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.

My solution to the changing rules...dont buy into it...let GW know what you think by voting with your wallet. imaging if people stop showing up to conventions to play and get get together with a few friends with a few beer and rules all agree on. who is to say you HAVE to keep buying GW codex books

*Rant warning! People with something better to do, skip to the next post!*

I'm getting tired of any complaint about the new codex style being brushed off as whining about nerfs. I play fluffy armies. As fluffy as kittens, and usually about as effective. I've been fielding Thousand Sons for years now. Their fluff being that they're a traditional Cabal true to the teachings of Magnus. (I.E. they don't worship Tzeentch, they steal and barter for what magic they can and hope to stay one step ahead of the all knowing god.) That means no power fists, no mutations, no super Chaos Lord etc. At the same time, I was running the campaign at our local store. I chose to run it as jungle fight, to encourage people to buy/field units they wouldn't normally touch. Yes, I willingly played 1k Sons in the jungle, fight after fight. It hurt, a lot. And my win/loss stayed around 50%. Not amazing. But it was fun.  I might not have fought 10s across the board, but I have NO problem fielding an underpowered list and taking a beating for it.

That said I have split feelings on the new books. I think the balancing that is being put forth is a good thing. Some lists need to be toned down. However, balanced doesn’t mean “everything is interchangeable”.  Iron Warriors shouldn't be able to field buckets-o-Oblits. But that doesn’t mean that they have to be stripped down to a silver version of the Black Legion.

Dark Angles, I don’t have much of a problem with. They might be underpowered, but if they are truly a blueprint for the new way of things eventually they’ll be all right. I don’t have a problem with their strict set up. The lack of an Armory however is worrying. The DA can pull this off, due to their exacting organization, it’s not hard to take all the options a unit would have in the armory and put them in their entry.

Chaos will be the true test of this new lay out. Chaos is popular because you can do anything with it, and it will be damn hard to keep that under the new direction of books.  Obviously we can’t pass judgment on it yet, we don’t have it.  I’m not saying that it will be crap because things are changing. It’s entirely possible to rewrite Chaos into this new way of things and not lose any flexibility or character. Yet, with the lack of effort going into the books now and just blatant stupidity (Jervis had to have the rules for reserves explained to him recently in an interview) I doubt it will happen.

What has me worried is that according to the recent rumors the cults are taking a hosing and the fluff seems to be going out the window.  I’d gladly give up my AP 3 bolt guns, to field MY commander and not Arhiman. I’d be willing to give back the  rumored 3/4+ so my Emperor’s Children opponent could give his Havocs sonic weapons. And I’ll kill a man before I let him field a sorcerer with the mark of Khorne. The only thin ray of hope is the intensely unsubstantiated rumor that there may be a shift in the way books will interact. The idea being that there will be other Chaos books that will let you sort of plug and play with units. (The rumor being that there will be a codex “daemons” and one for cults) However with the current policy being that all armies will be supported “forever” (which I like a lot by the way) this seems very, very unlikely.

Really the problem I have with the changes is that we may be looking at the end of flavorful armies. I don’t have a problem with more responsibility being put on the players to model and field their armies to make reflect their fluff. This might even cut down on the “my army is Night Lords this week!” crap. However if all the armies get too bland, what’s the point?

Posted By Radar75 on 05/23/2007 11:56 PM
 (Jervis had to have the rules for reserves explained to him recently in an interview)

Could I please get a source on this? It would make my day.

Abba, you missed my point. The point was that chaos players and eldar players didn't play certain factions/legions/craftworlds because they had a special codex or rules dedicated to them....they played them because they either looked cool, or their background was cool. In 3rd. edition, I saw a lot of players playing Biel-tan and World Eaters because of the inherent power levels of those lists (back when you could assault out of transports)...not because they thought the craftworld was cool or that World Eaters was the legion that interested them the most. The thing is, in 2nd edition they didn't have lists for them. You built a 'theme' based on unit choices...not because any special rules attached to them. I think that is the direction that the rules are heading...and there is still a variety of builds with that logic. You can still build a list that represents the "Biel-tan" craftworld in the new eldar codex. We all made do in 2nd edition with codexes like that...we can make do again. I am glad they are gutting the wargear from books...I mean honestly...when was the last time you saw a guy using a Psyocculum in the witchhunters codex...or purity seals in the marine codex? I see no problem with how they are doing the books now...the only problem I have is that they are doing it midway through this edition.

