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

TS amped up to 11 in the 3.5 codex? Yeah, no...

The 3.5 Codex was fun, fluffy and allowed lots of customisation and genuinely made you feel like a proper chaos marine force.

Unfortunately it was unfun for everyone else. Obnoxious wargear, broken army lists and hilariously overpowered units was just miserable to play against.

Or do we have those rose tinted glasses on too tight to look over horrible internal balance?

I don't think anyone that played 3.5 would get another intepretation mills.

However Common sense and such.

Not Online!!! wrote:
I don't think anyone that played 3.5 would get another intepretation mills.

However Common sense and such.

It's essentially two camps: people playing WITH the codex thought it was perfect, infallible, and the modicum of balance and the example all codices should be held to; and people playing AGAINST it who said "Are you freaking kidding? 24" total with move and charge for Khorne bikers that now get Blood Angels' Furious Assault rules because FETH YEAH CHAOS?!?!?!?!"


I pretty much invalidate anyone's opinions for life if they claim 3.5 was even remotely balanced.

It wasn't. It did do a good job of capturing the faction.

It's an apt thing to bring up as the exact same thing is happening with the Marines current incarnation.

In both cases they were super cool releases full of powerful and flavourful options. The fact they are outliers is the problem.

I'd love to play 40k if all armies had the same care and attention paid to them

 Just Tony wrote:
It's essentially two camps: people playing WITH the codex thought it was perfect, infallible, and the modicum of balance and the example all codices should be held to; and people playing AGAINST it who said "Are you freaking kidding? 24" total with move and charge for Khorne bikers that now get Blood Angels' Furious Assault rules because FETH YEAH CHAOS?!?!?!?!"

I played against it, it was super hard and unfun to be on the receiving end. At the same time I think every army should have been like that. It is sad how we went from 3.5 to 4th CSM codex. Chaos felt more like Renegades from there on to me.

 Eldarain wrote:
It wasn't. It did do a good job of capturing the faction.

It's an apt thing to bring up as the exact same thing is happening with the Marines current incarnation.

In both cases they were super cool releases full of powerful and flavourful options. The fact they are outliers is the problem.

I'd love to play 40k if all armies had the same care and attention paid to them

Yeah, however GW did show that they could do such a dex AND have it balanced.
(IA13 R&H were pretty much as customizable AND balanced)
AND not have marines level stupidity.

As for Chaos 3.5.
It's how the faction is supposed to feel, it's also the worst exemple for internal and external balance there was until the Deathstart /formation stupidity , scatbikes and of course the new supplements.

a_typical_hero wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
It's essentially two camps: people playing WITH the codex thought it was perfect, infallible, and the modicum of balance and the example all codices should be held to; and people playing AGAINST it who said "Are you freaking kidding? 24" total with move and charge for Khorne bikers that now get Blood Angels' Furious Assault rules because FETH YEAH CHAOS?!?!?!?!"

I played against it, it was super hard and unfun to be on the receiving end. At the same time I think every army should have been like that. It is sad how we went from 3.5 to 4th CSM codex. Chaos felt more like Renegades from there on to me.

Careful now, the self-appointed king of whether 3.5 was balanced (despite cherry picking the worst examples. Hows about you pick a DG or TS lit from that time?) will find your opinion invalid (Oh noes! The horror!).

Best post a TvTropes link just to make sure.

 Grimtuff wrote:
Careful now, the self-appointed king of whether 3.5 was balanced (despite cherry picking the worst examples. Hows about you pick a DG or TS lit from that time?) will find your opinion invalid (Oh noes! The horror!).

Best post a TvTropes link just to make sure.

To many players Chaos is really just World Eaters. If you're not frothing berzerkers, tossing your weapons into ditches in order to engage the enemy with your teeth you're not being 'true' to what Chaos is supposed to be.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:
Careful now, the self-appointed king of whether 3.5 was balanced (despite cherry picking the worst examples. Hows about you pick a DG or TS lit from that time?) will find your opinion invalid (Oh noes! The horror!).

Best post a TvTropes link just to make sure.

To many players Chaos is really just World Eaters. If you're not frothing berzerkers, tossing your weapons into ditches in order to engage the enemy with your teeth you're not being 'true' to what Chaos is supposed to be.

