What else...?

Sisters.


Hell I've even got armies that aren't 'real' as far as current 40K is concerned:

Adeptus Mechanicus
Deathwatch
Lost & The Damned
Genestealer Cult

Necroman wrote:Yeah, LOL at the possibility of SOB scoring near last on any list made by Melissia.

the_ferrett wrote:*Must not snark at the complainers. Must not snark the complainers*

So if I were to snark at you, would that be complaining about complaining about complaining about complaining about the game?

I'll hazard a guess: Next will be Tau, Blood Angels, or Dark Angels.

Touche, good sir, Touche!

So where are the witch hunters?
Ancient fluff that nearly pre-dates the old ones.
Boring mono-pose models.
Again with the models, but the quality of them this time.
Irritating rules that need updating badly.

The list goes on.
But i want to see how you compare these points to your own views of them, as you seem to have a pretty big obsession with the SoB.

Hm, this thread gets more interesting the longer it goes on. I shall monitor it closely.

Of course, really I just want to see where the Orks end up.

۞ Jack ۞ wrote:So where are the witch hunters?
Ancient fluff that nearly pre-dates the old ones.

That ancient fluff is still good. While I'd like to see the major Orders fleshed out more, better what we have now than the sort of garbage they put in the latest Tyranids codex.

Boring mono-pose models.
Again with the models, but the quality of them this time.

Yes, the models are the army's greatest weakness. 50 pounds for a single squad of 13 year old basic infantry is insane.

Irritating rules that need updating badly.

Really, I think what the Acts of Faith need most is to become something you can use at will, instead of the unnatural interruption at the start of the phase.

Interesting posts so far by Melissia, for the most part I agree with them. The whole Tyranids > everyone is annoying. What happened to Orks being the dominant race IF they all banded together?

I don't think the Necrons will develop well unless they drastically change the fluff.

I hate CSM, I don't think Chaos fits into 40k very well to begin with and I think CSM are just silly. And then there's the little fact that 3.5 was also better. I wish 40k just had the Imperium dealing with Xenos threats, but we just have to have Chaos don't we?

Necroman wrote:Yeah, LOL at the possibility of SOB scoring near last on any list made by Melissia.

the_ferrett wrote:*Must not snark at the complainers. Must not snark the complainers*

So if I were to snark at you, would that be complaining about complaining about complaining about complaining about the game?

I'll hazard a guess: Next will be Tau, Blood Angels, or Dark Angels.

I'd say Tau is a good bet, a still 4th Ed. codex plus paper-thin, enigmatic fluff.

I think you hit the nail on the head as to what makes Tyranids such a good army. They have no personality - well, they do, but not individually. If you are looking for an army with heroes, they're not it by a long shot. But they're a very unique race in 40k, the most visually unique, and they make great adversaries. I like being that adversary for people.

edit - You also gave me a badass idea for a Tyranid Prime. So simple I never thought of it. Convert a Lictor model.

Yeah, that's what I intend to do if I ever start a Tyranid army-- convert a lictor into a tyranid prime.

Out of all of the units in the Tyranid army, the Lictor is the coolest to me anyway, in both fluff concept and model.

I was babysitting for much of yesterday, I'll work on it after class.

What I always hated about the Necrons and Tyranids was that they seem to take away from what is the central conflict of WH40k. I always felt that the endgame should be Chaos v.s. Imperium. Now Chaos seems to be much less of a threat than the Tyranids or the Necrons and I think it detracts from what I think should be the real fight.

Don't particularly agree with what you have said about CSM. To me they are pretty great (though they do sometimes have pretty lame fluff... and just how many times can they fail to invade the Imperium without some form or re-election? ).

They have one of the best conversion possibilities of any army as well

But each to their own.

As far as end game goes, I don't think it's fair to have it soley be Chaos vs. IoM. I think every faction should have an equal shot at the IoM, in fact I always thought the only criteria for an army being playable was if it was a threat to the humans.

The story of 40k has always been to me the IoM fighting to the bloody end on countless fronts with an array of diverse and deadly foes, not just chaos.

Yeah I so far agree with you on the 3 codexs. And i completely agree with you on the necrons. And that they are a bit overpowered in fluff.

I didn't mean that the entire endgame would just be Imperium v.s. Chaos, I just wanted the resolution of the Imperium's plot to come from Chaos rather than from the Tyranids or Necrons. It just seems to me that with the whole Horus Heresy and Black Crusades thing, to have the Necrons or Tyranids end the Imperium would be unfufilling.

Ah I see what you mean. You know even if it's just a "what if" novel or something it would be cool if there was a series of books that had terra besieged, one book for every faction.

I like that idea. Then we get a bunch of alternate endings to satisfy every fanbase, culminating in a "BUT... what if the Imperium wins?" right at the end.

Consider me riveted to this thread. I'm interested to see where all of my armies lie.

I'm a little bit sad about your take on two of my favorite armies (that I don't actually play... yet), BT and Nids.

The whole Crusader pastiche of the Black Templars puts them high on my list, and I'm a raving, blubbering Starship Troopers fanboi, so Nids are easily one of my favorite 40k armies.

I'm calling Orks at #1.

Because Melissia has stated that this thread is about more than just fluff, and because I know she dislikes the current SoB model range and isn't wild about their rules, I'd say we'll see them much lower on the list than we expect. I'm calling Codex: WH (she'll get it right) at #10.

Guard, probably #2 - I've heard her extoll the virtues of Guard fluff, and I'm almost certain she likes their rules and models.

I have a feeling my Tau will end up ranking fairly low.

These sort of threads I always find interesting because it shows the diversity in gamers.

Example #1 being that where Melissa dislikes the Necron background I personally love it, it's why I've just started collecting them. That's two opposing opinons of the same game, brilliant. It's that diversisty that opens the game to a wider audience and keeps it going. As I said, brilliant.

I <3 this thread!

Personally, I don't think WH40K would lose much if they took out Necrons in their current incarnation. They need to do something really cool like they did with the Dark Eldar to make them 3-dimentional and interesting.

Ugavine wrote:These sort of threads I always find interesting because it shows the diversity in gamers.

Example #1 being that where Melissa dislikes the Necron background I personally love it, it's why I've just started collecting them. That's two opposing opinons of the same game, brilliant. It's that diversisty that opens the game to a wider audience and keeps it going. As I said, brilliant.

I dislike what's currently done with it, but I explicitly stated I like the potential that the faction has.

Apparently I'm being made to chauffeur people around today... I'll have it done tonight when I'm not being asked to waste gas on pointless ventures.

Go get a cab meter, just to see the looks on their faces when you start it.

Smarteye wrote:I <3 this thread!

Personally, I don't think WH40K would lose much if they took out Necrons in their current incarnation. They need to do something really cool like they did with the Dark Eldar to make them 3-dimentional and interesting.

When did this happen?

I kid...I still think they are little more than Eldar with SM fetishes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:

Ugavine wrote:These sort of threads I always find interesting because it shows the diversity in gamers.

Example #1 being that where Melissa dislikes the Necron background I personally love it, it's why I've just started collecting them. That's two opposing opinons of the same game, brilliant. It's that diversisty that opens the game to a wider audience and keeps it going. As I said, brilliant.

I dislike what's currently done with it, but I explicitly stated I like the potential that the faction has.

Apparently I'm being made to chauffeur people around today... I'll have it done tonight when I'm not being asked to waste gas on pointless ventures.

I am bored this is unaccpetable.

I should note that I don't really dislike any of the low ranking factions/codices, the reason they're low ranking is a combination of competitiveness, appeal, how much they fit into my view of 40k. Personally I think that, outside of Chaos Space Marines, all of the factions have concepts that greatly appeal to me. It's just a matter of their execution-- some of them were done far better than others. Which of course brings me to:

12: TAU EMPIRE


Along with the Necrons, the Tau and their Empire were added in after the conclusion of second edition. Of the two, this faction fared far better, but could still use some work.

Just like with Black Templars, there's some things I like about the army, that entice me to try it out... yet... they're poorly executed. The Tau fluff was originally unambiguously "the good guys", making them fit in like an executioner's block in a preschool building. GW has tried to move them away from that since then, but I feel they haven't done enough to do so. The fact that they try and make the Tau to be a credible threat on par with everything else also is questionable, as they do so even when they emphasize how little territory the Tau actually have at the moment.