Capt K

PS: and don't even get me started on the court of the young king...that was the dumbest unit anyways and never should have been in the game at all...and I played Biel-Tan!

Well, court of the Young King is one, but the Seer Council is another. Although I have nothing against "game balance adjustment" (I'm not one of those powermongers anyway, and GW studio has its reasons even if they are often irrelevant to any mathematical evidence) I just HATE WITH PASSION when a unit is not available anymore, model-wise.

Removing "black guardian" or the Ranger dislocation table can be explained and even tolerated. But what am I supposed to do with my five Farseers now?

But it's merely an itch compared to what Chaos players are going to endure.

So I assume you dont use the vehical upgrades for falcons to make them unkillable, right?

Posted By Voodoo Boyz on 05/23/2007 1:19 PM
The problem with Eldar is summed up in two words Holofields and Harlequins.

I'm afraid that while your anti-eldar ranting was entertaining while drunk, it is decidedly shrill when you are sober.  (Note:  I'm not siding with Toreador either, as his tolerance of GWs terrible excuses for rules is the stuff of legends.)  Holofields and Harlequins...

Holy crap batman.  Give me a break.  Your entire arguement hinges on the fact that falcons are broken.  News flash!  Even Eldar players agree that it is broken.

If you take them away, where does that leave the rest of the list?  What are harlequins going to do if they have to foot slog it?  Does it factor into your analysis that Eldar are paying higher than MEQ prices for a bunch of T3 Sv4+ "specialist troops", half of which perform in a lacklustre fashion or don't really perform their specialty at all due to shoddy rules writing?  Does it factor into your analysis that Wraithguard are still totally worthless?

Are you sure that it is the "Eldar" which are too good instead of the "Falcon" which is too good?

Damn I'm gone for 2 days and you guys are discussin' Eldar? ...

chaos = eldar.. doncha know.. rofl

Posted By two heads talking on 05/24/2007 7:44 AM
chaos = eldar.. doncha know.. rofl

Chaos + Eldar =

CHAOS ELDAR!!!!

Chaos Eldar get Falcons with:

Daemonic Posession, Mutated Hull, Parasitic Posession, Holofields, Spirit Stones, Vectored Engines, Havoc launcher, Pintle mounted combi-bolter and Shuriken cannon.  All for 50 points!

They also get obliterator-lords which are wraithlords which can morph any weapon in the game including twin linked battlecannon and prism cannon!  (Can't combine with fireprism though, since this would be cheesy).

They also get Berserker Harlequins with the Mark of Khorne and Khornate Chain Axes with Furious Charge, Daemon Banshees with bare boobies and the Mark of Slaanesh and Farseers with Mark of Tzeench.

5 Farseers is pretty over the top and you can still field 3 and 10 Warlocks. Black Guardians are just that.

My curiosity of the new Chaos Dex is getting the best of me. I am very curious to see how they play out. Rumours are just that, and until we see the full codex we won't be able to tell much for sure. From the looks of some of the rules, the Chaos dex could be able to handle the Eldar and Zilla lists.

World Eaters seem to come off on the short end followed by Emperor's Children. While both Death Guard and Thousand Sons seem to get infinitely better. I guess at least now you can put your Khorne Berzerkers in rhinos and land raiders without them furying out at the worst time, but Khorne berzerkers don't seem to be that great in close anymore. The loss of the chainaxes seems to be quite a blow. I would bet this guarantees the Orks lose the Choppa rule, but how will they defeat any armour in CC now?

Interesting days ahead.

Long ago we had a store tournament at a place I worked at, and the boss overruled me on allowing one of his "friends" to use a custom eldar list. It was an eldar list with rolls on the random tables from the Realm of Chaos hardbound books. It was evil. Dire Avengers with iron hard skin... He took the tournament and gained the hate of everyone involved and never played there again......

Well, Chaos Eldar get paper-thin transports, and paper-thin armored troops, and no psychic powers at all...

And their version of Harlequins does not make anyone cry cheese.

