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.

Wow, it has been a while since I have been here.  Wanting to see a review of the new codex chaos, I figured I knew where to go.  Thanks Dakka and HBMC! I loved the review, it is about what I expectec based on local rumblings, but it sure was nice to read this review.

Also Kudos to Yak, and thanks, I had no idea what was going on with Dakka, WOW.

That said:

YAK wrote: Personally, I am so very happy to see this new codex and I cannot wait until they get around to "blandizing" (tm) every single codex.

I most totally disagree (hopefully you wont delete my account now that you're master of the universe, heh).

I have always been of the mindset that through clever writing and refinement we (all 40k players) could essentially have our cake and eat it too (variety and configurable lists, new units and tourney balance)!

Furthermore I posit that simply reducing any codex (codices in this case) to base uniformity or blandizing, is totally the wrong way to go especially while simultaneously compressing multiple codices into one.  For example do you think they would have written CSM to encompass all the loyalists into one, and simply had marine veterans squads count as the famous chapters and as elite choices, so you could have a squad of red green or grey marines in your army of blue ones?  No one would have liked that.  It's bad design, thats what they did to Chaos.  The demon concept reduction and the chaos mixing in armies is abhorrent.

Through a refinement of the currently (previous) available codex they could easily have made a better codex by maintaining almost everything, adding a few more units and limiting the excessive combos.  I suggest a chaos doctrine system, like the Marines and IG would have been brilliant, where an advantage is counterbalanced by a disadvantage and the existing legions of fame already have perscribed doctrines.

What say you?

Yes, because marine and IG doctrines are so balanced

Marine ones certainly not, but IG ones are fine, IMO the IG dex is the best one out there, and everything should have been patterened off of it.  Like the chaos dex.

The nice thing about the current codices is that all of the options and points are listed under the unit entry in a very clear and concise manner. I know flipping back and forth to the unit special rules is a pain at times. However, you did that anyway with the current codices for all the different types of wargear, doctrines, traits, etc. The guard codex requires you to check three different areas (armoury, doctrines and army list) for points, which is not good.

Posted By vhwolf on 08/15/2007 8:43 AM
How did they fail to use the 2 design principles that you have stated. You could have stated they did not use them in the way you would have and this would have been a factual statement, however your statement was an opinion not fact.

It's all subjective and opinion anyhow, what is a significantly different model to another is entirey subjective. they're just lumps of metal and plastic what makes a lump of plastic a space marine is your (my) imagination. I would say that if it was signicantly different to justify different rules before it should have different rules now, that is my opinion.

What constitutes a chaos model? Something that has (had) rules in a chaos codex, what box it comes in it totally irrelevant, also my opinion. The presence of an explicitly Chaos Rhino, Predator and Land Raider is based upon volume of sales rather that some inherent Chaos-ness of the kit.

@ Inquisitior Malice: I don't believe GW fully goes with the using all existing models policy either but I believe that they should.

Perversely the new CSM codex has made 40k less complete than it was before it was released.

Posted By Toreador on 08/15/2007 8:43 AM
I may be mistaken, but I seem to remember that they have stated the next Chaos codex with the daemons of the big 4 will interact with C:SM, albeit in a limited way.

Yes, as long as you play Apocalypse.  Then the daemons of the big 4 can "interact" with the CSM codex by allying with them.  Of course Grey Knights can also "interact" with CSM in this way, as can Orks, IG, SM, SoB, Tau, Tyranids, Necrons, etc.

That actually gives me an idea!  Since in their infinite wisdom GW did not deign to confer upon rubric terminators the blessing of further existence, just use Grey Knights and "counts as".  If they're led by a grandmaster then the "sorcerer champ" will even have a proper force weapon!  And they're fearless too!  Grey Knights certainly make much better rubric terminators than the Tzeentch terminators from the Chaos codex do.

To sum up this thread there are two groups of people. Those who hate the new codex and those who hate the previous codex and anyone who used it.

I think the lesson here is the best way to enjoy GW's games is to not use any of their rules.

Posted By Crimson Devil on 08/15/2007 10:09 AM
To sum up this thread there are two groups of people. Those who hate the new codex and those who hate the previous codex and anyone who used it.

I think the lesson here is the best way to enjoy GW's games is to not use any of their rules.