I played with and against that codex quite frequently. There were a handful of lists that tarred all of the others with the same brush (plus some rules misunderstandings and different versions floating around...). Iron Warriors 9xOblits and 4xHS, a list which frankly looks tame today, Siren bombs, Dreadaxe DPs (which were far from invincible. Killed a fair few of them with maxed out Blood Claw squads) and infiltrating+daemonic speed Lords (which were easily halted with a power fist to the face). That's it. Everything else was chock full of flavour, though no less balanced than anything else GW has produced over the years.

But, my opinion is invalid. My opinion was already made invalid because I posted a link to TvTropes at some point in the past but frankly I don't give a crap about what he thinks.

 Dr. Mills wrote:
The 3.5 Codex was fun, fluffy and allowed lots of customisation and genuinely made you feel like a proper chaos marine force.

Unfortunately it was unfun for everyone else. Obnoxious wargear, broken army lists and hilariously overpowered units was just miserable to play against.

Or do we have those rose tinted glasses on too tight to look over horrible internal balance?

But surely it's not unreasonable for people to still want all that flavour and customisation - just with better balance?

 vipoid wrote:

 Dr. Mills wrote:
The 3.5 Codex was fun, fluffy and allowed lots of customisation and genuinely made you feel like a proper chaos marine force.

Unfortunately it was unfun for everyone else. Obnoxious wargear, broken army lists and hilariously overpowered units was just miserable to play against.

Or do we have those rose tinted glasses on too tight to look over horrible internal balance?

But surely it's not unreasonable for people to still want all that flavour and customisation - just with better balance?

To the casual people, you can't have both. For better balance, certain options need to be stripped. This is okay because you don't need 10 obnoxious rules to show you're special.

Grimtuff wrote:But, my opinion is invalid. My opinion was already made invalid because I posted a link to TvTropes at some point in the past but frankly I don't give a crap about what he thinks.

Given your incessant wall of bitter validation text, I'd say you most assuredly DO give a crap. It's also why you post your opinions on a public forum.

Which, conveniently, automatically invites debate.



Since you want to go off on my lack of line by line, let's fling a little more.


My brother played Death Guard, and with any monogod army, you could push it past what is essentially supposed to be the core balance of the book.

Khorne is addressed constantly and consistently, with no arguments back. No need to rehash.

I played Iron Warriors before the IA was even a thing, let alone 3.5 coming out. What wound up happening is me selling my IW and my TSons.

Speaking of TSons, ANY event where you get random free upgrades is a balance breaking issue. 9 dudes? Free HQ "slot" Oh, points for upgrades? Never mind, you can count to 9 so be rewarded.

Slaanessh army as a whole was just hard to budge, but then slap in your Lash Prince to drag ANYTHING that can attempt to sway the battle out.

Without going to the whole "mutable genus" thing that started in that book, which is possibly the most imbalanced mechanic ever introduced, and only got WORSE with 3.5, the whole book was a host of "have your cake and eat your opponent's bakery too."

Historically Chaos didn't have ordinance. Starting with that book, not ONLY did you get a LRBT, but it fought in hand to hand better than any dreadnought in the game. Walls of balance.




I'll help you out a bit. Go to your favorites tab, click on TVTropes, and look up "Jump the Shark".

 Just Tony wrote:
Given your incessant wall of bitter validation text, I'd say you most assuredly DO give a crap. It's also why you post your opinions on a public forum.

Which, conveniently, automatically invites debate.



Since you want to go off on my lack of line by line, let's fling a little more.


My brother played Death Guard, and with any monogod army, you could push it past what is essentially supposed to be the core balance of the book.

Khorne is addressed constantly and consistently, with no arguments back. No need to rehash.

I played Iron Warriors before the IA was even a thing, let alone 3.5 coming out. What wound up happening is me selling my IW and my TSons.

Speaking of TSons, ANY event where you get random free upgrades is a balance breaking issue. 9 dudes? Free HQ "slot" Oh, points for upgrades? Never mind, you can count to 9 so be rewarded.

Slaanessh army as a whole was just hard to budge, but then slap in your Lash Prince to drag ANYTHING that can attempt to sway the battle out.

Without going to the whole "mutable genus" thing that started in that book, which is possibly the most imbalanced mechanic ever introduced, and only got WORSE with 3.5, the whole book was a host of "have your cake and eat your opponent's bakery too."