Posted By carmachu on 05/24/2007 7:33 AM

I, for one, am for a game where cheese is limited

So I assume you dont use the vehical upgrades for falcons to make them unkillable, right?

That is correct.  I didn't even know what you all were talking about, in relationship to the invulnerable Falcons, until I went back to the new Codex. 

Just like in the previous post, I like to play fluffy armies.  I am a role-player first, and a war game fan second.  I wish there was more story themed/campaign games.  However, when someone only desires to play cheese, all you get is cheese.

Don't get me wrong.  It is still fun to play against cheese.  I look at it as a challenge.  If I can win, then I beat the cheater.  It makes me feel better about my abilities.  If you can defeat the cheater, as well as the honset, then the enjoyment is that much better for me.

As to Chaos, I am glad that they are doing a book about the Renegades.  Blackheart is a great idea for an opponent.  He could be full of Chaos, or just against the "corrupt" Empire.  I love the story hook.  It would be a fun army to play.

I also dearly hope that they release a Cult Codex.  I have read in other posts that the next Chaos Codex will have the Cult troops in it, but will be worked in such a way, that a all Cult Codex will be possible.  That is cool.  Two to four pages for each Cult in the last Chaos Codex for each Cult faction was a mistake in my book.  Almost no fluff, limited rules, and almost no dirversity was a goof in every sense of the word.

Also, you could not play Daemons unless you summoned them.  What?  In the fluff, the Daemons can enter the material universe with great effort.  They don't need to be summoned.  It just makes it easier for them.  So, why can't I play a all Daemon army against my Daemonhunter army?  Because the rules don't allow for it.

Instead, my Daemonhunters have to be allies in a Space Marine army so my entire force will not be destroyed by the two Land Raiders my opponent is running. 

With these new possible codexes, you could play Renegades, Cults, Daemons, and Lost.  That sounds GREAT to me.  So, I have to buy 3 books instead of one.  That's OK.  I get more fluff, hopefully.  It could be really good.

Get rid of the Armory, and you don't have invulnerable Falcons.  You don't get Nidzilla.  You get less cheese, and more story.  I am all for it.

Cheese and cheating are two very different things.

Posted By Toreador on 05/24/2007 8:23 AM
5 Farseers is pretty over the top and you can still field 3 and 10 Warlocks. Black Guardians are just that.

Wait, how do you field 3 farseers?

Posted By Toreador on 05/24/2007 8:23 AM
I would bet this guarantees the Orks lose the Choppa rule, but how will they defeat any armour in CC now?

The same way they do now - really lucky dice rolling.

Ummm.....

The Eldar codex doesn't HAVE a general armory; characters and vehicles have a short list of possible options/upgrades included in their entries. Tyranids don't have a real armory either, just a few options to fill mandatory slots on big bugs (e.g., a Carnifex HAS to take 2 weapon biomorphs, from this list).

Heh heh, sorry 2. Been playing too many multiplayer games lately with tons of Farseers on the field

Easy. You make the Orks base strength 4 (nobs go to str5) and the Bezerkers should be str 5. No more dumb chain axe/ choppa rule.

Capt K

Warboss should go to T5 also with strength 6.

The rumour is that Orks drop to 6pts a model, and gain Furious Charge. Berzerkers are WS 5 I think also with Furious Charge.

5 Farseer's? It isn't GW's fault, they only sold 2 in a box

I've got more than one Space Marine Captain, even though I only use one (if at all) in a game. I also a few Chaplains, because I liked the miniatures back then.

Anyway, people who picked armies for the wrong reasons (whoooohoo, exploitable Blood Angels*!) generally are the most vocal. They couldn't win without the tried-and-tested combos people would put in the dark corners of the gaming forums.

"Too bad if your power combo worked in the last edition, I can't actually say I'm sorry you put on your miniatures chess-like restrictions in order to try and win a game."

*I've actually heard a story of a BA player losing a battle in turn 1, against IW, 1500 points a side. Though it must've been short on terrain...

Posted By Destrado on 05/24/2007 7:04 PM

*I've actually heard a story of a BA player losing a battle in turn 1, against IW, 1500 points a side. Though it must've been short on terrain...

Huh?

Most battles are won or lost on the first turn unless you're playing with much, much more terrain than GW suggests.