Originally, Dark Eldar was in this position. But Dark Eldar's playstyle and models, and possibly fluff, look to be greatly improved with the upcoming codex, and so they're bumped up. Which is unfortunate for the Tau, because frankly I think they have a lot of potential. It's just that they haven't had enough fluff, or enough models, or enough rules to build on that potential. The rules kinda suffer in fifth edition, and they weren't actually THAT great in fourth edition anyway (though they were better than they are now, with fifth edition codices out). I imagine they will move up quite a few spots when the fifth edition codex comes out, probably sometime late next year or early the year after. I look forward to it, and hope they don't do any more stupid things like "Tau can defeat a Tyranid fleet without a single casualty!". As much as I despise the more over the top Tyranid fluff, come ON! They're not THAT incompetent!

The parts of the Tau fluff that I like actually tend to be on how naieve they are, but eventually they're going to have to learn the harsh, unforgiving, merciless truth of the 40k galaxy. And I rub my hands with psychotic glee over how much that realization might change their way of thinking, way of life, and way of warfare. But the Tau at least have the firepower to withstand it a bit longer, and I hope they do. They're one of the more alien factions in the setting, and at the same time, their purely scientific view on warfare and technology is refreshing and has a lot of potential... both for units, AND for potential conflicts revolving it rogue AIs. And the fact that they are an empire of many races brings hope to me that the fifth edition codex will really let you go crazy with the auxiliaries-- be they human, kroot, demiurg, or what have you. It's a part of the army list that reminds me of the Roman Empire and their use of foreign light auxiliaries in support of their legions, and I like such historical references.

So despite it s seemingly low rating, the Tau Empire, much like the previous codex, has a lot of potential. It just feels wasted, with mediocre, incomplete, and often over the top fluff, and rules which have suffered due to age. I sincerely hope GW's fifth edition release makes me want to buy a Tau army.

Props to ChiliPowderKeg for calling Tau for spot number 12!

Unfortunately, I agree... as much as I love the Tau, they just seem too damn lucky. Defeating an entire Hive Fleet without losing a single ship? Standing against the IMPERIUM at Damocles? And they only survived that one because the Imperium was distracted by Hive Fleet Behemoth. They're a tiny empire in a big galaxy.

However, I do very much like some of the more sinister overtones they've been given, with the heavily implied brainwashing, indoctrination, and mind control in their codex, and the outright gleeful sterilization and concentration camps discussed in Dawn of War. They're getting grimdarker, but they've got a ways to go before they really fit.

But a young, ambitious alien empire that's not afraid to make some shiny technology is definitely near the top of my list. Just under the ever-hilarious Orks, in fact.

I predict another Space Marine book at 11. I'm guessing Dark Angels.

I agree with the placement of Tau, but not entirely with the reasoning (the fluff bit). They are naive and that pisses me off, but it's the "mysterious ethereal caste" that influence the Tau this way. They were warring like a legit race before these obviously eldar/old one equivalents rocked up and turned them communist.

Oh no I feel the need to add my 2 cents.

First of all its silly to see people get miffed at Melissa's posts because its mentioned that
they are Melissa's opinions on the matter.

Next classic Chaos Space Marines had amazing fluff and depth and I understand why
the new one ticks people off. But hey I was a Chaos Marine, once upon a time, and I
will gladly say their newer codex is vastly superior to the previous ones. Honestly most
of the rankings have some good opinions on the nature of the army.

Enjoy for what it is. Heck I play a Ultra successor chapter using the Dark Angels Codex. This way
I can use all Terminators. It will be interesting to see where mine fall on the list.

Goddamnit SaintHazard, stop predicting me already.

But yes, DA is next, I'm working on their post which will explain why they are where they are.

Score one for me.

I'm totally going to see if I can predict the rest of the codices in order.

Interesting thread thus far. I look forward to seeing where it goes. I do disagree with the placing of the CSM and BT but I can completely understand why others wouldn't like them, after all 40k would be terribly boring if we all liked the same armies.

That's why I don't want the Tau made Grimdark™. There are already 13 Grimdark™ factions, and we don't need a 14th.

The rules and fluff comments are bang on.

I don't necessarily want them grimdark, I just want them to not be made out to be "OMG FLAWLESS GOOD GUYS!"

Nothing is flawless in 40k. There needs to be some more cracks in the Tau Empire's facade.

I dunno that I ever read Tau as being flawless. They always reminded me of true believers in a cult.

I have to agree with Necron post, I beleive they are cool to have such immense technology and being unable to replicate it etc, but they need names or at least communication to make them worthy, I hate the idea of soundless Aliens. However I think the C'tan and Necrontyr are cool.

The worst part is the rules though, phase out is crap, so is the lack of HQ and Troop choices.

BTW, my 600th measly post for me!!

Personally, I like the whole "soundless undying robots" thing.

The fact that they bear down on you, with single-minded purpose, without making so much as a sound is actually extremely creepy and cool.

Yeah, tau is in its place.

My biggest beef with tau is that they are really poorly defined as a race to me. It's like, their fluff is a confusing mishmash of communism and Vedic traditions, but without the rich history and color of the latter or the passion of the former.

In the end, you get a race of petty warlords with a modern art style (I mean that literally), that winds up being bland and soulless compared to most of the rest of the races.

They sort of feel like characters in a sitcom that represent "normal" to make the other characters look more dynamic and interesting.

Good read so far.

So the factions models figure into this rating of the codices? Shouldn't it be "M rates the armies" then?

Manchu wrote:So the factions models figure into this rating of the codices? Shouldn't it be "M rates the armies" then?

Who cares?

Yeah, I just saw the "/factions." My b.

gorgon wrote:I dunno that I ever read Tau as being flawless. They always reminded me of true believers in a cult.

Me too.

They'll do everything they can to get you to convert to their side peacefully, or by force of arms if necessary.

Once you are inside, you get the protection of the Federation.

If you are incorrigible, though, they will try to wipe you out. E.g. the Orks. Tau don't bother to negotiate with Orks any more, they just dust Mycota on their planets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
However this is off topic. Let's move swiftly on to the next Codex.

SaintHazard wrote:Personally, I like the whole "soundless undying robots" thing.

The fact that they bear down on you, with single-minded purpose, without making so much as a sound is actually extremely creepy and cool.

But from a narrative respect that is really boring and when space bugs have more character...essentialy to me you are just playing the creepy and aloof enemy instead of what you get with other armies where characters on the battlefield add to the narative experience. As mentioned unit selection and competitive builds just are not there either.

Melissia wrote:I should note that I don't really dislike any of the low ranking factions/codices, the reason they're low ranking is a combination of competitiveness, appeal, how much they fit into my view of 40k. Personally I think that, outside of Chaos Space Marines, all of the factions have concepts that greatly appeal to me. It's just a matter of their execution-- some of them were done far better than others. Which of course brings me to:

I know I'm biased, but when you rank them on competitiveness and appeal I don't know how you keep the Space Wolves from being on top. IMO, their fluff is probably some of the best in the Warhammer 40,000 world. Their differences from the traditional Astarties and character deapth make them a very appealing army. Not to mention that their codex is one of the most competitive in the game today.

Wolflord Patrick wrote:I know I'm biased, but when you rank them on competitiveness and appeal I don't know how you keep the Space Wolves from being on top. IMO, their fluff is probably some of the best in the Warhammer 40,000 world. Their differences from the traditional Astarties and character deapth make them a very appealing army. Not to mention that their codex is one of the most competitive in the game today.

Their fluff is awful. When it gets more imaginative than Wolf Wolfborn wielding the Wolfish Sword of WolfWolf, riding a Thunderwolf, wearing a Wolftooth Wolflace, with the Wolf Claw of Wolf on his other hand, I'll give it a second look.

For now, it's about as bad as fluff can possibly get.

Wow, sounds like a lot of hate there...

Obviously I disagree, as the Ragnar books are some of the best reads I've had in the Black Library.