Historically Chaos didn't have ordinance. Starting with that book, not ONLY did you get a LRBT, but it fought in hand to hand better than any dreadnought in the game. Walls of balance.




I'll help you out a bit. Go to your favorites tab, click on TVTropes, and look up "Jump the Shark".

So, to sum up for everyone: 'Chaos was once good, because of this, you should be crappy, also, stay in the arbitrary box that was built for you. Tony has spoken.'

Also, just curious when does this Chaos 'history' start? Because, yeah, they've had ordnance since 2nd edition, also, nobody really had ordnance in RT days.

 Just Tony wrote:
Slaanessh army as a whole was just hard to budge, but then slap in your Lash Prince to drag ANYTHING that can attempt to sway the battle out.

Lash of Fzorgle did not appear until the 4th edition codex.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:
So, to sum up for everyone: 'Chaos was once good, because of this, you should be crappy, also, stay in the arbitrary box that was built for you. Tony has spoken.'

Nobody is saying this or arguing for it, please stay civilised.

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:
Lash of Fzorgle did not appear until the 4th edition codex.

Yep, 3.5 had the invisible (= can't shoot it, can't charge it) Slaanesh DP that IIRC only SoB had a roll against wether they would be affected by it or not.

a_typical_hero wrote:
Nobody is saying this or arguing for it, please stay civilised.

Several people have, and continue to imply this state of affairs.

Also, civility is relative, and mine was quite relative.

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
Slaanessh army as a whole was just hard to budge, but then slap in your Lash Prince to drag ANYTHING that can attempt to sway the battle out.

Lash of Fzorgle did not appear until the 4th edition codex.

Which just highlights my point he does not know what the hell he is waffling about. At least get the bloody codex correct...

But my opinion is invalid, right? Because you have deemed it so.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
Nobody is saying this or arguing for it, please stay civilised.

Several people have, and continue to imply this state of affairs.

Also, civility is relative, and mine was quite relative.

I think the only honest reply to those two claims is "no".

What is considered civil does depend on culture and what is considered okey in it. Stuff you considered civil in Sweeden, could be not only not considered civil, but even law breaking in some countries. So it is very much relative.

Misrepresenting someone's arguments is uncivil pretty much everywhere.

This thread has gone so far off topic now we should probably let this one die now

Yeah like I don't understand how that was like even possibly a racist comment lol

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Misrepresenting someone's arguments is uncivil pretty much everywhere.

Using exageration as a rethoric tool though is just also valid.
And from some of the responses here we can pretty much assume that Tony here has a bit of an iffy grasp at best in regards to CSM dexes.

And to top it off he just outright thinks invalidating someones opinion on a generalisation about a subject he has not really a clue about is considered quite a bit more rude.



_____
Regardless, i think we can assume GW will not do anything to the traits of mainline CSM, maybee DG or TS get lucky. Maybee. I somehow doubt it.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
We're not talking about Primaris equivalent treatment. Chaos needs updated traits and something equivalent to doctrines.

That is the Primaris treatment, dude.

Do you think GW would have released those supplements to support a new kit of Tacticals?

Well then I guess sob are primaris now.

Seriously if gw wants to sell models other than loyalist sm they need to give good rules to other factions. No one wants to build an army just to lose to sm.

Sob got their mono faction bonus so gw needs to hurry up and release the rules for other factions. Else people will start to get fed up and stop playing.

Nope. Models stay and rules change. As a consequence I would rather have good models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CadianGateTroll wrote:
CSM are supposed to be the bad guy and bad guys are supposed to lose to the good guys.

Primaris are the poster boys of the setting and therefore their task is to sell the whole 40K universe to the audience. They can't do this if they have bad rules because 12 year old Timmy will start to flip tables.

Compared to SM, CSM always had subpar rules with exception of 2nd and 3.5th. That's a design feature and not an oversight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dr. Mills wrote:
The 3.5 Codex was fun, fluffy and allowed lots of customisation and genuinely made you feel like a proper chaos marine force.

Unfortunately it was unfun for everyone else. Obnoxious wargear, broken army lists and hilariously overpowered units was just miserable to play against.

Or do we have those rose tinted glasses on too tight to look over horrible internal balance?