Wow. Sigged.   

There's alot of stuff I agree with in Yak's post on this thread.  I think after watching tourney armies quickly degrading into Godzilla Nids, biker Lord demon bombs, all drop troop, all dev squad, all infiltrating all assaultcannon toting, 'All anything' armies, we've seen that the rule system was reaching a breaking point.

I do understand HBMC's view and feel for the guy as much as I can. but I actually do think those of us still playing in a few years will have a much more solid game because of it.

I can't say I didn't entirely predict virtually every word of HBMC's review when I saw his name as the subject's author. 

BYE

Posted By Crimson Devil on 08/15/2007 10:09 AM
To sum up this thread there are two groups of people. Those who hate the new codex and those who hate the previous codex and anyone who used it.

I think the lesson here is the best way to enjoy GW's games is to not use any of their rules.

That's how you do it, boys.  Wit.

Ok, throwing my .02 credits in the ring, and stipulating that I have not read all 21 pages of this discussion (sheesh 21 pages already)

My first army was chaos, back in the days of second edition before the codex had come out. I looked forward to it with anticipation when it did. I spent my hard earned (for a 17 year old) money on the book, and loved much of it. I sold off my chaos, and moved on to eldar, then marines, then imperial guard, tau... been a long time

When I was younger, I admit I didn't get it. I took a little of this, a little of that. I took Khorne cause skulls were cool...

Now, I have been looking back at chaos, and thinking about playing a Nurgle army. Thank GW that temptation is gone.

---

Specific things:

Why couldn't demons have a single profile, single points cost. And then maybe something as simple as gaining the favor of their patron to split them up. Mark of Nurgle grants mortals +1 T, it grants demons +1 T and reroll failed wounds... Khorne mortlas gets +1 ?, Khorne daemons get +1 ? and reroll misses... etc


In regards to random possessed. The forces of chaos in the 40k universe have lost the ability to play dodge ball. No longer do the big jocks (lords) pick and choose their forces from everything available. Instead they put on a blindfold and spin around, loading up anybody they trip over. Come on! Random effects on possesed is cool, but not being able to include them in the battle plan because you won't get to know what they can do until you start???


As for the itemized options for each choice, I think this could be a good thing. Keep the armory section, drop the point values there, and then spell out what is available for each character to take, and the appropriate point value. BUT FOR THE LOVE OF MALAL, please notice that certain combinations are more valluable then others. They hit a speed bump in the Space Marine codex when they gave a price break for single wound models for power weapons and power fists, but lightning claws and thunder hammers stayed full price. What the feth? Number A, the number of wounds the model has doesn't eddect the value of the weapon, the number of attacks, the WS, and the S do. Ok, honestly, the W does effect it, so do the saves, but not as much as the first 3.

Why can't they spell out that a powerfist for a lord is 18 points, or 22 points for a power fist and generic close combat weapon. (Please Note: these numbers yanked from my anal orifice, and should not be considered any part of a valuable argument, they are merely present for illustrative purposes.

Emperor Damn It, stop using point values for anything but balance!!! Don't make something cost more than it should to discourage me from taking it.

You (meaning GW) have beendoing this for umpteen and a half years already, you should know what portion of a marines 15 points come from the bolter, what comes from the armor, and from each portion of the stat line.

Hey look, fire frenzy is back, yay...

Ugh... no chaos for me

Posted By Inquisitor_Malice on 08/15/2007 7:48 AM

I have plenty of chaos units (one for example being my 40+ hrs khorne biker lord) that is no where near as effective in the new rules.  I'm not crying about loss of my daemonic rune, 2+ armour, feel no pain, collar of khorne, PF/LC/Bike/Plasmagun, kitchen sink toten mo-fo. 

I'm not crying about the loss of him either.  And neither is Farsight.  oof.


I think, out of all this, the most valid complaint is the generifying of the daemons and the legions.  Rules changes like +1 I instead of warp scream...whatever, simplification isn't *always* bad.  But one of the big appeals of Chaos (to me) was the fact that it was 6 or more different armies all in one book.  Now, it's really just "pick a mark, any mark!" and "Khorne and Slannesh, living together" for every army.  GW is probably right to limit the options on HQs and special characters - they've proven themselves to be incapable of keeping individual units balanced while also giving a lot of options.  But that doesn't mean they need to eliminate army types and variety of units as well.  I'm sure the Daemon codex will address this, but who knows.  The fact that what was once all in one codex now has to become two, with LESS stuff, makes no sense to me.  The next codex would have to be full of all sorts of crazy daemons, or also include LATD and specific legion rules to even be worth printing.