While I do agree that the newer characters don't have the deapth of the older ones. Characters like Logan, Ragnar, Ulrik, and Bjorn have been around the game for a long time and have some great history.

Simply put, the 5th edition book certanily makes them competitive. The only other army I would think has as much appeal would be the Orks.

Oh, I like most of the rules in the Space Wolf codex. I only hate one faction more (Blood Angels) because I hate their fluff and rules.

So, my hate is not as intense as it could be.

Not quite.

Kilkrazy wrote:

gorgon wrote:I dunno that I ever read Tau as being flawless. They always reminded me of true believers in a cult.

Me too.

They'll do everything they can to get you to convert to their side peacefully, or by force of arms if necessary.

Not to mention what was brought up in Xenology (if you are one of those that don't ingore everything released outside of codexes):



It's a conspiracy!



Which make them alot more sinister than most would think. See what interesting fluff you miss when you don't read anything outside the codices?

Personally SW are the only kind of marines I would ever play, as much as I dislike them as a whole. They are different and funny. The viking pagan background is refreshing between all those dull christian-like, stuck up bald supersoldiers who are the rest of astartes, and the feral feel of the chapter offers a wide range of crazy conversion possibilities .

Lack of imagination in GW writters doesn´t represent a problem since we have loads of nordic mythological stuff to pick up all the names and simbology we need to build our own fluff.

The Tau could really use a kick in the ass in terms of fluff; i love their faith in technology as opposed to the Imperiums blind mysticism, they just need far more depth

And they're not friggin space communists, i hate that argument

SaintHazard wrote:

Wolflord Patrick wrote:I know I'm biased, but when you rank them on competitiveness and appeal I don't know how you keep the Space Wolves from being on top. IMO, their fluff is probably some of the best in the Warhammer 40,000 world. Their differences from the traditional Astarties and character deapth make them a very appealing army. Not to mention that their codex is one of the most competitive in the game today.

Their fluff is awful. When it gets more imaginative than Wolf Wolfborn wielding the Wolfish Sword of WolfWolf, riding a Thunderwolf, wearing a Wolftooth Wolflace, with the Wolf Claw of Wolf on his other hand, I'll give it a second look.

For now, it's about as bad as fluff can possibly get.

Made me lol so hard I coughed water all over my keyboard. I do agree with you though, Space Wolves are terrible... Especially where they attack the Thousand Sons for no good reason.

SaintHazard wrote:

Wolflord Patrick wrote:I know I'm biased, but when you rank them on competitiveness and appeal I don't know how you keep the Space Wolves from being on top. IMO, their fluff is probably some of the best in the Warhammer 40,000 world. Their differences from the traditional Astarties and character deapth make them a very appealing army. Not to mention that their codex is one of the most competitive in the game today.

Their fluff is awful. When it gets more imaginative than Wolf Wolfborn wielding the Wolfish Sword of WolfWolf, riding a Thunderwolf, wearing a Wolftooth Wolflace, with the Wolf Claw of Wolf on his other hand, I'll give it a second look.

For now, it's about as bad as fluff can possibly get.

I spot a mistake!

Canis is actually not, as people commonly believe, Latin for "wolf." It actually means "Dog." His name is Dog Wolfborn, people!...





Actually, now he sounds like a Starfox character.

Anyway, I'm afraid it really isn't as bad as all that in the SW codex. Arguably, there is only a few references of that fashion to wolves in the SW dex, disregarding Dog Wolfborn. I mean, most other characters are armed with Norse-referencing names, and the items such as Wolf Claws have been called that since the last codex. Even the psychic powers are named more for weather occurrences than anything else. I can understand the annoyance with the Wardian writing in new codexes, but let's not blow it out of proportion.

Wolflord Patrick wrote:I know I'm biased, but when you rank them on competitiveness and appeal I don't know how you keep the Space Wolves from being on top.

Because I don't like their fluff as much as you do?

Also, the competitiveness of every army is over/underrated.

Melissia wrote:

Wolflord Patrick wrote:I know I'm biased, but when you rank them on competitiveness and appeal I don't know how you keep the Space Wolves from being on top.

Because I don't like their fluff as much as you do?

Also, the competitiveness of every army is over/underrated.

I can see that.

Melissia wrote:
Because I don't like their fluff as much as you do?

Also, the competitiveness of every army is over/underrated.

Not saying how much you do (or don't) like their fluff. Just throwing it out there that I'm a SW nut which would influence my ranking them close to the top.

Also, and while I agree that the competitiveness of every army is over/underrated based largly on who is playing them and what is in his/her list.

All things being equal and understanding that this is your thread and you are giving us your opinion, I felt like sharing mine...

Now, I'll shut-up and wait anxiously to see the rest of your list.

subbed, agree p much with everything, though Im sad my beloved nids didnt get too much love, however I will grudgingly admit that they are made out to be slightly too OP fluffwise.
Interested to see where codex marines is placed.

Trilobite wrote:subbed, agree p much with everything, though Im sad my beloved nids didnt get too much love, however I will grudgingly admit that they are made out to be slightly too OP fluffwise.
Interested to see where codex marines is placed.

Scared to see where my beloved Eldar end up, I am assuming that they will be close to the bottom here.

While I enjoy my fluff for my army I often wonder how long it takes a dieing race to die and how long GW can just let them die...

SaintHazard wrote:Personally, I like the whole "soundless undying robots" thing.

The fact that they bear down on you, with single-minded purpose, without making so much as a sound is actually extremely creepy and cool.

That's why I said they're still only an adversary army. They serve the same purpose as zombies or a natural disaster: something to bear down on the protagonists, not being protagonists in their own right. You can keep that feel, but if you do the hero units to pick up the slack. The Lord would need dozens of options, including stat changes, so that your Lord would feel like an individual.

Ailaros wrote:
My biggest beef with tau is that they are really poorly defined as a race to me. It's like, their fluff is a confusing mishmash of communism and Vedic traditions, but without the rich history and color of the latter or the passion of the former.

Their physiology seems mixed up too. They're predators with a hunting tradition that influences their military tactics, but they've got hooves like prey animals and they have relatively crappy ungulate-like vision? So they've evolved into carniverous blue deer? Gives a new meaning to The Deer Hunter.

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:I spot a mistake!

Canis is actually not, as people commonly believe, Latin for "wolf." It actually means "Dog." His name is Dog Wolfborn, people!...

Dogs are canis lupus familiaris. Wolves are canis lupus lupus or some other variant of canis lupus. So canis just means canine and includes all the canines: dogs, coyotes, wolves, etc. Essentially canis wolfborn = wolf.

Ailaros wrote:Yeah, tau is in its place.

My biggest beef with tau is that they are really poorly defined as a race to me. It's like, their fluff is a confusing mishmash of communism and Vedic traditions, but without the rich history and color of the latter or the passion of the former.

Communism - a : a theory advocating elimination of private property
b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed

I believe the word you are looking for is

Dictatorship - a : a form of government in which absolute power is concentrated in a dictator or a small clique
b : a government organization or group in which absolute power is so concentrated
c : a despotic state

But at the same time they

assimilate - a : to make similar
b : to alter by assimilation
c : to absorb into the culture or mores of a population or group

other races in order to push forward the ideals of their greater good and to form the "perfect Empire".

A lot like Hitler and his Nazi government party tries to do in World War 2, and would have been successful if they had not decided to pick on Russia and The United States of America.

I feel that the Tau are in the same situation and the Imperium of Man will be their version of Russia.

More like carnivorous blue cowbirds.

AlexHolker wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:Personally, I like the whole "soundless undying robots" thing.

The fact that they bear down on you, with single-minded purpose, without making so much as a sound is actually extremely creepy and cool.

That's why I said they're still only an adversary army. They serve the same purpose as zombies or a natural disaster: something to bear down on the protagonists, not being protagonists in their own right. You can keep that feel, but if you do the hero units to pick up the slack. The Lord would need dozens of options, including stat changes, so that your Lord would feel like an individual.

Who said every player wants to play a "protagonist" type army? What if a player wants to play the role of the DM, so to speak, and send endless hordes of undying monstrosities at the protagonist, which would be those Spess Mehreens over yonder hill?