I played my beloved NL at the time and my regular opponent was my pal who ran Dark Angels. We always duked it out in his custom-built Cityfight terrain.
Good times but the amount of customizations I could do was obscene. My regular troops and Havocs got a bonus to their cover save and my Raptor champion got S6 on the charge. Another favourite of mine was the placement of a Gargoyle "daemon bomb" to keep his Dev's locked in combat.

You can guess that my pal wasn't too thrilled to face my CSM at that time.

Primaris are the poster boys of the setting and therefore their task is to sell the whole 40K universe to the audience. They can't do this if they have bad rules because 12 year old Timmy will start to flip tables.

except primaris weren't that great for the past 2 years.

Compared to SM, CSM always had subpar rules with exception of 2nd and 3.5th. That's a design feature and not an oversight.

In 5th ed, Chaos vs Loyalists was almost always an easy win for Chaos. Loaylists had more interesting rules and more viable armies. Chaos was more boring, but that was not intentional.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Misrepresenting someone's arguments is uncivil pretty much everywhere.

Using exageration as a rethoric tool though is just also valid.
And from some of the responses here we can pretty much assume that Tony here has a bit of an iffy grasp at best in regards to CSM dexes.

And to top it off he just outright thinks invalidating someones opinion on a generalisation about a subject he has not really a clue about is considered quite a bit more rude.



_____
Regardless, i think we can assume GW will not do anything to the traits of mainline CSM, maybee DG or TS get lucky. Maybee. I somehow doubt it.

More my fault for trying to do all my posting at work, I'm forced to go by memory as my boss will probably frown upon me dredging through codices at work. I could try to go through my pdf of the 3.5, which is the only copy I have, but you can't thumb drive at work anymore because of their heavy anti-corporate espionage software. Fun fact: a military CAC reader set off security alerts and I had to explain why I was accessing Army email and pay stubs at work. THAT level.

At any rate, once I get it printed back off or email the pdf here at work so I can line by line, I'll go into more detail and leave less to chance.

The post by Strg Alt above this one however kind of alludes to the same level of customization that made the codex imbalance, which is just one of my gripes about it. More on this when I can drop page numbers and paragraphs.

 Just Tony wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Misrepresenting someone's arguments is uncivil pretty much everywhere.

Using exageration as a rethoric tool though is just also valid.
And from some of the responses here we can pretty much assume that Tony here has a bit of an iffy grasp at best in regards to CSM dexes.

And to top it off he just outright thinks invalidating someones opinion on a generalisation about a subject he has not really a clue about is considered quite a bit more rude.



_____
Regardless, i think we can assume GW will not do anything to the traits of mainline CSM, maybee DG or TS get lucky. Maybee. I somehow doubt it.

More my fault for trying to do all my posting at work, I'm forced to go by memory as my boss will probably frown upon me dredging through codices at work. I could try to go through my pdf of the 3.5, which is the only copy I have, but you can't thumb drive at work anymore because of their heavy anti-corporate espionage software. Fun fact: a military CAC reader set off security alerts and I had to explain why I was accessing Army email and pay stubs at work. THAT level.

At any rate, once I get it printed back off or email the pdf here at work so I can line by line, I'll go into more detail and leave less to chance.

The post by Strg Alt above this one however kind of alludes to the same level of customization that made the codex imbalance, which is just one of my gripes about it. More on this when I can drop page numbers and paragraphs.

In regards to customisation

You see, gw is capable of actually making balanced,ultra customizable armies, atleast Allan bleigh was, cue ia 13.
But then again bleigh also put a pricetag on them....

Gw itself often beeing Bad at rules and constantly beeing forgiven by most of the community is what Imo is the main issue.

Also, if we take a look at the build your trait options so far, beyond sm, they are actually competently handled somewhat.

I'll disagree about the "build your trait" thing. It's honestly a bit of a disadvantage to anyone playing one of those armies if you have no idea what the model actually does. If you were facing Chaos before, you knew what you were in for vs. any unit type. With 3.5, you didn't have that.

Even if someone was playing a named Legion, you had less than even odds that they'd be running that Legion to its inherent rules, much like you had some Samm Hain Eldar armies that conspicuously ran identical to Alaitoc once Codex:CWE hit.

As I said in other threads and forums that I've whined about this problem, it all started with Tyranids and snowballed from there. Even if the Tyranids' version of it wasn't as egregious as what came after, it still kicked off the arms race, similar to the WFB 7th books going nuclear being kicked off by High Elves.