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.

I feel like writing up my own CSM tactica, because I feel that Stelek's doesn't really explore the potential of most units. It's a very narrow-minded view on things. So would anyone have a problem with me writing up MY version of the tactica? I feel that things which need more attention are;

Chaos Space Marines: They're often underestimated. They're the cheapest cult troops and don't worry about their Ld, because with a champ they're Ld 10. They're also the only troops choice that can take additional weapons (apart from noise marines, who have very limited choice).

Khorne Berzerkers: It's now common knowledge that they are much more effective in 5th, and even before that, they were brutal in a Land Raider. Yet no-one has published this for the unenlightened.

The other HQ choices: Yes, Lucius is useless, but who said that Huron can't dish out some damage? Warptime and a powerfist are nice things to have, no?

And everything else.

Furthermore, I want this to be a community-based project. I want you to share your alternatives to the cookie-cutter list that makes tournaments dull. Share your tactics for individual units if you like, and we'll have an open-minded tactica that can be added to by anyone with a good idea.

Of course no one would have a problem with that, ESPECIALLY for the reasons provided. I've got nothing against Stelek, but it just ain't Tactica if it doesn't explore possibilities. It's Strategica-Cheese-Sauce. I'm a cheese lover, but again, it ain't Tactica...

Just don't let it end up like the Eldar Tactica. That article makes me queasy...

Cheese Elemental wrote:
Chaos Space Marines: They're often underestimated. They're the cheapest cult troops and don't worry about their Ld, because with a champ they're Ld 10. They're also the only troops choice that can take additional weapons (apart from noise marines, who have very limited choice).

They aren't referred to as cult troops.

Cheese Elemental wrote:Furthermore, I want this to be a community-based project. I want you to share your alternatives to the cookie-cutter list that makes tournaments dull. Share your tactics for individual units if you like, and we'll have an open-minded tactica that can be added to by anyone with a good idea.

If your going to use the article to bash the tournament set up, that wins games, how do you think it will turn out as a community project? "Lash is a terrible power and anyone who uses it gets all 0s on their sports!" is not something I want to hear about Lash. Lash is good and deserves it's due as the best power in the codex. But warptime is good on Nurgle DPs, Gift of Chaos can pick off some ICs but it isn't reliable, and Nurgle's rot isn't really that good unless you plan to drop in on a lot of IG, Tau, or Eldar (and the Dark variety). I just feel you writing a tactica article while talking down the tournament set up isn't truly a tactica it's a "How I feel people should play this codex-ica".

Now hold on while I light the signal up for H.B.M.C. and Nurglitch so this can turn into a real battleground.

Oh never mind.

Cheese Elemental:

Good idea. It would be good to see someone do a proper Tactica article instead of Stelek's rather limited take on Codex: Chaos Space Marines.

I find it helps to try and find a use for something rather than writing it off at first glance. At least it's more fun than playing rock-scissors-paper with the 'no-brainer' army lists.

Lucius, for example, is great against stuff like Terminators, enemy Berzerkers, Boyz, Nobz, and whatever else. He's cheap, hits first, and he really hurts the units that rely on an avalanche of attacks.

I'd find another guide very useful. Stelek had some limitations in his guide; transports were not considered.

Stelek's guide hasn't been updated for 5th ed, right?

sourclams wrote:Stelek's guide hasn't been updated for 5th ed, right?

That's correct. We need an update...

I dont have an immediate problem with it, as long as you do it right, and as long as you consider all points.

Remember writing a tactica should mean that you actually know what youre talking about, so dont write anything that youre not to sure on. If you have never used a CSM Landraider spam army or a berzerker horde then dont write about them. You should also at least double the amount of games you are playing, againt all levels of opponents, so that you really know whats going on. Tacticas shouldnt be written on anecdotal evidance.

What you have to remember is that he and his local players spens more time and money on 40K than most people so the likelyhood is thet he has more experiance than you. If you do actually involve the whole community however, then you will have a much wider range of experiance. But then it wont really be your tactica anymore so you shouldnt show bias towards any of it.

Do it properly and it will be good, but that involves a lot of hard work, time and effort. Are you sure you have it in you?

I'd suggest you cover the dual-lash tourney megabuild. Well, mention it. And why it works. And what it doesn't work well against (mech lists, anything else?). But that might be 3 sentences. I'd also mention alternative builds that are good, maybe not as good in the tourney system metagame, but are still good and powerful builds.

To make it a bit easier on yourself, you may want to narrow your focus down to 'Lists made [more] effective in 5th edition' like the Berzerker Rush. If the community thing works out and your tactica takes off, then all the better.

Nurglitch wrote:Cheese Elemental:

Good idea. It would be good to see someone do a proper Tactica article instead of Stelek's rather limited take on Codex: Chaos Space Marines.

I find it helps to try and find a use for something rather than writing it off at first glance. At least it's more fun than playing rock-scissors-paper with the 'no-brainer' army lists.

Lucius, for example, is great against stuff like Terminators, enemy Berzerkers, Boyz, Nobz, and whatever else. He's cheap, hits first, and he really hurts the units that rely on an avalanche of attacks.

Stelek's rather limited take on Codex: Chaos Space Marines might also be due to the fact that the Codex itself is rather limited, especially in certain areas and in certain settings.

Alpharius:

No, it isn't, unfortunately. Codex: Chaos Space Marines could be far more limited and Stelek's article would still be badly written, incomplete, narrow-minded, full of unpacked assumptions, colloquialisms, bad arguments, and worse prose. He describes no method that might underwrite his conclusions, makes little attempt to write in an orderly fashion, and does little but confirm his own prejudices.

I can't imagine Stelek did more than beat out a first draft in half an hour, let alone performed any kind of analysis, or serious consideration of the subject.