Arschbombe wrote:they have relatively crappy ungulate-like vision

They don't. They have incredibly sharp vision (sharper than that of a human), but their eyes focus more slowly at distance.

Cambak wrote:
But at the same time they

assimilate - a : to make similar
b : to alter by assimilation
c : to absorb into the culture or mores of a population or group
.

We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.

Alright I got it, someone give me ediin's peanut!

I've read the codex several times over but I don't recall the "Defeated a Hive Fleet without a ship lost" part. Is that supposed to be part of the new Tyranid dex, or am I just blanking out while reading?

That was in the Nid dex. Something about the Nids attacking a forested world the Tau controlled and used Kroot (and adapting thier tech) to fight the nids off in like a month.

No, it's the fluff regarding Commander Shadowsun.

Melissia wrote:No, it's the fluff regarding Commander Shadowsun.

Yeah I don't like her.
But I love Farsight!

Asherian Command wrote:

Melissia wrote:No, it's the fluff regarding Commander Shadowsun.

Yeah I don't like her.
But I love Farsight!

Ah, I knew I blanked out!

I also dislike the character and tend to skip over her entry for a distaste of using named characters, especially those with a lack of simple bonuses.

Cambak wrote:

Ailaros wrote:Yeah, tau is in its place.

My biggest beef with tau is that they are really poorly defined as a race to me. It's like, their fluff is a confusing mishmash of communism and Vedic traditions, but without the rich history and color of the latter or the passion of the former.

Communism - a : a theory advocating elimination of private property
b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed

I believe the word you are looking for is

Dictatorship - a : a form of government in which absolute power is concentrated in a dictator or a small clique
b : a government organization or group in which absolute power is so concentrated
c : a despotic state

But at the same time they

assimilate - a : to make similar
b : to alter by assimilation
c : to absorb into the culture or mores of a population or group

other races in order to push forward the ideals of their greater good and to form the "perfect Empire".

A lot like Hitler and his Nazi government party tries to do in World War 2, and would have been successful if they had not decided to pick on Russia and The United States of America.

I feel that the Tau are in the same situation and the Imperium of Man will be their version of Russia.

Tau society and government is more akin to a realized version of Confucian and Platonic-Republican ideology than anything

SaintHazard wrote:Who said every player wants to play a "protagonist" type army? What if a player wants to play the role of the DM, so to speak, and send endless hordes of undying monstrosities at the protagonist, which would be those Spess Mehreens over yonder hill?

Then take a bog standard Lord and make no attempt to single him out as anything interesting. Just because you could make your Lord a necromancer-style individual in a tide of drones doesn't mean you'd have to.

Retribution wrote:

Cambak wrote:

Ailaros wrote:Yeah, tau is in its place.

My biggest beef with tau is that they are really poorly defined as a race to me. It's like, their fluff is a confusing mishmash of communism and Vedic traditions, but without the rich history and color of the latter or the passion of the former.

Communism - a : a theory advocating elimination of private property
b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed

I believe the word you are looking for is

Dictatorship - a : a form of government in which absolute power is concentrated in a dictator or a small clique
b : a government organization or group in which absolute power is so concentrated
c : a despotic state

But at the same time they

assimilate - a : to make similar
b : to alter by assimilation
c : to absorb into the culture or mores of a population or group

other races in order to push forward the ideals of their greater good and to form the "perfect Empire".

A lot like Hitler and his Nazi government party tries to do in World War 2, and would have been successful if they had not decided to pick on Russia and The United States of America.

I feel that the Tau are in the same situation and the Imperium of Man will be their version of Russia.

Tau society and government is more akin to a realized version of Confucian and Platonic-Republican ideology than anything

Tau are Utilitalistc
they just want everybody to be friends. EVERYBODY.

I actually like the Tau. I didn't initially, but they grew on me, mainly after playing against my friend for years who used them. They could use more options, but they're kind of the opposite of the spectrum of Tyranids in terms of technology.

What's funny is, fluff terms, they're not that dissimilar to Tyranids on what they do. They approach new civilizations, ask them to join them, or they wipe them out. Tyranids just force everyone to 'join' them, as biomass.

Tyranids are on an eternal 'quest' to adapt, but they do it biologically. Tau do the same thing, but technologically. And while Tyranids focus on close quarters fighting, Tau focus on long range fighting.

I kind of wish my friend still played. It would be awesome to use my new Tyranids against his old Tau.

But Orks want to be their friends, and the Tau won't play with them!

Because orks don't play nice!

I like both tyranids and tau, and they're both on the bottom. This doesn't bode well for eldar.

Mr Nobody wrote:Because orks don't play nice!

I like both tyranids and tau, and they're both on the bottom. This doesn't bode well for eldar.

Well eldar are a great race! I really hope they are higher than Inqusition and Witch Hunters. As Eldar are one of my favorite races!
And they are one of the most well written even though they need a new codex.

Asherian Command wrote:even though they need a new codex.

Not as much as Tau, 'Crons, =I=, CSM, BT, (Deamons?) or even DA as loath I am to admit it. Eldar are still quite competitive and have a wide array of options.

Givin GWs recent release shedule (IG, SW, 'Nids, BA, DE) of updating old codexes almost perfectly in oldest to newest order, (YAY!) the Craftworlders are still a while off yet.

Eldar made second place last year in 'ard boyz. I don't think they need a new codex that bad. They DO need a new codex I think, but then, I think every army that's not in fifth edition does.

sniperjolly wrote:

Asherian Command wrote:even though they need a new codex.

Not as much as Tau, 'Crons, =I=, CSM, BT, (Deamons?) or even DA as loath I am to admit it. Eldar are still quite competitive and have a wide array of options.

Givin GWs recent release shedule (IG, SW, 'Nids, BA, DE) of updating old codexes almost perfectly in oldest to newest order, (YAY!) the Craftworlders are still a while off yet.

Man, I have to say, GW dug themselves a nice hole with these codexes. So many splinter armies like different chapters and different inquisition forces really eats up development time.

err, what? There's only two "Inquisition" codices (Codex: Witch Hunters, Codex: Daemonhunters), that's the same as the amount of Eldar codices.

But there's SEVEN Space Marine codices (Codex: Space Marines, Codex: Chaos Space Marines, Codex: Space Wolves, Codex: Blood Angels, Codex: Dark Angels), Codex: Black Templar, Codex: Daemonhunters). Now THAT eats up development time Space Marines make up just shy of half of all codices. Which is why some of them were bound to be ranked low regardless.

I'm not arguing that at all. In fact, I believe they could roll the Space marine chapters into 1 book, and have a couple of pages of alternate lists for divergent chapters. The same could be done to the inquisition. Just have smaller, differing wargear lists for inquisitors of each type, a general inquisition army list, and specialized units like Grey Knights depending on your inquisitors order.

I was just saying, having so many splinter armies with their own book really does eat up development time they could give to other, full armies.

-Loki- wrote:The same could be done to the inquisition

Don't even get me started. Just know that I will never, EVER agree with that, unless you specifically disclude Sisters from "Inquisition".

I do. Sisters of Battle and Grey Knights actually do deserve their own codex, since while being power armoured, they are significatnly different to Space Marines. It wouldn't be hard to put them in as specialized units into a combined Inquisitor codex though.

as it is, there's so many codexes, even discounting the minor codexes they don't want to continue like Lost and the Damned, that they don't even get out of a new edition with all of the released armies getting an updated codex. 4 of the bottom 3 in this thread are good examples.

Melissia wrote:

-Loki- wrote:The same could be done to the inquisition

Don't even get me started. Just know that I will never, EVER agree with that, unless you specifically disclude Sisters from "Inquisition".

I hope you are as hot as your icon Melissia sweet princess!

o.O

what

sniperjolly wrote:o.O

ʇɐɥʍ

Fixed

Interesting list, so far I agree with the placements. Wouldn't actually be too surprised if Witch Hunters didn't end up as number one though, I think I remember something about you hating how the Sisters were just thrown into there or something.

Although I agree that the fluff needs a bit of a rework, you guys do realize that the only thing that makes Tau any more "good" than any other faction in 40K is that they say "Join us or" before "die!"

