stealth992 wrote:

JGrand wrote:

TLDR

Do you think the IG codex is outdated? Unbalanced? I think it does not allow for much variety. I play IG what should I buy. Vendetta and Infantry Squads, durr. Oh you like Steel Legion? Cool you could get Yarrick he's an independent character who was on Armageddon. Oh I forgot CCS are better. durr. What do you think of the IG codex?

Anyone know if they are going to make a new codex for IG? And if so when?

I was talking to a friend just the other day about something that people seem to not get:

Just because something is "sub-optimal" or "less efficient" doesn't mean it is "unusable" or "uncompetitive".

Perhaps it's a WAAC mindset that really permeates most people. Maybe it's that people don't like to think for themselves. Or perhaps most are too lazy to make original lists and proxy units instead of ripping power lists of the internet. I don't know.

What I do know is that lots of the time units that are viable and sub optimal are still usable in a competitive environment. You can win with Berzerkers or Noise Marines. It's just that regular CSM and PM's do it better. Does that make them untakable? No. You can win with a Blood Angels commander. Sure, the Librarian is a better value, but does that in itself make the Commander "unusable"? No. I just can't take this kind of mindset seriously.

On the note of 'mediocre units being unusable in light of better units'. Firstly, I'll have you note I do not use daemon princes or obliterators. So if I believed mediocre units are unusable why would I be using them? I am by no means a power gamer. But logically speaking, if you had the choice to pick up your new girlfriend in a ferrari or a ford escort, which ones it gonna be? That's just logic. What I would have liked to see for instance are not units that are so good that they completely dominate their section, but a variety of units in a section that have their own 'niche' in the game. When I run my defilers, I hate having the feeling that I would be in a better situation right now if I had brought obliterators. Especially when my defiler gets pwned second turn. And when my 275 point abaddon rolls a 1 and wounds himself I can't help but think I'd be a lot better off if I brought a daemon prince for half the price. How do you not understand what I'm talking about? This is not a WAACs mentality, this is just logic. Although to be fair, I exaggerate a lot when I rant for dramatic effect and to get people riled up so they'll get involved with the thread.

Although, your bottom line being that less efficient does not equal not take-able I agree with.

JGrand wrote:

Yes, I don't think I could agree more. That's all I hear in the OP though. BTW, my friend plays with a Chaos Vindi. It works well for him.

I actually do too. At worst it's a nice distraction. It was fun to model as well.

I completely agree with you. I've read through both, the old CSM and the 'new' CSM, and I agree that they've lost a lot. You ARE the bland marines now. The OP just seems to be whining about the fact that there is only one 'Timmy, Power Gamer' build.

I think the blandness is first on the list of why it's bad. I do however, think that there is plenty that can be done better. I used the example of a BA Commander being underused compared to a Librarian. There are multiple reasons to take the Commander which can be weighted in accordingly. In the CSM codex there is almost no reason to roll with a Lord or Sorcerer. The only thing they do better is to hide in a squad, which would be fine if they didn't cost a mere 25 points less. The benefits of the DP are worth those few points 90% of the time.

There are also plenty of units that truly need some work. I'm not saying that Bikes, Possessed, and Chosen can never be taken or do well; what I am saying is that the point costs have become way out of line with other codices. The aren't horrible, but ultimately can be a liability more than a help unless the army is building around them. Both the Elite and Fast Attack sections are rather gimmicky. All of the stuff there is now done cheaper, better, more efficient, and more take-able in other codices. I think this is why people start to get a bit upset. Why do the CSM bikers pay 8 more points for an extra attack? Why are Raptors flavorless and more costly than Assault Marines? Why do the Predator and Vindicator cost 15 more points? Because the codex is outdated.

Again, this stuff can all be used. It's still viable, just suffering a bit from codex creep. It happens and other armies are much, much worse off in that regard.

Good work. This, if nothing more, proves my point.
Anyway, back to the CSM. Again, there's a lack of fluff, but to be fair that's still not a big deal. Well, it might be if you're trying to play Legions, but whatever. Fact is a lot of that fluff is still around, and is also pretty damn easy to find. Maybe that doesn't suit everyone, but it's never caused me issues.

I have always hated a HQ commanding differently marked troops. The basic troops of the CSM codex should be marines with access to marks (not icons) and lesser daemons (with access to marks). The Cult troops should be elites. The Mark of the HQ should unlock that particular cult troop as a troop choice. I just can't stand the lack of fluff in most lists. "Durr hurr this Slaneesh DP and his identical buddy lead these Plague Marines while employing the help of three full units of extremely rare Obliterators". ...shiver....

On the note of 'mediocre units being unusable in light of better units'. Firstly, I'll have you note I do not use daemon princes or obliterators. So if I believed mediocre units are unusable why would I be using them? I am by no means a power gamer. But logically speaking, if you had the choice to pick up your new girlfriend in a ferrari or a ford escort, which ones it gonna be? That's just logic. What I would have liked to see for instance are not units that are so good that they completely dominate their section, but a variety of units in a section that have their own 'niche' in the game. When I run my defilers, I hate having the feeling that I would be in a better situation right now if I had brought obliterators. Especially when my defiler gets pwned second turn. And when my 275 point abaddon rolls a 1 and wounds himself I can't help but think I'd be a lot better off if I brought a daemon prince for half the price. How do you not understand what I'm talking about? This is not a WAACs mentality, this is just logic. Although to be fair, I exaggerate a lot when I rant for dramatic effect and to get people riled up so they'll get involved with the thread.

Although, your bottom line being that less efficient does not equal not take-able I agree with.

No you aren't, cause the lord can actually ride in your transports.

Daemon princes die in turn one every time against shooty armies.

JGrand wrote:

No you aren't, cause the lord can actually ride in your transports.

Daemon princes die in turn one every time against shooty armies.

It's riding in a transport for around 150 points Lord or Sorcerer. I don't have the exact points here so this is from memory:

Sorcerer w Mark (around 20), warptime (25), and wings (10) as everyone is claiming they are a must have is 155

Lord with Daemon Weapon (40) the only reason to take one, mark (20), wings (10) is 160

vs

175 MoN Warptime

+1 or 2 WS, +2 S, +2T, +1W, +1 A, fearless (over Sorcerer) and Eternal Warrior.


You are telling me that riding in a transport and 20 points is worth the offset all of that? Ok....

BloodThirSTAR wrote:Yet the daemon prince is a staple unit compared to a Chaos Lord. If you dont want the princes shot down 1st turn then hold them in reserve. This tactic has worked very well for me versus shooty armies. To say they simply are shot down first turn versus shooty armies is not true. They can start on the table behind tanks for a 4++ save even. The lash prince and Nurgle prince are two of the best units in the codex. To say otherwise with lack of any substantial support is basically an exercise in trolling the forum - at least that's how I see it.