If anyone is planning on replacing this article, I'd strongly suggest:

1. Describe a method according to which you rank a unit's value by points and FOC slots. I suggest considering units by their effect, efficiency, synergy, and redundancy.

2. Analyze each unit and all its possible builds. Provide cross-references and page numbers. Describe its role (effect, efficiency), which units it synergizes with, which units its role can overlap, and its unique abilities. Also mention weaknesses, any rules disputes associated with the unit, and mention cost/model in $. Write up each unit as a distinct essay in the article.

3. Analyze combinations of units, and tactics for maximizing their effectiveness.

4. Mathhammer, mathhammer, mathhammer. Recruit a statistician to run the numbers for each unit.

5. Let the numbers and analysis speak for themselves, make all conclusions tentative.

6. Note areas where the article could be expanded, and where errors might produce different conclusions.

7. Research! Don't just sit down and start banging at your keyboard. Delineate research responsibilities and organize meetings to collate and discuss findings. Have a writer not involved in the research process do the write-up. Preferably someone with technical writing experience.

8. Edit, edit, edit. Get someone who isn't involved in the analysis and writing part to edit the document before posting it. Make sure they have editing experience.

9. Adopt a neutral tone and let the analysis speak for itself. Draw only tentative revisable conclusions. Cash out all adjectives and adverbs, or leave them out.

10. Include diagrams and photos, for clarity as well as to break up text with pretty pictures.

Um, Nurglitch, then the Tactica it would be better written than both the codex and the rules of the game!

jmurph wrote:Um, Nurglitch, then the Tactica it would be better written than both the codex and the rules of the game!

He is right Nurglitch if he dose that people might start expecting it of GW and then we be out of the game. If you at least get a good start I am sure people will help you along the way.

So Nurglitch is saying don't bother writing a Tactica unless you are willing to create a 90 page thesis clogged with numbers that nobody will read?

You do a lot of Stelek bashing, but I've rarely seen you give out tactical advice that was barely sound, much less capable of matching Stelek's.

Modquisition on:

Everyone please be polite including to former members. Stelek cannot defend himself at this point so attacks are not appropriate.

On the positive I get to use my new favorite stickie

Modquisiiton off

Personally I believe its an excellent idea. I'd proffer focus on one aspect potentially and explore the full options in the context. Submissions or arguments by others may be incorporated.

40K suffers from onelisttorulethemallitis and exploring other options (even if they are less effective) would be beneficial.

why bother asking? just do it if you feel that you have something useful to add.

I'm not bashing Stelek's tactica; it IS good for tournaments, but I just have my own take on things.

sourclams:

As usual you get me dead wrong. I'm starting to think you do it on purpose. All I'm suggesting is that if someone is going to do this and improve on what Stelek has provided, they should make up for the deficiencies of Stelek's article. Surely you're familiar with the principle that any job worth undertaking is worth doing well.

Reecius:

I think the idea is to drum up interest and get the ball rolling. It's not a job for any one person.

Try to make a tactica about competative CSM armies that isnt the lash-obliterators + cult marine part and you will fail. There are some but very limited chances to change anything for a competative army.

If you want something something for fun you can use most of the things in that abomination of a codex.

You still think "lash-obliterators + cult marine" armies are competitive?

It is quite obvious they are, since they are still placing well in competative enviroments.

The Stelek tactica is good. Yes narrow minded and snarky as all hell +twelve, but he cuts straight to the easily quantifiable and efficient style he wants. Totally acceptable and worthwhile to read.


Personally, I think Ahriman could use some field testing. He can cast multiple shooting powers a turn, no? Does this include 3 of the same power? 3 winds of chaos can be nasty(it had better be, he costs more than a land raider.)

Nurglitch wrote:You still think "lash-obliterators + cult marine" armies are competitive?

Changes to line of sight rules and how cover saves are obtained makes this even more competitve than before. It's still the flagship Chaos list. Just look at the tournament results.

So in a sense, you're right, I don't "think" lash armies are competitive, I know they are because it's the only chaos list winning the competitions.

Nurglitch bases his conclusion that lash armies are no longer competitive on his extensive analysis and data gathering, not merely looking at the results of tournaments, or even playing the game like us mere mortals! Fools! Do not dare disparage his heaps of numbers and statistics that shows how the army works! He needs not place or deign to even compete in tournaments to show you the glory of his mastery! REPENT!

... what were we talking about again? Oh, right... the more tacticas, the better as far as I am concerned. I think everyone is going to have different ideas of what makes a good list, or ways to use units. Some codex's have more builds than others, and those builds will be of greater or lesser competitive advantage, and I think it is a plus when people tell us about what works for them. It never would have occured to me that Immolator Spam would work so well until St. John ran it in that tourney and did so well.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Of course no one would have a problem with that, ESPECIALLY for the reasons provided. I've got nothing against Stelek, but it just ain't Tactica if it doesn't explore possibilities. It's Strategica-Cheese-Sauce. I'm a cheese lover, but again, it ain't Tactica...

Just don't let it end up like the Eldar Tactica. That article makes me queasy...

hey! Writing that thing was a valuable test of concentration.

The more tacticas the better, not that I have any place to say. I considered a CSM one, a Tyranid one and a Space Marine Anti-tank one but, well, I just don't care enough I guess. But I would say those are three Tacticas that could use writing if someone was interested. The Tyranid one updating the 4th ed book to the 5th ed rules. Biovores still kind of suck, for example.

I think this is a great idea but do it according to two things. First, write about what you think and give a supporting argument. Second, cover the new as well as the old by reviewing commonly accepted power builds/power units as well as other units that have potential. I think a lot of people have gotten tunnel-vision when it comes to the CSM codex. Finally remember that some people on the forums are a little "high strung" and wear your asbestos underwear.