My 2 cents:

In order of Cool to Lame:

1.) Codex: Soccer Hooligans
2.) Codex: Zombie Robots
3.) Codex: Boring Marines
4.) Codex: Emo Marines
5.) Codex: Zergomorphs
6.) Codex: Ghostbusters
7.) Codex: Deep Dark Secret Marines
8.) Codex: Space Crusades
9.) Codex: Pink Squiggly Stuff 'n Horns
10.) Codex Space National Guard
11.) Codex: Space Commies
12.) Codex: SuperNuns
13.) Codex: Space Furries
14.) Codex: Space Twilight
15.) Codex: Space Elves
16.) Codex: Emo Space Elves with Cool Models

Soccer hooligans being CSM? Come on...

No, Orks being soccer hooligans, emo marines being CSM.

Emo marines are surely more Dark Angels.

Emo Marines are totally CSM. Sitting in their room crying that their daddy doesnt love them.

ChaosGalvatron wrote:Emo Marines are totally CSM. Sitting in their room crying that their daddy doesnt love them.

Unfortunately, NOBODY UNDERSTANDS THEM LIFE IS PAIN.

Their pain is crawling in their skin, from a wound that cannot heal.

Their problem is that they had a really bad breakup 10,000 years ago. but due to the Eye of terror it feels like only yesterday.
So they are been all stalky to the imperium ("what are you doing? have you met someone else? do you really think guilliman is good enough for you?") and they have this new relationship. but it is really abusive. And they say that Chaos will change. But how many times can they walk into a door?

Well, iv read the whole thread and I actually don't mind it. I just got back from work though and the thread is only an extra page. CMON PPL !!!

My 2 cents, Eldar better be near the top. Great fluff, great play style, great look. Not perfect but most codex's have issues. Eldar could use some character fixes and updated mini's.

Anyway, write more Melissia. Now. And make me pie.

So every single cookie cutter SM codex is still to go?

ChaosGalvatron wrote:So every single cookie cutter SM codex is still to go?

DA is next, and BT has already been done, but Vanilla, BA, and SW are somewhere up the list, yes.

oops. didnt notice the BT got covered already.
Maybe part of their problem is that so much of their fluff/rules have been integrated with the normal SM.
When they first came out they were a true Crusading chapter and felt special

ChaosGalvatron wrote:oops. didnt notice the BT got covered already.
Maybe part of their problem is that so much of their fluff/rules have been integrated with the normal SM.
When they first came out they were a true Crusading chapter and felt special

I kind of feel like they're the most "different" of the four "deviant" codices in the way they actually function on the tabletop.

With chapters like BA, SW, and DA, only very specific parts of the codex are radically different. They all still have Tactical Marines, Assault Marines, Rhinos, Razorbacks, Predators, Land Raiders, Land Speeders, Terminators, etc - and most of them work in very similar if not identical ways.

On the other hand, BT doesn't have Tactical Squads - they have combined squads of up to 10 power armored Marines and five Scouts. They don't have Veterans, they have Sword Brethren, whose Terminators can take more than one heavy weapon. They don't have Predators with interchangeable bits, they've got Predator Annihilators and Predator Destructors. They have very few of the normal HQ options, and a few all of their own. They have Vows.

Some of these are throwbacks to 4th edition, but that doesn't change the fact that that's how they are.

BT are, in my opinion, the Space Marine chapter with the most flavor.

One of the many reasons they're my favorite Marine codex.

Ouze wrote:My 2 cents:

In order of Cool to Lame:

1.) Codex: Soccer Hooligans
2.) Codex: Zombie Robots
3.) Codex: Boring Marines
4.) Codex: Emo Marines
5.) Codex: Zergomorphs
6.) Codex: Ghostbusters
7.) Codex: Deep Dark Secret Marines
8.) Codex: Space Crusades
9.) Codex: Pink Squiggly Stuff 'n Horns
10.) Codex Space National Guard
11.) Codex: Space Commies
12.) Codex: SuperNuns
13.) Codex: Space Furries
14.) Codex: Space Twilight
15.) Codex: Space Elves
16.) Codex: Emo Space Elves with Cool Models

At the very least I am providing a list which describes what I like about the armies, trying to focus on that instead of just the stupid memes.

I hate memes.

A midterm tomorrow, but I'll try to work on it after class during breaks in study.

SaintHazard wrote:

ChaosGalvatron wrote:oops. didnt notice the BT got covered already.
Maybe part of their problem is that so much of their fluff/rules have been integrated with the normal SM.
When they first came out they were a true Crusading chapter and felt special

I kind of feel like they're the most "different" of the four "deviant" codices in the way they actually function on the tabletop.

With chapters like BA, SW, and DA, only very specific parts of the codex are radically different. They all still have Tactical Marines, Assault Marines, Rhinos, Razorbacks, Predators, Land Raiders, Land Speeders, Terminators, etc - and most of them work in very similar if not identical ways.

On the other hand, BT doesn't have Tactical Squads - they have combined squads of up to 10 power armored Marines and five Scouts. They don't have Veterans, they have Sword Brethren, whose Terminators can take more than one heavy weapon. They don't have Predators with interchangeable bits, they've got Predator Annihilators and Predator Destructors. They have very few of the normal HQ options, and a few all of their own. They have Vows.

Some of these are throwbacks to 4th edition, but that doesn't change the fact that that's how they are.

BT are, in my opinion, the Space Marine chapter with the most flavor.

One of the many reasons they're my favorite Marine codex.

Fair enough. i only just got back into 40k. but i bought the BA codex and the SM codex and it seems like most of the special BT stuff has been absorbed by the normal SM's. Having said that i dont have the BT codex, so cant compare.
I liked BT they were the Teutonic Knights of 40k (in both color scheme and flavour)

SaintHazard wrote:
On the other hand, BT doesn't have Tactical Squads - they have combined squads of up to 10 power armored Marines and five Scouts.

Just a minor quibble.

They can take up to 10 scout armored marines if the take 10 power armored marines in their crusaider squads.

The scouts can't outnumber the power armored marines when you make the squad, and you can have 10 power armored marines per the entry in the codex.

For grins, I'll run a pair of 20 man squads and throw in a chaplain with 3 cenobyte servitors in one squad. Righteous Zealing 1d6+3" is fun.

Oh, cool. I misread the codex then, my bad. Thanks for the correction.

In any case, my next Marine army (if there IS a next Marine army) WILL be BT.

If I were to start a Marine army, it would probably be Grey Knights, but that depends on how their spring codex works out.

Are you ever going to rate a codex again?

Melissia wrote:If I were to start a Marine army, it would probably be Grey Knights, but that depends on how their spring codex works out.

Pew Pew...more codex mock up/ranking IMO.

And I was dissapointed that you simply ignored that creepy guys internet advances towards you on the previous page...

I think her ignoring him speaks volumes.

Melissia wrote:If I were to start a Marine army, it would probably be Grey Knights, but that depends on how their spring codex works out.

If they made them plastic, I'd be all over it like stink on a monkey.

I would just like to say that Tau are not Communists. After all, they have a Caste system.

It seems to me they operate more like the Feudal States of Warring Era Japan. When a Shogun defeated another Shogun, he would often try to coax the samurai under his enemy to join him. That's what the Tau remind me of.

I would just call the tau "asian", seeing they have influences from both India and Japan.

Yes. "Asian." That's a form of government.

CSM are getting a pretty raw deal ITT. Even the lame "BT are okay but not really" argument is more convincing, IMO.

Th3ee Legged Dog wrote:
Pew Pew...more codex mock up/ranking IMO.

And I was dissapointed that you simply ignored that creepy guys internet advances towards you on the previous page...

I laughed out loud at this.

WarWizard91 wrote:

Th3ee Legged Dog wrote:
Pew Pew...more codex mock up/ranking IMO.

And I was dissapointed that you simply ignored that creepy guys internet advances towards you on the previous page...

I laughed out loud at this.

Lol
i couldent help it sorry
I liked the Tau mainly because of there under dog position in 40k. for some reason i always end up playing the under dog guys.

Arschbombe wrote:

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:I spot a mistake!

Canis is actually not, as people commonly believe, Latin for "wolf." It actually means "Dog." His name is Dog Wolfborn, people!...