That's too funny lambadomy. I'm sure Farsight will be glad to spit on his grave once the new codex is released.

That lord did what he was designed to do in our game.    Take all of the firepower from an entire army for a full round, live and go crazy.   

That chaos biker lord will be missed. 

hah, well, yeah, I figured out what I did wrong though...I even mentioned it before the game but didn't do it. Charge them with fire warriors, hope the FW die on your turn, and THEN shoot them while they sit there. Oh well, I never said I knew what I was doing. Maybe the Thousand Sons-in-name-only lead by their unclean-bloodthirsty-keeper-of-change demon army I'm building will avoid that problem in the future...only because it means you have to use the new codex too!

A lot of the rumors simply were not true. Undivided players seem to be the ones crying the most as they were playing the truly cheesy armies. The cults look a lot stronger to me overall, including EC.

- G

I'm surprised nobody's brought up the poor fellows who bought 40 furies for their lightning bolt marines with bat themed helmets. Now they're stuck with ugly models that have wings but don't fly.

Posted By keezus on 08/15/2007 1:34 PM
I'm surprised nobody's brought up the poor fellows who bought 40 furies for their lightning bolt marines with bat themed helmets. Now they're stuck with ugly models that have wings but don't fly.

Yes, thank you for twisting the knife a bit.  You are right!  The worst thing was, I don't think Night Lords were all that powerful before!  Why did they get nutted?  Couldn't they have given us something, like night lords still have acute senses/night vision, or the +1 cover save?  it didn't make them more vicious in combat

Posted By keezus on 08/15/2007 1:34 PM
Now they're stuck with ugly models that have wings but don't fly.

Are you talking about the Furies or the Night Lord Marine models?

Posted By dienekes96 on 08/15/2007 6:12 AM
I'll absolutely agree that the LatD are getting screwed in general by GW. They always have been, even when they did get their (pretty cool) list. But I don't lay that at the feet of Codex: CSM...because that would be slowed. Codex: CSM hasn't been the host of the LatD list since, mostly ever. But I agree that LatD need real attention...much more so than a Daemon Codex.

[...]

Dakka, more and more, is a place where folks hold a candle and refuse to light it, because they'd rather curse the darkness. Rail on GW all you want...I don't care. They are a faceless company designed to make money. There is NO social bargain. But quit pretending it's personal.

To your first point: I agree. It's important to note, however, that (unless I missed something) we don't know anything about the Daemon Codex except that it'll have daemons. Note that this does not mean it will exclusively have daemons. There could very well be a LatD list in that book, or rules for fielding Traitor Legions. I rather suspect there will be something along those lines, because, as interesting as a true Daemonic Legion would be for 40k, it doesn't really fit that setting nearly as well as WHFB.  Until we get some concrete information about the book that's been promised to us next year by the head of 40k games development, let's not scream like four year old girls.

(That said, if they are going to add LatD or Traitor Legion rules to the Daemon book, they're pretty friggin' stupid for not announcing that ahead of time and heading this off at the pass. But GW's marketing has always been piss-poor.)

I agree even more with the second point. Games Workshop is not your friend, and it's not like they're upsetting you out of spite. I have no doubt that they did what they did (both here and in the DA/BA books) with the best intentions, and probably to address some of the balance problems people here have been kvetching about for years. I've lurked here for a long, long time - since the black and gold boards - and the general tone has always been "Screw the fluff, I'm going to play what's most mathematically efficient at killing Marines." To see people now screaming about how unfluffy it is to have to take 10 marines to get a heavy weapon is deepest irony.

Posted By keezus on 08/15/2007 1:34 PM
I'm surprised nobody's brought up the poor fellows who bought 40 furies for their lightning bolt marines with bat themed helmets. Now they're stuck with ugly models that have wings but don't fly.