In my experience the army which wins the roll for first turn will generally win the game (400/550 or so games for me). That's just how 40K works in general.

Of course being wiped out in turn one is a bit more unusual.

Posted By Asmodai on 05/24/2007 7:22 PM

Huh?

Most battles are won or lost on the first turn unless you're playing with much, much more terrain than GW suggests.

In my experience the army which wins the roll for first turn will generally win the game (400/550 or so games for me). That's just how 40K works in general.

Of course being wiped out in turn one is a bit more unusual.

Whomever gets first turn will generally pound a hell lot more out of an enemy, seeing as his army will be at 100% fighting efficiency. Reducing the efficiency of the other army before it gets to you can make the victory pendulum shift in your direction, but you're hardly holding it there. I've heard that there was nearly nothing left of the BA army when the smoke cleared - ouch!

Posted By Toreador on 05/24/2007 2:45 PM
The rumour is that Orks drop to 6pts a model, and gain Furious Charge. Berzerkers are WS 5 I think also with Furious Charge.

Great, so everyone gets FC but BA now.  Awesome. :thumbs down:

Posted By keezus on 05/24/2007 7:38 AM

Posted By Voodoo Boyz on 05/23/2007 1:19 PM
The problem with Eldar is summed up in two words Holofields and Harlequins.

I'm afraid that while your anti-eldar ranting was entertaining while drunk, it is decidedly shrill when you are sober.  (Note:  I'm not siding with Toreador either, as his tolerance of GWs terrible excuses for rules is the stuff of legends.)  Holofields and Harlequins...

Holy crap batman.  Give me a break.  Your entire arguement hinges on the fact that falcons are broken.  News flash!  Even Eldar players agree that it is broken.

If you take them away, where does that leave the rest of the list?  What are harlequins going to do if they have to foot slog it?  Does it factor into your analysis that Eldar are paying higher than MEQ prices for a bunch of T3 Sv4+ "specialist troops", half of which perform in a lacklustre fashion or don't really perform their specialty at all due to shoddy rules writing?  Does it factor into your analysis that Wraithguard are still totally worthless?

Are you sure that it is the "Eldar" which are too good instead of the "Falcon" which is too good?

I'm not sure what made it shrill, but I'll try and tone it down a notch or two.  Play against Mech Eldar with the Rending Clowns, especially if you're trying NOT to cheese (or are just using Orks) and you start to get bitter.

And if people can complain about Marines, well I can complain about Eldar, who really are the real cheesy armies in the game.  Marines sure can cheddar it up too, but it's on a different level.

Yes, Falcons being broken is the Crux of the problem with Eldar, but it's really Holofields, not just Falcons.  Because of Stones+Holofields even the lowly Fire Prism can be taken 3 times and at the end of a game contest 3 objectives or table quarters.  Things like this make Eldar exceptionally good at objective based missions and VP denial (though admittedly, Falcons are better).

Yes without the Falcons, the army is a lot harder to win with.  Harlequins are still rediculous.  VoT is stupid, yes it's counterable, but I suspect that if there weren't Falcons for delivery you'd see them screened by cheap Guardian squads with Farseers (or Eldrad) running behind 3 squads of em with Fortune, or one seer *cough* I mean Eldrad and an Avitar for fearless.

On one hand, yes the army has a hard time competing with other top armies without Falcons - on the other with them combined with Harlies and the other options they're one of the best armies in the game. 

And if Chaos gets toned down, and if Marines get redone ala Dark Angels, then the Eldar shoot up to the top even more with Nidzilla vying for top spot as the "new IW" list.

And if those two things happen the Eldar without Holofield skimmers becomes a much more workable army, though again no one will bother because an army with 3 Holofield Skimmers just makes it that much easier to win. 

Posted By CaptKaruthors on 05/24/2007 2:03 PM

The loss of the chainaxes seems to be quite a blow. I would bet this guarantees the Orks lose the Choppa rule, but how will they defeat any armour in CC now?

Easy. You make the Orks base strength 4 (nobs go to str5) and the Bezerkers should be str 5. No more dumb chain axe/ choppa rule.