Dogs are canis lupus familiaris. Wolves are canis lupus lupus or some other variant of canis lupus. So canis just means canine and includes all the canines: dogs, coyotes, wolves, etc. Essentially canis wolfborn = wolf.

Yes, but the Romans used it to refer specifically to dogs, as in domestic, not wolves.

Now you are talking about the scientific use of Latin for names of species and genera versus the actual Roman use of Latin.

Also there are three adjectives, canine (dog-like), lupine (wolf-like) and vulpine (fox-like).

If it helps, I was originally referring to it's use by the Romans, not it's scientific use. Should have made that clear.

If you're translating the word from Latin to English, "canis" means "dog." In the nominative case.

However, since Gothic is not Latin, but a made-up language based on badly butchered Latin, Canis means "Wolf" because GW sez so.

Less latin, internet advances, and dog vs wolves, more codex ranking God darn it!

Manchu wrote:CSM are getting a pretty raw deal ITT. Even the lame "BT are okay but not really" argument is more convincing, IMO.

I thought my opinions on CSMs were far clearer and far more... coherent than most of the rankings that came after it, ESPECIALLY the Black Templars. I dislike CSMs. I dislike their models, I dislike their fluff, I dislike their rules for being yet another MEQ army. At least their rules have variety and competitiveness, which puts them above Necrons, but it's quite clear that I don't like them. At all.

I fail to see how this is not "convincing". I know my opinions better than you know my opinions, I would think...


As for writing the next part, that will have to wait until tomorrow. After a long day of studying and so on, I'm going to bed. I have a chem test tomorrow, and a lab as well.

Canis is now a genus of the family Canidae, which includes dogs and wolves.

In latin it just meant dog though, the latin for wolf was lupus I believe.

Now the proper names for dogs and wolves is Canis Familiaris and Canis Lupus respectively.

ive gotten into an arguement with my wife about reading this....and im willing to sacrifice my time with her to follow the leader on the listings (just cant spare my time with my daughter...shez only 17 months and she knows what a crisis suit is...there is hope for her yet!!!)...but....yeah....besta luck 2 you on ur chem test, and i whole heartedly agree about the necrons....i just wish GW would quit the bull, and drop all the codices at once...that would make life so much easier...and theyd b richer to boot...but alas, companies dont have brains....and THE MAN wantz 2 keep a brutha down...(lol)

Good god 24 hours, 3 pages later and still no DA :(

They should of named Canis Varg.

Varg is wolf in Norwegian and sounds cool then Canis.

"Varg Wolfborn"

People under 12 wouldn't get he was like, a wolf or whatever.

calling it, Sisters are #1 because they are super women in space and that other crap

Hang on i'll grab you some salsa for that chip on your cold, living metal shoulder.

Ordo Dakka is slowly becoming one of my favorite people on Dakka.

You just don't see quality snarkery like that these days.

Ordo Dakka wrote:Hang on i'll grab you some salsa for that chip on your cold, living metal shoulder.

Haha, good one

Kurgash wrote:calling it, Sisters are #1 because they are super women in space and that other crap

And they're hot!

But if you say that to their face, they'll kill you.

SaintHazard wrote:Ordo Dakka is slowly becoming one of my favorite people on Dakka.

You just don't see quality snarkery like that these days.

definitely agree with the bottom part, I havent seen enough to justify Ordo Dakka being a favourite, but that post is a start...

Mr Nobody wrote:But if you say that to their face, they'll kill you.

Which is why they're hot!

/ducks and covers

Melissia wrote:I fail to see how this is not "convincing". I know my opinions better than you know my opinions, I would think...

Wait, it's not that I'm not convinced that what you posted are your true opinions. I'm not actually concerned about your opinions simply as opinions but rather as points in a discussion. And as points, I don't find that they build a convincing case for CSM being either a low-end faction or a low-end codex. Although your arguments against CSM were certainly far more fleshed-out than those against the Black Templar faction/dex, I find that I can agree more with your take on the latter than the former.

Manchu wrote:

Melissia wrote:I fail to see how this is not "convincing". I know my opinions better than you know my opinions, I would think...

Wait, it's not that I'm not convinced that what you posted are your true opinions. I'm not actually concerned about your opinions simply as opinions but rather as points in a discussion. And as points, I don't find that they build a convincing case for CSM being either a low-end faction or a low-end codex. Although your arguments against CSM were certainly far more fleshed-out than those against the Black Templar faction/dex, I find that I can agree more with your take on the latter than the former.

Does she have to convince you? Is that a thing she has to do?

You had this problem in Dave's thread too. Chill, kick back, and enjoy the ratings.

SaintHazard wrote:Does she have to convince you? Is that a thing she has to do?

You had this problem in Dave's thread too. Chill, kick back, and enjoy the ratings.

It's a forum. On a forum, we discuss things. If all I wanted to do was read Melissa's opinions without comment (or with making numerous off-topic comments), I would urge her to start a blog. I don't understand why you seem to have such trouble with this concept. Just to be clear, I'm not going to argue with you any further about this again.

Manchu wrote:It's a forum. On a forum, we discuss things. If all I wanted to do was read Melissa's opinions without comment (or with making numerous off-topic comments), I would urge her to start a blog. I don't understand why you seem to have such trouble with this concept. Just to be clear, I'm not going to argue with you any further about this again.

So 1) everything has to be an argument, but 2) you're not going to argue with me over whether everything has to be an argument?

Hypocrite much?

The discussion should be on-topic. If you want a thread where you and I argue about how people should post on Dakka, we can start a thread in OT about it.

So you two should start a thread arguing about arguing to not argue? I think that's a triple negative.

Lets get at least halfway through before the thread gets locked, shall we?

SaintHazard wrote:If you're translating the word from Latin to English, "canis" means "dog." In the nominative case.

However, since Gothic is not Latin, but a made-up language based on badly butchered Latin, Canis means "Wolf" because GW sez so.

Point, I guess, though my other statements still stand.

Anyway, any other ranking predictions for us?

To get this back on track, I'll summarize Melissa's post about CSM and why I find it unconvincing:

Paragraphs 1 & 2: Confusing the HH books with the fluff in C:CSM. Yes, the CSM origin is the HH. But the current book is not about the HH-era Legions at all. Discussion of CSM fluff should entail discussion of M41-42, esepcially the Black Legion and Huron's Red Corsairs. Some people don't like/cannot accept the idea of motley CSM warbands and just want evil SM chapters. That might be a valid point but it isn't even discussed here. I agree that the characterization of Horus's motives by BL authors has been pretty weak thus far. That however, has little to do with C:CSM. A review of the dex should focus not on Horus, Magnus, and Fulgrim but rather Abaddon, Ahriman, and Lucius.

Paragraphs 3 & 4: Melissa says the Codex is actually great and derides those who whine about it as basically spoiled. I totally agree with this. But if that's the case, then why is C:CSM second-to-last? Maybe people who deride the book deserve this criticism but then . . . isn't Melissa deriding the book? And at the same time praising it? This is pretty confusing. What is clear, however, is that this is not an argument supporting the low rank she gave this book.

So why is C:CSM ranked so low by Melissa? Well, to be fair, she tells us at the beginning of her post on them:

Melissia wrote:I just don't like them.

And I've seen that same unsupported sentiment echoed throughout the thread ever since. So, yes, an argument like "the Black Templars fluff seems somehow off" ends up being a more interesting and convincing point than "I just don't like CSM."

kronk wrote:

Kurgash wrote:calling it, Sisters are #1 because they are super women in space and that other crap

And they're hot!

Damn Kronk where did you get that picture? That costume is fantastic. Though you can see the wood grain on the storm bolter in her left hand...

One of the main reasons I dont care for the new CSM codex was taking out the fluffy demons and replacing it with generic ones. I love the World Eaters and now not being able to take bloodletters and bloodthirsters all but killed my will to keep building that army.

To counter the "chaos has bad fluff" argument. Read the old chapter approved they are awesome. One of the main reason I like the traitor legions are most of the primarchs that are evil are there because they were duped by horus OR the emperors own ignorance. Angron of the world eaters for example just wanted to die with his fellow gladiators on his home world. The emperor basically kidnapped him and Angron had to watch as his people were butchered without him.