If you re-read the thread you'll see that those of us who created expensive and detailed armies based upon the Legion rules actually have no right to complain, and that we're 'whiny asses'. Furthermore, we should just suck it up and play, or our invent our own rules. These are considered actual solutions by the rose-tinted glasses-wearing folk around here.

That might constitute a detailed and well-thought-out argument at Warseer, but I'm surprised that anyone would let it fly here...

BYE

I think the heavy weapons being limited to larger squads is fine.

It solves a big game balance issue and helps make tanks more survivable - a huge problem with the rules.

Fluff wise, I don't think it's unreasonable that less than every second Marine has a Powerfist, Lascannon or Plasma Gun.

Wanna hear a funny? My LatD army has always been labeled "The Lost and the Discontinued" - it's made up of old(er) figs, e.g., Mordians, Praetorians, Tallarns, etc. The Imperial Eagles have been carefully dremel'd away. Now, of course, the army list is similarly discontinued.

Wait, that's not really funny, is it...

Forgive me for skimming the last 8-10 pages here but I have been summoned from elsewhere.

I'm 100% with Yak on this. It keeps surprising me how oddly critical people are of GW with their "dumbing down" of the game and such. I am of the opinion that the tighter and more detailed a rule is written the more it destroys other parts of the game because of the tunnel vision involved in writing it. "Yeah, it makes sense that the passengers would bail out of a vehicle that suffers a penetrating hit. Sure" Meanwhile gun drones everywhere are being shaken loose from their mounts when a Piranha they're not even attached to gets hit.

On to the actual point though ...Diversity. I loved the game Space Marine back in the day. I never found a problem with the rules and I thought it was pretty tactically challenging. I was a Blood Angels player and my most common opponents were World Eaters and Ultramarines. The wierd thing is that their units and my units had the exact same rules! Wierd! I certainly don't think that any of us ever considered ourselves "Generic Space Marine Players." Do you actually need a different set of rules to have a different army? Seriously think about that.

I personally like the fact that there are different armies in the 40K universe and I really enjoy the Trait-Doctrine system employed in those codeci but do we really need the option to upgrade a sergeant to a veteran and then open up a list of 20 more options to him? In a skirmish level game that makes complete sense but the scope of most 40K games makes it a bit overkill to have that type of distinction between two sergeants in the same platoon. Warmachine is the perfect example of this. A unit of Khador Demo Corpsmen can have a Kapitan and 2-4 Squad members. That's it! The Kapitan does not have the ability to give himself an invulnerable save or make himself immune to instant-death. Two of the squad members cannot trade in their hammers for ranged weapons. The Warjacks are an even better example! A Juggernaught will always be the same right down to which arm he carries his axe in! There are no left handed Juggernaughts whether they are loyalist or traitors, whether they are the first one on the force or the 100th one, whether they are painted red or blue, etc. That game has an almost non-existent amont of diversity and yet somehow it is stealing players from 40K (myself included). Players will praise Privateer Press for their simplistic ruleset yet hard to master game and in the same breath curse Games workshop for attempting the same?  By the way, I've never seen the same Khador list twice and that army is the most comonly played here.  Sounds diverse to me.

As far as people wasting their time with their conversions and their beutiful minis that's a joke. How many times have you sat across the table from a lump of uncleaned metal described to you as "A Demon Prince with aura, flight, a demon sword, and a partridge in a pear tree, etc." Great! I'll remember that if you can since the model desn't look anything like the god of war you just described! Oh, that's a chosen veteran super marine? Wow, it looks more like a set of legs with a half melted mounds bar that you dropped into a bucket of green paint! Now I'm hearing that because someone actually did build and paint their demons or nurglings or whatever they aren't really Nurgle anymore because the actual entry in the section doesn't specifically call them out by name? They behave the same on the battlefield? So what. As long as we still have to roll dice they'll be different enough. Do we really care that a Blood Angels Tactical Marine has to spend 15 minutes a day in the Chaplains private office before entering the battlefield as opposed to the Ultramarines Tactical Squad Marine who needs to chrome his forehead pimples? In the fluff, sure. On the battlefield, no.

The moral is that what we've been screaming for is solid rules and if this is what it takes I'm on board.