Capt K

That won't happen.  The Orks will win CC by having S4 Power Klaw Nobs hiding in a mass of cheap bodies, much like they do now.  Anything the Orks did as casualties were icing on the cake for the most part - mainly because there generally aren't a whole lot of them around when you actually DO make it to CC.

Not that I have any hopes for Orks becoming a decent army with the new dex.  If they stay a CC army and don't get movement bonuses or much better transport options then they're going to stay as crappy as they are now.

Sorry.  I wasn't making myself very clear.  The only time I remember Eldar having a few choices where when they were still wearing mesh armor.  Once the Aspects came on the scene, that all changed. 

My point was, you can still have a good army without an Armory.  You can even have different armies.  Dark Angels, even with the new Codex, can be different from player to player.  Not as different as when you use the old Marine Codex, but still different.

However, if you stick with the fluff, Space Marine armies should rely on standard equipment.  Think about it.  They use the "HOLY BOLTER"  In game turns, it's not that great.  Read any of the Black Library stuff, and Bolters rock.

My point is that, in a universe that is as regimented and ignorant as the 40K setting, you should not see that much change between "standard" Chapters.  They would be as bound by tradition as they are bound by available equipment.  Space Marines are wearing armor that is thousands of years old.  Their weapons are just as old.  You don't need a huge Armory to represent that.

Chaos should be the same.  They either spend most of their time in a timeless netherworld, or have to steal what equipment they can find.  As long as you include a few options, you remain true to the fluff while still providing players with some options.

This should be different for Daemons.  While Greater Daemons from the dominant Powers should be pretty standard, other Daemons should include great variety.  This should be reflected in the new Codex.

I have a probelm when players forget the setting, and just choose units based on tabletop performance.  Should 6 Obliterators ALWAYS be in a Chaos army?  Should every Space Marine have a Power Weapon and Furious Charge?  Should EVERY Chaos Devastator Squad include 4 Autocannons with Tank Hunter?  Should Falcons be able to cross the entire board in 1 turn, and be tougher than a Land Raider?  Does every Terminator Squad NEED 2 Assault Cannons?  Should a Renegade Space Marine force have access to 4 Lascannons?

The answer to all of these questions is "no".  But, you see it in every army, and people complain about it, because it is effective on the tabletop.  I, for one, am glad that this cheese is being reigned in.  It is more enjoyable for me.  Not everyone has to agree with my ideas.  That's what makes building your OWN army so fun.  You want an all assault army.  Fine.  Build it.  You can still do it with the new Dark Angel Codex, just not so cheesy.  You want to play an Alpha Legion army.  Fine.  Build the army, and paint them like Alpha Legion Marines.  Just because they don't have Infiltrate for EVERY unit doesn't make them NOT Alpha Legion.  It just means that you will have to work on your army design.  Not EVERY Alpha Legion Marine was a master infiltrator.  They are just known for using surprising tactics.  This was what GW was trying to do in the last Codex.  Did it work?  Kind of.  Will the new Codex work?  We will just have to wait and see.

Posted By keezus on 05/24/2007 8:01 AM

Chaos + Eldar =

CHAOS ELDAR!!!!

Chaos Eldar get Falcons with:

Daemonic Posession, Mutated Hull, Parasitic Posession, Holofields, Spirit Stones, Vectored Engines, Havoc launcher, Pintle mounted combi-bolter and Shuriken cannon.  All for 50 points!

Do not, I repeat, do not give them any ideas.

Nice post Loken. Nice to see someone can respond with a real agument rather than the usual 'stop complaining or stop buying' crap.

One thing I will say is that certain things you've described are the fault of the rules.

Take your Havoc squad w/4 ACs and Tank Hunter example. If the rules allowed squads to split fire between more than one target, units like this wouldn't have to exist.

Why do people take 6 Oblits? Because the rules have been designed so that certain things are good, and certain things are bad. If you can get 6 Lascannons for 300 points or 6 Lascannons for 600 points, which option do you take? The cheaper one.

If all the units in the game were useful, then we wouldn't see this sort of disparity. If units could do more than one thing at a time, we wouldn't be forced to take cookie-cutter units.

Unfortunately GW does not see this. In thier opinion, the only way to balance things is just to remove options until you have so little room to move that it's balanced because you have no choice.

BYE