So in finalizing while I do think 15 is a bit low I certainly wouldnt fault anyone for putting it that low...except its lower then Dark angels and thats just mean lol

In addition, it's the fact that many genuinely don't care any more about the "mission" of Horus that makes them cool in my mind. Some have no real reason for doing the things they do, other than a Joker-like urge to just do it. The World Eaters, for example, love killing - it's not revenge or a way to a better human empire, but a way of life for them, and that's what makes them cool. The Iron Warriors were always paranoid and hateful, and never truly trusted the Emperor; to them, Horus' claims made sense, so it also made sense to ally with him for the short term. Cold, brutal logic.

However, I can also see why people would dislike them, and I certainly don't begrudge Melissia her opinion, as i expect she has good reason for it. In any case, roll on the next Codex!

@Gorskar: Disagreeing with someone and explaining that disagreement is not begruding them their opinion. Perhaps everyone has good reasons to think whatever they think. But without stating what they are . . . well, we could see all of Melissa's ranks in just one post as a list, right? No explanation needed. Ouze did this last page. You just described a really great point in favor of CSM from the actual CSM dex so I don't have to assume you have a good reason to say you like CSM. You explained it. Now if you said "I like CSM because they are stupid and lame" I would wonder what was going on.

Hm, perhaps, I suppose...
But I think she probably does have a good reason for her opinions, she just didn't lay them out. Either way, it's causing debate, which is a good thing for a thread, and should lead to some good points on both sides.
Thanks for the compliment, by the way.

PraetorDave wrote:storm bolter in her left hand...

One barrel. They're both bolt pistols.

Not having come to C:CSM before the current edition, I have to say that I'm fairly happy with generic daemons and most of the other options. There are a few characterful things that I wish had been kept from previous editions- cultists; mutants and chaos hounds from Lost and the Damned; Raptors as Daemonkin instead of taking marks; Veteran Skills for Chosen. OK, that's several things- things that differentiated them from "Marines but with Evil LOLz". Space Marines are mostly already anti-heroes anyway.

However, the background material in the Codex really isn't great; with one exception, the tale of Sergeant Constantinus, it's not compelling about why a Marine would turn rogue or become an Aspiring Champion. You have to dig back to Realms of Chaos, Index Astartes, or Warhammer Fantasy to find interesting stories about Chaos and that make it fun. I couldn't find a good 'hook' for the army until I read Codex: Dark Angels.

While I agree that Cultists should have been retained, I must protest about there being little to like about the fluff. I love the story of Ahriman and the creation of the Rubric Marines, for example. The Red Corsairs also have a neat story (their color scheme is the only thing that bothers me) as a template for a "create your own traitors" counterepoint to DIY chapters.

@Exopheric
That's just it, though. They're not just "marines but evil," as you say. I disagree that most loyalists are anti-heroes; indeed, they are often portrayed as super-heroic at times. The CSM, on the other hand, are whatever you want them to be, and that's what makes them one of my favourite armies. Want an army of misunderstood, aggrieved fallen heroes? You can do that. Want an army of glory-hungry warriors out to honour their bloodthirsty gods? You can do that, too. An army of vicious and sadistic murderers? Looks like you want to be a Night Lord. There is plenty of good fluff to draw upon, too; I especially like the stories of Ahriman and Kharn, and the Red Corsairs have their own cool factor too.

Well, I *did* pick CSM as my first army to get into. The army list is flexible and it doesn't have quite the proliferation of special units and rules that something like, well, Codex Space Marines has. For a beginning player, that's actually a plus. And I do like that it's wide open to interpretation. Looking back through the codex, there are some other things that I find appealing. After reading A Thousand Sons Ahriman's story certainlt became much more interesting; he' s a quite likable character.

Gone for what, twelve hours, and already two more pages? Goddamn, goddamn.

Well anyway, as predicted by Saint Hazard (I have a text file with the order of the factions, so no, I didn't change it because of his prediction), here's:

11: Dark Angels


Once again, I feel bad giving them this rating. I admit I like the majority of the factions, and yet with a rating system like this that's a numbered list, it's hard to be fair.

In this case, though, I think it's merited. I feel much the same about Dark Angels as I do about Black Templars, except I actually prefer Dark Angels a bit more because of their focus on plasma and ranged warfare. Plasma is cool, both from a visual and from a physics perspective (well, technically it's hot), after all, and I have a preference for playing armies which have some focus on shooting (Although, given that I play Orks, obviously it isn't a requirement). Their codex also has a better variety of choices than the BT codex I feel, including the awesome all-terminator army. They've suffered a bit with age, and yet they still have a good amount of variety to help cover for that.

Yet, for all of that, they're still kinda languishing behind any of the modern codices, left in the dust to suffer from age. Their fluff feels the same way, as well-- their focus on secrecy has resulted in us not knowing that much about them or their "dark secret", which while attractive to some people makes the army less desirable to me. Some secrets are necessary for the sake of a continued narrative, but something feels off about the Dark Angels' narrative. Still, at least they have one and they are, very slowly, moving forward and trying to resolve their dark secret (in secret of course), where with the Black Templars it feels are kinda stuck in stasis (which again is appealing to some people, but not necessarily to me).

All in all, despite anything I've said here, I think DA are a good mid-level codex, IE, they aren't spectacular, but they do look fun, and have a good amount of somewhat interesting fluff. They need more work done on them, but I could say (and have said) the same thing about any non-fifth edition codex.

Well, as a DA player I think I can accept that.

Interesting. The whole "secretive society who refuse to trust other chapters" thing is actually one of the things I personally like about them. Goes to show how a single aspect can have a radically different effect on two opinions.

Though you're right in that they have suffered a bit with age. I just don't want to see them get the Matt Ward treatment with their next codex, and suddenly we see Ezekial surfing atop a Land Speeder chariot pullet by jetbikes while Dreadnoughts armed with six autocannons arrive by Deep Strike by burrowing like Mawlocs, then grow wings... but not before twenty Terminators disembark from the Dreadnought and assault the same turn.

That said, I predict Daemonhunters are next.

Personally I just hope they focus on the ranged combat aspect, and keep the all-terminator army. Terminators are fun to fight against, and kinda fun to use, too (as I've found from proxying a large terminator army before, one whose army list I posted in the army list section a few months ago), although I should note I still despise deathstar armies. But with an all-terminator army, with multiple units of terminators, they have a lot of potential to be a highly elite army rather than a deathstar army.

I like Grey Knights for the same reason, there's just something awesome about Grey Knights, and when I get to their rating (no, Saint Hazard, you didn't get it right this time ) I'll discuss that something.

Melissia wrote:Personally I just hope they focus on the ranged combat aspect, and keep the all-terminator army.

The ranged combat aspect is something I hope they keep too, primarily because if my army is reduced to Green Blood Angels someone is getting taken to the Rock.


In other, unrelated news, am I the only one who gets a warm fuzzy feeling from having the 250th post in a thread?

Damn! The Oracle lied to me.

Well, let's see what's next, and I'll make my next prediction afterwards.

I agree that a future DA book should emphasize range. It's not that DA don't like getting stuck in but I think of them as being expert swordsmen who wouldn't lower themselves to duel an Ork. And there are enough in-your-face Marines already.

Agreed there, we have two up-close SM armies on the go. A third is not really necessary, and it would be nice to have a shooty army that isn't T'au.

Melissia wrote:Plasma is cool, both from a visual and from a physics perspective (well, technically it's hot),

yuck yuck yuck

Save deamonhunters for post 666

Just discovered this thread. Glad you're doing it, Forum was getting a bit boring.

@Gorskar: Power armor will always tempt players to go in for HtH, so I doubt a Marine army will every be shooty on the level of Tau.

Hmm, there is that, I guess. I expect it's why so many MEQ armies favour that style of play.

Well, that, and the high WS/S/T/I and fact that at least two MEQ armies are heavily focused towards it...

MEQ lends itself to close combat, as there its higher stats offer the best benefit. But that doesn't mean it can't create a capable non-assault army.