I think there will be a lot of powerful armies coming out of the new codex. Of course it is very frustrating when we basically have to start all over again from scratch now. But then I am looking forward to doing something new and to be honest I was never a big proponent of deamons, except for plague bearers... I have about 49 of those.

- G

Glaive wrote: I'm 100% with Yak on this. It keeps surprising me how oddly critical people are of GW with their "dumbing down" of the game ... the tighter and more detailed a rule is written the more it destroys other parts of the game

Well OK Glaive, lets just get rid of armies all together then, everyone plays a naked captain and 2 10 man marine squads with rocket launchers and flamers.

The other army can be 30 orks.

You're kidding right?

Posted By Glaive Company CO on 08/15/2007 3:35 PM
*snip*     

Well, it looks like you and Jervis will be happy for years to come!

Posted By Glaive Company CO on 08/15/2007 3:35 PM

Players will praise Privateer Press for their simplistic ruleset yet hard to master game and in the same breath curse Games workshop for attempting the same?

Choosing this quote only because it's the most recent of it's type in this thread.  Over and over again people are saying things like "people complain about X but like Y, and they're the same!"  Same or not, it is almost never the same people who like one and hate the other.  I don't see the point of these statements unless you have proof that the person is contradicting himself.  The internet isn't some faceless void - everyone is an individual with their own opinions.  This isn't as bad as when people are taking something someone says, re-wording it and then mocking their made up, meaningless version, but it's still doesn't actually do any good or really mean anything.

Personally, I think that people are missing one of the main points of all the complaining.  It's not just "it's too simple".  it's not just "I want all the options I had before".  It's a combination of simplicity, and choices that are obviously bad or obviously good.  If you look at the various (tournament) chaos lists floating around, they all seem to revolve around the Lash of Submission.  Now, I can't say if this will really end up being the uberpower people think it will be, but the point is that not only did they limit what you can do with the daemon princes, they also made what few choices you did have meaningless by making an obvious best choice.

This same problem exists for a lot of the units.  Posessed?  Please.  Dreadnaughts, Defilers?  Double please.  You may not agree, but I think they really suck in this codex, and a lot of people agree.  Limiting choice wouldn't be as big a deal if the limited choices were all good/interesting.  But by failing to do that, they've made it even MORE limited, except for players who make their lists like the WD random-ass lists, or based on what models they like most.

Obviously, if all you do is play for fun, and not to win or field competitive lists, then it doesn't matter what units suck.  And there's nothing wrong with playing that way.  But I don't think it is the norm to not give a crap if you win, or are in a position to win.

Yes, it all sucks because we know this from all the games people have played with the dex.

Oddly enough, everyone said the Tyranid codex sucked when it first came out......

Posted By Toreador on 08/15/2007 4:35 PM
Yes, it all sucks because we know this from all the games people have played with the dex.

Oddly enough, everyone said the Tyranid codex sucked when it first came out......

And yet again that misrepresentation comes up.

Most of us who are complaining believe it will be a competetive codex. We are upset by the lack of viable choices and customization. Not the power. Indeed most if not all suspect there is a power list or two written into the book (and a quick glance says two lash whip princes is the early choice).

I still feel that the nid codex is awash in bad choices that are never taken, with two power lists (one prevelant).

How are nerfed marines competative?


I still think the tyranid codex sucks, but not as bad as THIS donkey gong.

When we say that this is broken, it is about putting an army on the table and actually playing a good game. These marines are going to go about two moves, and die in droves to the might of the new Tau, Eldar, or tyranid,( you make up an army and play) codex. As a CSM, you get to pick.... a gun, a whip, and a lame psy power that will miss at least three quarters of the time. The units are all the same, the demons are all the same, and unless you are very lucky or very stupid, your going to get this codex for the sole purpose of telling everyone else that they are wrong, and getting the same army as everyone else is COOL. Hell, you don't even get the plesure of playing a game. you get to pull out your box, everyone rolls a D6, and then you get to go back to looking at all the models you don't get to play anymore. Compairing the Dark Angels to this trite is a laugh.

I can see here who read the damn book, and who is hanging on to a slim fragment of hope.

!@#$!!! You know what the real funny thing is, though?
These are the codexs we've been waiting for, and guess who gets the ramming without vasoline next? WAAAGHHHH!!!!!!