It doesn't hurt that 5th ed. lends itself to assault, either. Maybe 6th will be shooty and we can have new DA in 2012--after the latest Nilla Marines book, of course.

Melissia wrote:MEQ lends itself to close combat, as there its higher stats offer the best benefit. But that doesn't mean it can't create a capable non-assault army.

True enough, it's a style used by my Iron Warriors to some effect. It's just MEQ do seem to have more capability in assault, despite their proficiency in shooting at people.

I'm so happy orks and daemons haven't made it yet...I find them both fascinating in fluff and play

As someone who dislikes the space marines (mini scale too small, armour too bland\outdated imo), if I had to make an army I would use the "look" of the Dark Angels. The robe\armour look is pretty sweet.

Stupid marines

Truescale Marines wouldn't be able to get cover saves (I jest... kinda).

While I whole heartedly LOVE CSM, mostly Khorne although I like the original fluff on Khorne better than the purely mindless. But nothing says you can't have regular CSM worship Khorne the boxed set even comes with fluffy Khorne icon options. I do think CSM is largely lacking good writing. Basing things largely in the codex off of Black Legion that's failed 13 black crusades isn't it? Doesn't exactly make someone a scary foe.

As far as complaints about CSM I think it kind of sucks not to get something like land speeders or an equivalent. I don't even know what they do I just think they look cool. Since CSM is still in 4th edition (I'm hoping that's the reason at least), land raiders only hold 10 units instead of 12 which without some sort of explanation makes zero sense. I also think Kharn should still have eternal warrior like he used to. But I also roll a ton of 1's.

PS. My first choice would've been IG, Orks or SM for an army. But I'm poor so IG was out of the question. Out of my two friends I'm playing 40k with, one's running SM and one's running Orks. I wanted to do something different.

You wanted to be different from your friend, who was playing Space Marines, so you decided to play Space Marines.

Chaos seems quite a bit different from plain SM especially when it comes to options and the two don't exactly look alike. I wanted something with a ballistic skill and guns that wasn't guys with cone headed helmets. Granted when I picked my army I hadn't seen the cool looking Eldar Rangers. Of course on a side note I'm running less shooty just by chance, and more zerkers.

To be fair, you drop a rock in the army lists and you'll eventually find a Space marine clone.

(Go Deathguard *shifty eyes*)

I judge whether or not it is a Marine codex by whether or not they are Marines in fluff, rather than how different they may or may not be from Codex: Space Marines.

But then, fluff is really the only reason I play 40k over any other system, or... actually the only reason why I play tabletop games at all.

I'm kind of that way, too, although not by plan. Do any other games catch your interest at all?

Honestly? Not really. Flames of War kinda, but for entirely different reasons.

Yeah, I'd rank the worst GW fluff way above the likes of AT-43 or even PP. I actually don't know why I both writing "even" there. That kind of puts these ranks in perspective , no?

Why did somebody someware post that DAs are emo? What whould make people think that?

That joke has some age on it. It's a jab at them having all these "dark" (melodramatic) secrets.

oooook. note to the Dark angles. Emos wear black, not green

All DA used to wear black. Now only the Fallen (life is pain) and the Ravenwing do. When asked about this, Chapter Master Azrael said that wearing black was for conformists. Cypher and Sammael, meanwhile, said that they were so nonconformist that they refused to try and fit in with Azrael and the rest of the popular kids.

lol

TheAngelKing47 wrote:While I whole heartedly LOVE CSM, mostly Khorne although I like the original fluff on Khorne better than the purely mindless. But nothing says you can't have regular CSM worship Khorne the boxed set even comes with fluffy Khorne icon options. I do think CSM is largely lacking good writing. Basing things largely in the codex off of Black Legion that's failed 13 black crusades isn't it? Doesn't exactly make someone a scary foe.

As far as complaints about CSM I think it kind of sucks not to get something like land speeders or an equivalent. I don't even know what they do I just think they look cool. Since CSM is still in 4th edition (I'm hoping that's the reason at least), land raiders only hold 10 units instead of 12 which without some sort of explanation makes zero sense. I also think Kharn should still have eternal warrior like he used to. But I also roll a ton of 1's.

PS. My first choice would've been IG, Orks or SM for an army. But I'm poor so IG was out of the question. Out of my two friends I'm playing 40k with, one's running SM and one's running Orks. I wanted to do something different.

there is so much wrong in this statement. the reason the Landraider can olny carry 10 people is becuae it has to have room for the lascannon generators. same with normal marne LR. the LRC can seat 12 because it has bolters instead so no need for generators.
From my firend's perspective, the black crusades have done something, they mortally wounded rowboat girlyman, they destoryed the citidel of Kromarch and left the planet a dead world, they managed to slaughter the BA at Mackan.
according to outdated fluff, the 13th black crusade is still being fought arround the eye, so its kind of a stalemate, although in the black crusades the IoM forces chaos back, they cause considerable damage. they pretty much only get defeated when the IoM brings in a tonne of reinforcements.
Yes their fluff sucks and is dated and needs a major overhall. But they shouldn't get the "cool toys" that Codex SM gets because then it will be codex: SM with spikes. Yes I will admit that they need some more vechiles, lets see they have: rhinos, LR, Dreads, predator, defiler, bikes. thats it, they need more varity, more chaos stuff though!

how long have you been playing 40k, cause SM have had the landspeeder since forever and Chaos haven't ever had it. why cause GW is don't use that term as a slur on Dakka sure, but offical fluff has it being discovered during M31 (the HH), but dosn't give a time when but saying it became widely used after that. Its werid that they give all these toys to the SM while saying chaos can't have them because it was made after the HH, whats to stop later tratiors bringing over to chaos in the years after the HH? I have no idea.

Why? Cause the fluff was retconned and it wasn't developed until after the heresy as an assault vehicle. In Tales of Heresy prototype land speeders are mentioned as being used by the Word Bearers.

Melissia wrote:I judge whether or not it is a Marine codex by whether or not they are Marines in fluff, rather than how different they may or may not be from Codex: Space Marines.

But then, fluff is really the only reason I play 40k over any other system, or... actually the only reason why I play tabletop games at all.

Thats an interesting opinion Melissia. Im in it for the 'look' of my armie. I think Eldar are the bee's knee's of awesome but couldnt care less about their history. I tend to make up my own fluff.

As for 40k fluff in general I don't really enjoy it much. Maybe its because of all the marine armies and books. They seem to flood this game to the point I feel like im drowning and I just hate reading\hearing about it sometimes.

Now, write up the next review and bring me pie.

OoieGoie wrote:Thats an interesting opinion Melissia. Im in it for the 'look' of my armie. I think Eldar are the bee's knee's of awesome but couldnt care less about their history. I tend to make up my own fluff.

As for 40k fluff in general I don't really enjoy it much. Maybe its because of all the marine armies and books. They seem to flood this game to the point I feel like im drowning and I just hate reading\hearing about it sometimes.

Now, write up the next review and bring me pie.

Have you read Path of the Warrior? It was bloody brilliant, and the first Xenos book that succeeded in capturing how interesting things OTHER than humans can be.

I thought that was Deff Skwadron.

Though technically it isn't a book anymore, just a series of images.

That was comedy though, while awesome. I'm talking novel-length stuff.

True, but I tend to ignore BL novels anyway (it's rare that they're actually particularly good, personally I prefer the Battletech/Mechwarrior series from a literary perspective).

I really enjoy Warmachine stuff at the moment, I haven't experienced any sort of steampunk fiction before though so that may be why.

Any suggestions?

Manchu wrote:All DA used to wear black. Now only the Fallen (life is pain) and the Ravenwing do. When asked about this, Chapter Master Azrael said that wearing black was for conformists. Cypher and Sammael, meanwhile, said that they were so nonconformist that they refused to try and fit in with Azrael and the rest of the popular kids.

Hahaha

Well, I bet that Blood Angels are next.

But then again, my bets in Just Dave's thread were pretty catastrophic......

Prediction for top 4: BAs, SoB, Orks, IG!

C:WH is an awful book. It really belongs at the bottom of the list. We'll see hwo high even Melissa ranks it. (But I know she's not a huge fan, either.) Frankly, I'm surprised it's above BT and DA. Both of them are far better.